[Congressional Record Volume 171, Number 65 (Thursday, April 10, 2025)]
[House]
[Pages H1588-H1593]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
HIGHLIGHTING THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
(Under the Speaker's announced policy of January 3, 2025, Mr. Kiley
of California was recognized for 60 minutes as the designee of the
majority leader.)
Mr. KILEY of California. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to highlight ten
ways in which the State of California is currently under Federal
investigation. In particular, the Newsom administration is under
Federal investigation.
The New York Times recently ran a story on this topic with the
headline, ``Trump Takes Aim at California Six Times in 24 Hours.''
The question was asked: Why is the administration targeting
California? They call it a multipronged assault on California that has
begun in earnest. That is actually the wrong question. Why the
administration is targeting California is the wrong question. The
appropriate question is: Why is California so flagrantly violating
Federal law in so many different ways?
In the article, the junior Senator in our State, Adam Schiff, is
quoted as
[[Page H1589]]
saying: ``The President had a `partisan vendetta against California.'''
Senator Schiff says that he is ``continuing to weaponize the Federal
Government against the one in ten Americans.''
Of course, that is not it at all. Protecting the civil rights of
Californians is not weaponizing the Federal Government. It what is the
Federal Government is supposed to do and what it is required to do
under established law.
What Senator Schiff and others are so upset about is that they are
used to one-party rule in California being absolutely unchecked. They
are used to radicalism and having absolutely no counterweight. They are
used to Governor Newsom. His only motivation is his own political self-
promotion. He has a supermajority legislature and other statewide-
elected officials that simply go along with whatever he says or does,
regardless of how much damage it does to our State and regardless of
how clearly it violates Federal law.
When The New York Times asked my opinion for this article, I said:
``Extreme policies and unchecked one-party rule have lowered the
quality of life across our State. All Californians will benefit from
greater accountability. We need balance and common sense.''
Investigation into Male Athletes Participation in Girls' and Women's
Sports
Mr. KILEY of California. Mr. Speaker, I will discuss today the ten
ways in which Federal investigations are restoring that sense of
balance and common sense and assuring compliance with the law.
Number one is on the issue of men in women's sports. The State has
continued to be defiant. Recently, the U.S. Department of Education's
Office for Civil Rights announced a direct investigation into the
California Interscholastic Federation because of its refusal to follow
antidiscrimination laws related to girls and women's sports. This
includes the possibility of allowing male athletes to compete in
women's sports and use women's intimate facilities.
Governor Newsom has received a letter from U.S. Secretary of
Education Linda McMahon. The letter warns the Governor that California
could lose Federal funds if the State continues allowing transgender
athletes to play in girls' and women's sports.
Secretary of Education McMahon wrote: ``I am officially asking you to
inform this Department whether you will remind schools in California to
comply with Federal law by protecting sex-separated spaces and
activities.''
She also wrote: ``Allowing participation in sex-separated activities
based on `gender identity' places schools at risk of Title IX
violations and loss of Federal funding. As Governor, you have a duty to
inform California school districts of this risk.''
Interestingly enough, Governor Newsom actually recently stated that
he believes it is unfair for the State to allow men to compete in
women's sports. Yet, he has taken absolutely no action to stop this
unlawful practice.
Investigation into Alleged Violations of the Family Educational Rights
and Privacy Act
Mr. KILEY of California. Mr. Speaker, the second ongoing
investigation relates to California's policy of forcing school
districts and schools to keep secrets from parents about their own
children. The U.S. Department of Education's Student Privacy Policy
Office has launched an investigation into the California Department of
Education for alleged violations of the Family Educational Rights and
Privacy Act, FERPA, which gives parents the right to access their
children's educational data.
It is alleged the California Department of Education has abdicated
the responsibilities FERPA imposes because of a new California State
law that prohibits school personnel from disclosing a child's gender
identity to that child's parents.
What happened in California is there are a number of school districts
that have said that they are simply going to hide this information from
parents. They will not tell parents if their child changes their name
or pronouns or anything like that.
There are other districts that say that this is not right. We
actually want to make sure we are being open and transparent with
parents. They passed their own policy, saying, no, our policy is that
we believe that parents have a right to know this.
What the State then did is they started suing these districts. They
tried to get legal judgments against them, saying they were required
under law to lie to parents about their children. Fortunately, those
lawsuits are being rejected.
The State legislature then followed up with a statewide law, saying
that it is now the policy of the State that they are not allowed to
communicate this information with parents. The school districts are not
allowed to have any policy that allows them to communicate this
information with parents.
Mr. Speaker, think about the absurdity of this. In California,
teachers are forced to use one name and one set of pronouns with a
student in class. Then their parents come in for a conference, and they
are supposed to switch names and switch pronouns and doctor their
assignments and the names written on them. This has actually been done
in documented cases in California.
Thankfully, this Federal law of protecting the privacy right of
students and the right of parents to know this information is on the
books. Accordingly, the Department of Education has launched a Federal
investigation.
Investigations Relating to Racial Discrimination in California Higher
Education
Mr. KILEY of California. Mr. Speaker, the third ongoing investigation
relates to the issue of racial discrimination in California higher
education. The Department of Justice under Attorney General Bondi is
investigating several California universities to assess compliance with
the 2023 U.S. Supreme Court ruling that ended affirmative action in
college admissions. This is notable because not only is this now the
supreme law of the land, per the recent Supreme Court decision, that
there must be equal access but it is also overwhelmingly the expressed
will of California voters.
Just a few years ago, in 2020, the supermajority legislature tried to
repeal an existing State constitutional provision that forbade racial
discrimination in college admissions. They put it directly on the
ballot. By a supermajority, they passed a measure to put it on the
ballot. The people of California said no.
Despite the fact the campaign for this initiative had a massive 10-1
spending advantage, the people of California voted 57 percent to 43
percent to say, no, we want equality under law to continue to be the
policy of our State. This investigation by Attorney General Bondi is
not only about assuring compliance with Federal law but it is also
going to protect the clearly expressed will of the people of
California.
Investigation Relating to the Crisis of Anti-Semitism at Universities
Mr. KILEY of California. Mr. Speaker, the fourth investigation
relates to the crisis of anti-Semitism at our universities. The Federal
Task Force to Combat Anti-Semitism has announced that the Department of
Justice has opened a civil pattern or practice investigation into the
University of California under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of
1964.
The investigation will assess whether the University of California
has engaged in a pattern or practice of discrimination based on race,
religion, and national origin against its professors, staff, and other
employees by allowing an anti-Semitic hostile work environment to exist
on its campuses.
Attorney General Bondi said: ``This Department of Justice will always
defend Jewish Americans, protect civil rights, and leverage our
resources to eradicate institutional anti-Semitism in our Nation's
universities.''
We have seen over the last 1\1/2\ years or so absolutely abhorrent,
outright anti-Semitism at many universities throughout the country,
including at California universities, which our Committee on Education
and the Workforce did a lot of work to expose through a number of
hearings.
While there have been some positive reforms that have occurred on
some campuses, there are still many ongoing and very severe problems.
These issues are aided and abetted in a lot of cases by university
faculty and administrations. This is an investigation into the full
gambit of that activity.
Then there is a related set of investigations that are looking at the
extent to which students who are here, international students, are
actually working to advance not only anti-Semitic but pro-Hamas
activity.
[[Page H1590]]
Related to all of these anti-Semitic incidents on university
campuses, we saw illegal activity with encampments that violated the
law, violated university policies, and violated the civil rights of
other students. We saw buildings being taken over, and we have seen
connections between these activities and the agenda of Hamas and groups
affiliated with Hamas.
Recently, the administration has revoked about 100 student visas at
universities across California, including the University of California,
Berkeley, which is part of a broader assessment of individuals who are
involved in activities deemed contrary to U.S. interests.
This is actually a small number--100 out of 140,000 international
students--that are in California. We do know that there are people who
are here and not from this country. They have participated in these
illegal activities because, as the President's order cites, Federal law
bars noncitizens from being in the U.S. if they support terrorism.
Any connection with pro-Hamas activity falls under the purview of
those statutes. Indeed, the executive order from the White House quotes
the President as saying that his intention is to deport Hamas
sympathizers and revoke student visas.
In a similar vein, UCLA been sued in Federal court in a case alleging
that it enabled protesters at an encampment to block Jewish students
from accessing certain campus pathways. To the extent that folks who
are here on a visa were involved in that sort of illegal, pro-terrorist
activity, the administration is doing an assessment to take appropriate
action.
investigation into potential illegal policies relating to california's
high-speed rail
Mr. KILEY of California. Mr. Speaker, the sixth investigation against
some of the insane and potentially illegal policies in California
relates to high-speed rail which is the biggest public infrastructure
failure in United States history.
I was at Union Station in L.A. a couple of weeks ago. We were with
Secretary of Transportation Sean Duffy. He announced this investigation
specifically into the Federal money that has gone into high-speed rail.
{time} 1245
The review that we launched on that day will help determine whether
roughly $4 billion in taxpayer money should remain committed to the
project to build high-speed rail in the California Central Valley
between Merced and Bakersfield.
I have also requested an investigation by the FBI into how exactly it
is that California has so far spent some $17 billion on this project,
which was approved in 2008. We are talking over 15 years, and it has
yet to lay any track. At this point, even The New York Times has said
that the project isn't going to be completed this century at the
current pace.
The overall cost has ballooned over $130 billion. That is more than
$100 billion more than it was supposed to have been. The whole thing
was supposed to be completed by now, per the initial projections, but
at this point, even the first segment from Bakersfield to Merced, a
very modest segment, they are saying isn't even going to be completed
by 2033. Indeed, just last week, there was a report from the
nonpartisan legislative analyst that there is another $9 billion
funding gap, and they are continuing to rely on Federal funding.
This is an investigation that is ongoing, and I fully expect it will
result in those funds being clawed back and hopefully then used on
infrastructure projects in California that will actually serve to move
people and goods, create jobs that have positive economic value, and
actually be helpful in improving the quality of life for folks in our
State.
The seventh ongoing investigation relates to California's cap-and-
trade program. An executive order from the President has directed
Attorney General Bondi to identify State and local acts that may be
unconstitutional or preempted by Federal law. It singles out
California's cap-and-trade program, which sets limits on greenhouse gas
emissions and then has companies buy and sell credits.
As the order says, California punishes carbon use by adopting
impossible caps on the amount of carbon that businesses may use, all
but forcing businesses to pay large sums to trade carbon credit to meet
California's radical requirements.
What is the result of this? Even as we have seen gas prices that have
gotten much lower across the entire country, Californians continue to
pay astronomical prices when they fill up their cars. Indeed,
California is now some $1.60 above the national average. We have the
highest gas prices in the country, higher than even Hawaii.
The major cause of that is the State's taxes and regulations and
other requirements, foremost among them being this cap-and-trade
program, which adds substantially to the price of each gallon of gas.
The eighth ongoing investigation relates to the homelessness crisis
in California. California is the national leader in homelessness. It is
not even close. We have roughly one-half of the unsheltered homeless in
the entire country, despite spending absolutely staggering amounts of
money. Indeed, over the course of the last 5 years, we have seen $24
billion spent on homelessness, and homelessness has continued to go up
significantly.
A recent audit actually found that the State has lost track of the
money and can't even tell us where it went or what outcomes it has
produced. Now, the new United States Attorney for the Central District
of California, Bill Essayli, has announced the formation of a
homelessness, fraud, and corruption task force, which will investigate
fraud, waste, abuse, and corruption involving funds allocated toward
the eradication of homelessness within the seven-county jurisdiction of
the Central District of California.
The task force will be comprised of Federal prosecutors from the
major fraud section, the public corruption and civil rights section,
and the civil division's civil fraud section of the U.S. Attorney's
Office. It will specifically look into what is going on in Los Angeles,
where recently a court-ordered audit found that homelessness services
provided by the city and county were ``disjointed'' and contained
``poor data quality and integration.''
There is a lot of Federal money at stake and at issue, by the way.
During COVID, the Federal Government sent $100 million in emergency aid
to L.A. County to address homelessness, and last month, the U.S.
Department of Housing and Urban Development awarded more than $200
million to address homelessness in L.A. Now, there is a Federal
investigation ongoing led by the U.S. Attorney's Office into exactly
what has happened to all of this money.
The ninth ongoing investigation relates to concealed carry. As part
of a broader review of restrictive firearms-related laws in California
and other States, the Department of Justice's Civil Rights Division has
announced an investigation into the L.A. County Sheriff's Department to
determine whether it is engaging in a pattern or practice of depriving
ordinary, law-abiding Californians of their Second Amendment rights.
The release from the Attorney General's Office notes that a recent
Federal court decision found that the law and facts were clearly in
favor of two private plaintiffs who challenged the lengthy, 18-month
delays that the L.A. County Sheriff's Department had imposed when
processing their concealed handgun license applications and that the
Civil Rights Division has reason to believe that those two plaintiffs
are not the only ones in this county of some 8 million people
experiencing long delays that are unduly burdening or effectively
denying the Second Amendment rights of the people of Los Angeles.
The release from the Attorney General goes on to note the ways in
which the Second Amendment rights of Californians have been unduly
burdened in countless ways. They call California a particularly
egregious offender. In response to recent Supreme Court caselaw,
California enacted new legislation to further restrict the ability of
ordinary, law-abiding Californians to keep and bear arms.
Many California localities appear to be imposing additional burdens
beyond those required by California State law, including by subjecting
ordinary, law-abiding Californians to expensive fees
[[Page H1591]]
and lengthy wait times associated with applications for concealed
handgun licenses.
Now, there will be some counterweight to these measures that are
restricting the rights of Californians. In fact, there was even a
recent proposal in the legislature that went to the very core of the
Second Amendment that would have said that you are no longer allowed to
defend yourself against an intruder who breaks into your own home.
Luckily, that bill was defeated, Mr. Speaker, but it just shows you how
far California has gone from what is protected by the Constitution.
Finally, of course, there is ongoing Federal action, this being the
10th Federal action related to California, when it comes to sanctuary
jurisdictions. The Attorney General and the Secretary of Homeland
Security, pursuant to an executive order from the President, are, to
the maximum extent possible under Federal law, evaluating and
undertaking any lawful actions to ensure that so-called sanctuary
jurisdictions which seek to interfere with the lawful exercise of
Federal law enforcement operations do not receive access to Federal
funds.
Further, the Attorney General and the Secretary of Homeland Security,
per the terms of the order, are evaluating and undertaking any other
lawful actions, criminal or civil, that they deem warranted based on
any such jurisdiction's practices that interfere with the enforcement
of Federal law.
When it comes to sanctuary policies, California has been the very
worst offender in the country. The State has a sanctuary State policy
that was passed in 2017 and is responsible for many tragedies that have
been documented throughout our State. We even have jurisdictions like
Los Angeles, San Diego, and San Francisco that were already sanctuary
jurisdictions on top of being within a sanctuary State but are now even
going further. One of them is even passing what they are calling a
super sanctuary jurisdiction ordinance.
Those of us who represent districts in California that are not
sanctuary jurisdictions have also asked the administration to be sure
to recognize those counties and jurisdictions that are, in good faith,
trying to comply with Federal law, very much unlike jurisdictions like
Los Angeles, San Diego, and San Francisco.
These are 10 ways in which we see, finally, something of a check on
the runaway lawlessness of the Newsom administration and a number of
jurisdictions in California.
In Congress, we are very much a partner in those efforts. Indeed, I
am working on a number of measures here in Congress in the House of
Representatives that are seeking to push back on the radical, harmful
policies of the Newsom administration.
For example, we recently introduced legislation to overturn Newsom's
ban on gas-powered vehicles.
I have introduced legislation called the No Medicaid for Illegal
Immigrants Act, which will seek to preserve Medi-Cal benefits for
American citizens at a time when the policy of expanding those benefits
to everyone in the State illegally is literally bankrupting the system.
In addition to Secretary Duffy's investigation into high-speed rail's
staggering failures, I have introduced legislation to ensure that the
high-speed rail project will be ineligible for any Federal funding
going forward.
California has a long way to go toward restoring sanity, but these
actions are very important steps, and I look forward to following these
investigations as they protect the civil rights of Californians and
protect our citizens against truly radical and failed policies.
tax credits for charter schools
Mr. KILEY of California. Mr. Speaker, today, I am excited to announce
new legislation that I am introducing, along with Representative
Claudia Tenney, called the High-Quality Charter Schools Act, which is
going to be among the most significant pieces of legislation for school
choice that we have had in this country in a very long time.
What it will do is create a new tax credit for charitable
contributions to nonprofit charter school organizations. Specifically,
it will establish a 75 percent Federal tax credit for qualified
charitable contributions made to nonprofit charter school organizations
with a proven record of success, incentivizing donations to support the
development of more high-quality charter schools.
This could be truly significant, allowing perhaps millions more kids
in this country to gain access to charter schools. That is because the
reality that we see right now is that we have very successful charter
schools that get tremendous results for students.
For example, Success Academy in New York is the number one school
system in the entire State, but there are a limited number of seats and
it costs a lot of money to start a new school. A lot of times,
especially in States like California or New York, you are disadvantaged
under State law. We have politicians like Gavin Newsom or the
supermajority in California who do everything possible to try to stop
us from helping our students succeed.
There are all of these obstacles that exist, often under State law,
as well as the inherent obstacles that exist to starting up an
enterprise as complicated and complex as a school, and the Federal
charter school grant program has actually been critical to helping a
number of charter schools start.
What this legislation seeks to do is to help those that have proven
to be successful to expand and replicate their model. That is because
the ones that are really successful often have very long waiting lists.
We can have thousands of kids on a waiting list for a school.
By the way, charter schools are required to conduct lotteries. They
can't show any sort of favoritism in their admissions or anything like
that. They have to be open to all, so they have a lottery. If a student
doesn't win the lottery, unfortunately, then he or she can't go to the
school. If their local neighborhood school is not a good one, then the
child misses out on the opportunity to go to a high-quality school and
has to end up going to a low-quality school.
The best and most effective way to expand educational opportunity and
excellence in America today is to facilitate the expansion and
replication of charter schools that have proven to be successful.
That is precisely what this legislation does, and I am hopeful we
will get it passed into law, perhaps even as part of the reconciliation
process as a way to start to turn around this sharp decline in
education outcomes that, unfortunately, is posing such a risk to our
country's future.
I look forward to hopefully getting bipartisan support, seeing it
passed into law, and seeing what it will do for so many kids across
this country.
Restoring Public Trust in Elections
Mr. KILEY of California. Mr. Speaker, this week, I introduced, along
with my colleague Jay Obernolte, as well as Representatives Calvert,
Fong, Valadao, and Issa, the Election Results Accountability Act, which
will restore some measure of public trust in our elections.
The problem in California, one of many problems with our elections in
California, is that they take forever. Not only do voters have about a
month to cast their votes, but it then takes about a month to actually
count the votes, with updates being made periodically throughout what
is called a monthlong canvassing period. You see results that flip.
Someone is ahead on election night, but somehow, 3 weeks later, they
are behind. If you are in a tight race, Mr. Speaker, you are just
living and dying with each update: Am I going to be the next city
council or school board member?
It limits your ability to plan, Mr. Speaker, because you don't know
if you are going to be coming into office or you need to find some
other job or if you will be planning to run again, whatever the case
may be. The voters don't know who is going to be their Representative
when they should.
It also just fosters a sense of distrust in the process, and it is,
frankly, embarrassing to our State. Every other State manages to get
its act together. Most of them can give us the results on election
night. That is kind of the way it is supposed to work, Mr. Speaker. You
go to the voting booth, cast your vote, and find out who won that
night.
Mr. Speaker, you don't find out a month later and have it change
several times in the process. This is beyond embarrassing for
California, and it is time we brought some accountability.
[[Page H1592]]
We introduced this legislation, the Election Results Accountability
Act, which will require all States to count and publicly report no less
than 90 percent of ballots cast in Federal elections within 72 hours of
polls closing.
Additionally, it mandates that States complete the ballot count and
certify the final results within 2 weeks of election day.
These are not onerous requirements. Ninety percent of the votes
within 3 days need to be counted, and we need to have the results
within 2 weeks. Our State should be more than capable of complying with
this.
By the way, even though we are requiring it in Federal elections,
that likely will mean we will get the results up and down the ballot,
as well. This, along with measures that we passed today, the SAVE Act
to require proof of citizenship in order to vote, as well as an
initiative that I think is likely to be presented to California voters
in the near future to require voter ID, will go a long way toward
ensuring election security, election integrity, and the sense of
democratic legitimacy on which our State and country's political
identity depends.
{time} 1300
Reverse California Ban on Gas-Powered Vehicles
Mr. KILEY of California. Mr. Speaker, this last week, I introduced
legislation in the House to reverse California's ban on gas-powered
vehicles. This is a special resolution under the Congressional Review
Act that provides a fast-track procedure not subject to a Senate
filibuster to overturn an agency action.
In this case, it is the action of the Biden administration that gave
Gavin Newsome special permission to ban gas cars in California.
This is a measure that will affect almost everyone in our State. It
is set to go into effect in 2035. It is utterly unrealistic, and yet,
it has not been subject to a vote of the people, a vote of the State
legislature, or a vote of the United States Congress.
That will change soon.
This measure, I believe, will pass hopefully with bipartisan support,
and it will restore the ability of Californians to select the vehicle
of their choice. It will also prevent massive increases in costs for
Californians who are already burdened with the highest cost of living,
the highest gas prices, the highest energy prices, and much more of any
State in the country.
I think this is a pretty commonsense measure. Unfortunately,
California has dragged a lot of other States along with it with this
measure, so it is truly an issue of national concern, as well.
I look forward to seeing this passed to reverse the Biden
administration's waiver under the Clean Air Act for California, and I
think this will go a long way toward restoring some sanity to our
State.
Artificial Intelligence in Education
Mr. KILEY of California. Mr. Speaker, this last week as chair of the
House Subcommittee on Early Childhood, Elementary, and Secondary
Education that covers K-12 education, I held a very important hearing
on the topic of artificial intelligence in education.
Now, we are in the midst of a truly unprecedented period in which AI
is advancing at a mind-boggling rate in terms of its capabilities, and
there is truly no end to this progress in sight. We see all of the
leading labs introducing new models it seems like every day that
demonstrate increasingly astonishing capabilities.
There are a lot of risks and concerns that tend to come to mind when
people see this progress and a lot of, I think, legitimate fears as it
relates to AI and its impact on society. It is very important that we
are attentive to these concerns in taking whatever measures we can to
make sure we get these questions right.
I think that it is equally important that we make sure that the
benefits of this technology as it exists now and as it is likely to
exist in the future are understood, as well.
I think that there is, frankly, far less dialogue and conversation on
a national level than there should be about the absolutely enormous
changes that could well be ahead of us.
I wanted to use this hearing to examine one particular domain where
AI holds the potential to dramatically expand opportunity and benefit
our country and bring unprecedented opportunities to American kids
across the country.
I am a former high school teacher, and we have in this country truly
shameful achievement gaps when it comes to the educational
opportunities that are available to kids depending on their ZIP codes.
In my view, much of that is as a result of failed policies, none more
so than in California, which has just about the widest achievement gaps
of any State in the country.
We absolutely need to have policy reforms that bring accountability,
that empowers parents, that expands school of choice, and that supports
teachers among many other policy reforms.
The correct use of artificial intelligence could go a long way in
itself toward bridging these achievement gaps. Not only that, I believe
that it will very soon be possible for any child in our country to
receive a richer educational experience than any child did just a few
years ago. This is because of the absolutely incredible capabilities
that are now accessible to anyone for free or at very little cost on a
computer or smartphone.
We saw during our hearing examples of how these possibilities are
already being realized in many classrooms across America. You could
have, for example, a personalized tutor who knows just about everything
there is to know, who knows everything about your own strengths and
weaknesses, your own interests, and who engages with you directly to
learn any topic.
Now, this is no small matter because studies show that having access
to a high-quality tutor is one of the most important interventions that
improves educational outcomes by a significant degree, potentially
moving you a half standard deviation or so or giving you more than a
years' worth of additional learning in any given year if you have
access to a high-quality tutor.
Well, with AI tools, any child will have that access at a level that
has never been known before in a more personalized way than has ever
been known before. What is more, these tools allow for learning across
different modalities through text, through images, through voice, and
can engage with different students in different ways.
Just to give you another example, they can take on the form of
different characters. When you are learning history, you could actually
have a conversation with an animated version of a historical figure. If
you are reading a book, you can actually have a conversation with a
character in the book. If you are learning physics, maybe you can learn
physics from a reanimated version of Einstein himself.
This is just the tip of the iceberg.
When you look at the technologies that are advancing when it comes to
augmented reality, when it comes to VR, we are already seeing ways in
which AI is being deployed for sort of career training-type learning,
whether it is welding or other types of careers or trades where these
environments can be simulated in very realistic ways to help students
learn regardless of whether they go to a school or you can get hundreds
of thousands of dollars' worth of expensive machinery.
I think that we are still just scratching the surface of what is
possible here. One of the suggestions at our hearing is that we need to
continue to facilitate ways of sharing best practices; importantly, as
well, when it comes to how these tools can be used by teachers because
a teacher's role is as important as ever, potentially more important,
in the sense that having access to AI tools that can assist students in
individual ways actually frees teachers in many ways to provide the
sort of mentorship and instruction and teaching that only a caring
human can.
We saw examples in our hearing of how AI tools have been used to
assist with lesson planning, have been used to help grade papers, or to
provide direct immediate feedback to students to help with the
assessment process and many other ways, as well.
For those who think that the AI tool is somehow going to change the
role of the teacher, these tools can change the role of the teacher but
I think in very positive ways, as well.
Of course there are risks in this domain, as well, when it comes to
academic dishonesty, when it comes to the potential of further
absorbing students into digital worlds and thereby exacerbating some of
the harms we have seen in excessive use of smart phones. All of those
things we need to be very mindful of, as well, which is why following
[[Page H1593]]
our hearing we are exploring ways to establish forums where these sort
of best practices can be shared so different teachers, different
schools, different States can see what is happening elsewhere, see what
the results are, and see the impact it is having on the well-being and
learning of our students.
This is one area where I think there truly is unbounded potential,
and I am looking forward to working with our subcommittee to try to
assist districts across the country and unlocking that potential.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
____________________