During a House Foreign Affairs Committee hearing prior to the congressional recess, Rep. Brad Schneider (D-IL) slammed his GOP colleagues for holding a hearing about the Biden Administration’s foreign policy.
Category
🗞
NewsTranscript
00:00I'd like to recognize at this time the gentleman from Illinois, Representative
00:05Schneider, for five minutes. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to associate myself
00:12with the words of my colleague from Pennsylvania, Ms. Dean. The world's on
00:17fire. Russia's consolidating gains in Ukraine. China is testing red lines in
00:23the Pacific. Iran proxies are active across the Middle East. And now, just
00:28yesterday, the Trump administration announced is open direct talks with Iran.
00:32That's a major development, one with implications for the regional stability,
00:37for nuclear proliferation, and for U.S. deterrence. This subcommittee focused on
00:43oversight and intelligence is precisely the place we should be asking about
00:49these issues and asking tough questions. What are the administration's objectives?
00:53What is the intelligence shaping this approach? What are the risks? What are
00:58our allies being told and how are they supporting us or challenging us? But we're
01:04not doing that today. In his opening remarks, the chair appeared to claim that it
01:10was DEI policies that was responsible for Russia's invasion of Ukraine, Hamas's
01:16invasion of Israel, China's actions in the Indo-Pacific. I don't think he believes that,
01:23but that's what this hearing seems to imply. I'll use my military language. I won't. I'm just
01:32going to say we shouldn't be doing this. I was going to. Yep. So we're holding a hearing
01:40instead to relegate the past administration's diversity initiatives at the State Department,
01:45while Tehran and Moscow coordinate, and Beijing expands its influence. What are we
01:53doing? We're attacking internal HR policies, attacking them with some absurd, I have to say,
01:59absurd arguments, gentlemen. This is not serious foreign policy oversight. It's a political sideshow,
02:05and it's a profound abdication of the responsibility we hold in this committee as members of Congress.
02:10To be clear, I don't defend every initiative of the previous administration. I didn't then,
02:16I don't now. I raise concerns publicly and privately, but at least their efforts to broaden
02:21recruitment and strengthen retention at the State Department were aimed at building institutional
02:27capacity, strengthening America's capacity to perform diplomacy and development around the world
02:34making our country more safe and more secure. That's more than I can say for what we are
02:39doing today. This hearing has nothing to do with confronting our adversaries. It has nothing to do
02:44with securing American leadership in a dangerous world. It has everything to do with scoring short-term
02:50political points and earning the favor of the gentleman at 1600 Pennsylvania. At a time when our
02:56credibility, our alliances, and our deterrence posture are on the line, we should be focused on the hard work
03:03of oversight, asking hard, challenging questions, reviewing classified assessments, holding this
03:09administration accountable for the real decisions like was made or at least announced yesterday.
03:15Instead, this committee is looking inward, picking fights with civil servants, and dangerously wasting
03:21the moment. This isn't leadership. This is abdication. I want to pick up on something else that my
03:27colleague said. She quoted former Secretary Buttigieg, diversity is uniformity. And I'm going to argue that
03:34uniformity is a threat to what we are or who we are trying to be as a nation and our diplomacy. And I'll ask any of the
03:43two gentlemen, I'll read a quote and see if you share a concern I have about this. The quote is, quote, the
03:49Department of State specialists on Near East were almost without exception unfriendly to the idea of a Jewish state. Some thought the
03:56Arabs on account of their number and because of the fact that they control such immense oil resources should be appeased. Some
04:02among them were also inclined to be anti-Semitic. I want to make plain that the President of the United States, and not the
04:09State Department, is responsible for making foreign policy. Do you agree with that, Mr. Harkinson?
04:17Absolutely, the President of the United States is in charge of foreign policy.
04:20Mr. Rogers?
04:24Yes, I agree that the President is in charge of foreign policy.
04:28Ambassador, do you know who said that? By any chance? It's a trick question.
04:33I think I do know who said it, but I'll say no.
04:36It was President Truman.
04:38Okay.
04:39President Truman was talking about the Arabists in the State Department because at that time,
04:44we had uniformity in our State Department. Uniformity in thinking, uniformity of experience, oftentimes
04:51uniformity in education. The reason we promote diversity in our diplomatic corps, from the most
05:00senior ambassadors to the most junior foreign officers, is because we need their experience.
05:06We need their perspective. And if we go down a path where it's not just merit. Merit counts.
05:12It's imperative. But if we only say merit is the only thing, then we end up with a State Department
05:20that looked like it did in the 1940s. That's not what we want. We want a State Department that is
05:26prepared for the challenges of the 2025s and the century ahead, with a rising China, a threatening
05:33Iran, and a threatening Russia. We need these diversity programs to bring in people with a variety
05:39of perspectives, a variety of experiences, and a variety of ideas. And so I resent the idea that
05:46we should all be thinking alike or looking alike or following the same path. We need to challenge
05:50each other. Time is over. I yield back.