Latest news with #HouseEducationandWorkforceCommittee
E&E News
30-07-2025
- Politics
- E&E News
House Republicans push Labor to unwind mine dust rule
Republicans on the House Education and Workforce Committee are urging the Trump administration to roll back a Biden-era regulation that limits mineworkers' exposure to toxic silica dust. In a letter to the Department of Labor on Tuesday, seven GOP lawmakers, including Chair Tim Walberg (R-Mich.). argued the 2024 rule places 'unwarranted and costly obligations' on the mining industry and fails to account for other measures to keep workers safe on the job. 'Simply put, the Biden-Harris administration's actions failed to enhance worker safety when it limited protections for miners and imposed hundreds of millions of dollars in costs,' the letter states. 'DOL should consider initiating a new rulemaking to prevent serious economic hardship.' Advertisement The Mine Safety and Health Administration rule lowers the maximum exposure level for respirable crystalline silica to 50 micrograms per cubic meter of air over the course of an eight-hour shift, down from the previous level of 100 micrograms.
Politico
23-07-2025
- Politics
- Politico
House Dems launch multi-committee Epstein attack on Republicans on last day before recess
Locked out of power, House Democrats are using every opportunity to further divide Republicans over the Jeffrey Epstein saga. In committee markups, hearings and in procedural motions on the House floor, Democrats have sought to force votes that would force Republicans to take positions on whether to release the Epstein files — slowing down legislative business and, in some cases, grinding it to a halt. It's part of a formal, concerted strategy being backed by House Democratic leadership, according to a person granted anonymity to share private party deliberations. And it's already forcing House Republicans to respond. Speaker Mike Johnson already announced the House would leave for August recess a day earlier than scheduled after a clash in the Rules Committee over an Epstein-related amendment prevented some legislation from being considered on the House floor. Republican leaders aren't planning to allow any votes on legislation that would compel, or express support for, the release of the Epstein files after the August recess after the Trump administration moved to release grand jury information related to the case. But hours before the House was scheduled to take its last floor votes for the week before breaking for recess, Democrats were pursuing workarounds to that blockade. The GOP-led House Education and Workforce Committee pulled an entire bill — a measure related to enhancing detection of human trafficking — from consideration during a markup because Democrats were rolling out amendments tying the bill to Epstein. One amendment, from Rep. Yassamin Ansari (D-Ariz.), would have required the Department of Labor to include case studies about Epstein's affairs as part of training efforts, while another filed by Rep. Suzanne Bonamici (D-Ore.) would have mandated the agency to release all unclassified documents about Epstein and co-conspirator Ghislaine Maxwell. Bonamici said in an interview former Labor Secretary Alex Acosta was pressured to resign from his post as U.S. Attorney in Florida due to an outcry over his handling of the Epstein case: 'We think people should know what information they have, and if [Republicans] support transparency, they should vote for this amendment to release that information.' During a House Energy and Commerce markup on student athlete legislation, Democrats forced Republicans to take another vote to release materials related to the case against the disgraced financier and convicted sex offender who died in his jail cell by suicide in 2019. Rep. Marc Veasey (D-Texas) introduced an amendment during that meeting that would require Trump to publicize Epstein documents related to Larry Nassar, the former Michigan State University and U.S. gymnastics doctor who was charged with sexually assaulting hundreds of girls and women. News reports in 2023 indicated that Epstein had attempted to contact Nassar while the two were both incarcerated for sex crimes. Veasey's amendment also would have tied the purpose of the underlying bill being debated in committee — to codify the public rights of student athletes and provide legal protections to college sports officials — would not go into effect until those materials were released. Republicans voted to table, or kill, the amendment after House Energy and Commerce Chair Brett Guthrie (R-Ky.) ruled that it was not germane — a common tactic to swat away proposals from the minority party. Nick Niedzwiadek and Hailey Fuchs contributed to this report.
The Hill
21-07-2025
- Politics
- The Hill
Linda McMahon's answer on Holocaust denialism should scare us
Questioner: 'Madam Secretary, does refusing to hire a Holocaust denier as a member of Harvard's history department faculty count as an 'ideological litmus test?'' Witness: ' I believe that there should be diversity of viewpoints relative to teachings and opinions on campuses.' Had I just heard that correctly? Had Education Secretary Linda McMahon really just said Holocaust denialism was just a diverse view point? I was shocked. But just recently, this exchange really happened. I sat across the dais from McMahon in the House Education and Workforce Committee room. On the desk before me was the April 11 letter sent to Harvard by the Trump administration, laying out their outrageous demands of the university in order to retain their federal funding. Contained in that letter is the phrase which has become a rallying cry for the Trump administration in their crusade against Harvard: 'viewpoint diversity.' This is the one diversity program that the administration has deemed not only important, but imperative to future of higher education. But although McMahon has been beating the drum loudly on the lack of 'diverse viewpoints' on colleges campuses, she's been vague on what that means and whether the administration has the authority to enforce viewpoint diversity on campus. In her hearing before the Senate the previous day, Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) pressed the secretary on this very question. Beyond saying that college faculties need more conservative voices, she wasn't able to clearly articulate the powers that the federal government has in that realm, nor was she able to clearly define what viewpoint diversity means, nor the limits that should be recognized. So I asked. I asked if, under the demands listed in the letter, the Harvard government department would be compelled to hire faculty that believe the 2020 election was stolen. I asked if Harvard Medical School would be required to hire immunologists that adhere to Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy's view on vaccine efficacy. McMahon's response was to bluster about free speech and multiple viewpoints on college campuses. She obfuscated and I pressed. It was at this point I asked, 'Madam Secretary, does refusing to hire a Holocaust denier as a member of Harvard's history department faculty count as an 'ideological litmus test?'' She responded: 'I believe that there should be diversity of viewpoints relative to teachings and opinions on campuses.' There are a number of deeply disturbing aspects to that answer. I could write at length about the implications that widely discredited and — in the case of the third example, deeply offensive and dangerously ignorant — conspiracy theories should have a place in academic institutions that are at the global forefront of research. There is also much to be said about that fact that an administration which claims to be fighting against antisemitism does not immediately condemn Holocaust denial and insist that it does not have a place or a platform in higher education. But the pressing issue at stake here is that the administration cannot identify a limit to such viewpoint diversity. If a candidate for a position in the government department has a sincere political belief that the 2020 election was stolen, should they be hired in the interest of 'viewpoint diversity' although they would not meet the academic standards required for a serious candidate in political science? If they are not hired by the school, does the federal government have the power to punish the university? What does this mean for current faculty who disagree with the administration? 'Ideological vetting' is already happening to the school's prospective international students; it is not a stretch to imagine that that vetting might extend to faculty and domestic students too. Freedom of speech and freedom of dissent are among the most sacred and fundamental tenets of our democracy, enshrined in the very first amendment of the Bill of Rights. Universities are the arenas where those freedoms are exercised; places where ideas are tested and debated and critical thought is encouraged. History teaches us that government interference in and crackdown on colleges and universities is a tactic used by authoritarian governments to quash dissent. That is not to say that there aren't problems on college campuses today, and there should always be an unwavering commitment to student safety and wellbeing. But political dissent is not a crime. Dissent is a function of a healthy and vibrant democracy, and higher education is there to teach students how to think, not what to think. No matter where you fall on the political spectrum, all Americans must understand what is at stake in the administration's battle with Harvard. We should all be concerned about the federal government's attempt to force compliance from an independent institution, particularly one tasked with educating our young people and producing the world's preeminent research. If you love what makes this country great — freedom of speech, the right to dissent, the defense of civil rights — then you must know: we have a lot to lose if we do not fight for it.
Yahoo
05-06-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
‘The power belongs to the parents': Rep. Owens, Education chief back school choice and parental rights
During a House Education and Workforce Committee meeting Wednesday, focused on the policies and priorities of the Department of Education, the department's chief, Linda McMahon, doubled down on the Trump administration's stance to reduce federal involvement in education and to increase spending on school choice. 'We seek to shrink federal bureaucracy, save taxpayer money and empower states who best know their local needs to manage their education in this country,' she said in her opening statement. In the few months McMahon has been in her role, she said there have been many conversations with local leaders, teachers and parents around the United States asking for 'accountability and more local control,' she said, and 'That's our goal, to give parents access to the quality education their kids deserve, to fix the broken higher education industry that has misled students into degrees that don't pay off, and to create safe learning environments.' During the hearing, McMahon also said she would hold college institutions accountable by requiring them to 'have a little skin in the game relative to the loans that are made when these colleges and universities set their fees.' McMahon noted that most college campuses lack viewpoint diversity, with more progressive professors compared to conservatives. She also addressed civil rights violations, specifically antisemitic actions against Jewish faculty and students on some of America's most prestigious campuses. 'One of President Trump's campaign promises was that he was not going to tolerate antisemitic attacks on college campuses and universities, and he's clearly fulfilling that promise,' she said, adding that along with Harvard and Columbia, the administration is investigating civil rights violations at about 60 other universities. Many lawmakers are upset with the Trump administration's handling of the Department of Education, specifically McMahon's negative opinions of diversity, equity and inclusion programs and practices, as well as the deep cuts to staff and funds the administration is making at the federal level. During the hearing, Utah Rep. Burgess Owens said that McMahon's role 'represent(s) the end of accepting failure as an option' by being in favor of school choice and going after the 'scourge of DEI in our educational institutions.' Owens asked her to explain how dissolving DEI in education is important in terms of student's civil rights. Owens said he believes the education system that's been in place for decades is not benefiting young people, and the decline in test scores is proof of that. 'The power belongs to the parents, and we're going to start producing the smartest, wisest and most hopeful students in the history of mankind,' he said. McMahon responded that DEI 'did more, I think, to separate and to provide more segregation ideas, because it pitted an oppressor versus oppressed ideology,' and that it goes against 'everything we've been trying to accomplish in our country over the years, so that everyone really has equal access, equal opportunity under law.' In response, Rep. Summer Lee, D-Pa., said the administration's removal of DEI practices 'has undoubtedly revived the culture of racism we haven't seen since the Jim Crow era.' 'It's reminiscent of the suppression of abolitionist newspapers, and this department's financial aid policies harken back to a time when higher education was reserved for affluent, well-connected, and predominantly white students,' Lee added. McMahon responded by saying that studies specific to cultures, like African or Asian studies, are not under the DEI umbrella, 'if they are taught as part of the total history package.' Following the hearing and in response to Lee's comments, Owens told the Deseret News that, 'They (Democrats) like to fear monger.' 'We're the ones that are trying to look after all our kids. (Democrats have) proven over the last 50 years, they have no idea, and they don't care,' he said. 'So let's ... put her comments to the side, because we're now working to (support) all our kids so that they can live the American dream.'
Yahoo
04-06-2025
- General
- Yahoo
Education Secretary Defends Hiring Holocaust Deniers at Harvard
Education Secretary Linda McMahon wants the modern American canon to include alternative histories of some of the world's most egregious tragedies. Speaking before the House Education and Workforce Committee Wednesday amid the White House's efforts to dismantle her agency, McMahon claimed that the Trump administration's treatment of Harvard University—which includes orders for the university to introduce conservative viewpoints into its curriculum—has been fair. 'You're saying Harvard can have its funding and its international students back if and when it teaches what the Trump administration demands,' said California Representative Mark Takano, citing an April 11 letter from the DoEd which effectively ransomed the university's federal funding until Harvard abolished 'all criteria, preferences, and practices … that function as ideological litmus tests.' 'Does refusing to hire a Holocaust denier as a member of Harvard's history department faculty count as an ideological litmus test?' asked Takano. 'I believe that there should be diversity of viewpoints relative to teachings and opinions on campuses,' McMahon said. 'But what about this situation…. Would being a Holocaust denier count as that?' Takano continued. But McMahon deflected answering the question directly, pointing instead to Harvard's decision to fire the leaders of its center for Middle Eastern studies. Takano also pressed McMahon on whether the ordinance would compel Harvard to hire faculty that reject the results of the 2020 presidential election or the efficacy of vaccines. In response, the education secretary insisted that there 'should be different viewpoints' in America's most elite universities—even if those viewpoints are not based in any matter of science, fact, or proof. McMahon also scolded Takano for impressing a 'political ideology' that she argued was a 'false narrative.' Pennsylvania Representative Summer Lee also torched McMahon for using the Education Department to introduce dangerous and unfounded ideas into American history, asking the former professional wrestling promoter to explain what 'both sides' of African-American history would be. 'During your confirmation hearing you were asked by Senator Chris Murphy if an African-American history class violated the administration's position on diversity, equity, and inclusion. You said you would look into it,' said Lee. 'Have you looked into it?''I do not think that African studies or Middle East studies or Chinese studies are part of DEI—if they are taught as the total history package,' responded McMahon. 'So that if you're giving the facts on both sides, of course they're not DEI.' 'I don't know what both sides of African-American history would be,' Lee said. 'Well if African American history is part of—' McMahon started, before Lee interjected to argue that it would be impossible to teach the whole of history in singular semesters. 'Do you not agree that it makes sense that there would be separate courses for these courses of study?' Lee said, pointing out that the same teaching philosophy exists across areas of study, from literature to music. 'One wouldn't study baroque music and necessarily have to learn about African studies at the same time.' McMahon eventually conceded that she agreed African history could be taught as an isolated area of study without being considered a 'DEI course.' Trump signed an executive order to strip the Education Department for parts in March. The order had McMahon's approval. The agency has historically been responsible for approving, monitoring, and distributing federal financial aid, such as Pell Grants and other aid made available to the public via the FAFSA. It's also been responsible for assessing and analyzing America's K-12 systems, as well as aggregating data and research on American educational policies. The department also oversaw the implementation of Title IX, and ensured that the American public had equal access to a valuable education. In the immediate wake of the order, McMahon penned the mass layoff of more than half the agency's staff. The Education Department was already the smallest Cabinet agency, with just over 4,000 employees. Its budget cost American taxpayers $268 billion in 2024, roughly four percent of overall spending.
