[Congressional Record Volume 169, Number 206 (Thursday, December 14, 2023)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages E1227-E1228]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




   OPPOSITION TO H. RES. 927, CONDEMNING ANTISEMITISM ON UNIVERSITY 
                                CAMPUSES

                                 ______
                                 

                          HON. BETTY McCOLLUM

                              of minnesota

                    in the house of representatives

                      Thursday, December 14, 2023

  Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to H. Res. 927.
  Let me be clear--I condemn antisemitism on our university and college 
campuses in the strongest possible terms. If I thought this resolution 
was a good faith effort to combat antisemitism, I'd support it. 
Regrettably, that is not the case.
  Like many of my colleagues, I was disappointed by the testimony 
provided by the presidents of Harvard, MIT, and UPenn. Calling for 
genocide is dangerous and intolerable, and the presidents should have 
used their time in front of the Education and Workforce Committee to 
explicitly condemn attacks against the Jewish community and affirm 
their commitment to protecting Jewish and Arab students experiencing 
hate. Those private institutions are now deciding how to proceed with 
their leadership and make amends for their offensive statements.
  This resolution does nothing to address the problem of antisemitism 
on campuses. Instead, House Republicans are once again using Jewish 
pain to score political points. There are many ways that Congress can 
address the rise in hate--for example, implementing President Biden's 
National Strategy to Counter Antisemitism. Or, instead of cutting $35 
million from the Department of Education's Office for Civil Rights that 
protects Jewish students on campus, they could join Democrats in fully 
funding the office. This resolution fails to do either, and instead of 
funding these important initiatives, the House Republican majority is 
continuing to hide behind empty words--and actions speak louder than 
words. I uphold and include in the Record  the comments made by my 
colleague, The Honorable Jamie Raskin (MD-08) made on the House Floor 
on December 13, 2023.
  For these reasons, I must oppose the resolution.

       * Remarks by Rep. Jamie Raskin per the United States House 
     of Representatives Congressional Record, Volume 169. Issue 
     205, December 13, 2023.
       Mr. RASKIN. Mr. Speaker, I rise to oppose this resolution 
     which, to my knowledge, would mark the first time in American 
     history that the House of Representatives would vote to tell 
     private college and university presidents to resign. I want 
     all of my colleagues to think very seriously about what this 
     means for us today and in the future.
       We are all profoundly disturbed by the resurgence of anti-
     Semitism and racism in campus towns, including death threats, 
     serious death threats against Jewish students at Cornell, and 
     actual shootings and attempted murder of three Palestinian-
     American students in Burlington, Vermont.
       We all want to express our outrage in House resolutions, 
     which we have done more than 20 times as a House of 
     Representatives, and numerous times even since October 7. For 
     example, on November 2, we passed H. Res. 798, which 
     condemned all forms of anti-Semitism on college campuses, 
     denounced any support for terrorist groups on campus, 
     reaffirmed the free speech rights of Jewish students and 
     faculty, and urged enforcement of Federal civil rights laws 
     to protect Jewish students against anti-Semitism.
       Why do we need this resolution? The only thing new about it 
     is it would have the U.S. House of Representatives call 
     specifically for the resignation of two college presidents, a 
     call that has been slipped in at the bottom of page 2 of the 
     resolution.
       This extraordinary passage comes close to being what the 
     Constitution calls a bill of attainder, which is the 
     unconstitutional imposition by Congress on a specific citizen 
     or citizens of a criminal punishment or stigma by the 
     Congress itself. Although this resolution is not a criminal 
     punishment or stigma against specific citizens, it is 
     undoubtedly a civil punishment and stigma against specific 
     American citizens.
       How many of you would like the president of the college 
     where you went or where your children go to be walking around 
     with a congressional resolution telling them to resign?
       Everyone knows that this will be an academic scarlet letter 
     and a professional death sentence for anyone carrying it 
     around. Does anyone think that UPenn President Liz Magill, 
     who has already resigned in the face of Ms. Stefanik's 
     ceaseless campaign to force her out, will ever be able to 
     find another college presidency? Give me a break.
       Now, I hold no brief for the college presidents' overly 
     legalistic, ethically tone-deaf answers awkwardly advanced in 
     response to Ms. Stefanik's rapidfire, yes-no questions. It 
     should not be difficult for anybody to say in an age of 
     rampant gun violence and lax Republican gun laws, which have 
     put tens of millions of AR-15s in circulation in our society, 
     anyone calling for genocide of the Jews, or anyone else, 
     should be sent immediately a campus security detail to see if 
     they pose the risk of harm to other people or if they need an 
     immediate mental health exam. If there is not an imminent 
     threat, surely the call for genocide of the Jews by 
     definition constitutes a hostile learning environment and 
     should occasion aggressive disciplinary action.
       Where is the common sense on the part of the college 
     presidents? Where is the common sense in the Congress of the 
     United States of America?
       Calling for the resignation of private individuals at 
     private universities would be a dramatic and unprecedented 
     departure for the U.S. Congress, which has never before voted 
     to tell a college president to resign.
       Before we affix this lifelong stigma, reproach, and 
     dishonor on a private citizen, do you think perhaps we should 
     offer them some kind of due process, the kind of due process 
     that even George Santos got and that Donald Trump is getting 
     all over America right now for his 91 Federal and State 
     felony charges?
       The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Meuser). The time of the 
     gentleman has expired.
       Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 2 
     minutes to the gentleman from Maryland.
       Mr. RASKIN. Mr. Speaker, should Harvard President Claudine 
     Gay, who is the first Haitian American ever to serve in that 
     position, and Sally Kornbluth, who is Jewish, get the chance 
     to explain what they are actually doing to combat racism and 
     anti-Semitism at their schools and what they have done in 
     their lives and in their careers to oppose anti-Semitism and 
     racism, which are the gateways to destruction of liberal 
     democracy? Do we care about that, or is this just a bunch of 
     drive-by talking points?
       Is it relevant that the Harvard and MIT boards have made 
     unanimous statements affirming the leadership of their two 
     college presidents? Are we saying that their boards don't 
     matter or they are indifferent to anti-Semitism and the 
     leaders of the Freedom Caucus knowbetter than the Jewish 
     president of MIT what anti-Semitism is?
       Now I know these two were the presidents testifying before 
     Ms. Stefanik, but are we sure that these two are even the 
     worst in the country when it comes to bias and 
     discrimination? Is this a one-shot deal, or, as Ms. Stefanik 
     promises, is this just the beginning? Are we going to go 
     through all of the college and university presidents in 
     America? What about the CEOs of the businesses? Maybe they 
     are not performing to her satisfaction either.
       Indeed, maybe there are college presidents who have looked 
     the other way in not hypothetical cases of anti-Semitism and 
     racism but real cases of anti-Semitism and racism. What about 
     them? Are we going to let them go, or are we going to go 
     after them? Maybe we should determine who the worst are 
     before we start using the resources of the House of 
     Representatives to call for people to resign.
       Are there college presidents, by the way, who looked the 
     other way when there was sexual abuse of college male 
     wrestling team members, rape of students, or female gymnasts 
     or female soccer players? Are we interested in that now that 
     we are superintending higher education in America, now that 
     we are the appellate review board for the colleges?
       The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has 
     expired.
       Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 1 
     minute to the gentleman from Maryland.
       The SPEAKER pro tempore. Members are reminded to direct 
     their remarks to the Chair.
       Mr. RASKIN. Mr. Speaker, are we prepared to become the 
     national academic appeals panel for college presidents, 
     coaches, and professors, or is that perhaps best left to the 
     universities themselves?
       Maybe it is that we just don't have a positive legislative 
     agenda of our own to lower drug prices in America, to get aid 
     to our democratic allies in Ukraine against the fascist 
     imperialist thug Vladimir Putin. Maybe we don't have anything 
     real to do, so we decide instead to go around and start 
     lecturing

[[Page E1228]]

     the college presidents and the college boards all over 
     America.
       In the absence of a real program for America, the majority 
     is filling our hours with censures, expulsions, motions to 
     vacate the speakership, overthrow their own leaders, and, of 
     course, impeachment of President Biden for what? For doing 
     nothing wrong. That is all that they give us. This 
     cannibalistic instinct they have unleashed now turns on 
     private citizens, academic leaders who will wear the scarlet 
     letter ``A'' so they can have some more press conferences.
       Vote ``no'' on this resolution.

                          ____________________