[House Report 118-574]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
118th Congress } { Report
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
2d Session } { 118-574
======================================================================
PROMOTING RESPONSIBLE OVERSIGHT TO ELIMINATE COMMUNIST TEACHINGS FOR
OUR KIDS ACT
_______
July 5, 2024.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the
State of the Union and ordered to be printed
_______
Ms. Foxx, from the Committee on Education and the Workforce, submitted
the following
R E P O R T
together with
MINORITY VIEWS
[To accompany H.R. 6816]
[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]
The Committee on Education and the Workforce, to whom was
referred the bill (H.R. 6816) to prohibit the availability of
Federal education funds for elementary and secondary schools
that receive direct or indirect support from the Government of
the People's Republic of China, having considered the same,
reports favorably thereon with an amendment and recommends that
the bill as amended do pass.
The amendment is as follows:
Strike all after the enacting clause and insert the
following:
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Promoting Responsible Oversight To
Eliminate Communist Teachings for Our Kids Act'' or the ``PROTECT Our
Kids Act''.
SEC. 2. PROHIBITION ON AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS.
(a) Prohibition.--Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no
funds may be made available under an applicable program to any
elementary school or secondary school that--
(1) has a partnership in effect with a cultural or language
institute directly or indirectly funded by the Government of
the People's Republic of China, including a Confucius
Institute;
(2) operates a learning center directly or indirectly
supported by the Government of the People's Republic of China
(commonly referred to as a ``Confucius Classroom''); or
(3) otherwise receives support from an individual or entity
acting directly or indirectly on behalf of the Government of
the People's Republic of China, including support in the form
of teaching materials, personnel, funds, or other resources.
(b) Effective Date.--The prohibition under subsection (a) shall take
effect on the date that is one year after the date of the enactment of
this Act.
(c) Contracts Made Prior to Date of Enactment.--
(1) In general.--
(A) Waiver request submission.--In the case of an
elementary school or a secondary school that is a party
to a contract described in paragraph (2), the school
timely shall submit to the Secretary a request for a
waiver of the prohibition under subsection (a) that
includes--
(i) the complete and unredacted text of the
contract, and if the contract is not in
English, a translated copy of the text into
English; and
(ii) a statement demonstrating that the
contract is for the benefit of the school's
mission and students and will promote the
security, stability, and economic vitality of
the United States.
(B) Waiver issuance.--the Secretary, upon receipt of
a request submitted under subparagraph (A), may issue a
waiver to the school for a period beginning on the
effective date specified in subsection (b) and ending
the date on which the contract terminates.
(2) Contracts described.--A contract is described in this
paragraph if the contract--
(A) takes effect before the date of the enactment of
this Act;
(B) continues to be effective after the effective
date specified in subsection (b); and
(C) relates to at least one of the circumstances
described in paragraph (1), (2), or (3) of subsection
(a).
(d) Notice to Affected Schools.--Not later than 90 days after the
date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall provide notice
to elementary and secondary schools of the requirements of this section
together with guidance for achieving compliance with such requirements.
(e) Definitions.--In this section:
(1) Applicable program.--The term ``applicable program'' has
the meaning given that term in section 400(c)(1) of the General
Education Provisions Act (20 U.S.C. 1221(c)(1)).
(2) ESEA terms.--The terms ``elementary school'', ``secondary
school'', and ``Secretary'' have the meanings given those terms
in section 8101 of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act
of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 7801).
PURPOSE
The purpose of H.R. 6816, the Promoting Responsible
Oversight to Eliminate Communist Teachings for Our Kids
(PROTECT) Act, is to prohibit federal education funds from
being given to any elementary school or secondary school that
directly or indirectly receives support from the Government of
the People's Republic of China. Forms of support may include
partnerships with cultural or language institutes funded by
China, such as the Confucius Institute; operation of Confucius
Classrooms supported by China; or receiving any form of
support, including teaching materials, personnel, or funds,
from an individual or entity acting on behalf of the Chinese
government.
COMMITTEE ACTION
118TH CONGRESS
First Session--Hearings
On September 19, 2023, the Committee's Subcommittee on
Early Childhood, Elementary, and Secondary Education held a
hearing on ``Academic Freedom Under Attack: Loosening the CCP's
Grip on America's Classrooms.'' The purpose of the hearing was
to examine the covert influence of foreign governments and
organizations, particularly the Chinese Communist Party, on
U.S. K-12 schools. Testifying before the Subcommittee were Mr.
Michael Gonzalez, Senior Fellow, Heritage Foundation,
Washington, DC; Ms. Gisela Perez Kusakawa, Executive Director,
Asian American Scholar Forum, New York, NY; Mrs. Nicole Neily,
President, Parents Defending Education, Arlington, VA; Mr. Ryan
Walters, State Superintendent of Public Instruction, Oklahoma
State Department of Education, Oklahoma City, OK.
Second Session--Hearings
On May 8, 2024, the Committee's Subcommittee on Early
Childhood, Elementary, and Secondary Education held a hearing
on ``Confronting Pervasive Antisemitism in K-12 Schools.'' The
purpose of the hearing was to discuss the proliferation of
antisemitism in K-12 schools. During the hearing, Committee
Chairwoman Virginia Foxx (R-NC) asked New York City Chancellor
David Banks if foreign governments donate significant funding
to NYC Public Schools. Chancellor Banks stated that the Qatar
Foundation did, and he followed up after the hearing and
confirmed that the Italian government and the Consulate General
of the Republic of Korea contributed funding to NYC K-12
schools. Testifying before the Subcommittee were Mr. David
Banks, Chancellor, New York City Public Schools, New York City,
NY; Ms. Karla Silvestre, President, Montgomery County Board of
Education, Montgomery County Public Schools, Rockville, MD; Mr.
Emerson Sykes, Senior Staff Attorney, American Civil Liberties
Union, New York, NY; Ms. Enikia Ford Morthel, Superintendent,
Berkeley Unified School District, Berkeley, CA.
Legislative Action
On December 14, 2023, Representative Kevin Hern (R-OK)
introduced H.R. 6816, the Promoting Responsible Oversight to
Eliminate Communist Teachings for Our Kids (PROTECT) Act, with
Representatives Elise Stefanik (R-NY), Tim Walberg (R-MI), Beth
Van Duyne (R-TX), David Rouzer (R-NC), Mark Alford (R-MO),
Brian Babin (R-TX), Bob Good (R-VA), Ben Cline (R-VA), Jake
Ellzey (R-TX), Josh Brecheen (R-OK), Randy Weber (R-TX), Jake
LaTurner (R-KS), Ronny Jackson (R-TX), Andrew Ogles (R-TN),
Burgess Owens (R-UT), Bill Huizenga (R-MI), Scott Franklin (R-
FL), Andrew Clyde (R-GA), Robert Aderholt (R-AL), Joe Wilson
(R-SC), Rick Allen (R-GA), Nathaniel Moran (R-TX), Chuck
Edwards (R-NC), Doug LaMalfa (R-CA), James Baird (R-IN), Austin
Scott (R-GA), Debbie Lesko (R-AZ), and Neal Dunn (R-FL) as
original co-sponsors. The bill was referred solely to the
Committee on Education and the Workforce. On June 13, 2024, the
Committee considered H.R. 6816 in legislative session and
reported it favorably, as amended, to the House of
Representatives by a recorded vote of 25-15. The Committee
considered the following amendments to H.R. 6816:
1. Representative Moran offered an Amendment in the
Nature of a Substitute that adds a provision to address
contracts running longer than the Act's implementation
timeline so that local educational agencies are not
sued for breach of contract. The amendment was adopted
by a recorded vote of 25-15.
2. Representative Bobby Scott (D-VA) offered an
amendment that adds an authorization of $300 million
per year starting in fiscal year 2025. The amendment
failed by a recorded vote of 16-24.
COMMITTEE VIEWS
INTRODUCTION
Over the last decade, the Chinese Communist Party and the
authoritarian government of the People's Republic of China
(PRC) has fostered relationships with American K-12 schools
through grants, sister school partnerships, and other
programming through a program called Confucius Classrooms.
CHINA'S ACTIVITY IN U.S. K-12 SCHOOLS
Styled as language and culture programs, Confucius
Classrooms are an important element of the PRC's global
influence campaign. The Chinese government's effort to forge
ties with American schools through its Ministry of Education
Office of Chinese Language Council International, which until
recently was known as ``Hanban,'' is one facet of the Chinese
Communist Party's (CCP) broader soft-power strategy to
influence policy in nations throughout the world. The United
States Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations found
that expanding Confucius Classrooms in the United States has
been a top priority for the Chinese government, the United
States Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations
found.\1\ Many K-12 schools eagerly accepted CCP-linked grants,
which came with perks including fully funded teacher exchanges,
Chinese language programs, and opportunities for American
students to learn in China.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\China's Impact on the U.S. Education System--Permanent
Subcommittee on Investigations.
\2\Little Red Classrooms--Parents Defending Education.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Confucious Classrooms are smaller-scale, K-12 versions of
Confucious Institutes that the CCP has pushed for on U.S.
college campuses. These institutes purport to teach Chinese
language and culture. Confucius Institutes are established as
partnerships between a host institution, a Chinese partner
(usually a Chinese university), and a Chinese government
agency. The Ministry of Education Office of Chinese Language
Council International funds each Confucius Institute, often at
around $100,000 per year, and asks host institutions to match
those funds with their own contributions, usually classroom and
office space.
China heavily encouraged the creation of Confucius
Classrooms, and many of these developed as offshoots of a
Confucius Institute. China strategically deployed and rapidly
expanded their Confucius Classrooms, going from very few in
2008 to more than a thousand worldwide by 2017. More than 500
American K-12 schools have hosted Confucius Classrooms, aided
in part by the Asia Society, an American nonprofit that
previously ran a network of 100 Confucius Classrooms before
they ended the partnership in 2021.\3\ A Parents Defending
Education report tracked Chinese affiliation in 143 schools
across 34 states--with at least seven still active today.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\Schools: Confucius Classrooms Network Online (asiasociety.org).
\4\Little Red Classrooms--Parents Defending Education.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Confucius Institute funding comes with strings attached
that compromise academic freedom. The Chinese government
approves teachers, events, and speakers and requires teachers
to sign contracts pledging they will not damage the national
interests of China. The contracts make clear a Chinese director
or teacher will be terminated if they ``violate Chinese laws''
or ``engage in activities detrimental to national interests,''
and states that they must ``conscientiously safeguard national
interests.''\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\Microsoft Word--20190227 Chinas Impact on the US Education
System (senate.gov).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
CONCLUSION
It is unacceptable that the CCP is attempting to influence
U.S. K-12 schools. Congress should take immediate action to
ensure that students are not being indoctrinated with communist
propaganda. This bill will help ensure that the Chinese
government does not take advantage of local school districts
and the parents and students in them.
SUMMARY
The PROTECT Act prohibits federal education funds from
being given to any elementary school or secondary school that
directly or indirectly receives support from the Government of
the People's Republic of China. Forms of support may include
partnerships with cultural or language institutes funded by
China, such as the Confucius Institute; operation of Confucius
Classrooms supported by China; or receiving any form of
support, including teaching materials, personnel, or funds,
from an individual or entity acting on behalf of the Chinese
government.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/house-bill/6816/
text.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
H.R. 6816 SECTION-BY-SECTION SUMMARY
Section 1--Short title
Names the bill the Promoting Responsible Oversight
to Eliminate Communist Teachings for Our Kids Act
Section 2--Prohibition on availability of funds
The bill prohibits funds from being made available
under a U.S. Department of Education program to any elementary
school or secondary school that:
Has a partnership with a cultural or
language institute funded by the government of the
People's Republic of China.
Operates a learning center supported by
the government of the People's Republic of China.
Otherwise receives support from an
individual or entity acting on behalf of the government
of the People's Republic of China.
EXPLANATION OF AMENDMENTS
The amendments, including the amendment in the nature of a
substitute, are explained in the body of this report.
APPLICATION OF LAW TO THE LEGISLATIVE BRANCH
Section 102(b)(3) of Public Law 104-1 requires a
description of the application of this bill to the legislative
branch. H.R. 6816 prohibits the availability of Federal
educations funds for elementary and secondary schools that
directly or indirectly receives support from the Government of
the People's Republic of China. H.R. 6816 is applicable to
federally funded elementary and secondary schools, and
therefore does not apply to the Legislative Branch.
UNFUNDED MANDATE STATEMENT
Pursuant to Section 423 of the Congressional Budget and
Impoundment Control Act of 1974, Pub. L. No. 93-344 (as amended
by Section 101(a)(2) of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of
1995, Pub. L. No. 104-4), the Committee traditionally adopts as
its own the cost estimate prepared by the Director of the
Congressional Budget Office (CBO) pursuant to section 402 of
the Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974.
EARMARK STATEMENT
H.R. 6816 does not contain any congressional earmarks,
limited tax benefits, or limited tariff benefits as defined in
clause 9 of rule XXI of the Rules of the House of
Representatives.
ROLL CALL VOTES
Clause 3(b) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of
Representatives requires the Committee Report to include for
each record vote on a motion to report the measure or matter
and on any amendments offered to the measure or matter the
total number of votes for and against and the names of the
Members voting for and against.
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
STATEMENT OF GENERAL PERFORMANCE GOALS AND OBJECTIVES
In accordance with clause (3)(c) of House rule XIII, the
goal of H.R. 6816 is to halt the flow of CCP funds to public
elementary and secondary schools.
DUPLICATION OF FEDERAL PROGRAMS
No provision of H.R. 6816 establishes or reauthorizes a
program of the Federal Government known to be duplicative of
another Federal program, a program that was included in any
report from the Government Accountability Office to Congress
pursuant to section 21 of Public Law 111-139, or a program
related to a program identified in the most recent Catalog of
Federal Domestic Assistance.
STATEMENT OF OVERSIGHT FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE COMMITTEE
In compliance with clause 3(c)(1) of rule XIII and clause
2(b)(1) of rule X of the Rules of the House of Representatives,
the committee's oversight findings and recommendations are
reflected in the body of this report.
REQUIRED COMMITTEE HEARING AND RELATED HEARINGS
In compliance with clause 3(c)(6) of rule XIII the
following hearing held during the 118th Congress was used to
develop or consider H.R. 6816: On September 19, 2023, the
Committee's Subcommittee on Early Childhood, Elementary, and
Secondary Education held a hearing on ``Academic Freedom Under
Attack: Loosening the CCP's Grip on America's Classrooms.''
NEW BUDGET AUTHORITY AND CBO COST ESTIMATE
With respect to the requirements of clause 3(c)(2) of rule
XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives and section
308(a) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 and with respect
to requirements of clause 3(c)(3) of rule XIII of the Rules of
the House of Representatives and section 402 of the
Congressional Budget Act of 1974, the Committee adopts as its
own the cost estimate prepared by the Director of the
Congressional Budget Office.
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Legislation summary: On June 13, 2024, the House Committee
on Education and the Workforce ordered to be reported eight
bills and one joint resolution. This document provides
estimates for seven of those bills and the resolution.
Generally, the legislation would:
Repeal a rule submitted by the Department of
Education relating to ``Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Sex
in Education Programs or Activities Receiving Federal Financial
Assistance;''
Allow nurse practitioners and physician assistants
to diagnose, treat, and certify an injury and extent of
disability for the purposes of federal workers' compensation;
Require elementary and secondary schools and
institutions of higher education to meet new requirements in
order to maintain eligibility for funding from the Department
of Education;
Prevent student athletes from being considered the
employees of an institution of higher education; and
Authorize appropriations for the educational
activities of the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum.
Estimated Federal cost: The estimated costs of the
legislation fall within budget function 500 (education,
training, employment, and social services).
Basis of estimate: For this estimate, CBO assumes that the
legislation will be enacted near the end of fiscal year 2024.
The estimated costs do not include any interaction effects
among the pieces of legislation. If all seven bills and the
resolution were combined and enacted as a single piece of
legislation, the estimated costs could be different than the
sum of the separate estimates, although CBO expects that any
difference would be small.
CBO estimates that implementing H.R. 8606 would cost $8
million over the 2024-2029 period. Implementing the remaining
bills and the joint resolution would each cost less than
$500,000 over the same period. Any related spending would be
subject to the availability of appropriated funds.
H.J. Res. 165, a joint resolution providing for
Congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, United
States Code, of the rule submitted by the Department of
Education relating to ``Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Sex
in Education Programs or Activities Receiving Federal Financial
Assistance:'' H.J. Res. 165 would disapprove the rule submitted
by the Department of Education relating to ``Nondiscrimination
on the Basis of Sex in Education Programs or Activities
Receiving Federal Financial Assistance,'' as published in the
Federal Register on April 29, 2024.
The rule amends title IX of the Education Amendments of
1972 (title IX), which prohibits discrimination on the basis of
sex in any education program or activity receiving federal
financial assistance. The rule clarifies definitions related to
sex-based discrimination and harassment and specifies the
requirements for grievance procedures, and requirements for
preventing sexual discrimination and remedying its effects.
Institutions that fail to comply with title IX, as amended
by the rule, could lose federal funding. However, CBO expects
that institutions will comply with the regulations to avoid
doing so. On that basis, CBO estimates that disapproving the
rule would not affect institutions' eligibility for federal
student aid.
Based on the costs of similar activities, CBO estimates
that implementing the resolution would cost less than $500,000
over the 2024-2029 period. Any related spending would be
subject to the availability of appropriated funds.
H.R. 618, Improving Access to Workers' Compensation for
Injured Federal Workers Act: H.R. 618 would allow nurse
practitioners and physician assistants to diagnose, prescribe
treatment, and certify an injury and the extent of disability
for the purpose of compensating federal workers under the
Federal Employees' Compensation Act (FECA). Using information
from the Department of Labor, CBO expects that nonphysician
providers would be compensated at the same rate as physicians
and that total benefits provided to injured federal workers
would not significantly change. Some people may receive
treatment more quickly under the bill, which could increase
costs over the 10-year period because some payments to medical
providers that would have occurred in 2035 under current law
could be paid in 2034. On the other hand, if injured workers
receive treatment faster, some may return to work more quickly,
which could reduce costs. CBO has no basis to estimate which
effect would predominate, but we expect that those effects
would roughly offset each other. Thus, CBO estimates that
enacting H.R. 618 would affect net direct spending by an
insignificant amount.
The FECA payments are mandatory. The costs of those
payments are charged to a claimant's employing agency, which
reimburses the Department of Labor out of its salaries and
expense accounts. Any effect on discretionary spending would be
subject to future appropriation actions.
H.R. 5567, CLASS Act: H.R. 5567 would require public
elementary and secondary schools that receive funding from the
Department of Education to disclose to the department funds
received or contracts signed with foreign sources that are more
than $10,000.
CBO expects schools would comply with the new requirements;
thus, enacting the bill would not affect their eligibility to
receive federal funds. Based on the costs of similar
activities, CBO estimates that implementing the bill would cost
the Department of Education less than $500,000 over the 2024-
2029 period. Any related spending would be subject to the
availability of appropriated funds.
H.R. 6816, PROTECT Our Kids Act: H.R. 6816 would prohibit
elementary and secondary schools that receive direct or
indirect support from the government of the People's Republic
of China (including Confucius Institutes), from receiving funds
from the Department of Education.
The 2018 National Defense Authorization Act prohibited
institutions of higher education from using federal funding for
Chinese language programs at Confucius Institutes. As a result,
nearly all Confucius Institutes at postsecondary institutions
have closed, according to a Government Accountability Office
report released in 2023.\1\ On that basis, CBO expects schools
would comply with the new requirements; thus, enacting the bill
would not affect their eligibility to receive federal funds.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\Government Accountability Office, China: With Nearly All U.S.
Confucius Institutes Closed, Some Schools Sought Alternative Language
Support, GAO-20-105981 (October 2023), www.gao.gov/products/gao-24-
105981.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Based on the costs of similar activities, CBO estimates
that implementing the bill would cost the Department of
Education less than $500,000 over the 2024-2029 period. Any
related spending would be subject to the availability of
appropriated funds.
H.R. 8534, Protecting Student Athletes' Economic Freedom
Act: The bill would prohibit student athletes from being
considered an employee of an institution based on the athletes'
participation in a varsity intercollegiate athletic program or
competition. Based on the costs of similar activities, CBO
estimates that implementing the bill would cost the Department
of Education less than $500,000 over the 2024-2029 period. Any
related spending would be subject to the availability of
appropriated funds.
H.R. 8606, Never Again Education Reauthorization and Study
Act of 2024: H.R. 8606 would authorize the appropriation of $2
million each year from 2026 through 2030 for the Director of
the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum to support
education and training related to the lessons of the Holocaust.
Under current law, the authorization of appropriations for
those activities expires at the end of 2025. The bill also
would require the Director to conduct a study on the
educational activities being carried out at the state and local
level. Assuming appropriation of the authorized amounts and
using historical spending patterns for those activities, CBO
estimates that implementing H.R. 8606 would cost $8 million
over the 2024-2029 period and $2 million after 2029.
H.R 8648, Civil Rights Protection Act of 2024: H.R. 8648
would require any institution of higher education that receives
federal student aid to make publicly available its process for
addressing violations of title VI of the Civil Rights Act and
any complaints received regarding alleged violations. The bill
also would require the Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights at
the Department of Education to give monthly briefings on
violations specific to race, color, or national origin, and
report the findings of institutional complaints.
CBO expects institutions would comply with the new
requirements; thus, enacting the bill would not affect their
eligibility for federal student aid. Based on the costs of
similar activities, CBO estimates that implementing the bill
would cost the Department of Education less than $500,000 over
the 2024-2029 period. Any related spending would be subject to
the availability of appropriated funds.
H.R. 8649, Transparency in Reporting Adversarial
Contributions to Education Act: The bill would require
elementary and secondary schools that receive funding from the
Department of Education to disclose to parents and the public
any contributions received from foreign countries and the terms
or conditions of such contributions.
CBO expects schools would comply with the new requirements;
thus, enacting the bill would not affect their eligibility to
receive federal funds. Based on the costs of similar
activities, CBO estimates that implementing the bill would cost
the Department of Education less than $500,000 over the 2024-
2029 period. Any related spending would be subject to the
availability of appropriated funds.
Pay-As-You-Go considerations: The Statutory Pay-As-You-Go
Act of 2010 establishes budget-reporting and enforcement
procedures for legislation affecting direct spending or
revenues. CBO estimates that enacting H.R. 618 would affect net
direct spending by less than $500,000 over the 2024-2034
period.
Increase in long-term net direct spending and deficits: CBO
estimates that enacting the joint resolution or any of the
seven bills in this estimate would not increase net direct
spending or deficits in any of the four consecutive 10-year
periods beginning in 2035.
Mandates: H.R. 8534 would impose an intergovernmental
mandate as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)
by prohibiting states from designating varsity athletes of a
school, conference, or association as employees of that entity.
CBO estimates that the net costs of the direct effects of the
legislation would not result in additional expenditures or
losses in revenue; therefore, the cost of the preemption would
not exceed the threshold established in UMRA for
intergovernmental mandates ($100 million in 2024, adjusted
annually for inflation).
The bill would not impose a private-sector mandate as
defined in UMRA.
Enacting the legislation may result in other secondary
effects on private entities by denying employment-related
benefits to varsity athletes that they may otherwise have
qualified for as an employee. However, CBO's estimate of those
effects is subject to uncertainty because the question of
whether athletes affected by the bill should be recategorized
as employees of their institutions remains unsettled as court
rulings, administrative decisions, and changes in policies of
the National Collegiate Athletics Association are announced.
What effect, if any, the bill would have on private entities
would depend on the final adjudication of the matter.
None of the remaining pieces of legislation contained in
this estimate would impose intergovernmental or private-sector
mandates as defined in UMRA.
Estimate prepared by: Federal Costs: Meredith Decker
(Department of Labor); Leah Koestner (Department of Education);
Susanne Mehlman (United States Holocaust Memorial Museum);
Garrett Quenneville (Department of Education). Mandates: Erich
Dvorak, Brandon Lever, and Grace Watson.
Estimate reviewed by: Elizabeth Cove Delisle, Chief, Income
Security Cost Estimates Unit; Justin Humphrey, Chief, Finance,
Housing, and Education Cost Estimates Unit; Kathleen
FitzGerald, Chief, Public and Private Mandates Unit; H. Samuel
Papenfuss, Deputy Director of Budget Analysis.
Estimate approved by: Phillip L. Swagel, Director,
Congressional Budget Office.
COMMITTEE COST ESTIMATE
Clause 3(d)(1) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of
Representatives requires an estimate and a comparison of the
costs that would be incurred in carrying out H.R. 6816.
However, clause 3(d)(2)(B) of that rule provides that this
requirement does not apply when, as with the present report,
the Committee adopts as its own the cost estimate for the bill
prepared by the Director of the Congressional Budget Office.
CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW MADE BY THE BILL, AS REPORTED
As reported by the Committee, H.R. 6816 makes no changes to
existing law.
MINORITY VIEWS
INTRODUCTION
H.R. 6816, the Promoting Responsible Oversight Eliminate
Communist Teachings (PROTECT) for Our Kids Act, prohibits
federal education funds from going to elementary and secondary
schools that receive direct or indirect support from the
Chinese government. The Majority claims that this bill will
``halt the flow of [the Chinese Communist Party] money and
propaganda into our K-12 schools . . .''\1\ Yet, it has not
demonstrated a significant amount of such funding is going to
K-12 schools, nor has it proven that the ``flow of propaganda''
actually exists. Further, the bill raises a number of
administrative questions and concerns for public schools and
could fuel anti-Asian sentiments in classrooms.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\Press Release, Rep. Kevin Hern, Hern introduces bill to combat
Confucius Classrooms, CCP-funded influence in American schools (Dec. 15
2023), https://hern.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=888.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY OF CONCERNS
Chinese Influence Has Not Posed a Threat to Elementary and Secondary
Classrooms
Confucius Classrooms, which are affiliated with Confucious
Institutes, are centers for Chinese culture and language
established at public and private elementary and secondary
schools--either to bolster a Chinese program already at the
school or to start a new one.\2\ Over nearly five years, the
number of Classrooms has dropped from more than 500 to
currently no more than 16.\3\ Many countries around the world
lack quality Chinese language and culture resources and
Confucious Institutes and Classrooms provide those resources
for free.\4\ Experts have summed up the current state of these
programs, saying ``[t]he harsh reality is that Confucius
Institutes/Confucius Classrooms stepped up to fulfill a need
that governments were not--and they were happy to accept a
`freebie,' . . . Now that Confucius Institutes have been
tainted by wider distaste and suspicion of the Chinese
government, this `freebie' now has a cost.''\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\China's Impact on the U.S. Education System: Hearing Before the
Subcomm. on Investigations of the S. Comm. on Homeland Security &
Governmental Affairs, 116th Cong., 90,147 (2019).
\3\Confucius Institutes Around the World--2024, Dig Mandarin (Mar.
20, 2024), https://www.digmandarin.com/confucius-institutes-around-the-
world.html; Beth Wallis, Tulsa Public Schools ended Chinese language
program weeks before Oklahoma Superintendent's Congressional testimony,
National Public Radio KOSU (Sept. 29, 2023) https://www.kosu.org/
education/2023-09-29/tulsa-public-schools-ended-chinese-language-
program-weeks-before-oklahoma-superintendents-congressional-testimony;
Little Red Classrooms China's Infiltration of American K-12 Schools,
Defending Ed. (Jul. 26, 2023) https://defendinged.org/investigations/
little-red-classrooms-china-infiltration-of-american-K-12-schools/.
\4\Lin Yang, Controversial Confucius Institutes Returning to U.S.
Schools Under New Name, VOA News, (June 27, 2022) https://
www.voanews.com/a/controversial-confucius-institutes-returning-to-u-s-
schools-under-new-name/6635906.html.
\5\Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Parents Defending Education (PDE), a right-wing non-profit
organization, published a report in July 2023 entitled,
``Little Red Classrooms: China's Infiltration of American K-12
Schools.'' The report alleges undue Chinese influence in
America through the existence of Confucius Institutes,
Classrooms, and related ``programming'' that currently exists
or previously existed in public schools across the United
States, including in areas near U.S. military bases.\6\ Despite
the claims in the report, Committee Democratic staff have been
unable to locate credible evidence to support either the claims
made by the Majority and PDE that there is inappropriate and
undue foreign influence in our nation's K-12 public schools. In
2019, the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and
Governmental Affairs' Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations
held a hearing entitled ``China's Impact on the U.S. Education
System''. The hearing was held the day after the Committee
released a bipartisan staff report with the same title.\7\
While the staff report made recommendations that schools should
ensure that Chinese partnership organization's ``vetting,
screening and interview processes are aligned with their own
hiring protocols and procedures''\8\ and that ``the State
Department should demand reciprocal and fair treatments of its
diplomats and employees in China.''\9\ The Committee did not
find security risks or curriculum vulnerability, as claimed by
the Majority.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\Little Red Classrooms China's Infiltration of American K-12
Schools, Defending Ed. (Jul. 26, 2023) https://defendinged.org/
investigations/little-red-classrooms-china-infiltration-of-american-K-
12-schools/.
\7\China's Impact on the U.S. Education System: hearing Before the
Subcomm. on Investigations of the S. Comm. on Homeland Security &
Governmental Affairs, 116th Cong., 80 (2019).
\8\Id. at 91.
\9\Id. at 92.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
H.R. 6816 Will Raise Administrative Questions and Concerns for Public
Schools
H.R. 6816 would raise a number of administrative questions
and concerns. The bill restricts funding from any U.S.
Department of Education (Department) administered programs
going to schools with direct or indirect support from the
Chinese government. The bill specifically prohibits funds from
going to elementary and secondary schools that ``have a
partnership in effect with a cultural or language institute
directly or indirectly funded by the Government of the People's
Republic of China (PRC), including a Confucius Institute''\10\;
operate a ``learning center directly or indirectly funded by
the Government of the People's Republic of China''\11\; or
``receive support from an individual or entity acting directly
or indirectly on behalf of the Government of the People's
Republic of China, including support in the form of teaching
materials, personnel, funds, or other resources.''\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\Promoting Responsible Oversight To Eliminate Communist
Teachings for Our Kids Act, H.R. 6816, 118th Cong. Sec. 2.
\11\Id.
\12\Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Implementing the text of H.R. 6816 in public schools will
likely be massive administrative burden. First, a school may
not even be aware that a funder or partnership entity it works
with has ties to China that would be prohibited under the bill.
Often local businesses partner with schools to provide support
for students, a common community practice throughout the U.S.
If, for example, a restaurant donates a free dinner to students
in conjunction with a school achievement, and the owner has
``ties'' to China that could be implicated by H.R. 6816 (e.g.,
is a legal Chinese immigrant, with a work visa), it is unclear
whether such donations would be prohibited under this bill.
Second, a plain language interpretation of the bill text
suggests that if an individual with Chinese citizenship wanted
to donate a new field, an HVAC system, or work at an elementary
or secondary school, that school could potentially lose their
funds administered under the Elementary and Secondary Education
Act of 1965 (ESEA) because the bill lacks detail on how to
determine whether someone is indirectly acting on behalf of the
Chinese government. Such concern about whether any Chinese
national could be classified as someone who acts directly or
indirectly for the Chinese government is complicated for
multiple reasons. Unilaterally claiming anyone of with Chinese
citizenship is directly or indirectly under the control of the
PRC has negative social and economic consequences. This was
evident in the Department of Justice's China Initiative which
unfairly accused Chinese researchers of being spies resulting
in charges that were ultimately dismissed after ruining the
careers of several researchers.\13\ For example, Gang Chen, a
Professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT),
was falsely accused of being a Chinese spy and investigated by
the Department of Justice (DOJ) because of his identity.\14\
Although all charges against him were dismissed, the negative
impact on his personal and professional lives resulted in
damaging his reputation since he was arrested in front of his
wife and children and put on administrative leave from
work.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\George Pence, While China Initiative may have ended, foreign
influence remains DOJ enforcement priority, Reuters (Mar. 28, 2022)
https://www.reuters.com/legal/legalindustry/while-china-initiative-may-
have-ended-foreign-influence-remains-doj-enforcement-2022-03-28/.
\14\Kimmy Yam, MIT professor wrongfully accused of spying for China
helps make a major discovery, NBC News, (Aug. 25, 2022) https://
www.nbcnews.com/news/asian-america/mit-professor-wrongfully-accused-
spying-china-helps-make-major-discove-rcna44637.
\15\Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Conversely, Amnesty International has recently reported on
Chinese transnational repression, the effort by the PRC
government to harass, intimidate, or surveil Chinese nationals,
particularly students, while they are abroad.\16\ The report
documents PRC efforts to intimidate students to self-censor in
both academic and social settings, and to make certain research
and career decisions.\17\ Ironically, to the extent the
deplorable efforts of the PRC are successful, it would
strengthen arguments that Chinese students are inherently under
some form of control by the PRC.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\Amnesty International, On My Campus, I Am Afraid: China's
Targeting of Overseas Students Stifles Rights, Amnesty International,
2024, https://www.amnestyusa.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/On-My-
Campus-I-Am-Afraid-Chinas-Targeting-of-Overseas-Students-Stifles-
Rights.pdf.
\17\Id. at 16-18.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The likely result under this bill would be a chilling
effect on schools working with Chinese nationals and Chinese-
Americans. Schools may not feel comfortable accepting gifts
from Chinese nationals unless the donor can provide them with
documentation that they are not working with the Chinese
government--which would likely be impossible to disprove to
anyone looking for such a tie. Further, this could seriously
impact the ability of U.S. schools and foreign language
education programs to hire Chinese-American Mandarin teachers
and educational specialists as they would also likely have ties
in China that could dissuade schools from working with them,
for fear of losing federal funds.
Public Schools Would Be the Most Impacted by H.R. 6816
Though H.R. 6816 applies to all elementary and secondary
schools, public schools would be the disproportionately
impacted since private schools typically do not receive federal
funds directly through ESEA programs. Therefore, even though
the bill's prohibitions would apply to private schools, there
would be no method to enforce such a prohibition under the
bill, since they have no federal funds that could be rescinded.
H.R. 6816 Has the Potential To Limit Chinese Language and Cultural
Exchange Programs
As discussed earlier, schools may avoid collaborations with
``Chinese language and cultural institutes'',\18\ and
``learning centers''\19\ fearing regulatory complications or
loss of federal funding, thereby reducing the diversity of
educational experiences available to students. There is a
mountain of evidence to support the notion that a bilingual
population boosts the economy and opens the door for increased
earnings and job opportunities.\20\ Additionally, bilingualism
promotes cultural awareness and competency.\21\ H.R. 6816 has
the potential to weaken the future of America's labor force by
decreasing student access to vital skills that are beneficial
for successful futures.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\Promoting Responsible Oversight To Eliminate Communist
Teachings for Our Kids Act, H.R. 6816, Sec. 2, 118th Cong.
\19\Id.
\20\Sophie Hardach, Speaking more than one language can boost
economic growth, World Economic Forum (Feb. 6, 2018) https://
www.weforum.org/agenda/2018/02/speaking-more-languages-boost-economic-
growth/; Press Release, U.S. Dep't of Educ., Biden-Harris
Administration Launches ``Being Bilingual is a Superpower'' to Promote
Multilingual Education for a Diverse Workforce (Nov. 16, 2023), https:/
/www.ed.gov/news/press-releases/biden-harris-administration-launches-
%E2%80%9Cbeing-bilingual-superpower%E2%80%9D-promote-multilingual-
education-diverse-workforce, https://careerservices.fas.harvard.edu/
blog/2022/11/07/the-benefits-of-being-bilingual/.
\21\Amy Bergen, The Benefits of Being Bilingual, Idealist (Nov. 29,
2021), https://www.idealist.org/en/careers/bilingual-hired.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
H.R. 6816 Could Further Fuel Anti-Asian Sentiment and Actions
In attempting to target Chinese government influence in
schools, H.R. 6816 could further fuel anti-Asian sentiments,
which are already prevalent in the U.S. For example, Stop AAPI
Hate, a U.S.-based coalition with the goal of stopping racism
and discrimination against Asian Americans and Pacific
Islanders (AAPI), has reported receiving over 11,000 incidents
of hate driven by anti-Asian rhetoric from the start of the
COVID pandemic in March 2021 to March 2022.\22\ It is important
that we do not further such sentiments and cause unnecessary
alarm and suspicion in school staff, parents and communities
due to increased discrimination against students and teachers
of Asian descent or that further fuel fear and xenophobia.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\22\Community Reports to Stop AAPI Hate 2020-2022 Key Findings,
Stop AAPI Hate (Nov. 2023), https://stopaapihate.org/wp-content/
uploads/2023/10/23-SAH-TaxonomyReport-KeyFindings-F.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DEMOCRATIC AMENDMENT OFFERED DURING MARKUP OF H.R. 6816
Ranking Member Bobby Scott (D-VA) put forward an amendment
to provide funds to assist schools with the administrative
burden of complying with the bill. Significant effort may need
to be expended to investigate existing and new contracts, and
to determine whether existing or potential business partners
have ties to the PRC that could be implicated by the bill. The
amendment authorized $300 million for fiscal year 2025 and each
subsequent fiscal year to carry out the requirements in the
bill.\23\ Committee Republicans rejected this amendment on a
party-line vote.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\23\According to the National Center for Education Statistics in
the Institute of Education Sciences at the U.S. Department of
Education, there were 99,388 public elementary and secondary schools
for the 2022-2023 school year. NCES, Digest of Education Statistics
tbl. 216.10 (2023), https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d23/tables/
dt23_216.10.asp. Three hundred million dollars would provide $3,000 per
year to each of those schools to offset the costs of compliance. In
reality, the administrative burden this bill poses could easily require
a full time administrative staff person at each school. Providing a
modest salary of $50,000 to each of those schools for such a position
would cost approximately 5 billion dollars.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
CONCLUSION
H.R. 6816 is a solution in search of a problem. While the
Majority claims that the Chinese government is infiltrating our
school systems and brainwashing our children--or has the
ability to do so if left unchecked--there is no such evidence.
Further, the legislation unnecessarily would punish public
schools and leave public schools with a significant
administrative burden. Lastly, it could further fuel anti-Asian
sentiments. For the reasons stated above, we urge the House of
Representatives to oppose H.R. 6816.
Robert C. ``Bobby'' Scott,
Ranking Member.
Gregorio Kilili Camacho Sablan,
Suzanne Bonamici,
Mark Takano,
Mark DeSaulnier,
Pramila Jayapal,
Members of Congress.
[all]