Jump to content
TedderVision

Paul Vang

Members
  • Content Count

    1,455
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    10

Everything posted by Paul Vang

  1. Mr. Vang, with thanks to Mr. Portman, submits A BILL To counter foreign disinformation and propaganda, and for other purposes. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. This Act may be cited as the “Countering Foreign Propaganda and Disinformation Act”. SEC. 2. CENTER FOR INFORMATION ANALYSIS AND RESPONSE. (a) Establishment.—Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the President shall establish a Center for Information Analysis and Response (in this section referred to as the “Center”). The purposes of the Center are— (1) to coordinate the sharing among government agencies of information on foreign government information warfare efforts, including information provided by recipients of information access fund grants awarded using funds made available under subsection (e) and from other sources, subject to the appropriate classification guidelines; (2) to establish a process for integrating information on foreign propaganda and disinformation efforts into national strategy; and (3) to develop, plan, and synchronize interagency activities to expose and counter foreign information operations directed against United States national security interests and advance narratives that support United States allies and interests. (b) Functions.—The Center shall carry out the following functions: (1) Integrating interagency efforts to track and evaluate counterfactual narratives abroad that threaten the national security interests of the United States and United States allies, subject to appropriate regulations governing the dissemination of classified information and programs. (2) Analyzing relevant information from United States Government agencies, allied nations, think-tanks, academic institutions, civil society groups, and other nongovernmental organizations. (3) Developing and disseminating thematic narratives and analysis to counter propaganda and disinformation directed at United States allies and partners in order to safeguard United States allies and interests. (4) Identifying current and emerging trends in foreign propaganda and disinformation, including the use of print, broadcast, online and social media, support for third-party outlets such as think tanks, political parties, and nongovernmental organizations, in order to coordinate and shape the development of tactics, techniques, and procedures to expose and refute foreign misinformation and disinformation and proactively promote fact-based narratives and policies to audiences outside the United States. (5) Facilitating the use of a wide range of information-related technologies and techniques to counter foreign disinformation by sharing expertise among agencies, seeking expertise from external sources, and implementing best practices. (6) Identifying gaps in United States capabilities in areas relevant to the Center’s mission and recommending necessary enhancements or changes. (7) Identifying the countries and populations most susceptible to foreign government propaganda and disinformation. (8) Administering and expending funds made available pursuant to subsection (e). (9) Coordinating with allied and partner nations, particularly those frequently targeted by foreign disinformation operations, and international organizations and entities such as the NATO Center of Excellence on Strategic Communications, the European Endowment for Democracy, and the European External Action Service Task Force on Strategic Communications, in order to amplify the Center’s efforts and avoid duplication. (c) Interagency Manager.— (1) IN GENERAL.—The President is authorized to designate an official of the United States Government to lead an interagency team and to manage the Center. The President shall delegate to the manager of the Center responsibility for and presumptive authority to direct and coordinate the activities and operations of all departments, agencies, and elements of the United States Government in so far as their support is required to ensure the successful implementation of a strategy approved by the President for accomplishing the mission. The official so designated shall be serving in a position in the executive branch by appointment, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate. (2) INTERAGENCY STEERING COMMITTEE.— (A) COMPOSITION.—The Interagency Manager shall establish a Steering Committee composed of senior representatives of agencies relevant to the Center’s mission to provide advice to the Manager on the operations and strategic orientation of the Center and to ensure adequate support for the Center. The Steering Committee shall include one senior representative designated by each of the Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of State, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the Administrator of the United States Agency for International Development, and the Chairman of the Broadcasting Board of Governors. (B) MEETINGS.—The Interagency Steering Committee shall meet not less than every 3 months. (C) PARTICIPATION AND INDEPENDENCE.—The Chairman of the Broadcasting Board of Governors shall not compromise the journalistic freedom or integrity of relevant media organizations. Other Federal agencies may be invited to participate in the Center and Steering Committee at the discretion of the Interagency Manager. (3) SCOPE OF RESPONSIBILITY AND AUTHORITY.— (A) LIMITATION ON SCOPE.—The delegated responsibility and authority provided pursuant to paragraph (1) may not extend beyond the requirements for successful implementation of the mission and strategy described in that paragraph. (B) APPEAL OF EXECUTION OF ACTIVITIES.—The head of any department, agency, or other element of the United States Government may appeal to the President a requirement or direction by the official designated pursuant to paragraph (1) for activities otherwise in support of the mission and strategy described in that paragraph if such head determines that there is a compelling case that executing such activities would do undue harm to other missions of national importance to the United States. (4) TARGETED FOREIGN AUDIENCES.— (A) IN GENERAL.—The activities under this subsection of the Center described in paragraph (1) shall be done only with the intent to influence foreign audiences. No funds for the activities of the team under this section may be used with the intent to influence public opinion in the United States. (B) RULE OF CONSTRUCTION.—Nothing in this subsection may be construed to prohibit the team described in paragraph (1) from engaging in any form of communication or medium, either directly or indirectly, or coordinating with any other department or agency of the United States Government, a State government, or any other public or private organization or institution because a United States domestic audience is or may be thereby exposed to activities or communications of the team under this subsection, or based on a presumption of such exposure. (d) Staff.— (1) COMPENSATION.—The President may fix the compensation of the manager of the Center and other personnel without regard to chapter 51 and subchapter III of chapter 53 of title 5, United States Code, relating to classification of positions and General Schedule pay rates, except that the rate of pay for the executive director and other personnel may not exceed the rate payable for level V of the Executive Schedule under section 5316 of that title. (2) DETAIL OF GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES.—Any Federal Government employee may be detailed to the Center without reimbursement, and such detail shall be without interruption or loss of civil service status or privilege. (3) PROCUREMENT OF TEMPORARY AND INTERMITTENT SERVICES.—The President may procure temporary and intermittent services under section 3109(b) of title 5, United States Code, at rates for individuals which do not exceed the daily equivalent of the annual rate of basic pay prescribed for level V of the Executive Schedule under section 5316 of that title. (e) Funds.—Of amounts authorized to be appropriated for fiscal year 2017 for the Department of Defense and identified as undistributed fuel cost savings, up to $250,000,000 may be available for purposes of carrying out this section and the grant program established under section 3. Once obligated, such funds shall remain available for such purposes until expended. SEC. 3. INFORMATION ACCESS FUNDS. (a) Grants And Contracts Of Financial Support.—The Center may provide grants or contracts of financial support to civil society groups, journalists, nongovernmental organizations, federally funded research and development centers, private companies, or academic institutions for the following purposes: (1) To support local independent media who are best placed to refute foreign disinformation and manipulation in their own communities. (2) To collect and store examples in print, online, and social media of disinformation, misinformation, and propaganda directed at the United States and its allies and partners. (3) To analyze tactics, techniques, and procedures of foreign government information warfare with respect to disinformation, misinformation, and propaganda. (4) To support efforts by the Center to counter efforts by foreign governments to use disinformation, misinformation, and propaganda to influence the policies and social and political stability of the United States and United States allies and partners. (b) Funding Availability And Limitations.—All organizations that apply to receive funds under this section must undergo a vetting process in accordance with the relevant existing regulations to ensure their bona fides, capability, and experience, and their compatibility with United States interests and objectives. SEC. 4. INCLUSION IN DEPARTMENT OF STATE EDUCATION AND CULTURAL EXCHANGE PROGRAMS OF FOREIGN STUDENTS AND COMMUNITY LEADERS FROM COUNTRIES AND POPULATIONS SUSCEPTIBLE TO FOREIGN MANIPULATION. The President shall ensure that when the Secretary of State is selecting participants for United States educational and cultural exchange programs, the Secretary of State gives special consideration to students and community leaders from populations and countries the Secretary deems vulnerable to foreign propaganda and disinformation campaigns. SEC. 5. REPORTS. (a) In General.—Not later than one year after the establishment of the Center, the President shall submit to the appropriate congressional committees a report evaluating the success of the Center in fulfilling the purposes for which it was authorized and outlining steps to improve any areas of deficiency. (b) Appropriate Congressional Committees Defined.—In this section, the term “appropriate congressional committees” means— (1) the Committee on Foreign Relations, the Committee on Armed Services, the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, the Select Committee on Intelligence, and the Committee on Appropriations of the Senate; and (2) the Committee on Foreign Affairs, the Committee on Armed Services, the Committee on Homeland Security, the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, and the Committee on Appropriations of the House of Representatives. SEC. 6. TERMINATION OF CENTER AND STEERING COMMITTEE. The Center for Information Analysis and Response and the interagency team established under section 2(c) shall terminate 15 years after the date of the enactment of this Act. SEC. 7. RULE OF CONSTRUCTION REGARDING RELATIONSHIP TO INTELLIGENCE AUTHORITIES AND ACTIVITIES. Nothing in this Act shall be construed as superseding or modifying any existing authorities governing the collection, sharing, and implementation of intelligence programs and activities or existing regulations governing the sharing of classified information and programs. PES: This bill directs the Department of State to establish a Center for Information Analysis and Response to: coordinate the sharing among government agencies of information on foreign government information warfare efforts, establish a process for integrating information on foreign propaganda and disinformation efforts into national strategy, and develop and synchronize interagency activities to expose and counter foreign information operations directed against U.S. national security interests and advance narratives that support U.S. allies and interests. The President is authorized to designate a U.S. government official to lead an interagency team and to manage the center. The center may provide grants to or contract with specified entities to: support local independent media to refute foreign disinformation and manipulation in their communities, collect and store examples of disinformation and propaganda directed at the United States and its allies, analyze foreign government information warfare tactics and techniques, and support center efforts to counter foreign disinformation and propaganda efforts to influence the policies and social and political stability of the United States and its allies. The President shall ensure that the State Department, when selecting participants for U.S. educational and cultural exchange programs, gives special consideration to students and community leaders from populations and countries deemed vulnerable to foreign propaganda and disinformation campaigns. The center shall terminate 15 years after enactment of this Act.
  2. Paul Vang

    General Election Debate 1 (Foreign Policy)

    Tonight ladies and gentleman we've been pitched a brand of hawkish liberal foreign policy that is both fundamentally hypocritical and morally bankrupt. In one breath my opponent says we will be a beacon of global human rights all the while continuing support for Saudi Arabia one of the biggest violators of human rights facilitating a mass starvation humanitarian crisis in Yemen in addition to their large support of terrorism. We'll continue the global intervention adventurism like we've seen in Iraq, Libya, Afghanistan, and Syria filling our cemeteries with our very best while engulfing us to trillions in debt. Stoking more global condemnation of the United States and inspiring more terrorism for intrusion after intrusion to prop up an empire our founders direly warned of us prophetically centuries ago in their grand wisdom. It's a weight on our back that has held us down for decades as politician after politician have refused to put America first in the world. Out of touch classroom academia op-ed posturing on a global stage with the lives of our service members just as my own was risked on the battlefield in Iraq for a cause we shouldn't have gotten involved in. We'll be lead into globalist economic suicide pacts like the Paris Climate Agreement in an attempt ineffectually address climate change. An action that by 2040 according to a study by the National Economic Research Associates would cost us a 38% cut in iron and steel production, 31% cut in natural gas production, an 85% cut in coal production, a GDP loss of $3 trillion, and the loss of some 6.5 million industrial jobs. Meanwhile, according to proponents' own data, the agreement would have no discernible effect on global temperatures. But loose unoutlined promises of a green new deal type jobs program unacted on by House majority leadership like my opponent is somehow supposed to make up for such a windfall of economic self-harm. As a sponsor of the largest jobs program since the actual New Deal in the Rebuilding America's Infrastructure Act let me tell you, there's empty talk in the world and then there's proven results. All the while turning a blind eye to the harmful effects of the free mass importation of harmful carbon pollution by foreign exporters particularly because apparently one wouldn't want to anger an oppressive violator of human rights such as we see with the Chinese government. Truly white flag surrenders on economic, environmental, and moral standings across the board. This is the message my opponent is trying to sell you on. It's a philosophy concerned about superficial appearances and self-promotion over actual action. My opponent calls for the ending of family separations at the border all the while I've been the only member of Congress to sponsor legislation on the matter. It's been overlooked because it wasn't something House majority leadership such as that which my opponent is apart of could claim as their own personal victory. Rather than act on the matter in a time expedient fashion he'd rather wait so he could bask in his own self-righteousness enacting it as President himself. My foreign policy will be one that will worry more about bringing the American troops home than some distant squabble unrelated to our country. One that upholds our economic interests over unamerican self-sabotaging globalist allegiance and rogue economic actors that push down their own people to maintain their projection of power. America first through and through.
  3. IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Ms. Vang (for himself, Ms. Warren, Mr. McCain, Ms. Cantwell, and Mr. King) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs A BILL To reduce risks to the financial system by limiting banks’ ability to engage in certain risky activities and limiting conflicts of interest, to reinstate certain Glass-Steagall Act protections that were repealed by the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, and for other purposes. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. This Act may be cited as the “21st Century Glass-Steagall Act”. SEC. 2. FINDINGS AND PURPOSE. (a) Findings.—Congress finds that— (1) in response to a financial crisis and the ensuing Great Depression, Congress enacted the Banking Act of 1933, known as the “Glass-Steagall Act”, to prohibit commercial banks from offering investment banking and insurance services; (2) a series of deregulatory decisions by the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System and the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, in addition to decisions by Federal courts, permitted commercial banks to engage in an increasing number of risky financial activities that had previously been restricted under the Glass-Steagall Act, and also vastly expanded the meaning of the “business of banking” and “closely related activities” in banking law; (3) in 1999, Congress enacted the “Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act”, which repealed the Glass-Steagall Act separation between commercial and investment banking and allowed for complex cross-subsidies and interconnections between commercial and investment banks; (4) former Kansas City Federal Reserve President Thomas Hoenig observed that “with the elimination of Glass-Steagall, the largest institutions with the greatest ability to leverage their balance sheets increased their risk profile by getting into trading, market making, and hedge fund activities, adding ever greater complexity to their balance sheets.”; (5) the Financial Crisis Inquiry Report issued by the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission concluded that, in the years between the passage of the Gramm-Leach Bliley Act and the global financial crisis, “regulation and supervision of traditional banking had been weakened significantly, allowing commercial banks and thrifts to operate with fewer constraints and to engage in a wider range of financial activities, including activities in the shadow banking system.”. The Commission also concluded that “[t]his deregulation made the financial system especially vulnerable to the financial crisis and exacerbated its effects.”; (6) a report by the Financial Stability Oversight Council pursuant to section 123 of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (12 U.S.C. 5333) states that increased complexity and diversity of financial activities at financial institutions may “shift institutions towards more risk-taking, increase the level of interconnectedness among financial firms, and therefore may increase systemic default risk. These potential costs may be exacerbated in cases where the market perceives diverse and complex financial institutions as ‘too big to fail,’ which may lead to excessive risk taking and concerns about moral hazard.”; (7) the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations report, “Wall Street and the Financial Crisis: Anatomy of a Financial Collapse”, states that repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act “made it more difficult for regulators to distinguish between activities intended to benefit customers versus the financial institution itself. The expanded set of financial services investment banks were allowed to offer also contributed to the multiple and significant conflicts of interest that arose between some investment banks and their clients during the financial crisis.”; (8) the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations report, “JPMorgan Chase Whale Trades: A Case History of Derivatives Risks and Abuses”, describes how traders at JPMorgan Chase made risky bets using excess deposits that were partly insured by the Federal Government; (9) in Europe, the Vickers Independent Commission on Banking (for the United Kingdom) and the Liikanen Report (for the Euro area) have both found that there is no inherent reason to bundle “retail banking” with “investment banking” or other forms of relatively high risk securities trading, and European countries are set on a path of separating various activities that are currently bundled together in the business of banking; (10) private sector actors prefer having access to underpriced public sector insurance, whether explicit (for insured deposits) or implicit (for “too big to fail” financial institutions), to subsidize dangerous levels of risk-taking, which, from a broader social perspective, is not an advantageous arrangement; and (11) the financial crisis, and the regulatory response to the crisis, has led to more mergers between financial institutions, creating greater financial sector consolidation and increasing the dominance of a few large, complex financial institutions that are generally considered to be “too big to fail”, and therefore are perceived by the markets as having an implicit guarantee from the Federal Government to bail them out in the event of their failure. (b) Purposes.—The purposes of this Act are— (1) to reduce risks to the financial system by limiting the ability of banks to engage in activities other than socially valuable core banking activities; (2) to protect taxpayers and reduce moral hazard by removing explicit and implicit government guarantees for high-risk activities outside of the core business of banking; and (3) to eliminate any conflict of interest that arises from banks engaging in activities from which their profits are earned at the expense of their customers or clients. SEC. 3. DEFINITIONS. In this Act— (1) the term “bank holding company” has the meaning given the term in section 2 of the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956 (12 U.S.C. 1841); and (2) the terms “insurance company”, “insured depository institution”, “securities entity”, and “swaps entity” have the meanings given those terms in section 18(s)(6)(D) of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act, as added by section 4(a) of this Act. SEC. 4. SAFE AND SOUND BANKING. (a) Insured Depository Institutions.—Section 18(s) of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act (12 U.S.C. 1828(s)) is amended by adding at the end the following: “(6) LIMITATIONS ON BANKING AFFILIATIONS.— “(A) PROHIBITION ON AFFILIATIONS WITH NONDEPOSITORY ENTITIES.—An insured depository institution may not— “(i) be or become an affiliate of any insurance company, securities entity, or swaps entity; “(ii) be in common ownership or control with any insurance company, securities entity, or swaps entity; or “(iii) engage in any activity that would cause the insured depository institution to qualify as an insurance company, securities entity, or swaps entity. “(B) INDIVIDUALS ELIGIBLE TO SERVE ON BOARDS OF DEPOSITORY INSTITUTIONS.— “(i) IN GENERAL.—An individual who is an officer, director, partner, or employee of any securities entity, insurance company, or swaps entity may not serve at the same time as an officer, director, employee, or other institution-affiliated party of any insured depository institution. “(ii) EXCEPTION.—Clause (i) shall not apply with respect to service by any individual which is otherwise prohibited under clause (i), if the appropriate Federal banking agency determines, by regulation with respect to a limited number of cases, that service by such an individual as an officer, director, employee, or other institution-affiliated party of an insured depository institution would not unduly influence— “(I) the investment policies of the depository institution; or “(II) the advice that the institution provides to customers. “(iii) TERMINATION OF SERVICE.—Subject to a determination under clause (i), any individual described in clause (i) who, as of the date of enactment of the 21st Century Glass-Steagall Act, is serving as an officer, director, employee, or other institution-affiliated party of any insured depository institution shall terminate such service as soon as is practicable after such date of enactment, and in no event, later than the end of the 60-day period beginning on that date of enactment. “(C) TERMINATION OF EXISTING AFFILIATIONS AND ACTIVITIES.— “(i) ORDERLY TERMINATION OF EXISTING AFFILIATIONS AND ACTIVITIES.—Any affiliation, common ownership or control, or activity of an insured depository institution with any securities entity, insurance company, swaps entity, or any other person, as of the date of enactment of the 21st Century Glass-Steagall Act, which is prohibited under subparagraph (A) shall be terminated as soon as is practicable, and in no event later than the end of the 5-year period beginning on that date of enactment. “(ii) EARLY TERMINATION.—The appropriate Federal banking agency, at any time after opportunity for hearing, may order termination of an affiliation, common ownership or control, or activity prohibited by clause (i) before the end of the 5-year period described in clause (i), if the agency determines that such action— “(I) is necessary to prevent undue concentration of resources, decreased or unfair competition, conflicts of interest, or unsound banking practices; and “(II) is in the public interest. “(iii) EXTENSION.—Subject to a determination under clause (ii), an appropriate Federal banking agency may extend the 5-year period described in clause (i) as to any particular insured depository institution for not more than an additional 6 months at a time, if— “(I) the agency certifies that such extension would promote the public interest and would not pose a significant threat to the stability of the banking system or financial markets in the United States; and “(II) such extension, in the aggregate, does not exceed 1 year for any single insured depository institution. “(iv) REQUIREMENTS FOR ENTITIES RECEIVING AN EXTENSION.—Upon receipt of an extension under clause (iii), the insured depository institution shall notify shareholders of the insured depository institution and the general public that it has failed to comply with the requirements of clause (i). “(D) DEFINITIONS.—For purposes of this paragraph, the following definitions shall apply: “(i) INSURANCE COMPANY.—The term ‘insurance company’ has the meaning given the term in section 2(q) of the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956 (12 U.S.C. 1841(q)). “(ii) INSURED DEPOSITORY INSTITUTION.—The term ‘insured depository institution’— “(I) has the meaning given the term in section 3(c)(2); and “(II) does not include a savings association controlled by a savings and loan holding company, as described in section 10(c)(9)(C) of the Home Owners' Loan Act (12 U.S.C. 1467a(c)(9)(C)). “(iii) SECURITIES ENTITY.—The term ‘securities entity’— “(I) includes any entity engaged in— “(aa) the issue, flotation, underwriting, public sale, or distribution of stocks, bonds, debentures, notes, or other securities; “(bb) market making; “(cc) activities of a broker or dealer, as those terms are defined in section 3(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78c(a)); “(dd) activities of a futures commission merchant; “(ee) activities of an investment adviser or investment company, as those terms are defined in section 202(a) of the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 (15 U.S.C. 80b–2(a)) and section 3(a)(1) of the Investment Company Act of 1940 (15 U.S.C. 80a–3(a)(1)), respectively; or “(ff) hedge fund or private equity investments in the securities of either privately or publicly held companies; and “(II) does not include a bank that, pursuant to its authorized trust and fiduciary activities— “(aa) purchases and sells investments for the account of its customers; or “(bb) provides financial or investment advice to its customers. “(iv) SWAPS ENTITY.—The term ‘swaps entity’ means any swap dealer, security-based swap dealer, major swap participant, or major security-based swap participant, that is registered under— “(I) the Commodity Exchange Act (7 U.S.C. 1 et seq.); or “(II) the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78a et seq.).”. (b) Limitation On Banking Activities.—Section 21 of the Banking Act of 1933 (12 U.S.C. 378) is amended by adding at the end the following: “(c) Business Of Receiving Deposits.—For purposes of this section, the term ‘business of receiving deposits’ includes the establishment and maintenance of any transaction account (as defined in section 19(b)(1)(C) of the Federal Reserve Act (12 U.S.C. 461(b)(1)(C))).”. (c) Permitted Activities Of National Banks.—The paragraph designated as “Seventh” of section 24 of the Revised Statutes (12 U.S.C. 24) is amended to read as follows: “ Seventh. (A) To exercise by its board of directors or duly authorized officers or agents, subject to law, all such powers as are necessary to carry on the business of banking. “(B) As used in this paragraph, the term ‘business of banking’ shall be limited to the following core banking services: “(i) RECEIVING DEPOSITS.—A national banking association may engage in the business of receiving deposits. “(ii) EXTENSIONS OF CREDIT.—A national banking association may— “(I) extend credit to individuals, businesses, not for profit organizations, and other entities; “(II) discount and negotiate promissory notes, drafts, bills of exchange, and other evidences of debt; and “(III) loan money on personal security. “(iii) PAYMENT SYSTEMS.—A national banking association may participate in payment systems, defined as instruments, banking procedures, and interbank funds transfer systems that ensure the circulation of money. “(iv) COIN AND BULLION.—A national banking association may buy, sell, and exchange coin and bullion. “(v) INVESTMENTS IN SECURITIES.— “(I) IN GENERAL.—A national banking association may invest in investment securities, defined as marketable obligations evidencing indebtedness of any person, copartnership, association, or corporation in the form of bonds, notes, or debentures (commonly known as ‘investment securities’), obligations of the Federal Government, or any State or subdivision thereof, and includes the definition of ‘investment securities’, as may be jointly prescribed by regulation by— “(aa) the Comptroller of the Currency; “(bb) the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation; and “(cc) the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System. “(II) LIMITATIONS.—The business of dealing in securities and stock by the association shall be limited to— “(aa) purchasing and selling such securities and stock without recourse, solely upon the order, and for the account of, customers, and in no case for its own account, and the association shall not underwrite any issue of securities or stock; and “(bb) purchasing for its own account investment securities under such limitations and restrictions as the Comptroller of the Currency, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, and the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System may jointly prescribe, by regulation. “(III) PROHIBITION ON AMOUNT OF INVESTMENT.—In no event shall the total amount of the investment securities of any single obligor or maker, held by the association for its own account, exceed 10 percent of its capital stock actually paid in and unimpaired and 10 percent of its unimpaired surplus fund, except that such limitation shall not require any association to dispose of any securities lawfully held by it on August 23, 1935. “(C) PROHIBITION AGAINST TRANSACTIONS INVOLVING STRUCTURED OR SYNTHETIC PRODUCTS.—A national banking association may not— “(i) invest in a structured or synthetic product, a financial instrument in which a return is calculated based on the value of, or by reference to the performance of, a security, commodity, swap, other asset, or an entity, or any index or basket composed of securities, commodities, swaps, other assets, or entities, other than customarily determined interest rates; or “(ii) otherwise engage in the business of receiving deposits or extending credit for transactions involving structured or synthetic products.”. (d) Permitted Activities Of Federal Savings Associations.—Section 5(c)(1) of the Home Owners' Loan Act (12 U.S.C. 1464(c)(1)) is amended— (1) by striking subparagraph (Q); and (2) by redesignating subparagraphs (R) through (U) as subparagraphs (Q) through (T), respectively. (e) Closely Related Activities.—Section 4(c) of the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956 (12 U.S.C. 1843(c)) is amended— (1) in paragraph (8), by striking “had been determined” and all that follows through the end and inserting the following: “are so closely related to banking so as to be a proper incident thereto, as provided under this paragraph or any rule or regulation issued by the Board under this paragraph, provided that for purposes of this paragraph, closely related shall not be considered to include— “(A) serving as an investment adviser (as defined in section 2(a) of the Investment Company Act of 1940 (15 U.S.C. 80a–2(a))) to an investment company registered under that Act, including sponsoring, organizing, and managing a closed-end investment company; “(B) agency transactional services for customer investments, except that this subparagraph may not be construed as prohibiting purchases and sales of investments for the account of customers conducted by a bank (or subsidiary thereof) pursuant to the bank’s trust and fiduciary powers; “(C) investment transactions as principal, except for activities specifically allowed by paragraph (14); and “(D) management consulting and counseling activities;”; (2) in paragraph (13), by striking “or” at the end; (3) by redesignating paragraph (14) as paragraph (15); and (4) by inserting after paragraph (13) the following: “(14) purchasing, as an end user, any swap, to the extent that— “(A) the purchase of any such swap occurs contemporaneously with the underlying hedged item or hedged transaction; “(B) there is formal documentation identifying the hedging relationship with particularity at the inception of the hedge; and “(C) the swap is being used to hedge against exposure to— “(i) changes in the value of an individual recognized asset or liability or an identified portion thereof that is attributable to a particular risk; “(ii) changes in interest rates; or “(iii) changes in the value of currency; or”. (f) Prohibited Activities.—Section 4(a) of the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956 (12 U.S.C. 1843(a)) is amended— (1) in paragraph (1), by striking “, or” and inserting a semicolon; (2) in paragraph (2), by striking the “requirements of this Act.” and inserting “requirements of this Act; or”; and (3) by inserting before the undesignated matter following paragraph (2) the following: “(3) with the exception of the activities permitted under subsection (c), engage in the business of a ‘securities entity’ or a ‘swaps entity’, as those terms are defined in section 18(s)(6)(D) of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act (12 U.S.C. 1828(s)(6)(D)), including dealing or making markets in securities, repurchase agreements, exchange traded and over-the-counter swaps, as defined by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission and the Securities and Exchange Commission, or structured or synthetic products, as defined in the paragraph designated as ‘Seventh’ of section 24 of the Revised Statutes (12 U.S.C. 24), or any other over-the-counter securities, swaps, contracts, or any other agreement that derives its value from, or takes on the form of, such securities, derivatives, or contracts; “(4) engage in proprietary trading, as provided by section 13, or any rule or regulation under that section; “(5) own, sponsor, or invest in a hedge fund, or private equity fund, or any other fund, as provided by section 13, or any rule or regulation under that section, or any other fund that exhibits the characteristics of a fund that takes on proprietary trading activities or positions; “(6) hold ineligible securities or derivatives; “(7) engage in market-making; or “(8) engage in prime brokerage activities.”. (g) Anti-Evasion.— (1) IN GENERAL.—Any attempt to structure any contract, investment, instrument, or product in such a manner that the purpose or effect of such contract, investment, instrument, or product is to evade or attempt to evade the prohibitions described in section 18(s)(6) of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act (12 U.S.C. 1828(s)(6)), section 21(c) of the Banking Act of 1933 (12 U.S.C. 378(c)), the paragraph designated as “Seventh” of section 24 of the Revised Statutes (12 U.S.C. 24), section 5(c)(1) of the Home Owners’ Loan Act (12 U.S.C. 1464(c)(1)), or section 4(a) of the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956 (12 U.S.C. 1843(a)), as added or amended by this section, shall be considered a violation of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act (12 U.S.C. 1811 et seq.), the Banking Act of 1933 (Public Law 73–66; 48 Stat. 162), section 24 of the Revised Statutes (12 U.S.C. 24), the Home Owners’ Loan Act (12 U.S.C. 1461 et seq.), and the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956 (12 U.S.C. 1841 et seq.), respectively. (2) TERMINATION.— (A) IN GENERAL.—Notwithstanding any other provision of law, if a Federal agency has reasonable cause to believe that an insured depository institution, securities entity, swaps entity, insurance company, bank holding company, or other entity over which that Federal agency has regulatory authority has made an investment or engaged in an activity in a manner that functions as an evasion of the prohibitions described in paragraph (1) (including through an abuse of any permitted activity) or otherwise violates such prohibitions, the Federal agency shall— (i) order, after due notice and opportunity for hearing, the entity to terminate the activity and, as relevant, dispose of the investment; (ii) order, after the procedures described in clause (i), the entity to pay a penalty equal to 10 percent of the entity’s net profits, averaged over the previous 3 years, into the Treasury of the United States; and (iii) initiate proceedings described in section 8(e) of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act (12 U.S.C. 1818(e)) for individuals involved in evading the prohibitions described in paragraph (1). (B) CONSTRUCTION.—Nothing in this paragraph shall be construed to limit the inherent authority of any Federal agency or State regulatory authority to further restrict any investments or activities under otherwise applicable provisions of law. (3) REPORTING REQUIREMENT.— (A) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 1 year after the date of enactment of this Act, and every year thereafter, each Federal agency having regulatory authority over any entity described in paragraph (2)(A) shall submit to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs of the Senate and the Committee on Financial Services of the House of Representatives and make available to the public a report, which shall identify— (i) the number and character of any activities that took place in the preceding year that function as an evasion of the prohibitions described in paragraph (1); (ii) the names of the particular entities engaged in those activities; and (iii) the actions of the Federal agency taken under paragraph (2). (h) Attestation.—Section 4 of the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956 (12 U.S.C. 1843), as amended by section 4(a)(1) of this Act, is amended by adding at the end the following: “(k) Attestation.—Executives of any bank holding company or its affiliate shall attest in writing, under penalty of perjury, that the bank holding company or affiliate is not engaged in any activity that is prohibited under subsection (a), except to the extent that such activity is permitted under subsection (c).”. SEC. 5. REPEAL OF GRAMM-LEACH-BLILEY ACT PROVISIONS. (a) Termination Of Financial Holding Company Designation.— (1) IN GENERAL.—Section 4 of the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956 (12 U.S.C. 1843) is amended by striking subsections (k), (l), (m), (n), and (o). (2) TRANSITION.— (A) ORDERLY TERMINATION OF EXISTING AFFILIATION.—In the case of a bank holding company which, pursuant to the amendments made by paragraph (1), is no longer authorized to control or be affiliated with any entity that was permissible for a financial holding company on the day before the date of enactment of this Act, any affiliation, ownership or control, or activity by the bank holding company that is not permitted for a bank holding company shall be terminated as soon as is practicable, and in no event later than the end of the 5-year period beginning on the date of enactment of this Act. (B) EARLY TERMINATION.—The Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (in this section referred to as the “Board”), after opportunity for hearing, at any time, may terminate an affiliation prohibited by subparagraph (A) before the end of the 5-year period described in subparagraph (A) if the Board determines that such action— (i) is necessary to prevent undue concentration of resources, decreased or unfair competition, conflicts of interest, or unsound banking practices; and (ii) is in the public interest. (C) EXTENSION.—Subject to a determination under subparagraph (B), the Board may extend the 5-year period described in subparagraph (A), as to any particular bank holding company, for not more than an additional 6 months at a time, if— (i) the Board certifies that such extension would promote the public interest and would not pose a significant risk to the stability of the banking system or financial markets of the United States; and (ii) such extension, in the aggregate, does not exceed 1 year for any single bank holding company. (D) REQUIREMENTS FOR ENTITIES RECEIVING AN EXTENSION.—Upon receipt of an extension under subparagraph (C), a bank holding company shall notify the shareholders of the bank holding company and the general public that the bank holding company has failed to comply with the requirements of subparagraph (A). (b) Financial Subsidiaries Of National Banks Disallowed.— (1) IN GENERAL.—Section 5136A of the Revised Statutes (12 U.S.C. 24a) is repealed. (2) TRANSITION.— (A) ORDERLY TERMINATION OF EXISTING AFFILIATION.—In the case of a national bank which, pursuant to the amendment made by paragraph (1), is no longer authorized to control or be affiliated with a financial subsidiary as of the date of enactment of this Act, such affiliation, ownership or control, or activity shall be terminated as soon as is practicable, and in no event later than the end of the 5-year period beginning on the date of enactment of this Act. (B) EARLY TERMINATION.—The Comptroller of the Currency (in this section referred to as the “Comptroller”), after opportunity for hearing, at any time, may terminate an affiliation prohibited by subparagraph (A) before the end of the 5-year period described in subparagraph (A) if the Comptroller determines, having due regard for the purposes of this Act, that such action— (i) is necessary to prevent undue concentration of resources, decreased or unfair competition, conflicts of interest, or unsound banking practices; and (ii) is in the public interest. (C) EXTENSION.—Subject to a determination under subparagraph (B), the Comptroller may extend the 5-year period described in subparagraph (A) as to any particular national bank for not more than an additional 6 months at a time, if— (i) the Comptroller certifies that such extension would promote the public interest and would not pose a significant risk to the stability of the banking system or financial markets of the United States; and (ii) such extension, in the aggregate, does not exceed 1 year for any single national bank. (D) REQUIREMENTS FOR ENTITIES RECEIVING AN EXTENSION.—Upon receipt of an extension under subparagraph (C), a national bank shall notify the shareholders of the national bank and the general public that the national bank has failed to comply with the requirements described in subparagraph (A). (3) CLERICAL AMENDMENT.—The table of sections for chapter one of title LXII of the Revised Statutes is amended by striking the item relating to section 5136A. (c) Repeal Of Provision Relating To Foreign Banks Filing As Financial Holding Companies.—Section 8(c) of the International Banking Act of 1978 (12 U.S.C. 3106(c)) is amended by striking paragraph (3). SEC. 6. REPEAL OF BANKRUPTCY PROVISIONS. Title 11, United States Code, is amended by repealing sections 555, 559, 560, and 562. SEC. 7. TECHNICAL AND CONFORMING AMENDMENTS. (a) Bank Holding Company Act Of 1956.—The Bank Holding Company Act of 1956 (12 U.S.C. 1841 et seq.) is amended— (1) in section 2 (12 U.S.C. 1841)— (A) by striking subsection (p); and (B) by redesignating subsection (q) as subsection (p); and (2) in section 5 (12 U.S.C. 1844)— (A) in subsection (a), by striking the last sentence; (B) in subsection (c), by striking paragraphs (3), (4), and (5); and (C) by striking subsection (g). (b) Bank Holding Company Act Amendments Of 1970.—Section 106(a) of the Bank Holding Company Act Amendments of 1970 (12 U.S.C. 1971(a)) is amended by striking the last sentence. (c) Clayton Act.—Section 7A(c) of the Clayton Act (15 U.S.C. 18a(c)) is amended— (1) in paragraph (7), by striking “, except that” and all that follows and inserting a semicolon; and (2) in paragraph (8), by striking “, except that” and all that follows and inserting a semicolon. (d) Commodity Exchange Act.—The Commodity Exchange Act (7 U.S.C. 1 et seq.) is amended— (1) in section 1a(21)(G) (7 U.S.C. 1a(21)(G)), by striking “(as defined in section 2 of the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956)”; (2) in section 2(c)(2)(B)(i)(II)(dd) (7 U.S.C. 2(c)(2)(B)(i)(II)(dd)), by striking “(as defined in section 2 of the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956)”; and (3) in section 2(h)(7)(C)(i)(VIII) (7 U.S.C. 2(h)(7)(C)(i)(VIII)), by striking “, as defined in section 4(k) of the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956”. (e) Community Reinvestment Act Of 1977.—Section 804 of the Community Reinvestment Act of 1977 (12 U.S.C. 2903) is amended— (1) by striking subsection (c); and (2) by redesignating subsection (d) as subsection (c). (f) Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform And Consumer Protection Act.—Section 201(a)(11)(B) of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (12 U.S.C. 5381(a)(11)(B)) is amended by striking “for purposes of section 4(k) of the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956 (12 U.S.C. 1843(k))” each place that term appears. (g) Federal Deposit Insurance Act.—The Federal Deposit Insurance Act (12 U.S.C. 1811 et seq.) is amended— (1) in section 8(b)(3) (12 U.S.C. 1818(b)(3)), by striking “section 50” and inserting “section 48”; (2) in section 18(u)(1)(B) (12 U.S.C. 1828(u)(1)(B)), by striking “or section 45 of this Act”; (3) by striking sections 45 and 46 (12 U.S.C. 1831v and 1831w); and (4) by redesignating sections 47 through 50 as sections 45 through 48, respectively. (h) Federal Reserve Act.—The Federal Reserve Act (12 U.S.C. 221 et seq.) is amended— (1) in the 20th undesignated paragraph of section 9 (12 U.S.C. 335), by striking the last sentence; and (2) in section 23A (12 U.S.C. 371c)— (A) in subsection (b)(11), by striking “subparagraph (H) or (I) of section 4(k)(4) of the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956 or”; (B) by striking subsection (e); and (C) by redesignating subsection (f) as subsection (e). (i) Financial Stability Act Of 2010.—The Financial Stability Act of 2010 (12 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.) is amended— (1) in section 113(c)(5) (12 U.S.C. 5323(c)(5)), by striking “(as defined in section 4(k) of the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956)”; (2) in section 163 (12 U.S.C. 5363)— (A) by striking subsection (b); and (B) in subsection (a), by striking “(a)” and all that follows through “For purposes” and inserting “For purposes”; (3) in section 167(b) (12 U.S.C. 5367(b)), by striking “under section 4(k) of the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956” each place that term appears; and (4) in section 171(b) (12 U.S.C. 5371(b))— (A) by striking paragraph (3); and (B) by redesignating paragraphs (4) through (7) as paragraphs (3) through (6), respectively. (j) Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act.—The Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (Public Law 106–102; 113 Stat. 1338) is amended— (1) by striking section 115 (12 U.S.C. 1820a); (2) in section 307(f) (15 U.S.C. 6715(f)), by amending paragraph (2) to read as follows: “(2) BOARD.—The term ‘Board’ has the meaning given the term in section 2 of the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956 (12 U.S.C. 1841).”; (3) in section 505(c) (15 U.S.C. 6805(c))— (A) by striking “section 47(g)(2)(B)(iii) of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act ” and inserting “section 45(g)(2)(B)(iii) of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act”; and (B) by striking “section 47(a)” and inserting “section 45(a)”; and (4) in section 509(3)(A) (15 U.S.C. 6809(3)(A)), by striking “as described in section 4(k) of the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956”. (k) Home Owners' Loan Act.—Section 10(c) of the Home Owners' Loan Act (12 U.S.C. 1467a(c)) is amended— (1) in paragraph (2), by striking subparagraph (H); and (2) in paragraph (9)(A), by striking “permitted” and all that follows and inserting “permitted under paragraph (1)(C) or (2) of this subsection.”. (l) Internal Revenue Code.—Section 864(f)(4)(C)(ii) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by striking “(within the meaning of section 2(p) of the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956 (12 U.S.C. 1841(p))”. (m) Payment, Clearing, And Settlement Supervision Act Of 2010.—Section 803(5)(A) of the Payment, Clearing, and Settlement Supervision Act of 2010 (12 U.S.C. 5462(5)(A)) is amended— (1) in clause (viii), by adding “and” at the end; (2) in clause (ix), by striking “; and” and inserting a period; and (3) by striking clause (x). (n) Securities Exchange Act Of 1934.—The Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78a et seq.) is amended— (1) in section 3(a)(4)(B)(vi)(II) (15 U.S.C. 78c(a)(4)(B)(vi)(II)), by striking “other than” and all that follows and inserting “other than a registered broker or dealer.”; and (2) in section 3C(g)(3)(A) (15 U.S.C. 78c–3(g)(3)(A))— (A) in clause (vi), by adding “and” at the end; (B) in clause (vii), by striking the semicolon and inserting a period; and (C) by striking clause (viii). (o) Title 11.—Title 11, United States Code, is amended— (1) in section 101— (A) in paragraph (25)(E), by striking “, measured in accordance with section 562”; (B) in paragraph (47)(A)(v), by striking “, measured in accordance with section 562 of this title”; and (C) in paragraph (53B)(A)(vi), by striking “, measured in accordance with section 562”; (2) in section 103(a), by striking “555 through 557, and 559 through 562” and inserting “556, 557, and 561”; (3) in section 362(b)— (A) in paragraph (6), by striking “555 or” each place that term appears; (B) in paragraph (7), by striking “(as defined in section 559)” each place that term appears; (C) in paragraph (17), by striking “(as defined in section 560)” each place that term appears; and (D) in paragraph (27), by striking “(as defined in section 555, 556, 559, or 560)” each place that term appears and inserting “(as defined in section 556)”; (4) in section 502(g)— (A) by striking “(1)” before “A claim”; and (B) by striking paragraph (2); (5) in section 553— (A) in subsection (a)— (i) in paragraph (2)(B)(ii), by striking “555, 556, 559, 560, or 561” and inserting “556 or 561”; and (ii) in paragraph (3)(C), by striking “555, 556, 559, 560, or 561” and inserting “556 or 561”; and (B) in subsection (b)(1), by striking “555, 556, 559, 560, 561” and inserting “556, 561”; (6) in section 561(b)(1), by striking “555, 556, 559, or 560” and inserting “556”; (7) in section 741(7)(A)(xi), by striking “, measured in accordance with section 562”; (8) in section 761(4)(J), by striking “, measured in accordance with section 562”; and (9) in section 901(a), by striking “555, 556, 557, 559, 560, 561, 562” and inserting “556, 557, 561”.
  4. Paul Vang

    Schedules That Work Act

    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Mr. Vang (for himself, Ms. DeLauro , Mr. Scott of Virginia, Mrs. Carolyn B. Maloney of New York, Mr. Takano, Mrs. Napolitano, Miss Rice of New York, Mr. Pocan, Mr. Danny K. Davis of Illinois, Ms. Kaptur, Ms. Norton, Mr. Cummings, Mr. Cohen, Ms. Clark of Massachusetts, Ms. Pingree, Mr. Jeffries, Ms. Slaughter, Mr. Langevin, Mr. Brendan F. Boyle of Pennsylvania, Mr. Engel, Mr. Cicilline, Mr. Tonko, Ms. Moore, Mr. Gallego, Mr. Lowenthal, Ms. Sánchez, Ms. Michelle Lujan Grisham of New Mexico, Mr. Beyer, Mr. Ryan of Ohio, Ms. Speier, Mr. Kennedy, Ms. Lee, Mr. Nadler, Ms. Roybal-Allard, Mr. Serrano, Mr. Espaillat, Ms. Velázquez, Mr. McGovern, Ms. Schakowsky, Ms. Wasserman Schultz, Ms. Wilson of Florida, Ms. McCollum, Mr. Swalwell of California, Mr. Kilmer, Mr. Khanna, Mr. Delaney, Mr. Larsen of Washington, Mr. Higgins of New York, Mr.Larson of Connecticut, Mr. Kildee, Mr. Rush, Ms. Tsongas, Mr. Cartwright, Mrs. Dingell, Mr. Payne, Mr. Lewis of Georgia, Mr. Pascrell, Mr. Smith of Washington, Mr. Gene Green of Texas, Mr. DeSaulnier, Mr. Courtney, Ms. Judy Chu of California, Ms. Adams, Ms. Bonamici, Mr. Ellison, Mr. Conyers, Mr. Capuano, Ms. Meng, Mr. Grijalva, Ms.Eshoo, Mr. Hastings, Ms. Matsui, Mrs. Davis of California, Mr. Gutiérrez, and Mr. Sean Patrick Maloney of New York) introduced the following bill; A BILL To permit employees to request changes to their work schedules without fear of retaliation and to ensure that employers consider these requests, and to require employers to provide more predictable and stable schedules for employees in certain occupations with evidence of unpredictable and unstable scheduling practices that negatively affect employees, and for other purposes. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; FINDINGS. (a) Short Title.—This Act may be cited as the “Schedules That Work Act”. (b) Findings.—Congress finds the following: (1) The vast majority of the United States workforce today is juggling responsibilities at home and at work. Women are primary breadwinners or co-breadwinners in 64 percent of families in the United States. (2) Despite the dual responsibilities of today’s workforce, both hourly and salaried workers often have little ability to make changes to their work schedules when those changes are needed to accommodate family responsibilities. (3) (A) Low-wage working mothers are more likely to be raising children on their own than higher-wage working mothers. For example, more than half of mothers in low-wage jobs who have very young children are single parents, compared to around one-third of all working mothers who have very young children. (B) At the same time, low-wage workers have the least control over their work schedules and the most unpredictable schedules. For example— (i) roughly half of low-wage workers reported very little or no control over the timing of the hours they were scheduled to work; (ii) (I) many workers in low-wage jobs receive their work schedules with very little advance notice; and (II) 41 percent of workers who are ages 26 through 32 (referred to in this section as “early-career workers”) in hourly jobs report getting their work schedules a week or less in advance; (iii) some workers in low-wage jobs are sent home from work when work is slow without being paid for their scheduled shift; (iv) (I) many employers have adopted “just-in-time” scheduling, which bases workers’ schedules on perceived consumer demand and often results in workers being given very little advance notice of their work schedules; and (II) in some industries, the use of “call-in shift” requirements—requirements that workers call in to work to find out whether they will be scheduled to work later that day—have become common practice; and (v) (I) 20 to 30 percent of workers in low-wage jobs struggle with being required to work extra hours with little or no notice; and (II) in a typical month, for the 74 percent of early-career workers in hourly jobs who report fluctuations in their work hours, those hours typically fluctuate by more than an 8-hour day of work and pay per week. (4) Unfair work scheduling practices make it difficult for low-wage workers to— (A) provide necessary care for children and other family members, including securing and maintaining stable child care; (B) access and receive needed care for the workers’ own serious health conditions; (C) pursue workforce training; (D) get or keep a second job, which many part-time workers need to make ends meet; (E) plan for and access transportation to reach worksites; and (F) qualify for and maintain eligibility for needed public benefits and work supports, such as child care subsidies and benefits under the supplemental nutrition assistance program, due to fluctuations in income and work hours. (5) Twenty-six percent of workers on irregular or on-call schedules and 19 percent of workers on rotating or split shift schedules experience work-family conflict, compared to 11 percent of workers on regular work schedules. A recent national survey of retail workers found that unpredictable schedules among parents are associated with higher stress and less time spent with their children. (6) Unpredictable and unstable schedules are common in a wide range of occupations, including food preparation and service, retail sales, and cleaning occupations. According to data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics for early-career adults, 64 percent of food service workers, 50 percent of retail workers, and 40 percent of cleaning workers know their schedules only a week or less in advance. The average variation between the least and most hours worked in a single month is 70 percent for food service workers, 50 percent for retail workers, and 40 percent for cleaning workers. (7) Food service workers, retail workers, and cleaning workers are among the lowest-paid workers, and those occupations account for nearly 24 million workers, which is almost one-sixth of the workforce. (8) Employers that have implemented fair work scheduling policies that allow workers to have more control over their work schedules, and provide more predictable and stable schedules, have experienced significant benefits, including reductions in absenteeism and workforce turnover, and increased worker morale and engagement. (9) This Act is a first step in responding to the needs of workers for a voice in the timing of their work hours and for more predictable schedules. SEC. 2. DEFINITIONS. As used in this Act: (1) BONA FIDE BUSINESS REASON.—The term “bona fide business reason” means— (A) the identifiable burden of additional costs to an employer, including the cost of productivity loss, retraining or hiring employees, or transferring employees from one facility to another facility; (B) a significant detrimental effect on the employer’s ability to meet organizational needs or customer demand; (C) a significant inability of the employer, despite best efforts, to reorganize work among existing (as of the date of the reorganization) staff; (D) a significant detrimental effect on business performance; (E) insufficiency of work during the periods an employee proposes to work; (F) the need to balance competing scheduling requests when it is not possible to grant all such requests without a significant detrimental effect on the employer’s ability to meet organizational needs; or (G) such other reason as may be specified by the Secretary of Labor (or the corresponding administrative officer specified in section 8). (2) CAREER-RELATED EDUCATIONAL OR TRAINING PROGRAM.—The term “career-related educational or training program” means an educational or training program or program of study offered by a public, private, or nonprofit career and technical education school, institution of higher education, or other entity that provides academic education, career and technical education, or training (including remedial education or English as a second language, as appropriate), that is a program that leads to a recognized postsecondary credential (as identified under section 122(d) of the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act), and provides career awareness information. The term includes a program allowable under the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (29 U.S.C. 3101 et seq.), the Carl D. Perkins Career and Technical Education Act of 2006 (20 U.S.C. 2301 et seq.), or the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1001 et seq.), without regard to whether or not the program is funded under the corresponding Act. (3) CAREGIVER.—The term “caregiver” means an individual with the status of being a significant provider of— (A) ongoing care or education, including responsibility for securing the ongoing care or education, of a child; or (B) ongoing care, including responsibility for securing the ongoing care, of— (i) a person with a serious health condition who is in a family relationship with the individual; or (ii) a parent of the individual, who is age 65 or older. (4) CHILD.—The term “child” means a biological, adopted, or foster child, a stepchild, a legal ward, or a child of a person standing in loco parentis to that child, who is— (A) under age 18; or (B) age 18 or older and incapable of self-care because of a mental or physical disability. (5) COMMERCE TERMS.—The terms “commerce” and “industry or activity affecting commerce” have the meanings given the terms in section 101 of the Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993 (29 U.S.C. 2611). (6) COVERED EMPLOYER.— (A) IN GENERAL.—The term “covered employer”— (i) means any person engaged in commerce or in any industry or activity affecting commerce who employs 15 or more employees (described in paragraph (9)(A)); (ii) includes any person who acts, directly or indirectly, in the interest of such an employer to any of the employees (described in paragraph (9)(A)) of such employer; (iii) includes any successor in interest of such an employer; and (iv) includes an agency described in subparagraph (A)(iii) of section 101(4) of the Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993 (29 U.S.C. 2611(4)), to which subparagraph (B) of such section shall apply. (B) RULE.—For purposes of determining the number of employees who work for a person described in subparagraph (A)(i), all employees (described in paragraph (9)(A)) performing work for compensation on a full-time, part-time, or temporary basis shall be counted, except that if the number of such employees who perform work for such a person for compensation fluctuates, the number may be determined for a calendar year based upon the average number of such employees who performed work for the person for compensation during the preceding calendar year. (C) PERSON.—In this paragraph, the term “person” has the meaning given the term in section 3 of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 (29 U.S.C. 203). (7) DOMESTIC PARTNER.—The term “domestic partner” means the individual recognized as being in a relationship with an employee under any domestic partnership, civil union, or similar law of the State or political subdivision of a State in which the employee resides. (8) EMPLOY.—The term “employ” has the meaning given the term in section 3 of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 (29 U.S.C. 203). (9) EMPLOYEE.—The term “employee” means an individual who is— (A) an employee, as defined in section 3(e) of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 (29 U.S.C. 203(e)), who is not described in any of subparagraphs (B) through (G); (B) a State employee described in section 304(a) of the Government Employee Rights Act of 1991 (42 U.S.C. 2000e–16c(a)); (C) a covered employee, as defined in section 101 of the Congressional Accountability Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1301), other than an applicant for employment; (D) a covered employee, as defined in section 411(c) of title 3, United States Code; (E) a Federal officer or employee covered under subchapter V of chapter 63 of title 5, United States Code; (F) an employee of the Library of Congress; or (G) an employee of the Government Accountability Office. (10) EMPLOYER.—The term “employer” means a person— (A) who is— (i) a covered employer, as defined in paragraph (6), who is not described in any of clauses (ii) through (vii); (ii) an entity employing a State employee described in section 304(a) of the Government Employee Rights Act of 1991; (iii) an employing office, as defined in section 101 of the Congressional Accountability Act of 1995; (iv) an employing office, as defined in section 411(c) of title 3, United States Code; (v) an employing agency covered under subchapter V of chapter 63 of title 5, United States Code; (vi) the Librarian of Congress; or (vii) the Comptroller General of the United States; and (B) who is engaged in commerce (including government), in the production of goods for commerce, or in an enterprise engaged in commerce (including government) or in the production of goods for commerce. (11) FAMILY RELATIONSHIP.—The term “family relationship” means a relationship with— (A) a child, spouse, domestic partner, parent, grandchild, grandparent, sibling, or parent of a spouse or domestic partner; or (B) any individual related to the employee involved by blood or affinity, whose close association with the employee is the equivalent of a family relationship described in subparagraph (A). (12) GRANDCHILD.—The term “grandchild” means the child of a child. (13) GRANDPARENT.—The term “grandparent” means the parent of a parent. (14) MINIMUM NUMBER OF EXPECTED WORK HOURS.—The term “minimum number of expected work hours” means the minimum number of hours an employee will be assigned to work on a weekly or monthly basis. (15) NONEXEMPT EMPLOYEE.—The “nonexempt employee” means an employee who is not employed in a bona fide executive, administrative, or professional capacity, as defined for purposes of section 13(a)(1) of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 (29 U.S.C. 213(a)(1)). (16) PARENT.—The term “parent” means a biological or adoptive parent, a stepparent, or a person who stood in a parental relationship to an employee when the employee was a child. (17) PARENTAL RELATIONSHIP.—The term “parental relationship” means a relationship in which a person assumed the obligations incident to parenthood for a child and discharged those obligations before the child reached adulthood. (18) PART-TIME EMPLOYEE.—The term “part-time employee” means an individual who works fewer than 30 hours per week on average during any 1-month period. (19) RETAIL, FOOD SERVICE, OR CLEANING EMPLOYEE.—The term “retail, food service, or cleaning employee” means an individual nonexempt employee who is employed in any of the following occupations, as described by the Bureau of Labor Statistics Standard Occupational Classification System (as in effect on the day before the date of enactment of this Act): (A) Retail sales occupations consisting of occupations described in 41–1010 and 41–2000, and all subdivisions thereof, of such System, which includes first-line supervisors of sales workers, cashiers, gaming change persons and booth cashiers, counter and rental clerks, parts salespersons, and retail salespersons. (B) Food preparation and serving related occupations as described in 35–0000, and all subdivisions thereof, of such System, which includes supervisors of food preparation and serving workers, cooks and food preparation workers, food and beverage serving workers, and other food preparation and serving related workers. (C) Building cleaning occupations as described in 37–2011, 37–2012 and 37–2019 of such System, which includes janitors and cleaners, maids and housekeeping cleaners, and building cleaning workers. (20) SECRETARY.—The term “Secretary” means the Secretary of Labor. (21) SERIOUS HEALTH CONDITION.—The term “serious health condition” has the meaning given the term in section 101 of the Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993 (29 U.S.C. 2611). (22) SIBLING.—The term “sibling” means a brother or sister, whether related by half blood, whole blood, or adoption, or as a stepsibling. (23) SPLIT SHIFT.—The term “split shift” means a schedule of daily hours in which the hours worked are not consecutive, except that— (A) a schedule in which the total time out for meals does not exceed one hour shall not be treated as a split shift; and (B) a schedule in which the break in the employee's work shift is requested by the employee shall not be treated as a split shift. (24) SPOUSE.— (A) IN GENERAL.—The term “spouse” means a person with whom an individual entered into— (i) a marriage as defined or recognized under State law in the State in which the marriage was entered into; or (ii) in the case of a marriage entered into outside of any State, a marriage that is recognized in the place where entered into and could have been entered into in at least 1 State. (B) SAME-SEX OR COMMON LAW MARRIAGE.—Such term includes an individual in a same-sex or common law marriage that meets the requirements of subparagraph (A). (25) STATE.—The term “State” has the meaning given the term in section 3 of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 (29 U.S.C. 203). (26) WORK SCHEDULE.—The term “work schedule” means those days and times within a work period when an employee is required by an employer to perform the duties of the employee's employment for which the employee will receive compensation. (27) WORK SCHEDULE CHANGE.—The term “work schedule change” means any modification to an employee’s work schedule, such as an addition or reduction of hours, cancellation of a shift, or a change in the date or time of a work shift, by an employer. (28) WORK SHIFT.—The term “work shift” means the specific hours of the workday during which an employee works. SEC. 3. RIGHT TO REQUEST AND RECEIVE A FLEXIBLE, PREDICTABLE OR STABLE WORK SCHEDULE. (a) Right To Request.—An employee may apply to the employee's employer to request a change in the terms and conditions of employment as they relate to— (1) the number of hours the employee is required to work or be on call for work; (2) the times when the employee is required to work or be on call for work; (3) the location where the employee is required to work; (4) the amount of notification the employee receives of work schedule assignments; and (5) minimizing fluctuations in the number of hours the employee is scheduled to work on a daily, weekly, or monthly basis. (b) Employer Obligation To Engage In An Interactive Process.— (1) IN GENERAL.—If an employee applies to the employee's employer to request a change in the terms and conditions of employment as set forth in subsection (a), the employer shall engage in a timely, good faith interactive process with the employee that includes a discussion of potential schedule changes that would meet the employee’s needs. (2) RESULT.—Such process shall result in— (A) either granting or denying the request; (B) in the event of a denial, considering alternatives to the proposed change that might meet the employee’s needs and granting or denying a request for an alternative change in the terms and conditions of employment as set forth in subsection (a); and (C) in the event of a denial, stating the reason for denial, including whether any such reason is a bona fide business reason. (3) INFORMATION.—If information provided by the employee making a request under this section requires clarification, the employer shall explain what further information is needed and give the employee reasonable time to produce the information. (c) Requests Related To Caregiving, Enrollment In Education Or Training, Or A Second Job.—If an employee makes a request for a change in the terms and conditions of employment as set forth in subsection (a) because of a serious health condition of the employee, due to the employee’s responsibilities as a caregiver, or due to the employee's enrollment in a career-related educational or training program, or if a part-time employee makes a request for such a change for a reason related to a second job, the employer shall grant the request, unless the employer has a bona fide business reason for denying the request. (d) Other Requests.—If an employee makes a request for a change in the terms and conditions of employment as set forth in subsection (a), for a reason other than those reasons set forth in subsection (c), the employer may deny the request for any reason that is not unlawful. If the employer denies such a request, the employer shall provide the employee with the reason for the denial, including whether any such reason is a bona fide business reason. SEC. 4. REQUIREMENTS FOR REPORTING TIME PAY, SPLIT SHIFT PAY, AND ADVANCE NOTICE OF WORK SCHEDULES FOR RETAIL, FOOD SERVICE, CLEANING, OR SECRETARY'S DESIGNATED EMPLOYEES. (a) Reporting Time Pay Requirement.—An employer shall pay a retail, food service, or cleaning employee or a designated employee, in an additional occupation designated by the Secretary, under section 8(a)(2) as appropriate for coverage under this Act (referred to in this Act as “a retail, food service, cleaning, or Secretary's designated employee”)— (1) for at least 4 hours at the regular rate of pay of the employee involved for each day on which the retail, food service, cleaning, or Secretary's designated employee reports for work, as required by the employer, but is given less than four hours of work, except that if the employee's scheduled hours for a day are less than 4 hours, such employee shall be paid for the scheduled hours of the employee involved for that day if given less than the scheduled hours of work; and (2) for at least 1 hour at the regular rate of pay of the employee involved for each day the retail, food service, cleaning, or Secretary's designated employee is given specific instructions to contact the employer of the employee involved, or wait to be contacted by the employer, less than 24 hours in advance of the start of a potential work shift to determine whether the employee must report to work for such shift. (b) Split Shift Pay Requirement.—An employer shall pay a retail, food service, cleaning, or Secretary's designated employee for one additional hour at the employee's regular rate of pay for each day during which the employee works a split shift. (c) Advance Notice Requirement.— (1) INITIAL SCHEDULE.—On or before a new retail, food service, cleaning, or Secretary's designated employee's first day of work, the employer shall inform the employee in writing of the work schedule of the employee involved and the minimum number of expected work hours the employee will be assigned to work per month. (2) PROVIDING NOTICE OF NEW SCHEDULES.—Except as provided in paragraph (3), if a retail, food service, cleaning, or Secretary's designated employee's work schedule changes from the work schedule of which the employee was informed pursuant to paragraph (1), the employer shall provide the employee with the new work schedule of the employee involved not less than 14 days before the first day of the new work schedule. If the expected minimum number of work hours that a retail, food service, cleaning, or Secretary's designated employee will be assigned changes from the number of which the employee involved was informed pursuant to paragraph (1), the employer shall also provide notification of that change, not less than 14 days in advance of the first day this change will go into effect. Nothing in this subsection shall be construed to prohibit an employer from providing greater advance notice of a retail, food service, cleaning, or Secretary's designated employee's work schedule than is required under this section. (3) WORK SCHEDULE CHANGES MADE WITH LESS THAN 24 HOURS’ NOTICE.—An employer may make work schedule changes as needed, including by offering additional hours of work to retail, food service, cleaning, or Secretary's designated employees beyond those previously scheduled, but an employer shall be required to provide one extra hour of pay at the employee's regular rate for each shift that is changed with less than 24 hours’ notice, except in the case of the need to schedule the employee due to the unforeseen unavailability of a retail, food service, cleaning, or Secretary's designated employee previously scheduled to work that shift. (4) NOTIFICATIONS IN WRITING.—The notifications required under paragraphs (1) and (2) shall be made to the employee involved in writing. Nothing in this subsection shall be construed as prohibiting an employer from using any additional means of notifying a retail, food service, cleaning, or Secretary's designated employee of the work schedule of the employee involved. (5) SCHEDULE POSTING REQUIREMENT.—Every employer employing any retail, food service, cleaning, or Secretary's designated employee, subject to this Act shall post the schedule and keep it posted in a conspicuous place in every establishment where such employee is employed so as to permit the employee involved to observe readily a copy. Availability of that schedule by electronic means accessible by all retail, food service, cleaning, or Secretary's designated employees, of that employer shall be considered compliance with this subsection. (6) EMPLOYEE SHIFT TRADING.—Nothing in this subsection shall be construed to prevent an employer from allowing a retail, food service, cleaning, or Secretary's designated employee to work in place of another employee who has been scheduled to work a particular shift as long as the change in schedule is mutually agreed upon by the employees. An employer shall not be subject to the requirements of paragraph (2) or (3) for such voluntary shift trades. (d) Pay Stub Transparency.—Any pay provided to an employee pursuant to subsection (a), (b), or (c)(3) (referred to in this paragraph as “additional pay”) shall be included in the employee's regular paycheck. The employer shall identify, in the corresponding written wage statement or pay stub, the total number of hours of additional pay provided for the pay period involved and whether the additional pay was due to the requirements of subsection (a)(1), the requirements of subsection (a)(2), the requirements of subsection (b), or the requirements of subsection (c)(3). (e) Exception.—The requirements in subsections (a) through (d) shall not apply during periods when regular operations of the employer are suspended due to events beyond the employer’s control. SEC. 5. PROHIBITED ACTS. (a) Interference With Rights.—It shall be unlawful for any employer to interfere with, restrain, or deny the exercise or the attempt to exercise, any right of an employee as set forth in section 3 or of a retail, food service, cleaning, or Secretary's designated employee as set forth in section 4. (b) Retaliation Prohibited.—It shall be unlawful for any employer to discharge, threaten to discharge, demote, suspend, reduce work hours of, or take any other adverse employment action against any employee in retaliation for exercising the rights of an employee under this Act or opposing any practice made unlawful by this Act. For purposes of section 3, such retaliation shall include taking an adverse employment action against any employee on the basis of that employee’s eligibility or perceived eligibility to request or receive a change in the terms and conditions of employment, as described in such section, on the basis of a reason set forth in section 3(c). (c) Interference With Proceedings Or Inquiries.—It shall be unlawful for any person to discharge or in any other manner discriminate against any individual because such individual— (1) has filed any charge, or has instituted or caused to be instituted any proceeding, under or related to this Act; (2) has given or is about to give, any information in connection with any inquiry or proceeding relating to any right provided under this Act; or (3) has testified, or is about to testify, in any inquiry or proceeding relating to any right provided under this Act. SEC. 6. REMEDIES AND ENFORCEMENT. (a) Investigative Authority.— (1) IN GENERAL.—To ensure compliance with this Act, or any regulation or order issued under this Act, the Secretary shall have, subject to paragraph (3), the investigative authority provided under section 11(a) of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 (29 U.S.C. 211(a)). (2) OBLIGATION TO KEEP AND PRESERVE RECORDS.—Each employer shall make, keep, and preserve records pertaining to compliance with this Act in accordance with regulations issued by the Secretary under section 8. (3) REQUIRED SUBMISSIONS GENERALLY LIMITED TO AN ANNUAL BASIS.—The Secretary shall not under the authority of this subsection require any employer to submit to the Secretary any books or records more than once during any 12-month period, unless the Secretary has reasonable cause to believe there may exist a violation of this Act or any regulation or order issued pursuant to this Act, or is investigating a charge pursuant to subsection (c). (4) SUBPOENA POWERS.—For the purposes of any investigation provided for in this section, the Secretary shall have the subpoena authority provided for under section 9 of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 (29 U.S.C. 209). (b) Civil Action By Employees.— (1) LIABILITY.—Any employer who violates section 5(a) (with respect to a right set forth in subsection (a), (b), or (c)(3) of section 4) or subsection (b) or (c) of section 5 (referred to in this section as a “covered provision”) shall be liable to any employee affected for— (A) damages equal to the amount of— (i) any wages, salary, employment benefits (as defined in section 101 of the Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993 (29 U.S.C. 2611)), or other compensation denied, lost, or owed to such employee by reason of the violation; or (ii) in a case in which wages, salary, employment benefits (as so defined), or other compensation have not been denied, lost, or owed to the employee, any actual monetary losses sustained by the employee as a direct result of the violation; (B) interest on the amount described in subparagraph (A) calculated at the prevailing rate; (C) an additional amount as liquidated damages equal to the sum of the amount described in subparagraph (A) and the interest described in subparagraph (B), except that if an employer who has violated a covered provision proves to the satisfaction of the court that the act or omission which violated the covered provision was in good faith and that the employer had reasonable grounds for believing that the act or omission was not a violation of a covered provision, such court may, in the discretion of the court, reduce the amount of liability to the amount and interest determined under subparagraphs (A) and (B), respectively; and (D) such equitable relief as may be appropriate, including employment, reinstatement, and promotion. (2) RIGHT OF ACTION.—An action to recover the damages or equitable relief set forth in paragraph (1) may be maintained against any employer (including a public agency) in any Federal or State court of competent jurisdiction by any one or more employees for and on behalf of— (A) the employees; or (B) the employees and other employees similarly situated. (3) FEES AND COSTS.—The court in such an action shall, in addition to any judgment awarded to the plaintiff, allow a reasonable attorney’s fee, reasonable expert witness fees, and other costs of the action to be paid by the defendant. (4) LIMITATIONS.—The right provided by paragraph (2) to bring an action by or on behalf of any employee shall terminate on the filing of a complaint by the Secretary in an action under subsection (c)(3) in which a recovery is sought of the damages described in paragraph (1)(A) owing to an employee by an employer liable under paragraph (1) unless the action described is dismissed without prejudice on motion of the Secretary. (c) Actions By The Secretary.— (1) ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION.—The Secretary shall receive, investigate, and attempt to resolve complaints of violations of this Act in the same manner that the Secretary receives, investigates, and attempts to resolve complaints of violations of sections 6 and 7 of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 (29 U.S.C. 206 and 207), and may issue an order making determinations, and assessing a civil penalty described in paragraph (3) (in accordance with paragraph (3)), with respect to such an alleged violation. (2) ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW.—An affected person who takes exception to an order issued under paragraph (1) may request review of and a decision regarding such an order by an administrative law judge. In reviewing the order, the administrative law judge may hold an administrative hearing concerning the order, in accordance with the requirements of sections 554, 556, and 557 of title 5, United States Code. Such hearing shall be conducted expeditiously. If no affected person requests such review within 60 days after the order is issued under paragraph (1), the order shall be considered to be a final order that is not subject to judicial review. (3) CIVIL PENALTY.—An employer who willfully and repeatedly violates— (A) paragraph (1), (2), (4), or (5) of section 4(c), or section 4(d), shall be subject to a civil penalty in an amount to be determined by the Secretary, but not to exceed $100 per violation; and (B) subsection (b) or (c) of section 5 shall be subject to a civil penalty in an amount to be determined by the Secretary, but not to exceed $1,100 per violation. (4) CIVIL ACTION.—The Secretary may bring an action in any court of competent jurisdiction on behalf of aggrieved employees to— (A) restrain violations of this Act; (B) award such equitable relief as may be appropriate, including employment, reinstatement, and promotion; and (C) in the case of a violation of a covered provision, recover the damages and interest described in subparagraphs (A) through (C) of subsection (b)(1). (d) Limitation.— (1) IN GENERAL.—Except as provided in paragraph (2), an action may be brought under this section not later than 2 years after the date of the last event constituting the alleged violation for which the action is brought. (2) WILLFUL VIOLATION.—In the case of such action brought for a willful violation of section 5, such action may be brought within 3 years of the date of the last event constituting the alleged violation for which such action is brought. (3) COMMENCEMENT.—In determining when an action is commenced by the Secretary under this section for the purposes of this subsection, it shall be considered to be commenced on the date when the complaint is filed. (e) Other Administrative Officers.— (1) BOARD.—In the case of employees described in section 2(9)(C), the authority of the Secretary under this Act shall be exercised by the Board of Directors of the Office of Compliance. (2) PRESIDENT; MERIT SYSTEMS PROTECTION BOARD.—In the case of employees described in section 2(9)(D), the authority of the Secretary under this Act shall be exercised by the President and the Merit Systems Protection Board. (3) OFFICE OF PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT.—In the case of employees described in section 2(9)(E), the authority of the Secretary under this Act shall be exercised by the Office of Personnel Management. (4) LIBRARIAN OF CONGRESS.—In the case of employees of the Library of Congress, the authority of the Secretary under this Act shall be exercised by the Librarian of Congress. (5) COMPTROLLER GENERAL.—In the case of employees of the Government Accountability Office, the authority of the Secretary under this Act shall be exercised by the Comptroller General of the United States. SEC. 7. NOTICE AND POSTING. (a) In General.—Each employer shall post and keep posted, in conspicuous places on the premises of the employer where notices to employees and applicants for employment are customarily posted, a notice, to be prepared or approved by the Secretary (or the corresponding administrative officer specified in section ? setting forth excerpts from, or summaries of, the pertinent provisions of this Act and information pertaining to the filing of a complaint under this Act. (b) Penalty.—Any employer that willfully violates this section may be assessed a civil money penalty not to exceed $100 for each separate offense. SEC. 8. REGULATIONS. (a) Secretary Of Labor.— (1) IN GENERAL.—Except as provided in subsections (b) through (f), not later than 180 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall issue such regulations as may be necessary to implement this Act. (2) REGULATIONS REGARDING ADDITIONAL OCCUPATIONS TO BE COVERED.— (A) IN GENERAL.—In carrying out paragraph (1), the Secretary shall issue regulations that specify a process the Secretary will follow to identify and designate additional occupations, for purposes of section 4(a), that are appropriate for coverage under this Act. Nonexempt employees in such occupations shall be considered to be designated employees for purposes of this Act. (B) CRITERIA.—The regulations shall provide that the Secretary shall so designate an additional occupation— (i) in which not less than 10 percent of workers employed in the occupation generally— (I) receive advance notice of their work schedules less than 14 days before the first day of the work schedules; or (II) experience fluctuations in the number of hours the employees are scheduled to work on a daily, weekly, or monthly basis; or (ii) for which the Secretary determines such designation is appropriate. (C) DATA REVIEW.—In issuing the regulations, the Secretary shall specify the process by which the Department of Labor will review data from stakeholders, and data collected or generated by the Department, in making those designations. (b) Board.— (1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 180 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the Board of Directors of the Office of Compliance shall issue such regulations as may be necessary to implement this Act with respect to employees described in section 2(9)(C). The procedures applicable to regulations of the Board issued for the implementation of the Congressional Accountability Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1301 et seq.), prescribed in section 304 of that Act (2 U.S.C. 1384), shall be the procedures applicable to regulations issued under this subsection. (2) CONSIDERATION.—In prescribing the regulations, the Board shall take into consideration the enforcement and remedies provisions concerning the Board, and applicable to rights and protections under the Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993 (29 U.S.C. 2611 et seq.), under the Congressional Accountability Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1301 et seq.). (3) MODIFICATIONS.—The regulations issued under paragraph (1) to implement this Act shall be the same as substantive regulations issued by the Secretary to implement this Act, except to the extent that the Board may determine, for good cause shown and stated together with the regulations issued by the Board, that a modification of such substantive regulations would be more effective for the implementation of the rights and protections under this Act. (c) President.— (1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 180 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the President shall issue such regulations as may be necessary to implement this Act with respect to employees described in section 2(9)(D). (2) CONSIDERATION.—In prescribing the regulations, the President shall take into consideration the enforcement and remedies provisions concerning the President and the Merit Systems Protection Board, and applicable to rights and protections under the Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993, under chapter 5 of title 3, United States Code. (3) MODIFICATIONS.—The regulations issued under paragraph (1) to implement this Act shall be the same as substantive regulations issued by the Secretary to implement this Act, except to the extent that the President may determine, for good cause shown and stated together with the regulations issued by the President, that a modification of such substantive regulations would be more effective for the implementation of the rights and protections under this Act. (d) Office Of Personnel Management.— (1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 180 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the Office of Personnel Management shall issue such regulations as may be necessary to implement this Act with respect to employees described in section 2(9)(E). (2) CONSIDERATION.—In prescribing the regulations, the Office shall take into consideration the enforcement and remedies provisions concerning the Office under subchapter V of chapter 63 of title 5, United States Code. (3) MODIFICATIONS.—The regulations issued under paragraph (1) to implement this Act shall be the same as substantive regulations issued by the Secretary to implement this Act, except to the extent that the Office may determine, for good cause shown and stated together with the regulations issued by the Office, that a modification of such substantive regulations would be more effective for the implementation of the rights and protections under this Act. (e) Librarian Of Congress.— (1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 180 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the Librarian of Congress shall issue such regulations as may be necessary to implement this Act with respect to employees of the Library of Congress. (2) CONSIDERATION.—In prescribing the regulations, the Librarian shall take into consideration the enforcement and remedies provisions concerning the Librarian of Congress under title I of the Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993 (29 U.S.C. 2611 et seq.). (3) MODIFICATIONS.—The regulations issued under paragraph (1) to implement this Act shall be the same as substantive regulations issued by the Secretary to implement this Act, except to the extent that the Librarian may determine, for good cause shown and stated together with the regulations issued by the Librarian, that a modification of such substantive regulations would be more effective for the implementation of the rights and protections under this Act. (f) Comptroller General.— (1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 180 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the Comptroller General shall issue such regulations as may be necessary to implement this Act with respect to employees of the Government Accountability Office. (2) CONSIDERATION.—In prescribing the regulations, the Comptroller General shall take into consideration the enforcement and remedies provisions concerning the Comptroller General under title I of the Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993. (3) MODIFICATIONS.—The regulations issued under paragraph (1) to implement this Act shall be the same as substantive regulations issued by the Secretary to implement this Act, except to the extent that the Comptroller General may determine, for good cause shown and stated together with the regulations issued by the Comptroller General, that a modification of such substantive regulations would be more effective for the implementation of the rights and protections under this Act. SEC. 9. RESEARCH, EDUCATION, AND TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAM AND SURVEYS. (a) In General.—The Secretary shall provide information and technical assistance to employers, labor organizations, and the general public concerning compliance with this Act. (b) Program.—In order to achieve the objectives of this Act— (1) the Secretary, acting through the Administrator of the Wage and Hour Division of the Department of Labor, shall issue guidance on compliance with this Act regarding providing a flexible, predictable, or stable work environment through changes in the terms and conditions of employment as provided in section 3(a); and (2) the Secretary shall carry on a continuing program of research, education, and technical assistance, including— (A) (i) conducting pilot programs that implement fairer work schedules, including by promoting cross training, providing three weeks or more advance notice of schedules, providing employees with a minimum number of hours of work, and using computerized scheduling software to provide more flexible, predictable, and stable schedules for employees; and (ii) evaluating the results of such pilot programs for employees, employee's families, and employers; (B) publishing and otherwise making available to employers, labor organizations, professional associations, educational institutions, the various communication media, and the general public the findings of studies regarding fair work scheduling policies and other materials for promoting compliance with this Act; (C) sponsoring and assisting State and community informational and educational programs; and (D) providing technical assistance to employers, labor organizations, professional associations, and other interested persons on means of achieving and maintaining compliance with the provisions of this Act. (c) Current Population Survey.—The Secretary, acting through the Commissioner of the Bureau of Labor Statistics, and the Director of the Bureau of the Census shall— (1) include in the Current Population Survey questions on— (A) the amount of fluctuation in the number of hours the employee is scheduled to work on a daily, weekly or monthly basis; (B) the extent of advance notice an employee receives of the employee's work schedule; and (C) the extent to which an employee has input in the employee's work schedule; and (2) conduct at regular intervals the Contingent Worker Supplement, the Work Schedules and Work at Home Supplement, and other relevant supplements (as determined by the Secretary), to the Current Population Survey. SEC. 10. RIGHTS RETAINED BY EMPLOYEES. This Act provides minimum requirements and shall not be construed to preempt, limit, or otherwise affect the applicability of any other law, regulation, requirement, policy, or standard that provides for greater rights for employees than are required in this Act. SEC. 11. EXEMPTION. This Act shall not apply to any employee covered by a bona fide collective bargaining agreement if the terms of the collective bargaining agreement include terms that govern work scheduling practices. SEC. 12. EFFECT ON OTHER LAW. (a) In General.—Nothing in this Act shall be construed as superseding, or creating or imposing any requirement in conflict with, any Federal, State, or local regulation or other law (including the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 12101 et seq.), the Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993 (29 U.S.C. 2611 et seq.), the National Labor Relations Act (29 U.S.C. 151 et seq.), the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 (29 U.S.C. 201 et seq.), and title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 U.S.C. 2000e et seq.)). (b) Relationship To Collective Bargaining Rights.—Nothing in this Act shall be construed to diminish or impair the rights of an employee under any valid collective bargaining agreement.
  5. Paul Vang

    Update - AR Self Selecting

    So wait anything done up to this point hasn't mattered?
  6. Paul Vang

    2020 Presidential General Election Turn 2

    2 fundraisers 2 tier 3 positive ads in Pennsylvania targeting moderates $30,000,000x2= $60,000,000 2 tier 3 positive ads in Ohio targeting moderates $27,000,000x2= $54,000,000 2 rallies in Virginia targeting moderates 2 rallies in Colorado targeting moderates 1 rally in Pennsylvania targeting moderates 1 rally in Ohio targeting moderates 1 rally in Iowa targeting moderates Total ad costs = $114,000,000
  7. Paul Vang

    Southeast Senator Campaigning

    Paul Vang campaigning for Chad Allegra 1. rally for Florida conservatives 2. rally for Florida conservatives 3. rally for Florida moderates 4. rally for Florida moderates 5. rally for Georgia conservatives 6. rally for Georgia moderates 7. rally for North Carolina conservatives 8. rally for North Carolina moderates
  8. Paul Vang

    Midwest Senator Campaigning

    Paul Vang campaigning for Johnathon Grant 1. rally for Ohio conservatives 2. rally for Ohio conservatives 3. rally for Ohio moderates 4. rally for Michigan conservatives 5. rally for Michigan conservatives 6. rally for Michigan moderates 7. rally for Illinois moderates 8. rally for Illinois moderates
  9. Paul Vang

    Plains Governor Campaigning

    Paul Vang campaigning for David Spalding 1. rally for Texas conservatives 2. rally for Texas conservatives 3. rally for Texas conservatives 4. rally for Texas conservatives 5. rally for Colorado moderates 6. rally for Colorado moderates 7. rally for Oklahoma conservatives 8. rally for Kansas conservatives
  10. Paul Vang

    Northeast Governor Campaigning

    Paul Vang campaigning for Sergey Lewinsky 1. Rally for Lewinsky - Pennsylvania - Conservatives 2. Rally for Lewinsky - Pennsylvania - Conservatives 3. Rally for Lewinsky - Pennsylvania - Conservatives 4. Rally for Lewinsky - Virginia - Conservatives 5. Rally for Lewinsky - Virginia - Conservatives 6. Rally for Lewinsky - Virginia - Conservatives 7. Rally for Lewinsky - New York - Moderates 8. Rally for Lewinsky - New York - Moderates
  11. Paul Vang

    West Coast Senator Campaigning

    Paul Vang campaigning for John Allen Campaign Rallies: 8 Total Hours Location: Arizona, Target: Conservatives Location: Arizona, Target: Conservatives Location: Arizona, Target: Moderates Location: Arizona, Target: Moderates Location: Oregon, Target: Conservatives Location: Oregon, Target: Moderates Location: Nevada, Target: Conservatives Location: Nevada, Target: Moderates
  12. Paul Vang

    How will you address the US-China Trade War?

    Take into consideration what we've lost due to China for a second. Due to our trade deficit with and the unfair trade practices engaged by China since entering the World Trade Organization in 2001 we've lost 3.4 million jobs according to a study released by the Economic Policy Institute. 74% or 2.5 million of those jobs were in manufacturing. We're forced to content with currency manipulation, intentional product dumping to kill local markets and raise prices once they can monopolize, numerous WTO violations such as required technology transfer, some $300 billion is loses to IP theft, direct exporter subsidies, state owned enterprises, intentionally suppress wages, and more. China doesn't fight fair. Chinese companies are free to compete in the United States but American companies are not free to compete in China. Their predatory trade practices are far more lucrative than free trade. They've gotten rich off their mercantile practices. China's has had tariffs on us far before Trump ever did a thing. Removing our tariffs before acquiring anything in the way of tariff concessions means our companies have to take on the power of the Chinese dictatorship full even more exposed and less reciprocal. The trade deficit will only increase hurting more jobs and stagnating wages even further all the while making outsourcing to China even more profitable. I will offer to the Chinese a mutual tariff reduction of equivalent proportions but if they refuse the tariffs aren't going away just for nothing. I'm not going to hand the Chinese dictatorship everything they want on a silver platter in the hopes they take pity on us eventually and grant us some magical trade deal that will solve all of our problems. From there should they refuse our negotiations we'll have to work with other trade partners in jointing putting pressure on China to change. Doing nothing on China's trade practices will only wreck more havoc on American jobs and wages. Keep in mind economically it's China we have over a barrel not the other way around. Their economic dependence on us far exceeds ours on them. Their non-cooperation will make matters worse for themselves. As for the creation of new tariffs I've said before I'm generally, not absolutely for free trade. It has yet to be explained to me how freely taking in carbon emissions from foreign exports is a benefit to the country. To me it looks like we're just giving a free pass to harming our environment because of ideological aversions to tariffs. Those aversions have forced the House Democratic leadership to block the majority vote of debate on Mr. Bower's and I's carbon emission tariff putting ideology over consensus building or bipartisanship. Exemptions to carbon emission tariffs can be made if actions are taken towards better climate practices in exports to the United States but should for example the Chinese disregard such considerations I will not hesitate in protecting our environment and disincentivizing pollutants being exported into the country. Rebated directly to the public any rise in prices would easily be offset considering the rebate would be around $1100 per family of four. It's a far smaller tariff than anything Trump did and all the Trump tariffs cost the consumer was $60 on average in price rises so under the carbon tariff rises would likely be even smaller. As President I will take matters of trade with China seriously. I will not waive a white flag of economic surrender to them far too much is at stake. We owe it to those who's factories in this country have been closed because of our trade deficit with China. Millions of families who have suffered because of their behaviors.
  13. Countries influencing the elections of other countries is reprehensible no matter who the actor is. In regards to preventing another situation like we saw with Russia in 2016, I've recently introduced the Countering Foreign Propaganda and Disinformation Act into the House hopper. In my opinion, it's not enough just to talk about what you are going to do but rather lay your plans out for the public to read themselves. There's no need to wait for when one of us is elected President to do something about the issue. The bill will establish under the Department of State a Center for Information Analysis and Response to better coordinate within our government assessment and responses to attempts by foreign actors to engage in information wars. Were it in place prior to the 2016 elections we would have been far better prepared to deal with the information war the Russians were engaged in.
  14. Paul Vang

    Will you keep the U.S. Embassy in Jerusalem?

    Yes I will keep the US embassy in Jerusalem. It's merely recognizing a reality that Jerusalem is the capitol of Israel without taking a stance of the city's final status. For decades we've said we were going to do it and finally we did it. U.S. officials have clearly stated that the move of the embassy does not negate Palestinian claims to East Jerusalem or rule out the creation of a Palestinian state. President Trump’s embassy move may complicate peace negotiations in the short run, but it could have a positive impact in the long run if it shocks Palestinian and other Arab leaders into recognizing that the longer they wait to genuinely accept Israel’s existence and sign a peace treaty, the less they can expect to gain from such a treaty.
  15. The US was right to leave the UN Human Rights Council. The UN created the council in 2006 to replace the Commission on Human Rights whose reputation had fallen to the point that even former UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan acknowledged that “ the Commission’s declining credibility has cast a shadow on the reputation of the United Nations system as a whole.” In negotiations to create the council, the Bush administration fought hard to establish stronger membership criteria and other standards to make sure it did not replicate the weaknesses of the commission. All of their proposals were rejected. The Council since then has exhibited the same exact characteristics of the Commission of Human Rights demonstrating a vast bias against Israel constituting nearly half of all resolutions while ignoring the human rights violations of countries such as China, Russia, Cuba, Saudi Arabia, or Zimbabwe with no resolutions being passed condemning a single action of any of the following countries. Legitimate human rights violations of religious persecution, punishment for political dissent, suppression of the press, unequal rights for women, and the targeting of political opponents go routinely ignored. The Obama administration in 2009 rejoined the Council in an effort to reform it and their record shows such a notion to be debunk. Similar efforts under Trump got nowhere. A council in which 14 of the 47 members are considered "not free" according to Freedom House is going to stand a bulwark against any change. Instead repressive countries line up to praise one another, interrupt criticism from NGOs, and deflect criticisms by attacking other countries such as the United States that dare criticize their records. Take for example the Universal Periodic Review. The UPR is a process under which every country undergoes a review of its human-rights practices and receives recommendations for improvement. According to UPR Info, the country that has received the most recommendations is the United States. That's right according the the Council's process the United States is in more need of human rights advise than Cuba, Iran, China, or Sudan. It's just one big sham. Another example of its deflection to actually pursue real violators of human rights is in how many times the forty-four human-rights experts for thematic mandates established in 2006 have conducted visits to the United States. Of their over 600 visits to more than 160 countries the United States by far has been their top destination. Clearly, the Council is not allocating its time and effort optimally with the United States and Israel dominate its agenda and focus. The Human Rights Council does not equate to support for human rights. In fact it's a cover for violators of human rights. The United States shouldn't expend so much time, effort, and influence in making the Council slightly less harmful and bias when the other members are unwilling to invest similar time and effort in actually improving the council itself. As they say, the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result. The United States would be better served to focus its efforts on passing stronger resolutions in the Third Committee of the UN General Assembly. Rhetoric in regards to the Human Rights Council needs to take a backseat to reality and the ire taken at the Trump administration for their withdraw should really be directed at the countries that have refused to support U.S. efforts to fix the council’s manifest flaws—flaws that, like those of the Commission before it, sully the reputation of the United Nations.
  16. I do not believe we should support Saudi Arabia. My opponent Dylan Macmillan has stressed how we need to be involved the world over to stop human rights abuses. If that really is what he believes then we should have been at war in Saudi Arabia yesterday. Saudia Arabia is an oppressive Whabbist monarchy that has spread its radical Islamic extremism all across the world. Wahhabism is the ideological roots of ISIS. It is Saudi Arabia not Iran that is the world's largest state sponsor of terrorism. Of the terrorist organizations in the world designated by the State Department the overwhelming majority are Sunni Whabbist and Saudi funded while only two are Shi'a and only four have claimed support from Iran. It's even been admitted by the Hillary State Department in communication with US embassies that Saudia Arabia is a critical source of funding for terrorist organizations such as Al-Qaeda, the Taliban, and Lashkar-e-Taiba. We know from declassified information several of the 9/11 hijackers had direct connections with the Saudi government which isn't too surprising considering 15 of the 19 hijackers were Saudi citizens. Let's look further though at Saudi Arabia's human rights violations. They've caused the death of thousands of civilians with their intervention into Yemen which has been called the worst humanitarian crisis in the world. The UN has accused them of war crimes in the conflict. Their naval blockade has caused mass starvation making it nearly impossible for food, water, or fuel to pass through. 12 million in Yemen are on the brink of starvation. They rank 169th out of 180 in the 2018 World Press Freedom Index. Human rights activists are routinely jailed sometimes without a formal accusation of a crime and done in complete secrecy. The death penalty is widely used for many crimes and capitol punishment carried out by stonings, firing squads, beheadings, and crucifixions oftentimes done in public. My opponent Mr. Macmillan has called for domestically criminal justice reform for nonviolent drug crimes, well in the first half of 2018 there were 24 executions committed in Saudia Arabia for nonviolent drug crimes. Corporal punishment such as caning, flogging, and body mutilation is still commonplace in Saudi Arabia. It has been our government over the past decades that has enabled Saudi Arabia's oppression. Our military partnership, foreign military aid, arm sales, and intelligence sharing has made us complicit in Saudi Arabia's war crimes. It's your tax dollars America that's serving to starve children in Yemen. You don't get to know about it because Saudi Arabia has banned commercial flights and journalists from getting to the affected regions of Yemen. The majority of children in Yemen now physically stunted by malnutrition and have stunted brain development. The best leverage possible to stop Saudi Arabia's terror in Yemen is to suspend arm sales to them and if elected President I will do just that. Further more we will suspend funding, training, advising, and any other military coordination to and with the military of Saudi Arabia. I will also consider further sanctions against the country. US humanitarian aid in Yemen does not outweigh the military support and diplomatic cover we've given to Saudi Arabia.The United States has no business directly or indirectly supporting the oppressive Saudi regime and they must be held accountable for their actions.
  17. Paul Vang

    General Election Debate 1 (Foreign Policy)

    Thank you Ohio state university for having us tonight and thank you all of you watching across the country wanting to better inform yourself between your choice between Mr. Macmillan and myself on matters of foreign policy. You know both Mr. Macmillan and I are both college educated although he's spent much more time in the university system than I have. I don't know by what means he had of going college but I had to earn my ability to go to college through service in the US Army. That involved me serving my country in Iraq. You know it amazes me that my opponent sees us getting involved in Iraq as a good thing or the right thing to do. From the comfort and safety of his university classroom he felt righteousness which he still has today in dictating that American soldiers should be pushed around the world like pieces in the board game Risk to answer for whatever international cause seems worthy of spilling our blood over. Ship us out to places like Iraq, Libya, and Syria to play global policeman. Let me tell you as someone who was there that getting involved in Iraq was a mistake. Arguably the biggest military mistake in American history. Iraq is worse off now than before we set foot there back in 2003. Division has deepened. Extremism has flourished. The country's economy and infrastructure ruined. Kidnappings and killings are common place. The Christian minority persecuted after previously being tolerated. Hundreds of thousands of Iraqi civilians killed, thousands of American soldiers killed, and over two trillion dollars wasted. For wanting to give us credibility on the world stage like Mr. Macmillan says he wants to do I don't see how illegal invasions violating the UN's founding charter makes us look any better. If anything it's driven global resentment of us. I'll be honest here, Iraq was the worst time of my life. It's not fun losing the lives of your friends. It's not fun to have people shooting at you or firing mortars at you. The pain of war doesn't leave the lives of those who served just because they've left the battlefield. For many the home front is a new battlefield trying to fit back into society. You know we have appropriately 800 military bases in 80 different countries in the world. Can you name them all off the top of your head? I sure can't. 138,000 soldiers stationed the world over. When you have that many bases around the world you're an empire. If it were Russia, China, or Iran as spread out as us we wouldn't hesitate in calling it an empire. It goes directly against our founding in opposition to empire our current state of global military reach. To quote James Madison: "Of all the enemies to public liberty war is, perhaps, the most to be dreaded, because it comprises the germ of every other. War is the parent of armies; from these proceed debts and taxes are the known instruments for bringing the many under the domination of the few. In war, too...all the means of seducing the minds are added to those of subduing the forces of the people...No nation could preserve its freedom in the midst of continual warfare" What we've seen especially in the past few decades is military intervention after military intervention put us into a state of endless war. This has brought about a more authority to the central government more power in the Executive branch, more government secrecy, more government borrowing, more invasive government surveillance of the public, higher taxes, more concentration of wealth, and more dead soldiers. In short a distortion of the very governmental ideals we were founded on into something very different. My foreign policy will be driven by the advise our first President George Washington gave in his farewell address on what a truly American foreign policy should be, quote: "Observe good faith and justice towards all nations; cultivate peace and harmony with all. It will be worthy of a free, enlightened, and great nation, to give to mankind the magnanimous and too novel example of a people always guided by an exalted justice and benevolence" In other words, we must eschew empire, mind our own business, and display an example of peace and freedom to the rest of the world. To quote Patrick Henry: "Those nations who have gone in search of grandeur, power and splendor, have been the victims of their own folly. While they acquired those visionary blessings, they lost their freedom." To quote another great man in John Quincy Adams: "America has, in the lapse of nearly half a century, without a single exception, respected the independence of other nations while asserting and maintaining her own. She has abstained from interference in the concerns of others, even when conflict has been for principles to which she clings...Wherever the standard of freedom and independence has been or shall be unfurled, there will her heart, her benedictions and her prayers be. Bus she goes not abroad, in search of monsters to destroy. She is the well-wisher to the freedom and independence of all. She is the champion and vindicator only of her own." Adams understood that in attempting to militarily bring freedom to the world America would risk its own as he said quote "The fundamental maxims of her policy would insensibly change from freedom to force...She might become the dictatress of the world. She would be no longer the ruler of her own spirit." Our founders were very clear on their opposition to interventionism, global adventurism, and empire and what it would mean for our freedom and liberty. That being such, as President I would abstain us as much as possible from this decrepit abandonment of the cornerstones of our nation. We will not put our troops in harms way to score points on the global stage. We will contract the excesses of the empire we've had built in our name. I will working with our generals to create a plan to leave both Syria and Afghanistan. Following that I will look to repeal the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Terrorists or the AUMF that has lead us into forever expanding global warfare and return the choices of war and peace to Congress. Additionally I shall look to rectify the abuses of the Patriot Act which has wrecked havoc on the civil liberties of the American public and restore privacy to the public which has been lost in our monolithic battle with global terrorism. Our liberty must not be eroded by interventionism any longer. We have enough problems on the home front to deal with before looking for more trouble around the globe. I will be a President if elected who will serve the American people, not the global community which far too many Presidents have betrayed the role's duties outlined in the Constitution. America first and foremost in all that I do.
  18. Paul Vang

    2020 Republican National Convention

    2020 Republican National Convention Philadelphia, Pennsylvania Representative and Plains Gubernatorial Candidate David Spalding (R-WY) Representative and Midwest Senate Candidate Johnathon Grant (R-MO) Plains Governor and Senator-elect Jack Swanner (R-TX) Representative Frank Reagan (R-NY) Representative Sarah Fitzgerald (R-NY) RNC Chairman James Grant (R-PA) Representative and West Coast Senate Candidate John Allen (R-CA) Southeast Governor and Vice Presidential Nominee Rick Sharp (R-FL) House Minority Leader and Presidential Nominee Paul Vang (R-WI)
  19. Paul Vang

    Paul Vang (R-WI) Press Office

    From a Vang for President rally in Tampa, Florida Vang: "I want to thank you all for coming out tonight. For the first time tonight at one of my rallies I will not be getting the last word in. That is because I am here to announce that your governor Rick Sharp will be my running mate and potentially the next Vice President of the United States. He's a good man who has served you all well as a governor and without further ado I'd like to hand this on over to Rick himself!" Sharp: "Thank you Paul! Wow, what an honor. I'm so excited to work alongside this great man, and together, we're going to do great work. I think that Paul and myself are going to be a strong ticket, and one that can't lose. Both Paul and I have very strong records when it comes to getting stuff done, the proof is in the pudding. Paul, as House Minority Leader has been doing an outstanding job representing our party in Congress. The Macmillan camp tries to call him a do nothing and that is absolutely ridiculous. Paul was responsible for the Rebuilding America's Infrastructure Act. It's the single most significant investment in our infrastructure since the New Deal. For decades, significant investment in our infrastructure has been promised, and Paul Vang is the guy that delivered that promise! He did that as House Minority Leader folks, and I know he'll achieve so much more as President. As to what I'm bringing to the table, that is nothing but success, folks! When I was in Congress, I was able to broker a budget that was a success for all sides. Even after Calvin Ward wanted to give up, I persisted, and we avoided a government shutdown. I've proven that I can root out corruption, as I did in the case of Preston Moss who was so hellbent against a wall, he was willing to offer bribes. Corruption will not be allowed to stand under a Vang Presidency, and I will personally see to it. As Governor, I've been able to curb illegal immigration, as we have outlawed sanctuary cities, and instituted mandatory E-Verify regionwide! We're the only region that has taken concrete steps to curb the effects of global warming. Thanks to the budget surplus we achieved, we were able to invest significantly in research and infrastructure that will go to curb the rising sea levels that will affect many of America's cities. We were able to achieve all of this without some climate deal signed in a far flung place. No we did this right here in Florida, and Paul and I will be able to achieve so much more in Washington, all without a globalist climate deal which doesn't have the best interests of our nation in mind. Folks, I'm very excited to get out on the campaign trail and really make the best case on why Paul and I are the leadership America needs right now, and I think y'all will be able to see why. Thank you all, and may God bless the United States of America!"
  20. Paul Vang

    Paul Vang (R-WI) Press Office

    Paul Vang From the Office of Representative Paul Vang Infrastructure is the backbone of the U.S. economy and a necessary input to every economic output. It is critical to the nation’s prosperity and the public’s health and welfare. Infrastructure’s condition has a cascading impact on our nation’s economy, impacting business productivity, gross domestic product, employment, personal income, and international competitiveness. According to the experts at the American Society of Civil Engineers, America has been neglecting the needed investment in infrastructure spending only half of what's needed to maintain a state of good repair. This investment gap has grave consequences outlined very starkly in their Failure to Act 2016 study. If the investment is not resolved soon then by 2025 the US economy will lost roughly $4 trillion in GDP, $7 trillion in lost business sales, and some 2.5 million jobs. By 2040 those numbers rise to $14.2 trillion lost in GDP, $29.2 trillion in business sales, and 5.8 million jobs if current trends continue. The impact will be felt by American families greatly to the tune of roughly $3,400 a year. That's felt in many different ways too. Poor roads and airports mean travel times increase. An aging electrical grid and inadequate water distribution makes utilities unreliable. Problems like these translate into higher costs for businesses to manufacture and distribute goods and provide services which is passed along to workers and families. The infrastructure investment gap cannot be another can kicked down the road and my bill the Rebuilding America's Infrastructure Act closes that gap across all aspects of infrastructure in the country. The bill gives expert recommended levels of funding in almost every different aspect of American infrastructure. It addresses aviation, dams, energy, inland waterways, ports, rail, schools, solid waste, bridges, drinking water, hazardous waste, levees, public parks, roads, transit, and waste water all with the needed nuance to each individual category to get our infrastructure back on track. We shouldn't be tolerating year after year D+ grades when the public deserves the very best. The best part of all though is that the bill will not have an impact on the deficit. It's paid for by going after the leeches in our American system. Big companies like Amazon and Walmart are making more money than ever since the tax cuts but they still have far too many employees receiving public assistance. It's time they made a positive contribution to society that will benefit us all rather than exploit the public forcing them to subsidizing their low wages. They'll benefit from the infrastructure improvements in business activity anyways. It's also paid for by going after tax haven cheats and eliminating the widely exploited carried interest loophole. Cronyism needs to end, and it's going to be made to pay for our brighter future in the form of this bill. With $11 trillion in economic activity on the line we cannot afford to let such an opportunity to pass such groundbreaking legislation such as the Rebuilding America's Infrastructure Act go by. I hope whoever it is that is the next Speaker of the House strongly consider putting the bill on their first House docket and we can make history together. View full PR
  21. Paul Vang

    Mid-Session Schedules

    Paul Vang 2 fundraisers
  22. Paul Vang

    Paul Vang (R-WI) Press Office

    From a Vang for President rally in Cincinnati, Ohio "Thank you ladies and gentleman for coming out tonight. I wanted to address the hollow criticisms tonight I've received from my opponent Dylan Macmillan in regards to unions. Let me be clear from the get go I will not force right to work on Ohio. That is not a decision for the federal government to be making. Now Dylan Macmillan has made out my Constitutional amendment to give workers control over the usage of their union dues as a handout to big business. To believe this, one has to first off ignore the fact that I voted for campaign finance reform Constitutional amendment and second I've called for it to be reconsidered in Congress again. All my amendment addresses is qualms union workers have that the Democrats won't address such as 66 percent of government and private union employees saying it is unreasonable that union leaders across America can spend their dues on politics without getting their approval, 89 percent of private and government union employees agreeing that union workers should have the right to know how their dues money is being spent and believe the Department of Labor should disclose union spending on the Internet to ensure accountability, and 69 percent of private and government union employees believing union officials need to stop spending union dues on partisan politics and invest it in creating more jobs, as well as focus on the membership, not the elections. If empowering worker control of unions is somehow a radical notion it says more about the naysayers than anything else. Not only do I want to curb the excess of big business political lobbying, I've been the big business lobby's biggest target in the Republican party they spent millions against me in the Republican Presidential primary. No member of Congress has done more this session to curb the excess of big business than myself. My infrastructure bill the Rebuilding America's Infrastructure Act is in large part paid for by taxing big businesses like Walmart or Amazon for exploiting the taxpaying public by having their employees' low wages being offset by welfare. Essentially subsidizing low wages while they make even more profits after the Trump tax bill. This practice because of me is over instead it's been replaced with the biggest jobs program and infrastructure investment since the New Deal. Additionally my bill has been paid for by going after tax haven cheats and eliminating the widely exploited carried interest loophole. Cronyism's biggest enemy has been me. If anyone has advocated for handouts to big business it's been Dylan Macmillan. His undying support of the 21st Century Immigration Reform Act exposes that. That bill would double the amount of H1B visas that are used primarily by big business to hire foreign labor instead of American labor. Big business spends billions in lobbying in the Washington swamp to get their hands on these visas. According to Politico/Morning Consulate polling only 30% of American voters think these visas are even needed while 44% think that these visa holders definitely fill job opportunities that could be worked by Americans. In fact, when the gang of eight bill which the 21st Century Immigration Reform Act is a carbon copy of was first released in 2013 unions like the AFL-CIO ripped the plan with their President Richard Trumka called provisions of the bill related to H1B visas "unambiguous attacks on American workers". H1B visas have been a plague on American labor forcing workers in many cases to train their foreign replacements. Along with the H1B visas in the program the bill will create millions in other new foreign worker visas. How any of this is supposed to be good for American labor it beyond me. In the seven years since the introduction of the gang of eight bill the Democratic establishment hasn't given a second of thought to how these visas impact the American labor movement even after the largest union in the country comes out against them. Dylan Macmillan is not the principled union defender he wants to be seen as he's okay with the same old same old that's been fleecing Americans for far too long. I not only oppose this massive expansion of worker visas that will enrich big business to the detriment of American labor, but I will push to eliminate H1B visas altogether. A vote for Vang is a vote to stick up for the little guy to the excesses of big business I've proven that already and I will continue to do so. Thank you again for everybody coming out tonight, God bless you all, and God bless America!"
  23. Mr. Daniels, do you support gun control measures like those called for by governor Travere?
  24. Paul Vang

    Paul Vang (R-WI) Press Office

    Paul Vang From a Vang for President rally in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania "Thank you ladies and gentleman for coming out here tonight to hear me speak. I wanted to talk to you all about the future of our economy. Recently, I've been accused on being a do nothing which is rich to call the individual behind the largest jobs program since the New Deal in the Rebuilding America's Infrastructure Act. That bill by closing the investment gap on infrastructure at no cost to the average taxpayer or the deficit will create millions of jobs, save some 2.5 million jobs from being lost, save $3.9 trillion in GDP losses, save $7 trillion in business sales loses, and save the average household some $3,400 a year in disposable income. If this is considered do nothing then what do you call my opponent Dylan Macmillan who has yet to even get a bill signed into law? I've done more for the future for our economy already than anything he's promised. I've brought action to decades of inaction felt by Americans the country across in all aspects of infrastructure. That's highways, roads, railroads, schools, dams, the electrical grid, ports, bridges, levees, public parks, transit, and more. We were receiving an infrastructure grade by the American Society of Civil Engineers of a D+ with several sectors bordering on failure but that won't be an issue now. But I want to talk about some other things my opponent has talked about that I do not believe is in your interest economically. First off, he wants to go back to the Paris climate agreement. This is a globalist pact that by 2040 according to a study by the National Economic Research Associates would cost us a 38% cut in iron and steel production, 31% cut in natural gas production, an 85% cut in coal production, a GDP loss of $3 trillion, and the loss of some 6.5 million industrial jobs. Meanwhile, according to proponents' own data, the agreement would have no discernible effect on global temperatures. If letting our economy be decimated by a globalist agreement such as this is considered do something leadership I do not mind the title whatsoever. The funny thing is too since President Trump pulled out of the Paris climate agreement our carbon emissions have been down while European Union emissions have been up. Contrast the vast losses associated with the Paris climate agreement to my bipartisan Protecting Our Energy, Environment and Economy Act introduced alongside my Democratic friend who endorsed me after coming in third place in the Democratic primary Ken Bowers. With my plan the average family of four would receive some $1100 in rebates from deincentivizing foreign exporters from polluting carbon into our environment. While as I've said before I generally support free trade it has yet to be explained to me why allowing free polluting of our environment makes us better off in any way. With the rebate easily out pacing any rise in prices I would be protecting both the environment, American industry, and your bottom line unlike the Paris climate agreement. A majority of Congress voted to debate this bill, but doing so has been blocked by Democratic House leadership that includes Mr. Macmillan. Real bipartisan solutions aren't even allowed to be considered despite it receiving more support than the "bipartisan" climate change committee they wanted to create that failed in the Senate. Next, I want to go over Mr. Macmillan's call for a $15 minimum wage. This is a policy that has already cut many hours for workers in Seattle and closed many restaurants costing workers some $125 a month. Estimates on the impact of the policy suggest this would eliminate some 9 million jobs nationwide. Additionally this is a measure that would hurt many small businesses that make up 99.7% of all firms in the country who already operate on a thin margin as it is. According to polling conducted by the Economic Policy Institute on fast food businesses in Mr. Macmillan's home state of New York 70% of those surveyed said they would very likely increase prices were a $15 minimum wage be implemented just to get by. Contrast this to my call for a $10.10 federal minimum wage indexed to inflation, the Congressional Budget Office says it will lift some 900,000 Americans out of poverty, increase wages for 16.5 million Americans, while only costing some 500,000 jobs. Significantly less costs considering I've already created more than 500,000 jobs with my infrastructure plan. Additionally even 55% of employers support a $10 minimum wage according to Harris polling. I'm not in the business of killing millions of jobs while improving wages and if elected President we will raise the federal minimum wage to $10.10 indexed to inflation something 71% of Americans support. Lastly, I wanted to get into how the immigration bill the 21st Century Immigration Reform Act will impact Americans economically. As it currently stands according to Harvard-Harris polling some 81% of Americans want to see a reduction in immigration. We already as it is take in more immigrants than any other country in the world at a rate of some one million a year. Under the plan Mr. Macmillan supports we will see over the decade some 57 million immigrants brought into the country which is more than five times the current rate of immigration. This all will happen as according to the McKinsey Global Institute, by 2030 automation could destroy as much as 73 million jobs. The labor market with the destruction of millions of jobs that Mr. Macmillan's plans would cause, the looming threat of automation, and the vast influx of immigrants is not going to be one favorable to the American public whatsoever. I do not want that for our country and I've already proven I know how to create jobs and protect our economic future. A vote for Vang is a vote for economic security. Thank you all for coming out again, God bless you all, and God bless America!" View full PR
  25. Paul Vang

    Paul Vang (R-WI) Press Office

    Paul Vang From a Vang for President rally in Eau Claire, Wisconsin "Thank you ladies and gentleman for coming out here tonight to hear me speak. I wanted to talk to you all about my recent introduction of my Constitutional amendment to grant workers in unions greater control over their union's political lobbying. Now laughably but sadly predictably my opponent Dylan Macmillan and the rest of the Democratic establishment saw this as an attack on unions. You see unions matter to them insofar as they provide money to them and anything that would allow workers to decide to not give them their money is an "attack on unions" What I've proposed are measures that are highly popular among union members themselves. 66 percent of government and private union employees say it is unreasonable that union leaders across America can spend their dues on politics without getting their approval. 89 percent of private and government union employees agree that union workers should have the right to know how their dues money is being spent and believe the Department of Labor should disclose union spending on the Internet to ensure accountability. 69 percent of private and government union employees believe union officials need to stop spending union dues on partisan politics and invest it in creating more jobs, as well as focus on the membership, not the elections. Giving union members more control over how their dues are spent and more accountability to their unions is apparently too much to the Democratic establishment. They sing from the heavens the highest of praises of expanding our democracy but when giving union members a vote to not fund the Democratic party as the overwhelming amount of union lobbying dollars do comes up for a vote they emphatically retreat to condemnation. It's self interest not in the interest of union members themselves. I believe in giving Americans more choice whether that be in healthcare, unions, or what have you. Washington DC doesn't need to be intruding in the lives of every locality in the country. Wisconsin is a right to work state and were we to chose to not be one I would welcome that change. It shouldn't be Washington politicians making these sorts of decisions though that's what we have the legislature in Madison for. The tenth amendment is nothing more than a suggestion to my opponent Dylan Macmillan on the matter. But again it's quite the telling that those in Washington's Democratic establishment want more control over your life and attack giving more authority to you and your localities closer to home. A vote for Vang will empower the individual, the local, and the states not strip them of a say in the matter. That's not the right thing to do. Thank you again for everybody coming out tonight, God bless you all, and God bless America!" View full PR
×