BREAKING: Marjorie Taylor Greene Leads DOGE Hearing On Trans Athlete Inclusion In Women's Sports
03:21:10 Share

The NBA playoffs are here, and I'm getting my bets in on FanDuel. Talk to me, Chuck GPT. What do you know? All sorts of interesting stuff. Even Charles Barkley's greatest fear. Hey, nobody needs to know that. New customers bet $5 to get 200 in bonus bets if you win FanDuel, America's number one sportsbook.

21 plus and present in Virginia. Must be first online real money wager. $5 deposit required. Bonus issued is non-withdrawable bonus bets that expire seven days after receipt. Restrictions apply. See full terms at fanduel.com slash sportsbook. Gambling problem? Call 1-800-GAMBLER. This hearing of the subcommittee on delivering on government efficiency will come to order. Welcome, everyone. Without objection, the chair may declare a recess at any time. I recognize myself for the purpose of making an opening statement.

Good afternoon and welcome everyone. I would like to start by playing a video of why we are here today. So if we can go ahead and play that please. Where's our digital team? Here we go.

And Tom is pulling away.

Final 150 meters, Thomas wins the NCAA championship. Men should not be hurting women. They're hurting women very badly. They're hurting women. I was severely injured in a high school volleyball game by a transgender athlete on the opposing team. Anyone who disobeys federal law will be either prosecuted, sued, or say goodbye to your federal funding. We also signed an exemption.

Female athletes should never be forced to compete against mentally ill biological men who parade around in women's clothes.

But we'll hear from witnesses today who had to face off against biological male competitors. This led one to suffer a life-altering physical injury from a volleyball spike to her head. The other was thrown out of a recent fencing competition for refusing to compete against a man. Why is this happening when we have federal laws on the books intended to foster women's sports?

Back in 1972, Congress adopted Title IX to create and protect equal athletic opportunity for girls and women in schools and colleges. Congress included similar language in legislation governing other amateur sports competitions.

The law chartering the U.S. Olympic and Paralympic Committee, for instance, authorizes the Olympic Committee to recognize and empower national governing bodies to oversee individual sports on a national level. That includes determining how athletes are chosen to represent the U.S.

in the Olympic Games and other international competitions. These NGBs, such as USA Fencing, have statutory duties and obligations, including promoting equal athletic opportunity for women, biological women.

Specifically, NGBs are to provide equitable support and encouragement for participation by women where separate programs for male and female athletes are conducted on a national basis. Yet, USA Fencing makes a mockery out of women's fencing by allowing biological males to compete in its women's fencing competitions.

We understand there are roughly 200 biological males competing in the USA Fencing Women's Division. This includes males who have won national titles and represented the U.S. in international competition in women's fencing.

We subpoenaed the board chair of USA Fencing, Damian LaFelt, to appear here today. We did so because the board is responsible for setting USA Fencing policies and for ensuring those policies comply with federal law. At a recent board meeting where Mr. LaFelt presided, the board determined it would change its policy on transgender athletes if

and only if forced to do so. Some science shows that men have numerous physical advantages over women that create unfair and potentially dangerous competitions. Such physical advantages are significant in fencing. According to a letter we received from USA Fencing Board member Andre Giva, a coach of Olympians and world champions,

"Transgender women fencers have significant advantages in women's competitions," he writes, citing advantages in body size, reach, shoulder width, muscle development, explosive strength, and recovery capacity.

And a United Nations report issued last year finds that testosterone suppression does not eliminate the advantage of biological males to avoid the loss of a fair opportunity. It concludes, males must not compete in female categories of sport.

But it's not surprising that the USA fencing policy on trans competitors ignores the science. The board is not shy about putting politics ahead of the sport, ahead of women, and ahead of the law. In selecting sites for its national fencing events, for instance, the board policy is to avoid states whose laws and policies on LGBTQ rights and abortion it opposes. It uses equality maps.

to determine which states to blacklist from its competitions and which states to favor. This ends up favoring a lot of blue states and harming a lot of red ones. So it creates politically determined winners and losers.

But it has absolutely nothing to do with fencing and it contradicts USA fencing statutory duty as an NGB to develop interest and participation throughout the United States in fencing. Recently, the board even voted against playing the national anthem at its events.

So we shouldn't be surprised that the board opposed the creation of an all-female task force to reevaluate its transgender policy. And it has never surveyed its membership one simple question: Do you support transgender athletes competing in women's competitions? Notably, Americans broadly have been polled on that question

And the response is overwhelming. A New York Times Ipsos poll this past January found 94% of Republicans, 67% of Democrats, and 64% of independents agree. Keep men out of women's sports.

Americans also re-elected President Trump in November, and he spoke on their behalf in February when he issued his executive order keeping men out of women's sports. The United States is hosting the Summer Games in Los Angeles in 2028.

It's a great time for us to once again take the lead in protecting and preserving the ability of women to engage in safe, fair athletic competition by keeping biological men out of women's sports. A United Nations report issued last August most noted, noted female athletes worldwide have lost out on numerous medal opportunities.

Due to policies allowing males to compete in the women's category, more than 600 female athletes in more than 400 competitions have lost more than 890 medals in 29 different sports.

I don't want any more women missing out on medal opportunities, avoiding athletic competitions, or missing out on college scholarships. And I don't want to see any more girls or women getting hurt. We cannot and should not forget the gruesome injury suffered by one of our witnesses here today, Peyton McNabb.

It happened when she was spiked in the head by a male athlete who identified as a transgender woman. And I'd like to ask the digital team to please play this video now. That is sick. This is why I look forward to fighting and winning the battle to keep men out of women's sports alongside President Trump and brave women like Stephanie and Peyton who are here today.

Now you're going to hear from our Democrat colleagues who are going to fight for these mentally ill biological men to continue beating women and stealing their competitions, stealing their medals, and stealing their national championships. And with that, I yield to the ranking member, Stansbury, for her opening statement.

All right, well, thank you, Madam Chairwoman. As you can see, it's going to be an interesting hearing today. Welcome to the Oversight Committee and in particular the DOGE Subcommittee. I do want to say welcome to our guests and to your families. We do appreciate all of you coming here to tell your stories. But I want to make clear that this hearing is actually not about oversight or DOGE, but about spreading hate.

and using trans lives to distract from the real issues that Americans are facing, from attacks on our economy, to attacks on our democracy, to attacks on our communities. So let's call this hearing what it actually is.

It's about bullying trans kids and members of the trans community to distract from the failed policies of the Trump administration, the failed policies and exploitation of this Doge subcommittee,

And the GOP's own cruel agenda that is happening right now here on Capitol Hill as they're trying to gut Medicaid, gut food assistance, gut environmental programs to give tax breaks to billionaires because that is actually what's going on behind these doors all around us.

As the ranking member of this subcommittee, let me start by saying to everyone in the trans and LGBTQ+ community who might be watching or listening today that we see you, we love you, we respect you, we are fighting for you, and we will fight back against this hateful agenda. Now I do want to point out here at the outset that we are in fact in the oversight subcommittee on quote unquote delivering on government efficiency.

And this is a committee here in Congress that was created this year by the GOP supposedly to address government efficiency. And this hearing literally has nothing to do with that. In fact, it has nothing to do with anything that falls under the Oversight and Accountability Committee's jurisdiction. This hearing is so irrelevant to this committee. It's just a complete distraction from what is actually happening in Congress right now.

So let's review what this subcommittee is actually supposed to be working on, since my friends seem to have forgotten that. In their own rule, Rule 6 of this committee, this subcommittee shall, quote, have oversight jurisdiction over the federal civil service, including compensation, classification, benefits, federal property disposal, government reorganization and operations,

transparency, performance, grants management, and accounting measures generally.

That is the jurisdiction of this committee. And I don't know about any of you, but I don't see anything in here about sports, the Olympics, Title IX, fencing, and certainly nothing about policing the bodies of Americans. And frankly, hearings of this subcommittee have become so divorced from reality or anything resembling oversight in the jurisdiction of this committee,

It's basically turned into a political campaign ad, as you just saw on these TVs. That's what this

That's what this subcommittee has devolved into. And frankly, I think many of us expected that that's where we would end up. But meanwhile, Donald Trump is letting Elon Musk and his cabinet secretaries and OMB now continue to dismantle our federal agencies, to hack our private data. They're firing veterans and teachers and firefighters. They're trying to break Social Security and the VA.

is literally no oversight happening here in this committee under the GOP. In fact, my colleagues have failed to bring even a single administration witness here to this committee. They haven't brought Elon Musk, they haven't brought a cabinet secretary, they haven't brought a political, they haven't brought anyone to this committee to answer to the lawless and immoral behavior that's happening inside the administration or anything that relates to the jurisdiction of this committee.

That's why even though we had hoped on the Democratic side for real and meaningful bipartisan work to make the government more efficient, to make it work better for Americans, we have to sit here week after week and fight back against this abusive and lawless and ridiculous agenda.

And I want to just point out that there are now over 220 lawsuits against the Trump administration and over 130 court restraining orders and injunctions against them because of this agenda. So why did the chairwoman decide to call this hearing today?

What is it that we're trying to distract from an agenda that is so unpopular that two-thirds of Americans disprove of what Doge and Elon Musk is doing? Maybe it has something to do with the failure of the president in the first hundred days that his approval ratings have declined by 14%.

Maybe it's to distract from the reality that our economy is tanking and prices are going up. Maybe it's because the budget that came to Congress last week doubles down on proposals to take food out of the mouths of children.

Maybe it's because behind closed doors all around us they're trying to take away your Medicaid and your food assistance. So why bully trans kids? Why take up airspace to bully a population that only makes up 0.6% of the population? Because clearly they're living rent-free in the GOP's minds. But simply put, Republicans are focused on the wrong 1%.

So why are they so obsessed? Why is Trump attacking trans people? Why is this the centerpiece of the Republicans here on Capitol Hill? Honestly, it's weird and it's wrong.

I just want to say to all of the people in the trans community who are watching, we uplift your stories. We are fighting for the community. We are fighting for the rights of everyone in our communities. And this hearing has absolutely nothing to do with the oversight committee. And that is why at this time I make a motion to immediately adjourn this hearing.

The motion is not debatable. All those in favor of adjourning signify by saying aye. All those opposed signify by saying no. In the opinion of the chair, the no's have it. A recorded vote will be asked for. The clerk will call the roll. Yeah, we'll pause for the clerk. A recorded vote is ordered. The clerk will call the roll. Mr. Cloud. No. Mr. Cloud votes no.

Mr. Fallon. Mr. Timmons. Mr. Timmons votes no. Mr. Burchett. Mr. Burchett votes no. Mr. Burleson. Mr. Burleson votes no. Mr. Jack. No. Mr. Jack votes no. Mr. Gill. Mr. Gill votes no. Mr. Comer. Mr. Comer votes no. Ms. Norton. Yes. Ms. Norton votes yes. Mr. Lynch. Aye.

Mr. Lynch votes aye. Mr. Garcia? Yes. Mr. Garcia votes yes. Mr. Kassar? Yes. Mr. Kassar votes yes. Ms. Crockett? Yes. Ms. Crockett votes yes. Ms. Stansbury? Yes. Ms. Stansbury votes yes. Ms. Green? No. Ms. Green votes no. The clerk will report the tally.

Mr. Chairwoman, on this vote the noes are seven, the ayes are six. The noes have it and the motion to adjourn is not agreed to. Also pursuant to Committee Rule 6A2, Chairman Comer refers specific responsibility for the matter of this DOGE subcommittee hearing regarding USA fencing hearing to Chairman Green.

and the Subcommittee on Delivering on Government Efficiency. This hearing is directly under our jurisdiction. Without objection, Representatives McClain of Michigan, Mace of South Carolina, Crane of Arizona, Randall of Washington, Jacobs of California, and Simon of California are waived onto the subcommittee for the purpose of questioning the witnesses at today's committee hearing. Madam Chair, a point of parliamentary inquiry.

What's your inquiry? Could you please further expound about how this falls under the jurisdiction of the this subcommittee and the rules? Ms. Stansbury, under Committee Rule 6A2, Chairman Comer of the Oversight Committee has referred responsibility for this hearing to the Doge Subcommittee hearing regarding USA fencing. So...

Chairman Comer is changing the rules so that now fencing hearings fall under Department of Government Efficiency? Okay, this is the rule book right here, Ms. Stansbury. I'm sure you have a copy of it. Can you read us the part that refers fencing to this subcommittee? Number two, in addition, each subcommittee shall have specific responsibility for such other measures or matters as the chair of the committee refers to it.

and this is the hearing that we are having jurisdiction over. It's an important issue that biological men stay out of women's sports and we'd like to hold the hearing on that today and we're going to continue and go ahead. I'm pleased to introduce our witnesses today.

Stephanie Turner is a competitive fencer who recently took a knee at a USA fencing event to avoid facing a biological male in a women's event. Peyton McNabb is a former high school athlete and now an ambassador for independent women who was injured by a biological man in a high school volleyball game.

Damian LeFelt is the Chairman of the Board of Directors at USA Fencing, a recognized national governing body for fencing under the U.S. Olympic and Paralympic Committee as codified in the Ted Stevens Act. Fatima Goss Graves is the President and Chief Executive Officer of the National Women's Law Center. I want to thank you all for being here to testify today.

Pursuant to Committee Rule 9G, the witnesses will please stand and raise their right hand. Do you solemnly swear or affirm that the testimony you're about to give is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God? Let the record show that the witnesses answered in the affirmative. Thank you. You may take a seat.

We appreciate you being here today and look forward to your testimony. Let me remind the witnesses that we have read your written statement and they will appear in full in the hearing record. Please limit your oral statement to five minutes. As a reminder, please press the button on the microphone in front of you so that it is on and the members can hear you.

When you begin to speak, the light in front of you will turn green. After four minutes, the light will turn yellow. When the red light comes on, your five minutes have expired, and we would ask that you please wrap up. I now recognize Ms. Turner for her opening statements. Good afternoon, Chairwoman Green and Ranking Member Stansbury and members of the committee. It's a privilege to be invited here to speak to you today.

I started fencing at the University of Maryland College Club team 12 years ago and became competitive within the United States Fencing Association a year later. What started as a hobby quickly became a deep passion of mine. In these past 12 years, I estimate that I have spent over 7,000 hours training and over $100,000 between lessons, club dues, competition fees, equipment, and travel.

I have dedicated a significant portion of my life to this sport and competition because, like thousands of other women, I love it. My favorite part of fencing is the competition. The thrill, the fight, the triumph, and even the heartache. But lately, fair, female-only competition is harder and harder to come by. USA Fencing has over 200 self-declared members who identify as transgender.

Each time a man competes in the women's category with USA fencing's support, it removes fair sport and takes opportunities from women. Fencing is a combat sport, a martial art of sorts. There are elements of speed, power, reaction time, distance control, footwork, and blade work, all attributes affected by sex development. It's not uncommon for a quicker, more athletic opponent to overcome the technique of another fencer.

Athleticism is powerful in fencing and works in equal parts with strategy and technique. It's unbelievably demeaning to female fencers to put down the differences between men and women and any woman's loss to a man as a skill issue or that a woman simply needs to work harder. Within the USA Fencing authoritative body, there is a culture of intimidation towards women which demands that we be silent when men enter our tournaments.

a culture that includes public humiliation, doxing, social ostracism, dismissal, and even threats. I went from avoiding tournaments with known male athletes to reaching out to news outlets to get this story known. The USA fencing up until my protest has been unresponsive to women's demands for fair fencing and instead doubled down on efforts to promote male inclusion in the female category.

One month ago, I took a knee in protest to a man competing in my category, Division 1A Women's Oil, ironically held at the University of Maryland where my fencing career began. And the video of my protest went viral. The story of that knee began three years ago when I contacted icons out of desperation for numerous men taking women's national and world titles. Leadership was not only ignoring women, but encouraging and glorifying these men.

It felt like there was no place for women in USA fencing. It took me nearly three years to get up the courage to come out publicly. That knee I took in protest was a cry for help and an act of desperation. The night before the tournament, I saw Redmond Sullivan's name on the registration list. I recognized his name from a Redux article as a male fencer within

Wagner College's men's team who switched to the women's NCAA team and the women's USA fencing division. I cried the whole night and again felt betrayed by USA fencing. I had already spent the money on competition fees and new equipment and spent hours training and refurbishing my equipment. And I had traveled down from Philadelphia, Pennsylvania to College Park, Maryland the night before in preparation for that tournament. I felt trapped.

I had been defrauded of a women's tournament and sold a lie by USA Fencing. This was hardly the first time I faced fencing a man in a women's competition. In previous instances, I would wait until the last minute to register for a tournament to see if any known men would register. If they did, I would not sign up. I missed out on numerous regional and national tournaments. I did not want to keep abandoning opportunities to advance my fencing.

I had felt so isolated and strangled by USA Fencing for disagreeing with its transgender policy that I felt scared to speak openly online or with friends in the fencing community. I reached out to a church friend asking what I should do. We prayed together and asked God if it is his will that I protest, that he pair me with Redmond in about that following day. The next morning, I found myself on the platform against him and I stood down.

Speaking out on this issue has made me a target for harassment and violence, as well as cost me friends. I have decided to step away from the sport I love, at least for now as well, because USA fencing has fostered an environment where I am unwelcome in my own category. It is culturally acceptable to bully and shame women who speak up for other women. I should not have had to make this sacrifice. Women deserve to be treated fairly in sport.

We deserve opportunities to train, compete and win in women's category set aside for women. We deserve this at the lowest level of sport all the way through elite Olympic competition. I hope that by taking a stand and raising awareness of the misogyny in our sport, I can help ensure other women and girls do not have to take such risks to receive the most basic protections in sports. Thank you, Ms. Turner. I now recognize Ms. McNabb for her opening statement.

Good afternoon, Chairwoman Greene and Ranking Member Stansbury and members of the committee. Thank you for inviting me to appear today. My name is Peyton McNabb and I'm a sports ambassador for the Independent Women's Forum. We are a nonprofit organization that exists to expand support for policy solutions that actually enhance people's opportunities and well-being. Independent Women's motto is "Tell Her Story, Change the World."

Today I'm here to share my story. I'm a female athlete from Murphy, North Carolina who had my love of playing sports taken away from me. Since 2022, following a serious but avoidable injury, I've been speaking across the country sharing my story and advocating for protections for women and girls hard-earned rights to equal opportunity, fair play, privacy, and safety.

Like many other little girls, I grew up playing sports. As soon as I could walk, my dad enrolled me and my siblings in various sports. I'm incredibly thankful for that because participating in athletics has afforded me so many life lessons and given me valuable skills.

In high school, I played volleyball, basketball, and my favorite sport, softball. I was excited about the prospect of playing softball in college, but that day never came. My athletic career was hindered and cut short because I was forced to compete against a male athlete on an opposing high school women's volleyball team on September 1st, 2022.

I went into this game knowing that there was a male opponent, but I felt helpless and had no idea what to do. Neither I, my team, nor the administration agreed that we should be playing against a male, but the game went on. Toward the end of the game, the male athlete went up to spike the ball, and it came right at my face, slamming into my head. The force of the ball knocked me down, unconscious, while my body lay in a fencing position on the court. A fencing position is how your body reacts to a serious brain injury.

Everything was dark to me. The auditorium was absolutely quiet and my teammates were scared. That was my last day playing volleyball. Medical professionals informed me and my family of the heavy news that I suffered a traumatic brain injury, a brain bleed, and my body was experiencing partial paralysis on my right side. The doctors couldn't confirm how long it would take for my body to recover. It could take months or even years and they couldn't confirm whether I'd 100% ever be back.

While I've learned to navigate my new normal, there are several challenges that I deal with on a daily basis. Severe headaches, balance issues, vision impairment, and as my parents say, I'm just not the same kid. It is completely aggravating because the injury I suffered was 100% avoidable if only my rights as a female athlete had been more important than a man's feelings.

Since then, I've chosen to use my voice to advocate for girls nationwide, especially for my younger sister, Avery. I've decided to turn my pain into purpose. I played a role in helping pass the Fairness in Women's Sports Act in North Carolina legislature, although it was initially vetoed by former Governor Roy Cooper, who ironically has three daughters of his own.

Since speaking out, I've heard from so many girls. They see it happening in their schools. Male athletes competing in women's sports. The fear of being severely injured by a male athlete who is undisputedly on average bigger, faster, and stronger than the average female is real. I want y'all to know that this issue is very real. I didn't realize how big it was until it personally affected me.

What we are talking about is reality and basic truth. Men have an inherent biological advantage over women when it comes to sports. The advantage is particularly prominent respect to the activities where speed, size, power, strength, or cardio respiratory characteristics determine performance.

Males jump approximately 25% higher than females. Males throw about 25% further than females. Males run 11% faster than females. Males accelerate about 20% faster than females. Males punch 30 to 162% harder than females. Males are around 30% stronger than females of equivalent stature and mass.

This is undeniable and many more biological statistics can be found in independent women's competition report. I was so pleased to be at the White House on February 5th when President Trump signed the executive order entitled "Keeping Men Out of Women's Sports." Finally, we saw a president act to make sure that sports competition for women is fair and safe.

Now we need laws at the state level that define woman and keep women's sports safe for women. Today there are 27 states that have legislation protecting women's sports and more than a third of the nation also defines sex based words across their state laws. All 50 states should have this sort of legislation.

I am so proud of the progress being made in the states that are protecting their female athletes. I will continue to speak out about my experience with the hope that I might be able to protect the next young woman athlete from being injured. There should never be another Peyton McNabb. Thank you for having this hearing today so that my story can be shared. Thank you, Ms. McNabb. I now recognize Mr. Liefeldt for his opening statement. Thank you, Chairwoman Green, Ranking Member Stansberry, and other members of the subcommittee.

My name is Damian Leifeld and since September 2024, I have been the chair of the board of directors for USA fencing. I am proud to represent USA fencing at today's hearing. I understand USA fencing CEO who has knowledge of the operational day-to-day activities of the organization was prepared to testify, but that the subcommittee preferred I appear instead as made clear by its subpoena. I'm pleased to be here and will do my best to provide you with the information you seek as you consider this important topic.

As you know, USA Fencing is a national governing body for fencing. It supports over 700 affiliated clubs and 45,000 members. Like other sports, fencing promotes confidence and respect, and it encourages hard work, training, and discipline. I have been the grateful recipient of fencing's benefit for over 30 years. As an A-rated competitor, a referee, and as a coach, I have worked to bring fencing's benefits to all Americans.

Although it was adopted before I joined the board, USA fencing's transgender participation policy had that same goal. We recognize, however, that gender participation in sports is a complex topic and requires consideration of numerous viewpoints. Considerations of safety and fairness are paramount.

I understand that in developing its transgender participation policy, USA Fencing drew on its long experience with mixed gender competition where men and women have safely and fairly competed against each other for decades. USA Fencing also consulted the practices and policies of other NGBs as well as those of the IOC, the USOPC, and Fencing's International Federation known as the FIE.

The IOC and FIE policies were particularly important. As an NGB, USA fencing is governed by the Ted Stevens Act, which forbids NGBs from adopting eligibility criteria that are more strict than those of the Sports International Federation. The FIE does not ban transgender participation. As a result, I understand that the consensus among NGBs, including USA fencing, is that a ban on transgender participation could violate the Ted Stevens Act.

As Chairwoman Green pointed out, I've been a vocal advocate for transgender participation in fencing. Those are my own personal views. My actions of chair are guarded by the best interests of the organization and take consideration of the diverse viewpoints held by our members. I want to emphasize USA fencing's commitment to safety and fairness. I know that in other sports, some athletes have been severely injured in competition involving transgender athletes. Any significant injury in competition is a tragedy.

And my heart goes out to athletes like Miss McNabb who have suffered such injuries. But thankfully that hasn't been our experience in fencing. USA fencing has long sponsored mixed gender competition where men and women compete against each other. Those bouts show that mixed gender competition in fencing at least does not pose any significant safety risks above and beyond single gender fencing competition. The same is true for fencing involving transgender participation.

Additionally, while some attributes more common in men, such as height and physical strength, can certainly confer an advantage in a fencing bout, women more commonly exhibit other advantageous traits, such as flexibility and agility. Ultimately, fencing is a sport of strategy and technique. Those elements will most frequently determine who prevails. And when it comes to strategy and technique, neither sex has any inherent advantage.

Transgender status thus doesn't appear to confer any inherent advantage over a cisgender fencer. Cisgender women have beaten transgender women in 55% of the bouts for which USA fencing has data. I was disappointed to learn that following the Cherry Blossom tournament last month, Ms. Turner has decided to take a break from fencing. I hope she will reconsider. To be clear, USA fencing has not banned Ms. Turner. She remains free to enter tournaments and free to compete.

Regardless, the response to Ms. Turner's ballot underscores the importance of this issue and the need for reasoned discussion. USA Fencing welcomes that discussion. There can never be too much conversation about how to make our sport better. And so I want to be clear that if the law, research, or international consensus changes, USA Fencing is prepared to amend its participation requirements. We have been proactive in this area.

After months of discussion, USA Fencing recently adopted a contingent transgender participation policy that will go into effect if the law or regulations change. I'm happy to answer your questions. Thank you. I now recognize Ms. Goss Graves for her opening statement.

Good afternoon, Chair Greene, Ranking Member Stansberry, and members of the subcommittee. My name is Fatima Goss Graves, and I'm President and CEO at the National Women's Law Center. We've been around since 1972 when Title IX was first enacted, and we've been working to create equal opportunity for women and girls in sports and in society ever since. Women and girls face many obstacles to equal opportunity in sports,

fewer financial resources than men's programs, worse facilities, endemic sexual abuse,

And student athletes facing these persistent inequities are among the more than 12,000 people who have complained about discrimination in school. But who actually really can't pursue justice because the Trump administration has laid off half the staff whose jobs at the Department of Education it was to respond to these complaints.

Students, including disabled kids, survivors of campus sexual assault and other forms of discrimination are now basically in a situation where their complaints are being warehoused. So for over 50 years, the National Women's Law Center has been fighting for equality and will continue to fight until every girl has the same chance to play as everyone else. And as an expert on women's rights in sports and in society, I want to be clear here.

Transgender women do not pose a threat to women's sports. Transgender women belong in sports. And I'm here because I care about all women and girls in sport. And I know that bullying trans kids and creating panic about the existence of trans people will not make us safer. It won't solve any of the problems that I named about inequity in sports.

And the fixation on harming trans kids, it will not fix the problems of the American people. Because at the National Women's Law Center, we hear from people every day about the real problems that they are facing. They're concerned about reproductive freedom. They're struggling to put food on the table. They're agonizing about how to care for aging loved ones.

Hardworking folks around the country, from Texas to Georgia to Tennessee to California, we hear from folks who are worried that there is a budget in this Congress that would demolish programs like SNAP, Head Start, Medicaid, and generally make their lives harder. And they're looking for an end to attacks on schools, on healthcare, childcare, on workplace safety.

Instead, over the last few years, there has been this nonstop effort to convince the public that including transgender women in sports harms cisgender women and harms all people in society. But anti-trans sports fans, they actually harm all women.

And I have just a few examples that I want to name. For example, denying trans kids the chance to find teammates who have their back, that's harmful. Or harassing black and brown women and girls for not being, you know, feminine enough, that's harmful. School officials secretly investigating girls' gender to make sure that they are feminine enough to play, that is harmful and that is dangerous. And yes, those things are already happening.

For example, after Utah passed a trans sports ban, a state school board member posted a picture of a high school student athlete on social media suggesting that she was transgender. She was not. But she faced such intense cyber bullying and threats to herself and to her family, they had to actually get police protection. So as president and CEO of the National Women's Law Center, it could not be more clear to me.

Anti-trans bans, they hurt all women. They're wrong. We won't let them be enacted in the name of protecting women because they don't protect women. They harm us all and it's discrimination, period. And if the subcommittee wants to defend women, the National Women's Law Center definitely has ideas about that, ideas that will actually help.

Ideas that will combat the real threats to women and girls safety and equality today. Trans women in sports, it's just not one of them. Thank you.

We will now begin the five minute question period of the hearing. I would like to remind the members that Mr. Layfelt is here under a duly issued subpoena to answer questions at today's hearing after refusing to appear voluntarily. I now recognize myself for five minutes for the purpose of asking questions.

No one is here today to harm transgenders. We are here to defend girls and women, and we are here to defend Title IX, and to uphold President Trump's executive order that all biological males stay out of girls' and women's sports. Here displayed behind me is the post that Mr. LaFelt put up. Mr. LaFelt came in here today

saying that this is game day. You're right, Mr. LaFelt. This is game day. Under the Ted Stevens Act, USA fencing and other national governing governing bodies that are authorized to oversee individual sports on a national level have a certain obligation. One such duty is to provide support and encouragement for participation by women where separate programs for male and female athletes are conducted on a national basis.

Another statutory duty is to promote a safe environment in sports that is free from abuse of any amateur athlete, including emotional, physical, and sexual abuse. Mr. Leifelt, as the board chair of USA Fencing, surely you are aware of these legal requirements.

That means you believe that forcing a woman to compete against a biological man promotes a safe environment that is free from emotional abuse. Is that correct? One moment. A point of order, please, Madam Chair. You're not right. Madam Chair, I have a point of order. The document that you have up behind you is a misrepresentation of the actual post.

It appears that you're trying to misrepresent a witness here who you use subpoena powers against. This is not, Ms. Stansbury, Ms. Stansbury, this is not a point of order. This is the actual picture that she has lived and put on the board behind me. Ms. Stansbury, you're not recognized.

Ms. Stansbury, you are not recognized. Madam Chairwoman, you are misrepresenting the truth. This is not a point of order. You are misrepresenting what this committee does. You are misrepresenting the witnesses. You are misrepresenting policy. You are misrepresenting everything. Ms. Stansbury, you're not recognized. You're not recognized. That's not a point of order. You're abusing the rules of this committee.

This is the post of Mr. Liefeldt that he posted himself on his own social media. And that's exactly why we have it displayed here today because Mr. Liefeldt believes that he can take away the opportunities for women to compete in USA fencing and he thinks this is game day to defend biological men. Now, we're going to return to my time as chair of this committee

Ms. Turner, refusing to compete against a man cost you a 12-month probation. Did you feel you were in a safe environment, free from abuse when you were told you must compete against a man in an all-out competition? No. No, that wasn't free from emotional abuse. Ms. McNabb, when a biological man spiked a ball into your head, were you free from physical or emotional abuse?

I was not. Ms. McNabb, did you feel you were placed in a safe environment when you faced a biological male in a girls volleyball game? No, I did not feel safe. Ms. Turner, were you safe when you were forced to go up against a biological male in your sport? No, I was not.

Mr. Liefeld, do you think your perception of what constitutes a safe environment for women is more valid than that of a woman testifying here today?

Congresswoman, thank you for your question. There was a study that was published in 2010 regarding the safety of sports in the Olympic movement. There were 51 sports that were assessed as part of that study. That's a yes or no question, Mr. LeFelt. Is that your perception? You're sitting next to a young woman who received a brain injury from a biological male. Is it safe to compete against biological males? Yes or no, Mr. LeFelt?

What happened to Ms. McNabb? I'll take that as a no. Mr. LaFelt, do you think forcing a woman to change in front of a man in a locker room is abusive? Yes or no? Congresswoman, I'm not sure I follow the question. Do you want your daughter to change in front of biological men in locker rooms? Yes or no?

My daughter isn't really something that should be part of this. If you're not a quick no on that, we're going to take that as a no. We're going to switch gears to USA fencing site selection policy. You're the chair of USA fencing. You should be familiar. Mr. Liefeld, what does abortion have to do with fencing?

congresswoman that policy was passed before i got on the board uh however when you're the chair of the board now what does abortion have to do with fencing mr lefelt i'm on the board you're correct and i offered an amendment to that policy back in december congresswoman

that allowed for more flexibility at the city level. What, to get an abortion while you're at fencing competitions? I don't think so. And it also allowed for better convenience, so we enhanced the policy under my leadership under the board. More convenience to Planned Parenthood centers. Mr. LeFelt, why does USA Fencing state's abortion policies and LGBTQ policies in its site selection process to determine where tournaments are held? That's part of your site selection process.

is abortion availability and states and cities that are friendly to LGBTQ policies. How is that part of USA fencing? Congresswoman, we try to have tournaments in sites that are safe for all of our members.

Period. So you don't think red states are safe for fencing athletes? Red states are absolutely safe and we regularly host tournaments there including Texas, Ohio, Missouri. No, your site selection policies are based on abortion availability and LGBTQ availability, not on fencing, not on your sport. Now let's go a little bit further with this.

Madam Chairwoman, your time has expired. You're not recognized, Ms. Crockett. Mr. LaFelt, you wrote a blog post where you said that one day your daughter, Madam Chair, on a point of order. This is my time and I'm the chair of the committee. No, that was your time. Your time is over and now we're asking a week. The chair has discretion to assign time. I've lost time. I have lost time. As long as we have that understanding, that's fine. I've lost time. I yield two and a half minutes to the chairlady.

Mr. LaFell, you wrote a blog post where you said that one day your daughter might compete against a transgender woman, a biological man. You said that if she did, you might win or she might lose. But whatever the result, you hope she doesn't care about the outcome because the important thing is that both she

and her opponent enjoy the match. That's what you wrote in your little trans manifesto. But you came here today to win. And you came here today to defeat women in their own sport. So as you stand here before this committee today,

You are a man that would tell your daughter to lose and enjoy it to a biological man. My time has expired, and with that, I recognize Ms. Stansbury to defend all the trans. - Point of order. - Out of curiosity, is the chairwoman allowed to editorialize before every speaker on the Democratic side speaks, or is that part of her time, which we know that she went over? - It's not a point of order.

You're taking Ms. Stansbury's time. I know you're trying to be chair of oversight, but Ms. Stansbury is the ranking member. Chair would be better on this side. I do agree with that. It's Ms. Stansbury's time. Thank you, Madam Chair. As you can see, this is a hearing full of performance artists, not legislators. To our witnesses and guests, I do appreciate you coming today, but this is not the venue for this conversation, and our colleagues know that across the aisle.

That is part of why the distraction of the gaveling and the yelling and the performance art is happening here today because this is not an oversight hearing. This is not what the jurisdiction of the oversight committee is. And the chairman and the chairwoman both know that.

And they both know that a little over 100 days ago when Republicans were clamoring to show Donald Trump and Elon Musk that they were going to carry their water here in Congress, they created this subcommittee to do Elon Musk's bidding. But now that he is so unpopular that two-thirds of Americans are opposed to Doge and Elon Musk, the honeymoon is over, my friends. And so what are they doing with the Doge subcommittee?

They're bullying trans kids. They're talking about things that have absolutely nothing to do with government oversight or efficiency or the economy or the reality that Donald Trump is tanking the economy and the reality that Americans are pissed as hell and are marching in the streets.

And they're turning the Doge subcommittee into apparently now a fencing oversight committee. Welcome, we're not even gonna call it the Doge subcommittee anymore. This is called the fencing oversight committee. Welcome to the fencing oversight committee. But in reality, we know this is all about bullying trans kids,

as they are literally over on the floor debating renaming the Gulf of Mexico this week because they have no real agenda other than tanking the economy, taking away healthcare, taking away food out of the mouths of children, and basically distracting the American people while they prepare the largest tax break for billionaires ever in the history of this country.

But it's not enough to just obsessively talk and think about trans people, which obviously are living rent-free in their minds. Donald Trump has put into place over a dozen executive orders and actions bullying trans people. Here this committee is trying to take their own punch. They're trying to keep trans people from using bathrooms inside the Capitol. I mean, all of this is

part of their regular playbook, do really bad evil things and then distract the American people by doing ridiculous things in public spaces like this. So I am very grateful to Ms. Goss Graves for being here to break through the noise, to talk about real issues

that are affecting our communities because among the things that affect women, girls, all people are the cuts to health care, the cuts to education, the cuts to vital programs that our people depend on.

But what I think is so important is to highlight the ways in which using public spaces like this to bully trans people creates a lack of safety for the LGBTQ+ community. And so, Ms. Goss Graves, can you talk about how exactly what's happening here today normalizes hate and how that translates into violence and hate against the LGBTQ+ community?

You know, this is exactly my deep worry. Over the last couple of years, we have seen in states around the country and now in this body and from the president using government to attack some of our most vulnerable people. And the hateful rhetoric translates to violence.

It's trans young people who are experiencing violence in school. And it also means that we have seen an increase in incidents of suicide.

So when I think about young people today who may be tuning in, I want to reaffirm that their existence is okay and that they are supported. But I also want to say very, very clearly, even though people have been spun up in this frenzy that all the problems in the world are apparently now caused by trans folks existing, that is simply not true. And if we have a very serious

serious and concerted effort to address rising costs, to address access to healthcare, to address the experiences that people are having in this country who are begging for help, this body actually could be doing that in an oversight way even. It would be especially important to hear this body do that so that we could have a conversation around what has the impact been for people in this country, for women and girls because of DOGE.

Those are the things I hear about all the time. Yes, thank you very much. And I also want to acknowledge your-- The gentlelady's time has expired. I now recognize Ms. McClain from Michigan. You took a minute of my time wasting my time on a non-point of order. The gentlelady's time has expired. I now recognize-- Madam Chair, the clock was not running.

during the point of order. - Ms. McClain, for again. - Your time was not wasted. And to the trans community, we stand with you. - I now recognize Ms. McClain. - With the LGBTQ+ community, we stand with you. - Madam Chair. - And you can raise your, all you want.

- Thank you Madam Chair, but we stand with the LGBTQ+ community and you can gavel me to-- - Order, this hearing will come to order. - House come home and it won't stop it. - This hearing will come to order. - Madam Chair, I have a question. - This hearing will come to order. - Madam Chair, I just-- - This hearing will come to order. I now recognize Ms. McClain from Michigan. - I just have a point of order. - Thank you Madam Chair.

Let me tell you. Madam Chair, I just was, I had a point of order. Could we just have the timekeeper, you know, log the time between both the Democrats and Republicans, and then we rebalance them so that we each have equal time? That's pretty basic. We will consider that. Thank you. No, no, no, no, no, no, no. You took a minute of my time. That's not a suggestion. Those are the rules. Enough, enough.

No, no, no, no, no. You're wasting your time. That's not... Either we go by the rules or we're out of here. We're keeping equal time. The door's open. Ms. McClain from Michigan is now recognized. Thank you, Madam Chair. Let me tell you what I'm here for. I'm here to protect women and girls. And for all of you young women and girls watching today, I hear you.

I hear your stories. I hear your bullying stories. I hear your uncomfortableness. Because you see, sometimes young women and girls get trampled over. But let me tell you what I'm here for.

I'm here as a mother and as a coach and as an athlete to stand up for the rights of women and especially young girls. That's what I'm here for.

And in 1972, Title IX of the Education Amendments prohibits gender discrimination in all educational programs receiving federal funds. And I'm here today because women have had to fight for every God-given right. And I'll be damned if we're going to go back on that. When biological men invade women's spaces,

OUR rights are violated. And our spaces are violated. Now, my colleagues on the other side of the aisle constantly talk about following the science. But this makes it clear that this is merely a disingenuine slogan. So let's follow the science for a moment. Not opinions, but science.

So Ms. Graves, what is the average difference in skeletal muscle between biological men and biological women? So I'm definitely not a scientist, but I can tell you about the studies that have been done looking at transgender athletes, cisgender athletes. That's a great answer to a question I didn't ask, so perhaps I can help you. So the answer is, the answer I think where you're trying to go is, is there an inherent

Is there a biological difference between men and women? In all contexts, and the answer is no. Okay, let me educate you. Reclaiming my time. No, it's because UCLA has studied this. They did a study of... The gentlewoman's reclaimed her time. Ms. McClain's recognized. So I'll educate you.

I'll tell you, men have 30 to 40% more skeletal muscle than biological women. That's not right, that's not wrong, that just is what it is. I was gonna ask you what is the difference in upper body strength, but I don't think you know that either, so I'll answer that question for you as well. Biological men exhibit 20 to 50% greater upper body strength.

and 25 to 30% lower body strength than biological women. That's just the science. Ms. Graves, you stated your organization's mission is to ensure safety and opportunity for all girls.

Was Peyton McNabb safe on September 1st of 2022? It sounds like she definitely wasn't. Thank you. What happened to her was tragic. I would argue, though, that the answer is to ensure that people can't spike volleyballs into people's heads. That seems unsafe. Thank you for your answer, Ms. Graves. So I will reclaim my time on that. So here's the inherent problem. If I would say I'm a 6'2 blonde supermodel, you agree with that statement?

I know my husband does, but does that make it true? I'm not sure he'll tell you all because you're sitting down, but I'm assuming you're not blonde. Do I look like a six foot two blonde supermodel? No. Okay. But I identify as one. Okay? Just because I identify as one doesn't make it true, but let's go ahead and say for a moment it's true. The issue that I have for the young girls is you can live in your reality. You can live in your reality, but when your reality

intrudes on my safety and puts another person at harm or in harm's way, that's when I have a problem with it. When you want to live in your distorted reality, you can do that. But that doesn't mean everybody else has to do that either. Because I will ask you one other question. Can a 43-year-old man identify as a 13-year-old boy, Ms. Graves?

Can a 43-year-old man live in his reality of identifying as a 13-year-old boy? This question makes me understand that you... This question is a question that you need to answer that you refuse. If we're going to be who we want to be, can a 43-year-old man identify as a 13-year-old boy? The witness can answer, but the General Lady's time has expired. So here's the thing.

It is absolutely... It's a yes or no. So, I actually, I'm hoping that some people are watching and so that's why I'm trying to provide some... With... The gentlelady's time has expired. This is a yes or no question. Okay. I would have loved to give a fuller answer. My... Here is my answer to you. The answer is no, that an adult can't be a child.

Why they identify as white. Okay, thank you very much. Thank you for answering the question. The gentlelady's time has expired. I now recognize the witness will suspend. I now recognize Ms. Norton from Washington, D.C. for five minutes. This newly formed subcommittee has been nothing but a sham so far, this Congress. But this hearing takes this subcommittee to a new low.

one of hate and bigotry. I have spent my life fighting for civil and human rights of all Americans. I did so in the civil rights and women's rights movements as a lawyer, as chair of the New York City Commission on Human Rights, and as chair of the United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.

And I do so now as the only member of Congress representing the more than 700,000 residents of the District of Columbia who were denied voting representation in Congress and full self-government despite paying full federal taxes. I am disgusted this subcommittee would use its power to target transgender people.

But since the subcommittee is intent on talking about safety, let us talk about it. Ms. Goss-Graves, last year the Center for American Progress found that nearly half of transgender adults experience discrimination in public spaces. What kind of discrimination do transgender people face?

So transgender people face a wide amount of discrimination. They have trouble getting hired. They are more likely to experience harassment at work, in school, in other settings. They experience violence. Disproportionately transgender women experience violence. So the types and forms of discrimination that the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission used to track thoroughly is vast and

and could and should be the subject again of this committee, the committee could look at the wide range of discrimination that transgender individuals are experiencing at work and what is happening now at the EEOC now that it is not treating that type of discrimination in the same way that it used to. Please discuss the violence transgender people face.

Well, it is everything from sexual violence to assault in a lot of different types of spaces, spaces that, you know, one might feel safe ordinarily for trans people, especially when the rhetoric has increased, especially when at the highest

parts of our government, they are suggesting that it is okay to insult and to make it seem like transgender people are less than human. And it is, you know, what I think both our laws and, you know, my moral compass requires that anytime there is an organized effort to demonize a small group of people,

That we our laws have something to say about that. We should scrutinize the why we should make sure there isn't harm. But my own moral compass, I will say has something to say about that about any time a group of people experiences the level of hate and discrimination and violence. It's up to all of us to show up.

Discrimination and violence should never be acceptable. We cannot allow these against anyone. Today's attack on transgender people is a blatant attempt by the Republican majority to distract from the real harm they are causing Americans through their disastrous policies.

They are proposing taking away health care and food assistance from tens of millions of Americans to give tax cuts to the wealthy and corporations. Ms. Goss Graves, if Republicans make these cuts to Medicaid and food assistance, how will this affect the health and well-being of women across this country? It will be disastrous.

Almost half of births in this country are paid for by Medicaid. Women around the country and their families' lives can be upended by having access to health care one day and then not the other. And it will also change access to health care in entire regions. There are large parts of this country, especially in rural areas, that do not have enough health care systems.

And if Medicaid is gutted, that will only make for more healthcare deserts. And the last thing that I just want to say about this is that Medicare is, Medicaid is sort of the backbone of long-term care. The gentlelady's time has expired. I now recognize Mr. Cloud from Texas. Thank you, Madam Chair, and I appreciate you holding this hearing.

And I especially want to thank Ms. Turner, Ms. McNabb for being here and telling your stories, not only coming before Congress

Talking to us which is bold and heroic in its own right but taking the stand that you've taken and for Miss McNabb for continuing to tell your story I Am sorry that you've been put in this type of situation Where you're at a critical moment in our history where this is an issue that we're having to deal with but I admire you for your courage and thank you for being there

As a committee, we're bringing this up in part because of the Ted Stevens Act that Mr. Liefeld mentioned. The U.S. Olympic and Paralympic Committee is a congressionally chartered entity under that act, and the USOPC, therefore, and its NGB derivatives, the National Governing Boards, have to abide by federal law. And so we have Title IX, which says that these organizations will not discriminate based on sex.

And then we have, lately, executive orders where President Trump issued an executive order keeping men out of women's sports. He did this to rescind the funds from educational institutions that deprive women and girls of their fair athletics opportunities and to oppose male competitive participation in women's sports more broadly for safety, fairness, dignity, and truth. It's interesting to note that he referenced in that a previous article

Executive Order 14168, in which defined a female, which it seems that the left has a very difficult time doing, a person belonging at conception to the sex that produces the large reproductive cell. And so we have a pretty clear definition of the guidelines that you should be operating by and other organizations that are embracing sports and chartered by, and so it does fall under our

jurisdiction as Congress to consider whether or not you and these other organizations should be stripped of your certification under the Ted Stevens Act. And so we have to continue to look at this and just talk about this issue. A recent UN report that the chairwoman mentioned

notes that as of March 2024, over 600 female athletes in more than 400 competitions had lost 890 medals, 29 different sports to males, explicitly concluding that males have certain performance advantages in sports, which Ms. Graves seems to not agree with. This report also notes that injuries have included knocked out teeth, concussions resulting in neutral impairment,

Neural impairment, broken legs, and skull fractures. And it boggles the mind, Ms. Graves, that time and time again, what we have is mediocre male athletes turning into champions in women's sports, and you continue to think that there's not an advantage. I'm puzzled by that. - Is that a question? - How do you? - Yeah, so, well, first I just have to say, the idea that someone who identifies as a man

would instead live their entire life as a woman? That's not answering the question of how a mediocre competitor becomes a champion overnight. The notion is... I'll move on. It's sort of absurd. If you were to compare world-class, world-record times in track for women's sports compared to the male Texas high school

that happened just recently, you would find that the male high schoolers beat world record times virtually in every single race as female world class record holders throughout history.

As someone who ran track in the past, I wonder if I can retroactively identify and be recertified as a world-class world champion as opposed to the mediocre track person that I was. You can't because that's not how the rules work. And I think that's part of what I've been trying to explain here. I wanted to ask you something, Ms. Liffel, because...

The press release from US Fencing talked about how you came up with your site selection criteria, which the chairwoman talked to, but I wanted to dig into it a little bit because it says your source for analysis was primarily the equality maps, the Movement Advance Project.

Now, this is not, if you go to this site right now, what you would find on its homepage is a bunch of voting turnout information, how we could advance leftist, Marxist agenda, primarily Democrat agenda all throughout the country. There's maps to do it, ways to be engaged, all these kind of things. This is not at all any sort of nonpartisan agenda.

sporting effort or anything along those lines. And one thing DOGE has uncovered is been the fact that all these NGOs have been funded and, thank you, Madam Chairman. I apologize, I ran out of time. But the point is it's a political organization

not any sort of non-partisan. Thank you. The gentleman time has expired. Mr. Lynch from Massachusetts is now recognized for five minutes. Thank you, Madam Chair. I want to thank the witnesses for their willingness to testify before this committee and help us with our work. I do want to go back to the point that the ranking member raised, and she is correct in pointing out about the lack of jurisdiction of this subcommittee for the matter before us. This subcommittee

was created for the opportunity to confront the economic inefficiencies in our government. And that's exactly why most members chose to serve on this subcommittee, because of the issue involved. So this subcommittee could be focusing on the layoffs that President Trump has executed, over 200,000 firings of federal employees, employees from the EPA, employees from the Social Security Administration,

employees from the Nuclear Security Agency, employees from the FAA, including air traffic controllers. The President has fired NIH researchers working on Alzheimer's and cancer research. This subcommittee could be addressing the layoffs of 3,000 workers at the VA. I mean, that does affect the efficiency of our government programs.

President Trump laid off nurses, internists, physical therapists and staff who care for our wounded veterans all across America. He's even laid off people from the veteran suicide hotline in the middle of a veteran suicide crisis. This subcommittee could be holding hearings to find out why we have 250,000 people veterans on a waiting list for benefits and treatment at the VA.

and why veterans should be waiting months for an appointment. Veterans benefits are special, Madam Chair. They're special obligations of our country because those veterans benefits are obligations that exist because of courageous service previously rendered by our veterans. Every eligible veteran laying in a VA hospital bed all across this country

has honorably served by definition to be eligible for that care. They have honorably served in uniform on behalf of this country, on behalf of us all. And from Democrat to Republican administration, we have always maintained that veterans benefits must, must be rendered. We must keep our promise until now, until this administration, until now.

We've also been hearing from farmers who are dealing with Trump's tariffs all across America. We could be addressing the impacts of the Trump tariffs on all of our states. If those tariffs are impacting the export market for cranberries in Massachusetts, I can only imagine what's going on in Iowa and Georgia and Kansas and Illinois and Indiana, the great state of Georgia,

with $83.6 billion in agricultural production last year and 325,000 agricultural related jobs. That dwarfs what we have going on in Massachusetts and I hear plenty from our farmers and our bog operators. Madam Chair, since President Trump launched tariffs against 140 countries at the same time and then they retaliated against us on our farmers

We've seen the landscape change. Those 140 countries have shifted their major contracts to places like Brazil, Venezuela, Canada, Europe, and away from Iowa, Ohio, Georgia, Indiana, and Illinois. That's what we should be talking about in this committee. You know, one of my first cases as an attorney, I represented a women's swim team at one of our local high schools, Boston Latin Academy.

I believe firmly in women's rights in athletics. We've come too far to let that regress. But I hope someday we actually have a hearing here to talk about gender dysphoria or gender incongruence so we can get doctors and families in there whose families and kids are suffering from that disorder rather than

simply punching down at some of the weakest people and most vulnerable people in our society. Madam Chair, I thank you for your courtesy and I yield back. The gentleman yields and now... Madam Chair, I had some items to submit for the record. Yes, go ahead. I wanted to submit for the record a November 22, 2003. Here's the latest on USA Fencing Tournament site selection. It's personally from the US Fencing Tournament.

the US Track and Field Statement regarding transgender, transsexual policy, the USA Gymnastics Transgender and Nonbinary Athletic Inclusion Statement, the US Weightlifting Athlete Gender Inclusion Competitive Equity and Eligibility Policy, the US Tennis Association Transgender Inclusion Policy, and finally, ironically, the National Women's Soccer League, I'm not sure if they know what women is, but their policy on transgender athletes.

Without objection, so ordered. I now recognize Mr. Fallon from Texas. Madam Chair, thank you. For the next five minutes, we're going to live within the bounds of reality and actually use real science. Human beings with an XY chromosome will be referred to as male or men. Human beings with an XX chromosome will be referred to as female or woman. Mr. Liefeld, what is your current position within USA Fencing?

I'm the chair of the board of the director, sir. Okay, and in that role, is it fair to say that you celebrate transparency and promote fairness? I would certainly hope so, sir. All right, great. Congress has oversight over USA fencing. Are you here today to testify of your own volition?

I'm here to testify on behalf of the USA. Of your own volition. Did you come voluntarily? No, sir. I was subpoenaed. You did not. You had to be subpoenaed. Is that correct? Yes, sir. I have to give you an F on that count right here for transparency. Let's go. Did you recently change your social media profile from public to private? I did, sir. Okay. Was that before or after you got wind that you might end up being here today?

That was around the time that I was receiving death threats and anti-Semitic messages from other people, sir. Also happened to be right after you found out that you might be here, correct? I can't recall, sir, specifically when I went private. Yes, that is April 14th, and you did it after. So I'm going to give you another F, two counts for transparency. Let's talk about fairness, because you said you wanted to be fair.

There are two competitive classes in USA fencing, yes? Two divisions, men and women? That's correct, sir. Why is that? There's also a mixed event, I should add. A mixed event is a plurality of our events. But you have, but to be specific, because we have limited time, you have a male division and a female division. Is that correct? We also have a mixed division, sir. Do you have a male division and a female division, yes? We have a male division and we have a female division. We also have mixed events, which represent a plurality of our events. Do you allow men to compete against women?

In mixed events, sir. Okay, but not again. There is a distinct class for just women, yes? Yes, there is a women's event, yes, sir. Thank you, thank you. We're getting somewhere. Now, that is because I think you would agree that in general, maybe not because Ms. Graves doesn't, that men inherently have some physical attributes that give them an advantage. Would you agree with that?

I would agree to an extent, sir. There are some studies within sensing that. Madam, I'm going to reclaim my time because for instance, there is increased muscle mass, generally speaking with men, which makes them faster and stronger. They're better adapted with cardio respiratory capacity, lungs, perhaps with endurance. Men are generally taller, have stronger bones, and they have different skeletal structures. You got to know this. The pelvis in men are more narrow and the small Q angle that attaches the hip to the knee joint

That's important because the more narrow that cue angle is, the more force than you can project. Now that's only important in sports that require standing, squatting, kicking or pedaling. And then you also have a sex difference in the angle of the humerus and the ulna at the elbow. And the more narrow and the smaller that angle is, that projects more force upon extension in only sports that involve throwing, thrusting like in fencing, hitting a bat, racket or stick.

So like for instance what my colleague said, Will Thomas was 462nd best male swimmer for three years. And then he was winning events when he competed with women. Female gold medalists in the 100, 400 and 800 would not even qualify to compete for the gold in the men's division. Marathon, the best marathon female would be 90th against the men. Best triathlete female would be 50th against men. And Major League Baseball has had exactly zero women play.

on an opening day roster, NFL, NHL, NBA, again, zero. So let me ask you this question. I'm very curious to hear your answer. Yes, sir. Would you allow, do you think it's fair for a man that identifies as a man to directly compete against a woman? In a mixed event, sir. Okay. So you think that's fine? A man can compete against a woman in the women's division?

In the women's division, sir, they must go through one year. Right, right. So what I'm saying, so a man that's identifying as a man cannot, you're not cool with them fencing against women? Men compete against women in mixed events all the time, sir. They're a plurality of our events. And who generally wins those?

The recent data that we pulled showed that cisgender men prevailed in 64%. So cisgender men are men, okay? Let's just call it for what it is. Yeah, right. So the bottom line is this, even when you go through hormone treatments,

You know this. It doesn't reduce your height, it doesn't shrink your bones, it doesn't decrease your lung capacity, it doesn't alter your skeletal structure. There's exactly zero studies in the world that show that any amount of hormone therapy will ultimately result in parity between men and women. It doesn't exist. The IOC just did a study with 800 men, and even after a year, they retained 83% advantage

This is absolute lunacy. It's crazy. But you crazies, you keep being crazy. And we'll see you November 26. I yield back. Thank you. Madam Chair, I'd like to ask for unanimous consent. Without objection, so ordered. Well, I'd like to ask for unanimous consent to enter an article from NPR titled, What Has Doge Done in Trump's First Hundred Days into the USA Fencing Subcommittee of the Oversight Committee? I now recognize Mr. Garcia from California for five minutes.

Thank you, Chairwoman. I want to just start, of course, by thanking all of our witnesses for being here today. I appreciate your time. I've said from the beginning and from our first DOGE subcommittee meeting that we've really not talked about government efficiency or any real serious legislative work.

But even I am surprised that this subcommittee is now apparently in charge of policing women's sports. Now, this has nothing to do with our committee's jurisdiction, as said earlier, and nothing to do with helping the American people. Now, Republicans in Congress are trying to destroy our health care and social safety net, as we've seen them do over and over again. Elon Musk is destroying critical medical research programs.

We have a measles outbreak. We have an anti-vax health secretary. But apparently this committee wants to spend its time bullying trans kids and athletes and arguing about fencing tournaments. This is not only outrageous, it's also dangerous. Now this committee is supposed to be about saving taxpayer dollars. And let's be really clear.

Mr. Layfeld, USA Fencing doesn't receive large taxpayer-funded grants and doesn't really receive federal funding, is that correct? Sir, we do not receive a penny in federal funding. So you do not receive a penny of federal funding and we're spending our time in the Government Efficiency Committee debating a fencing tournament and your association. That of you which receive no federal dollars. Let's be clear, all kids and people deserve to be able to participate in sports.

And USA fencing and other sports have the right to lay out rules to make sure their sport is fair and safe. And we know that transgender youth and athletes experience all kinds of mistreatment because of their gender identity. This includes bullying in schools, family rejection, threats of violence even by some in Congress, and other discrimination.

Now sports participation can actually help overcome some of this vulnerability. Now we have a wide range of views on this committee, but I want to make sure that there are people are aware there is some bipartisan consensus. Here's a quote from one of my Republican colleagues who's actually on this committee today, which I want to read. I find it encouraging. It says, I strongly support LGBTQ rights and equality. No one should be discriminated against.

I have friends and family that identify as LGBTQ. Understanding how they feel and how they've been treated is important. Having been around gay, lesbian, and transgender people has informed my opinion over my lifetime. Now, Ms. Goss Graves, do you know who said this by any chance?

I don't know. This was actually Congresswoman Nancy Mace, who's I know waved on to our committee today. Now, Madam Chair, I'd like to insert into the record this article on CNN that says, titled, Nancy Mace, now targeting transgender lawmaker, calls herself pro-transgender rights in 2023. Madam Chairwoman? Whether.

without objection. Thank you. Now, Congresswoman Mace, of course, is here today. Now, in November of just last year, Congresswoman Mace posted 326 times on social media about trans people and their access to bathrooms in just one 72-hour period.

That's a fact. So I'd like to introduce another article from Newsweek and it's entitled, this is the title, Nancy Mace has posted 326 times in the last 72 hours about bathrooms. Madam Chair, can I introduce this into the record?

Without objection. Thank you. I point this out because it's actually important context. Republicans accuse Democrats of focusing too much on LGBTQ plus issues or trans issues. But we want to talk about protecting Social Security. We want to talk about protecting the cost of living. We want to talk about lowering prices. We want to make sure that all people have health care. But Republicans are so obsessed with

with demonizing trans people that we are wasting time in our government efficiency committee talking about trans people that like fencing.

Now let's remember, according to congressional testimony from the head of the NCAA, there are less than 10 trans college athletes in 2024. That's less than 10 out of half a million total NCAA athletes. Less than 10 out of half a million. Now Congresswoman Mace has posted about this issue hundreds and hundreds of times. That's equal to hundreds of individual posts per athlete. All the while, we're ignoring the real issues.

I want to remind everyone that we've seen 935 confirmed cases of the measles as of May 1st, according to the CDC. Nearly a thousand children are getting sick while our country is hit by crisis after crisis. Let's focus on the 930 adults and kids with measles versus the 10 trans athletes that are participating in college sports. It is obvious to the American public that this issue is being exploited by extremists to divide the American public. It's shameful.

It's been clear that DOGE is not about government efficiency. It's an attack on vulnerable people. And with that, I yield back. The gentleman yields. I now recognize Mr. Timmons from South Carolina. Thank you, Madam Chair. We are here today to shine a light not only on the integrity of women's sports, but on how government-backed institutions chartered by Congress may be misusing that authority to push controversial policies that violate basic human rights and disregard their congressionally authorized mission.

When an organization abuses authority delegated by the government, it is within the purview of the subcommittee, plain and simple. I realize my colleagues across the aisle don't understand that. USA Fencing is a national governing body for the sport of fencing in the United States, officially recognized under the Ted Stevens Olympic and Amateur Sports Act. That designation is not just ceremonial. It is a chartered monopoly backed by federal law and accompanied by special privileges and funding access. That status comes with an expectation.

that NGBs serve all athletes equitably, promote excellence, and adhere to national interests, not ideological crusades. Yet recent events raise serious questions about whether USA Fencing has abandoned its mandate, is wasting resources, undermining athletes, and jeopardizing the integrity of women's sports, all while flying under the flag of a federal endorsement. We've heard USA Fencing speak about inclusion, but what about transparency and fairness, especially toward female athletes like Stephanie?

We are having this hearing for women's rights, and we know the difference between a man and a woman. That's why we are here. Stephanie Turner and Peyton McNabb's rights have been violated. What's worse is they have been violated by an entity operating under the color of federal law, an organization that bears the name of our great country as bestowed by Congress in 1978. And I can assure you that in 1978, the members that voted for this law would be horrified. They would be horrified that we have to have this hearing.

Mr. Liefeld, you said earlier that the Ted Stevens Act prohibited you, prohibited you from discriminating against biological men that identify as women. What are you referencing? Congressman, I may have misspoke. I don't recall saying that.

Could you remind me specifically what my words were in that scenario, sir? You specifically said that the statute, you were statutorily prohibited from telling transgender men that they are not allowed to participate in women's competitions.

Sir, I believe what I was referring to is a statute within the Ted Stevens Amateur Sports Act which prevents any NGB from being more restrictive than their international federation. We have consulted with very competent legal counsel. Are you familiar with the executive order signed by President Trump right here? Yes, sir. Okay, so Madam Chair, I'd like to submit this for the record.

Without objection. So a couple things one this executive order prohibits all entities that receive federal funds, which I know you do not of allowing Transgender men to compete in women's sports. So that's basically your entire pipeline Your main purpose is to be competitive is to is to figure out who we're gonna send to the Olympics or one of your main purposes Is that is that fair? That's correct, sir. Okay, so you have women that are participating in

high school and in college and they're never going to compete against transgender men because that's federally prohibited. And by the way, this executive order also says that the Secretary of State shall use all appropriate available measures to see that the International Olympic Committee amends the standard governing. We're going to fix this and you're lagging behind us fixing it and what's going to happen

is we're gonna amend the Ted Stevens Act to literally, you're gonna lose your federal charger, and I appreciate that you did adopt a contingent policy, but why do we have to do this? You're really creating a problem where no problem should actually exist, and if all this isn't enough, I'm gonna just highlight something you had on your website. I mean, this is just pretty insane. What statutory or moral authority is granted to USA Fencing and its charter to determine who in our society is oppressed?

Congressman, forgive me, I can't. This is on your website. But if I could go back to something you were saying before, sir, about changing the law and what you were talking about with the executive order. Sure. All right. Thank you, sir. We will be prepared to pivot as soon as the Ted Stevens Amateur Sports Act changes. You might.

The FIE, the IOC. I mean, I have a feeling that we're going to write the statute in a way that if this is a problem when the statute becomes law, we're probably going to have some additional clauses in there that removes rights and abilities. But look, you do you. And we will follow the law, sir. The law is going to be punitive. I can assure you of that. We're not going to let this stand and it's going to get fixed. And anyways, I want to go back to this. So you say on your website that so.

Vietnam veterans are an oppressed group versus veterans. Why does a veteran of a war in Afghanistan or Iraq have, how is a Vietnam veteran oppressed?

Sir, I've actually never seen this, but I want to be clear. We have an appreciation for all of our veterans. We have many who have won. One individual who served our country admirably was disabled by an IED in Iraq. And we very, very much appreciate all of our veterans, sir. Without a doubt. Thank you. Matt.

Madam Chairwoman, I'd like to ask for unanimous consent to enter something into the record. Without objection. Madam Chairwoman, I'd like to enter an article from USA Today entitled Millions of People Would Lose Their Coverage Under Trump-backed GOP Plan to Cut Medicaid. This is the CBO score that came out today. We want to talk

about the people that are horrifying? - Without objection. Without objection, so ordered. - How about the millions of Americans that'll lose their lives? - We're not reading the article without objection, so ordered, just the title. I now recognize Mr. Kassar from Texas.

Madam Chairwoman, I want to start off by acknowledging that this morning the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office announced that more than 5 million Americans can lose their health care because of the Medicaid cuts being pushed by Republican members of Congress. So of course, Republicans on the Government Efficiency Committee are holding an emergency hearing on semi-pro fencing.

Not fences like the kind that goes around a building, but like the sport with the swords.

And I've knocked on thousands of doors and talked to thousands of Republican, Independent, and Democratic voters in my career. And not a single time has someone flung open their door and said, "Thank God you're here, Congressman. I want to ask you about transgender people fencing." It's just never happened. I've never even met a fencer before. I've just seen it on the parent trap. I'm sure it's a great sport, but what the hell are we doing here?

Seriously, we're here because chairwoman Marjorie Taylor Greene thinks that if she picks on vulnerable people like trans folks, she can avoid having a discussion about the allegations of insider trading against her. She thinks that she can distract from the fact that Trump and MAGA Republicans are raising your costs every single day, suppressing your wages every single day, stealing your taxpayer dollars every single day, and threatening your health care.

That's the reason we're at this crazy hearing today. Here we are in a subcommittee supposedly about government efficiency, spending hours upon hours trashing trans people and talking about trans folks in sports. There's more members on this committee than there are trans people in all of college sports.

Of the 500,000 student athletes in America, about 10 of them are trans. Not 10,000, 10. In Olympics, there are even fewer. So in my opinion, sports leagues will do a much better job than politicians up here on this committee coming up with fair and thoughtful ways of handling who does and who does not qualify for which sports.

But I think that instead of picking on LGBT people, politicians in this country should be singularly focused on improving the economy for every single working American. That's my crazy idea. Ms. Goss Graves, Republicans have called an emergency hearing on trans athletes in the sport of fencing today. Can you tell me how many college fencers are there total in the entire United States? I think about a thousand.

Compare that to, do you know how many people rely on Medicaid in this country? That's more like 80 million. And Social Security? That's more like 70 million. So 80 million people rely on Medicaid, 70 million people on Social Security. We're talking about 1,000 college fencers, period.

How many hearings do you think this committee has held on Elon Musk pushing Social Security to the brink of collapse? Oh my God. I don't think any. Zero hearings. How many hearings have we had about the millions of Americans who could lose Medicaid because of the cuts Republicans are pushing today? Zero. That is correct.

Zero hearings on these issues that impact us all. Republicans have called hearing after hearing obsessed with trans folks in sports, which of course only affects a tiny sliver of Americans. But no hearings on Medicaid, no hearings on Social Security, no hearings on raising wages and lowering costs. So if you're sitting at home watching, you need to know

The goal of this hearing is for Republicans to distract you from their own lies, their own corruption, and their own failure. The goal of this hearing is to make sure that Fox News has something to talk about other than Elon Musk getting billions of dollars a year in government contracts while cutting services for you. The goal of this hearing is to make sure that Fox News has something else to talk about other than chairwoman Marjorie Taylor Greene's alleged insider trading.

It's a sick reality right now in American politics that right wing Republican officials think that picking on trans people is how they'll earn more votes and raise more money. They pick on Americans that are already facing discrimination and violence and they're making those challenges worse. They're trying to pull the oldest trick in the book. Next time you go vote, ask yourself if these second rate schoolyard bullies are looking out for you or if they're scammers just like the man that holds their leash.

The gentleman's time has expired. It's important to point out that Democrat members today are not asking the two young ladies that are here representing their sports, and this is what the hearing is about today. I now recognize Chairman Comer from Kentucky. Thank you, Madam Chair. I want to start with a quick round of yes or no questions for each of our four witnesses, so please keep your answers from our first two questions to yes or no for time's sake.

First question, do you believe biological men should compete in women's sports? Ms. Turner? No. Ms. McNabb? No. Mr. Layfelt? If they comply with the requirements, sir. So is that a yes or no? It's if they comply with the requirements that have been set by our policy. They deserve to compete. By the president's policy? By the policy of USA Fencing. Ms. Graves, I'm going to take that as a yes. Ms. Graves? Yes.

I agree with Mr. Liefeldt that trans women should be able to compete in the sport in accordance with their gender identity. So two no's and two yes's. Second and last question for yes or no. Should biological men be able to get scholarships to college in women's sports? Ms. Turner? No. Ms. McNabb? No. Mr. Liefeldt? They can't get them anymore, sir. They can't get them anymore. So...

Do you believe, yes or no, they should, do you have a personal opinion on that? I don't really have an opinion on that, sir. Ms. Graves. I'm actually concerned about the tens of thousands of women in this country who play college sports who have fewer scholarship opportunities than men. This would actually be a really important. So you are concerned that a man would get a college scholarship that should go to a woman?

It's my understanding that there's less than 10 transgender women playing sports, but I know that there are tens of thousands of women who have newer scholarship opportunities. Mr. Liefeldt, on the website, and I know my colleague, Mr. Timmons, talked about it, there are some troubling statements. There's a page titled, and I think he referenced it, Power and Privilege.

This page promotes woke content, stating that people who are white, Christian, middle class, English speaking are all privileged and we should be asking if they're, quote, the right person to take up space or speak on certain issues. Your blog and social media posts consistently express similar views, so I assume you support the ideas on that webpage?

Sir, I'm not sure about the specific area of the webpage that you're referring to. As a board member, I focus primarily on governance, and if there's something that's operational, I stay very far away from that. So you disavow your website?

Is it I'm just not sure of the specific area of the website is it my website is that the USA fencing website sir that a USA fencing website Okay, I just am not familiar with the area that you're referring to you sir the reason we we're the reason that's odd It's because your your blog that we looked at expresses similar views So because I you know you appear to be white english-speaking male like like me So I didn't know you know there was just an odd

Odd opinion. You don't have any comment on that. You don't know anything about it. I'm just a sir. In all honesty, I'm not, not following the question. You're not following the question about the USA fencing website that has just a lot of, you know, concerning content on there that some would consider racist, discriminatory, or, uh,

You don't have any, that's not a concern or anything? I just, if you link me to the specific part of the website, I could get back to you with an opinion, but I'm just not following where it is. Okay, we'll get you a copy of your website that Mr. Timmons just referenced. So, Mr. Liefeld, let me ask a simple question. Do you support transgender women, which are biological men, competing in women's events? If they comply with the policy, sir.

Which policy? Whose policy are you going by? Should that be the policy? Should men be allowed? You're a leader in this. Show some leadership. Should men be able to compete in women's fencing? Sir, our policy was passed in 2022 prior to my joining the board, but right now, anybody who goes through one year... So you're okay with it? You're okay with it? You don't have a problem in the world with it? You knew this hearing was coming up? You knew this was the topic of the conversation? No.

you don't have an opinion on the policy? Are you going to change the policy? Sir, we've passed a contingency policy at this time. Due to the Ted Stevens Amateur Sports Act, our council has advised us that we cannot have a policy that's more restrictive than our international federation. I want to be clear that if Congress or the IOC or the FIE, our international federation, changes the policy to ban transgender participation, we will of course follow suit. Look,

I think the people, the majority of this Congress is committed to protecting

women in women's sports. NBC News poll asked when asked if they agree or disagree with transgender women competing in women's sports, 75% disagreed. This is one of those 80-20 issues that my colleagues on other side want to the hill they want to down. So we're going to try to protect women's sports. Thank you for having this hearing, Madam Chair, and I yield back. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Madam Chair, I'd like to ask for unanimous consent.

Without objection. I'd like to enter into the record a New York Times article entitled, The GOP Plans to Cut Medicaid Would Save Billions but Leave More Uninsured, Budget Office Says. That's what we're actually outraged about. Without objection. So ordered. I now recognize Mr. Burchett from Tennessee. Also, I want to point out that the most powerful oversight Republican in Congress is talking about fencing while they're trying to cut Medicaid.

Actually, Ms. Stansbury, you're not recognized. I now recognize Ms. Crockett from Texas. Thank you so much. It is so interesting that I just learned today at 44 years old that the Republicans are going to be the ones to save women, the same Republicans that have been saved for women's reproductive acts or the same Republicans that have stood for the Equal Rights Act.

Act, which would hopefully get women to equal pay, or the same Republicans that just this Congress voted for the SAVE Act, which we know would disenfranchise women from even being able to vote. But let me tell you, they are our saviors. And so I am so happy to be here today, because otherwise I would not have an idea that I had a savior in the Republicans. So let's also talk about the fact that it's only been 100 days, 100 long,

terrible days for anybody that absolutely believes in reality. Because what we know is that they have terminated staff responsible for enforcing federal protections against sex based discrimination. Sounds like that's pro women or they've cut funding for domestic violence survivor services, sounds pro woman to me. Or they've prohibited funding for research affecting women's health. That definitely sounds pro women to me.

Essentially, they closed the Department of Education's Office of Civil Rights. Again, sounds like they are fighting for us. And instead of providing oversight over these actions, congressional Republicans have been working to execute one of the most aggressive anti-women legislative agendas in history. And yet they're here today trying to convince the American people that discriminating against trans people is somehow the only way to protect women. This hearing has nothing to do with improving government efficiency,

It's another attempt by Republicans to distract from their demonic and disastrous policies that are making it more difficult for Americans to make ends meet. So, Ms. Scott-Scraves, I want to play a game. It's called Trump or Trans. You ready? Okay. So I'm going to ask you a question, and I want you to tell me whether or not it is Trump or trans people that are responsible. You understand? Got it. Okay, very good. The first one, gutted medical research. Trump.

kidnapping Americans and sending them to foreign countries, aka deporting them. Trump. Driving us into a recession. Trump. Increasing the cost of everything. Trump. Waging an idiotic tariff war. Trump. Harming farmers. Trump. Ignoring the Constitution. Trump. Proposing to take away Social Security. Trump. Cutting healthcare. Trump. Firing government workers who keep our country safe.

Trump. Encouraging an environment of hate and divisiveness. Trump. Thank you so much.

This committee could be engaged in actual oversight of fraud, waste, abuse, and mismanagement. So let's talk about waste. Like Trump's plan to spend almost $100 million for his little birthday parade. Or how he spent 25% of his first 100 days golfing, costing taxpayers tens of millions of dollars. In fact, it's a little bit over $30 million at our last estimation. In fact, President Trump is on pace to spend more than a billion dollars of taxpayer dollars just on golfing.

Yes.

Yet the Republicans have been silent. So they must think spending taxpayer dollars on the president's golfing trips is more important than providing health care to their constituents. And when I talk about constituents, we don't talk about the ones on this committee. So if we look at Texas 26, 39,000 children look to potentially lose their Medicaid with the cuts that they are about to vote on for reconciliation. 88,000 in Georgia 3, 68,000 in Missouri 7,

79,000 in Tennessee to 86,000 in South Carolina for 50,000 in Texas. Oh, 485,000 in Texas, 27 and in Georgia, 14111,000. And if you add that up just on this committee, we have 606,000 kids that are relying on us to do right by them. And instead we playing these crazy games because we worried about 10 trans folk that are in sports right now in college.

I wasn't elected to be engaged in these fights. I was elected to make sure that those kids, the kids that they are about to neglect with these terrible votes that they're about to take, I was elected to protect them and to make sure that they could grow up and have all the opportunities. But let's keep on track. Now, when we look at...

How much they are spending on, let's look at fraud. We could investigate whether the White House and the members of this subcommittee engaged in insider trading and market manipulation. Maybe it's a coincidence that the chairwoman brought hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of stock the day before Trump announced a 90-day pause on tariffs. But I guess we'll never know.

So finally, let's talk about abuse. Like how the Republicans have let Elon steal data of Americans and his competitors to make himself even richer. Look, don't let these hearings distract you from their destruction. This is a rage baiting instead. This is rage baiting instead of conducting oversight over the issues that Americans actually care about. And with that, I will yield. The gentle lady's time is expired. Madam Chair, I now recognize... Madam Chair, I move down to take down her words in puning you.

It's saying you committed a crime without objection, so ordered. - Second. - The committee will suspend. - Point of parliamentary inquiry. - Point of parliamentary inquiry. - We're gonna go with hers first, right? - Madam Chair. - The committee will suspend. The member will state the words she wishes taken down. - Well, actually, Madam Chair, the words were actually not made-- - The committee will suspend the words alleging a criminal act by the Chairwoman.

What words? The clerk will go over the recording with the stenographer and the committee will suspend. The hearing will come to order. Ms. Mace, I'd like to ask, we've looked at the words that were said and it's borderline whether it's parliamentary

and goes along with the rules saying could and accusing the White House and members of this committee of crimes is borderline. So in interest of the hearing and our witnesses that are here today defending themselves against the mentally ill biological males that have invaded their sports and in the interest of making sure that we stay on track,

instead of getting sidetracked into Democrats' nonstop fake accusations. I just ask, thank you for bringing up the motion and ask if you'd like. Yes, Madam Chair. Okay, thank you very much. With that, I now recognize, I now recognize, I now...

She already did, Ms. Stansbury. I now recognize Mr. Burchett from Tennessee for five minutes. Thank you, Chair Lady. Madam Chairman, I'm sorry. It has to be withdrawn on the record. She asked the question and she said yes, Madam Chairman.

You weren't listening, Ms. Stansbury. We handled that, and it has been removed for the record, the fake accusations of criminal behavior. Oh, are you accusing also? And lying, and you're continually disrupting this hearing and won't stay on track about mentally ill men trying to beat down women in women's sports.

We're going to stay on track now, Ms. Stansbury, so hopefully you can go along with this hearing and stay on subject. I now recognize Mr. Burchett from Tennessee. Thank you, Chairlady. Thank you for allowing me to be here. Much has been said about the number of trans athletes that are in sports today, or the lack of numbers, I guess, but I can tell you there's a couple of ladies sitting right here who have been greatly affected by

by those very small numbers. One is not being able to pursue her passion of fencing and the other lady has had a life altering event occur to her because of it. And I take a little bit of offense to that, being the father of a very cool young lady. I just think that this is something that needs to be noted and also

A lot of distractions have been made about cutting SNAP and all these other things, Medicaid, Medicare, what have you. All anybody on our side of the aisle is talking about is cutting waste, abuse, and fraud. The only people that are talking about making any cuts are my friends cackling to my right and a few commentators on CNN. And all we're talking about is waste, abuse, and fraud. And you have to ask, America's going to have to ask themselves eventually, why in the world

Are the folks on the left so afraid of waste, abuse, and fraud being cut? I suspect because it's going to come back to somebody's pockets. So with that, I appreciate the time you've allotted me. Mr. LaFell, did I say that name right, sir?

Close enough, sir. It's Liefeld. Liefeld? All right. I'm purchase it. Nobody ever gets it right. It's a German name, sir. A lot of people mess it up. I'm not really sure what mine is. I just East Tennessee. Let me ask you, while serving as chairman of the USA Fencing, you posted a very long pro-transgender manifesto on your blog. Let me ask you, why did you post this? And I would like to

for the record, put that on the record, Madam Chairman. Go ahead. Without objection, so ordered. Sir, I posted it in my personal capacity just over the years having observed a lot of transgender women transition and the success that they had found in fencing and the purpose that it gave them in life. Okay. In the post you mentioned you had no problem with your daughter facing a man in the sporting event. Is that true?

Uh, sir, at this time she's four years old and hits me with a foam saber but does not participate in fencing yet. Okay. But when she is at the age where she would take this sport on, is that something you would, you would think would be fair that she would compete with a man? Sir, we are one of the safest sports in the Olympic movements and, and 34% of our events are mixed gendered. Uh, it's very... I'm not talking about, I'm not talking about the safety issue. I'm just talking about the fairness issue, sir. I realize you have...

you cover up and I realize nobody gets poked in the face anymore, I get that, but do you think that's fair? That's just a simple yes or no? - So long as the competitor has met all the hormonal requirements and complies with the policy, I would be okay with it, sir. - Okay. On Instagram, a commenter asked, "Are you okay with a cis female?" And I don't like these terms, I had to look it up. A cis female is someone who's born a female, I believe is correct.

meaning women, are you okay with them being at a disadvantage? To which you replied, yeah. And to be clear, let's be clear, you'd be okay with a young lady or young woman being at a disadvantage or at a higher risk of being injured in any of these other sports?

Sir, thank you for giving me the opportunity to address that question. That was a question that required a far more nuanced answer than what I gave, and I appreciate having the opportunity on the committee to address that question. I want to be clear in saying that I expect anybody that is competing as a woman, as a transgender woman, that they meet the requirements as set forth in USA Fencing's policy. Okay, cool.

I hate to say I reclaim my time. That sounds like being a jerk, but I'm going to do that if that's all right with you, brother. Is it true that USA fencing created an equality map? I know it was referred to either of states not to have events in because of what the democratically elected representative of those states voted for.

So there was a map policy that a few of your colleagues have referenced that was passed before I joined the board. It does exist and it does not exclude any states from selection. To be crystal clear, we have had tournaments in numerous states that are listed in there, including Texas, Ohio, Florida, Missouri, etc. It does not exclude any states from selection and we proudly host tournaments in those states. Okay, well, I'm out of time. I apologize.

Thank you, Chair Lighty. Thank you, sir. The gentleman's time has expired. I now recognize Ms. Simon from California. Thank you, Madam Chair, and thank you all of you all for coming today. There's so much to say, but I have such a limited time and I actually have a question, but we'll also want to refer back historically. We've been having these conversations for quite some time. Ms. Gross?

Do you recall in 2000 and I believe it was 2009, the Castor Semayenya case? Correct. Yes. Could you tell folks a little bit about this case? I have some document on it too, but can you give me a few?

Yeah, you know, this was an Olympic sprinter and there were all sorts of assumptions that she was not a woman and she was subject to all sorts of invasive tests, but also bullying and harassment because she was assumed to be not feminine enough for the sport, basically. Yeah. So, you know, this case, she was a black woman.

And she was assumed-- - South African, I think, yeah. - South African black. And she was assumed to be too fast, too big, and of course she was asked to undergo testosterone testing and medical treatment to reverse her natural testosterone that was in her body, but she was born female. - That's correct. - So I just wanna make it clear where we are.

On March 25th, in this very room, my colleague, Ms. Presley, she introduced an amendment to this body. And the amendment was pretty clear, and it said, it requested that this body vote down anything, any mention of any policy that would ban racism, that would

push forth any clarity around us insinuating as a full body that the Trump administration, when he moved executive orders, that they wouldn't mention or allude to any kind of segregation. My colleagues on the right voted that amendment down, every single one of them. So even if you're not transgender, folks who are watching, I want you to understand why this moment is so important. We have

a party who has been very clear about what their intentions are for this country. Very clear about what their intentions are for this country. I think it's bringing us back to a 1950s America where segregation was legal. Who is to say that your African American daughter, because of her BMI, will be subject to the same kind of conversation? Who is to say if we move forth in this conversation,

that your daughter, who was born a female, would be subjugated and subject, I should say, to inspection of her genitals when she went up to the Mount to play t-ball because she looked a little bit different from other folk. There's a slippery slope here. I definitely want to talk about race, fraud, and abuse.

in the 119th Congress. It's important. And it's also important for us to realize that the cruelty of not centering all Americans, how difficult that is, but it is ingrained in who we are to figure out how we love and support and not pathologize anyone. Let's be careful. Let's be careful. Ms. Gross, I wanted to give you an opportunity while my time is limited

to share anything else about really what we're seeing here and how the slippery slope can maybe go a little bit farther and more horrific than it already is.

Well, I'd say it's already happening. We're already seeing girls being challenged for not being feminine enough, for being too tall, too fast, too good at what they do by other parents, by school officials. Discrimination never begins and ends with the small group of people who are initially targeted. It will extend and harm all girls.

Thank you. Thank you so much. I yield my time. The gentlelady's time has expired. I now recognize Mr. Burleson from Missouri. Thank you, Madam Chair. And thank you to our two witnesses for confronting the assault on women's sports. Men and women's sports is absolutely nonsense, no matter how you spin it. It's shameful to look at the women that have been hurt from these men and tell them that they need to be silent in the name of inclusion.

This whole hearing, we've had motions to try to stop this hearing, to stop these young women from expressing their views. It's almost as if we have nothing to see here. We don't want to hear what you have to say. That's the message that's coming from this side. But I'm here because I want to hear what you have to say. And, you know, look, whether it's fencing tournaments, track and field, my daughters are in soccer.

or volleyball games, you're endangering our daughters and belittling their narrative. The men like Mr. Liefeld who are wrecking women's sports with woke poison and a twisted, twisted mental view of things

are destroying the opportunities for these young women. Meanwhile, Americans, they all get this. They look at this and they think that this is absolutely crazy that we're even here. And so we're here to obliterate this insanity and fight for our girls and their safety and their fairness and their athletic endeavors. And I've got to tell you, Ms. Graves, I was shocked to read your testimony where you belittled

the experience of Miss Turner. In your testimony, you said that her experience is part of a larger scheme to attack young trans people. You said it was deliberate spectacle

that was carried out. Do you really believe she contrived this situation? That she put herself... She testified that she planned the night before. She cried the night before! Do you have any sympathy for a young woman who realizes she's gonna have to sword fight a man the next day? Protest is important. It is to make a point. There is mixed gender competition all the time in Fincing. You heard that it was a plurality of all... No, Ms. Grace, I'm taking my time.

This young woman did not register for a mixed sport, for a mixed event. She registered to compete with other women. And that right was taken from her. And she, you know, bravely stood her ground. And I think the world applauded you for that. Ms. McNabb.

The life changing altering, can you describe, and this is where I want to kind of give some time. This event has had a dramatic impact on your life, physically, the mental anguish that you've gone through. I, unlike some, I want to hear your story. I want to hear what you have to say.

Thank you, Congressman. Yeah, what happened to me was 100% avoidable and it completely changed my life. I never played volleyball again that day. That was the last day. And it's so sad because I had the hopes of playing collegiate sports in softball and that day never came because I was just never the same. I've had to navigate my new normal, which is incredibly sad, especially for my friends and family to see. And although I may look like

Like I'm doing better on the outside. There's things that are not, and I don't know if they'll ever be the same. I'm sorry for the experience that you went through. And you know, I'm really sorry that we have individuals in positions of power like Mr. LaFelt,

who have a twisted view on reality. And they're imposing that twisted view on you and your lives. It's really tragic and it's sad. And what's even worse is that now you're the one to blame because you two contrived these situations, according to Ms. Graves.

that you created this. You wanted this to happen, Ms. Turner. That's what Ms.-- - I never said that. - It's in your testimony. - I did not say that Ms. McNabb contrived the situation. I actually think the lesson from her situation is around concussion protocol-- - Let me ask, do you really believe the experiences that they've-- Ms. McNabb, do you really believe that she wanted to face all these medical issues? - I think what happened to her is tragic. There are hundreds of thousands of injuries that are-- - So why aren't you standing up for her?

I actually have. I said that this was terrible and I have solutions that don't involve bullying. Thank you, Ms. Graves. Look, I think that it's sick and twisted that individuals want to make men, make women have to sword fight men. And it's sick and twisted that individuals want to make individuals have to take a spiked ball to the forehead if that's what it takes for a trans person to play. I yield back. The gentleman's time has expired. I now recognize Ms. Randall from Washington.

Thank you. You know, this hearing, much like the long suspension that we had a few speakers ago, is a waste of taxpayer time. Yet another showing of the 24/7 circus that this majority has been conducting as puppets of this president's agenda. We have people at risk of losing health care coverage for

concussions for preventable diseases, for brain injuries, for cancer, people at risk of losing healthcare coverage, federal workers and veterans fired without reason, FAA woefully understaffed, and presidential appointees taking advantage of their position for personal gain. And yet, the first subpoena that this majority feels compelled to execute, not any that we

tried to offer for Elon Musk, but it's to bring the chairman of the board of USA fencing in. No offense, Mr. LeFault, but this is part of a crusade against trans people. There's nothing else to call it. No one can explain away how questioning the chairman of USA fencing on trans people in sports brings down costs for American people.

Much like no one can explain how banning trans people from our military ranks makes us more safe. In fact, Representative McGuire, who's not on this subcommittee but is on the full oversight panel, said this morning something that we could all do well to remember. If somebody saved your life on the battlefield, you wouldn't care if they were pink or blue or male or female, if they called themselves a Democrat, Republican or an Independent. We are all Americans. But we

care more my republican colleagues care more about policing the way that people live their lives instead of ensuring that they can't last week this committee advanced a bill gutting federal employee pay and benefits this week the energy and commerce committee was supposed to mark up their piece of their reconciliation package that would cut 880 billion from medicaid health care

for people. This is so unpopular that they had to push back their meeting a week in order to find the votes. But here's the thing, despite their attempts to distract and deflect by focusing on trans people who are just trying to play sports and live their lives, the American people are paying attention. They feel the cost of goods going up. Does this hearing address that?

American people feel the fear of wondering if they'll have health insurance tomorrow. Does this hearing address that? No. I don't know if any of my colleagues are even talking to their constituents because I've received over 60,000 messages and phone calls, held eight town halls since being sworn in, and not one person asked me to use my time here to attack trans people. I cannot make it make sense.

In fact, Madam Chair, as I think we heard earlier, 155,000 people in your district are at risk of losing their health care under the Republican Party's budget plan, including 111,143 children and 20,000 seniors. Do you want to tell those folks that you care less about them or should I?

Ms. Randall, in my district, no one's going to learn, lose any of their benefits. It was a promise by President Trump and myself, but they're concerned about men defeating women in sports. By the way, your patriarchy earrings are screaming of the hypocrisy. I'm glad you like my earrings, but I'd like to reclaim my time.

I'm here today on behalf of my sister, Olivia, who would have been unable to live with her complex disabilities for 19 years without Medicaid. And I'm here on behalf of the 72 million families and seniors who rely on Medicaid. I'm here to tell the American people that while this might be a scary time,

A time where we are feeling attacks on our most vulnerable communities every day, where the instances of suicidal ideation amongst LGBTQ folks is rising and this administration is cutting the very lifeline of the LGBTQ suicide hotline. There are people who see you and celebrate your humanity and who care about you. Ms. Graves, I've wasted all my time, but

I am grateful that you are here and we're able to share about the real ways that we could support women across the country. The gentle lady's time has expired. I now recognize Mr. Jack from Georgia. Well, thank you, Madam Chairwoman, and thank you for convening this hearing. Under your leadership, the Doge subcommittee has been one of the most active subcommittees across Congress, and my constituents are proud of our work to eliminate waste, fraud, and abuse.

of taxpayer dollars across the federal government. And today it is no surprise that our colleagues on the other side of the aisle have spent a majority of their time desperately avoiding the issue before us because 80% of Americans, Republicans and Democrats alike, believe biological men should never compete in women's sports. Mr. Liefeldt, as Mr. Fallon noted, you are testifying today under subpoena because you refused to appear before us voluntarily. Why did you refuse our initial invitation to testify?

Congressman, thank you for giving me the opportunity to address that. Our CEO of the organization, Phil Andrews, was offered as a witness, and we felt given his full-time capacity that he operates in this role, that he would be able to answer the questions more thoroughly than I can. However, since I'm here, I'm happy to be here and answer your questions. Thank you. And as chairman of USA Fencing, how many members of USA Fencing are biological men who have participated in women's competitions? Rough estimate.

Rough estimates are, I believe that it's roughly 200 total with, I think, 39 that are transgender women. And of that group of biological men, how many have won championships in women's competitions? Rough estimate. I couldn't tell you the specific number, sir. Five, more than 10.

I'm honestly not sure, sir. I mean, I have the data on how often cisgender women prevail against transgender women, but specifically the number of medals, et cetera, I'm not sure off the top of my head, sir. And conversely, how many biological women are participating in men's competitions within USA Fencing?

34% of our events are mixed, sir, and so it's fairly regular for that kind of event to happen. There are a plurality of our events. And again, I'm just referring to specifically male, non-mixed competitions, specifically male competitions. How many biological women are participating in those, to the best of your knowledge? So, just so I understand your question, sir, biological women competing in the men's division, sir? Yes.

I'm not sure, sir. Okay. Well, I think the disparity alone, as we've seen, confirms that this approach is inequitable. The data across other sports affirms that in recent years, over 600 female athletes have lost more than 900 medals to biological men and women's sports. And again, over 80% of Americans, Republicans and Democrats alike agree that biological men should never compete in women's sports.

Mr. Layfelt, and I mean this with respect, in your capacity as a representative of USA Fencing, have you ever impersonated a woman? No, I have not, sir. Not to my knowledge. I ask because I understand you have a history of creating fictitious female personas. In one instance, you impersonated a woman named Dorothy and wrote an email to yourself, which you then published on social media for all your followers to see along with your response. Do you want to comment on that?

Yeah, I do, sir. Thank you for giving me the opportunity to address that. It was a poor attempt at humor. It was unbecoming of me as a leader of this organization to post that as I did. And quite frankly, moving forward, that's not something that's going to happen again. It's unacceptable. And it's not something that should happen with any human to human interaction, period. Thank you.

Ms. Turner, Ms. McNabb, I want to commend both of you. You are both very brave women. And Ms. Turner, your courage that you displayed on March 30th galvanized millions of Americans in support of the simple truth that biological men should never compete in women's sports. And with my remaining time, Madam Chairwoman, I'd like to learn a little bit more about the culture within USA fencing. Specifically, Ms. Turner, reporting suggests that you previously raised your concerns

of the policies with which you have to face, to USA fencing officials, what was the response when you did so? I had done so privately and the answer is that they did not respond. But I have known of other members of USA fencing, a mother and a daughter who did come to USA fencing saying that they did not approve of the transgender policy and they were told that they would be sanctioned.

And did you or have you feared retribution from USA Fencing with respect to your brave stance and likewise your concerns you've raised before you took that stand? Yes, and I still do. I don't think I'll ever get a fair bout again from a referee or that I'll be welcomed without harassment. And why do you think that culture exists? Just, you know, you've experienced it. I'm curious your own perspective as it relates to the culture that tolerates this type of behavior.

I don't think they communicate well with people who oppose this policy. No one ever asked me what I thought. And I think maybe if they had, they'd know what my stance was. Well, your bravery led us to ask you your thoughts today in front of the American public. So grateful for both you, Ms. McNabb, and all of our witnesses for testifying. Madam Chairwoman, I yield the remaining four seconds to you. Thank you very much. The gentleman yields. I now recognize Ms. Jacobs from California.

Thank you. I'm not normally a member of this committee, but I could not sit idly by while Republicans attack the transgender community for the millionth time. And look, there are real well-intentioned questions and policy decisions that need to be made around trans issues. I understand that. For a lot of people, these issues are new. It can feel intimidating to talk about them, scary to ask questions. We need to be having dialogue.

But that's not what we're doing today in this hearing. This hearing is a waste of time and neglects to provide actual oversight of the ways the Trump administration is dismantling our government and hurting women and girls. Madam Chairman, would it be accurate to say that you believe no one should receive gender affirming care?

I believe that no minors should receive gender affirming care, sex changes, mutilating their body. They can't vote, they can't get a tattoo, they can't drive a car, they can't join the military. Thank you. I ask this because many people believe that Botox, filler, boob jobs are all gender affirming care and I know many of my colleagues

probably on both sides of the aisle, have partaken in this gender-affirming care. But okay, let's take this committee at its word that this hearing is about protecting women and girls. Ms. Goss Graves,

the Department of Education's Office of Civil Rights is the primary entity that investigates discrimination against women and girls in sports, in school. Is that correct? That's correct. That protects women and girls against sexual assault, whether in sports or elsewhere. Is that correct? That's correct. All right. Well, then would you say that getting rid of the Department of Education's Office of Civil Rights would hurt women and girls?

For sure, as did the cuts to the Office for Civil Rights, the group that actually responds to Title IX. That's exactly right, which is why I find it so interesting that the Trump administration has already closed more than half of the offices of the Office of Civil Rights in the Department of Education, including an office in California that is in the

middle of an active discrimination investigation. You would think if we were concerned about protecting women playing sports and protecting their Title IX rights that we would want to be actually looking into why we're closing these offices, not what we're doing right now. For the record, for folks watching, this is also the office that investigates anti-Semitism, incidents of anti-Semitism on college campuses. So remember that when my colleagues try and tell you that they're standing up for Jewish students.

I have a theory. I think we're probably talking about this issue instead of what the Trump administration is actually doing because my colleagues don't want to talk about, for instance, the 99,301 people who are at risk of losing their Medicaid in Nancy Mace's district or the 54,466 people who are at risk of losing their Medicaid in Brandon Gill's district.

or the 69,698 people who are at risk of losing their Medicaid in Pat Fallon's district or the 263,276 people at risk of losing their Medicaid in Eli Crane's district or the 235,530 people at risk of losing their Medicaid in Chairman Comer's office or the 155,530 people at risk of losing their Medicaid in

the chairwoman Marjorie Taylor Greene's office or the 1.7 million people statewide in Georgia who are at risk of losing their Medicaid or the 320,818 students who rely on school lunch in Georgia in order to get their food who are at risk of losing that

Maybe it's because the Atlanta Journal-Constitution has already ranked the chairwoman as last in a poll of potential candidates for the United States Senate in the Georgia seat. And she thinks that attacking trans kids will help her poll numbers. But I'm here to tell you that attacking trans kids is not going to launch a Senate campaign. Attacking trans kid is not good politics, not for the right, not for the left.

The American people did not say that they hate trans kids and they hate trans people in this last election. What they said is that they want us to take care of them. They are mad that someone else is getting surgery paid for when they are drowning in medical debt. They are mad that someone else is getting housing paid for when they can barely afford rent. So let's be clear that

on both sides of the aisle it is bad politics to attract to attack trans kids and it is a shame on this body that we work in that we all even have to be having this conversation today thank you so much madam chairwoman i yield back the gentle lady yields i now recognize mr gill from texas thank you madam chairwoman this is a an excellent hearing and we really really appreciate your leadership uh incredible leadership on this

topic and on this community on this issue and I'd also like to thank our witnesses Miss Turner and Miss McNabb for for particularly moving testimonies and thank you for your bravery for coming here I know it takes a lot of guts to testify before congressional committee Mr Layfield I'd like to ask you a few questions do you think that men should be allowed in women's locker rooms

Sir, those regulations are set by the tournament organizers. I'm just asking you yes or no. Do you think men should be allowed in women's locker rooms? I don't have a personal opinion on this, sir. You have a personal opinion on a lot of things, but not on that? Sure. I mean, a locker room is not really an area where people interact. So the answer is yes. Do you think that men should be allowed to share showers with women in athletic facilities?

I think that showering is a private activity and that it should be private. And it should be private. There's oftentimes communal showers. Are you okay with men showering with women? I don't have an opinion on that in the context of USA. You don't. Interesting. That's an astounding thing to not have an opinion on. I think most normal people have an opinion on that. Are you okay with women being at a disadvantage when competing against men in sports?

Sir, mixed events happen all the time and women are often- That's not my question. Let me ask it this way. Are you okay with cis females being at a disadvantage? If their competitor, assuming that you're talking about- It's a yes or no question. ... transgender female, that they've met the requirements set forth in the policy, it's assumed to be an equal playing field. Why did you post on social media for the world to see?

You were asked in an anonymous question which you posted online, are you okay with cis females being at a disadvantage? You said yeah. - Yeah, I believe it was Congressman Cloud that had asked me about that, sir, and I'm happy to address it again. That was a one-word answer to a more nuanced topic, and I feel like if I could take it back and expound a little bit more than what I had there. - Okay, reclaiming my time. - Sure. - Do you think that women, excuse me,

Do you think that parents who don't want their daughters competing against men in women's sports are whiny? No, sir. You don't? Why did you write that on social media? I've got a picture here where you posted that. You were allegedly responding to a parent who didn't want their daughter being beaten up by men in sports competitions. You said, "I'm not going to pull her from the sport and write a whiny email announcing my departure."

Sir, Congressman Jack had asked me about that and I want to be crystal clear that was an inappropriate message. Do you think that they're cowardly? No, I don't. I don't at all. And in fact... Why did you write that on social media? I regret it, sir. I deleted it shortly after posting it. I certainly don't feel that way anymore. And given a lot of the messages that we receive and even conversations that I've had... Do you think that parents who don't want their daughters competing against men in sports should be compared to the Ku Klux Klan?

No, absolutely not. And I acknowledge that I said that in the message, sir. Why did you do that? That was inappropriate. That was inappropriate? Yes, sir. Yeah, you're right. That is inappropriate. I'd like to read what you wrote and what you posted on social media. Sure. Responding allegedly to a lady who had these concerns, the only wizard that's going to dig you out of the myopic hole you put yourself and your family in is one of the, quote, grand wizard variety.

Inappropriate, sir, and I acknowledge that I said it, and I will commit to never making a message like that again. That was in response to a parent, according to you on social media, who had a problem with this. Was this a real email that you were responding to? It was a real email, sir. I did not respond to it and hit send back. This was a real email. Did an actual parent write this, or did you write this email? It was written by an actual person claiming to be a parent. They were not a member of our-- Were you that actual person?

No, sir. You were not that actual person, but you staged this whole interaction. The response, sir, was not real, and I regret that. Okay. You think inclusivity presumably is a big part of the fencing community. Is that right? I would say so, sir. We're a very welcoming community, and I'm proud of that. Are you welcoming to Trump supporters? Absolutely. Then why did you, in your Facebook page...

From The Fencing Coach, right, imagine being one of 71 million people dumb enough to vote re-election for a treasonous clown who's permanently banned from Twitter for inciting an insurrection. You mad MAGA bros.

I acknowledge that I stated that in my personal capacity, sir, our as chair. That was from the fencing coach. I have to acknowledge that 77 million people voted for him in reelection. That wasn't your personal capacity. That was from your capacity as quote the fencing coach online. Yes, that is my blog, sir. That's my publication and I acknowledge writing that. All right. My time is up. Thank you. I yield back. Wow.

Okay, thank you for that. Mr. Gill. I now recognize Mr. Crane from Arizona. Thank you, Ms. Chairwoman. Thank you to the guests for showing up today. Many Americans ask me all the time, what is wrong with this country? Why does it appear that we've gone mad? And I think this subcommittee hearing is a testimony to what has actually happened. And I know I hold some beliefs that, you know,

They're my own beliefs, they're not everybody's beliefs, but I tell them all the time, this is exactly what happens when you allow God to be pushed out of everything.

This is what we're seeing because God has clearly spoken about this. In Genesis 5-2, he says, I created them male and female. And what's really going on up here in D.C. is just a microcosm of culture. We've lost our minds. We've pushed God out of everything. And it's one of the reasons why it appears that we've gone mad and one of the reasons we have two beautiful young women here who are here to testify about how

They've been abused in sports by biological men. And none of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle have asked you guys a single question. Have you noticed that? They don't care. They don't hear you. They claim to be the party of women. We got two women sitting right here and they could care less that you're here. All they want to do is sit here and try and deflect and talk about how we're trying to bully transgender kids. And none of us are trying to do that.

As a matter of fact, I feel sorry for a lot of kids that grow up with gender dysphoria. It's hard enough to grow up as it is, let alone taking that on and having to deal with that. But that's not why we're here. They don't want to acknowledge why we're here. We're here to protect young women in women's sports from biological men.

You know, most of the men, real men that I know who came from good families, they were raised to protect women. It's something that we're all taught to do. We have clearly failed to do that as a culture and a society, and this hearing is a testimony to that. I want to ask you, Mr. Layfield, did you grow up in a family where your parents taught you to protect women?

Absolutely, sir. My parents are here with me today and I'm proud of the lessons that they taught me. They absolutely taught me to protect women. Great, thank you. Then why aren't you doing that, Mr. Layfield? Why aren't you protecting women? Because we got two sitting right next to you who will tell you that not only are you not protecting them, but you're depriving them from participating in sports and everything that goes along with that. Why aren't you protecting women?

Sir, from a fencing standpoint, it's one of the safest sports in the Olympic movement. I know that you think swords present some kind of danger. No, we're not talking about swords. We're talking about biological men and you know it. Don't try those games with me. We're not talking about swords. We're talking about the fact that you and other men and officials in authority have failed to protect young girls. And it's pathetic.

It is pathetic. I'm not going to sit here and try and convince my colleagues on the other side with biology or anything like that because they're long gone. There's no study that I could show them that would convince them that what they're doing is wrong. I'm asking you, why have you not protected young girls like these two sitting right next to you?

Sir, I believe we have protected young women in fencing. It's one of the- Okay, really, hold on a second. Let's ask the expert witnesses. Miss Turner, have men like Mr. Layfield protected you? No. Are they protecting other young girls from biological men participating in sports? No, he glorifies it. Miss McNabb, are men like Mr. Layfield protecting you and other young women participating in women's sports? Absolutely not. Do you feel safe?

No. You shouldn't because guess what? God created men and women differently. And I know that this town and many in this culture have a real problem with that, but it is a fact. Okay? It's just a fact and you guys know it. You have permanent injuries for the rest of your life. Is that correct, Ms. Knapp? That's correct, Congressman. Evil triumphs when good men and women do nothing. Not only have you done nothing to protect these young women, but you've actually cited

with policies that are destructive to young women's sports. You said you have a daughter, Mr. Layfield? I do, sir. That's sad, man. That's sad that you wouldn't protect young girls from what's going on in this culture. And it's disgusting to listen to these posts that you yourself posted. I can't believe that you're still the chairman of this organization. I really can't after hearing some of those posts.

Calling parents who are concerned about this type of leadership, KKK members, are you serious? Shame on you, bro. I yield back. The gentleman yields. I now recognize Ms. Mace from South Carolina. Thank you, Madam Chair, and thank you for the invitation to participate in today's hearing. Ms. Goss Graves, so-called, quote, expert in women's rights. Hi. Do you know how many years it took South Carolina to elect its first Republican woman to Congress?

Well, what year did... 100 years since women got the right to vote. Do you know how many years it took the Citadel, the Military College of South Carolina, to graduate its first woman? 157 years. So I have a series of yes or no questions I would like to ask you based on some of your previous statements. In your opening statement today, you said trans women are women. Ms. Goss Graves, what is a woman?

So a woman is an adult female. A woman identifies as a woman and I actually think it is- What do you consider a female? What is a female? So there are some women who were assigned a female test at birth. You say you're here to defend women, but shouldn't you be able to define one? Shouldn't you be able to define one if you're from women's rights? That's literally what I'm doing right now. Ms. Goss Graves, do women have penises?

So again, I believe that women... Democrats have gone so crazy. Women can have penises. That's not a thing. That's not biology. It's not science. And you sound like a lunatic. Should young girls just get used to penises in their locker rooms and showers? My next question, yes or no. Should little girls get used to penises in their locker rooms and showers?

Yes or no? I don't know what you're talking about, but what I will say is that privacy in locker rooms is extremely important. Oh, I absolutely do. We've heard testimony today about trans women. Those are women with penises. Those aren't real women. Privacy in locker rooms is extremely important. I'm going to reclaim my time. When President Trump issued an executive order to keep men out of women's sports, thank God he did, you said it was sexist bullying that harms all students. Correct. Is it sexist, yes or no, to protect women from men in sports? Yes or no?

If you can't answer the question, is it sexist to acknowledge basic science? Men and women are built differently. Is it sexist to acknowledge science? Can't answer the question. Does forcing little girls to-- does forcing little girls to strip down in front of men in locker rooms harm girls? Does forcing little girls to strip down in front of men in the locker room harm little girls? Yes or no? You can't answer the question. Does forcing little girls to shower

I'm going to reclaim my time. You can quit talking. These are yes or no questions. You can answer them or not. And you've chosen not to answer the questions today because you don't know how. It's shameful. Do you support drugging and chopping off kids' genitals in the name of inclusion? Is that a thing for you? I have to say. You get off on that? I'm so stunned. All right. When a biologist...

A psychological man crushes a girl in a contact sport and sends her to the ER. Is that your idea of empowerment? Is that empowering women when a young man beats a girl and sends her to the ER in a contact sport? Is that empowerment, empowering women? Is that what that is? Are you talking about Ms. McNabb?

I'm talking about any woman who gets crushed in a sport by a man physically and has to go to the ER. I'm going to reclaim my time. So, Madam Chair, we'll show that the witness, I'm going to reclaim my time. You can stop talking now. This is Ms. Mace's time, Ms. Goss-Graves. I would like some of that time back, Madam Chair.

If a man can be a woman, just identify as a woman, as you say, just by saying so, what is the point of having women's sports? What is the point of women's spaces? What is the point of women's scholarships? If you're just going to allow men to take them away, why even bother? Why bother? The loudest voices, I'm not asking you a question, I'm speaking. The loudest voices on the left claiming to fight for women's rights are the very first people to take them away, steal them, and tear these women down.

You're the first to erase them. Mr. Liefeldt, Ms. Goss Graves, you all are shameful. I didn't come here to play with an ideology helping on erasing women and grooming children. That's what you all are. You're groomers. And we're not going to. The chairwoman and I. Madam Chair, I'm going to reclaim my position. This is Ms. Mace's time. Ms. Goss Graves. Ms. Goss Graves. This is shocking.

shocking thing to say about this miss goss graves you are not recognized okay but i think i just want to say that that is a shock you are not recognized miss goss graves the time belongs to miss mace okay fine like chairwoman graham i've been holding line for women standing between perverts and the rights of women and girls and we're not going to let anyone in this country forget what a woman is mr lay felt will you face miss stephanie turner today will you look her in the eyes

Will you apologize to her for the way that she was treated by USA fencing? Standing up for women and girls, women's rights, standing her ground as a woman who only wanted to fence with other women. Will you apologize to her today? Congresswoman Mace, Ms. Turner was given a black card under our rules. Will you apologize for the way she was treated? So that's a no.

So Congresswoman, if I could respond to one thing. You know what's unbecoming of a leader? You said this just in your testimony just like five minutes ago. Yes, ma'am. That you've said several things that are just disgusting and unbecoming of a leader, to use your words.

It's unbecoming of a leader today to acknowledge what has happened to this young woman. You just look at her face and look what she has been through, the courage it took her to stand up for her rights as a woman and other women in other sports all across the country. And you can't even as a man look her in the eye and apologize for what happened to her. And as my colleague Congressman Greene said, real men protect women, you're not one. And I yield back.

The gentlelady yields. In closing, I want to thank our witnesses once again for their testimony today. I now yield to the ranking member Stansbury for closing remarks for three minutes. All right. Well, it's been an interesting journey today as it often is in this committee. You know, I want to start out by saying yes, thank you to our witnesses for sitting here in this toxic soup for the last three hours.

It's ironic because the jurisdiction of this committee is government efficiency and we just spent three hours talking about fencing, USA fencing,

trans athletes, girls. We had my friends across the aisle mansplaining to us about how they're protecting women. I mean, yeah, this was a really good use of government time and money. Meanwhile, behind closed doors, as we pointed out many times during this hearing,

My Republican colleagues across the aisle are trying to cut a deal to cut Medicaid. Now, I don't want to diminish anybody's life-altering experiences, and I am genuinely sorry to hear that both of our young lady witnesses who are here today had horrible experiences. It is bad. I'm sorry to hear that you had a bad experience. And I want to acknowledge that, and I appreciate you coming and appearing before the committee today.

But I don't need a bunch of GOP Republican colleagues mansplaining at me for three hours to tell me that they're trying to take away my rights. They're trying to take away your medical care. They're trying to take away environmental protections. They're trying to take away food assistance for the seniors and children of this country. Like this hearing has nothing to do with substance abuse.

for the United States. It has nothing to do with defending women's rights, has nothing to do with defending the rights of girls. It is all about using the issue of transgender lives to distract from the nefarious plots that are actually happening in this building while we're sitting here to actually take away your civil rights, your human rights, and

your access to vital life-saving care and programs that are vital to millions of Americans. That is actually what is going on here. But it is actually dangerous to the lives of trans individuals because trans individuals are being targeted, they're facing violence, and the only thing that is waste, fraud, and abuse in the DOJ subcommittee today is the waste of the last three hours of our lives that we will never reclaim.

The fraud that is this committee and the abuse of Americans that has spewed out of the mouths on the other side of the aisle for the last three hours. And so I want to say to everyone out there who is listening, whether you're a transgender American and LGBTQ plus individual or any American out there, we are fighting for you. We love you. We support you. And we will stand against hate. And with that, I yield back.

I hope the Democrats keep fighting for the mentally ill biological men who keep trying to beat down women in sports because it's a losing position. It's a losing battle and that was proven in the last election. Today we conducted oversight of our nation's

National governing body for the sport of fencing. And with so many of our nation's institutions, USA fencing has been captured by the left. They banned the national anthem before competitions, selected tournament competition locations based on state abortion and DEI laws, and punished female athletes for refusing to compete against men.

Earlier today, the ranking member called us weird for standing up for girls and women when she's the one who supports sex changes surgeries for little kids and forcing women to undress in front of creepy, perverted men. I'll let the American people decide who the weirdos are, because I think we know. The American people are tired of cultural Marxism and perverted sexual ideas being shoved down their throats.

especially when it is being done with our own tax dollars. The issue of men competing in women's sports shouldn't even have to be a discussion. It's unfair, unsafe, and straight up abusive. As board chair of USA Fencing, Mr. LeFelt has used his position to push his own personal trans agenda on the sport. As a matter of fact, Liz Kocab is the most decorated American veteran fencer in history.

And that is a man, a biological man, who is a ninth career gold medalist. Let's be real, Mr. LaFelt is not pretending anymore. He's defending the trans. And here's the issue. When you're sending emails to yourself calling yourself Dorothy,

you get caught and have to apologize for lying like that here right here in the Oversight Committee that is pathetic when you're calling parents whiny for defending their own little girls from the biological males that you're allowing to compete against them that's pathetic mr. lay felt you should resign from

from the chair of USA Fencing. You do not deserve the position that you have and that's the recommendation I have as the chair of the DOGE Subcommittee on Oversight. And furthermore,

It is pathetic that you're a father of a little girl that you would be perfectly fine to teach and encourage to lose because there is no female athlete that ever wants to lose or come in second place. You're sitting next to two champions next to you today that never wanted to lose, that never wanted to suffer a brain injury, that never wanted to have to

face a male athlete in their sport and you failed them and you are failing women. You need to resign. With that and without objection, all members have five legislative days within which to submit materials and additional written questions for the witnesses which will be forwarded to the witnesses. If there is no further business without objection, the committee stands adjourned.