[Congressional Record Volume 168, Number 107 (Thursday, June 23, 2022)]
[House]
[Pages H5856-H5867]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                       LGBTQI+ DATA INCLUSION ACT

  Mrs. CAROLYN B. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House 
Resolution 1191, I call up the bill (H.R. 4176) to improve Federal 
population surveys by requiring the collection of voluntary, self-
disclosed information on sexual orientation and gender identity in 
certain surveys, and for other purposes, and ask for its immediate 
consideration.
  The Clerk read the title of the bill.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Cicilline). Pursuant to House Resolution 
1191, in lieu of the amendment in the nature of a substitute 
recommended by the Committee on Oversight and Reform printed in the 
bill, an amendment in the nature of a substitute consisting of the text 
of Rules Committee Print 117-52, modified by the amendment printed in 
part A of House Report 117-381, is adopted and the bill, as amended, is 
considered read.
  The text of the bill, as amended, is as follows:

                               H.R. 4176

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled.

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``LGBTQI+ Data Inclusion 
     Act''.

     SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

       The Congress finds the following:
       (1) The National Academies on Sciences, Engineering, and 
     Medicine (NASEM), in their 2022 report, found that complete 
     and accurate demographic information on the LGBTQI+ community 
     should be standardized and collected.
       (2) Comprehensive statistics are needed to inform public 
     policy and Federal programs.
       (3) The availability of data also has a critical role in 
     ensuring that any disparities in areas like health outcomes, 
     housing, and employment can be addressed.
       (4) As of the March release of the NASEM report, limited 
     Federal surveys collect data on sexual orientation and 
     gender, with none currently measuring intersex populations.
       (5) The integrity of the Federal statistical system relies 
     on the ability of agencies to determine the content of their 
     statistical surveys based on considerations of relevance, 
     timeliness, accuracy, objectivity, and ability to maintain 
     confidentiality.

     SEC. 3. REQUIREMENT TO COLLECT DATA ON SEXUAL ORIENTATION, 
                   GENDER IDENTITY, AND VARIATIONS IN SEX 
                   CHARACTERISTICS.

       (a) Survey Requirement.--Not later than 360 days after the 
     date of the enactment of this Act, the head of any agency 
     that collects information through a covered survey shall 
     establish data standards that require, with regard to the 
     survey, the following:
       (1) Review.--The review of covered surveys to determine in 
     which surveys information about sexual orientation, gender 
     identity, and variations in sex characteristics is not 
     included.
       (2) Methods.--An identification of appropriate methods to 
     include questions on sexual orientation, gender identity, and 
     variations in sex characteristics in covered surveys that 
     facilitate categorization and voluntary participation and 
     preserve privacy and confidentiality.
       (3) Data collection.--The use of the appropriate methods 
     identified in paragraph (2) to gather data on sexual 
     orientation, gender identity, and variations in sex 
     characteristics for any survey identified in paragraph (1).
       (4) Assessment.--The implementation of a process to 
     routinely assess needed changes in covered survey methods 
     related to asking questions on sexual orientation, gender 
     identity, and variations in sex characteristics.
       (b) Data Reports; Waiver.--
       (1) Data reports.--Not later than 3 years after the date of 
     the enactment of this Act, any report published by an agency 
     that relies on covered survey demographic data shall include 
     information on sexual orientation, gender identity, and 
     variations in sex characteristics.
       (2) Waiver.--The statistical official (as described in 
     section 314 of title 5, United States Code) of each agency, 
     or the head of the agency, for any agency that does not have 
     a statistical official, may waive the requirement under 
     paragraph (1), on a case-by-case basis, if the standards and 
     policies in subsection (c) can not be met, or if adding such 
     information to the survey would impair the ability of the 
     agency to preserve the utility, accuracy, or objectivity of 
     the survey while also generating relevant evidence about the 
     LGBTQI+ community.
       (c) Confidentiality.--Any information collected relating to 
     the sexual orientation, gender identity, or variations in sex 
     characteristics of a covered survey participant shall be 
     maintained in accordance with applicable confidentiality and 
     privacy laws, policies, and standards.
       (d) Construction.--Nothing in this Act shall be construed 
     to require an individual to disclose their sexual 
     orientation, gender identity, or variations in sex 
     characteristics to an agency.
       (e) Rule of Construction.--Nothing in this section shall be 
     construed to permit the use of information collected under 
     this section in a manner that would adversely affect any 
     individual, or that is inconsistent with disclosure 
     limitations established in any other law.
       (f) Definitions.--In this section:
       (1) Agency.--The term ``agency'' has the meaning given that 
     term in section 551 of title 5, United States Code.
       (2) Covered survey.--The term ``covered survey'' means a 
     survey that includes demographic data in which--
       (A) a subject self-reports information; or
       (B) a knowledgeable proxy provides information about the 
     subject or responds for all individuals in a household.
       (3) Demographic data.--The term ``demographic data'' means 
     information about the race or ethnicity, sex, and age of a 
     survey participant or population.
       (4) Gender identity.--The term ``gender identity'' means 
     the gender-related identity, appearance, mannerism, or other 
     gender-related characteristic of an individual, regardless of 
     the designated sex at birth of the individual.
       (5) Sexual orientation.--The term ``sexual orientation'' 
     means how a person identifies in terms of their emotional, 
     romantic, or sexual attraction, and includes identification 
     as straight, heterosexual, gay, lesbian, or bisexual, among 
     other terms.
       (6) Survey.--The term ``survey'' means a data collection 
     activity involving a questionnaire for a sample of a 
     population and includes the decennial census.
       (7) Variations in sex characteristics.--The term 
     ``variations in sex characteristics''--
       (A) means a physical trait present at birth or naturally 
     occurring at a later time (including genitals, gonads, 
     hormone function, and chromosome patterns), that differ from 
     normative expectations for male or female bodies regarding 
     the development, appearance, or function of sex-related 
     characteristics; and
       (B) is sometimes referred to as intersex traits.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The bill, as amended, shall be debatable for 
1 hour equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority 
member of the Committee on Oversight and Reform or their respective 
designees.
  The gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Carolyn B. Maloney) and the 
gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. Comer) each will control 30 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Carolyn B. 
Maloney).

                              {time}  1445


                             General Leave

  Mrs. CAROLYN B. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous 
consent that all Members have 5 legislative days in which to revise and 
extend their remarks and insert extraneous material on the bill before 
us.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentlewoman from New York?
  There was no objection.
  Mrs. CAROLYN B. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such 
time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 4176, the LGBTQI+ Data 
Inclusion Act. This historic bill takes the long overdue step of 
ensuring that Federal agencies collect data on sexual orientation, 
gender identity, and variation in sex characteristics so that the 
Federal Government can better understand and serve America's LGBTQI+ 
communities.
  We are considering this legislation at a critical time. Across the 
United States, the rights of the LGBTQI+ people are under attack and 
the health and safety of LGBTQI+ people are under threat. From the 
limited data currently available, we understand

[[Page H5857]]

that LGBTQI+ people disproportionately experience poverty, housing 
insecurity, adverse physical and mental health outcomes, 
discrimination, and more. For example, according to the Williams 
Institute, more than one in five LGBTQI+ people live in poverty. 
According to the American Psychiatric Association, LGBTQI+ people are 
2.5 times more likely to experience depression, anxiety, and substance 
abuse than people who are heterosexual.
  There is also an epidemic of violence against transgender and gender-
nonconforming people across the U.S.--an epidemic that killed more than 
50 people last year.
  The LGBTQI+ Data Inclusion Act, introduced by my friend and chair of 
the Natural Resources Committee, Raul Grijalva, would close many 
longstanding gaps in the collection of data pertaining to our Nation's 
LGBTQI+ communities. By ensuring that Federal surveys collect data on 
sexual orientation, gender identity, and variations in sex 
characteristics, this bill will equip Congress and Federal agencies 
with the information they need to better understand the specific 
challenges faced by the LGBTQI+ communities and help us develop 
equitable policy solutions.
  This bill currently has 128 cosponsors. The legislation has also 
received overwhelming support from more than 200 civil rights, health, 
and scientific organizations and the LGBTQ+ Equality Caucus.
  This bill builds on the Biden administration's efforts to advance 
equity for LGBTQI+ populations, including by empowering Federal 
agencies to carry out the President's recently announced executive 
order to expand collection of Federal data pertaining to LGBTQI+ 
people.
  The Biden administration issued a Statement of Administration Policy 
that strongly supports passage of the bill.
  Importantly, under this bill answering questions about one's sexual 
orientation, gender identity, and variations in sex characteristics 
would be entirely voluntary, and the bill also includes strong 
confidentiality and privacy protections. The design of this bill 
strikes a necessary balance between informing policymaking and 
protecting the personal information of LGBTQI+ people across the 
country.
  Before I conclude, let me take a moment to acknowledge the importance 
of the House taking this historic step during Pride Month--a 
celebration of immeasurable contributions made by LGBTQI+ people in 
every aspect of American life and a reminder of our continued mission 
to ensure that every community in the United States is treated with 
equality and respect.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this bill, and I reserve 
the balance of my time.
  Mr. COMER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, the LGBTQI+ Data Inclusion Act requires Federal agencies 
to collect highly sensitive information from the American people.
  With Americans facing record inflation, record gas prices, supply 
chain shortages, and skyrocketing drug overdoses, it is unbelievable 
that this is a priority for the House Democrats.
  Mortgage rates are at their highest levels since 2008. Inflation 
rates are at their highest levels in 40 years. Nationally, gas prices 
are averaging over $5 per gallon. There is a severe shortage of baby 
formula across our country. It has been a free-for-all at the southern 
border since President Biden took office both for illegal immigrants 
and deadly drugs.
  The House majority is ignoring these issues. They have also ignored 
the botched withdrawal from Afghanistan, the origins of the COVID 
pandemic, and the impact of shutdowns and school closures on American 
children. Instead, today we are considering a divisive bill, a bill 
that does nothing to address Americans' problems.
  H.R. 4176 requires Federal agencies to include questions regarding 
sexual orientation and gender identity on their surveys. There are over 
130 such surveys across the Federal agencies. This also includes the 
Census. My colleagues across the aisle oppose asking whether someone is 
an American citizen on the Census because they say it could deter 
participation, but they want to ask about sexual orientation and gender 
identity.

  This is information many Americans would not want to share with the 
Federal Government. This could certainly reduce response rates to the 
Census and a host of statistical surveys our government relies on to 
inform important policy decisions.
  I would remind my House colleagues that asking these questions during 
a job interview is illegal. In fact, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act 
protects against employment discrimination on the basis of sex. This 
has been interpreted by the Supreme Court to include sexual orientation 
and gender identity. Yet, House Democrats want the Federal Government 
to ask Americans about this most private of information.
  My Democrat colleagues claim this bill will expand funding and 
services for those who identify as LGBTQI+, but they haven't specified 
funding and for what services.
  We also don't know how agencies will actually use this information, 
and we don't know how bad actors would exploit this information. 
Federal agencies are constantly the targets of cyberattacks and subject 
to leaks. A Chinese attack on the Office of Personnel Management 
exposed the data of millions of Americans. The Internal Revenue Service 
has leaked tax information on high-profile Americans to the press. This 
information could be used for harmful purposes, so Americans may be 
reluctant to risk answering a survey entirely.
  House Democrats say that these intrusive questions will remain 
optional under the bill, but we all know the pressure respondents will 
feel to answer a Federal agency survey. In fact, the bill has been 
amended by the rule to strike the exemption from penalty provision 
which protected survey respondents from fine or other penalty if they 
refused to answer a question.
  Why did this language need to be removed if the questions are 
optional?
  Are they planning to penalize respondents for not answering questions 
about their sexuality and gender?
  We do not know why, and that is because this bill hasn't gone through 
any due diligence.
  Another troubling part of the bill is how it allows observers or 
proxies to fill out these surveys on behalf of others.
  Should we really have other people asking highly personal questions 
about somebody else on a Federal agency survey?
  Republicans don't think so.
  A proxy could make a guess, or a person would have to tell this proxy 
their sexual orientation or gender identity--something they may not 
want to discuss.
  When the House Oversight and Reform Committee considered the bill 
last week, committee Republicans supported an amendment offered by 
Representative   Michael Cloud to strike this provision, but committee 
Democrats rejected it.
  House Republicans also have concerns about presenting children with 
questions about sexual orientation or gender identity.
  Why should a minor be confronted by such topics?
  For instance, the National Survey of Fishing, Hunting and Wildlife-
Associated Recreation includes respondents as young as 6 years old. 
Federal surveys are no place to confront the American people or their 
children with intrusive questions and concerns about sexual orientation 
or gender identity, especially when parents are worried about this 
agenda with an ever-evolving list of identities. It is hard to keep up.
  Many parents have grave concerns that advocates of this agenda are 
seeking to indoctrinate their children and drive a wedge within their 
families, and this bill confirms some of these concerns by allowing 
these questions to be directed to children. Democrats have not 
addressed or even acknowledged these concerns.
  In the committee markup of H.R. 4176, my colleague, Glenn Grothman, 
offered an amendment to prohibit the collection of this information 
from minors, but committee Democrats voted this sensible amendment down 
unanimously.
  What is more telling is House Democrat leadership have refused to 
make either Representative Grothman's or Representative Cloud's 
amendments in order today. I wonder why the House majority refuses to 
consider an amendment aimed at protecting children.

[[Page H5858]]

  These amendments address important issues. The American people's 
Representatives should be able to vote on them before sending this 
troubling bill to the Senate. The American people deserve better from 
this legislative body.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mrs. CAROLYN B. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such 
time as I may consume.
  I point out to my good colleague that this year the National 
Academies put out a report which found that complete and accurate 
demographic information on the LGBTQI+ community should be standardized 
and collected. The report showed that only a limited number of Federal 
surveys collect data on sexual orientation and gender identity, and 
that none collect data on intersex populations.

  This bill would greatly improve our data collection efforts. This 
would help ensure the Federal Government's programs and services can 
reach every person in the U.S. with the greatest effectiveness.
  It would help us also to better address longstanding health and 
economic inequities for America's LGBTQI+ population. From the limited 
research currently available, we understand that LGBTQI+ people 
disproportionately experience poverty, housing insecurity, adverse 
physical and mental health outcomes, discrimination, and more. So 
collecting this data is critically important to ensure that our 
policies meet the needs of our LGBTQI+ constituents.
  I will give one example of why this is so important. Without the 
collection of this data, States were not able to measure the impact of 
the pandemic on the LGBTQI+ individuals. They were completely left out 
of all medical surveys leaving pandemic response programs at risk of 
neglecting these individuals. It moves us to a more inclusive and 
equitable society.
  Representative Raul Grijalva is the distinguished and outstanding 
chairman of the Committee on Natural Resources. He is the author of the 
original bill. I was proud to work with him, with the committee members 
to bring it to the floor.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman 
from Arizona (Mr. Grijalva).
  Mr. GRIJALVA. Mr. Speaker, I thank Mrs. Maloney, who is the chair of 
the House Oversight and Reform Committee, and the LGBTQ+ Equality 
Caucus for their work and support for the LGBTQI+ Data Inclusion Act.
  As we celebrate Pride Month and remember the 53rd anniversary of the 
Stonewall riots, we recognize the progress, lived experience, and 
suffering of the LGBTQI+ community.
  In many ways our Federal Government is falling short on the promise 
to craft and implement inclusive public policy, in part, because we 
lack the necessary data to address the issues affecting the LGBTQI+ 
community.

                              {time}  1500

  While some data is currently collected and Federal agents have made 
progress, far too many LGBTQI+ individuals remain overlooked in many 
Federal data collection efforts.
  As the Center for American Progress has calculated, more than five in 
six LGBTQ adults cannot be identified by existing questions in non-
experimental survey conducted by the U.S. Census Bureau such as the 
American Community Survey and the Census, which only accounts for 
cohabitating same-sex couples.
  That is why I introduced this legislation, the LGBTQI+ Data Inclusion 
Act, to ensure we have robust and accurate data.
  The bill would require Federal surveys to include data collection on 
sexual orientation, gender identity, and variations of sex 
characteristics on a voluntary basis. Again, let me emphasize what the 
Chair emphasized, this bill would only collect voluntary, self-
disclosed data.
  An individual will not be required to disclose this information, nor 
would this information be used in a manner that would adversely affect 
any individual.
  It would ensure that lawmakers and Federal agencies have the 
comprehensive data they need to address the LGBTQI+ issues.
  We cannot craft policies that remedy the disparities faced by these 
individuals, particularly people of color, in issues of discrimination, 
unemployment, healthcare, housing instability, and more if we do not 
have the adequate and correct data.
  We have seen how the pandemic has impacted many Americans, and we are 
still learning how the LGBTQI+ community were disproportionately 
affected by the COVID-19 crisis. This is just one of many areas that 
our Federal Government lacks knowledge in how to respond to these 
issues.
  In many ways, the tireless work of LGBTQ organizations in gathering 
this information has provided a better scope of the problems and 
disparities than the Federal Government itself.
  The LGBTQI+ community deserves to be visible and heard so public 
policy can better reflect their needs. It is critical to close the data 
gap that often invalidates their lives.
  Perhaps more importantly, this bill comes at a time when Republican 
State legislatures across this country have introduced more than 300 
anti-LGBTQ bills that target youth and their families. This bill would 
force those individuals focused on denying rights to LGBTQ individuals 
to have a reckoning.
  It will allow the community to be counted and, therefore, heard.
  Not only is this bill necessary, it is a top priority of President 
Biden.
  During his first day in office, President Biden issued numerous 
executive orders to strengthen the rights and improve the lives of 
LGBTQI+ people across this country.
  He directed all Federal agencies that enforce Federal laws 
prohibiting sex discrimination to also prohibit discrimination based on 
sexual orientation and gender identity.
  Just last week, he established a new Federal coordinating committee 
on sexual orientation and gender identity for data which will lead 
efforts across agencies to identify opportunities to strengthen this 
data collection, while safeguarding privacy protection and the civil 
rights of individuals.
  These are all great initiatives, but we need to go further and codify 
them into law. This is why this bill is so important.
  In addition, this bill includes implementation of a process for 
Federal agencies to routinely assess changes needed in the collection 
of this data. This will provide enough flexibility for Federal agents 
to use the most effective data collection methods for their agency.
  We are grateful for the invaluable support and input of more than 200 
LGBTQI+ groups and allies that have helped get this legislation to 
where it is today. It could not have been done without them.
  This is an important piece of legislation for each and every LGBTQI+ 
individual in our Nation. As a proud ally, I urge my colleagues to 
support this bill so that all our constituents are seen, heard, and 
counted.
  We are not ignoring the current challenges facing Americans. They are 
not being ignored, as was brought up. Rather, we are treating all 
Americans equally and being inclusive.
  And in this great legacy of our Nation, one of the great legacies 
that all of us who take pride in being part of this Nation, who take 
pride in being Americans, one of the great legacies is that this Nation 
offers, under the rule of law, an inalienable right of equality; an 
inalienable right of access, and for public policy to reflect the needs 
and respond to the needs of all individuals.
  This bill takes us one step further in this direction. This bill is 
not punitive; it is inclusive. This bill is not mean-spirited; it is 
welcoming. And this bill, above all, is American for all Americans.
  Mr. COMER. Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
Wisconsin (Mr. Grothman).
  Mr. GROTHMAN. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  I rise today in strong opposition to H.R. 4176. This horrifying bill 
would require all Federal agencies that collect demographic data to ask 
Americans about their sexual orientation or gender identity; and that 
goes all the way to including the Census, ultimately, affecting every 
American.
  I realize the majority party will claim that you don't have to fill 
out this form. But we all know, as a practical matter, almost all 
people presented with a form will fill out the whole thing. There are 
very people who have the gumption or whatever to say,

[[Page H5859]]

I refuse to fill out such and such a question.
  Now, honestly, this bill affects adults. And I am old enough to 
remember when the gay rights movement was supposed to be about, we are 
not going to poke around and see what people are doing in the bedroom. 
Now we are kind of going in the opposite direction. We are going to 
require everybody to talk about their sexual orientation which, by 
itself, is a little bit offensive.

  But I am also going to focus more on the fact that this bill 
requires--doesn't require but asks for responses from people under 18 
years of age, which is just almost beyond belief.
  If a parent gets randomly selected to fill out the National Survey on 
Children's Health, Democrats want the Federal Government to ask parents 
to disclose if their 3-year-old son is attracted to boys or girls. That 
is why we should call this, steal our children's childhood act.
  When public schools report data to the U.S. Department of Education's 
Civil Rights Data Collection, schools will ask kindergartners through 
12th graders what their sexual orientation is or which gender they 
think they are.
  What exactly are you supposed to respond if you are an 8-year-old 
child?
  What are they supposed to do with this question?
  Johnny, here we have a question for you. And what is he going to say? 
I am gay because my favorite cartoon character is gay. I'm trans 
because I like my mother's dress.
  I don't know what they are supposed to do with this question, and I 
think it is absurd that we would ever expect anybody to ask these 
questions of a little child. But clearly, that is what the majority 
party wants.
  And we hear about today like people you couldn't tell what they are 
when they are 6 years old or 5 years old. I mean, really beyond belief.
  And like I said, our corrupt popular culture today, we are told 
people are identifying as something or other when they are 7 or 8 years 
old.
  So in any event, I think it is obvious to vote ``no'' on this bill. I 
don't know how, as a country, we got to a place where we are asking 7- 
or 8-year-olds to declare a sexual preference, but that is where we are 
today; and the majority party thinks it makes perfect sense.
  The Democrats must know this is wrong.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Ms. Jackson Lee). The time of the gentleman 
has expired.
  Mr. COMER. I yield an additional 1 minute to the gentleman from 
Wisconsin.
  Mr. GROTHMAN. I guess we can about wrap this up.
  I want the American public, though, to stop and think where we are 
today. We are going to pass a bill in which 7- or 8- or 9-year-olds are 
supposed to declare a sexual preference.
  I will close by saying, the clergy of this country should ponder how 
we got this far and what they want to do about it.
  Mrs. CAROLYN B. MALONEY of New York. Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute 
to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer), the distinguished majority 
leader.
  Mr. HOYER. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding.
  Obviously, in order to serve the American people and to serve their 
needs, we take in a lot of information--in this case, voluntary 
information, to determine what we can do to assist and make better the 
lives of people and the challenges they face.
  This Pride Month we celebrate all the progress we have made over the 
years to help LGBTQ Americans express themselves more openly, to help 
their community become more visible, and to be free from the danger of 
violence perpetrated against them because of who they are.
  We must acknowledge, however, that the Federal Government does not do 
enough to ensure that that community is seen and considered when making 
key policy decisions.
  Although there is evidence that LGBTQ Americans, especially 
transgender people, still face substantial prejudice in areas such as 
housing, employment, and education, we need more data to determine the 
scope of these challenges and to devise a policy solution that works 
for all.
  To promote visibility, foster inclusion, and build equity and 
equality for LGBTQ Americans, this legislation would ask the Federal 
agencies to collect voluntary information on orientation and gender 
identity whenever they ask for other demographic data.
  I want to emphasize, as I know has been emphasized, that although 
this data will be processed anonymously, submission of this information 
will always be and continue to be completely voluntary.
  Americans should never be forced to disclose their sexual orientation 
or gender identity to the government, period. To that extent I think we 
all agree.
  I thank Representative Grijalva for introducing this legislation, as 
well as Chairwoman Maloney and her colleagues on the Oversight and 
Reform Committee for their efforts to advance this bill.
  Although we still have much to do to address the disparities and 
marginalization of the LGBTQ people and what they face in America, this 
bill will help equip policymakers with the tools and information needed 
to make further progress.

  Our vote today is a continuation, frankly, of the efforts of Johnson, 
Milk, and other leaders who showed courage in the LGBTQ community to 
come forward and to say that we are people and we need to be treated as 
equal under the law. And this will, I think, help us meet that 
responsibility.
  Mr. COMER. Madam Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from 
Arizona (Mr. Biggs).
  Mr. BIGGS. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  Madam Speaker, today we have heard impassioned arguments from House 
Democrats about the need to gather better data on the American 
population. In fact, the majority leader just said: Obviously, we take 
information to better provide services to Americans. That is what he 
said.
  As required by the Constitution, the decennial Census is carried out 
every 10 years to conduct an actual enumeration ``in such manner as 
Congress shall by law direct.''
  It is well past time--it is well past time that Congress, again, 
directs the Census Bureau to collect data on the citizenship of 
respondents.
  I realize that many of my colleagues do not believe that there is a 
crisis on our southern border. But just last month, CBP had 239,416 
encounters along the southern border. And what that means is every 
encounter is either a surrender or an arrest of somebody who is 
illegally in the country.
  Of those, 25 percent involved an individual who had at least one 
prior encounter in the previous 12 months. This does not include the 
number of known and unknown getaways which, last year, are estimated to 
have been a million individuals we don't know anything about.
  So whether someone is a U.S. citizen is an important data point that 
should be recorded in the Census and on other Federal data surveys. If 
we are going to get information, as the majority leader said, this 
should be in that panoply of information.
  As we have heard today from my colleague across the aisle, data from 
these Federal surveys inform policy decisions. For instance, decennial 
Census data informs Federal funding and enforcement of the Voting 
Rights Act.

                              {time}  1515

  I believe we should know whether the Federal Government is serving 
its citizens well, but how can we do that when we do not know how many 
citizens there are, how many actual citizens there are, or where they 
live?
  Today, I will offer a straightforward solution to this problem as a 
motion to recommit. If we adopt the motion to recommit, we will 
instruct the Committee on Oversight and Reform to consider an amendment 
to require the Federal surveys covered by the bill--including the U.S. 
Census--to also ask respondents whether they are U.S. citizens.
  In contrast to asking intrusive questions about sexual orientation 
that serve no legitimate purpose, the Federal Government should have a 
better understanding of the U.S. citizens residing in America and those 
who are not citizens.
  This information will better inform lawmakers and ensure the 
government is working to better the lives of Americans, which is what I 
have heard is the stated goal of the Democrats.

[[Page H5860]]

  It is time that the U.S. Government--and U.S. Congress, especially--
works to protect the prosperity of the American people. Such serious 
work starts with strong borders and a sound immigration policy that is 
actually enforced.
  Contrary to what the chairwoman stated in the Rules Committee, the 
Supreme Court has not decided it is unlawful to inquire about 
citizenship on the Census.
  The Supreme Court--let me reiterate that--has not said you cannot 
inquire about citizenship. That is false. It has been done 
historically.
  In the prior case before the Supreme Court, the process leading up to 
putting the question on the Census was flawed. Upon that basis, the 
question was decided.
  But the decision states, ``The Enumeration Clause permits Congress, 
and by extension, the Secretary, to inquire about citizenship on the 
Census questionnaire.''
  That is what we are doing. We are following the Constitution as has 
been recognized by the Supreme Court. It is critical to ensuring an 
accurate apportionment of Representatives in the House based on the 
Census--in this House--unlike the information this bill seeks to 
collect. Similar to your underlying bill, this information will be 
voluntarily gathered.
  Today, the American people will finally get to see their 
Representatives take a vote on this important matter.
  Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to insert the text of the 
amendment in the Record immediately prior to the vote on the motion to 
recommit.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Arizona?
  There was no objection.
  Mrs. CAROLYN B. MALONEY of New York. Madam Speaker, I respond to his 
statements on the citizenship status in saying that it should be 
collected with LGBT data.
  I want to make it very clear that the citizenship question should not 
be part of this bill. Requiring that citizenship questions be included 
in this bill is a duplication and totally unnecessary.
  The Census Bureau and the Bureau of Labor Statistics already ask 
about citizenship status in two different surveys: the American 
Community Survey, and the Current Population Survey.
  This data is collected in addition to the volumes of citizenship 
records collected and maintained by the Department of Homeland 
Security.
  The Trump administration's efforts to add the citizenship question to 
the Census was a fear tactic, intended to discourage specific people 
from participating in the Census, and to exclude them from the count.
  Requiring citizenship data collection on Federal surveys was, and 
always will be, about suppressing data sets and denying U.S. citizens 
and residents the representation and resources they need to contribute 
to their communities.
  Now, the Supreme Court ruled that the Trump administration's stated 
reasoning for adding the citizenship question was ``pretextual.''
  Unlike the citizenship question, collecting data on sexual 
orientation, gender identity, and variations in sex characteristics 
will allow individuals to receive the proper care and resources they 
need to thrive, while helping to combat the discrimination they face 
every day.
  Unlike the citizenship question, these questions will be voluntary, 
and respondents' privacy will be vigorously protected.
  Madam Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman 
from Rhode Island (Mr. Cicilline), Chair of the LGBTQ+ Equality Caucus.
  Mr. CICILLINE. Madam Speaker, I thank the chairwoman for yielding.
  I rise in strong support of the LGBTQI+ Data Inclusion Act. I will 
say it is troubling for me to hear of the ongoing effort by our 
Republican colleagues to cancel the LGBT community.
  Efforts are underway to be sure that you are not allowed to speak 
about members of the LGBTQ community, the ``Don't Say Gay'' laws that 
are percolating in State legislatures and that have been passed in 
some; efforts underway to ban books that include depictions of members 
of our community; and now, today, an effort to oppose collection of 
data so you can pretend we don't exist.
  We are not going to tolerate that because LGBTQ+ members have existed 
in this country for a very long time, and for far too long, Federal 
surveys have failed to collect critical data on our community.
  But we know even with the limited data that we have that the LGBTQ 
community is facing many, many great challenges. LGBTQI+ people face 
higher rates of unemployment, poverty, and housing insecurity and have 
worse physical and mental health outcomes than their peers. That is a 
fact.
  These adverse experiences are not just a consequence of who they are, 
but they are a consequence of the way the LGBTQI+ community is treated 
in our country and in society.
  They are disparities that are a result of a society where 
discrimination, rejection, harassment, even bullying of LGBTQI+ people 
is still common. They are the result not of our identities, but of how 
society treats members of our community.
  Unfortunately, we are in particularly perilous times for our 
community because in the last year alone, State legislatures have 
enacted more than two dozen anti-LGBTQI+ laws. Is it any surprise that 
our community still has so many obstacles to overcome?
  While we know of some of these obstacles, we lack clear, 
comprehensive Federal data on our community and our experiences. The 
LGBTQI+ Data Inclusion Act will change that.
  Good policy comes from good data. If we are going to better serve the 
LGBTQI+ community, we need to be represented in Federal studies and 
surveys so that we can better tailor policy solutions and address the 
most pressing issues facing LGBTQI+ Americans.
  As States move to codify discrimination into law, it is even more 
critical than ever that the Federal Government collect this data on our 
experiences so that we will have better data to be able to develop 
better tools to tackle the many obstacles that face our community.
  You know, the whole purpose of this is a recognition that 
particularly for LGBTQ+ youth, which seems to be the real target of 
this effort to cancel, this cancel culture, that they deserve to be 
treated with respect and kindness and empathy like every other kid.
  It is imperative that we collect data so that young people can 
understand that they matter, and that when we think about mental health 
strains and housing instability and more, that we are going to develop 
solutions that address their issues.
  This legislation is about making us better as a country, more 
inclusive, making us better policymakers, while preserving the privacy 
of all people in the United States, including children.
  You know, some people in this Chamber want to deprive LGBTQ youth of 
the care and the resources they need to live healthy, authentic lives. 
They are making inaccurate claims about today's legislation for that 
reason.
  Let me remind you: The Trevor Project just released a report. Madam 
Speaker, 45 percent of LGBTQ youth seriously considered suicide in the 
past year. Almost half of these kids in the LGBTQ community seriously 
considered killing themselves.
  Madam Speaker, 25 percent of LGBTQ youth experience homelessness or 
housing insecurity. If you are an LGBTQ youth, you are four times as 
likely to attempt to kill yourself, and 43 percent of trans kids report 
being bullied in school.
  So these are real challenges. Nobody should be okay with that. We 
want to make sure, as so many leading medical organizations have 
already affirmed, the importance of providing safe, supportive 
environments for LGBTQI youth and young people to grow up.
  By ensuring that we have robust, exclusive data, today's legislation 
will help to ensure that our policies provide every family in this 
country and every LGBTQI+ young person access to the resources they 
need.
  We should all want that. You just can't cancel a group of folks 
because you don't like them. This is America. Every single person 
deserves to be counted, deserves to be respected, deserves to have 
access to their government, and the collection of data does a critical 
part of that work.
  I will end by thanking Chairman Grijalva for introducing this 
legislation, thanking Chairwoman Maloney for

[[Page H5861]]

helping shepherd this bill to the floor and for her strong advocacy, 
and I urge my colleagues: Think about those statistics. Think about the 
young people who are being impacted when you vote, and vote ``yes.''
  Mrs. CAROLYN B. MALONEY of New York. Madam Speaker, I thank the 
gentleman for his extraordinary statement, and I reserve the balance of 
my time.
  Mr. COMER. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Arizona (Mr. Biggs).
  Mr. BIGGS. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  Madam Speaker, I just want to cover and address some of the 
statements made by the chairwoman regarding my previous statement.
  She admitted in her statement that several surveys already gather the 
info that they seek in the underlying bill. Yet, that was a rationale 
for not asking the citizenship question.
  What is good for the goose is good for the gander. You are already 
collecting some of this information, as you admitted, from 5 different 
agencies, and you want to expand it to 130. You said, well, you guys 
get it from the Department of Labor statistics on the question of 
citizenship. Hey, let's get it all across the board. Let's do it all 
across the board. Same rationale.
  The chairwoman said the LGBTQ question will be voluntary, but the 
citizenship question is not. That is simply untrue. If you look at the 
amendment, that would be there.
  We discussed this in the committee. All you are doing is you are 
adding, in some cases, just the word ``citizenship'' to the questions 
that you are already asking, or you are asking whether or not the 
respondent is a citizen of the United States.
  That is voluntary. It is not mandatory. That is just untrue to say 
that.
  Then the argument was made that the Supreme Court used a rationale 
that was inaccurate. The Supreme Court rationale for not allowing the 
Trump administration, through an executive agency, to ask the 
citizenship question on the Census was this: It was because the process 
was not initiated by Congress.
  The Supreme Court specifically stated, ``The Enumeration Clause 
permits Congress, and by extension, the Secretary, to inquire about 
citizenship on the Census questionnaire.''
  It had not been done by Congress. It had been done by a lower-level 
agency. So all of those things should now dispel the arguments against 
including this amendment. That is why I am going to encourage everyone 
in this body to support the motion to recommit.

  Mrs. CAROLYN B. MALONEY of New York. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes 
to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee), the distinguished 
chief deputy whip.
  Ms. JACKSON LEE. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from New 
York, Chairwoman of the Oversight Committee, for her leadership, and 
Chairman Grijalva for his dynamic leadership, as well.
  I rise today because I just feel moved by the moment to really talk 
about truth in the moments that I have. I started this morning by 
citing the Declaration of Independence that said, we all are created 
equal--a portion thereof--with the unalienable rights of life and 
liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
  It is important that today in Pride Month, as I recognize my 
constituents in Houston, all of them, and the caucus that has been a 
steadfast advocate in Houston for the rights of all people in the 
LGBTQI community.
  It is important to be counted, to be recognized, and I want to 
emphasize, again, the distortion of how punitive this will be. It is 
voluntary.
  I know my constituents. Some of them don't even fill out the Census 
because they are free. They know they don't have to do it. Some of them 
don't answer questions on the Census.

                              {time}  1530

  For anyone to suggest that this would be punitive and that people 
would be fearful and they would think not to do it, it is voluntary. 
And I can assure you that this community, LGBTQI+ Americans, remains 
vulnerable to discrimination on a daily basis.
  Only 21 States have laws that explicitly prohibit discrimination 
based on sexual orientation in employment, housing, and public 
accommodations, and only 20 States have such protections for gender 
identity.
  H.R. 4176, the LGBTQI+ Data Inclusion Act, is to include and affirm 
and to be counted.
  Do you realize that in most States a same-sex couple can get married 
on Saturday, then be legally denied service at a restaurant on Sunday, 
be fired from their jobs on Monday, and evicted from their apartment on 
Tuesday?
  We thought we would be past that after years of working and fighting, 
but it is important to note that this bill will provide us with the 
appropriate information.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Ms. Ross). The time of the gentlewoman has 
expired.
  Mrs. CAROLYN B. MALONEY of New York. I yield such time as she may 
consume to the gentlewoman from Texas.
  Ms. JACKSON LEE. Madam Speaker, it is high time that we provide equal 
protection for all members of the LGBTQI community in accordance with 
the 14th Amendment.
  H.R. 4176--again, not punitive--will take us one more step forward in 
the decades-long journey toward equality by creating a tool kit through 
which our LGBTQI community members can be represented and the 
demographic data can be taken.
  Let me just simply say that the numbers speak truth. I said I wanted 
to discuss a moment of truth. When we have the data, we can help with 
housing, healthcare, schooling, or special needs that this community 
would have, representation as it relates to them being counted in 
Federal funding that may be necessary to aid in their circumstances.
  I am reminded of tragedies that have happened before. Does anyone 
remember a young man being assailed against a fence just because he was 
part of the LGBTQI+ community?
  I met with Matthew Shepard's mother. I remember these atrocities.
  I see in a State like mine that transgender families are threatened 
over trying to find resources for their children. We love our children. 
We love our families.
  The only thing I can see in this legislation is the importance of 
affirming, counting, treating with dignity, and recognizing that this 
wonderful community, the LGBTQI+ community, they, too, are America. We, 
too, are America.
  This is a moment of truth, and it is simply collecting data, 
punishing no one but uplifting all Americans. I ask my colleagues to 
support H.R. 4176.
  Mr. COMER. Madam Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
  Madam Speaker, the U.S. House of Representatives should focus on 
helping the American people survive economic turmoil and defending our 
borders and national security.
  I urge House Democrats to get back to what the American people 
elected us to do: conduct oversight over the Federal Government and the 
Biden administration, which is on a path to destroy America.
  We need to hold hearings, conduct oversight, and pass legislation 
addressing the crises affecting Americans today. That is our 
constitutional responsibility. That is the responsibility of the House 
Oversight Committee.
  Instead, we are spending valuable resources and time on divisive 
political messaging bills, and that is what this is. I oppose H.R. 
4176, and I urge my colleagues to do the same.
  Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mrs. CAROLYN B. MALONEY of New York. Madam Speaker, I yield myself 
the balance of my time to close.
  I thank the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Grijalva) for introducing 
this important legislation. I am pleased that we were able to bring 
this bill before the House during Pride Month to show that we care 
about everyone in our country. We think everyone should be counted, 
everyone should be surveyed, and everyone's needs should be listened 
to.
  I particularly thank the LGBTQ+ Equality Caucus for their attention 
and work on this bill and the Committee on Oversight staff for all the 
work required to make this happen.
  I am also very grateful to the more than 124 cosponsors, my 
colleagues here in this body, and more than 200 civil rights, health, 
and scientific organizations that have supported this bill

[[Page H5862]]

and affirm the need for comprehensive Federal data collection on 
members of the LGBTQI+ communities.
  This bill, H.R. 4176, moves this country one step closer to equality 
and gives us the tools to see and support all of our communities, all 
of our constituents.
  I again urge my colleagues to support this bill. I thank the 
leadership of this body, our Speaker, our majority leader, and our 
Caucus chair, all of whom have played a role in supporting this 
legislation and moving it to a vote today.
  Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Ms. JACKSON LEE. Madam Speaker, I am proud to rise in strong support 
of H.R. 4176, the LGBTQI+ Data Inclusion Act, and to discuss my 
amendment to this legislation.
  Despite significant legal advances over the past several years, 
including marriage equality, LGBTQI+ Americans remain vulnerable to 
discrimination on a daily basis.
  Today, only 21 states have laws that explicitly prohibit 
discrimination based on sexual orientation in employment, housing, and 
public accommodations, and only 20 states have such protections for 
gender identity.
  In most states, a same-sex couple can get married on Saturday, then 
be legally denied service at a restaurant on Sunday, then be fired from 
their jobs on Monday, and evicted from their apartment on Tuesday.
  Our country is comprised of trans people of color, lesbians living 
with a disability, gay immigrants, and those experiencing all other 
manners of intersecting and layering levels of oppression and 
privilege.
  H.R. 4176 would make note of these stories and add their voices to 
the mosaic of our country.
  The data available through these newly developed federal surveys will 
allow federal agencies to create better policies and practices designed 
to accommodate the needs of all our Nation's people.
  I am conscious of the fact that if Congress expects the LGBTQI+ 
community to trust the federal government with their information, we 
must ensure their privacy and protection.
  It is imperative that this data not be used to exclude, discriminate 
against, vilify, ostracize, or in any other way negatively impact 
anyone in this already vulnerable community.
  That is a promise we make today.
  Again, I remind you of the long path to full equality we walk. Let it 
be known, however, that one day our Nation will find itself knocking on 
equality's door.
  When that happens, future LGBTQI+ Americans will look back and see 
themselves not hidden in shame, but present.
  Present in our census, in our housing surveys, in our employment 
surveys.
  They will be present in our metropolitan cities and in our rural 
towns, from the Atlantic beaches to the Pacific Northwest. From the 
forests of Alaska to the plains of my own Texas.
  Through the LGBTQI+ Data Inclusion Act, LGBTQI+ Americans will be 
able to say--I was there. I am here.
  It is high time that we provide equal protection for all members of 
the LGBTQI+ community in accordance with the 14th Amendment, which 
ensures equal protection for ALL Americans.
  H.R. 4176 will take us one more step forward in the decades-long 
journey towards equality by creating a toolkit through which our 
LGBTQI+ community members can be represented in demographic data 
collection--and ultimately protected under the law.
  This bill will require federal agencies to assess the ways in which 
they document sexuality, gender identity, and gender variance in 
surveys and provide new opportunities for LGBTQI+ individuals to self-
identify themselves--all while ensuring the privacy and dignity of the 
people involved.
  Though this legislation enacts a simple change on federal surveys, it 
represents a great gesture for our future.
  We are not just talking about numbers today.
  We are not just talking about percentages and ratios and clusters.
  We are talking about the documentation and legacy of the great 
diversity of this Nation, and about enacting tools through which that 
diversity can be represented and protected.
  As you all know, representation is the bedrock of American democracy.
  If the government does not see you, how can it serve you?
  As we discuss this Act, I especially want to keep in mind the members 
of the LGBTQI+ community who experience the fluidity and 
intersectionality that are aspects of gender and sexual identity.
  Of course, gender and sexuality are just two facets of personhood.
  Race, religion, socio-economic status, geographic region, disability 
status, and culture all play a part in crafting identity.
  Madam Speaker, all of this is true about H.R. 4176, and yet, I 
encourage my colleagues in Congress to push for more.
  That is why I believe my amendment is very important.
  My amendment would direct the Comptroller General to issue a report 
to Congress about the impact of the implementation of this Act on the 
provision of services to LGBTQI+ persons.
  It would assess the impact of H.R. 4176 by ensuring transparency into 
the correlation between the provision of services and one's gender 
identity, sexual orientation, and variations in sex characteristics.
  Data collected through this Act would be used to monitor the flow of 
social services to LGBTQI+ communities. This will encourage the 
provision of services to the LGBTQI+ community, and if there are 
shortcomings, Congress and the public will be informed of them so that 
they can be remedied soon thereafter.
  Despite our many gains, the United States is not always a welcoming 
place for individuals across the spectrum of genders and sexualities.
  This is especially true for those coming from un-affirming 
communities and families--those for whom living their authentic lives 
may come at the cost of social ties and support systems.
  For some, authenticity can be isolating.
   As my colleagues know, the depression and suicide rates of LGBTQI+ 
individuals are horrifically high.
  LGBTQI+ youth in particular are at greatest risk.
  In Texas, The Trevor Project saw nearly 15,000 crisis contacts from 
LGBTQI+ youth in 2021.
  Research consistently shows that trans and gay youth are more likely 
to experience depression when living in un-affirming or discriminatory 
environments.
  Alternatively, the presence of supportive close friends and family in 
the life of an LGBTQI+ youth has a direct positive impact on that 
youth's self-esteem and overall health.
  That supportive person could be a teacher, an athletic coach, a 
mental health counselor, or a troop leader.
  The data available in H.R. 4176 could be used to help put more of 
these mentors in the lives of LGBTQ+ youth every day.
  The LGBTQI+ Data Inclusion Act would enable agencies that provide 
mental health and other social services to gain access to a wealth of 
information about the communities they serve, so that they can better 
serve the LGBTQI+ community.
  My amendment would allow us to see if they then use this data and 
their resources to safeguard the well-being of some of our Nation's 
most vulnerable individuals.
  Ultimately, the Comptroller General study required by my amendment 
enables Congress to monitor the progress of H.R. 4176 in action.
  It is with that in mind that I urge my colleagues to step forward in 
support of the LGBTQI+ Data Inclusion Act and my amendment.
  Our lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, and intersex 
communities deserve to be documented in our Nation's history. They 
deserve to have their stories collected and used for their well-being. 
I am honored to be a part of that aim today.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. All time for debate has expired.
  Each further amendment printed in part B of House Report 117-381 
shall be considered only in the order printed in the report, may be 
offered only by a Member designated in the report, shall be considered 
as read, shall be debatable for the time specified in the report 
equally divided and controlled by the proponent and an opponent, may be 
withdrawn by the proponent at any time before the question is put 
thereon, shall not be subject to amendment, and shall not be subject to 
a demand for division of the question.


               Amendment No. 1 Offered by Ms. Jackson Lee

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 
1 printed in part B of House Report 117-381.
  Ms. JACKSON LEE. Madam Speaker, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Page 4, after line 9, insert the following (and redesignate 
     the subsequent subsections accordingly):
       (e) Report.-- Not later than 2 years after the date of the 
     enactment of this Act, the Comptroller General shall provide 
     a report to Congress on the implementation of the 
     requirements of this Act by agencies, including how the 
     implementation of such requirements by agencies affected the 
     provision of services to persons according to the gender 
     identity, sexual orientation, and variations in sex 
     characteristics of the persons.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 1191, the 
gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson

[[Page H5863]]

Lee) and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Texas.
  Ms. JACKSON LEE. Madam Speaker, I thank the sponsor of this 
legislation and the chairwoman of the Oversight and Reform Committee 
for bringing this legislation to the floor.
  Data collection is an indispensable tool to understand and address 
changes facing the LGBTQI community and other sexual- and gender-
diverse communities.
  Madam Speaker, I include in the Record an article from American 
Progress dated May 24, 2022.

                 [From American Progress, May 24, 2022]

   Collecting Data About LGBTQI+ and Other Sexual and Gender-Diverse 
                              Communities

       Data collection is an indispensable tool to understand and 
     address challenges facing LGBTQI+ and other sexual and 
     gender-diverse communities. Although strides have been made 
     in recent years, a persistent lack of routine data collection 
     on sexual orientation, gender identity, and variations in sex 
     characteristics (SOGISC) is still a substantial roadblock for 
     policymakers, researchers, service providers, and advocates 
     seeking to improve the health and well-being of LGBTQI+ 
     people. More comprehensive and accurate point-in-time and 
     longitudinal demographic data on SOGISC are crucial to:
       Advance research agendas;
       Evaluate population trends;
       Identify community-based needs;
       Provide high-quality services;
       Track and address discrimination;
       Equitably distribute funding and other resources; and
       Shape evidence-based policy solutions to promote equity and 
     reduce disparities faced by LGBTQI+ populations.
       As the size and diversity of LGBTQI+ populations in the 
     United States continue to expand, particularly among youth 
     and young adults, the importance of collecting data on these 
     communities only continues to grow. Failing to collect these 
     data can create harms by hindering the ability of 
     researchers, policymakers, service providers, and advocates 
     to understand the experiences of LGBTQI+ communities, 
     identify disparities, generate policies that promote equity, 
     and evaluate the effectiveness of those policies. Yet 
     currently, the number of federally funded surveys that 
     include questions to identify LGBTQI+ respondents is limited.
       While there are many kinds of data relevant to the 
     experiences of LGBTQI+ communities, this report focuses 
     specifically on data collection to capture SOGISC in two 
     types of settings: general population surveys and surveys of 
     LGBTQI+ communities. General population surveys assess a 
     large sample of the entire population, of which the majority 
     identify as cisgender and heterosexual and will not have 
     intersex traits. In contrast, LGBTQI+ community-based surveys 
     sample a population predominantly comprising sexual and 
     gender minorities. Community-based surveys can provide 
     important opportunities to learn more about even smaller or 
     less-studied sexual and gender minority populations, such as 
     people who are asexual, same-gender-loving, or Two-Spirit. 
     Because of their specific focus on sampling LGBTQI+ 
     populations, community-based surveys may also be more likely 
     to reach larger proportions of groups such as LGBTQI+ people 
     of color, older adults, youth, people with disabilities, 
     people receiving social welfare support services, people 
     whose primary language is not English, and people interacting 
     with the criminal legal system.
       When designing questions to accurately and effectively 
     survey either the general population or a predominantly 
     LGBTQI+ population, researchers must carefully weigh a number 
     of key considerations that are explained in this report. 
     Regardless of the type of survey, however, it is imperative 
     to ensure the following:
       Entities collecting demographic data, including data 
     related to SOGISC, do so with a specific and well-defined 
     goal, such as collecting statistics on health experiences or 
     understanding the performance of a government benefit 
     program.
       Data are collected, used, maintained, and shared only with 
     strong privacy, confidentiality, and ethical standards in 
     place to minimize the risk of data disclosure and misuse.
       Entities collecting data adopt and post clear 
     nondiscrimination and confidentiality policies. These 
     policies should identify relevant legal nondiscrimination 
     protections; state why the data are being collected and how 
     they will be used; share contact information for resources to 
     enforce protections; and provide assurance that 
     confidentiality will be respected and that participation is 
     voluntary, allowing respondents to provide well-informed 
     consent with the knowledge that disclosure is voluntary and 
     that they have the right to opt out of responding.
       Research and researchers comply with and are certified 
     through the Collaborative Institutional Training Initiative 
     and consult community-based resources about how to conduct 
     effective and ethical research with LGBTQI+ populations that 
     ensures minority populations have a voice and role in the 
     design of survey questions.
       LGBTQI+ people are meaningfully involved in question 
     development, testing, and the evaluation process.
       This report examines best practices and key considerations 
     for collecting data on SOGISC in both general population 
     surveys as well as LGBTQI+ community-based surveys. The first 
     section of the report highlights evidence related to asking 
     these questions in general population surveys and examines 
     critical considerations, as well as avenues of future 
     research that policymakers and researchers should support. 
     The second section of the report compiles both evidence from 
     existing survey designs and interviews with LGBTQI+ 
     individuals to create new suggestions and recommendations for 
     SOGISC question design in surveys of LGBTQI+ communities. 
     Ultimately, improving SOGISC data collection through these 
     kinds of general population and community-based instruments 
     is crucial to identifying disparities and crafting policy 
     solutions that promote more equitable outcomes for LGBTQI+ 
     communities.
       General population surveys are used to collect data from 
     representative samples of the population, allowing 
     researchers to create population estimates, describe 
     population demographics, assess disparities, compute 
     statistical weights for survey analysis, and develop policy, 
     program, and funding priorities. Federal, state, and local 
     governments rely on data from general population surveys such 
     as the decennial census, the American Community Survey (ACS), 
     and the Current Population Survey (CPS) for everything from 
     allocating budget resources to deciding where to locate 
     hospitals.
       The persistent lack of routine data collection on SOGISC 
     remains a significant challenge for policymakers, 
     researchers, service providers, and advocates seeking to 
     improve the health and well-being of LGBTQI+ people. 
     Currently, most surveys, including those fielded by the U.S. 
     federal government and many state governments, do not collect 
     SOGISC information. While some surveys, such as the census 
     and the ACS, now invite people to answer questions about 
     their marital status or living arrangements in ways that 
     allow researchers to identify same-sex couples, this only 
     captures a small segment of the LGBTQI+ population. By not 
     asking specific questions about SOGISC, these surveys fail to 
     account for single LGB people or LGB people who are in a 
     relationship but not cohabitating with their partner(s), as 
     well as transgender people and intersex people altogether. 
     For example, according to the latest Gallup data, just 10 
     percent of LGBT adults in the United States are married to a 
     same-sex spouse, while an additional 6 percent live with a 
     same-sex domestic partner. This means that more than 5 in 6 
     LGBT adults cannot be identified by existing questions in 
     nonexperimental surveys conducted by the U.S. Census Bureau 
     such as the ACS and the census, which only account for 
     cohabitating same-sex couples. Failing to collect SOGISC data 
     creates real harms--hindering the ability to fully understand 
     the experiences of LGBTQI+ communities; to craft sound 
     policies that are inclusive of LGBTQI+ people and their 
     needs; and to evaluate the effectiveness of policies to 
     address disparities and promote more equitable outcomes.
       More than 5 in 6 LGBT adults cannot be identified by 
     existing questions in nonexperimental surveys conducted by 
     the U.S. Census Bureau such as the ACS and the census.
       As recommended by the National Academies of Sciences, 
     Engineering, and Medicine in their 2020 report, U.S. 
     population surveys must routinely collect, analyze, and 
     report demographic data that include SOGISC questions. The 
     information gathered by general population surveys shapes 
     major policy decisions and allocations of critical resources 
     related to health care, housing, employment, education, and 
     other services and benefits, affecting the everyday lives of 
     LGBTQI+ people and making the need to adopt SOGISC measures 
     even more urgent. Notably, expanding data collection on 
     SOGISC through government population-based surveys will 
     result in a larger sample size than in privately conducted 
     surveys. This is important because larger samples allow for 
     better, more reliable study and a richer understanding of the 
     diversity of the LGBTQI+ community. Moreover, having larger 
     samples will facilitate analysis and provide greater 
     comprehension of the experiences of populations that are 
     living at the intersection of multiple marginalized 
     identities.
       Expanding and enhancing SOGISC data collection also 
     provides critical tools necessary to craft policy solutions 
     to improve outcomes and advance equity. By improving data 
     collection on LGBTQI+ populations, government agencies can 
     take meaningful steps to fulfill the directives set out by 
     executive orders 13988 and 13985, which President Joe Biden 
     signed on day one of his presidency.
       LGBTQI+ advocates have long called for the federal 
     government and researchers to add SOGISC questions to major 
     surveys and other data collection efforts as a way to begin 
     addressing the deficiency of data on LGBTQI+ populations and 
     gaps in knowledge and policy affecting LGBTQI+ people. 
     Government officials, researchers, and others have questioned 
     whether the general population, composed mainly of non-
     LGBTQI+ people, would understand these questions, answer them 
     accurately, or even refuse to answer them. The answers to 
     these questions are important because they affect the quality 
     of data gathered about LGBTQI+ people and, by extension, the 
     resources allocated, decisions made, and policies created 
     that affect LGBTQI+ communities.

[[Page H5864]]

       Importantly, numerous federally supported entities and 
     other expert bodies have issued reports to determine 
     methodological best practices and improve measurement of 
     SOGISC in federal surveys. These groups have contributed to a 
     robust and continually growing body of research providing 
     evidence that SOGISC questions can be readily deployed in 
     federally funded and other surveys. For example, evidence 
     indicates that:
       Sexual orientation and gender identity data are not 
     considered especially difficult or sensitive for survey 
     respondents to report, meaning that people generally 
     understand what the questions are asking and are willing to 
     answer them.
       Securing participation of sexual minorities in surveys does 
     not require higher levels of effort, meaning it will not 
     create added costs or obstacles that would prohibit the 
     government or other researchers from conducting more 
     inclusive data collection.
       People with intersex traits appear willing to disclose 
     their status and support collecting data on this measure in 
     research.
       People will answer sexual orientation and gender identity 
     questions even across a variety of modes (for example, 
     telephone surveys and paper surveys) and via both self-
     reporting and proxy reporting (for example, when a single 
     household member responds on behalf of all household members) 
     in federal large-scale general population surveys.
       In other words, existing evidence addresses many of the 
     major hesitations or questions posed by government 
     researchers and others. Put simply, while more research is 
     needed to continue improving SOGISC measures, evidence 
     suggests these questions can function well in major general 
     population surveys, and they should be asked. For example, in 
     2021, the Census Bureau updated its experimental data 
     collection effort on the COVID-l9 pandemic to include 
     questions about sexual orientation and gender identity in the 
     Household Pulse Survey. This historic step marks the first 
     time a Census Bureau-sponsored survey has asked sexual 
     orientation and gender identity questions and highlights the 
     ways in which these questions can--and do--work in large, 
     nationally representative surveys. Expanding LGBTQI+-
     inclusive data collection by asking SOGISC questions on 
     general population surveys is paramount to advancing equity 
     for LGBTQI+ communities.

  Ms. JACKSON LEE. Madam Speaker, I include in the Record an article 
from the National Education Association, ``New Survey Data Shows LGBTQ+ 
Youth Mental Health Crisis.''

        [From the National Education Association, May 25, 2022]

        New Survey Data Shows LGBTQ+ Youth Mental Health Crisis

       Last year, nearly half of LGBTQ+ youth seriously considered 
     killing themselves, including more than half of trans youth, 
     according to new data from The Trevor Project.
       These figures reveal a deadly, mental-health crisis among 
     high school and college-age LGBTQ+ youth of all races, which 
     has been worsened by the Covid-19 pandemic and by recent, 
     political attacks on LGBTQ+ students by state legislators 
     across the nation.
       ``The [Trevor Project] study is actually on my computer 
     screen right now to send it to my colleagues,'' says Florida 
     high school teacher Michael Woods, whose state recently 
     passed a law that enables parents to sue school districts for 
     teaching LGBTQ-positive curriculum. ``Especially here in 
     Florida, with the `Don't Say Gay' law, which should also be 
     called `Don't Say Trans,' we have a lot of kids in stress,'' 
     he says.
       The study, which involved 35,000 LGBTQ+ high school and 
     college-age youth, of various races and identities, also 
     shows how schools and colleges can help. A little more than 
     half of LGBTQ+ youth identified their school or college as 
     ``an LGBTQ-affirming space''--and those students reported 
     lower rates of attempted suicide. Even something as simple as 
     using the correct pronouns--the ones that match students' 
     gender identify--can decrease suicidal ideas.
       ``Small steps can make a big difference,'' says Joe Bento, 
     a Seattle high school teacher who also is chair of the 
     Washington state chapter of GLSEN, a national organization 
     that helps educators make schools more affirming for LGBTQ+ 
     students.
       The Trevor Project data shows how things have gone from bad 
     to worse for LGBTQ+ youth in the past two years. In 2019, 40 
     percent of LGBTQ+ seriously considered suicide; in 2021, the 
     rate hit 45 percent.
       And it's even scarier among students of color. About one in 
     five Black LGBTQ+ students attempted suicide last year, as 
     did a slightly higher rate of Indigenous LGBTQ+ students.
       Meanwhile, mental-health care is scarce. Nearly half of 
     LGBTQ+ youth--and more than half of Latino LGBTQ+ students--
     told the Trevor Project that they wanted counseling and 
     didn't get it.
       The pandemic is an obvious factor, educators say. When 
     colleges and schools switched to virtual learning, many 
     LGBTQ+ students were closeted in homes where their identities 
     are hidden. (Only 1 in 3 LGBTQ+ youth said they have LGBTQ-
     affirming homes.) These students may have lost access to 
     counselors or other supports, like a Gay-Straight Alliance or 
     GenderSexuality Alliance (GSA) club.
       ``For a lot of queer students, school is their safe 
     space,'' says Bento. ``For a year and a half, they weren't in 
     that safe space.''
       Now, students are back on campuses, in school buildings--
     but that doesn't mean everything is okay, notes Bento. After 
     two years of pandemic-related isolation and trauma, students 
     desperately need mental-health support ``When we got back, 
     that didn't necessarily happen,'' he says. ``Suddenly it's 
     state testing! And it's this, this, this! Everything is `back 
     to normal,' but normal was garbage.''
       Many students are suffering. But it's almost always the 
     most marginalized students who have the least access to 
     mental-health supports, Bento points out.
       It's not just the pandemic. Making matters worse for LGBTQ 
     students, nearly 240 anti-LGBTQ+ bills have been filed this 
     year in state legislatures, most of them targeting trans 
     people, according to an NBC News analysis.
       Many of these bills have been signed into laws that ban 
     trans women and girls from participating in high school 
     sports, prohibit trans students from using school bathrooms 
     and locker rooms that match their gender identity, and 
     restrict LGBTQ-positive school curriculum. For example, 
     Florida's new law enables parents to sue districts if they 
     think their child has had inappropriate instruction on gender 
     and sexuality. The cost of litigation will be borne by 
     districts, which already are removing curricula.
       LGBTQ+ students are very aware of laws that seek to harm 
     them, educators say--and it causes them anguish. ``They're 
     just coming back to the rigors of school [after the 
     pandemic]--and now this!'' says Woods.
       NEA and its affiliates strongly oppose these laws. This 
     spring, NEA President Becky Pringle wrote an open letter to 
     Florida students, published in the Sun-Sentinel newspaper. 
     ``From protests to walkouts, you are bravely showing these 
     politicians that you aren't afraid to stand up for yourselves 
     . . . To our students in Florida and elsewhere: We see you! 
     We hear you! We are with you!''
       For his part, Woods, an educator of 29 years, isn't afraid 
     either. He wears his ``We're All Human'' t-shirt and answers 
     his students' distressed questions. But he worries about 
     younger teachers with less job security, living in more 
     conservative areas. Many may feel like they can't be the 
     educators that students need.
       ``When young people don't feel like they have anywhere to 
     turn or anyone to talk to . . . well, I know why the stats 
     are the way they are,'' he says.
       NEA members and their unions are working hard to get more 
     supports for students. In St. Paul, Minn., educators went to 
     the brink of striking this spring to protect the presence of 
     mental-health teams in every St. Paul school. Other K12 
     unions--like in Natrona County, Wyo.--are making sure federal 
     pandemic-relief funds are spent to hire more school 
     counselors and other professionals.
       Recently, the Biden administration urged colleges and 
     universities to do the same with their money.
       But it's also possible for individual educators to create 
     affirming spaces in their offices, classrooms, buses, and 
     other spaces. ``Words matter,'' says Bento, who introduces 
     himself to his students like this: ``My name is Mr. Bento. I 
     use he/him pronouns.''
       Safe space posters are great at signaling that you support 
     your LGBTQ+ students but may not be allowable in all places. 
     ``In those places, you can still put something on your body, 
     like a lanyard,'' says Bento. (The NEA LGBTQ+ caucus, of 
     which Bento is a member, offers ``Safe Person, Safe Space'' 
     cards for educators to put in their lanyards.)
       Bento uses the word ``partner,'' instead of boyfriend or 
     girlfriend, a subtle nod to the fact that not every 
     relationship looks the same and that some students may not 
     identify as male or female. ``Think about who is not 
     represented [in your words, in your curriculum],'' urges 
     Bento.
       Yes, curriculum matters, too. (See GLSEN's inclusive 
     curriculum resource.) ``Students need curriculum that 
     reflects who they are, they need positive representation,'' 
     says Bento. ``And not just Harvey Milk! Not just the AIDS 
     epidemic! Where's the joy?''
       In fact, The Trevor Project asked LGBTQ+ youth the same 
     question: ``Where do you find joy?'' The responses can guide 
     educators in creating better spaces for all students. Answers 
     include:
       Learning about LGBTQ history;
       Learning I'm not alone and there are more people like me;
       Supportive teachers;
       Having a safe space to express gender, gender identity, and 
     sexuality;
       LGBTQ clubs on campus; and
       Living as their authentic self.

  Ms. JACKSON LEE. Madam Speaker, I include in the Record an article 
from National Public Radio titled ``The Census Bureau's first ever data 
on LGBTQ+ people indicates deep disparities.''

              [From National Public Radio, Sept. 24, 2021]

  The Census Bureau's First Ever Data on LGBTQ+ People Indicates Deep 
                              Disparities

       The U.S. Census Bureau in July began asking Americans about 
     their sexual orientation and gender identity--a watershed 
     moment that marks the first time the federal government has 
     tried to capture data on LGBTQ+ Americans in its large real-
     time national surveys.
       The results so far are preliminary, but they do indicate 
     that the disparities queer

[[Page H5865]]

     Americans experienced prior to the pandemic have continued to 
     endure 18 months in. For some, those disparities have grown 
     deeper.
       According to the data, which captures results from July 21 
     to September 13, LGBTQ+ people often reported being more 
     likely than non-LGBTQ+ people to have lost employment, not 
     have enough to eat, be at elevated risk of eviction or 
     foreclosure, and face difficulty paying for basic household 
     expenses, according to the census' Household Pulse Survey, a 
     report that measures how Americans are faring on key economic 
     markers during the pandemic.
       While think tanks like the Williams Institute at the UCLA 
     School of Law and advocate-led research groups have 
     previously studied LGBTQ+ poverty, no large government 
     population surveys, like those conducted by the census or the 
     Treasury Department, have attempted to capture the realtime 
     economic experiences of LGBTQ+ people.
       Previously, those analyses were limited to studies of 
     ``same-sex couples,'' a question the census began analyzing 
     with limited success in 1990, but that leaves out significant 
     portion of LGBTQ+ people. Lack of accurate data on the 
     population as a whole--and particularly on transgender 
     people, a group that has been chronically under surveyed--
     hampered any federal response to persisting inequities, 
     advocates say.
       ``Having this on [the Pulse survey], both as a way to 
     understand what's going on during the pandemic, but also 
     hopefully as a starting point to more federal data 
     collection, is really an important moment,'' said Bianca D.M. 
     Wilson, the senior scholar of public policy at the Williams 
     Institute.
       The data has only begun to be collected, and it's still too 
     early to tell whether the differences between groups are 
     representative of the LGBTQ+ population overall or just those 
     who were surveyed by the census at a given moment in time.
       While researchers cautioned against drawing major 
     conclusions, the trends that emerge in the data are 
     consistent with what other surveys have found prior to the 
     pandemic as a result of employment discrimination, underpay, 
     discriminatory lending practices and other policies that have 
     limited economic mobility for queer people.
       According to The 19th's analysis of the first four releases 
     of data from the census survey, as much as 23 percent of 
     LGBTQ+ people and 32 percent of trans people reported having 
     lost employment in the month before the census conducted its 
     questionnaire. About 15 to 16 percent of non-LGBTQ+ people 
     reported the same.
       About 12 percent of LGBTQ+ people said they sometimes or 
     often did not have enough to eat. For non-LGBTQ+ people, the 
     figure was between 6 and 7 percent, and for trans Americans, 
     it was as high as 24 percent. About 31 percent of queer 
     people also said they had difficulty paying for basic 
     household expenses; for non-LGBTQ+ people it was 23 percent.
       Housing insecurity was prevalent across all groups, with 
     more than 40 percent of people--both LGBTQ+ and non-LGBTQ+--
     saying they were very or somewhat likely to face eviction by 
     the end of September or October.
       It's unclear how accurate the data for transgender 
     Americans is because the sample sizes are much smaller. But 
     it does follow what is already known: Roughly 29 percent of 
     respondents to the 2015 U.S. Transgender Survey, done by the 
     National Center for Transgender Equality and seen as the only 
     comprehensive study of its kind, said they lived in poverty. 
     About 30 percent said they had experienced homelessness in 
     their lifetimes.
       ``These are sort of the systemic disparities that we 
     observed pre-pandemic, that the pandemic has not only 
     deepened for both groups, but also sort of widened,'' said 
     David Schwegman, assistant professor of public policy and 
     administration at American University, who has conducted 
     research on ``same-sex couples'' and housing discrimination.
       Wilson at the Williams Institute said that absent this kind 
     of large-scale data collection about LGBTQ+ people, 
     policymakers couldn't truly answer big questions about 
     whether attempts to address economic stress exacerbated by 
     the pandemic--like the now-expired federal eviction 
     moratorium--were working for everyone.
       But data collection is only one step toward equity.
       Dean Spade, an associate professor at Seattle University 
     School of Law who has also advised the upcoming National 
     LGBTQ+ Women's Community Survey by think tank Justice Work, 
     said that real change requires more than just counting trans 
     and LGBTQ+ people at the federal level.
       Counting marginalized people to better understand the 
     issues they face doesn't necessarily mean their suffering 
     will be addressed through policy, he noted--and trans people 
     are accustomed to social services leaving them out or not 
     being designed with them in mind. It's why trans people, for 
     example, are helping each other pay for medical procedures 
     that aren't covered by insurance, housing those experiencing 
     homelessness and creating mutual aid networks, Spade said.
       ``We're helping each other survive right now,'' he said.
       And there are still significant challenges with the data as 
     it is. Samples sizes are small, an issue that has barred 
     marginalized communities, including Asian women, Native 
     Americans and Pacific Islander women, from representation in 
     real-time data on some national surveys.
       Those small sample sizes make it difficult to draw big 
     conclusions from the data until months down the line. The 
     Census Bureau said in a statement that it currently doesn't 
     have additional analysis to offer on the data, though it did 
     publish a report on the first set of LGBTQ+ data this summer, 
     finding that LGBTQ+ people are more likely than non-LGBTQ+ 
     people to face economic hardship.
       ``The primary focus has been on collecting and releasing 
     data in a timely manner but there are plans in the future to 
     release data products that will provide additional context,'' 
     the bureau said in a statement.
       The other challenge has been crafting questions in a way 
     that takes into account knowledge gaps people may have about 
     what terminology best describes them.
       The census survey, for example, asks respondents to choose 
     which best represents how they think of themselves: ``gay or 
     lesbian''; ``bisexual''; ``something else''; ``I don't 
     know''; or ``straight, that is not gay or lesbian.'' In past 
     attempts to phrase these questions, heterosexual people have 
     been found to incorrectly mark themselves, economists said, 
     so additional phrases have been added to improve clarity.
       The survey also asks if people describe themselves as male, 
     female or transgender, and some transgender people may not 
     want to identify themselves given the rise in anti-trans 
     bills across the country, Schwegman said.
       Spade pointed to smaller studies led by advocates as 
     important pools of information that can't be found anywhere 
     else, since they ask questions about daily threats like over-
     policing and poverty.
       ``I think that those kinds of studies can be, to a lot of 
     us, more valuable than something larger that didn't ask the 
     questions or that missed whole groups of people in our 
     community,'' he said.
       The real-time data from surveys like the current census 
     one, which will be collecting responses from July 21 to 
     October 11, could help impact policies in real time. The 
     problem for pandemic-related policies being negotiated in 
     Congress this fall is that this data may be coming too late, 
     Wilson said.
       ``It's 18 months into the pandemic, and had that been the 
     starting place, we would not be looking at a sample size that 
     would create problems for all the analyses that we want to do 
     to understand a trans-specific experience,'' Wilson said.

  Ms. JACKSON LEE. Madam Speaker, my amendment would direct the 
Comptroller General to issue a report to Congress about the impact of 
the implementation of this act on the provision of services to LGBTQI+ 
persons. It would ensure the impact of H.R. 4176 by ensuring 
transparency in the correlation between the provision of services and 
one's gender identity, sexual orientation, and variation in sex 
characteristics.
  Again, I have emphasized, we want to have truth and discussion here. 
We want to be helpful. We want to affirm people and have them counted. 
Data collection through this act will be used to monitor the flow of 
social services to LGBTQI communities.
  This will encourage the provision of services to the LGBTQI+ 
community, and if there are shortcomings, Congress and the public will 
be informed of them so that they can be remedied soon thereafter.
  Despite our many gains, the United States is not always a welcoming 
place for individuals across many spectrums. This is essentially true 
for those coming from unaffirming communities and families, those for 
whom living their authentic lives may come at the cost of social ties 
and support systems.
  Madam Speaker, I ask my colleagues to support this amendment because 
it affirms children, families, our fellow colleagues, our soldiers, law 
enforcement, first responders, firefighters, teachers, people who see 
us in the retail area. It affirms America. This knowledge about who we 
are can be enormously helpful to being a better America.
  Madam Speaker, I ask my colleagues to support the Jackson Lee 
amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. For what purpose does the gentleman seek 
recognition?
  Mr. COMER. Madam Speaker, I rise in opposition to the amendment 
offered by Congresswoman Jackson Lee.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Kentucky is recognized 
for 5 minutes.
  Mr. COMER. Madam Speaker, the amendment admits that the ultimate 
purpose of this bill is to steer taxpayers' hard-earned dollars to yet 
another demographic subgroup.
  The amendment requires GAO to report on how the bill will impact 
Federal agency provision of services to individuals--in other words, 
how Federal

[[Page H5866]]

grant programs and financial assistance will be provided based on 
people's sexual orientation and gender identity.
  House Republicans believe that all Americans deserve equal treatment 
and respect. In fact, that is guaranteed under our Constitution. We 
oppose the continual dividing of Americans for political purposes. This 
amendment is pure identity politics and an abuse of taxpayer dollars.
  Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote against this amendment, 
and I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. JACKSON LEE. Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman 
from New York (Mrs. Carolyn B. Maloney), the distinguished chairwoman 
of the full committee.
  Mrs. CAROLYN B. MALONEY of New York. Madam Speaker, I rise in support 
of the Jackson Lee amendment.
  This amendment would require reporting to Congress on the impact of 
data collection on the LGBTQI+ populations, facilitated by this act, 
and the provision of services extended to those groups.
  As the chair of the Committee on Oversight and Reform, I am committed 
to ensuring the effectiveness and efficiency of government operations 
for all Americans. Reporting on the impacts of H.R. 4176 will provide 
transparency into the data collection and help inform our policymaking 
efforts.
  Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this amendment.
  Mr. COMER. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. JACKSON LEE. Madam Speaker, may I inquire how much time remains 
on each side.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentlewoman from Texas has 2 minutes 
remaining. The gentleman from Kentucky has 4 minutes remaining.
  Ms. JACKSON LEE. Madam Speaker, let me offer what we are living in. 
There are more than 300 laws that have been passed across the Nation 
that are discriminating against the LGBTQI+ community. In addition, we 
find that less than half of these 50 States are protecting this 
community. That means that there is a half loaf for many in this 
community.
  How do we remedy and educate States and local communities? We do so 
by ensuring that information is given. That is how you protect taxpayer 
dollars, that you are constructive in the use of dollars.
  This is only to help with better implementation of social services 
that are already rendered, but such social services may not be geared 
toward addressing some of the populations here in the United States.
  My amendment, which is what we always ask for, is making sure that we 
are accountable when we are addressing the concerns that have not been 
addressed in the LGBTQI+ community.
  That is what I hope most people will see. But at the same time, I 
hope my amendment characterizes what America is: a compassionate, with 
passion, caring, and humanitarian Nation.
  We go all over the world to fight for human rights, justice, and 
equality. Our soldiers put on the uniform to dignify our Constitution. 
Why not here in America?
  Do my friends on the other side of the aisle realize how many men and 
women in the United States military come from the LGBTQI+ community? 
They didn't ask questions; they put on the uniform. I know they fought 
really hard not to have questions asked.
  I ask my colleagues to support the Jackson Lee amendment for 
accountability and fairness and to recognize all of us are Americans.
  Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

                              {time}  1545

  Mr. COMER. Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 1191, the 
previous question is ordered on the amendment offered by the 
gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee).
  The question is on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from 
Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee).
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the ayes appeared to have it.
  Mr. COMER. Madam Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to section 3(s) of House Resolution 
8, the yeas and nays are ordered.
  Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, further proceedings on this question 
are postponed.


     Amendment No. 2 offered by Mrs. Carolyn B. Maloney of New York

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 
2 printed in part B of House Report 117-381.
  Mrs. CAROLYN B. MALONEY of New York. Madam Speaker, Representative 
Sean Patrick Maloney has an amendment at the desk, and I am his 
designee.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Page 4, line 22, insert after ``proxy'' the following: 
     ``(including a proxy of a deceased individual, if 
     applicable)''.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 1191, the 
gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Carolyn B. Maloney) and a Member 
opposed each will control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from New York.
  Mrs. CAROLYN B. MALONEY of New York. Madam Speaker, I yield myself 
such time as I may consume.
  Today, I rise in support of this amendment that clarifies the Federal 
surveys governed by this bill can and should collect data on deceased 
LGBTQ individuals when applicable.
  As we know, due to mistreatment and being stigmatized, LGBTQ+ youth 
are over four times more likely to attempt suicide than their peers.
  In recent years, the number of violent fatal attacks against 
transgender people have hit record highs. But importantly, the actual 
number of fatal attacks is widely believed to be undercounted. Allowing 
a proxy of a deceased person to respond to a Federal survey can right 
this wrong.
  Federal surveys often do not collect key demographic information on 
those they study, such as the gender identity or sexual orientation of 
a deceased person. As a result, we as policymakers do not have the full 
picture and cannot accurately identify disparities or create policy 
solutions that serve each person we represent.
  For example, the Justice Department's National Crime Victimization 
Survey only asks questions about the victim's sexual orientation but 
not about their gender identity.
  This potentially severe undercount of targeted violence against the 
transgender community has left us making policies with one hand tied 
behind our backs.
  This amendment ensures that researchers and policymakers can 
understand the experiences of deceased LGBTQ individuals and make more 
informed decisions as we fight for equality and justice under the law.
  Madam Speaker, I urge support of this amendment, and I reserve the 
balance of my time.
  Mr. COMER. Madam Speaker, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Kentucky is recognized 
for 5 minutes.
  Mr. COMER. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Madam Speaker, this amendment stoops to the lowest level possible--in 
fact, 6 feet under.
  It is bad enough that under H.R. 4176, House Democrats seek to 
subject living people, including children, to intrusive and 
inappropriate questions related to their private sexual orientation and 
gender identity. It is especially troublesome that House Democrats 
would allow proxies to answer such sensitive questions on behalf of 
others, as this bill allows. But shockingly, this amendment expands 
that authority to allow proxies to answer survey or Census questions 
about sexual orientation and gender identity on behalf of dead 
Americans.
  If someone claims to be a ``knowledgeable proxy,'' this amendment 
permits that individual to answer a Federal survey on behalf of a 
deceased person who can no longer answer for himself or herself.
  With this amendment, someone who has guarded their personal privacy 
their entire life will have to worry that sensitive aspects of their 
personal life will be shared with the Federal Government after they die 
or worry that it could even be made up. How is collecting this 
information even useful at all?

[[Page H5867]]

  It is hard to imagine making the underlying bill much worse, but this 
amendment succeeds with flying colors.
  I urge my colleagues to reject this amendment and vote to protect 
Americans' ability to simply rest in peace.
  Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mrs. CAROLYN B. MALONEY of New York. Madam Speaker, I urge support of 
this amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 1191, the 
previous question is ordered on the amendment offered by the 
gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Carolyn B. Maloney).
  The question is on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from New 
York (Mrs. Carolyn B. Maloney).
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the ayes appeared to have it.
  Mr. COMER. Madam Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to section 3(s) of House Resolution 
8, the yeas and nays are ordered.
  Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, further proceedings on this question 
are postponed.


     Amendment No. 3 Offered by Mrs. Carolyn B. Maloney of New York

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 
3 printed in part B of House Report 117-381.
  Mrs. CAROLYN B. MALONEY of New York. Madam Speaker, I rise as 
designee for Congresswoman Rashida Tlaib's amendment made in order by 
the rule.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Page 2, line 20, insert after ``confidentiality'' the 
     following: ``, including protocols for anonymizing data 
     collected and destroying personally-identifiable information 
     at the appropriate time and not later than three years after 
     the date on which the information is collected''.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 1191, the 
gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Carolyn B. Maloney) and a Member 
opposed each will control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from New York.
  Mrs. CAROLYN B. MALONEY of New York. Madam Speaker, this 
straightforward amendment requires the agencies collecting information 
through this bill to create standards and protocols for anonymizing and 
destroying personally identifiable information at the appropriate time.
  This amendment is a strong addition to the underlying bill, as it 
ensures that the necessary demographic information collected will be 
responsibly destroyed to fully protect an individual's privacy.
  Complete and accurate data collection is essential to informing 
policies, laws, and programs that address the needs of our communities.
  Individuals who identify as LGBTQI+ have been underrepresented in 
Federal data collection efforts for generations. This critical 
information has been missing from this community in all areas of data 
collection and has led to worsened outcomes compared to individuals who 
are fully counted in Federal data collection.
  I am proud to support this commonsense pro-privacy amendment, and I 
urge my colleagues to do the same.
  Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. COMER. Madam Speaker, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Kentucky is recognized 
for 5 minutes.
  Mr. COMER. Madam Speaker, I rise in opposition to the amendment which 
ironically highlights the underlying bill's serious intrusion into 
Americans' privacy.
  When the government collects very personal and sensitive information, 
as H.R. 4176 seeks to recklessly expand, Americans' data regrettably 
becomes the target of malicious actors.
  Too often, we see this story play out in our government, the over-
collection of Americans' private information being hacked or improperly 
disclosed.
  From the leaking of Americans' tax records to the breach of Federal 
employees' entire background investigation files, the Federal 
government does not have a very good track record of securing private 
data. Yet, this amendment allows government agencies to place 
Americans' most private data at risk for up to 3 entire years.
  Republicans will not stand for subjecting Americans' most private 
information to cyber hackers and other wrongdoers, information that 
should not even be collected in the first place.
  Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote against this amendment, 
and I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mrs. CAROLYN B. MALONEY of New York. Madam Speaker, I urge support of 
this amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 1191, the 
previous question is ordered on the amendment offered by the 
gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Carolyn B. Maloney).
  The question is on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from New 
York (Mrs. Carolyn B. Maloney).
  The amendment was agreed to.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 1(c) of rule XIX, further 
consideration of H.R. 4176 is postponed.

                          ____________________