[Congressional Record Volume 170, Number 82 (Friday, May 10, 2024)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages E474-E475]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                        EQUAL REPRESENTATION ACT

                                 ______
                                 

                               speech of

                        HON. HARRIET M. HAGEMAN

                               of wyoming

                    in the house of representatives

                         Wednesday, May 8, 2024

  Ms. HAGEMAN. Mr. Speaker, I wish to reiterate Congress's intent to 
further describe its expectations of the executive branch when 
interpreting, administering, and complying with this bill's provisions 
should it become law. The legislative intent of this bill is simple, 
yet Congress is compelled to further clarify the record on this bill to 
pre-empt an executive branch that routinely seeks to avoid the letter 
of the law through rule- and policy-making, and in the face of an 
administration opposed to this bill.
  The Fourteenth Amendment establishes that a U.S. citizen is a person 
born or naturalized in the U.S. Federal law further clarifies that a 
U.S. citizen is someone who is a citizen of the U.S. by law, birth, or 
naturalization. Under H.R. 7109, it is this citizenship status that the 
federal government is to collect through the decennial census, and then 
determine apportionment and the electoral college. Should this bill 
become law, Congress intends the executive branch to use this 
definition when implementing the Act, and no rule or policy can 
infringe on this requirement.
  Congress would typically expect the executive branch to execute all 
of the Nation's lawful force as instructed by the legislative branch 
and as required by the separation-of-powers provisions found in the 
Constitution. Congressional and judicial scrutiny of the acts of the 
executive branch has continued to increase over time because of its 
propensity to ignore, misinterpret, or misapply Congressionally imposed 
restrictions or mandates. The current administration has a track record 
of routinely pushing the limits of, and outright ignoring, the law to 
achieve political goals through rulemaking and other executive policy.
  The Biden Administration's regulatory abuse is exemplified through a 
variety of actions, such as the Department of Education's Income Drive 
Repayment Program; a slate of Environmental Protection Act rules, such 
as Multi-Pollutant Emissions Standards for Model Years 2027. Later 
Light-Duty and Medium-Duty Vehicles, and the Clean Power Plan 2.0; the 
Bureau of Land Management's Conservation and Landscape Health Rule; and 
the Security and Exchange Commission's Enhancement and Standardization 
of Climate-Related Disclosures for Investors. None of these rulemakings 
find a foundation in the laws, yet the Administration has moved forward 
with

[[Page E475]]

them in furtherance of a political agenda. The scope of this issue is 
further confirmed as a contributing factor in the Supreme Court's 
consideration of Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo.
  Congress should also be concerned about the Biden Administration's 
willingness to carry out this Act as written in light of its stated 
opposition to the Equal Representation Act. Just this week, the Biden 
Administration issued a formal Statement of Administration Policy 
``strongly opposing the bill.'' Contrary to the Administration's 
statement, this law is imperative to gathering important information on 
the number of non-citizens living here, to the integrity of U.S. 
elections, and to ensuring that only American citizens are counted 
towards Congressional apportionment. This is especially so at a time 
when the Biden Administration is allowing non-citizens en masse into 
the country.
  Congress intends to collect information on the citizenship status of 
all census respondents, using the legal definition of a United States 
citizen, and to use this count to determine Congressional apportionment 
and the electoral college. No administrative rulemaking or policy can 
or should be used to waive, circumvent, provide exceptions to, or 
otherwise change the intent of Congress in the Equal Representation 
Act.

                          ____________________