Committee Summary for House State-Federal Relations and Veterans Affairs (01/24/2025)

Bill/Time	Type	Title	Sponsor
HB220 00:01:02.719 - 8:30:33 AM	Public Hearing	closing the presidential or state primary of political parties.	Sellers, John(R)[A-]2024
HB64 00:34:42.679 - 9:04:13 AM	Public Hearing	relative to extending hiring preferences for military members and their spouses to the state and private businesses, and establishing purchase preferences for disabled veterans and military spouses regarding state supply purchases.	Roy, Terry(R)[B]2024
HB256 01:10:58.880 - 9:40:29 AM	Public Hearing	establishing a committee to study the federal government's response to the 1967 attack on the USS Liberty.	Sabourin dit Choinière, Matt(R)
HCR8 02:25:08.120 - 10:54:39 AM	Public Hearing	urging Congress to find that the Piscataqua River and Portsmouth Harbor lie within the state of New Hampshire.	Barton, Joseph(R)
HR11 03:35:40.840 - 12:05:11 PM	Public Hearing	urging the United States government to investigate allegations of abuse of minorities, especially Hindus, Buddhists, Christians, and other religious minorities by the interim government of Bangladesh.	Khan, Aboul(R)[B+]2024
HCR9 04:54:15.120 - 1:23:46 PM	Public Hearing	urging the United States to reject compliance with the European Union's Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive.	Bernardy, JD(R)[A-]2024

HB220: Representative Kraton Support00:01:02.719 - 8:30:33 AM; Representative Kraton introduced HB220, which aims to transfer statutory authority from the Department of Education to the Department of Military Affairs and Veteran Services for educational support services. He explained that the Department of Military Affairs and Veteran Services has been performing these roles but lacks the statutory backing. The bill seeks to update the statutes to align with the current operational responsibilities, with both the Department of Education and the Department of Military Affairs in agreement.
HB220: Brent Fraser, Department of Military Affairs and Veteran Services Support00:03:19.680 - 8:32:50 AM; Brent Fraser supported HB220, stating that it codifies the ongoing work already being done by the Department of Military Affairs and Veteran Services since January 2024. He detailed the department's responsibilities in reviewing, evaluating, and approving educational and training programs for veterans under a federal agreement. He emphasized that the program is federally funded with no impact on the general fund budget.
HB220: Steve Applebe, Department of Education Support00:04:52.080 - 8:34:23 AM; Steve Applebe, representing the Department of Education, supported the bill, emphasizing the benefits of consolidating veteran services into a one-stop shop under the Department of Military Affairs and Veteran Services. He noted the department's existing ties to the Federal Department of Veterans Affairs, which made the transition logical and efficient.
HB220: Kevin Grady, State Veterans Advisory Committee, Hooksett, NH Support00:06:39.800 - 8:36:10 AM; Kevin Grady from the State Veterans Advisory Committee and a resident of Hooksett, NH, supported HB220. He shared the background of the establishment of the Department of Military Affairs and Veteran Services and how it was realized that certain services needed to be consolidated under this department for a more streamlined approach to veteran services. He emphasized the committee's full support for the bill.
HB220: Cindy Bennett, Raymond, NH Information Only00:09:28.200 - 8:38:59 AM; Cindy Bennett introduced herself as a first-time visitor to the legislative building, expressing excitement about her presence. She mentioned being a mother of 13 children, having homeschooled them, and currently working as a teacher at a private Christian school in New Hampshire. She also noted her involvement in her local school board and other town boards. Bennett shared personal anecdotes about her children, particularly mentioning her son's service in the Army and his pursuit of a college degree, indicating her pride in his achievements and his current residence in Georgia.
HB220: Ray Plant, Dunbarton, NH Information Only00:12:06.440 - 8:41:37 AM; Ray Plant introduced himself as a first-term representative living in Dunbarton but representing a district that includes Dunbarton, Hooksett, Allenstown, and Epsom. He mentioned his service in the Vermont Army National Guard for 19 years, his role as the Brigade Aviation Officer, and his full-time job as a pilot for JetBlue out of Boston. Plant also shared his familiarity with the VA healthcare system, particularly the facility in Manchester, due to his VA rating.
HB220: Representative from Londonderry Information Only00:13:44.399 - 8:43:15 AM; The representative from Londonderry, in his seventh term, expressed his pleasure in serving on the committee since its inception. He praised the committee's leadership and shared his professional background as a chiropractor in Londonderry, mentioning his work with veterans through the Veterans Affairs recommendation. He also discussed his involvement with an opioid bill, which received attention from the VA secretary and is moving forward.
HB220: Jim Kraton, Hillsboro District 30, NH Support00:16:02.759 - 8:45:33 AM; Jim Kraton introduced House Bill 122, which aims to increase the limit on payments for claims arising from actions or activities of the New Hampshire National Guard from $500 to $1,000. He explained that the current limit has not been updated since before the Civil War and provided examples of how the National Guard might cause minor damages that need quick resolution. Kraton also mentioned historical context from his time in Germany, where similar issues were handled efficiently.
HB220: Nicole Desrosiers Bixler, Deputy Adjutant General Support00:21:39.480 - 8:51:10 AM; Nicole Desrosiers Bixler supported the increase of the claim limit to $1,000, noting that the previous limit was set in 1981 and needed adjustment due to inflationary costs. She explained that the bill also updates language to reflect the current Department of Military Affairs and Veteran Services. Bixler highlighted the efficiency of resolving small claims quickly, within approximately two weeks, as opposed to the lengthy legal process for claims over $1,000.
HB220: Unknown Speaker Information Only00:23:00.600 - 8:52:31 AM; The speaker discusses the availability of written testimony previously submitted by someone named Britain. The speaker confirms that the testimony was sent via email about a week ago and offers to resend it to the committee members. They also mention providing a hard copy to the clerk for filing.
HB220: Representative Bataki Information Only00:24:10.520 - 8:53:41 AM; Representative Bataki inquires about the source of the funds for the proposed increase from $500 to $1,000 in the bill. The response clarifies that the money would come from the Department of Military Affairs and Veteran Services' state budget, not from federal funds. The budget officer mentioned that such an increase would have applied only twice in 25 years, and the total would have been more than $500 in those instances, necessitating a claims appeal process.
HB220: Nicole Desrosiers Bixler, Deputy Adjutant General Information Only00:24:58.840 - 8:54:29 AM; The Deputy Adjutant General continues to provide information regarding the fiscal impact of the bill. They mention that the fiscal note was prepared in 2024, estimating a fiscal impact of less than $10,000 for the years 2025 through 2028. They express confidence that the department could absorb this cost within their state budget and discuss the possibility of using general funds, with an uncertainty about whether there is a specific line item for this funding.
HB220: Kevin Grady, 27-year resident of Hooksett, NH Support00:28:09.480 - 8:57:40 AM; Kevin Grady, representing the SVAC, supports the bill. He argues for the need to update the legislation, which has not been revised since before the 20th century. He highlights the small cost increase as justified to avoid the claims process for claims between $500 and $1,000.
HB64: Representative Roy Information Only00:34:42.679 - 9:04:13 AM; Representative Roy introduces HB64, which aims to extend hiring preferences for military members and their spouses to state and private businesses and establish purchase preferences for disabled veterans and military spouses regarding state supply purchases.
HB64: Representative Terry Roy, Rockingham 32 Support00:34:46.320 - 9:04:17 AM; Representative Terry Roy introduced House Bill 64, emphasizing its importance in supporting active duty military members and their families. He highlighted that the bill aims to provide hiring preferences to help military personnel establish and grow businesses in New Hampshire, thereby encouraging them to remain in the state after their military service. Roy addressed concerns about preferential treatment by explaining that such preferences are a way to honor the sacrifices made by military members and their families, suggesting that anyone can join the military to earn similar benefits.
HB64: Representative from Antrim Information Only00:40:01.839 - 9:09:32 AM; The representative from Antrim, identified as Representative Kraton, co-sponsor of the bill, did not add further comments and passed on the opportunity to speak.
HB64: Brent Fraser, Director of Community-Based Military Programs, Department of Military Affairs and Veteran Services Support00:40:01.839 - 9:09:32 AM; Brent Fraser expressed the department's support for HB 64, which aims to extend hiring preferences to military members, their spouses, and disabled veterans. He provided statistics on veterans in New Hampshire, noting their economic conditions and the potential positive impact of the bill on their employment and financial security. Fraser mentioned the desire to work with the bill's sponsors on specific language regarding the adjutant general's role in oversight and management, indicating that the department is not currently staffed to execute that aspect. He also discussed how the bill could help address the gender gap in New Hampshire and support various state initiatives.
HB64: Melissa Wette, Department of Defense State Liaison Support00:51:43.319 - 9:21:14 AM; Melissa Wette, who works for the Department of Defense as a regional liaison for New England, expressed support for House Bill 64. She explained her role in advocating for policies that enhance the quality of life for service members and their families, covering issues like health care, child care, education, and spouse employment. Wette's testimony was interrupted for questions, but she affirmed her support for the bill and its potential to positively impact military families.
HB64: Melissa Wette, Department of Defense State Liaison Office, New England Region Support00:53:54.880 - 9:23:25 AM; Melissa Wette continued her testimony on House Bill 1064, emphasizing the bill's potential to create employment opportunities for military spouses. She highlighted the challenges faced by military families due to frequent relocations every 2 to 3 years, which often disrupt the employment and career progression of military spouses. She cited a 2021 Department of Defense survey where 48% of active duty spouses reported difficulty finding employment during relocations. Wette noted the high unemployment rate among military spouses at 21%, significantly higher than their civilian counterparts, and stressed the importance of two incomes for military families. She argued that offering employment preference could reduce this unemployment rate and benefit both military families and employers seeking talent. Wette praised New Hampshire's historical support for military families and thanked Representative Terry Roy for his advocacy. She also mentioned that Maryland and a few other states have implemented similar policies and offered to provide more details post-meeting. Wette responded to questions about the specifics of the 48% statistic, the 21% unemployment rate, the applicability of federal employment preferences, and whether the bill covers National Guard spouses, clarifying that as written, it applies to active duty spouses only.
HB64: Representative Lloyd Information Only00:56:58.160 - 9:26:29 AM; Representative Lloyd inquired about other states' implementation of similar policies, to which Melissa Wette responded that Maryland was the most recent to implement such a policy and a few other states are following suit. She mentioned she could provide a list of those states post-meeting.
HB64: Representative Mandal Information Only00:58:51.119 - 9:28:22 AM; Representative Mandal sought clarification on the 48% statistic mentioned by Melissa Wette, which she explained as the percentage of active duty military spouses who reported difficulty finding employment during relocations according to a 2021 Department of Defense survey.
HB64: Representative Bennett Information Only00:59:38.160 - 9:29:09 AM; Representative Bennett asked about the 21% unemployment rate among military spouses, questioning if it included those not seeking employment. Melissa Wette clarified that this statistic only includes military spouses actively seeking but unable to find employment.
HB64: Representative Plant Information Only01:00:35.520 - 9:30:06 AM; Representative Plant asked about the scope of public employment covered by the bill, to which Melissa Wette responded that it would include state and municipal employment. She also noted that a previous executive order by President Biden provided hiring preference for military spouses in federal civilian positions but is no longer in effect.
HB64: Representative Hemingway Information Only01:01:59.160 - 9:31:30 AM; Representative Hemingway inquired if the bill's provisions would extend to National Guard spouses. Melissa Wette clarified that as currently written, the bill applies only to active duty military spouses, but amendments could extend it to cover National Guard and reserve spouses.
HB64: Kevin Grady, Hooksett, New Hampshire, State Veteran Advisory Committee Support01:04:00.559 - 9:33:31 AM; Kevin Grady, a 25-year Air Force veteran and a 27-year resident of Hooksett, New Hampshire, spoke in support of the legislation. He emphasized the importance of the bill, aligning it with the State Veteran Advisory Committee's mantra that when one serves, the whole family serves. Grady shared his personal experience of moving 10 times during his career, highlighting the challenges military spouses face in reinventing themselves in new locations. He views the bill as a small but significant step to acknowledge the sacrifices made by military families.
HB64: Danielle Albert, New Hampshire Department of Labor Information Only01:04:46.000 - 9:34:17 AM; Danielle Albert, Deputy Commissioner of the New Hampshire Department of Labor, clarified that the department is neutral on the bill. She provided technical considerations related to the amendments in the bill, specifically pointing out issues with the definition of a military spouse and the eligibility verification process under RSA 275G. Albert suggested potential statutory reference errors and the need for clarification on who can be asked for qualifying documents by private employers. She offered to submit these technical considerations in writing by the following week.
HB64: Representative Kraton, Labor Committee Support01:08:26.560 - 9:37:57 AM; Representative Kraton from the Labor Committee expressed support for the bill, drawing from his 30-year military service where his family moved 23 times. He highlighted the significant challenges military families face, particularly with school transitions for children and employment for spouses. Kraton believes that the legislation could ease these burdens for approximately 500 military families in New Hampshire and sees it as a worthwhile legislative effort.
HB256: Representative Matt Sabourin dit Choinière, Seabrook, Rockingham District 30 Support01:10:58.880 - 9:40:29 AM; Representative Saberin introduced the bill, emphasizing the presence of USS Liberty crew members and their families at the hearing. He mentioned submitting written testimony from the family of David Edwin Lewis, a crew member from Seabrook who passed away in 2021. Saberin stressed the importance of investigating the incident, noting the crew's desire for clarity on the event.
HB256: Representative Barton, Littleton Support01:12:53.760 - 9:42:24 AM; Representative Barton expressed support for the legislation, recounting a recent interview he watched with a USS Liberty survivor. He highlighted the secretive nature of the incident and the lack of aid received by the crew, suggesting there were unanswered questions regarding the attack by the Israeli military. Barton believes it's important for New Hampshire to seek answers for its constituents and press the federal delegation for further investigation.
HB256: Representative Mandle Information Only01:17:21.120 - 9:46:52 AM; Representative Mandle sought clarity on the purpose of the proposed committee, noting that there had been previous investigations and compensation from the Israeli government. He questioned what new information the committee aimed to uncover. In response, it was explained that the committee would focus on interviewing surviving crew members to gather firsthand accounts and conduct thorough research to provide a well-researched answer, independent of previous governmental findings.
HB256: Unknown Speaker Information Only01:18:54.920 - 9:48:25 AM; The speaker discussed the absence of direct interviews from survivors of an incident due to what they believe was a gag order. They suggested that as survivors are nearing the end of their lives, they might be more willing to speak out, potentially providing new insights into the incident.
HB256: Unknown Speaker Information Only01:19:33.000 - 9:49:04 AM; The speaker raised a concern about potential legal consequences for the State of New Hampshire if service members break a gag order to provide testimony. They noted that such orders are likely federal and not within the state's jurisdiction, suggesting that any testimony would be given voluntarily at the individual's own risk.
HB256: Representative Bon Support01:20:23.280 - 9:49:54 AM; Representative Bon confirmed their support for the bill, although they are not a sponsor of HB256. They clarified that there are existing books and at least one documentary about the incident, but none of these included interviews with survivors. They emphasized the importance of getting testimony from all surviving members to understand the full story of the incident.
HB256: Representative Floss Information Only01:21:11.280 - 9:50:42 AM; Representative Floss sought clarification on the expected outcomes of the survivors' testimonies. They were informed that the goal is to pressure the federal government to release information similar to that released about historical assassinations, suggesting that a detailed account from survivors could lead to the unsealing of related documents and prompt federal action.
HB256: Representative Mandle Information Only01:23:16.679 - 9:52:47 AM; Representative Mandle sought to clarify if the bill's intent is focused on understanding the U.S. government's role in the incident or if it might be biased against Israel. The response indicated support for Israel but emphasized the need for clear answers about the specific attacks on the ship, hoping for an unbiased investigation.
HB256: Representative Manion Information Only01:24:46.480 - 9:54:17 AM; Representative Manion asked if the support for a full investigation would hold regardless of which country was involved in the incident. The response affirmed that the investigation's necessity does not depend on the country involved.
HB256: Representative Bennett Information Only01:25:34.119 - 9:55:05 AM; Representative Bennett inquired about the number of New Hampshire residents on the ship involved in the incident. The exact number was not known, but it was confirmed that there were New Hampshire members on the crew, including a naval commander from Littleton.
HB256: Representative Jonah Wheeler, representing Peterborough and Sharon Support01:26:17.040 - 9:55:48 AM; Representative Wheeler expressed strong support for the legislation, highlighting the need for transparency and a genuine investigation into the incident. He noted the presence of a commander from Colebrook on the ship and criticized the federal government's past investigation as false. He emphasized the importance of the state taking action to investigate and learn the truth, given the lack of federal response over the years.
HB256: Representative Jonah Wheeler, representing Peterborough and Sharon Support01:26:17.040 - 9:55:48 AM; Representative Wheeler expressed his belief that the investigation into the USS Liberty incident was false, suggesting that the federal government conducted a misleading investigation. He emphasized the need for a state government-commissioned committee to genuinely study the issue and compile accurate information, as he believes the survivors' testimonies and other evidence indicate a cover-up.
HB256: Representative Gagy Information Only01:30:20.960 - 9:59:51 AM; Representative Gagy read an excerpt from a document related to the USS Liberty incident, focusing on the testimony of Admiral Isaac C. Kidd, who led the investigation. The excerpt detailed the rushed nature of the investigation and the belief that the Israeli attack was deliberate, not an accident. Gagy questioned the witness about the evidence presented in the excerpt, seeking to understand the implications for the proposed committee.
HB256: Tom Mullen, representing Auburn, Maine Support01:36:42.280 - 10:06:13 AM; Tom Mullen, a survivor of the USS Liberty attack, provided a detailed account of his experience during the attack. He described the initial sighting of Israeli planes, the subsequent attack, and the severe damage to the ship. Mullen expressed his belief that the federal government engaged in a cover-up of the incident and emphasized the need for the truth to be acknowledged. He supported the formation of a committee to investigate the matter further.
HB256: Michael Lay, representing Florida Support01:54:08.800 - 10:23:39 AM; Michael Lay, another survivor of the USS Liberty attack, shared his personal experience of being injured during the attack. He recounted the day's events, the lack of official questioning by the government, and the belief that the attack was intentional. Lay supported the idea of a committee to investigate the incident, seeking acknowledgment and the truth from the federal government.
HB256: Unnamed Speaker, Navy Veteran Information Only02:08:47.400 - 10:38:18 AM; The speaker, a Navy veteran, discussed his service experience and questioned Michael Lay about his testimony regarding the USS Liberty incident. He asked about the location of the duty station, the position during the attack, and the visibility of the American flag on the ship. He expressed concern about the incident's implications and suggested further investigation into the matter.
HB256: Catherine Peterson, Nashua Support02:14:14.840 - 10:43:45 AM; Catherine Peterson, a native of Nashua, spoke about her cousin Jim Makis, who was affected by the USS Liberty incident. She emphasized the impact on her cousin's life and supported the bill, urging the committee to allow the veterans to speak freely about their experiences and lift any existing gag orders.
HB256: Jason Gearhard, Northfield Support02:15:46.679 - 10:45:17 AM; Jason Gearhard, a former state representative from Northfield, supported the bill and discussed the need for declassifying documents related to the USS Liberty incident. He referenced an article from antiwar.com and argued that the federal government's refusal to release these documents due to national security concerns is unfounded. He stressed the importance of state governments in conducting oversight and urged the committee to investigate further.
HCR8: Representative Barton, Portsmouth Support02:25:08.120 - 10:54:39 AM; Representative Barton, the prime sponsor, discussed the boundary dispute between New Hampshire and Maine, particularly regarding the Piscataqua River and Portsmouth Naval Shipyard. He proposed a concurrent resolution similar to one passed in 2005, but with an added request for the President to issue an executive order changing the duty stations of service members and employees at the shipyard from Kittery, Maine, to Portsmouth, New Hampshire. He provided historical context and documentation to support his argument.
HCR8: Mark Stetson, Portsmouth Support02:33:34.600 - 11:03:05 AM; Mark Stetson, a retired naval architect from Portsmouth, supported the resolution. He detailed his background and experience at the Portsmouth Naval Shipyard and explained the tax implications of the boundary dispute. He argued that the duty station change from Portsmouth to Kittery was arbitrary and has led to unlawful taxation by Maine. Stetson suggested immediate action by the President to change the duty station and urged Congress to resolve the border issue permanently.
HR11: Representative Abul Khan, Rockingham 30 Support03:35:40.840 - 12:05:11 PM; Representative Abul Khan, the prime sponsor from Rockingham 30, introduced the resolution urging the U.S. government to investigate allegations of abuse against religious minorities in Bangladesh. He shared his personal connection to the country, noting the rise of fundamentalist groups and the targeting of minorities. Khan emphasized the urgency of the resolution and the potential personal risks he faces in supporting it, but stressed the importance of standing up for human rights globally.
HR11: Representative Abul Khan, Rockingham 30 Support03:39:52.239 - 12:09:23 PM; Representative Khan continued his testimony from the previous segment, discussing the political and religious situation in Bangladesh. He explained that the recent government in Bangladesh, which came to power after a fundamentalist student uprising, is characterized by Islamic fundamentalism. He described how this government, led by an interim chief advisor Dr. Yunus, is supported by fundamentalist groups banned in the U.S. and other countries. Khan highlighted the economic turmoil, loss of jobs, and persecution of minorities, particularly Hindus, under this regime. He responded to questions about the potential for regional instability, anti-India sentiments of the current government, and the role of Saudi Arabia in funding madrasas. Khan also noted the impact on the garment industry and other sectors due to the uprising, expressing concern about the potential for increased terrorism and instability.
HR11: Representative Jones Information Only03:47:58.199 - 12:17:29 PM; Representative Jones questioned the use of the word 'allegations' in the bill, suggesting that 'incidents' might be a more appropriate term. Khan explained that 'allegations' was used to encourage a thorough investigation by the U.S. government into the situation in Bangladesh, indicating a softer approach to accommodate various perspectives.
HR11: Representative from Dunbarton Information Only03:49:21.840 - 12:18:52 PM; The representative inquired about United Nations involvement in the situation in Bangladesh. Khan responded that the UN is investigating the treatment of minorities, but expressed skepticism about the effectiveness of these investigations when conducted in collaboration with the current government.
HR11: Representative Saber Support03:50:52.760 - 12:20:23 PM; Representative Saber shared personal connections to the issue of religious persecution and expressed support for the measure. He also asked about the persecution of minority Islamic sects, to which Khan replied that he was unaware of any issues specifically targeting Shia sects, emphasizing the focus on Hindus due to anti-India sentiments.
HR11: Representative Buddha Information Only03:54:00.199 - 12:23:31 PM; Representative Buddha raised concerns about the impact of Bangladesh's political instability on regional stability and U.S. interests, particularly in security, trade, and humanitarian sectors. Khan acknowledged the potential for increased tensions and economic disruptions, highlighting recent incidents at the India-Bangladesh border and the potential for Bangladesh to become a breeding ground for terrorism.
HR11: Representative Rollins Information Only03:58:04.279 - 12:27:35 PM; Representative Rollins asked about Khan's ability to communicate with family members in Bangladesh, to which Khan confirmed communication was still possible but expressed concerns for his personal safety if he were to return to Bangladesh.
HR11: Representative Manion Information Only03:58:50.359 - 12:28:21 PM; Representative Manion inquired about potential foreign backers behind the regime change in Bangladesh. Khan mentioned Dr. Yunus's connections to the Clinton Foundation but hesitated to delve into political affiliations, noting the bipartisan nature of the committee.
HR11: Ashish K Deb Information Only04:00:23.840 - 12:29:54 PM; Ashish K Deb began his testimony, but the transcript ends before further details are provided.
HR11: Ashish Deb, Greater Boston area Information Only04:00:36.560 - 12:30:07 PM; Ashish Deb, a software engineer who has lived in the Greater Boston area since May 1988, provided a detailed account of the violence and atrocities against religious minorities in Bangladesh following the fall of Sheikh Hasina's government in August 2024. He highlighted the transformation of student-led protests into an anti-government movement, influenced by Islamic indoctrination in madrasas. Deb discussed the subsequent violence targeting supporters of the Awami League and religious minorities, particularly Hindus. He also mentioned the formation of an interim government under Professor Muhammad Yunus, criticizing its lack of control over law and order and its denial of the ongoing attacks. Deb emphasized the persecution of minorities, including the jailing of a Hindu monk, Chinmoy Krishna Das, on false charges of treason. He urged the committee to raise these concerns with the US Senate Foreign Relations Committee and the US State Department to restore peace, justice, and democracy in Bangladesh.
HR11: Mohammad Safiur Rahman Chy, known as Tipu Chy Information Only04:30:25.800 - 12:59:56 PM; Mohammad Safiur Rahman Chy, also known as Tipu Chy, spoke about the human rights abuses and the conspiracy to turn Bangladesh into a radical state. He detailed the suppression of freedom of expression, media control, and the influence of Jamaat-e-Islami, a group he claims was involved in the violence and killings during Bangladesh's fight for independence in 1971. Chy mentioned the assassination of Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman in 1975 and the subsequent 21-year rule by anti-democratic forces. He described the recent violence, including the destruction of minority homes and places of worship, and the collapse of the economy. He accused Professor Muhammad Yunus and his advisors of being involved in the conspiracy and urged the committee to raise awareness and take action against these issues.
HR11: Abu Mansur, Bangladesh Information Only04:46:43.920 - 1:16:14 PM; Abu Mansur, from Bangladesh, provided insights into the ongoing minority issues in his country, emphasizing that these problems have persisted over time. He discussed the ideological differences between political parties in Bangladesh, particularly highlighting the fanatical nature of Jamaat-e-Islami and its role in historical violence. Mansur shared his personal experience with religious conversion and the threats it posed. He noted that while Professor Muhammad Yunus is secular, his advisors are pushing him towards radicalism. Mansur explained the constitutional changes in 1988 that designated Islam as the state religion, leading to the marginalization of minorities. He concluded by urging the committee to address these human rights issues.
HCR9: Representative JD Bernardi, Rockingham 36 (Southampton, Kensington, Hampton Falls, Newton, Plaistow) Support04:54:15.120 - 1:23:46 PM; Representative JD Bernardi introduced HCR9, urging the US to reject compliance with the European Union's Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD). He explained that the directive, passed in July 2024, aims to transform global business practices, affecting companies with over 1,000 employees and 450 million Euros in revenue. The directive imposes ESG standards on companies and their supply chains, even if they do not operate within the EU. Bernardi highlighted the potential for massive fines and the threat of business disruption if companies do not comply. He argued that this directive could lead to a wealth transfer from developed to developing countries and warned that it threatens US sovereignty. He suggested that the resolution would signal to the Trump Administration to advise Europe of non-compliance, potentially leading to tariffs or other sanctions.
HCR9: Representative Hemingway Information Only05:08:56.400 - 1:38:27 PM; Representative Hemingway discusses his research on ESG (Environmental, Social, and Governance) standards, which he understands as becoming a necessary criterion for businesses to operate and secure loans. He notes that non-compliance with these standards in countries like Japan and China could result in severe consequences such as inability to secure loans or employment. He questions the potential for these standards to act as a control mechanism.
HCR9: Representative Information Only05:11:15.760 - 1:40:46 PM; The speaker raises concerns about potential retaliation from the EU if the US were to implement the resolution discussed in HCR9. They discuss the possibility of tariffs and other economic measures as responses to the EU's actions, indicating a readiness to engage in economic countermeasures if necessary.
HCR9: Representative Cyber Information Only05:12:47.040 - 1:42:18 PM; Representative Cyber questions how the proposed resolution differs from existing tariffs and whether it might force compliance on companies doing business with the EU. He also raises concerns about the impact on companies that are already complying with EU standards and how this resolution might affect their ability to conduct business.
HCR9: Representative Manion Information Only05:15:44.320 - 1:45:15 PM; Representative Manion discusses the potential impact of the EU directive on smaller manufacturers, suggesting that it could lead to a scenario where only larger international corporations survive due to the stringent compliance requirements. He sees this as potentially picking winners and losers in the market.
HCR9: Representative Mandel bom Information Only05:16:37.520 - 1:46:08 PM; Representative Mandel bom seeks clarification on whether the core issue with the EU directive is the ability to sue companies or the specific actions mandated by the law. The response clarifies that the directive affects the ability to do business in Europe based on compliance with a set of requirements.
HCR9: Representative Information Only05:17:30.440 - 1:47:01 PM; The speaker questions if the opposition is to the general compliance or specific mandates within the EU law. The response is that it's about compliance with a broad set of requirements that the EU has imposed, which some might find acceptable and others objectionable.
HCR9: Representative Gagy Information Only05:18:34.200 - 1:48:05 PM; Representative Gagy questions the EU's approach, likening it to a 'my way or the highway' policy. He suggests that the US could respond by making the EU pay for their defense or restricting access to US-made components, indicating a readiness to escalate if necessary.
HCR9: Representative Information Only05:19:20.360 - 1:48:51 PM; The speaker expresses concern that the EU directive could lead to increased prices for consumers. They suggest that a strong US stance might force the EU to reconsider the directive, given its narrow passage and the shifting political landscape in the European Parliament.
HCR9: Representative Bernardi Information Only05:21:45.558 - 1:51:16 PM; Representative Bernardi discusses the potential for the EU to change the directive in response to a new parliament. He clarifies that the issue is not with the EU setting standards for their companies but imposing them on international companies, including American ones.
HCR9: Representative F Information Only05:23:19.040 - 1:52:50 PM; Representative F questions the appropriateness of US government intervention in private business dealings with the EU, arguing that the EU directive applies to companies with significant revenue from Europe, not just US companies. The response clarifies that the issue is the EU mandating requirements on American businesses.
HCR9: Unidentified Speaker Information Only05:24:27.440 - 1:53:58 PM; The speaker expressed concerns about setting a precedent with HCR9, questioning the implications for foreign companies operating under U.S. regulations. They were concerned about the U.S. having more stringent requirements than other countries and how this might affect international business practices.
HCR9: Unidentified Speaker Information Only05:25:15.718 - 1:54:46 PM; The speaker discussed international trade practices, which are often governed by commissions and committees under the UN. They mentioned the potential impact of U.S. regulations on foreign business practices, specifically citing an example of banning products made with slave labor.
HCR9: Unidentified Speaker Information Only05:26:03.360 - 1:55:34 PM; The speaker compared the situation to the TikTok ban, which was ruled constitutional. They clarified that the TikTok ban was not a complete ban but a requirement for TikTok to divest ownership from the Communist Party of China (CCP). They discussed the implications of similar actions for foreign companies.
HCR9: Unidentified Speaker Information Only05:26:50.760 - 1:56:21 PM; The speaker further discussed the TikTok situation, explaining that ByteDance, the owner of TikTok, was given the option to sell to a U.S. company. They questioned how this was different from companies complying with existing laws or choosing not to do business in certain regions.
HCR9: Unidentified Speaker Information Only05:27:36.200 - 1:57:07 PM; The speaker emphasized that countries can set their own standards for commerce. They mentioned the U.S. setting a standard against social media companies owned by the CCP and noted that the European Union sets many standards that may be disagreeable to the U.S. population.
HCR9: Unidentified Speaker Information Only05:28:23.520 - 1:57:54 PM; The speaker agreed that the European Union has the right to set its own standards but expressed concerns about the ideological bent of some of those standards. They mentioned that standards against products made with slave labor would be acceptable, but many of the EU's standards are not.
HCR9: Unidentified Speaker Information Only05:29:12.400 - 1:58:43 PM; The speaker reiterated that the issue with the EU's standards is their ideological nature and that the U.S. administration has already rejected some of these standards. They argued that the EU should not impose these standards on U.S. companies.
HCR9: Unidentified Speaker Information Only05:29:59.360 - 1:59:30 PM; The speaker questioned the acceptability of certain EU standards, particularly those related to union collective bargaining, ESG, and DEI requirements, which the U.S. government has already opposed.
HCR9: Lloyd Information Only05:31:49.600 - 2:01:20 PM; Lloyd asked about the profitability of corporate sustainability in a capitalist society, questioning whether the speaker was aware of recent reports suggesting sustainability is more profitable. The response indicated a lack of awareness of specific reports but acknowledged the importance of sustainability, though with differing opinions on what constitutes sustainable practices.
HCR9: Mandal B Information Only05:32:41.200 - 2:02:12 PM; Mandal B questioned the speaker's concerns about the EU setting standards for private businesses. They asked for clarification on which specific standards were objectionable and requested a detailed list of acceptable and unacceptable standards from the EU directive.
HCR9: Unidentified Speaker Information Only05:33:27.440 - 2:02:58 PM; The speaker responded to Mandal B, emphasizing that while some EU standards might be acceptable, the entire basket of standards is not. They argued that the EU should not impose these standards on U.S. companies, and the U.S. has the right to refuse to comply.
HCR9: Unidentified Speaker Information Only05:34:16.360 - 2:03:47 PM; The speaker clarified that the purpose of HCR9 is to assert U.S. sovereignty and reject the EU's basket of standards. They mentioned that the U.S. could take counteraction against European companies if the EU enforces these standards on U.S. companies.
HCR9: Mandal B Information Only05:35:03.958 - 2:04:34 PM; Mandal B requested a detailed breakdown of which EU standards the speaker finds acceptable and unacceptable. The speaker responded by listing some unacceptable standards, including union collective bargaining, ESG, and DEI requirements.
HCR9: Benett Information Only05:36:37.320 - 2:06:08 PM; Benett asked if complying with the EU standards might lead to U.S. employees refusing to work for companies that comply, questioning whether Americans would have the resolve to stand against such policies. The response indicated that reactions could vary, with some employees leaving and others causing companies to change policies.

Moffett, Michael(Chairman)(R)[A-]2024	Mandelbaum, Jennifer(Clerk)(D)[F]2024	Rollins, Skip(V Chairman)(R)[A-]2024
Jeudy, Jean(D)[F]2024	Budathoki, Suraj(D)	Foss, Lily(D)
Gagne, Larry(R)[A-]2024	Lundgren, David(R)[B]2024	Leavitt, John(R)[A-]2024
Belcher, Mike(R)[A]2024	Plante, Raymond(R)	Hemingway, Wayne(R)
Mannion, Tom(R)[A+]2024	Lloyd, Christal(D)[CT]2024	Seibert, Christine(D)[F]2024
Jones, Philip(D)[CT]2024	Manohar, Sanjeev(D)	Bennett, Cindy(R)