mr. chairman , i rise in support of the amendment offered by my colleague the ranking member of the judiciary subcommittee on crime , mr. scott xz4003641 along with ms. woolsey , mr. van hollen , mr. frank , mr. edwards , and mr. nadler , to the base bill , h.r. 27 . 
as i stated with respect to the rule , h. res. 126 , the party-line vote of 220-204 that we saw in the 108th congress on the debate of the then h.r. 1261 should evidence the need for the most open debate over the deficiencies that lie within the provisions on the floor . 
the need for debate arises from disagreement . 
as representatives of the united states congress , we all have a duty to fully debate the issues on behalf of our constituents . 
a restricted rule precludes that opportunity . 
i support the scott-woolsey-vanhollen-frank-edwards-nadler amendment to h.r. 27 to remove the provision allowing religious discrimination in employment from the underlying bill . 
a base bill purportedly designed to improve the opportunity to achieve adequate employment is no place to encourage discrimination . 
in fact , there is no place for religious discrimination in american law just as there should be no place in america for that kind of backwards thinking . 
h.r. 27 , in its current state , erodes fundamental civil rights protections for the unemployed and the underemployed by exempting faith-based organizations from compliance with the current non-discrimination law . 
presently , under our country 's existing laws , in title vii of the civil rights act , employing institutions using private funds were exempt from employment discrimination protections . 
however , wia programs are federally funded and as such do not fall under the jurisdiction of the title vii statute . 
simply put : public funds are not allowed to be used to encourage religious discrimination in employment and that should not change . 
each of my colleagues should understand that without this important amendment , we are advocating the notion that one 's ability to provide employment to those who are in need is contingent on the religious institution to which the individual belongs . 
what if anything is accomplished by attempting to create religious hierarchies in the workplace ? 
what benefit does that provide the employer ? 
none . 
and thus the language allowing religious discrimination should be stricken from the bill . 
as should all language that does not add to the well being of job-seekers or employment services . 
the founding fathers of this country found it necessary to say that no one should be unfairly judged or discriminated against on the basis of their religion . 
this congress should do no less . 
we should not create law that does harm . 
we should not encourage discrimination of any kind , religious or otherwise . 
surely , this country prides itself on its diversity and its willingness to open its doors to people of different religions , races , and ethnic backgrounds . 
yet on the floor of the people 's house we are faced with an attempt by the republicans to create a monolithic sub-culture within our employment training programs . 
despite the rhetoric on the other side of the aisle , h.r. 27 as it currently reads will not only result in the loss of jobs for applicants who do not identify with their prospective employer 's religious beliefs but more importantly it will cause the loss of quality workers . 
the scott-woolsey-van hollen-frank-edwards-nadler amendment will effectively retain civil rights protections for individuals who seek employment or employment training . 
this amendment simply retains their freedom of religious choice and their freedom not to be discriminated against due to their religion . 
this amendment adds nothing to the law rather it maintains current law . 
without the addition of this proposal , however , the body elected to serve all of the people of this country will have endorsed employment discrimination with federal dollars . 
we simply can not allow this to happen . 
we must do everything we can to preserve the fundamentals of head start . 
i urge my colleagues to vote to ensure that our job programs are not muddied and degraded by the promotion of religious discrimination . 
therefore , i stand in full support of this amendment and i urge my colleagues to do the same . 
