i would think that the offer would be the most likely under -- author would be the most tweet.owner of tehe host: dan brenner, thank you so much. we have also been talking to carl colglazier. his documentary can be seen on the c-span2 web site. congratulations. we will go down to the house of representatives. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2012] washington, d.c., april 26, 2012. i hereby appoint the honorable bill flores to act as speaker pro tempore on this day. signed, john a. boehner, speaker of the house of representatives. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the order of the house of january 17, 2012, the chair will now recognize members from lists submitted by the majority and minority leaders for morning hour debate.

the chair will alternate recognition between the parties with each party limited to one hour and each member other than the majority and minority leaders and the minority whip limited to five minutes each, but in no event shall debate continue beyond 11:50 a.m. the chair recognizes the gentleman from oregon, mr. blumenauer, for five minutes. mr. blumenauer: thank you, mr. speaker. with the unfortunate arizona state immigration law under review by the supreme court, it's an appropriate time to take a step back and look at the big picture. mexico is exhibiting some of the demographic changes taking place around the world that are exhibited in the most extreme forms in places like japan and italy where birth rates are falling, the population is aging and dramatic stress is placed upon their economy. it's not yet to that point in

mexico, but the game has definitely changed. in contrast, the united states, which has had a growing and vibrant population, in no small measure because we've been energized from people around the world. it's time to consider our immigration policies and practices for the future. even though there's been no more contentious issue in american politics than immigration, the situation surrounding mexican immigration has changed profoundly. as i mentioned, the birth rate is falling and for the first time as many people are leaving the united states for mexico as are arriving from mexico in the united states. illegal entry is clearly declining. the number of arrests at the border demonstrates that. the number of people being deported in greater numbers than ever before. it's not that there isn't still a problem. there are still some bad actors coming across the border, no

mistake about it. but there are important opportunities to concentrate on what's important, people dealing with drugs, security threats, criminals, wasting resources on an effort for people who want to work or want to be with their families, it doesn't make us any safer. it's past time to deal with the millions of people who are already here and part of the fabric of our communities. often they are with families that include children who are citizens and other family members who are citizens as part of an extended family, and it's not just the members of those extended families that rely on one another. america relies on these millions of people. had the alabama legislature found out with draconian efforts to try to deal with illegal immigrants and legal immigrants, by the way, almost

wound up ruining a number of their farmers and they had to backtrack. immigrants have always been a source of america's strength. our current policies inflict damage to the realities of those family ties, especially to children who are already citizens. but we do other dumb things. we deny smart people who are educated at great expense at some of the finest institutions in america with important skills that would be valuable to business, we make it hard for them to be there. unfortunately, if their skills are going to be utilized, too often they end up being hired by foreign overseas competitors or american companies have to create jobs for them overseas. there are a half dozen pieces of legislation in a piecemeal fashion that will make it better. one of the most important is the dream act which allows children who were brought here at an early age to be able to earn the right to citizenship if they've done work in education or perform work in the military.

i'm pleased to see support for all of these different pieces of legislation that would bring a measure of rationality and fairness gaining support, but the most important thing we can do is return to that spirit of bipartisan cooperation that was exhibited by the late ted kennedy and by the way, john mccain used to be, before he ran for re-election in today's arizona, because they were sponsoring comprehensive immigration reform. they didn't rely on a half dozen pieces of legislation but really looked at the problem holistically. to have a thoughtful path to citizenship that people could earn, not being granted amnesty but by paying taxes, learning the language, demonstrating a clear commitment to what it takes to be a constructive part of the community. comprehensive immigration reform is what ultimately will help us unwind this problem,

save money and heartache and get about the business of building a stronger american future for all our families. thank you and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the chair recognizes the gentleman from illinois, mr. shimkus, for five minutes. mr. shimkus: thank you, mr. speaker. i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. shimkus: thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, i come to the floor again as i've had the past two years to talk about the location of high level of nuclear waste around this country and compare and contrast it with where we have high level nuclear waste, mostly spent nuclear fuel, but other types of waste and compare it to where it should be based upon a 1982 law, the nuclear waste policy act, and the 1987 amendment to that law which identified yucca mountain as the location where we should be storing high-level nuclear

waste. so today we go to pennsylvania and west virginia area and we compare yucca mountain with nuclear power plant called limerick. so at yucca mountain currently there's no nuclear waste on site. at limerick there is 1,143 metric tons of spent nuclear fuel on site. at yucca mountain the waste would be stored, if it's there, 1,000 feet underground. at limerick, you can see waste is stored above ground in pools and casks. if it was at yuck awe mountain it would be 1,000 feet above the water table. at limerick, the waste is stored 20 feet above the

groundwater. finally, at yucca mountain -- yucca mountain is 100 miles from the colorado river. limerick is on the sck -- scuckill river which is 60 miles from philadelphia. the difficulties we've had and public policy being as is defined by law the question is why do we still have nuclear waste in pennsylvania right outside philadelphia and why don't we have it underneath a mountain in a desert? and the answer is, i know it will shock people, politics here in washington, especially in the other chamber, not complying with the law along with an administration that is in lead with those who have a

final scientific study with yucca mountain. what i've done is lock at the senators from the states around the nuclear power plants that i've been addressing and why do they stand individually? well, senator casey relatively new senator has really been silent on that. although he has said as a senator from the state with nine commercial reactors and 10 million people living within 50 miles of those reactors, i can tell you that nuclear security is extremely important to pennsylvanians. obviously the nuclear waste is not that important to him since he's been silent on yucca mountain. senator toomey is quoted as saying the alternative is what we have now, highly radioactive waste located at 131 sites in 39 states including nuclear power plants close to thely high valley -- close to lee

high valley. senator manchin, somewhat relatively new, silent on what we should do with the high level nuclear waste. part of this process is to identify that and hopefully have him come out in a statement. senator rockefeller voted no. and he has -- his statement is nuclear energy is touted by his proponents as carbon-free option that should have its share of the nation's electricity generated expanded. we don't know about the human and safety concerns. and that's where i very much disagree with the senator because the federal government has spent 20 years and $9 billion studying yucca mountain. unprecedented. 100-year projections were shown showing safety and there is no safer place in the entire united states for nuclear waste than yucca mountain. so then i've been doing a tally across the country of the senators and where they stand

as of today. we have 48 who support yucca mountain and high-level nuclear waste. 18 we don't know. hopefully they get a chance to cast a vote. 20 who are no. in the filibuster world that operates in the other chamber, you know we really need 60. we're very close in fact. if 12 of these 18 undecided are yes, there should be no reason why we would allow senator reid and the president of the united states to block further development and movement to take all of our high-level nuclear waste, store it safely in a mountain in a desert and i yield back my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the chair recognizes the gentlelady from texas, ms. jackson lee, for five minutes. ms. jackson lee: i ask unanimous consent to address the house. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. ms. jackson lee: yesterday the guest chaplain asked that the house of representatives be blessed and that each member of the house of representatives be blessed.

and in our opportunity to be free in our expression of religion, i ask that each of us bless this nation. for that reason i will discuss just a series of issues hoping that we can improve the quality of life of not only americans but people around the world. first, we have to clean up our house, and so i express outrage of the actions of two former t.s.a. workers, t.s.a. officers, and who -- two present t.s.o. officers. all of us are human, but the outrage of participating in drug trafficking right here in the united states as an official of the united states government should be condemned by all of us. and i will call for immediate hearings to ensure that the culture of t.s.o. officers, besides their frontline duty,

is to respect the job and the task. as a champion of their work, believing that their work is extremely vital to the security of this nation and the fact that we have not had attack on our soil since 9/11, i call for immediate investigation and response. this morning as well, we determined that the secret service, who finished quickly an investigation of the colombian debacle, dealing with sex workers, prostitutes, now have discovered through a contractor that in fact actions occurred in el salvador. we thought it might not be the culture, but let's own up and begin as necessary to purge those who are reckless in their behavior. thank you to the men and women of the secret service who've always done their duty, but to the dastardly deeds of those who think it's a play town, get out now. there's no tolerance for this kind of behavior. let me immediately to the work in syria.

i was the first member to go to the syrian embassy to ask for the removal of dr. assad and we have been moving along while others have been slaughtered. meaning, discussions at the u.n. national security council, a special envoy, do this, do that, while women and children are being slaughtered, it's time there to be a stronger statement on the removal of dr. assad and the increase in u.n. peacekeepers. the people need your help in syria. the bloodshed continues. the fear is insurmountable almost. it's necessary on behalf of the human rights to be able to move quickly in syria. as the supreme court has discussed the arizona law, i hope that we can bless america by having comprehensive immigration reform. i hope we can understand there are laws that work well. just helping a korean student who was shot in my jurisdiction whose father was denied entry because of his language and didn't understand, he now has

been granted humanitarian parole. let's have comprehensive immigration reform so that we don't have states who are stopping families who are u.s. citizens in the streets of arizona profiling them because of this dastardly law, that we don't have police officers having to become immigration officers while they need to be rescuing people and saving people. let's do the decent thing. let's bless america and have comprehensive immigration reform. then, of course, the senate is debating the issue of the violence against women act, an act that as a new member of congress i had the pleasure of both co-sponsoring, writing amendments as a member of the house judiciary committee, and it's sad we have a divide on the violence against women act that has bipartisan support. the leahy bill. this house should take that bill up as it passed the senate. do you realize how many women are being killed a day, an hour because of the domestic violence that this particular act helps to outreach and

provide resources and counseling and opportunities to be able to nurture those women and to be able to ensure that they are safe? as a former board member of the houston area women's center, that's been a living example of protecting women against dastardly violence and, of course, men who are subject to domestic violence, it's unfortunately a form of an epidemic in this country as we have seen bullying. we have to be able to bless america and have people turn internally. let them seek help. but why stall the passage of the violence against women's act which in fact would provide the nurture and comfort and resources and the national statement that we abhor and stand against violence against women and others who will be impacted violently in this nation? as a member who stood along chairman hyde some years ago, the late chairman hyde, a republican, who stood alongside of us to say he stands with

legislation to protect women, get the senate to do its business and let the house do its business. let us bless america. i yield back. . the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from tennessee is recognized, mrs. blackburn, for five minutes. mrs. blackburn: thank you, mr. speaker. i rise today to offer my praise to one of tennessee's true living legends, born in clarksville, tennessee, in tennessee's seventh congressional district, coach pat head summit, paved the way for women athletes at her high school and then at the university of tennessee martin. she was an exemplary student athlete and today the gem at u.t. mart -- gym at u.t. martin is named in her honor. she took the reins at the university of tennessee in 1974 and she has led the lady vols to an unprecedented 31 consecutive ncaa tournament appearances.

in her time as a coach she has coached 12 olympians, 20 kodak all americans, and 77 all s.e.c. performers. after 1,098 career wins, over 38 seasons. pat head summit is the all-time winningest coach in ncaa basketball history. pushing excellence both on and off the court, coach summit prepared her players to be successful women when they hang up their jerseys. we will remember her legacy at u.t. for two things -- winning games and most importantly graduating players. every lady volunteer, every lady volunteer who finished their eligibility at the university of tennessee graduated from college. that is a statistic to cheer about.

coach summit has dedicated her career and her magnificent journey to the great nation of women's basketball and to the student at-heat she's chand. this week we have welcomed coach summit and her son, tyler. they have been here in d.c. with us this week as we have saluted her career and as we cheer her as she now coaches millions of volunteers in fighting alzheimer's and earlie onset dementia. thank you, coach summit, for leading by example, both on and off the court. yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the chair recognizes the gentleman from maryland, mr. hoyer, for five minutes. mr. hoyer: thank you, mr. speaker. ladies and gentlemen of the house, 64 years ago the state of israel was born out of the hope of a generation and on the heels of history's darkest human tragedy.

notwithstanding the many grave challenges that it has faced since that day, still in our time israel has achieved a thriving economy, a strong national defense, and important role as a member of the family of nations. israel's existence itself is a powerful symbol of the jewish people's resolve never again to permit its sons and daughters to face the threat of persecution or genocide. onle my many visits to israel, i witnessed the triumph of a dream, a beautiful dream, that sustained the jewish people for 2,000 years and has been fulfilled through the blossoming of a desert, the emergence of israel's high-tech economy, and the freedoms of speech, press, and religious for its citizens of every faith. israel continues to impress the world with their achievements in business, technology, sports,

the arts, and defense of human rights. they are even more remarkable when considering the very real dangers israel faces in the form of terrorism, regional instability, and the threat from iran. for americans, israel's peace and security has always been an important interest of the -- national interest of the united states of america. as president obama has made very clear, our countries will continue to work closely together to prevent a nuclear armed iran. not only do the united states and israel share common interest, we also share common values. democracy, equal opportunity, human rights, and a yearning for peace and the ideals we hold in our hearts. together, together we have worked for 64 years to defend them and promote them. on the anniversary of israel's independence, americans continue

to stand side by side with israel as it pursues peace and security for its people and, yes, for its region. i pray for the peace of israel and its people and for all the people of that troubled region. i know the strong bonds between our nations will endure for generations to come. those futures were what we worked so hard to make possible for thousands and thousands. mr. speaker, i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the chair recognizes the gentleman from illinois, mr. dold, for five minutes. mr. dold: i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized. mr. dold: thank you, mr. speaker. in march the united states recognized 10 women who were risking their lives to bring about justice in their countries. these women were honored in the united states at the 2012 international women of courage

and visited congress to share their stories and give a voice to the people of their countries who have nowhere else to turp. i had the privilege of meeting with each of these women and listening to their stories and learn more about their fight to end human rights abuses and make the world a better place. i was impressed with their strength, their courage, and want to share some of their stories with you here today that we can for those who have no voice. miriam is from afghanistan, at age 27 she is the director of a woman's association for culture and speaks out for the rights of women and girls in kandahar province. her life has been threatened numerous times, and yet she continues to fight for women in afghanistan and has started the overwhelm female focused radio station in the nation. she received the international women of courage award for

striving to give a voice to women through the power of media, government, and civil society. priscilla is from brazil. she's 34 and serves as the general coordinator for strategic programs for the rio day january narrow state secretariat of public security. she's one of the most senior officers in the police pacification units in her country and has worked to end drug dealing operations in brazil. she arrested a gang of criminals who had once kidnapped her and is working with the state and local governments to improve conditions throughout brazil. she received this award for integrating previously marginalized populations into the larger rio dejanuary narrow community. zinmar, from burma, at age 36, is a democratic activist who was a former political prisoner and held for 11 years because of her efforts to promote democracy,

women's empowerment, and conflict resolution in burma. she received this award for championing democracy, strengthening civil society, and empowering individuals to contribute meaningfully to the political transformation of burma. jeana is from colombia, at age 38 is an investigative journalist. while on assignment she was repeatedly raped and left in a dumpster. she was left in this dumpster by her attackers and told they were sending a message to the colombian press. since that horrific attack, she has spoken out against sexual violence and become a role model for women in colombia. she was given this award for her unfailing courage, determination, and perseverance fighting for justice all around the globe. hannah is a 27-year-old architect from libya who contributed to the proper documentation of the violence during the revolution in her

country. she also was an advocate for women's rights in her country and received this award for courageous advancement for the cause of freedom of expression and women rights during a time of conflict and transition in libya. anyssa is from maldives and founded hope for women. she advocates for ending gender base violenced and serves as the deputy minister of women's affairs. she received this award for courageous advocacy of women's rights and protection of domestic violence. shahad is 33 from pakistan who is a courageous human rights activist. she provides political training, microcredit information, and more to women in her country. there have been numerous attempts to end her life, but she remains committed to advancing women's rights and

even won a local office in her country. she received this award for fearlessly championing pakistani women's political and economic rights. sumar is from saudi arabia and at 31 monitors human rights in her country. she is the first woman in saudi arabia to file a lawsuit against the government demanding that women have a right to vote. she won this award for demonstrating significant courage in her activism while becoming a champion in the struggle for women's suffrage and legal rights in saudi arabia. awala is from sudan and a human rights activist, forced to flee darfur, she lived in an internally displaced persons camp and spoken out of human rights abuses in these camps and advocated for women's rights in her country. she's been persecuted by the government of sudan and forced

to flee her country and was given this award for giving a voice to the women in darfur. i want to say these women act as a role model for all women across the country, across the world, we must stand up for women's rights. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the chair recognizes the gentlelady from california, ms. woolsey, for five minutes. ms. woolsey: mr. speaker, last weekend the united states government in afghanistan reached a strategic agreement to define the terms of the relationship between our two countries in the near-term future. first of all this agreement affirms that our combat troops will not leave afghanistan until 2014. which is far too slow a timetable. don't we have enough evidence right here after 10-plus years that we are not making america safer with this war? we are not minimizing the terrorist threat, and we are not

bringing stability and security to afghanistan? how much more will americans be asked to sacrifice? how many more tens of billions in taxpayer dollars will be wasted when we have so many needs right here at home. how many more americans have to come home in a casket? how many more will take their own lives because the mental health distress of serving in a combat zone becomes too much. how many more have to spend the rest of their lives in a wheelchair or without a limb or limbs because of injuries suffered in an immoral and unnecessary war? believe me, mr. speaker, there is not a minute to waste. now is the moment to end this war and which our troops home. -- and bring our troops home. the meeting this weekend does, however, show the importance of a plan going forward, a plan that would define the terms of

our engagement with afghanistan after the war is over. i have always said that ending the military occupation does not mean abandoning afghanistan. the question is what form will our partnership take and on that question the agreement signed this weekend provides very little guidance. . according to "the washington post," in fact, and i'll quote them, they say the specifics of the u.s. commitment to afghanistan have yet to be formally outlined. then "the post" adds that the document provides only a vaguely worded reassurance, leaving many to guess what the u.s. commitment means in practice, unquote. well, mr. speaker, we need more than a guess. we need a clear strategy for investing in afghanistan and its people. and while a lot of the talk has been about continuing to shore

up afghan security forces, we need a comprehensive approach. in short, we need to implement smart security, the strategy i've spoken about from this spot hundreds of times since 2004. smart security would replace our military surge with a civilian surge. it would put humanitarian aid front and center. it would emphasize development and diplomacy instead of invasion and occupation. it would mean in place of troops and weapons we give experts tools and resources to rebuild afghan infrastructure, hospitals and schools. it would mean investing in programs to improve maternal health and child mortality. it would mean a focus on democracy promotion and rebuilding civil society in afghanistan.

it would also mean shifting the emphasis to peace building, conflict prevention and human rights education. this approach would save lives. it would promote peace. it is a superior counterterrorism and national security strategy. it will keep the american people safe. it will advance our values in a way that a decade of war clearly has not. we can't wait until 2014, mr. speaker. we need a smart security approach in afghanistan, and we need it now. and we need to start by bringing our troops home. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady yields back. the chair recognizes the gentleman from south carolina, mr. duncan, for five minutes. without objection, the gentleman is recognized. mr. duncan: thank you, mr. speaker. i rise today in honor of our country's veterans, and i want to begin briefly by mentioning an organization that helps

veterans that was recently brought to my attention. patriot outreach, a nonprofit organization to assist our military with getting the help they need to deal with the trauma associated with aspects of military service. you can learn more about that at patriotoutreach.org, and i think they're doing a great service to our veterans. the legacy of heroes is the memory of a great name and the inhair tans of a great -- inheritance of a great example. in our country some of our greatest individuals are veterans which answered the call to protect us. our country has given them a firm promise. because of their willingness to protect us through their service when their service ends, we promise to take care of them, but unfortunately if you talk to veterans today they don't believe our government is living up to their promises. when we made the commitment to take care of our troops when they returned home, we never

said anything about making them jump through hoops or navigate a complicated bureaucracy. we promised our veterans the moon and instead have failed in many instances to provide them with the most basic of care. as of march 16 this year, the columbia, south carolina, regional office of the veterans administration had pending cases with an average wait time of 232 days. survivor benefits for veteran spouses can take between 10 months and 18 months to be dispersed and sometimes even longer depending on the health status of the beneficiary. my office is serving a constituent because he had 12 claims pending before the v.a. which date all the way back to 2004. another constituent has had her claims delayed over 18 months because she's been told by the v.a. they don't have her medical records. now, this is despite the fact that she's already sent the v.a. her medical records twice by certified mail. unfortunately, claims aren't

the only backlog facing the v.a. veterans are also forcing to delay seeking medical attention, and it has forced some veterans to have to wait months to receive medical care. mr. speaker, to put it simply, the v.a. isn't clicking and ticking. despite the best intentions of v.a. personnel to deliver a high level of service and care to our veterans, too many service men and women are falling through the cracks. in my district in south carolina we created an advisory committee comprised of military veterans to provide insight into some of the problems they are facing today. their view is not that the law needs to be changed, necessarily, but that the spirit of law is not being followed. veterans were promised certain benefits and in too many cases they are still waiting to receive them. in addition to the mounting problems regarding veteran services, i'm deeply concerned that veterans will be negatively impacted by the implementation of obamacare. the unconditional and

unconstitutional health care law is to begin lumping our service men and women into the bureaucracy of obamacare. not only do i think this breaks a promise made to our veterans, but i'm afraid it will make an already bad situation worse. in conclusion, mr. speaker, we can do better, and for the sake of our living heroes, we must do better. let us not forget the promises that we made to our veterans and not just honor our veterans with our words but let's honor them with our actions. thank you. may god bless our troops in the field, those here at home, may god bless those who served our country in uniform, and may god continue to bless the united states of america. and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the chair recognizes the gentleman from georgia, mr. johnson, for five minutes. mr. johnson: thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, today i rise to

talk about the discriminatory voter i.d. laws that are undemocratic and simply un-american. the american legislative exchange council, also known as alec, has long been a secretive collaboration between big business and tea party conservative politicians serving in this nation state and -- in this state and federal legislatures. they help the superrich by any means necessary. yesterday i discussed how alec had produced legislative policy that degrades our air and water quality and wrecks our environment. last week i outlined how alec

has infiltrated our criminal justice system by producing legislation that stimulates higher and higher levels of incarceration to the benefit and to the surging profits of the private for-profit prison industry. and if that wasn't enough, with 194 days left until the general election, alec has been working hard to suppress the votes of the most vulnerable in our society. alec has met with its corporate allies and right-wing state officials behind closed doors to promote legislation, to suppress the votes of likely democratic voters. by suppressing -- by making it more difficult for people to exercise their rights to vote, alec's model voter i.d. act

grants an electoral advantage to republicans while undermining the rights of individuals to vote. in addition, alec has worked to make it easier for corporations to participate in the political process. their public safety and elections task force promotes model legislation that would disenfranchise millions of voters, devastate campaign finance reform and allow for greater corporate influence in elections. mr. speaker, it has injected these corrosive laws into our states, and they have spread like untreated cancer. bills based on alec's model legislation have already been introduced in 34 states and passed in many of those states. voter suppression comes in many forms, from new voter i.d. laws to eliminating election day

registration to voting -- to restricting voter registration drives by community groups to reducing the number of days for early voting and limiting the number of days of voter registration. there is no doubt that alec is directly tied to the proliferation of these voter i.d. laws in the states' legislatures. these policies are not about preventing fraud in the voting process, this legislation is solely about disenfranchising minorities, the elderly and other at-risk voters such as the poor who are unlikely to have the kinds -- the technical kinds of i.d. that these pieces of legislation demand.

so -- now, alec has -- after the spotlight has started to shine on alec, they have come out publicly and said, ok, we are going to get out of the public policy business. they're going to not write any more model legislation like the florida shoot first and -- shoot first and ask questions later. they're not going to introduce any more of that type of legislation, and they also have announced they are going to shut down their public safety and elections task force which is the committee that produced the voter suppression legislation. that's a good thing, but the damage has already been done and we're going to have to remain vigilant about this group, this shadowy group, alec, this unholy alliance

between tea party republican legislators and big business. we'll have to keep our eyes open and i'll have more to talk about in the coming days. and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from georgia is recognized for five minutes. mr. westmoreland: i come to the floor with great sadness and also a great sense of pride to honor the service of a hero. private frank davis. on march 29, 2012, jonathan gave the ultimate sacrifice in kandahar province of afghanistan while supporting operation enduring freedom. jonathan was the son of reverend and mrs. carrie davis of griffin, georgia. his mother, tracy, described him as tender hearted. a tenderness that extended to both his peers and animals. his heart was so large that

they now have numerous pets running around their home due to jonathan not being able to turn away a single stray. his nurturing and giving nature was one of the things that was loved most about him. as a child, jonathan always stood up for his classmates who were being bully and many of jonathan's peers remember he was the first one to come to their defense. he was willing to give his shirt off his back to help others and was always concerned about the well-being of everyone around him, especially those less fortunate. jonathan was playful and strove to make others mappy, either by playing pranks on him or his unforgettable smile that could light up a room. after graduation, he, like myself, married his high school sweetheart. her name's kristen. kristen is expecting their

first child, and jonathan talked all the time of how excited he was to become a father. he carried the sonogram of baby benjamin in his wallet everywhere he went and couldn't wait to teach their baby boy soccer. his unwavering courage, huge heart and strong christian faith is the reason why he answered his calling to join the army. he was assigned to the fourth squadron, 73rd calvary, region meant, fourth brigade combat team of the 82nd airborne division at fort bragg, north carolina. he was pursuing a medical career after the army and had already completed part of his e.m.t. and paramedic training, was on the path to attending medical school. jonathan was part of a scout group sweeping an area in afghanistan and doing what he does best, protecting others, when his group came under enemy fire and he suffered fatal

wounds. at only age 20, jonathan was taken from us much too soon. on april 7, the first assembly of god's church in griffin, georgia, celebrated the life of jonathan and he was laid to rest by his close family and friends. i am proud to stand before you and honor the life of p.s.c. jonathan davis and thank him for his dedicated service to our country, his endless generosity and brave spirit are among the many reasons he will be missed so much by all who had the privilege to know him. joany and i extend our deepest sympathies to the friends and family of jonathan, and we will never forget his great sacrifice for our nation and those that allows us to live free every day. jonathan, till we meet again jonathan, until we meet again someday, thank you, brother. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the

chair recognizes the gentlelady from california, ms. speier, for five minutes. miss fire: thank you, mr. speaker. i -- ms. speier: i rise fen for the 19th time to highlight the epidemic of rape and sexual assault in the military. by the military's own figures, 19,000 sexual assaults and rapes occur each year, but only 13% of the members of the military actually report them. last week i met with secretary of defense leon panetta, along with my colleagues torques discuss d.o.d.'s new report of data on rape and sexual assault in the military. the report shows a slight increase in reports of rape and assault, but a startling decrease in the number of charges brought against purported perpetrators. with the decrease in charges came significant decrease in prosecution, punishment, and convictions. the numbers, frankly, are discouraging. i was only pleased about one thing, secretary panetta and i

agree the only way to solve this problem is with an increase in prosecution. we agree on the result to be achieved but for right now we do not agree on the steps to achieve it. after our meeting, secretary panetta announced new initiatives, but d.o.d.'s three major proposals will not increase prosecutions, convictions, or punishments. proposal one, elevate cases of rape and sexual assault to higher ranking officials in the chain of command. military commanders today told me that many are already having them handled by colonels and captains, yet this does not result in more prosecutions. i believe the cases have to be handled by an impartial office within the military but outside the chain of command. number two, establish a special victims unit in each service of the military. these units have been in place in the army since 2009. i am impressed with the training program that is offered to the

various members of the investigation and prosecution within the army. but again we have not seen an increase in prosecutions, convictions, or punishments as of yet. proposal three, create a centralized data base of these proceedings and cases. this is a good thing. it it's already required in the department of defense as a result of the ndaa 2009. for all intents and purposes, all these initiatives are already in place to some extent. what the problem is is the chain of command. let me explain. claudia, an army corporal, whose attempts for justice back in 2003 and 2004, were thwarted repeatedly by commanding officers, including a high ranking lieutenant colonel. all of whom were unmoved by her reports of sexual assault and harassment. the corporal was on combat

employment in iraq when she awoke to a specialist on top of her sexually assaulting her and using force. she was in shock and screamed. she immediately reported it to her platoon sargent who responded with a lack of surprise or concern. he advised her to wait while he, quote, looked into it, unquote. he did not have any advice for how she could go -- get help or go

the speaker pro tempore: the chair recognizes the gentleman from texas, mr. olson, for five minutes. mr. olson: mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized. mr. olson: mr. speaker, i rise today to recognize dei cook, a distinguished leader in my home community of fort bend county, texas. for over 40 years, dei has given her time and -- dee has given her time and energy to help the children of our community.

it fights on behalf of abused and neglected children. dee has served as the grand officer of the george foundation since 1988. the george foundation contributes to many worthy causes throughout fort benton county. indeed, has played a pivotal role in making sure the generosity of the foundation is directed to causes that help our community the most. however, the childs advocate of the community, that brings me to the floor today. by contributing her time, energy and resources, dee has helped child advocates to serve over 8,000 children throughout the county. . under her leadership she's taught them to be better leaders, more effective program

managers, and to achieve the dream of helping the most vulnerable children in our communities in ways we never thought possible 20 years ago. her contributions are helping children and in turn strengthening our communities and neighborhoods. she's given a voice to those who desperately need one on their behalf. these efforts to build -- doesn't stop with child advocates. she's also started an annual eight-month leadership for nonprofit course who teach the rising stars the skills they need to build a strong nonprofit community. most importantly she's led a cooperative effort to create the youth in philanthropy. the team is 100 fort bend county high school juniors and seniors who spend the school

year seeing how volunteerism and philanthropy coexist. at the end of the school year they'll put their knowledge to the test by awarding monetary grants to nonprofits. life changing indeed. i commend dee for a lifetime of service to fort bend county. on behalf of the people of fort bend county, thank you. fort bend county will not be the county we love without dee cook. in closing, this love for fort bend county will be on display tonight at constellation field as the new pro baseball team, the sugarland scooters, has their first home game. i enjoy dee and the people of sugarland in saying, go,

scooters. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the chair will receive a message. the messenger: mr. speaker, a message from the senate. the secretary: mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: madam secretary. the secretary: i have been directed by the senate to inform the house that the senate has passed s. 1789, an act to improve sustained and transform the united states postal service in which the concurrence of the house is requested. the speaker pro tempore: the chair recognizes the gentlelady from california, mrs. capps, for five minutes. mrs. capps: mr. speaker, we all know that congress, if congress doesn't come together soon, interest rates on student loans will double on july 1. rates will go from 3.4% to 6.8%. right now in our country, student loan debt is higher than credit card debt. this is a huge challenge and

barrier facing students, their families, and our economy. we cannot have our graduates leaving school with crushing debt. it limits the careers they can pursue. we certainly don't want young people shying away from continuing their education because they know they'll never be able to afford it. we must keep open the doors of opportunity for all and in the process produce a well-educated work force that's going to grow our economy. but if congress doesn't act soon, more than seven million low and middle income students nationwide will be required to pay more for their student loans. this would mean adding thousands of dollars to a college bill. and that's why i'm a proud supporter of legislation to address this issue. i support ending some of the lavish subsidies we give to extraordinarily profitable oil companies and using that money to keep student loan rates from doubling and at the same time reducing our deficit by wls of dollars.

-- by billions of dollars. we must get our priorities straight. we should be investing in our students and bringing down our deficit instead of handing over our taxpayer dollars to some of the richest corporations in the world. i urge my colleagues to join in this effort and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady yields back. the chair recognizes the gentleman from louisiana, mr. boustany, for five minutes. mr. boustany: ning you, mr. speaker. -- thank you, mr. speaker. i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized. mr. boustany: mr. speaker, i recently received the monthly -- first monthly update from the u.s. department of veterans affairs since the announced delays associated with the lafayette and lake charles v.a. community-based outpatient clinics. v.a. secretary shinseki's office followed through on my request for defailed monthly updates of the progress the v.a. is making with regard to these clinics in both lafayette and lake charles. the errors in the contracting

process were solely the v.a.'s fault and they have admitted it. i will remain vigilant in overseeing the expedited process to deliver south louisiana veterans the local care they need and deserve. i'm pleased to announce that there are new and much needed services for veterans coming to lafayette in early may. these services include home-based primary care, imaging and x-ray service, prosthetics, and dental care. for the veterans in lake charles, a mobile clinic providing primary care services is expected to begin june 4 and selection of a location is under way. this would be a first for our vet rabs in lake charles who had to travel afar to get basic care. according to the v.a. officials, the veterans' affairs primary care services will be available in lake charles three days per week also beginning june 4. women services will be provided one day per week in lake charles beginning as well. we need to do more and we are

going to do more. these are all very important services the veterans of south louisiana deserve after sacrificing so much for our country, they should not have to wait any longer for this very much needed medical care. expediting this process must remain a top priority for the veterans -- v.a. having cared for veterans in the v.a. system during my medical career, i know localized, personalized outpatient facilities and care are best for our veterans. this is a critical priority for our area. this is the least we can do for those who fought for our country, on behalf of our country, and i'm committed to ensuring this unnecessary v.a. mistake does not repeat itself in the future and i will continue demanding accountability from the v.a. leadership on this and other issues. i'll continue to be the leading advocate for local veterans as we work to improve health care for our veterans in lafayette

and lake charles and the surrounding communities of south louisiana. god bless those who have served our country, god bless america. mr. speaker, i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the chair recognizes the gentlelady from wisconsin, mrs. capps, for five minutes. ms. moore, excuse me. ms. moore: thank you, mr. speaker. i come humbly to the well today under the epluribus unum to humbly ask there be swift bipartisan action in re-authorizing the violence against women's act. vawa's authorization of course lapsed at thend of the last fiscal year, september 30, 2011, and unfortunately for every day that passes by, women pay the price. the annual national citizens of domestic violence serves as a daily snapshot taken every year

by the national network to end domestic violence found that in one 24-hour period in the united states, over 67,000 victims were served through emergency shelters, transitional housing, counseling, and more. 22,000 hotline phone calls were answered, and over 26,000 people participated in domestic violence prevention and education, training. . but for all these people served, unfortunately in the same 24-hour period, there are nearly 11,000 unmet request for services because these programs neither have the resources to help these victims nor the authorizations based on best practices on how we need to change vawa in order to meet the needs of women. our colleagues across the

capitol in the senate are on the cusp of passing a bipartisan vawa re-authorization bill that contains these provisions to strengthen our ability to combat not only domestic violence but also sexual assault, dating violence and stalking. and i'm so proud to say that right here on the floor one month ago i introduced a companion bill to the senate legislation that contains these badly needed updates to reflect the numerous stakeholders and lays a path forward for violence. the vision to protect all victims no matter what their gender, sexual orientation, immigration status or whether or not they reside in sovereign territories or in states. now, these updates have garnered criticism from our colleagues on the other side of the aisle that offer fundamental simple rights that

ought to be guaranteed by the 14th amendment. for example, this bill would recognize the tribes authority to prosecute non-indians or indians who abuse their american indian spousing or dating partners on tribal lands. 52% of women who are beaten, battered, raped or stalked on tribal lands are not prosecuted because tribes have no authority and on tribal lands there's no follow-up and no prosecution. the bill would also provide equal opportunity for services for traditionally underserved communities including those who have barriers because of their religion, gender identity or sexual orientation. it's absurd to say because you are a homosexual that you don't deserve protection from being beaten or stalked or raped. and, of course, the hippocratic oath would have us scoop up a

person who may be lying in the street hit by a truck, we don't ask people for their immigration papers in order to intervene in a life-saving intervention. why would we demand this of non-- of immigrant women? we have got to ensure a more comprehensive response to the continuing problem of enforcement, reporting and services for victims of sexual assault. just yesterday the house republicans put their so-called clean re-authorization bill on the floor. and let me tell you this -- it's clean, perhaps, because we don't want to dirty our hands dealing with the beatened, stalked, murdered and bullied -- butch batterers, we don't

want to deal with homosexuality. we want a clean legislation that keeps immigrant women in the shadows and keeps their pain and their battery and their victimization in the shadows and makes them invisible. and we are actually sanctioning the abuse that occurs on tribal lands and providing a sanctuary for assailants who commit these crimes on native lands by not providing this authority to tribal nations. i urge my republican colleagues to work together with house democrats -- the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman's time has expired. ms. moore: with that, mr. speaker, i thank you for your indulgence and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady's time has expired. pursuant to clause 12-a of rule 1, the chair declares the house in recess until noon

>> another bill today requires federal agencies to automatically monitor cyber information and assess threats. live coverage when the house returns here on c-span. we are going live to capitol hill for minority leader nancy pelosi's weekly briefing. >> absolute statement, nothing we can do, tee tax code or any other place, brings more money to the federal treasury than the education of our children, early childhood, k through 12, higher education, post graduates, lifetime learning. nothing brings more money to the

treasury than investment in education. it's the most important decision a family and a nation can make. i think we only have time for one more because the room is needed. >> the speaker said there is bipartisan support for his pay-fors. support for the middle class tax extension and payroll tax credit. are you confident with your caucus you'll be able to hold it together? >> there's a unity in our caucus that people making over $1 million a year should not have a tax cut extended. and that is with absolute clarity. certainly we support the tax cuts to the middle class, but not for the high end. what we all support in our caucus is fairness. but that's a place that the bipartisanship seems to end. because the republican majority seems to think it's ok to give,

in their budget, tax cuts to the wealthiest people in our country who are making seniors pay more for medicare. seniors will pay $6,400 more under the ryan republican tea party budget, $6,400 more while tax cuts will continue to go to people making over $1 million a year. big tax cuts going there. maybe as much as $400,000. we agree middle income tax cuts are important. where we disagree is where the issue of fairness. >> what speaker bane certificate telling us -- >> maybe a slush fund to him but it's survival to women. it's survival to women. that just goes to show you what a luxury he thinks it is to have good health for women. we do not agree.

[inaudible] >> we are hoping that we can get this. see what the senate passes today. i think if there's bipartisan support for the senate version, that speaks to why shouldn't we -- why would we want to support a bill that says we don't have violence against women except certain women it's ok. we want our bill to look very much like the senate bill. >> this week there was an instance of mad cow disease found in your home state. do you think it's desirable or necessary to test all cattle as

they do in japan? >> i don't know. i think that we had sot initial conversations with the extent of this. i think it's pretty contained, but again i haven't had a full briefing on it. i'll give you some thoughts when i get a better briefing as to what it is. but so far what i have had from my state of california is it's pretty contained. we'll see. again, you take us to a place where there is a government role that is appropriate. and one of the things that people say, how come you all can't come to agreement on things? because we have a difference of opinion about what the role -- public role is. and clean air, clean water, food safety, public safety, public transportation, public education, public health, medicare, medicaid, sths, you have heard me say that before. if there is no public role or

enforcement of regulations in that regard, it's very hard to come to common ground to say you want none. we can't agree with that. but that's what they call common ground. take a look at the particulars there. i don't really know enough about anything beyond the statement i made to you. yes, ma'am. >> the privacy changes that the white house wants are a nonstarter with the internet companies. just wondering what you think of the bill, whether you are for it or share the white house's concern? >> i don't -- again with all due respect to each of you when you make a contention that somebody said whatever, i have to see what his statement was on the subject. but i do know this, because i spent many years on the

intelligence committee, the threat of cyberattack is real to our country. the response to it has to have a balanced security and freedom. the bill that is before us obviously has -- there are some concerns among our members and certainly with the white house about some of the privacy provisions. issues that also relate to liability immunity for some of these big companies. but we do have to have a bill and we have to recognize the public-private partnership in it. any real attempt to deal with cybersecurity, though, must also address this critical infrastructure aspect of this and that's the utilities and the rest. that is not the jurisdiction of the intelligence committee. it is the jurisdiction of the homeland security committee. in their deliberations, in their subcommittee, they put forth a bill that did address the critical infrastructure in subcommittee in a bipartisan way. when it went up to full committee, the republican

leadership stripped the critical infrastructure aspects -- provisions out of the bill. very dangerous. you might want to ask them why. you may want to ask them why knowing how important a critical infrastructure provisions were, knowing that they had bipartisan support and having the republicans vote against their own amendments, their own amendments because they got orders from headquarters that they did not want the regulation of the utilities that would be necessary to truly protect us from a cyberattack. so the white house has expressed some concern. we are reviewing those and looking at the impact of the amendments that have been made in order. i'm not satisfied that they approved enough of them. do i salute the chairman of the committee, mr. rogers, and the ranking member, mr. ruppersberger, the republican and democratic leadership of the committee, for trying to work

together to put together a bill that could gain bipartisan support. clearly it does not go far enough. i wish that the rules committee would have allowed, which it can, an amendment on the critical infrastructure. that would have made a big difference. they chose not to in keeping with the republican leadership stripping of the critical infrastructure out of the bill. that really is harmful to our national security. i'm looking at the -- talk to mr. ruppersberger again, he gave me his take on the amendment this morning. i want to see what they are, listening to both sides. it's very difficult, but i do salute him for doing his best to try to get the best possible bill with privacy protection that is are so important to our country while we have our responsibility to protect and defend, thank you very much. good morning.

[captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2012] >> we heard from minority leader nancy pelosi and shortly we are expecting to be briefed by house speaker john boehner. while we wait for that a little of an update what's happening on capitol hill. the house is coming back in at noon eastern to work on a couple of cybersecurity bills. on the other side of the capitol the senate today is continuing work on a bill aimed at reducing violence against women. and lawmakers in the senate are also considering a pair of judicial nominations. in addition to the house and

senate, we are also having live coverage of the senate agriculture committee today, meeting to go over the farm bill section by section. the national journal writes the 2012 legislation would cut direct payments to farmers on the books since 1996, and also counters cyclical payments intended to act as a backstop when market prices fall below a set level. that would replace the program with stronger crop insurance. you can see the ag culture committee hearing, markup, halfing live right now on c-span3. -- happening live right now on c-span3.

>> we are expecting to hear momentarily from house speaker john baber giving his weekly briefing. yesterday speaker boehner released a press release announcing the house will vote this friday on extending current interest rates on federal student loans.

in his press release he said that it's currently paid for by eliminating a slush fund in the president's health care law. that legislation expected to come up tomorrow in the house.

>> the senate agriculture committee is meeting today to go over the farm bill section by section. we have live coverage of that markup on c-span3. as we wait for speaker john boehner to come and brief us about what's happening in the house, we are going to listen to an interview from earlier today about that. capitol hill covering the farm

bill for reuters. what are a few of the changes in the bill? >> well, most notably the proposal being given to the committee by chairman stabenow will create a new farm support system. since the 1930's farm supports have been based on government's attempts to prop up market prices. particularly in the last six or seven years we have had a run of very high market prices, record high prices, and there's a belief that a new system would be a better choice and this new system would be an insurance-like program which would protect farmer revenue against low prices and the effect of bad yields or bad weather. it's a more comprehensive approach to farm supports than has been used since farm subsidies began.

that's the big thing in what is called the commodity title. in the conservation portion of the bill, there would be less land would be setaside for long-term -- setaside for crops for long periods of time and more attention would be paid on what is called working lands, which is the land that produces crops. and the idea is that there would be more of a focus of lower cost supports that encourages farmers to practice soil, water, and wildlife conservation as part of producing crops. >> it sounds like some major changes. how are groups reacting to it? what kind of lobbying is happening? >> well, the -- as you know the markup was delayed for a day partly because some of the groups, particularly southern producers, rice and peanuts, were unhappy with what was in the bill. the approach that senator -- chairwoman stabenow is taking to what is called a shallow loss

revenue protection program, is most popular in the midwest, which means it appeals to corn and soybean growers the most. it has some support from wheat growers. it's less popular in the south where growers say crop insurance has not been a good deal for them and so creating another program similar to crop insurance may have its drawbacks. the rice grewers particularly also. there is very little in the bill offered for them. back in the fall during the supercommittee process, they -- the leaders of the house and senate agriculture committees tried balancing this all up by saying we'll give some crops higher target prices, higher guaranteed price for their product. we'll give other crops the chance to use this revenue program. but those higher target prices were taken out of the bill

that's being presented to the committee. >> the bill is some 900 pages long. can you give us of the scope of the bill? how many people does it impact? >> one could say it impacts everybody in the united states because it affects food production. that's a simple but rather large way of defining it. it affects people who care about environmental protections because there is -- because the farmers control something like 900 million acres of land in the united states, which is a good chunk of the united states. and there's also nutrition section in the bill which was prominently is food stamps or now called the supplemental nutrition assistance program, and that affects somewhere around one in seven or one in eight americans right now because of the high unemployment rate. there's also sections on as it's called energy but mostly means

attempts to develop bioenergy, particularly this case would be second generation biofuels and to come up with biomass crops that could be another way for farmers to make money aside from traditional food crops. the bill has more than a dozen titles. research projects, there's international food aid programs. there's export promotion programs. there's programs to encourage farmers overseas to grow more food themselves so they don't have to rely on international aid when they run short on food. it is an incredibly expansive bill. >> chuck abbott is a commodities correspondent to reuters. thank you. >> you're welcome.

>> we have live coverage of the markup of the farm bill on our companion network, c-span3, began at about 10:30 this morning. we are live right now on capitol hill waiting for remarks from house speaker john boehner. he's giving his weekly legislative briefing this morning. we are expecting him any moment now.

>> again we are live on capitol

hill waiting for remarks from house speaker john boehner with his weekly legislative briefing. should happen any moment now. the house today about to gavel back in at noon eastern. they are working on cybersecurity legislation. first votes expected about 1:30 eastern. we'll have the house as usual here on c-span. over in the senate they are working on violence against women bill. votes in a few moments also expected on judicial nominations. you can see live coverage of the senate on our companion network, c-span2. and we are also covering the markup of the farm bill that's happening on our companion network, c-span3. that starts about 10:30 this morning. from the associated press, new reports find insurance companies will have to return more than $1 billion this year to consumers and employers to meet a requirement in president obama's overhaul. larry levity of the nonpartisan keyser family -- kice kaiser family foundation says it's one

of the greatest benefits. the companies expect premiums to go up overall.

>> it looks like it will be a moment or two before we hearing from the house speaker, from speaker boehner, with his legislative briefing today. we'll have it when it gets under way live here on c-span. until then your phone calls from this morning's "washington journal." host: let's look how the "wall street journal" is covering this story. it says postal rescue passes the senate. the senate approved a bill that would divert closings of post offices for two years and continue saturday mail delivery. it will also trigger early retirement for as many as 100,000 postal workers as part of the plan to save $20 million a year at the financially distressed u.s. postal service. the vote happened in the senate yesterday after a series of amendments. other newspapers are also looking at this story, including "the washington post." congress moved one step closer wednesday to overhauling the cash strapped u.s. postal service by approving sweeping

reforms. to rebalance the mail agency'ses finances and help cut the size of its delivery networks. the bipartisan measure passed 62-37 and would give the cash strapped postal service nearly $11 billion to offer buyouts and early retirement incentives to hundreds of thousands of postal workers and pay off its debt. joining us now is ed o'keefe, "washington post" federal government propertier and blogger, good morning. thanks for joining us. tell us about how much work went into getting this bill passed in the senate yesterday. caller: it's been in the works for, gosh, more than two years at this point. this has been sort of a real pipe dream of the postal service to get this done. they argue they need congress essentially to get out of the way, to loosen the restrictions on when and how mail can be delivered and when and how post offices can operate. but if you look at the process that completed itself in the senate, it's a process that

definitely probably put more restrictions on the postal service than it would have liked. in fact they put out a statement last night saying that basically what was passed in the senate is unacceptable to them because it's not going to help them easily cut $22 billion in costs in the next three years as they would like to. host: the postal service has talked about closing a slew of their offices across the country, many of them in rural areas. does this head that off? caller: it does to some extent because if you put a lot of restrictions now on what kind of post offices and mail distribution centers they can close. for example, at least in the senate version of this, they would not be allowed to close any rural post office unless the next nearest location were 10 miles or fewer away. and having looked at the charts and maps of this, i know that there are facilities that right now are about 50 miles away from the next -- >> see "washington journal" every morning at 7:00 eastern here on c-span.

back to capitol hill live for house speaker john boehner. >> families and small businesses arne our country are still struggling in this economy. many are continuing to ask where are the jobs? the clear difference in the focus of the two parties right now, republicans focused on jobs and the economy. passing nearly 30 bills blocked by the senate. the president's party has a different focus it's about politics not about the american people. last month the democrat leader in the senate explained to the press how his party planned to exploit the violence against women act for political gain. as politico reported, senate democrats wanted to manufacture a fight to accuse republicans of waging a war against women and provide fodder for a campaign ad. but the white house it seems is also entirely devoted to this type of petty politics. this week the president traveled

across the country on taxpayers' dime at a cost of $179,000 an hour insisting that congress fix a problem that we were already working on. frankly i think this is beneath the dignity of the white house. democrats and republicans knew that this was going to take effect. democrats and republicans fully expected this would be taken care of. and for the president to make a campaign issue out of this, and then to travel to three battleground states, and go to three large college campuses on taxpayers' money to try to make this a political issue is pathetic. and his campaign ought to be reimbursing the treasury for the cost of this trip. our country's facing some major economic and fiscal challenges. again here's the president

wasting time on a fake fight to try to gain his own re-election. these are the types of political stunts and frankly they aren't worth and worthy of his office. this is the biggest job in the world. and i have never seen a president make it smaller. the president keeps attempting to invent these fake fights because he doesn't have a record of success or positive agenda for our country. it's as simple as this. the emperor has no clothes. they can't talk about the record on jobs because their policies have made the economy worse. they can't talk about their record on spending because the president's policies have added $5 trillion to the national debt. and they can't talk about their record on gas prices because gas prices have more than doubled on the president's watch. republicans have listened to the american people. we've got a better plan. our plan to help american job

creators continues to be our focus. we have over 30 bills waiting action in the united states senate. this week we'll pass more bills to stop cyberterrorism. we are also moving to conference this week on the highway bill that includes the keystone pipeline, a commonsense measure that would keep us from sending north american energy to china and create thousands, tens of thousands of jobs here in our country. republicans have taken on the tough issues that face our country. and we have offered solutions to solve them. and i would urge the president and some democrat leadership to show some courage and to join us. questions? a rights gasheteed by the constitution are for natural persons only not corporations. do you agree with that? do you support amending the constitution in that way? >> amending the constitution is

a serious matter and i'm not sure what they are attempting to get at, but i'll take a look at it when i see it. >> a couple minutes ago using this preventive health fund is going to hurt women's health. i want to hear your side. >> we have already taken $4 billion out of this fund. it was used to help pay for the payroll tax credit. many democrats voted for it. the president signed it into law. so i think they have made clear the precedent is there that they don't believe this money is essential to their program. that's why it's being paid for here. >> spoke to anyone associated with the romney campaign? >> i haven't made it a happen to

talk to the candidates or the campaign during the process. >> there is no coordination to refute the president? it's almost like you're doing romney's bidding? >> i'm doing my own. >> basically the top line in the budget control act have -- >> blah, blah, blah. so? >> that's your response? >> yeah. >> calm down, calm down. i'm call on you. >> thank you. my question is about the national drug shortage. over a year ago the preserving access to lifesaving medication act was first introduced. one of three nonpartisan bills with the idea given the f.d.a. more teeth to handle the drug shortage crisis a. crisis that involved children not being able to have access to medication that saved their lives. my question to you is, after one year none of these three bills have been brought to the floor.

my question is, mr. speaker, why is it that legislation that everybody agrees is desperately needed is taking so long to pass? >> well, the congress is working on this. the senate is getting ready to move a bill. the energy and commerce committee is getting ready to mark up a bill in early may. there is a bipartisan proposal they have been working on that would help the f.d.a. and the drug companies to meet the shortages. but i have also asked where has the administration been? where's the president of the united states been? where's his proposal? why hasn't he talked about this? something that's critically important to our country, as opposed to creating all these fake issues, he's running around the country dealing with? >> they said to talk to you about the leadership. they said it's a matter of leadership. >> i respect the committee process.

and the committees have their work to do to investigate this. and i'm confident that the energy and commerce committee in a bipartisan way will deal with this issue. >> i know your answer to the question you weren't impressed what the president was saying. are you going to go with the b.c.a. or try to go lower? maybe as low as the ryan budget? >> my goal is to move appropriation bills through the house and hopefully work with our senate colleagues to move appropriation bills on their own. i am -- worked last year to try to rebuild the appropriations process. it's one of the essential responsibilities of the congress to spend the american people's money wisely. i think we do that best when we move individual bills. and i'm going to continue to work with our senate colleagues to work on movement of these

bills. when we get to september we'll have a discussion then about how many bills have become law, what isn't finish shalled -- finished, and what else needs to be done. >> you criticized the president on these campaign trips here -- >> you said it right, campaign trips. >> on these trips, whatever -- >> the sheriff in your home county, richard jones, threatened the clinton administration on multiple occasion when is he came to that county. what's the equivalency here? were those not campaign trips? what's the reason? >> the president has the ability to use air force one and all the tools of the federal government to do official business. and when you look at almost all of the presidents, they find official business to do along with their campaigning. but this one does not pass the straight face test.

you know it and i know it. it's time for the obama campaign to pony up and reimburse the treasury. >> the cybersecurity bill yesterday, what's your response to that? >> the white house believes the government ought to control the internet. the government ought to set standards and the government ought to take care of everything that's needed for cybersecurity. they are in a camp all by themselves because whether it's private industry, whether it's other parts of the government, understand that we can't have the government in charge of our internet. and that the bills that we are moving this week are commonsense steps that will allow people to communicate with each other, to work together, to build the walls that are necessary in order to prevent cyberterrorism from occurring. there are more steps that are going to have to be taken beyond these. but this is a fundamentally

different approach than what the white house and some want to do in terms of creating this monster here in washington to control what we are going to see or not see on the internet. >> getting back to student loans, there seems to be bipartisan agreement not let the rates rise but the fight is over how to pay for it. give both sides agree on most of the tax cuts being renewed, isn't this just political posturing on both sides at this point? >> let's remember something. democrats put this into law. they are the ones that put into law the doubling of student loan interest rates to occur this july. and why they did it? i don't know. but the fact is students who are already struggling with the cost of college we do not want to see these interest rates go up, and there's never any thought these

interest rates would go up. last one. [inaudible] >> there's always hope. i did talk to senator rubio about his idea and particulars about how this would work. i found it of interest. but the problem with this issue is that we are operating in vea hostile political environment. and to deal with a very difficult issue like this i think it would be difficult at best. but again let me ask this question, the president of the united states runs around the

country doing speeches, done a couple speeches over the last 15 months, about immigration. matter of fact over the last three years he's done a number of speeches about immigration. where's the president's immigration plan? where does the president stand on this issue? instead of campaigning all the time, maybe he ought to come back to washington and go to work. >> mr. speaker, on the secret service -- [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2012] >> house speaker john baneer with his weekly legislative agenda. the house came in this morning at 10:00 eastern. they'll return in about 15 minutes or so to debate cybersecurity legislation that seeks to get business and government to share information that could stop attacks on computer networks. the white house last night issued a veto threat against the legislation. first votes expected at about 1:30 eastern. can you watch the house live here again starting at noon eastern on c-span.

arizona's immigration law is before the supreme court this week. justices will decide whether arizona has the authority to enforce its own immigration law or whether that's the role of the federal government. we'll air the orel -- oral arguments starting at 8:00 p.m. eastern here on c-span. >> this year's student cam competition asked students across the country what part of the constitution was important to them and why? today's first prize winner and high school selected article 1. >> patents and copyrights is one of the essential specifically enumerated powers given to the federal government and our nation's founding. >> the constitution sets control over patent laws one of the enumerated powers of the congress. >> whenever i'm working on a video project, intellectual property really affects me. from patents and the equipment i use, to the copyrights of what

i'm allowed to use for my video. this all goes back to intellectual property. intellectual property is a promise from the government to legally protect creators from having others copy their content for a limited period of time in exchange for them releasing that content into the market. this is done to spur economic growth and encourage progress. this started back in england with the statutes of ann and trying to set up a new government our founding fathers made sure intellectual property was included. >> our founding fathers recognized that in order to overcome the deficiency of labor the u.s. from the very beginning was going to need to rely on innovation. they recognize the way you protect innovation is provide rewards for it so they create add clause in the constitution from the very beginning to provide that a clear reward for innovation. >> specifically it gives the congress power, quote, to promote the progress of science and useful arts by securing for limited times to authors and

inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries, unquote. >> innovation propelled americans to become an economic superpower. during the second industrial revolution, u.s. economy grew at its fatsest rate in the country's history. infrastructure created jobs and nutris -- industries and nerc surpassed britain to become the world leader. all of this has provided over 500,000 patents issued by the uspto. is our current patent system still propin -- still supporting innovation? >> one record, one of the many details of a busy enterprise. >> a lot has changed. so if you have gone from an era in which most inventions were made in single fields like the first patent -- >> world in which most inventions is very clab budget reconciliation is required. >> the patent system hasn't been able to keep up. >> right now there are about 700,000 applications that haven't even been opened yet.

>> meanwhile, this fast-base of innovation combined with the misuse of the patents has flooded our court system. in 2011 the leahy-smith america invents act was introduced. among other changes the american invents act will convert the peatent system from his to invent to first to file. this would streamline the system by automatically giving the rights of the invention to the first to file it with the patent office as opposed to having it go back and look for prior versions of that intention in the rare case someone invented it first. a detailed debate ensued. first issue? does this fit the constitutional criteria? >> the genl property clause of the constitution gives the protection to the first to invest. >> the bills' inclusion of a move to a first inventor to file system is absolutely consistent with the constitution's requirement that patents be awarded to the inventor. >> second issue, can congress

change the system? >> some have argued that the first to file provision in this bill violates the constitutional provision giving congress the power toe quote, promote the privacy rights and useful arts, but does not how or it should do so. awarding patents to the first to file is consistent with that constitutional power. >> with that decided, congress asked the question whether this bill will promote the progress of science. opponents criticize the bill the possibility of harming small business. >> politicize patent system will further entrench those very powerful interests with deep pockets and lots of lobbying -- >> the news sim it will actually make it easier for small businesses and inventors because the new system is very clear and transparent. the new system will enable a true inventor to file a provisional patent application which ensures that that person then has the first access to

later patent coverage and to know that there's no one else would be able to later come in and claim superior rights. >> the bill would eventually pass both houses with support from the uspto. >> when thomas edison filed his patent for the phonograph, his application was approved in just seven weeks. and these days that process is taking an average of three years. it's a bill that will put a dent in a huge stack of patent applications waiting for review. >> the combination of additional resources to the uspto plus a new streamlined system has allowed the patent backlog to go down for the first time in many years. >> we made progress but we have more work to do. >> with the explosion of new copyrightable text, photos, and videos, the copyright field like the patent field has faced many challenges.

mainly, online piracy. >> there are a couple of pieces of anti-piracy legislation working their way through the chill kwlill process as we speak -- capitol hill process as we speak. >> in late 2011 representative smith introduced soapa, the -- sopa the, the sopon line piracy act. >> that's where the stop online pay acy act comes in. >> it would create a system that would allow the attorney general to block sites on the domaining system that allegedly support copyright infringele. supporters of the bill claim this would help eliminate online piracy. however the bill has faced much backlash. >> they start meddling with the domain name system. that is the fundamental architecture net. >> vaguely written bill that affects engaged in, enable, or facilitate infringement or have a high probability of doing so would harm the internet. the bill would additionally allow websites to be sued simply for having these links on their

site. >> what they said is we are going to criminalize the linking and structure of the internet itself. so if someone posts copyrighted -- a copied video, we are going to force the intermediaries, google and many others, the i.s.p.'s and so forth, to take the link down. this is known as sensorship of the internet links. >> this would include some of those popular sites on the internet. for completely monitoring that massive amount of data would be bankrupting. this would cause much damage. may use these resources for harm, there are many, many more who use them for good, legal, and worthwhile purposes. for me, such an action would eliminate some of my greatest resources and means of distribution. additionally, the position of making streaming of copyrighted words a felony would make a project such as this highly dangerous. >> there is a problem but this is not necessarily the right recommend any. -- remedy. >> unfortunately such a system wouldn't even work.

go consistently go around it by typing the i.t. address. it is centered around a balance between you small and big. between users and creators. when we view changes in the intellectual property field, we must look at that balance. for how else can we support the constitutional role for intellectual property to promote the progress of science and useful art? >> go to student cam.org to watch all the winning videos and continue the conversation about today's documentary at our facebook and twitter pages. >> the national public radio table. you guys are still here. that's good. i couldn't remember where we landed on that. >> this weekend on c-span, the 98th annual white house correspondents dinner. president obama and late night talk show host jimmy kimmel

headline the event before an audience of celebrities, journalists, and the white house press corps. coverage starts with the red carpet arrivals live at 6:30. and watch the entire dinner only on c-span. you can also sy this. c up your experience online at c-span's dinner hub. find the celebrity guest list, highlights of past dinners, blog, and social media posts at c-span.org/whcd, the white house correspond -- correspondent's dinner, live saturday at 6:30 p.m. eastern on c-span. >> born in a north korean work camp, it's the only world chin had ever known. he's also the only one to ever escape from camp 14. >> his first memory at the age of around 4 was going with his mom to a place near where he grew up in the camp to watch somebody get shot. and shooting public executions in the camp were held every few

weeks. and they were a way of punishing people who violated camp rules and of terrorizing the 20,000 to 40,000 people who lived in the camp to obey the rules from then on. >> sunday, author blane harden on shin's journey out of north korea and learning about society and civilization. at 8:00 on c-span's "q&a." and may 6, look for our "q&a" interview with robert caro, coincides with the release of passage of power, volume four, in the years of lyndon johnson, his multivolume by eaggraphy of the 36th president. >> i seem to have earned a certain place where people will listen to me and i always cared about the country and the greatest generation, writing that book, give me a combined -- kind of a platform that was completely unanticipated.

so i thought i ought not to squander that. i ought to step up as not just as a citizen and journalist, as a father, husband, and grandfather and if i see these things i ought to write about them and try to start this dialogue which i'm trying to do with this book about where we need to get to next. >> in his latest, "the time of our lives" tomorrow brokaw urge americans to redefine the american dream, and sunday, may 6, your questions for the former anchor and managing editor of "nbc nightly news." in his half dozen books he's written about the greatest generation, the 1960's, and today. in-depth, sunday, may 6, live at noon eastern on c-span2's book tv. >> in just a moment we'll go live to the u.s. house. members will take up cybersecurity legislation, attempting to get business and government to share information that could stop attacks on computer networks. the house set to gavel in momentarily.

we'll have it live here. the senate live now debating re-authorization of the violence against women act. shortly they'll consider two judicial nominations. you can seat senate on c-span2. and right now c-span3 live as the senate agriculture committee debates and marks up the farm bill seeking savings of $26 billion over 10 years. that session could last most of the day. you can see all of it on c-span3. and now live to the floor of the u.s. house. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2012]

the speaker pro tempore: the house will be in order. the prayer will be offered by our chaplain, father conroy. chaplain conroy: let us pray. eternal god, we give you thanks for giving us another day. lead us this day in your ways that our nation might be guided

along the roads of peace, justice, and good will. grant strength and wisdom to our speaker and the members of both the people's house and the senate, to our president and his cabinet, and to our supreme court. bless as well the moral and military leaders of our country and may those who are the captains of business, industry, and unions, learn to work together toward the mutual benefit of all, walking in the ways of righteousness and working for the highest good of our beloved land. grant us the courage to develop a sound energy program for the good of all and may our people respond with willing hearts to make that program work. bless us this day and every day and may all that is done within the people's house be for your greater honor and glory, amen.

the speaker pro tempore: the chair has examined the journal of the last day's proceedings and announces to the house his approval thereof. pursuant to clause 1 of rule 1, the journal stands approved. the pledge of allegiance will be led by the gentleman from new york, mr. higgins. mr. higgins: i pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america and to the republic for which it stands, one nation, under god, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. the speaker pro tempore: the chair will entertain up to 15 requests for one-minute speeches on each side of the aisle. for what purpose does the gentleman from south carolina seek recognition? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection.

mr. wilson: in 2002, yucca mountain was approve as the location for our nation's nuclear depository which was authorized by congress in 1987. in 20 10, the president sadly placed party politic thovers interests of the american people and began the wasteful process of stopping the project. consumers in south carolina have paid over $1.3 billion for the establishment of a national nuclear repository at yucca mountain. in order to establish accountability and protect the people living in the second congressional district of south carolina, i have introduced the yuke ka utilization to control contamination act this bill gives the administration two options, first, certify the yucca mountain project, or second, face fines to reimburse consumers across the nation who have paid for its opening. the president constantly talks about fairness. it is only fair that the people of south carolina receive the services they've already paid

for with hardworking taxpayer dollars, promoting jobs. god bless our troops and we will never forget september 11 and the global war on terrorism. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. for what purpose does the gentlelady from california rise? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized for one minute. >> patients deserve choice when selecting the right prescription and pharmacy for them but powerful unregulated middlemen, known as pharmacy benefit managers or p.b.m.'s, are limiting their options. these companies are telling doctors what drugs they can prescribe, limiting access to pharmacy patient care and telling them what pharmacies they can go. to ms. chu: that's not fair to patients. with the pending merger of two of the biggest p.b.m.'s, one company will control 3/4 of the market. this leaves us with less competition, higher prices and

fewer choices. that's why i support the medicare performance and audit act, ensuring that p.b.m.'s are transparent and fair when dealing with local pharmacies and will help make sure the medicare part d prescription program works for seniors and it will protect pharmacy choice for patients. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from pennsylvania rise? >> to address the house for one minute and revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized. >> last week, liberal msnbc host ed schultz found himself agreing with conservatives. the answer is sugar reform. sugar processors benefit from a federal shoe depar benefit that fixes prices and guarantees their profits. mr. pitts: schultz noted that american crystal sugar makes $1.5 billion in rev mue and

pays the c.e.o. $2.4 million in compensation. while schultz is probably mostly concerned about a labor dispute between american crystal and its workers, i hope he'll also consider the many other workers in sugar-using industries. the federal program inflates the price of sugar in the u.s., placing american sugar users at a severe disadvantage to their foreign competition. in the last 15 years, more than 100,000 workers in sugar-using industries have lost their jobs. i've been proud to work with congressman danny davis to reform that program and make it fair for everyone, democrats and republicans, liberals and conservatives agree that the u.s. shouldn't be guaranteeing corporate profits at the expense of workers and consumers. i hope the ag committee will reform the sugar program as we deal with the farm bill. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. for what purpose does the gentlelady from illinois rise? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized for

one minute. >> mr. speaker, i rise today about a serious issue, horse slaughter. ms. schakowsky: a recent poll confirm what is we know, most americans oppose the slaughter of horses for human consumption. the last u.s. horse slaughter houses were closed in 2007. but despite public opposition, congress recently restarted horse meat inspections, paving the way for slaughter houses to reopen. that's why we need to pass the american horse slaughter prevention act which would prohibit the sale and transport of no, sir slaughter in the united states as well as transporting them across the boarder to canada and mexico. the passage of this critical bipartisan bill would save the lives of approximately 100,000 american horses, exported for slaughter each year. horses have a special place in our nation's history and folklore and they are not

raised for food. this bill would make sure these majestic creatures are treated with respect and dignity they deserve. it should be passed now. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from tennessee rise? >> request permission to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> thank you. mr. speaker, i rise today to honor an outstanding young man from my district who i have recently had the pleasure of getting to know. lance corporal cody evans, a -- of speedville, tennessee, serves in the united states marine corps as a combat engineer, one of the most dangerous jobs in the military. mr. fleischmann: while serving in afghanistan, lance corporal evans stepped on a pressure plate while sweeping for i.e.d.'s, nearly losing his life. he lost both legs and suffered

numerous other injuries. i met lance corporale advance in january of this -- lance corporal evans in january of this year. he has the spirit of a fighter, a spirit that is -- that has led to his continued recovery. no mention of cody would be complete without mentioning his mother, regina. who has been with him constantly. her dedication to her son is incredible. as a nation, we must recognize those who serve, who have the character and commitment to the risk -- to risk their lives so we may sleep peacefully at home. cody evans deserves this recognition, which is why i ask that this poem be placed in the congressional record. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from florida rise? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one

minute. >> i also ask unanimous consent that all members have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks on the topic of my one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. mr. deutch: today is israel's independence day and i recognize our great ally's many achievements over the last 64 years. israel has endured against all odds, against border attacks, against deniers of her right to exist, against international bias and even in the face of the threats posed by iran's nuclear ambitions, veil valiantly strides forward. veil is the world's hub for biotechnology, for medical research, green energy and innovation and she is also a welcoming home to those seeking freedom and equal rights as the region's only true democracy. so as we celebrate israel's independence day, let's remember why our bonds run so deep. it's more than strategic

cooperation or shared security, it's the values that americans and israelis share for democracy and freedom, for basichu that's forms the bond and it's a bond that i will always work to protect and support. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from illinois rise? >> i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> a few months ago, i had the opportunity to visit the children's advocacy center in my hometown. i am grateful for their helping of children that need it the most. april is recognized as national child abuse prevention month. unfortunately, sexual abuse of children is still a serious problem in our country and too many cases go unreported. my colleague from california i have introduced h.r. 3486, the speak out to stop children

child -- to stop child abuse act which would require states that receive federal funding under their child abuse prevention and treatment act to have a law on the books that makes it a criminal penalty for any adult that knowingly fails to report the sexual abuse of a child. mr. schilling: h.r. 3486 simply asks those who witness the sexual abuse of a child to report it. i want to thank congresswoman bass for introducing the legislation and i recommend all of my colleagues help support this also. thank you. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. for what purpose does the gentlelady from california rise? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentlelady is recognized for one minute. >> mr. speaker, i rise today to recognize april as national child abuse prevention month. during this month, it is important we acknowledge the role we all play in promoting the social and emotional well being of children in our communities.

unfortunately, throughout the congressional term, we have been astonished by a few high profile sex abuse cases and in some situations, the abuse was unreported for years, leaving dozens of youth vulnerable to further bad treatment for decades. adults should never turn a blind eye after seeing sexual abuse firsthand. failing to report child sexual abuse is not new. in 1999, sherice iverson was attacked in a restroom. a witness didn't stop the attack or call for help. she was ultimately murdered. ms. bass: california enacted a law in her name to make sure this never happens again. a the end of 2011, representative schilling and i introduced a similar bill here in congress, the bipartisan speak out to stop child abuse act requires all adult witnesses to report child sexual abuse to law enforcement. i ask my colleagues to

co-sponsor this bipartisan bill. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from louisiana rise? >> i ask unanimous consent to aguess the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. fleming: mr. speaker, the e.p.a. is out to get you and crucify you. that's the message from one of president obama's e.p.a. appointees to our country's oil and natural gas companies. yesterday we learned that an official at the environmental protection agency based in dallas used the roman empire to illustrate the kind of philosophy that he's followed at the e.p.a. here's what he said, and i quote, the romans used to conquer little villages in the mediterranean, they go into a little turkish town somewhere, they'd find the first five guys they saw, and they would crucify them. and then you know, that town was really easy to manage for

the next few years. and that's exactly what he did as an e.p.a. official. going after a company that was safely using hydraulic fracturing to drill for gas. he led the charge to crucify this company with no proof that the company had done anything wrong in a case that was finally dismissed last month by a federal court. this is in fascism at its worse, and if someone needs to be made example of it's this e.p.a. official who disregarded science and facts to negatively pursue the obama administration's administration's war on energy. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from california rise? >> to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> i rise to discuss issues affecting veterans throughout california, particularly the va disability payment back lock and inaccuracy rates at the oakland regional office.

a vietnam veteran from my district many others across the country is suffering from stage four lung cancer caused by exposure to agent orange. he made great sacrifices to protect our country but waited for more than a year for the oakland office to process his claim. mr. mcnerney: my office was able to help him but such delays are unacceptable. long waits for benefits have become the norm for veterans in northern california. with more and more veterans return interesting iraq and afghanistan, it is imperative the v.a. take action now to address the backlog in oakland. while i welcome the news that the entire staff at the facility will be retrained much more is needed. i call on the v.a. to implement a concrete plan to address the inaccuracies and delays at the oakland office. our regions and nation's veterans deserve no less. i yield back my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from new york rise? >> to address the house for one

minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> mr. speaker, i rise to discuss an important issue to young america. mr. higgins: access a forwardable education. young americans are graduating with a college degree but up to $100,000 in student loan debt. 37 million people have outstanding student loan debt, totaling over $1 trillion. 2/3 of the debt held by americans under the age of 30 is student loan debt. in 2007 a democratic congress cut the interest rate on student loans in half, 3.4%, but it is set to expire this summer and allowing the interest rate to double would constitute a tax hike on students and middle america. in my western new york district alone this rate increase a effect 62,000 students and

their families. i urge my colleagues to take immediate action on this issue because all americans deserve a fair shot at a good education. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from oregon rise? mr. defazio: to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. defazio: the house republicans want to play politics on the issue of doubling student loans. they say, well, the reduction in student loan interest rates was never supposed to be permanent. well, guess what? the bush tax cuts which i voted against for millionaires and billionaires were never supposed to be permanent, either. but you're fighting to preserve them every step of the way. we can do one simple thing here. if we raise the tax rate on income over $350,000 only from 35% to 36%, we could give millions of students a more affordable education with lower interest rates.

those who have already made it would share a little bit of burden to help those who want to be the next generation of business leaders and political leaders and scientists for our country. so come on, guys, the millionaires and billionaires, they can take care of themselves. that wasn't supposed to be permanent, but let's help the students. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from new jersey rise? >> to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. holt: mr. speaker, a century ago juliette jordan low assembled 18 girls from georgia for the first girl scout meeting. from daze yes low's start 15 million people have been counted among the ranks of the girl scouts of the u.s.a. and today there's a membership of more than three million. today girl scouts are involved in much more than cookies. i have had the privilege to see their wonderful community service projects, have a end ited award ceremonies, and their work to introduce girls

ever all ages to math and science. recently i had the opportunity to spend time with members of the girl scouts from west windor in new jersey. their robotics team placed first in the eastern pennsylvania division of the first lego league and they are competing in the world festival in st. louis this week. i extend them my best wishes. i'm inspired by the girl scouts and i rise to honor all the work that the girl scouts have done over 100 years and i wish them success for the next 100 years. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. for what purpose does the gentlelady from texas rise? ms. johnson: to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. ms. johnson: thank you very much, mr. speaker. in a global economy, putting a college education within reach for every american has never been more important. but it's also never been more

expensive. our nation's young people have been hit particularly hard during the economic downturn over the last several years. in texas and all across the country students and recent college graduates are now facing the highest unemployment rate of any other group. 2/3 of the class of 2010 graduated with an average of $25,000 of student loan debt. young americans are rightly concerned about their future and so am i. on july 1 of this year, stafford loan interest rates are set to double unless congress takes action. mr. speaker, as we sit here as a congress, need to work together to present this increase. i along with my democratic colleagues in congress and president obama have been working for a number -- on a number of efforts to make college more affordable. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady's time has expired. ms. johnson: thank you, mr.

speaker. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from tennessee rise? mr. cohen: to address the house for one minute. revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman from tennessee is recognized for one minute. mr. cohen: thank you, mr. speaker. the best thing members of congress can do to represent their constituents is to stay in touch. today we had another teletown hall in my district and we listened to seniors be concerned about social security and medicare. they wondered why the ryan budget takes away from them and why would social security and medicare good for so many years to come and not the cause of the deficit that their futures, health care expenses, and their daily expenses are being threatened? those are good questions. and i let them know that the democrats in this congress and the senate aren't going to allow that to be jeopardized. we are going to maintain social security and medicare as we know it. it's so important. and for the young people, i see one up there, the young people, mr. speaker, need to see the student loan rate stay at 3.4% and not the way the republicans are going to do it by taking away cervical cancer screenings

and mammograms for women. that's wrong. we need to protect our future. the future generations should be statesmen and not worried about tomorrow's election. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from north carolina rise? >> move to address the house for one minute. permission to revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> thank you, mr. speaker. i rise today for the observance of the national day of prayer which will take place next thursday, may 3. this tradition begun under president eisenhower and continued through peacetime and wartime, through times of prosperity and times of uncertainty demonstrates our commitment as a nation maintaining a foundation of wear. through wear we acknowledge gd gives us peace in the mitts of our circumstances and we seek wisdom to know and act upon god's purpose and we feel the power of god to those of us who call on his name. mr. mcintyre: we know the true source of power cannot be found here in the house of congress or the oval office in the west

wing or chambers of the supreme court but only on our knees before the one who is the true source of power. may we pray not only next thursday on the national day of prayer and join communities across this nation which are joining in prayer for our country, but may we do so also in honor and in recognition of our national motto, in god we trust. indeed, may god bless this great nation. thank you, mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. for what purpose does the gentlelady from california rise? >> to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentlelady is recognized for one minute. >> mr. speaker, we must hold the government accountable for the safe keeping of the sensitive information that we choose to share with it. ms. hahn: in response to a number of privacy concerns i have with the cyberintelligence sharing and protection act, i sought to encourage more government accountability by co-sponsoring a bipartisan amendment with congressman woodall that was offered to the

rules committee yesterday addressing some of these concerns. under the current bill the threshold for having a cause of action against the government for disclosing personal information is exceptionally hard to meet. our amendment would have lowered this threshold ensuring that the government treats highly sensitive and personal information it receives with the utmost care. while this amendment was a great example of democrats and republicans coming to the on an issue that all americans care about deeply, unfortunately the rules committee chose not to move it forward. while i believe it is important to protect our country against impending cyberattacks, it must be done in a manner that fully respects americans' constitutional rights. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady yields back. who seeks recognition? for what purpose does the gentleman from florida rise? >> by direction of the committee on rules i call up house resolution 631 and ask for its immediate consideration.

the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the resolution. the clerk: house calendar number 127, house resolution 631, resolved, that at any time after the adoption of this resolution the speaker may, pursuant to clause 2-b of rule 18, declare the house resolved into the committee of the whole house on the state of the union for consideration of the bill h.r. 3523, to provide sharing of certain cyberthreat intelligence and cyberthreat information between the intelligence community and cybersecurity entities, and for other purposes. the first reading of the bill shall be dispensed with. all points of order against consideration of the bill are waived. general debate shall be confined to the bill and shall not exceed one hour equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the permanent select committee on intelligence. after general debate, the bill shall be considered for amendment under the five-minute rule. in lieu of the amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the permanent select committee on intelligence now printed in the

bill, it shall be in order to consider as an original bill for the purpose of amendment under the five-minute rule an amendment in the nature of a substitute consisting of the text of rules committee 112-20. that amendment in the nature of a substitute shall be considered as read. all points of order against that amendment in the nature of a substitute are waived. no amendment to that amendment in the nature of a substitute shall be in order except those printed in the report of the committee on rules accompanying this resolution. each such amendment may be offered only in the order printed in the report, may be offered only by a member designated in the report, shall be considered as read, shall be debatable for the time specified in the report equally divided and controlled by the proponent and an opponent, shall not be subject to amendment, and shall not be subject to a demand for division of the question in the house or in the committee of the whole. all points of order against such amendments are waived. at the conclusion of consideration of the bill for amendment, the committee shall rise and report the bill to the

house with such amendments as may have been adopted. any member may demand a separate vote in the house on any amendment adopted in the committee of the whole to the bill or to the amendment in the nature of a substitute made in order as original text. the previous question shall the previous question shall be considered as ordered on the bill without intervening motion except one motion to recommit with or without instruction. section 2, it shall be in order at any time through the legislative day of april 27, 2012, for the speaker to entertain motions that the house suspend the rules under clause 1 of rule 18 relating to the following measures, a, the bill h.r. 2096, to advance cybersecurity research, development, and technical standards and for other purposes. b, the bill h.r. 3834, to amend

the high performance computing act of 1991, authorize activities for support of networking and information technology research and for other purposes. c, the bill h.r. 4257, amend chapter 35 of title 44 united states code to revise requirements relating to federal information security and for other purposes. section 3, upon the adoption of this resolution it shall be in order to consider in the house the bill h.r. 4628 to extend student loan interest rates for undergraduate federal direct stafford loans. all points of order against consideration of the bill are waive the bill shall be considered as read. all points of order against provisions in the bill are waive the previous question shall be considered as recordered -- as ordered on the bill and in the amendments thereto to time passage without intervening motion except, one, one hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority

member on education and the work force and two, one motion to recommit. section 4, the committee on appropriations may, at any time before 6:00 p.m. on wednesday, may 2, 2012, file privilege red ports to accompany measures making appropriations for the fiscal year ending september 30, 2013. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from florida is recognized for one hour. >> mr. speaker, for the purpose of debate only, i yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from colorado, mr. polis, pending which i yield myself such time as may i -- as i may consume. during consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the pups of debate only. i ask unanimous consent that all members have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized. >> mr. speaker, i rise today in support of this rule, house resolution 631, the bill

provides for consideration of multiple pieces of legislation meant to provide slugses -- solutions to some of today's mosts preing threats and concerns. mr. nugent: resolution 631 ensures that we'll be able to have a robust debate on important issues facing our nation's cybersecurity infrastructure while also providing a path forward for student loan legislation that reflects quick action we need to take on this pressing issue. house resolution 6 1 gives the house the opportunity to be a leader when it comes to our nation's cybersecurity needs. the rule also sets up the opportunity for us to vote tomorrow on a measure that addresses our nation's student loan programs. without this legislation, americans with federal student loans will see their rates double starting in july. these are issues that cannot wait. our nation's security cannot wait and a time when our work force is so bleak and president obama's policies keep digging us deeper and deep for the a financial hole, we cannot wait

on finding a solution for the young people with student loan debt who are still trying to find a place in our work force. we all know that the internet has been fundamentally change -- has fundamentally changed the way we live our lives day-to-day. i think it's safe to say that 20 years ago, many of us in this room couldn't have agin where we could do- imagined a world where we could do almost anything we wanted, buy groceries, run a business, talked to a loved one serving overseas, throh comput. the iernehas made all this bufor l ts th intern has madelife, busine, d en government toome exnt faster d more sparent,t's openeus up u.s. rep companit slaught of cybintrusions that stealtive inrmation, even our own govent

cyberattacks this costs american companies valuable inatio intelleual propernd rech and osts ment rk and it c erican wke their jobs. 's hd ay exactly how much cyberattasost our nation economy, but it wld much as $400 billioa , accoing to one rort fromcomputer security institute and thf.b.i. toy, the house will begin consideration of a bill that will hp protect our om the kinds o threat. the inti - t cyberintelligence a shari twould allow private mpans to voluntarihare formatio withach otr with the governmt a panersp. the bill inudignificant safeguardsto protectersonal and private infmation. it signifintlymi the ral fedevernme's use of at imaon tt e ivate compans voluntarily prid cluding e govement ity to searcday tafment

ituires anndepende inecrgeneral for the intelligence community audit -- audit this information shared with the government and report regularly to congress for oversight. it encourages the private sector to make the information shares with others, including the government, as anonymous as possible. this is a strongly bipartisan piece of legislation, mr. speaker that passed out of the intelligence committee with an overwhelming vote of 17-1. in the rules committee yesterday, we heard testimony from both sides, speaking of the cooperative, bipartisan work that was done in this piece of legislation. i commend the work of the intelligence committee -- the work the intelligence committee did with members on both sides of the aisle as well as private sector company, trade groups, privacy and civil liberty advocates and executive branch. it's because of these efforts that virtually every sector of the economy supports this legislation.

it's also why there are more than 100 oco-sponsors of the legislation, including -- co-sponsors of the legislation, include 1g1 committee chairmen. recognizing we don't always face one problem at a time this rule provides for consideration of a measure to address student loans. our legislation -- the interest rate reduction act would provide federally subsidized student loan interest rates to not double in july of this year this one-year measure would cost the government $5.9 billion. now you all probably heard me talk about bringing the nation back to its core mission. you've also heard me talk about how we need to cut back on the nice to haves, to make hard choices that we will and won't pay for. back when the previous majority passed their health care

takeover in 2010, they paid for it in part by taking $9 billion, $9 billion, mr. speaker, from the college financial aid trust funds. now that they've robbed peter to pay paul, they're realizing peter still needs the money too. to resolve the problem, the interest rate reduction act payers in stop-gap measure by taking some of that stolen money back from the obamacare slush fund and redirecting it to student financial aid. sometimes this house has to multitask, mr. speaker. as we face an economy that can't afford to lose any more jobs to cyberattacks and college loan recipients who can't find a job thanks to president obama's failed policies, this is one of those times. houseres. 631 provides the house with a way forward on both of these critical measures. with that, i encourage my colleagues to vote yes on the

rule and yes on the underlying pieces of legislation and i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from colorado is recognized. mr. polis: thank you. i thank the gentleman from florida for yielding me the customary 30 minutes and i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. polis: i rise in opposition to the rule and the underlying bills, h.r. 3523, the cyberintex sharing and protection act and h.r. 4628, the interest rate reduction act. both bills are being brought to the house under a hyper partisan, closed process, that limit december bait and discussion that can improve the legislation and allow the house to work work -- to work its will. many of the meaningful amendments that would have protected privacy under cispa were not allowed under this rule and under the interest rate reduction act new york amendments were allowed.

i want to address both of the bills that are contained in this underlying rule. first, the interest rate reduction act. this is a bill of rather mysterious origin that appeared in the rules committee yesterday mere hours after having been introduced by its lead sponsor, mrs. biggert of illinois no regular order was followed for this bill. this bill receive nod hearings and no markups by the committee of jurisdiction. within hours of it being introduced, it was brought immediately to the rules committee with direction to go to the floor of the house of representatives, without a single member of either party having any opportunity to amend the bill and with only one hour of debafmente what is new about this with regard to student loan rates. that was well-known fact with

regard to the expiration date that the rate would increase from 3.4% to 6 ppt 8%. i've joined my colleague mr. courtney, who will late air dress these issues, as a sponsor of his bill that would address extending the lower student loan rate. yet there's been no interest from the committee chair or republicans with regard to this issue until yesterday afternoon when a new bill, without the benefit of a markup, was presented to the rules committee, going completely around the committee of jurisdiction. look, there's a legitimate issue here. middle class family are having a tougher and tougher time affording college for their kids, at the same time that a college education is more necessary than ever for young people to have the skills a they need to compete in the global economy. it's a serious issue that deserves serious treatment. there's a lot of cost drivers with regard to education.

some have commented about a higher education bubble that has led to higher and higher 2003 igs rates. certainly -- tuition rates. certainly how it's targeted absolutely affect tuition rates and whether there's a bubble. but instofede a thoughtful approach, an approach that looked at drivers of cost and outcomes from higher education, an approach that looked at employment levels preed and -- pre and post higher education, a bill was immediately created and brought to the floor within a day, again there's technically a three-day rule that the majority has said they would follow, they would give members of this body three days to consider this legislation. but they calculate three days in a funny way. there was as far as i know, no members of the body who saw this bill before yesterday afternoon.

here we are today on the rule with final passage vote without any opportunity to amend expected to occur mid day tomorrow. by most calculations, sounds like well less than three days. they had maybe six hour, seven hours yesterday, 24 today, maybe 10 tomorrow. seems like in fact less than 48 hours. less than two days but nevertheless it's yet another example of only governing out of a sense of crisis. with regard to this issue, one with which we do have time fundamentally to follow regular order and more importantly we did have time. this is not an issue that appeared from nowhere. why has the -- why has the chair of the committee of jurisdiction not been working on thsh -- on this issue for weeks and months, and while many of us appreciate the sudden interest in helping middle class families aford college, it would be good to do so in a more thoughtful manner that truly addresses the cost

drivers of education. i also take issue with the other underlying bill, the initial bill that we thought we would be debating under this rule, before this other mysterious bill appeared out of nowhere and came to the rules committee. this was a bill that did follow regular order in the intelligence committee and while a number of amendments that are meaningful are included in this rule, several of the most meaningful amendments that truly would have addressed the privacy concerns with regard to cispa are not allowed under this rule. cispa asks americans to once again make a false choice between security and liberty. now, we all agree on both sides of the aisle, americans in general that cybersecurity is an important issue that needs to be addressed. that's why it's critical that we get information sharing correct. this bill in its current form before us is an unprecedented, sweeping piece of legislation that would waive every single privacy law ever enacted in the

name of cybersecurity. it would even waive the terms of service, supersede the terms of service that most american consumers, american people believe that they're entering into a contract with a provider of a website or service of their choice. that information, without any safeguards, would be shared to the government. as a former tech entrepreneur myself, i know how important cybersecurity is, frankly, it's something i've never thought we could rely on the government to do for us and i think a lot of tech companies feel the samey. -- the same way. but that doesn't mean in the effort for expediency we should give up our privacy rights and inler -- liberties to protect online networks. . the direction that people can have more comfort with, they haven't gone nearly far enough to ensure that customers' private information remains that, just private. there's nothing in this bill to stop companies from sharing their private information with

every branch of the government, including secret, unaccountable branches, including the military, and allowing the military or n.s.a. to spy on american citizens on american soil goes against every principle that this nation stands for. a lot has been made of saying, oh, it's optional. well, it may be optional for the corporations to share information, but is it option for their users with information they have to enter a specific terms of service to have that information shared without their consent? in many cases under the terms of service agreement the users may in fact be the owners of the information. the company may be the host or provider again outside of any legal process gives that company that's hosting -- the ability to share wholesale information that can include health records, that can include firearm registration information, that can include credit card information, that can include account

information, that can include political information. with secret government authorities. now, we have government authorities that have the responsibility to charge with keeping america safe on american soil. namely the department of homeland security, the f.b.i. they have worked hard over decades to strike a fine balance between protecting our liberties and security. the military and the n.s.a. are unaccustomed to that balance. that's why even within the military many from d.o.d. have expressed opposition to this bill. the deputy assistant secretary of defense for cyberpolicy within d.o.d. said that a civilian agency and not an agency within d.o.d. should be responsible for securing the domestic civilian internet. according to mr. rosenbaugh, it is not the right approach for the united states of america to have a foreign intelligence focused on domestic networks doing something that throughout history has been a domestic function, end quote. so not only will the military

and the n.s.a. be able to receive private information if this passes but be able to use it for almost any justification. while ostensibly a cybersecurity pill, cispa allows for the protection of national security, end quote. a broad and undefined category that can include prack particular will i everything under the sun. is it tea party activist a threat to national security? is a communist activist a threat to national security? the danger this can be used for political oppression and stifle political speech is very real under this bill. in addition because of the immunity clauses of this bill there is no incentive at all for companies to withhold their customers' sensitive private information, cbs are exempted from any liability for violating their own terms of service and sharing information with secret government agencies. in fact, given the high compliance costs for this sort of sharing, cispa actually

incentivizes companies to dump all their information on the government so they can take advantage of this blanket immunity this bill includes. this legislation also has glaring omission when is it comes to the nation's future capacity to be confident in cybersecurity. the bill lax -- lacks adequate support that can improve the signert security. train egg in the pipeline for cybersecurity experts cleg stem -- including stem programs, and providing scholarships and ways that students can attain the highest levels and enter public service to support the cybersecurity of the nation. mr. speaker, there should be an open rule for both of the underlying bills to give members of this house across the ideological spectrum the opportunity to address the deficiencies in both these bills. we have heard from supporters of the cybersecurity bill the privacy concerns are overblown. trusses, they have said. republicans say, trust big government bureaucrats, trust

anonymous intelligence officers to use that information responsibly. well, under this bill we have no choice but to trust them because the bill imposes no serious limitation on what corporations or secret government agencies can do with our private information. it's outrageous to have a closed rule on the student interest loan bill, a bill no member of this boddy, democrat or republican, has had any opportunity to amend, and it is also outrageous to not allow a full discussion of the thoughtful amendments brought forth by members of both parties that would remedy some of the very severe deficiencies in the cybersecurity bill. i therefore cannot support this rule or bills and i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from florida. mr. nugen: -- mr. nugent: i yield five minutes to the gentleman from texas, mr. thornberry. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas is recognized for five minutes. mr. thornberry: thank you, mr. speaker. i appreciate the gentleman from florida for yielding to me. i rise in support of the rule

and the bill, the cyberbill that it brings to the floor, as well as the other cyberbills which the house will consider today and tomorrow. and let me begin, mr. speaker, by acknowledging the leadership of the speaker and majority leader for setting up a process for a thoughtful examination of the many issues related to cybersecurity. they recognize that not only is it a significant national security threat, it's a threat to our economy and to jobs, but at the same time what we are trying to protect is owned -- at least 85% is owned and operated by the private sector. so one has to tread carefully in this area and we have tried to do so with the limited legislation that is before the house today and tomorrow. i also want to thank the members of the house cybersecurity task force who put in a great deal of time and expertise in sorting through these issues and making recommendations.

mr. aderholt, mr. chaffetz, mr. could haveman, mr. goodlatte, mr. hurt, mr. latta, mr. lungren, mr. mccaul, mr. murphy, mr. terry. of course a number of members have worked on these issues for several years, including a number of those i just mentioned, as well as mr. langevin, mr. ruppersberger, people on both sides of the aisle. finally i also want to take a second to thank the staff of the various committees who have worked on this issue as well as josh martin, michael seeds of my office, as well as general stewart, the speaker's national security advisor whose guidance on substance and process was invaluable. mr. speaker, we will have ample opportunity to debate the merits of the individual pieces of legislation, but i think it's important at the beginning just to step back and say why all this hubbub about computers? what does all that mean? i think we should start with the point that cyber, and that

includes networks connected to the internet and networks that are not connected to the internet, but cyber is deeply ingrained in virtually every facet of our lives now. from the time we get up till the time we go to sleep. and all the times in between. we very much depend on cyberand anything you very much depend on can and often does become a vulnerability. so we know of it at least three different kinds of vulnerabilities these days. people can reach through the internet and steal information which businesses, large, medium, and small have produced. it happens every day in this country. intellectual property is ripped out of the possession of those who produce it. and every time people steal information they cost us jobs. they are stealing jobs as well. so our economy is directly affected by the difficulty in

protecting the information that we as individuals and businesses store on our computers. in addition to that, though, information can be destroyed on our computers or it can be manipulated or the computers themselves can be manipulated. so that what we intend to do or what we want to do is not possible. and if, for example, you have a lot of bank records that are destroyed, or other such important records, then it can have a huge effect on our economy as well as our security. but going beyond stealing information, destroying information, we now know it's possible to reach through the internet and other networks to have physical consequences in the real world, to flip a switch, to open a valve. it's the sort of thing that happened with the virus in iran. but there are physical consequences to doing so. so that's part of the reason that people talk about the electricity grid going down, a

whole city being poisoned by its water supply, chemical plants releasing emissions that it doesn't intend to release. physical consequences, real death potentially and destruction can occur all because of things going on the internet. that's the reason a lot of people talk about a cyber9/11, or a cyber-pearl harbor. i know it's tempting to think all that's hyped, but the truth is over the past decade and especially over the past couple years, the number and sophistication of threats has grown much more rapidly than our ability to respond. it's especially our laws and policies that have not kept up with the growing sophistication of threats. so the bills that we have before us this week, four of them, try to begin to take a step to close that gap between the growing threat and laws and

policies. they don't solve all the problems. they don't try to. but they are a step in the right direction. mr. nugent: i yield the gentleman an additional minute. mr. thornberry: i would just point out two other things briefly. one is, again, one criticism one hears is that, well, you don't solve this problem or that problem. and there are -- that is absolutely true. these bills, all four of them, don't solve all the problems in cyberspace. but we shouldn't let the pursuit of the perfect answer prevent us from accomplishing some significant steps in the right direction, and that's what these bills do. the second point i'd make as the gentleman from florida mentioned is, three of these bills were reported out of committee by voice vote. the information sharing bill was reported out 17-1. and i believe that it has been made better since then.

new protections are there. a host of restrictions on what the information can be used and privacy protections have been added and will be added with the amendments to come. i think this deserves the support of all members on both sides of the aisle. and members on both sides of the aisle should take credit for taking a step to make our nation more secure. i thank the gentleman for yielding. yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from florida reserves. the gentleman from colorado is recognized. mr. polis: thank you, mr. speaker. it's my honor to yield two minutes to the gentlewoman from illinois, ms. schakowsky. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from illinois is recognized for two minutes. ms. schakowsky: i think the gentleman for yielding. i rise today to oppose the rule and the underlying bill despite my genuine concern for cybersecurity. i believe that some positive changes by the chairman and ranking member, it still fails to adequately safeguard the privacy of americans and that

is why i am the one that voted against it in committee. we absolutely can combat the serious threat by cyberattacks and still ensure that we are protecting not only our computer systems but also the civil liberties of americans. as the obama administration wrote yesterday in opposition to this bill, quote, cybersecurity and privacy are not mutually exclusive, unquote. i'm particularly concerned because this legislation has the potential of exposing personal information of customers that may be shared both with the government and between companies. the obama administration writes that the bill, quote, lacks sufficient limitations on the sharing of personally identical -- identify tent final information between private entities, end quote. i offered an amendment to simply require companies to make reasonable efforts to

remove information unrelated to the cybersecurity threat which can be used to identify specific persons. even with this basic standard for compliance, the big private companies refused to make the effort and my amendment was not made in order. the bill allows the u.s. military to directly receive cyberinformation on americans. by allowing companies to give information to the n.s.a. or other military agencies, this bill threatens the long held american tradition that the military does not snoop on u.s. soil against u.s. americans. -- against u.s. citizens. i also offered an amendment to require that information to be received only by civilian agencies -- thank you. ensuring a lateer of protection between citizens and the military. unfortunately my amendment together with all o

of publriva internet