what they used those programs to do and with those programs have allowed them to do is to gain the medical billing systems. there's been some interesting reporting on this that have showed it has increased spending for hospitals. as far as medicaid, i don't know exactly how many people, but it did end up finding a lot of additional medicaid for the states. host: peter suderman peter, "down the drain." thank you for joining us. ♪ [captioning performed by national captioning institute] on, d.c., may 15, 2013. i hereby appoint the honorable mo brooks 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 3, 2013, the chair will now recognize members from lists submitted by

the majority and minority leaders for morning hour ebate. 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 each, to five minutes but in no event shall debate continue beyond 11:50 a.m. the chair recognizes the gentleman from maryland, mr. hoyer, for five minutes. mr. hoyer: thank you, mr. speaker. i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. hoyer: mr. speaker, this week the house will be voting or the 37th time to repeal the affordable care act. this vote comes at a time when we are facing serious and pressing challenges, one of the most important of which is the operations of the sequester. 37 votes to repeal the affordable care act. let us set aside for a moment

the important issue of how health reform is working and making quality care accessible and affordable for more americans. i'll be speaking more about that from this floor in coming days as i know some of my colleagues will. what i find and i believe most americans find incomprehensible is that how this house could waste its time on such a blatantly partisan vote when the effects of sequestration are having a growing negative effect on our economy and on the lives of so many american families. that ought to be our focus this week and every week until we find a solution, mr. speaker. speaker boehner said to this 37th repeal vote is justified because freshmen members have not had the opportunity to vote on this issue. if that is his view, then, by the same reasoning he should allow avoten a balanced

alternative to the sequester. freshmen have not had a chance to cast their votes on whether to replace the entire sequester with a big and balanced solution to deficits. if the house proceeds with a vote on repealing the affordable care act on the grounds that members deserve an opportunity to be on the record on such an important issue, surely, surely, mr. speaker, we also ought to have a vote on replacing the sequester which we know is having adverse effects on our economy and on our national security. american families and businesses are facing greater and greater uncertainty as the results of the sequester and the unwillingness on the part of congress to take a meaningful bipartisan action to stop it. with this uncertainty, businesses have showed slowed hiring and in some cases have even begun to lay off workers. this indiscriminant and

irrational nature of the sequestration means that its ill effects will be felt across our economy and society without regard to our priorities. it also means that none of us, not one of us in this chamber are immune in our own districts where constituents will see reduction in services and dislocation. because of the sequester, we are at risk of 70,000 young people kicked off head start. 10,000 teachers' jobs at risk for title 1 cuts. four million fewer meals on wheels for seniors. 600,000 women, infants and children dropped off the rolls. emergency unemployment insurance cut by 11% for two million out-of-work americans. 2,100 fewer food safety inspectors. that's a job of 18% to make

sure our food is safe. and one third of our combat units are grounded. the responsible path forward is for democrats and republicans to work together on a big and balanced approach to deficits that restores certainty to our businesses and families. four times, four times mr. van hollen, the ranking member of the budget committee, has offered an amendment to the sequester which would get to the same deficit reduction but in a way that was prioritizing those things that are important in our country and eliminating those that are not and raising some additional revenues as well. four times. not only has that not been considered, but the republicans have refused to allow that amendment on the floor. yet, we have the 37th time to repeal the health care bill. a 37th vote to repeal health

care reform which is already benefiting millions of americans. it's not a responsible use of congressional time. i urge the speaker and the republican leader to cancel this repeal back -- repeal vote and get back into business by allowing us to consider a balanced alternative to the sequester this week. i also urge them to bring to the floor a motion to go to conference on the budget. my republican friends pleaded, pleaded, pleaded for the senate to pass a budget. the senate passed a budget. we passed a budget. regular order is going to conference where we could in fact come to an agreement on a big and balanced deal to replace this negatively impacting sequester. nothing on the schedule to do that. either to repeal the sequester and change it orce. bu that will go

nowhere and everybody knows that to be the case is on the floor this week. how sad. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the chair recognizes the gentleman from florida, mr.ry del, for five minutes. -- mr. radel, for five minutes. mr. radel: mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. . radel: since our founding, we've always had a distrust of government. i think that's a healthy thing. most especially today as we learn at what the department of justice and i.r.s. have done. what we are learning is that this is a threat to your first amendment, freedom of speech, and let there be no question that order of importance when it comes to your very first in your bill of rights, freedom of

speech. now, i believe that these rights are so say credit, so precious that i'm introducing the free flow of information act to protect journalists from the prying eyes of this federal government. it is my hope that republicans and democrats alike will support this just like then-senator obama did in 2007. a select few represent the worst when it comes to shutting down your basic right to speak out as an individual or report the news as an organization. now is the time that we stand up and say our society is not about i, the federal government. it is about we, the people. and to quote my generation's music, from public enemy, to rage against the machine, we got to fight the powers that be. we got to take the power back. and so in other words, we need to stand up and say that we see the abuse from a few in washington. we need, we must return the power back to the people. after all, washington works for you, not a party, not an

ideological, your government elected and unelected works for you, not against you. but now we clearly see that both the i.r.s. and department of justice are working against you, working to stifle, to shut down your god-given right of freedom of speech. that freedom often carried out by the press. now, in the united states we are so unique and so powerful because we really share a common belief of some pretty simple things. you should be able to speak your mind. again, it's called freedom of speech. and journalists should be able to do their job and do so without the heavy-handed tyrannical government threatening or stifling them. it's called freedom of the press. but now we see an entire culture of government acting on their own behalf. not even beholden to an administration, party or even a belief. their own ideological, these are rogue agencies that we're talking about, unelected, unchecked, without boundaries, without ethics and without a shred of respect for the constitution or you.

these individuals are some people on some floor of some building named after some dude that you've never even heard of messing with your life. and if you don't think that wiretaps or i.r.s. audits are going to hit you, think again. two groups from my home in southwest florida were hit so hard by the i.r.s. that they quit, they shut down their groups. that's it. enough is enough. now, this is the clearest example of how the government is coming after you, to strip away your most basic rights. these groups were really made up of hardworking americans just like you. their goal, to teach people about the constitution. now, think about that for a second. they wanted to teach people about the very document that tells you you have the right to say what you want. they're now gone. and let's look at the department of justice wiretapping, seizing and prying into the lives of journalists. i worked as a journalist for almost 20 years living with what i thought our government also believed in, freedom of

the press, the freedom to investigate, share and speak out on injustice. and from journalists to partisan pundits, rachel to bill o'riley, they're coming for you next. sean hannit, chris hayes, you're next to try to get some answers. where does all of this end? well, this is where the so-called far left and far right need to embrace each other. whether you are a tea partier or part of the occupy moment, this is about you. whether you are an evangelical christian wanting to share the word of god or an atheist asking for a more secular society, this is about you. this is about you, your freedom of speech, your ability to express what you believe in. this is about you. washington insiders should not be dictating your life. it's about them, not about you. the more government is more out-of-control, the more it's

about them and not you. i believe in you. stand with me and let's take the power back and return this government to we, the people. i promise to stand with you. mr. speaker, i yield the remainder of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields. members are reminded to direct their remarks to the chair and the chair recognizes the gentleman from california, mr. miller, for five minute mr. miller: i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. miller: mr. speaker, little more than 100 years ago a new york state assemblyman was an eyewitness to one of our nation's worst industrial tragedies. the triangle shirtway factory fire. he recounted how he saw girl after girl appear in the reddened windows, pause for a terrifying moment and left to the payment below to land as a manageled bloodied pulp. he said it seemed like a ghastly eternity and described how the firemen's life nets were torn by the impact of the

falling body. this inferno at a sweatshop garment factory in new york city, employed mostly poor immigrant women. 146 workers died that day because it lacked proper stairways, fire escapes and managers had locked all of the exiting. this tragedy shook our nation and led to life-saving workplace safety reforms. a century later, i recently met a young bangladeshi garment worker. she, too, jumped from a woman of a garment factory. she survived. 12 of her co-works who -- co-workers who jumped with her did not. many were found inside of the factory dead. this haunting tragedy has many parallels to the triangle fire. exit doors were locked, fire extinguishers were not working, fire codes went unenforced. we don't tolerate these workplace conditions in the united states anymore but these are deadly conditions that are

tolerated in other countries that make the clothing that we wear. these tragedies that moved from new york to bangladesh, driven by business models and global supply chains of the world's leading retailers and clothing brands, but now bangladesh has had what might be its own triangle shirt waist fire. more than 1,100 people died in a garment factory as the garment factory collapsed. some 2,000 more were injured and rescuers are still pulling bodies out three weeks later. there have been an additional 40 fires, explosion and other incidents between the two fires. it is simply a matter of time before there's another one. these incidents shocked people around the globe and laid bear the need for bold action. the lives of four million workers in these factories are counting on bold action, but not everyone has been shocked. major american retailers and clothing brands have refused to change thewa in bangladesh.

the second largest garment producer in the world after china. they're hoping instead that the heightened attention that this will pass without having to change their business model. that business model pits sweatshop against sweatshop, country against country in a race to the bottom to rake in billions of dollars in profits while paying as little as 22 cents per shirt. in bangladesh, american and international companies flourish in this system. companies we all know like wal-mart, the gap, jcpenney and the children's place, just to name a few. they refuse to accept responsibility. what can be done? certainly there are things the local government can do. address corruption that allows unsafe dangerous struck tures. enforce safety codes. defend the right of workers to form unions and be able to have the workers refuse unsafe work. bangladeshy government is scrambling to implemented

limited reforms hoping to keep the industry critical to its economy. but only the retailers of the brand can put a floor on this race to the bottom muchhe economic power rests with them. that is why the announcement this week by major european companies and one american company that they have signed a binding and enforceable fire and building safety agreement for bangladesh factories is so significant. h and m, prime mart, c and a are to be alouded for their unprecedented and bold steps. they have been joined by only hussenrican company, van which has calvin klein and tommy hilfiger mon its brand. benneton have also agreed to sign this enforceable agreement. it provides for independent safety inspections, mandatory repairs and renovation, money to fund the necessary safety upgrades. the right of workers to refuse

unsafe work. and the vital role of workers and unions. this agreement is truly unprecedented. wh companies? where are the american retailers? where are the american clothing brands? where's wal-mart? where's jcpenney? where's the gap? where's the children's place? they are silent in the face of this tragedy is inexcusable. they should find the binding safety agreement and protect bangladeshy workers. they should sign it now. experts estimate the safety improvements under this plan would cost about a dime a garment. a dime for the life for -- of these women. i urge all americans to join in demanding that american retailers and the fashion brand stop selling their bloodstained garments and sign the enforcement agreement to protect these women. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the chair recognizes gentleman from alabama, mr. brooks, for five minutes. mr. speaker, the

president and senate gang of eight bill is not only bad for america, it is a disaster for american workers who are pitted against millions of illegal aliens and the competition for scarce jobs. on april 24, 2013, dr. frank morris, former executive director of the congressional us foundation, and now leader for the american -- african-american leadership foundation stated, quote, the senate gang of eight's immigration bill is not only impractical but immoral. increasing immigration levels through amnesty and new visa programs, particularly at the low-skilled level, will flood the labor market with millions more people, leading to higher unemployment, more poverty, and a lower standard of living for many in the black community. end quote. dr. morris is right. amnesty undermines millions of african-american workers' incomes and job searches, by flooding the american market

with cheap labor. in an april 23 news release, the african-american leadership foundation stated, quote, blacks have an unemployment rate nearly twice that of the national average. the senate's immigration plan to drastically increase the immigrant work force will continue to keep that number high. end quote. dr. morris emphasized that illegal aliens have huge advantages over american job seekers, again i quote. immigrants are the preferred employees because they are more vulnerable. you can cut them out of overtime, can you cut them out of safety measures. can you cut them out of anything -- you can cut them out of anything and they have no recourse, end quote. charles butler, the african-american leadership foundation, added that the amnesty bill would, quote, provide green cards and residency benefits to illegal aliens when many americans are hurting the most. what makes sense is for america's jobs to be reserved for people legally entitlemented to compete for them. end quote. in 2007, t. willard fare,

president of the urban league of greater miami, emphasized that, again, i quote, amnesty for illegal workers is not just a slap in the face to black americans, it's an economic disaster. i see illegal immigration and the adverse impact it has on the political empowerment of african-americans and the impact it has on the job market. end quote. how bad does illegal immigration hurt american workers? harvard professor found in a study released in april of 2013, quote, illegal immigration reduces the wage of native workers by an estimated 99 bd billion to $118 billion a year and generates a gain for businesses and other users of immigrant of 107 to $128 billion, end quote. who is hurt the most by illegal aliens? american workers who lose $ 9 billion to $118 billion in badly needed income. who is helped the most by

illegal aliens? employers who pad their profits to the tune of $107 billion to $128 billion when they hire illegal aliens over americans. the doctor adds that, quote, immigration has its largest negative impact on the wage of native workers who lack a high school diploma, a group that makes up a modest share of the work force. these workers are among the poorest americans. end quote. who do american workers compete against for jobs? for a 2010 pew hispanic center study, 7.8 illegal aliens hold jobs in america. that's 7.8 million job opportunities that would be opening up for american workers if the president would enforce federal immigration law. the way to help our blue collar and low-wage workers is not to flood the market with illegal aliens. the way to help america's blue collar and low-wage workers is by denying american jobs to illegal aliens, thus forcing blue collar wages up and helping workers and their families

pursue the american dream. mr. speaker, we must return american jobs to american citizens. the white house and congress should be fighting for american jobs, for american citizens, not just for illegal aliens. mr. speaker, i cannot in good conscious ratify illegal conduct with my vote. and i hope other elected officials in washington will represent americans seeking jobs not foreigners illegally on american soil. mr. speaker, i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the chair recognizes the gentlewoman from california, ms. chu, for five minutes. a school st month district considered outsourcing the roles of their school psychologists and social worker. after all, budgets are tight and what harm could come from this? andrew, the district psychologist and christine, the school social worker, had already faced an uphill battle

helping their students. although the district has only 900 children in attendance, gallonway is geographically one of the largest districts in new york state. as the overwhelm school psychologist social worker, andrew and christine struggled to meet the needs of their students. facing more than double the recommended ratio of students to mental health professionals across the district. an onslaught of letters and testimony soon flooded the board of education as students, parents, and teachers alike protested on andrew and christine's behalf. the board soon relented to the public outrage. perhaps thanks to a very moving letter of support that andrew received. this letter was from a young student explaining that he would not be alive today if it had not been for adrew intervening in his life. -- andrew intervening in his life. this student was not someone andrew saw regularly. they met onlthmes the year.

mental health counsel something a critical component for a student's success. three meetings were enough to save this student's life. as a clinical psychologist i know that there is no budget cut more shortsighted than one that stands between mental health resources and those who need them. for students, that access may be the difference between a day in class and act of aggression against themselves or their peers. in the case of andrew and that student, it made the difference between life and death. that's why last week i introduced the partnerships for achieving student success. it does more than ever before to help our nation's neediest schools ensure that our children have access to the appropriate mental health and student service professionals on campus. it creates a federal grant program to help low income school districts recruit, ploy,

and retain school counselors, school social workers, school psychologists, and other psychologists qualified to work in k through 12 schools. gallonway school district ultimately kept their mental health professionals, but not every school district has the capacity to do so. by expanding the number of school mental health professionals in low-income, high-need schools we can expect positive change in the lives of students who need it most. that's why the pass act already has the support of the american psychological association, national association of school psychologists, american school counselor association, and the school social work association of america. it is why i take to the floor today to encourage my colleagues to support this bill and improve the academic and life success for students across this country. together we can make sure that the andrews of this world are there when their students need

hem. the speaker pro tempore: the chair recognizes the gentleman from california, mr. royce, for five minutes. mr. royce: mr. speaker, i rise today to condemn the systematic and brutal enslavement of women during world war ii by the imperial government of japan. what is known today as comfort women is in reality a state sponsored program of sexual brutality against 200,000 women from korea, china, taiwan, and the philippines. the fact that women and girls as young as 13 years old would be forced into this kind of misery is appalling. it runs counter to every recognized international norm against human dignity. anyone seeking to justify or deny the existence of comfort women is ignored history. the cheer amount of evidence

regarding this terrible time in history is staggering. not overwhelm are there documents chronicling the existence of comfort women camps, but there is also the gut wrenching testimony of survivors and of eyewitnesses, countless governments around the world have come to the conclusion that, yes, the imperial government of japan did indeed condone this most reprehensible of actions during world war ii, along with such brutal violence, is the rape ofman king. that is why i rise today to condemn the unfortunate remarks of the mayor of osaka, japan, who as recently as yesterday denied the existence of comfort women. the mayor not only questioned the existence of comfort women, but he sought to justify the use of quote a comfort woman system, unquote, as a means to boost morale for the military. the mayor's remarks are

absolutely outrageous and it adds insult to injury for survivors and their families. the rise of ultranationalism in japan is very worrisome, and as chairman of the foreign affairs committee i strongly condemn it. mr. speaker, the house went on record in 2007 to express our outrage regarding the forced enslavement of 200,000 women during world war ii. the civilian populations of korea, china, taiwan, and the philippines suffered so much from the imperialism and aggression of the imperial government of japan. we speak with one voice when we speak against grave violations of human rights. it is in america's interest that we continue to press for justice and to never forget. thank you. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields. the chair recognizes the

gentleman from indiana, mr. carson, for five minutes. mr. carson: thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, this week the house is voting to repeal the affordable care act for the 37th ime. in every congressional district there are seniors, new mothers, young children, low-income families, and young adults just starting out on their own. to my good -- do my good republican friends really want to take away their chance for better health? i would never do that to my constituents. which is why i'm here today, mr. speaker, to say again i am proud of my vote for the affordable care act. recently i had a chance to spend some time with some hoosiers across my district, and i heard again and again they are worried

about rising health care costs and their families' ability to access care. fortunately millions of americans no longer have to worry about accessing care because of the affordable care act. instead, more than half a million medicare beneficiaries in indiana alone receive free preventive services of 2012, avoiding more costly illnesses. . more than 17 million children with pre-existing conditions are no longer being denied insurance coverage. more than 100 million americans no longer face lifetime limits on coverage. mr. speaker, over 360,000 small businesses have already used tax credits to help insure two million workers. by the end of this year, health exchanges will be set up,

making it easier for people who don't have insurance to choose the coverage that best suits their needs. and next year we will happily welcome even more consumer protections. insurance companies will no longer be able to place lifetime limits on coverage, discrimination against pre-existing conditions will be banned for all americans. this means that when a woman notices a lump under her arm, there is no reason for her to wait until she finds a job to schedule an appointment. and she doesn't have to wait to get sicker, costing more of her time off from work and away from her family. under the affordable care act, mr. speaker, she knows she can obtain potentially life-saving care right away. the same goal for her spouse, her parents and her children. our health care system benefits

us all. it benefits us by allowing us to make investments in lower cost treatments and prevention now rather than expensive therapies later. of course i know that times are tough right now and we have to be even more careful about the mandates we put on businesses. but my good republican colleagues seem to forget that people have to be healthy to contribute to our economic growth. as a representative of many hardworking families, mr. speaker, i have stood here time and time again over the past few years to extend the hand to anyone who wants to work with me and us to provide quality health care for all americans. today, i make that very same offer. i'll work gladly with anyone who wants to improve our health care system and ensure that all americans have access to quality and affordable health

care. i call on my republican colleagues to work with us to implement the affordable care act and start improving it. it's time we all stand together, mr. speaker, and start looking out for the health of this great nation. without it we have nothing. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields. the chair recognizes the mr. man from kentucky, whitfield, for five minutes. mr. whitfield: thank you, mr. speaker. i rise today to express in very strongest terms possible my disapproval of a pattern of conduct of the obama administration that is of great concern to all of us, a pattern of conduct in which this administration rewards its iends and punishes its opponents. and when our founding fathers

wrote the constitution many years ago, there were some basic principles in that constitution. one was equal protection under the law. and the other was protection from discriminatory practices. well, we all know about the i.r.s. being accused of going after groups that they disapprove of. and today and late yesterday afternoon, two more incidents arose that shows that this administration is about punishing their opponents and taking care of their friends. the first incident reinvolves round the -- revolves around the environmental protection agency. there is something called the freedom of information act in which individuals, groups, other entities can request the federal government to obtain

information about regulations, things that the federal government is doing, and if the group asks for a waiver of fees to obtain that information, they can obtain the information free. well, because of a lawsuit filed by the competitive enterprise institute, we now find out that e.p.a. routinely grants fee waivers to its favored left-wing groups who demand a more intrusive and powerful e.p.a. but systematically deny waivers for free information from any group that e.p.a. disagrees with. in fact, the headline says e.p.a. gives information for ree to groups it agrees with 92% of the time, but it denies fee waivers for groups that it

disagrees with 93% of the time. we cannot afford a government that systematically goes against groups that it opposes and yet rewards groups that it favors. i want to give you another example that came about yesterday. more than 573,000 birds are killed by the country's wind farms each year, including 83,000 hunting birds such as hawks, falcons and eagles. now, nearly all the birds being killed are protected under the federal environmental laws which prosecutors are used to generate tens of millions of dollars of fines and settlements from businesses, including oil and gas companies , electricity generators over the past five years.

as a matter of fact, b.p. oil company was fined $100 million for killing and harming migratory birds during the 2010 gulf oil spill, and pacific corp, which operates coal plants in wyoming, paid more an $10.5 million in 2009 for electrocuting a number of agles along powerlines and its substation. and yet this administration has never fined or prosecuted a wind energy company, even those that throughout the law repeatedly -- that flout the law repeatedly, and helping keep the scope of the deaths secret. so there is clearly a double standard in this administration

. if you kill an eagle and you happen to be a private business or you are a power generator or you're an oil company or chemical company, you're going to be fined. but if you're a wind energy company, even though the bird you killed may be protected under the endangered species act, you're going to be protected. america will not stand for a government that rewards its friends and punishes its this nts in discriminatory fashion. and with that i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields. the chair recognizes the gentleman from illinois, mr. davis, for five minutes. mr. davis: i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: boyd. -- without objection. mr. davis: thank you very much, mr. speaker. i rise today to acknowledge the fourth anniversary of the end -- sri ivil war in shry

lanka, on may 18, four years ago. all those that care about the are eing of this country indeed glad and delighted. however, there remains my levels of suspicion who still feel they are being denied equal rights, equal protection under the law and are being treated as second-class citizens. a large number of people fled the country, left their homeland during the war, and many have not returned to their homes. and while peace is present but there still exists many hard feelings, therefore, i urge that the government and the tammle community find as many ways possible to promote peace

d live in harmony with equality, equal justice and equal protection under the law. and so i thank you, mr. speaker , wish the country well on its peaceful coexistens and yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the chair recognizes the gentleman from puerto rico, mr. pierluisi, for five minutes. mr. pierluisi: i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. pierluisi: mr. speaker, today joined by a bipartisan group of my colleagues, i am introducing the puerto rico status resolution act. this bill is a response to the results of a referendum held in puerto rico in november. the first question asked voters if they support puerto rico's

current territory status which deprives my constituents of the most fundamental democratic rights. 54% said no. the second question asked voters for their preference among the three alternatives to the current territory status. of those who the chair: an option, 50% favored statehood. puerto rico to become a state. the president is seeking an appropriation to conduct the first federally authorized vote in puerto rico's history, intended to resolve the territory's future status. the legislation i'm filing today is consistent with the president's budget request and serves as a blueprint for how the vote conducted pursuant to that appropriation could be sfructured. after outlining the rights and responsibilities of statehood,

the bill authorizes a vote on whether puerto rico should be admitted into the union as a state. if a majority of voters affirm puerto rico's desire for statehood, the bill provides for the president to submit legislation to admit puerto rico as a state after a reasonable transition period. the bill also expresses congress' commitment to act on such legislation. now, i want to speak directly to the men and women who voted for statehood in november. our movement has become the predominant force in puerto rico. every day we grow stronger. like you, i believe that justice delayed is justice denied. and like you, i find it difficult to be patient. but we fight with our hands as well as our hearts. it requires passion but d also demands perseverance. there are no shortcuts on the

path to statehood, and politicians who suggest there are are leading us to a dead end. the statehood movement is powerful because we're united by a single principle, the principle of equality. the november vote has for theified our spirit and renewed -- as fortified our spirit and has renewed our sense of purpose. we will not shy away from a fight. history has chosen when people have self-government and rest assured now that the people of puerto rico has withdrawn second-class citizenship, the question is when puerto rico will obtain equality through statehood. i know you'll respect my constituents for seeking the same rights and responsibilities as your constituents. this respect must fake the form of concrete action. the u.s. citizens of puerto

rico have made their voices heard and they deserve a meaningful response from their national government. there is overwhelming evidence that territory status has affected puerto rico's political, economic and social development, and it has become clear that the status quo does not serve the national interest either. he u.s. skeds when -- succeeds when puerto rico succeeds. when the island is strong, stable and secured and when the residents does not feel obligated to relocate to the states. a robust and resilient state of puerto rico would advance the national interest. the position of every president since harry truman has been their administration would accept whatever status choice is made by a majority of puerto rico's voters. the u.s. government is a champion of democracy and self-determination around the world and it must adhere to those principles with respect

to its own citizens. this is especially true in light of the service the generations of men and women from puerto rico have rendered to this nation, most notably in the armed forces, but in so many other ways as well. in a very real sense, puerto rico has earned the right to be equal and equal we will become. puerto rico has been called the shining star of the caribbean. the time has come for our star to shine alongside the others on the flag of the united states of america. i yield back the balance of my time. . the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields. the chair recognizes the gentleman from texas, mr. poe, for five minutes. mr. poe: mr. speaker, early last year i spoke with businesswoman katherine engelbreck and also founder of true the vote and king street patriots in houston, texas. true the vote is a nonpartisan organization whose purpose is to train poll workers to uphold

voter integrity at the polls. because despite what many says, voter fraud is rampant in america. the patriots group is a group of individuals of liberty minded philosophy. they are patriotic houstonians who meet weekly to discuss what's going on here in washington. katherine told me both of these groups and her family had not only been harassed by liberal progressive groups but also by the federal government. it all began when katherine applied for nonprofit status in 2010 for true the vote and king street patriots. so began the tidal wave of government inquiries and harassment. in a recent interview katherine said this. we applied for nonprofit status in 2010. since that time the i.r.s. has run us through the gauntlet of analysis and hundreds of questions over and over and over again.

they requested to see each and every tweet i ever tweeted. each and every facebook post i ever posted. they have asked to know every place i ever spoken since our inception. and to whom and everywhere i intend to speak in the future. we have learned that the i.r.s. even has asked these groups, spreebling, for donorlies -- mr. speaker, for donor lists. this goes well beyond the business of the i.r.s. it didn't stop there. the federal government's snooping included six visits by the f.b.i. as well as multiple unannounced visits from osha, and, yes, even the a.t.f. mr. speaker, you may remember the a.t.f. those are the ones responsible for smuggling guns in mexico. how ironic it is they want to audit american citizens but lose track of guns where they were purposely sent to the drug cartel. in any event, in addition to true the vote, katherine and her

husband were also personally audited. keep in mind katherine and her husband have owned a small family business for 20 years and have never been audited by the i.r.s. until all of this. why now? it seems very coincidental. i asked that question when i submitted a foia request on behalf of them to f.b.i., osha, and the a.t.f. asking if they were under criminal investigation. the reply from these agencies was, none of these individuals were being treated or under criminal investigation. well, if they are not, then why are they being treated like criminals? just because they question government. mr. speaker, katherine's not alone. the i.r.s. has admitted to systematically targeting certain groups who have opposing views from the administration. according to "usa today," between february of 2010 and may, 2012, only one tea party group was granted the tax exempt status from the i.r.s.

but during that same two-year period, the i.r.s. has approved dozens of liberal and progressive groups for their tax exempt status. coincidence? yeah, right. not only does this behavior of the i.r.s. threaten individual freedom and violate the constitution, i think it may be criminal. it is unlawful for any federal agency to use its law enforcement and its investigation power as a means to harass and target certain individuals whose political views differ from any administration. it would appear such actions are also in violation of federal law and the equal protection and due process protections guaranteed in the constitution. private citizens should not be punished for questioning governments. this is america. not a third world dictatorship or the soviet union. this type of government oppression and political opposition is disturbing. i have written attorney general

eric holder to request him to direct u.s. office of special counsel to investigate any potential violation of the hatch act that may have occurred by i.r.s. employees. i have also asked attorney general holder to appoint a special prosecutor to investigate all of this. no government should be requiring citizens to furnish their schedules, donor list, personal communications, or political group to any government agencies. no government agency whether it's the i.r.s., the f.b.i., the a.t.f., or osha should be used as a tool to suppress those who are considered opposition groups and dare to question our government. the i.r.s. is abusing its power to tax the harassing and punishing those who have, quote, been taxed enough already. and that's just the way it is. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. pursuant to clause 12-a of rule

legislation calling for the full repeal of the 2010 health care law. you already heard some speeches about this this morning. for mo about that bill coming up -- for more about that bill coming up, we spoke to a capitol hill reporter.

>> jennifer is health reporter for politico. hy are house republicans setting up another vote on repealing the health care law of 2010? >> well, they really got some opposition from their freshmen members and the most conservative members saying that the house isn't doing enough to repeal the health law. obviously president obama has been re-elected. this is his law and he's never going to allow repeal to get past his desk. but that doesn't mean that house republicans don't want to make a statement and make it clear to the public that they continue to fight this law. >> how many times have house republicans tried to repeal the law? >> this will be the 37th vote o repeal a portion of the law. there has been 37 votes but this is the third time they've attempted full repeal of the law. >> what are republicans saying specifically about the health care law that they say hurts the economy? >> well, you know, it's a lot of things that are going to start to go into effect early next year. there's going to be requirements on employers to

either provide coverage oral pay penalties. there will be increasing in rates. they say that will hurt the ublic. >> so the democrats have seen this debate before. you mentioned all the other times attempts at repealing or votes on repeal anyway. what are democrats saying on this go around? >> they basically will say this is more of the same and congress could spend their time doing better things that help the economy. they say it's wasting this time and taxpayer money that the senate won't take up and the president would certainly veto if it ever got that far. >> you mentioned there are a number of parts of the law that have yet to be implemented. when will the law be fully implemented? >> the significant portion will be implemented next year. that's when the requirements to buy insurance or pay a penalty will go into effect. that's when employers will have to provide coverage or pay a

exchanges, which are the marketplaces where you can buy insurance, will go into effect next year too. >> there was a bill that came up on the house floor that was pulled kind of at the last minute. can you tell us about that bill and whether it's coming back to the floor? >> that was the helping sick americans now act and that bill would have taken money from the health law prevention fund to extend the life of these high-risk insurance pools. one of the first pieces of egislation to go into effect s these high-risk pools that was supposed to provide coverage to very, very sick people that have a hard time finding insurance. they went into effect in 2010 and set to expire at the end of next year. the white house said that these pools were going to run out of money so they cut off new enrollees in the pools. republicans said, you know, this is a mistake. you know, democrats -- obviously it was kind of sarcastic but said democrats are leaving the sickest americans uninsured.

so they said this arrangement, taking money out of the prevention fund into the high-risk pools, was going to help them. but many conservatives and freshmen members said that that looked like it was pumping up the health law and they didn't want to do that, particularly because they hadn't voted on full repeal. so republicans say once they vote on full repeal they can potentially come back to this helping sick americans act. i think it's yet to be determined whether that's going to be enough to bring those conservative republicans around, but they're hoping this is the first step. >> well, in addition to this full repeal bill that's coming up in the house, are there any other health care-related pieces of legislation out there that you're keeping your eye on? >> this is the main one right now. i think we'll see more hits against the health law, but i don't think that's going to be anytime soon. >> jennifer haberkorn who is--

"politico," thanks for the update. >> thank you. >> that health care repeal bill coming up tomorrow on the house floor. they're back at noon today for debate on five bills. votes later this afternoon. middle of the afternoon the house republican conference is meeting behind closed doors for a party strategy meeting. we'll have live coverage of the house when they gavel back in here on c-span. just a short while ago the house speaker and republicans talked about the bill coming up tomorrow. they also talked about other issues on capitol hill. >> americans need commonsense solutions to help create jobs and they need accountability from their government. the house is working to give them both. our jobs plan has been out there and we're going continuing to focus on ibe repe

obamacare. why? because it's going to raise the cost of health care, raise the cost of health insurance, reduce access to the american people and continues to get in the way of employers hiring new workers. in addition to that, i think the american people deserve the truth and fairness from their government. i want to applaud chairman issa and the government reform committee for all of their work last week on benghazi, trying to get to the bottom of what happened. the administration could make it a lot easier for all americans by coming forward with emails that they've shown us in some cases but have not turned over to us. i don't want to prolong this any more than anyone else. what i want is the truth. in addition to that, the i.r.s. has admitted to targeting conservatives.

even if the white house continues to be stuck on the word if. now, my question isn't about who's going to resign. my question is who's going to ail over this scandal. >> good morning. obviously there have been a lot of questions raised over the last several days that the news has i think awakened the public, beginning to raise questions in their minds as to the direction of this government, as really to whom is this government accountable, and we're going to proceed obviously in our work here in the house bearing in mind we got to restore the trust in government and we've got to restore the faith in our economy. and there are questions that are being answered and we are accountable to the families to the victims in benghazi. we certainly are accountable to

the taxpayers and the people of this country as to the actions of the i.r.s.. and we certainly have plenty of questions that are accountable to the press in terms of its first amendment rights and its ability to enjoy those and realize those. you know, we got plenty of action, though, on the floor today -- this week. obamacare repeal is there again because we do not believe that an individual mandate is the direction washington-based health care is the direction we ought to go and we also are going to be working on an s.e.c. accountability act. this is a bill coming out of the financial services committee. it is a bill that the president's former jobs council said is necessary in terms of creating the conditions to create jobs. so i'm hopeful we can get a bipartisan vote on that coming together on the one thing that people are continuing to wonder

and that is, is washington concerned about the future of his economy? >> the american public is wondering instead of washington spending their time research based on your political beliefs or your economics or your job that maybe they should be focusing on job creation. . one thing the president can do when he looks for bipartisan and cooperation is the keystone pipeline. 20,000 jobs can be created with that single approval. tomorrow is a anniversary. 1,700 days since it's applied. 1,700 days. 15,000 pages have been reviewed. instead of reviewing the american people what they do with their politics, let's find places where jobs are created. can the pass the senate? yes.

in march the vote was 62-37. 17 democrats voted for it. the report came back said it was minimal environmental impact. but a maximum impact on 20,000 jobs. the election is over. the time now, mr. president, is to focus on job creation and get the administration working in the right direction. i believe keystone is the place we should focus. >> what the american people expect from their government is accountability and they expect us to create an environment here the economy will prosper. when president obama's health care law, his proposal, became law, 2,400 pages became law, he told us that it was going to lower costs, improve quality, lower premiums, cover anyone that had a pre-existing condition, and for those under

26 they would now have health care. but today as we pull back the curtain on this law, what we see, what the american people see, is that obamacare is actually making it worse. the president promised that premiums would go down. in fact, he said that premiums on the average american family would go down $2,500. what we are seeing already is that for the average american family premiums have gone up by $3,000. the president promised that those with pre-existing conditions would now be covered. unfortunately, less than 1% of those with pre-existing conditions were able to sign up for the very program that was made available to them before the president announced they were out of money. the president promised that his plan was going to lead to all americans being -- having access to health insurance. and yet c.b.o. has already

analyzed that when this law is fully implemented there will be 30 million people still uninsured. clearly this law is making it worse for americans. from all backgrounds, from all walks of life, from every corner of this country. it imposes higher cost, it is limiting access, it's very difficult to find a doctor who will take a new medicare patient right now. it is threatening the very health innovation and medical technology that this country has led. so that's why i'm proud that the house republicans this week are voting to repeal this law. and we are committed to working to replace it with the kind of health care reforms that are going to help americans not hurt hem. >> washington gone wild is what many kansans are thinking this

morning as they read the headlines. and it's very disturbing to watch all of these scandals unfold, whether it's the concerns about benghazi, the use at the i.r.s., secretary sebelius taking calls, soliciting donations from people she will be regulating, to the d.o.j. and the a.p. phone records. it makes us miss the days of harry truman when the buck stopped at the president's office. but i'm pleased this week the house will be doing something positive to try to turn this conomy around. buy teeing up a real of the obamacare law. as kathy pointed out, the american people were promised so many things and they were misled. we have seen over $1 trillion in tax increases because of the healthe

cuts to medicare advantage to prop up the law. we have seen premiums rather than being decreased, increase -- increasing to the tune of $3,000. but probably most importantly, this has been a drag on the economy and jobs. the uncertainty surrounding the has dent's health care law cost about seven million jobs, or will cost millions and millions of jobs. and it has already proven to a lot of people that we will have layoffs. so i'm pleased the house will be teeing up the repeal vote today. >> after months of misleading testimony and evasive answers to the question about whether or not the i.r.s. was targeting taxpayers and entities based on

their political beliefs, they have now been caught red-handed. if we are going to get accountability back in this government, which is critical, you have to have accountability to create certainty, then we are going to get to the bottom of this. and i can tell you right now that this culture of rot and abuse at the i.r.s. is going to be rooted out. the ways and means committee is going to be working with the other committees in congress to ensure this happens and that a full accounting of what happened is made to the american people. thank you. >> questions? >> mr. speaker, you represent the cincinnati area. do you have a concern when you heard from constituents that some of those iri.r.s. employees there are being scapegoated for decisions made in washington? >> i don't have any personal direct jodge -- knowledge of that. i want to thank dr. boustany and mr. jordan from ohio who have been spearheading this effort to get to the bottom of it. frankly, their questions go back over a year. so it's time for answers.

>> i would like to put your uestion back to you. it sounded there was no political motivation. who should go to jail? >> there are laws in place to prevent this type of abuse. someone made a conscious decision to harass and to hold tax exemptquests for status. i think we need to know who they are and whether they violated the law. it's clearly someone violated the law. >> speaker boehner, obviously this must have some type of impact in the house. the house g.o.p., the white does it help your 2014

prospects? >> we have a twofoldere in the congress. we need to keep focused on the priorities of the american people and those priorities are the fact that we are not creating jobs quick enough, and we've got stagnant wages in our country. so the issue of jobs and legislation to help create a better economy, it continues to be our number one focus. in addition to that, we have a responsibility under the constitution to provide oversight of the executive branch. and we are going to continue to do both of our jobs as outlined by the constitution. but when it comes to dealing with the white house, whether it's on the accountability side or the jobs side, i'm going to do everything i can to try to get cooperation from them to advance both of our agendas.

let me tell you, i'm very interested in -- and i'm hopeful we are going to get a clear explanation for why such unprecedented action was taken. it befuddles me that there could be some justification that would allow them to infringe on first amendment to the constitution. thanks, everybody. >> the health care repeal bill coming up tomorrow on the house floor. this morning democratic whip steny hoyer talked about the latest effort by republicans. t revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. hoyer: mr. speaker, this week the house will be voting or the 37th time to repeal the affordable care act. this vote comes at a time when we are facing serious and pressing challenges, one of the most important of which is the operations of the sequester.

37 votes to repeal the affordable care act. let us set aside for a moment the important issue of how health reform is working and making quality care accessible and affordable for more americans. i'll be speaking more about that from this floor in coming days as i know some of my colleagues will. what i find and i believe most americans find incomprehensible is that how this house could waste its time on such a blatantly partisan vote when the effects of sequestration are having a growing negative effect on our economy and on the lives of so many american families. that ought to be our focus this week and every week until we find a solution, mr. speaker. speaker boehner said to this 37th repeal vote is justified

because freshmen members have not had the opportunity to vote on this issue. if that is his view, then, by the same reasoning he should allow a vote on a balanced alternative to the sequester. freshmen have not had a chance to cast their votes on whether to replace the entire sequester with a big and balanced solution to deficits. if the house proceeds with a vote on repealing the affordable care act on the grounds that members deserve an opportunity to be on the record on such an important issue, surely, surely, mr. speaker, we also ought to have a vote on replacing the sequester which we know is having adverse effects on our economy and on our national security. american families and businesses are facing greater and greater uncertainty as the results of the sequester and the unwillingness on the part of congress to take a meaningful bipartisan action to stop it. with this uncertainty, businesses have showed slowed

hiring and in some cases have even begun to lay off workers. this indiscriminant and irrational nature of the sequestration means that its ill effects will be felt across our economy and society without regard to our priorities. it also means that none of us, not one of us in this chamber are immune in our own districts where constituents will see reduction in services and dislocation. because of the sequester, we are at risk of 70,000 young people kicked off head start. 10,000 teachers' jobs at risk for title 1 cuts. four million fewer meals on wheels for seniors. 600,000 women, infants and children dropped off the rolls. emergency unemployment insurance cut by 11% for two million out-of-work americans.

2,100 fewer food safety inspectors. that's a job of 18% to make sure our food is safe. and one third of our combat units are grounded. e orward is for democrats and republicans to work together on a big and balanced approach to deficits that restores certainty to our businesses and families. four times, four times mr. van hollen, the ranking member of the budget committee, has offered an amendment to the sequester which would get to the same deficit reduction but in a way that was prioritizing those things that are important in our country and eliminating those that are not and raising some additional revenues as well. four times. not only has that not been considered, but the republicans have refused to allow that amendment on the floor.

yet, we have the 37th time to repeal the health care bill. a 37th vote to repeal health care reform which is already benefiting millions of americans. it's not a responsible use of congressional time. i urge the speaker and the republican leader to cancel this repeal back -- repeal vote and get back into business by allowing us to consider a balanced alternative to the sequester this week. i also urge them to bring to the floor a motion to go to conference on the budget. my republican friends pleaded, pleaded, pleaded for the senate to pass a budget. the senate passed a budget. we passed a budget. regular order is going to conference where we could in fact come to an agreement on a big and balanced deal to replace this negatively impacting sequester.

nothing on the schedule to do that. either to repeal the sequester and change it or to go to conference. but a 37th vote that will go nowhere and everybody knows that to be the case is on the loor this week. >> the house comes in tide today at noon eastern. they'll take up a bill on repealing the health care law tomorrow in the u.s. house. the issue is on the mind of majority leader harry reid in the u.s. senate when they gaveled in this morning. albert einstein, the great albert ann stein, defined insanity as follows: doing the same thing over understand a oveandover again ag different results. that's what albert einstein said. if his deaf mission is true -- and i'm not going to argue with einstein -- the house

republicans have truly lost their minds. this week the har house of representatives wil vote for the 37th time -- mr. president, 37th time. what are they voting on 37 times? exactly the same thing -- they are vietnaming to repeal the landmark -- voting to repeal the landmark constitutional health care reform bill known as obamacare now. and i say that proudly. after last year's election, speaker boehner conceded that obamacare is here to stay. here wheys said, and i quote. "it's pretty car that the president was reelected." that's a fair statement. he went ton say, "obama is law of the land. it's pretty clear that president obama was reelected and obam obamacare is the lf the land land." so no matter what he said then, this is now.

and he's changed his mind. the house will waste yet another week on another dead-end repeal vote. perhaps republicans think the 3th time is the -- the 37th time is the charm. 37 times on the exact same thing. the key party extremists bullied the leader into holding yet another vote to repeal the ah. affordable care act and roll back benefits for tens of millions of men's. this is what the speaker said last week, this is a quote. "we've got 70 new members who have not had a opportunity to vietnam on the president's health care law. frankly, they've been asking for an opportunity to vote on it." mr. president, this political cakabuki has tied up the floor f the house of representatives for weeks andost the american taxpayers $52.4 million and counting. these are fur compiled by

cbs news. just wasting 37 votes, all the house staff, all their personnel that have responsibilities for making sure that place runs as well as it does. that money -- $52.4 million -- is enougho restore funding for 19 million meals for homebound seniors or 6,900 children dropped from the head start program. although the vote may be political theater, it does have one benefit: the american people will know where the freshman class of the house of representatives stands. i think we know. there will be another opportunity to see this. do they stand with millions of americans who are already benefiting from obamacare? we know that answer. or do they stand with the insurance companies? we know that answer.

the insurance companies, who would like nothing better than to have things the way they used to be, and to once again deny coverage to sick children, impose lifetime caps on care, and discriminate against those with preexisting conditions. since president obama signed the affordable care act into law, insurae companies can no longer put profits ahead of people. one of the provisions in is bill says that of premiums paid to insurance companies for health care, 80%f those benefits must go to patients. no long, as they did, 50% of the premium goes for salaries and bonn uses and other perfection -- and bone bonuses and other t. insurance companies can no longer discriminate against children with preexisting conditions. ey can no longer raise year rates for no reason. they can no longer drop your coverage if you get sick. mr. presiden that's what

happened. but this week, for the 37th time, house republicans will try to change all that. here are a few of the other benefits already in effect that house republicans would eliminate: in nevada -- mr. president, we're not a heavily populated state like massachusetts or california or new york, but we are getting bigger. we have about 3 million people. in nevada alone, tens of thousands o seniors have saved tens of millions of dlars on medicines because the affordable care act closed the gap on prescription drugs. that means millionsf seniors across this country have more money in their pockets pour food, gas, electric bills. more than 3 million young people, because of obamacare, including 33,000 young nevadans, have benefited from a provision in the law that allows children to stay on their parents' health plans until they're 26 years old. that means no person will have

to worry about getting sick while looking for a job that offers insurance. or they don't -- they can go to college. mr. president, in my little town of searchlight, nevada, a boy made a decision, was he going to join the military? -- a very patriotic family -- or go to school in he decided to go to school. the family is not one of means. his mom worked part-time in a post office and his dad worked in a power plant about 40 miles from searchlight. this -- oh, they were so happy. this boy was going to go to college, the first person in their family to go to college. an he did extremely well, finished one year, he's in his second year, and he started feeling some discomfort. he had tes testicular cancer. he wasn't -- the time had had

passed. he was 23 years old and could no longer be on his parents' nuns. they had no money to cover this cancer that their son had, their youngest boy. they begged and borrowed and literal dily -- i shouldn't say "begged," but they had a difficult time. a difficult time. he needed two surgeries. they -- the republicans in the house i guess want to go back to that. maybe the republicans here. they love voting against obamacare provisions. they want to go back to a time when that boy, jeff, would no longer have insuran. that's what they want these young men and women who are trying to go to college, get a job, they want to go back to at time. thaunder obamacare, hundredsf thousands of businesses already

offer their employees health benefits through tax credits for doing the right thing. small business owners can spend their capital on growing their firms instead of growing insurance premiums. thanks to the affordable care act, insurance companies can no longer set arbitrary lifetime caps on benefits, as they did. what does that mean? there's a provision hidden in that policy they sold you that when your benefits reach $50,0 $50,000, coverage stops. doesn't matter if you've been noter an automobile accident -- you've been hurt in an automobile accident, cancer, or some other dread disease, it used to stop. no more. millions of americans are no longer one car accident away from bankruptcy. today children can no longer be denied coverage because they're born with a disease or disability. and soon being a womanill n

longer be a preexisting condition. i said it right, mr. president. no longer will being a woman be a preexisting condition. my daughter has a preexisting condition. why? she's a woman. but no longer. in a few months, 129 million americans with preexisting conditions such as high blood pressure or epilepsy can rest assureassured that they'll haves to affordable insurance and lifesaving care regardless of how much money they make or don't make. and conge 2 soon 25 million more americans will have access to reasonably priced health care. if republicans get their way, these benefits and more will disappear. there's going to be a vote take place in the house of representatives to repeal everything that i've talked about. not change it, repeal it.

obama was -- led the charge here and we were able to pass the affordable care act. the most significant change in health care delivery system since medicare. those many, many years ago. -- it ensures access to qlity, affordable health care for every american. republicans would erase these gains and force millions of american families to r rely on expensive emergency room carer go without care at all. fortunately, the republicans' latest exercise in insanity, as described by albert einstein -- that is, their latest repeal effort -- is >> the house will take up the health care repeal bill tomorrow. they gavel in today at noon eastern for five bills on the agenda. over in the senate now they are wrapping up work on the corps of engineers water project bill.

amendment votes are under way. they should have final passage shortly. you can follow that on c-span2. on c-span3 we are covering the house agriculture committee and their markup session of the farm bill. we showed you the senate yesterday. the house agriculture committee meeting. that's under way now on c-span3. later today on c-span3, 1:00 p.m. eastern, we'll have coverage of the house judiciary committee. hearing from attorney general eric holder. previously scheduled hearing, the issues will include certainly questions about the department of justice accessing telephone records of the associated press reporters and editors. and also yesterday attorney general holder announcing that the department of justice, the f.b.i. will investigate the i.r.s. targeting of conservative groups. that hearing at 1:00 this afternoon. we talked about the issue of the i.r.s. this morning with a member of the house oversight committee on washington -- on "washington journal".

host: congressman john mica is our guest, republican from florida. he's representing the seventh district. thanks so much for being here. guest: good to be back. host: wanted to talk to you the the i.r.s. and scrutiny they have given to conservative groups, tea party groups. the acting commissioner of the i.r.s. had an opinion piece today where he says we should have done a better job. midst takes were made. but they were in no way due to any political or partisan motivation. guest: well, we hope that's the case. i guess the bombshell got dropped last week and this report which brought you a copy the inspector general highlights a host of abuses, and unfortunately congress now has the responsibility of investigating what took place. and that will happen this week beginning with the ways and means committee. uponly other committees in the

-- possibly other committees in the senate and house will review the matter because you can't take a agency like i.r.s., which is supposed to be fair to all citizens and all organizations, nd have it misuse its power. the report really speaks for itself. i don't know if you had a chance to review it. the full report's there. i understand you have it online. host: on our website, c-span.org. guest: so your viewers can see it. it says quite clearly they targeted specific groups. they delayed the processing for targeted groups, and then they requested unnecessary information, harassed the groups by that method. so the commentary is not something that's being made in a partisan manner. i think they new they were going to blow off and last week they sort of leaked this out and i

think the acting commissioner has now tried to temper that with his commentary. i believe the attorney general has now launched an investigation. it's pretty serious. host: as you mentioned attorney general eric holder said there will be an investigation. what do you make of that? will that be adequate? guest: i think congress has primary responsibility. it's interesting because there may be some evidence already, i mean you just don't launch one of these investigations unless there is some criminal activity. that remains to be seen, of course, but i have a little bit of concern sometimes when the department of justice or f.b.i. gets a hold of a case, benghazi for example. you have months and months of delay. you also sometimes have congress restrained from going in and

talking to folks because there is an investigation going on. i'm not sure -- again his role at this juncture. i read part of the report and it appears that some individuals either misled or lied to congress which might -- which might be a very serious offense. i don't know of specific criminal acts or how high up the chain of command, who gave these orders to proceed in this manner. they have tried to -- some of the reports i have heard and in the report there's some talk about a small team of cincinnati. but i think somebody is again at a higher level must have been involved in order to allow this to proceed. it went on for some time. again the report details the time. and the timing before the election to target one political

persuasion or the conservative groups is pretty serious matter. again to sort of close them down before the election. now i have heard this morning and i don't have this documented, but some of the other groups, labor and some of the more liberal groups, they were expediting some of their requests for this 501-c-4 status, which again raises questions. host: "usa today" reports that it says that as application from conservative groups sat in limbo, groups with obviously liberal names were approved in as little as nine months. that's a story from "usa today." friday e a hearing on the house ways and means committee will look at the i.r.s. issue. our guest is congressman john mica. from the oversight and government reform committee, he's the chairman of the government operations subcommittee. will we see your committee take this up? guest: we'll look at it. dave camp is the chairman of

ways and means. talked to dave yesterday. you couldn't have a fairer, bert respected individual heading the investigation. the i.r.s. is under ways and means authority. our committee has very broad jurisdiction government and reform oversight. we can investigate just about anything. we'll see if there's some things actually that -- sometimes these matters go beyond one particular area of jurisdiction. and that's where we would probably come in. it's up to mr. issa. i understand mr. issa had asked some questions. mr. boustany from louisiana had been in there. senator hatch. and it appears they were not given the proper information, which raises a lot of questions. i think our committee with the leadership of mr. issa also has role in the future.

one of the key questions here is how far did this go? did it go just to higher levels in i.r.s.? or were there other agencies that were using this kind of targeting before the election to go after certain political interest or folks that might make a difference in the election? then you've got a really serious matter. as of right now we are in a preliminary state. we really don't know and you don't want to speculate. host: congressman john mica is our guest. republican of florida. if you'd like to join the conversation democrats call 3880. -88 -- 81. epublicans 202-558-3le caller: good morning, congressman mica. i'm a florida resident now.

before the 2012 election i was audited twice. my accountant said this is very peculiar some of the audits that occurred on my taxes. i have given to all types of different republican candidates throughout the united states. d i felt that -- i turned up on the huffington post, too. they listed all the major donors. i just feel that maybe i was one of the people that were targeted in this -- before the elections of 2012. i wonder if you could comment on it. guest: again at this stage it's very hard to say anything that would indicate that they were targeting individuals that were contributors like yourself. i know all kinds of folks. some of the groups who advocate

various positions, be they conservative or liberal, already feel like they are victimized by government. and not shown proper attention. or folks are coming after them. so this is going to raise a hole host of those speculative issues. again, there is no way to tell at this point. we have to do our due diligence, and that's our responsibility to investigate, ninds out -- find out what took place. mr. turner, mike turner from ohio, has already introduced legislation. i understand that some of the penalties, if someone purposely does this at an agency, are weaker, ill defined. he has introduced legislation actually before i saw the report yesterday i agreed with mike to help be a co-sponsor of that

legislation. so we need to get in and make certain people are first held accountable. find out what happened. and make certain that that's nailed down. then how far this thing went. and then make certain it doesn't happen again. we are always trying to perfect the system. and particularly the electoral process. you don't want that violated because it's what makes us a great country and free country. host: steve, topeka, kansas, independent caller. go ahead. caller: good morning, representative mica. i'm concerned about the attitude of the republican congress that everything, no matter how minor, is a crisis or the fault of president obama. let's face it, you guys lost two elections to the man and you're going to do anything you can and look under every corner of every niche to try to find something that connects the white house or

the president directly to some scandal. this is an obstructionist government and how do you expect any better when your party comes to power what, kind of democratic attitude do you expect on the other part of the party? guest: i have to take issue with you. i think anyone, maybe we could go back and replay the tape of my comments, i tried to stick entirely what the inspector disclosed.i.r.s. has part of that was disclosed last week by some of the folks in the i.r.s. tempered. so reaction by the public. i didn't write the headlines of every major newspaper today. this isn't something that we are blowing out of proportion. again we are trying to find the facts. that's our responsibility. investigate them. i don't think i ever mentioned president obama in my commentary. and we shouldn't.

but there have been presidents who have used this. some have been republicans, i guess, most noteworthy of some abuse or at least accused abuse of the i.r.s. is president nixon. i read in preparation for coming on today i forgot about this, but his second impeachment article, or statement was that he had used -- improperly used i.r.s. so i'm not saying -- this in any way we have a linkage yet to the higher ups in the obama administration. but certainly when the inspector general of i.r.s. brings this out, this isn't partisan issue. it's something that has to be fully vetted. and already we do know that some folks at i.r.s. misled members of congress. they have asked questions about what was going on for several years now.

and not until the end of last week did we have really an inc.ling of this, -- ink ling of this. you ought to go on line and find the report. it lays out the timetable. i didn't prepare this. i didn't prepare this -- republicans didn't prepare this. these are the facts we deal with. you try not to be partisan. you want to try to be responsible and make certain that we fix a problem. and we hold people accountable. as i said before, we make certain it doesn't happen again. host: that report is on our website, c-span.org. here's the head wlintse in the paper today from "the new york times," mismanagement by i.r.s. cited in tea party scrutiny. smiley tweets in and asks, congressman, are you saying these investigations will take up all the house duties to pass immigration reform and gun control? could these be distracting to the agenda? guest: probably somewhat of a

distraction. even today the focus shifts from a whole host of things. you have the implementation of obamacare which is heading -- i didn't say this, but some of the democrats said it, heading for possible train wreck. you've got the question of our debt ceiling. the country not being fiscally responsible. you've got immigration reform. a whole host of major issues before the congress. this unfortunately does come at a time and now you've got -- what's the latest one i'm going after, i guess, a.p. reporters, partisan isn't a thing. a.p. and others have disclosed some of what has -- they consider some additional requirements or harassment in an investigation. so, these things do detract, but

the work of congress still goes on. and that -- a lot of that meat and potatoes work that doesn't ged headlines. host: democrat from ohio. welcome. caller: thank you so much for having me on. i hope i can take the congressman at his word that he is trying to be nonpartisan, but i do note that he looks awfully happy this morning. i would like to ask -- guest: beautiful day in washington. caller: to citizens united and e 501-c-4 social welfare exemption for funding charitable crossroads pact qualifies as a charitable social welfare organization, and gets a tax exemption, when glenn beck's

912 project gets a tax exemption. it was congress in the first place, republicans in congress, that kept complaining as if they were victims of some targeted i.r.s. scandal. i would hope that the congressman will join in fully funding cut funds to it. the i.r.s. is required by law to supervise these programs and make sure that they qualify for this welfare exemption which is primarily not to be used for political purposes. and it seems like the whole qualification is just a joke and maybe these 501-c-4 exemptions should just be outlawed. host: someone is on twitter agrees with you. all tax exemptions should be eliminated. the status has been misused for decades.

guest: i think they need to look at the i.r.s. report. not again republican or mica's report, but -- she mentioned glenn beck. actually i think people would be startled to find that right here in their timetable they said i.r.s. exemption division began targeting applicants with names containing tea party patriots and other political titles, as well as 912-- a group founded by conservative political commentator glenn beck. that's not mr. beck or some commentator's comment or mine. this is from the report. i heard mr. beck and i have heard others. sometimes you agree with him, disagree with them. but here i.r.s. is saying, he was targeted. this group was targeted. and that's a pretty serious offense when you go after folks like that. people in this country should be

entitled to their free speech. that's great. we can say whatever we want. u can't defame people in public, and there is liability laws. in the political arena it's pretty much fair game. but to target, to have an independent agency that's supposed to be independent like i.r.s., target mr. beck, specifically tea party conservative groups, and then again if what you read a few minutes ago is true, as reported, again these are -- that's the whole purpose of what i think congress has the responsibility to do. get the facts. find out. but this, again, is not my commentary, this is the summary of the report prepared by the inspector general of the i.r.s. that's why it's on the front page of the paper, not because anything republican or some

commentator said. serious matter. host: two folks, the caller and tweeter, who said this exempt status should be done away with. not worth having. guest: that's an interesting question. should groups have the right to participate -- not get into the tax arena or be libel for taxes, who are practicing free speech. the courts have usually always held on the side of these groups. and those lately they have allowed some of the business groups to even get engaged because it's part of the right under the first amendment free speech. and that's something that people feel should be protected. i think it would be very hard to close them down. it would be hard to tax them, too. i guess you could pass a law that might be held unconstitutional. it's a tax on free speech.

host: digging into that on twitter wanted to know what constitutes a social welfare program? in this definition. guest: that one you got me. i'm not an attorney. we have to go back -- host: do you think they should be separate from political groups? guest: again, that's something you can decide by law. and then does that group have the right to free speech, too? so far i think the courts have held that just about every group , every individual has the right to expend their money, and you can't impose a penalty, be it a tax or something, on them. but we do have a process for determining that 501-c-4 status. and the 501-c-4 status does give them the right to become engaged in politics. there's some pretext as far as who the donors are. we may want to go back and look and revisit all of this.

within the framework of the constitution and the right of free speech. host: welcome, mary. caller: i agree with everything that's been said so far. especially by e callers. however, what's shocking to me is how easy it is to obtain one of these tax exempts -- tax exedgeses. yes, i have free speech. maybe i should be tax exempt. it's corruption. no wonder the tax base in this country is in the shape it's in. if everybody is going to get a tax exemption, who is going to pay their taxes? this is ridiculous? guest: the tax exemption is only for that activity, the free speech activity. again there are limits. it's not that they are not paying taxes. if they have any kind of business activity or income. but again, as i understand it, they do process these doesn't ns everybody

get them. that was part of the problem. some got them quicker than others if they met this little evaluation now that's been disclosed by the inspector general, treasury department. and that's not fair if you're giving them, again, on an equitable basis to target conservative groups and delay their processes, harass them, asking them additional and unnecessary questions. and then other groups favoring them, expediting their request. so that's, again, something that has to be looked at very carefully. host: congressman john mica, republican of florida. he represents the seventh district which includes sanford and winter park. he's in his 11th term, as we talked about earlier he sits on the oversight and government reform committee, also the

transportation and infrastructure subcommittee. he's the chairman of the government operations subcommittee which is part of oversight. to new hampshire, republican, ray, go ahead. caller: hi, thank you for taking my call. talk about privacy in the i.r.s., i remember back in i think it was 1980's where came out that i.r.s. employees were routinely looking at neighbors' tax returns, celebrity tax returns. and that came out and some safeguards were put in to keep this from happening. next year with the implementation of obamacare, the i.r.s. is going to be the enforcement arm of making sure that we have health insurance, they are going to have access to our health records. determine are we eligible for tax credits? are we going to be paying the tax it is we don't have health insurance? what kind of assurances do

american people have that this information isn' going t leaked? is it going to be -- how is itg? that all this new information, all these new employees of the tax -- i.r.s., what kiped of training, -- what kind of training will they have so we can make sure that sensitive information will be kept secret or private? host: thank you, ray. guest: very good point. i'm not sure what protections we have. again, i think the caller raises a host of issues. you can't take things for granted as we have seen even with these 501-c-4 applications. that's got to be a pretty big force. it's estimated 15,000 or 16,000 i.r.s. enforcers. then access to all kinds of information. may want to go back and look at

that. again the caller raisings an excellent point of protecting folks now in light of this incident. you want to make certain you have in place the right protections. mr. turner from ohio he moved almost immediately to introduce a bill that would have certain penalties for i.r.s. employees ho, again, misuse their power. one look at extending that into this new realm of health care such , which they'll take a big role. host: we see this head loin in the "washington post" this morning. media outlets are condemning agency. "the washington post" among other media groups are criticizing the justice department. this is for secretly gathering phone records of associated press journalists. we saw this issue discussed both with the attorney general yesterday. also jay carney, press secretary for the white house, fielded questions on it. is this a matter that might be fair game for the oversight

committee? guest: again, possibly. it does have multiple jurisdictions. i guess this all started from c.i.a. leak of information, trying to find out who leaked the information. the press again in this country have certain abilities in the constitution to talk to folks and report the news and not be harassed unduly. classified information and the leak of it has been a problem several times. i have picked up the paper and been stunned at what i have read that's been disclosed that i have heard in close quarters, supposed to be classified, and where it does pose risk for the united states and some of the things we are trying to keep to protect the united states. under wraps. it raises issues.

but i think what was -- what's unusual here is the number of folks they went after with i guess subpoenas and then the amount of time and information they were collecting. i don't know if there were wiretaps or anything like that involved, but again that's the responsibility of congress going in and find out did they misuse or abuse their power? and hold people accountable. try to correct it. we are always trying to perfect the system. sometimes the rats are finding a different way to the cheese. when you take on the media like the a.p., you're taking on some players. erful news and that gets a lot of attention. certainly like you said it's blown other issues off the front

page. we have benghazi last week. we have the i.r.s. scandal. and now the latest, the a.p. all these scandals are overshadowing other business of congress. those investigations should go on. and they won't detract other than the front page or the headlines and people spending more time commenting on those issues. the primary issues before congress. but the rest of the business of congress will and must go on. host: new york, democrats line. welcome. caller: yes. i think we can all agree that i.r.s. has to be apolitical, and a lot of people don't know that of those, roughly 16,000 employees, there are only two that are politically appointed. the commissioner and the chief counsel. everybody else is a career employee. now, that doesn't mean that they

don't have political views. my guess is that once this investigation, which we need, is fully completed, it will show stupidity as opposed to a political motive. but my real question, mr. mica, s -- my real question, mr. mica, is that a lot of us feel that the republicans here are selectively outraged. for example, when the naacp made a couple of political statements, then their tax exempt status was audited to a fare-thee-well. it took a couple of years of extensive audit. i think the congressional record would show, mr. mica, that you were silent on that matter. guest: well, may have been. don't weigh in on everything.

the comment today for the first time on this. i do think, though, that what you said in the beginning that i.r.s. needs to be apolitical, i think everyone would agree on. i would hope that this will be limited to some low-level officials who got out of control. it's our responsibility to find out. i was particularly concerned last time when i read the report i didn't know all the history of this, and some of the other members had made inquiries about some of this targeting, and it was displaying to see -- dismaying to see members of congress were either mislead or lied to. that's a serious offense. we do have to, again, this is simple. you have to find out what the facts are. go after folks. sometimes folks in congress will go off on different tan gents.

we shouldn't do that here -- tangents. we shouldn't do that here. should act responsibly in any of these investigations. and not do it just for political advantage. of coirs you are not going to maybe a --hings that may be of particular interest to the other side. and vice versa. but that's part of the political process. certainly both sides -- i have never seen a time in politics or issues in washington when either side doesn't get a fair chance to weigh in, state their position, advocate for their interest. host: congressman john mica, chairman of the government and operations subcommittee. it's part of oversight and government reform. he's also on the transportation and infrastructure committee. texas, tom, republican. go ahead. caller: good morning, c-span. thanks for taking my call. yeah, i'd just like to say it's

rather simple case here where you have a bunch of militant leftists at the i.r.s. serving as taxpayer funded political activists for obama. that goes all the way up to lois lerner. she's known about this for years. she's been one of the ring leaders. yet she comes on and claims that this investigation had nothing to do with political ideology. of course that's bogus. i had asay the i.r.s. needs to be fumigated of all those political activists because we'll see this for years and years to come. guest: it's going to be interesting. mr. miller, who is the acting i.r.s. commissioner, will be in on friday. and then george, the inspector general. miller is acting and actually i think shulman was in and he may have even been a republican appointee that was carried over

there during the time that a lot of this took place. miller's going to be answering for what took place under a different watch. partly i guess his watch. then the name i think people don't know, lois lerner's name, the gentleman just raised that, many questions about her because she has -- she's been in charge of the tax exempt division, i guess it is. also was changing around some of the criterion. again, i shouldn't say that. she may have been involved in that, we'll say. but the reports again place her in the middle of some of this. it's a name that people don't know. that probably know a lot more. i would say that after friday she will be on the hot seat before congress and have to answer a lot of questions. again, she was in charge -- >> all of this in our video

library at c-span.org. we'll head to the house floor next. gaveling in for five bills this afternoon. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national able satellite corp. 2013] the president and his

admini stration will do whatever it takes to expand power, including violating first amendment rights. over the coming weeks, it's my hope that had this is thoroughly investigated and those responsible will be held accountable. in conclusion, god bless our troops and we will never forget september 11 and the global war on terrorism. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentlelady from ohio seek recognition?

without objection, the gentlelady is recognized for one minute. mrs. beatty: thank you, mr. speaker. i rise to denounce the proposed cuts to the supplemental nutrition assistance program known as snap in the house farm bill. last week i had the opportunity to witness a mother feeding her two children and giving them a jumpstart because of snap. and then a young lawyer came and talked to us about being able to make an investment in this country because she was assisted. i'm from ohio and in ohio snap reaches 16% of the state's population. 84% of the households receiving snap have incomes below the poverty line. snap has helped lift about 4.7 million americans above the poverty line in 2011. including 2.1 million children. for many of the poorest americans, snap is the only form of income assistance they

had. mr. speaker, we must protect our most at-risk children and families in this nation. let's save snap. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentlewoman from north carolina seek recognition? ms. foxx: i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentlewoman is recognized for one minute. ms. foxx: thank you, mr. speaker. what was obamacare's central claim? the affordable care act as it was termed by president obama was supposed to make health care more affordable for the american people. many who believe that claim, however, now have buyers remorse. obamacare was to help save families $2,500 on their health care premiums. but that's not true. family premiums have increased $3,000 since 2008. even workers who make $25,000 a year will pay more for health care because of obamacare. young people struggling to pay off debt and find careers in

this jobless economy could see their health premiums rise by as much as $1 -- as much as 189%. in spite of lowesty promises, health insurance costs are higher. studies have found that obamacare will make health care premiums less affordable by the time it's implemented. it delivered a true train wreck to the american people. it's time to repeal obamacare and all its broken promises once and for all. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentlewoman from california eek recognition? without objection, the gentlewoman is recognized for one minute. mr. lee: thank you, mr. speaker -- ms. lee: thank you, mr. speaker. as if voting to repeal the affordable care act for the 37th time is not enough, republicans are adding insult to injury by marking up a farm bill this week that doubles down on the indiscriminate sequester. the supplemental nutrition assistance program, formerly known as the food stamp program, is one of our nation's

of defense against hunger and among the most effective forms of economic stimulus. every $1 in snap benefits generates $1.70 in economic activity. yet the republican farm bill cuts nearly $21 billion from our nation's anti-hunger program while millions of americans continue to struggle from the impacts of the great recession. these cuts would end food assistance for nearly two million low-income people, mostly working families and children and seniors already hit by the sequester. mr. speaker, when i was a student and a single mother, the american people provided a life line in the form of food stamps while i struggled to make a better life for my children. that's true today for millions of families across the country. including 4.3 million californians who need this critical life line. cutting snap is morally wrong and an economic disaster. we should reject these cuts and stop sequestration and create jobs. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman's time has expired. for what purpose does the

gentleman from north carolina eek recognition? without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> mr. speaker, on monday, justice was served in fill delve contra. when a monday -- philadelphia. when a monster by the ne kermit gosnell was convicted of the murder of three small babies in his abortion clinic. each and every life is precious, mr. speaker, and murdering an innocent baby for the sake of convenience or agreed is terribly, terribly wrong. in the last 40 years, mr. speaker, the lives of over 50 million young babies have been taken. mr. pittenger: how do we know that god did not place in the lives of these individuals a cure for cancer? a cure for alzheimer's? a cure for parkinson's? we won't know that until eternity. we grieve over those losses. may i quote thomas jefferson, mr. speaker, for the sake of our nation? god who gave us life gave us

liberty, can the liberties of a nation be secure when we have removed a conviction that these liberties are a gift of god? indeed i tremble for my country when i reflect that god is just and his justice cannot sleep forever. thank you. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from texas seek recognition? without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> mr. speaker, i rise today against the proposed cuts to the supplemental nutrition assistance program or snap. as the nation's most important anti-hunger program, snap offers nutrition assistance to 46 million low-income americans and provides economic benefits to communities. snap also allows families to more easily set aside a portion of their resources for food and not have to outsource all of their meals and to prioritize a healthier, more consistent diet

without compromising as much on obligations such as rent, utilities, transportation and other basic needs. over 80% of snap households have incomes below the poverty line and 40% have incomes below half of the poverty line. for many of these americans, snap is the only form of income assistance they receive. we cannot allow the budget to be balanced on the backs of the poor and most vulnerable in our country. mr. veasey: the proposed farm bill up for vote in the house agriculture committee today would cut $20 billion from the program. i join my colleagues in opposing these draconian cuts to ensure that 46 million people who rely on this program will have food. thank you, mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from kansas seek recognition? without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> thank you, mr. speaker. this sunday i had the good fortune of being at a high school for flint hills high. now, flint hills high has 11

strong graduating in 2013. but it was remarkable, with all the challenges the country faces, we had young people going to be nurses, young people entering our nation's army and marines, we had a young man who was off to attend school but who knew that he was going to be coming back to help his father and mother on the farm. with all the challenges faced today, it was incredibly heartening to see this next generation this next generation of leaders being raised in the heartland. mr. pompeo: congratulations to those 11, six young women and six young men. go mustangs. mr. speaker, i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentlewoman from minnesota seek recognition? without objection, the gentlewoman is recognized for one minute. ms. mccollum: mr. speaker, today the agriculture committee marks up the farm bill, cutting $20 billion from food support

for the poorest, most vulnerable americans. the republican snap cut will cut 210,000 children off the school lunch program and deny two million americans food. the supplemental nutrition assistance program, snap, is a life line for nearly 50 million americans to have access to healthy, affordable food and avoid hunger. more than half the snap recipients live in deep poverty. that's an income of less than $10,000 a year for a family of three. right now the daily snap benefit is $3.78. two out of three snap recipients in minnesota are poor children, seniors and adults with disabilities. to reduce the budget deficit by inflicting hunger on children, seniors and people with disabilities, it's simply immoral. i urge my colleagues to reject this cruel and harmful proposal to increase hunger in america.

the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from georgia seek recognition? without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> mr. speaker, i rise today to speak out against the i.r.s. for targeting americans because of their political beliefs. what is clear is that the i.r.s. has violated the public trust in a serious and disturbing way. it's sickening to learn that the i.r.s. not only targeted tea party conservative groups, but also groups that criticized the government or even taught the united states constitution. the united states is a beacon of hope and freedom for the oppressed all across the world. but the coordinated suppression of president obama's political opponents undermines who we are and what we stand for. mr. speaker, who gave the orders to target americans who disagree with this administration? who gave the orders? mr. graves: the american people deserve to know and our

republic depends on us finding out that answer. i represent a lot of georgians who are sick and tired of the i.r.s. targeting them. it is time for this house, the people's house, to instead now target the i.r.s. we must find the full truth and we cannot stop until we we have full accountability. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from connecticut seek recognition? without objection, jeat is recognized for one minute. >> mr. speaker, it's the fashion among many of us to blame the press for our troubles and that's because the press reports our troubles. mr. himes: at the best the media keeps us honest, keeps us in our constitutional lanes, and reports our failures. it is essential for democracy. there is a reason why freedom of the press is not the second or fourth or 10th amendment. it's the first amendment. so, mr. speaker, i'm profoundly concerned over the department of justice's overbroad and chilling behavior with he respect to the

associated press. seeking records for 20 phone lines, giving the a.p. no notice. refusing at this point to discuss their behavior feels to me like overreach. mr. speaker, it's time for the department of justice to stand back. you can imagine that there is somebody out there today who has a failure to report, who is chilled and says i will not do that because of the approach of the department of justice has taken. mr. speaker, i'm proud to serve in the very core of democracy that this chamber rests on foundations, and the key part is a free and competent press. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from california seek recognition? >> permission to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> thank you. madam speaker, across the country employers are holding office meetings and the announcement's going something like this. we love you guys, but here here

obamacare will cost us, we can't stay in business with obamacare, if we cut everybody back to 29 hours a week we can avoid the mandate and stay in business. mr. mcclintock: there is a name for them now, 29ers. obamacare was sold on three claims all of which were false. that it would save people money. in fact it's producing quickly increases in health plan costs. it would be good for the economy. in fact, the c.b.o. estimates it will cost the economy a net loss of 800,000 jobs. if you like your plan you can keep it. many are finding not only is that a lie, but they can't keep their jobs, either. madam speaker, let's pull the plug on this before it wrecks our health care and our jobs. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. for what purpose does the the gentlewoman from ohio seek recognition? >> unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentlewoman is recognized for one minute.

ms. kaptur: just this past sunday our nation celebrated mother's day. a day that honors the mothers of our republic. in march, we observed women's history month, honoring the progress towards full equality of over half our population. one would have thought when over 1,100 garment workers in bangladesh, seamstresses, sewers, cutters, helpers died working in dangerous factory conditions for an average wage of $38 a month, america's retailers would have been the first to sign the landmark international safety agreement to improve the working conditions of these workers who are predominantly women. surely with 20% of bangladesh's exports mostly garments are destined for u.s. buyers, our nation's clothing fimples should be on the frontline fighting for decent working conditions and a fair day's pay, not exploiting women workers. but only tommy hilgiger and calvin klein have stood up for

women garment workers. millions of invisible hands working in death traps making so much of the clothing we wear it's marketed in our country. where are wal-mart and sears? where is the gap and target? they appear missing in action. we need to reward those companies that care about workers and women workers -- the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady's time has expired. ms. kaptur: when you think about buying clothing think calvin klein and ask where are the others? the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from alabama seek recognition? without objection, the gentleman from alabama is recognized for ne minute. >> america struggles under president obama's economic policy. nearly 12 million americans are out of work. last month almost 280,000 americans were forced into part-time jobs because their they ere reduced or

couldn't find a full-time job. mr. brooks: the average workweek and weekly take-home pay for americans dropped. the best measure of employment, the labor participation rate, is at 63.3%. the worst since the economic ma lace of president jimmy carter. when the obama economy doing so poorly, why implement a law we know will kill, according to the congressional budget office, some 800,000 american jobs? obamacare undermines the ability of american companies to hire workers. it stymies economic growth, and it's only going to get worse. even top democrats admit as much. one of the laws' authors, senator max baucus, called it a train wreck. mr. speaker, we must stop the train before the wreck. it's time to repeal obamacare before it does even more damage to the american economy. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from oregon seek recognition? the gentleman is recognized for one minute.

mr. defazz heo: ok, 38th time repealing all or part of the affordable care act. now the republican mantra was, repeal, replace but somewhere along the way they forgot about the replace part. tomorrow, total repeal. what's that mean? i got a few concerns. means insurance companies could go back to rescinding, that is taking away your policy when you get sick, even if you have been paying premiums. they could do that until this law passed. 3.1 million young adults, 18-26, you are off your parent's policy. sorry. no insurance. 5.3 million seniors who got their doughnut hole reduced last year. sorry, you're back in the big doughnut hole. 3.54 million people, private plans who got free preventive procedures last year, sorry, they aren't he free. up to 17 million children with pre-existing health conditions would again be denied coverage. 105 million people with health care plan that previously had lifetime limits, whoa, your lifetime limits back.

total repeal, no replace, doing incredible damage to seniors, children, and many other insured americans. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from texas seek recognition? without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. you, madam thank speaker. you know during the commencement address in 2009 obama joked about the i.r.s. auditing university officials for failing to award him an honorary degree. fast forward to last friday when we learned that the i.r.s. has been targeting conservative groups. mr. speaker, the misuse of the i.r.s. power is no laughing matter. as chief justice john marshal once said, the power to tax is a power to destroy. folks and groups back home seeking to express their support

for our hard fought freedoms and liberty for a limited government, better america should never be subjected to intimidation because of their political beliefs. never. the use of the i.r.s. as a political weapon is unacceptable. what's worse, this is the same agency that will be enforcing obamacare. we must hold those responsible accountable and that's why the ways and means committee will hold a hearing this friday. the american people deserve the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. and you -- if you're as outraged as i am, call the white house at this number right there in front of u we must make sure it never happens again. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. members are reminded to direct their remarks to the chair. for what purpose does the gentleman from rhode island seek recognition? without objection, the gentleman s recognized for one minute.

mr. langevin: mr. speaker, today i rise in strong support of the supplement nutrition assistance program and against the proposed $20 billion cut in snap funding under the house republican farm bill. coming on the heels of a sequester-induced reduction, snap beneficiaries continue to feel pain and the cruel pinch of this congress' misguided priorities. snap better known as food stamps helps millions of americans living in poverty put food on the table. that may very well be the difference between a child or family going hungry or not. the wealthiest nation in human history, it is unconscionable that every american cannot afford life's basic necessities. 80%, mr. speaker, of the households receiving snap earn below the federal poverty line. that translates into millions of working families. with these cuts, make no mistake

about it, millions will go hungry and be forced to make decisions between food and other s that no one should have to confront. i call on my colleagues to reject these cuts. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from illinois seek recognition? >> ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> madam speaker, the president's health care law is full of broken promises, and these are only becoming more evident as the law becomes -- begins to take effect. this law promised affordable health insurance for all americans. a fine goal. but since 2008 health care premiums have increased by over $3,000. this law promised universal health care coverage, but according to the congressional budget office the law will leave 30 million americans without insurance. mr. hultgren: the program is set up to care for them is already turning qualified applicants

away. and the once promising future of medical innovation in america has been stifled by his new taxes and regulations, including poorly conceived tax on medical twices, a repeal of which i co-sponsored here in the house. madam speaker, we have also already seen that it's caused small businesses to cut back work hours, and the uncertainty over peppeding regulation makes business small and large hesitate to hire new people. and make new investment. slowing down our economic recovery. it's time for repeal and real reform. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from california seek recognition? without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> madam speaker, today i'm reintroducing the stop child abuse and residential programs for teens act. mr. miller: this legislation will protect teenagers attending residential treatment programs from abuse by staff personnel. these programs range from boot camps to behavior modifications

facilities. they are often the last resort for parents trying to help a child deal with behavioral issues, but investigations by our committee has found these programs are not always run in a safe manner. just last year in tampa bay times confirmed the problems continue, with stories of children being abused, bloodied, and choked to unconscious noes of these programs in the name of discipline. make it illegal for residential facilities denying child essential water, food, clothing, or shelt, or medical care whether under the guise of discipline or therapy. it would ensure parents have the information needed to make safe choices for their children about these programs. when a parent turens to these programs for help, they should trust the child would not suffer neglect, j.er or death. i yield back the balance of my time and encourage my colleagues to support this legislation. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from kansas seek recognition? >> unanimous consent to address

the house for one minute. revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> madam speaker, i stand today with americans rightfully outraged and stunned that their government has admitted to harassing americans with audits and paperwork simply based upon their political beliefs. the mr. yoder: they expect not to be discriminated against or targeted based upon the beliefs religious, political, or otherwise. madam speaker, we have learned over the past days about gross violations of our constitutional rights. an appalling overreach of the i.r.s. which has admitted to targeting certain americans for heightened tax scrutiny, and additional burdensome costly audits based solely on political affiliations. these anti-american violations strike at the heart of our free and and democratic society and confirm the worse fears that many americans have about their government. what makes matters worse is congress was misled into believing that this wasn't

happening. madam speaker, we must get to the bottom of these serious admissions by the i.r.s. there must be accountability and consequences for those involved. we must ensure that this never happens again. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from nevada seek recognition? >> unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. horsford: thank you, madam speaker. i come to the floor today opposed to looming cuts to the supplemental nutrition assistance program, or snap, and i urge the house agriculture committee and this congress to refrain from slashing funding for this vital program. snap provides food assistance to approximately 46 million americans and it has kept 4.7 million people out of poverty in 2011, including 2.1 million children. and snap has cut the number of children living in extreme

poverty in half. we should not be cutting the safety net for our most vulnerable while maintaining costly government subsidies for the well-off junk food, oil and gas industries. a nevada child in my district who receives $1.48 per meal is not the problem with the federal budget. the problem is corporate welfare and the special interest giveaways that litter our tax code. i urge my colleagues to not cut snap and to invest in our children and their nutrition safety. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from north carolina seek recognition? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house and revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> madam speaker, last week i held a telephone town hall meeting with my constituents and toward the end of that call i heard from a constituent who had already seen her hours cut at the local grocery store from 36 hours down to 28.

mr. mchenry: now, as a result of obamacare, industries, corporations, people are posed with this very tough challenge. either they pay for very expensive health care or cut people's hours or lay people off. unfortunately her grocery store decided to limit hours and make more part-time workers. sadly as a result of this she that 40 a month and prevented her from being able to pay for the very affordable health insurance plan she currently is on. other co-workers could no longer afford car payments, for instance, and this devastating effect is a terrible result of bad public policy and that's why we must repeal obamacare. and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentleman from massachusetts eek recognition? without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute.

mr. kennedy: thank you, madam speaker. i rise today in recognition of police week. a month ago this very day those of us from massachusetts had every reason to be proud of our first responders and our police officers. and over the course of that week i heard from so many of my colleagues, democrats and republicans, who said how proud they were to be from -- to be american, because of the response that our law enforcement officials took in reaction to the marathon bombings. it's not just in disasters, however, that our first responders and our police officers answer the call. and i want to recognize sergeant michael murphy from brooklyn and sergeant machado from brook river who are here this week. as a former prosecutor you realize every day that the routine is anything but. any time a car stops, any call that a police officer responds to, they literally put their life on

and we need remember only the acts of m.i.t. officer sean collier to recognize how dangerous the job is that they perform each and every day, to enforce our laws and to keep us and our neighbors safe. so as a member of the fourth district of massachusetts and on behalf of the commonwealth of massachusetts, i want to take a brief moment to all of our police officers and say thank you. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentleman from kansas seek recognition? without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one inute. >> on monday, president obama claimed that the i.r.s. was an independent agency. mr. president, that is not true. as your chart shows, the president can remove both the treasury secretary and the i.r.s. commissioner at will.

they both serve at the pleasure of president obama. mr. huelskamp: in recent weeks, months and perhaps years, president obama has claimed little or no responsibility for the actions of his administration. whether it is benghazi, the obamacare failures or this targeting of conservative groups by the i.r.s., president obama has flipped the moniker of president truman on its head. instead of the buck stops here, obama's theme has become, the buck never stops here. the evidence is clear that the i.r.s. targeted tea party and other conservative groups and the i.r.s. commissioner knew about it. this gross misuse of political power is an absolute outrage. mr. president, the i.r.s. commissioner and the treasury secretary serve at your will and thus the responsibility for their outrageous actions falls squarely on your shoulders. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentlewoman from illinois seek recognition?

ms. schakowsky: address the house for one minute, revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentlewoman is recognized for one minute. ms. schakowsky: are you kidding me? taking food out of the mouths of hungry children. is that the reason that any of us would come to congress? but that is exactly what the farm bill that's being considered today does. takes food out of the mouths of hungry children. not only will one million children lose their snap funding, the money that puts food on the table, but 200,000 of them will also lose their school lunches. this in the richest country in the world? this in the name of deficit reduction? this in a country where already tens of millions of children go to sleep hungry? there's not a district in this nation, there's not a member of

congress who doesn't have constituents who have to line up at a food pantry because otherwise they and their children would go to sleep hungry. this is the most incredibly mean-spirited piece of legislation. i urge a no vote on the $20 billions in the cut in snap -- $20 billion in the cut in snap. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentlewoman from nevada seek recognition? without objection, the gentlewoman is recognized for one minute. ms. titus: i rise today to recognize asian-pacific american heritage month and to celebrate the many contributions of this vibrant community to nevada's first district and to the country at large. asian-pacific americans comprised the fattest growing minority group in las vegas, having doubled in size between 2000 and 2010. along spring mountain road we

find the chinatown plaza built in 1995 by mr. and mrs. james chin, koreatown developed by mr. lee and mr. james yu and hundreds of thai, chinese, japanese and vietnamese restaurants, markets and shops that enrich our society and enhance our economy. along maryland parkway is a flourishing filipino district and numerous cultural festivals are held across the valley over the year, featuring music, dance, costumes and food from the thriving asian-pacific community. so as we celebrate a.p.a. heritage month, let us acknowledge the values that immigrants bring to our lives every day and recognize how much we all stand to gain by enacting immigration reform that honors our country's legacy as the land of opportunity. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from florida seek recognition? without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one

minute. >> madam speaker, i stand here today because supplemental nutritional assistance, snap, is not a form of government waste. there's nothing wasteful about a program that through providing modest assistance to low-income families, has nearly eliminated severe hunger in the united states of america. the average snap benefit provides only $1.40 per meal. mr. deutch: already this forces many seniors and families with young children to skip meals throughout the week or to face a shortage in food by the end of the month. we already know that children who go hungry are more likely to struggle in school and face serious health problems and less likely to escape poverty as adults. the g.o.p.'s proposed cuts to snap of $20 billion amount to punishing children who struggle with hunger is beyond their control. don't we have a national interest in protecting families a moral document. to feed s

and, madam speaker, there is nothing moral about abandoning america's families and american children who are struggling with hunger. thank you and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentlewoman from florida seek recognition? ms. wilson: madam speaker, it's now been 864 days since i arrived in congress and the republican leadership has still not allowed a single vote on serious legislation to address our unemployment crisis. we need to pass the american jobs act now. it deserves a vote. madam speaker, unemployment is now higher than 7.5%.

we hear about it in the news. another full percent of the work force can find only short-term, unreliable work. another half percent has stopped looking because there's no opportunity. another 5% are stuck working part-time when they want full-time work. so i real -- our real unemployment rate is closer to 14%. madam speaker, these people are not lazy, it's this congress that's lazy. we're doing nothing to create opportunity for americans who are suffering. our mantra should be jobs, jobs, jobs. the speaker pro tempore: the entlewoman's time has expired. pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20, the chair will postpone further proceedings today on motions to suspend the rules on which a recorded vote or the yeas and nays are ordered or on which the vote incurs objection under clause 6 of rule 20.

record votes on postponed questions will be taken later. for what purpose does the gentleman from north carolina seek recognition? >> madam speaker, i ask unanimous consent that the proceedings during the former member's program be printed and the congressional -- in the congressional record and that all members and former members who spoke during the proceedings have the privilege of revising and extending their remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. for what purpose does the gentleman from north carolina seek recognition? mr. mchenry: madam speaker, i move the house suspend the rules and pass h.r. 701 as amended. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: h.r. 701, a bill to amend a provision of the securities act of 1933 directing the securities and exchange commission to add a particular class of securities to those exempted under such act to provide a deadline for

such action. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from north carolina, mr. mchenry, and the gentlewoman from california, ms. waters, each will control 20 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from north carolina. mr. mchenry: mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent that all members have five legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and submit extraneous materials for the record on h.r. 701 as amended, currently under consideration. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. mchenry: madam speaker, i ask unanimous -- actually, i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. mchenry: thank you, madam speaker. my colleagues, this is a bipartisan, straightforward bill, had unanimous support within the financial services committee. this bill codifies an intended deadline within the jobs act. this legislation simply puts a reasonable date for the deadline, for an imivive -- for an improved regulation a which came out of a bipartisan bill before the house of

representatives just over a year ago. and then the jobs act that the president signed just more than a year ago. the deadline is very achievable, setting an october 31 deadline for the s.e.c. to write regulations is nearly 19 months after the jobs act was signed into law and it's in fact five months before the due date of the s.e.c.'s reoccurring review of a renewed regulation a. so regulation a is a very interesting provision within securities regulation. it's sensible and philosophically sound extension that should help millions of small and moderate-sized businesses but it's actually unused by all small businesses. now, the jobs act language includes raising the cap on

egulation a securities offerings from $5 million to $50 million, but the act also requires that we have meaningful regulatory improvements to regulation a so it can in fact be utilized by small businesses as it was intended. stakeholders and academics have testified that regulation a should be a covered security or the s.e.c. should radically simplify rega's registration and qualifications. if small businesses are to ever use and utilize this well-intentioned exemption again. . to prove it matters look at the dominance of rule 506. even more for issuances -- even $1 million, you compare the dominance of rule 501 to those other exemptions, and let's just

face it the numbers speak for themselves. additionally other areas of critical consideration include testing the waters activities, comment period, turn around, and number of securities and exchange committee -- commission staff dedicated to small business exemptions. we have made that very clear to the securities and exchange commission the concerns we have on those issues. the s.e.c. must conduct a holistic review of federal and state regulations on these matters to learn which have impeded entrepreneurs from accessing external capital, which is really what the intention of regulation a is all about. so if you look back at a g.a.o. report, it asserted from 1997 to 2011 the number of regulation a filings decreased from 116 annually to 19. now, that's only the number of

filings. now, to go to the next step of an offering that's even further reduced. t reduced from 57 in 1998 to one, just one offering under this important regulation in 2011. now, that's very disturbing. the same g.a.o. report maintained that the s.e.c. has never evaluated the abandonment of regulation a, an exemption solely created to capitalize small and moderate sized businesses in power every day investors. that's absurd. it's high time the s.e.c. get around to this and get it done. that's what this bill is all about. the small business administration asserts that there are more than five million small businesses in the u.s. with fewer than 20 employees. representing 20% of our national employment are firms with fewer than 100 employees employ more

than 36% of our national employment. these millions of small businesses do not utilize reg a or other exemptions actually intended for them. now, there are bad consequences for this because they are not able to get the capital they need to grow and prosper. and perhaps go from being small businesses to big businesses. or from small businesses to more successful small businesses. and they are the ones that are at a loss. at a time of high unemployment, we need to make sure we are able to get those capital stash everybodied businesses, get -- starved businesses, get them the money they need to grow and prosper in these tough economic times. this is a bipartisan bill that has garnered the support of my colleagues across the aisle, ms. eshoo and mr. scott, as well as my colleagues on this side of the aisle, mr. schweikert and mr. garrett have been long

proponents of these reforms and necessary changes. with that i'd like to retain the balance of my time. reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from north carolina reserves. the gentlewoman from california ms. waters: thank you -- ms. waters: thank you very much, madam speaker. i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. ms. waters: madam speaker, as you know the jump-start our business start-up act or the jobs act as it's commonly known was signed into law about one year ago. this bill received the support of both democrats and republicans of the financial services committee. some of us, including me, have some concerns about this legislation. we are basically taking a chance that investors will not be harmed, but we are taking a chance because we are so anxious

to create jobs. and this legislation is possibly yet another approach to creating jobs. this is not the american jobs act, but this is a jobs act, and i believe that my colleague on the opposite side of the aisle, mr. mchenry, really believes that this is going to create jobs, but we are going to create a -- take a chance this will create jobs. regulation a currently allows certain company to raise up to $5 million a year through a streamlined, less costly registration process. providing smaller companies with much needed capital without overly burdening them with registration requirements. in the jobs act we raised that level to $50 million. that's provide -- thus providing small companies with a greater ability to develop new products

and created much needed jobs for their local economies. the jobs act did not set a deadline under which the commission needed to complete this rule making. given the tremendous workload the commission is managing, including setting up new offices under the wall street reform act , regulating new markets such as the derivatives markets and completing various other rule makings under the jobs act, it is understandable that the s.e.c. has not yet completed the regulation a update. h.r. 701 would basically require that the s.e.c. complete the regulation a rule making by october 31 of this year. while i am reluctant to impose accelerated rule making timetables on the commission given the resource constraints they face, i will support this

bill and my colleagues are supporting this bill, particularly since we understand that the s.e.c. has indicated that they will finish the rule making before october 31 anyway. even without this legislation. finally, i would ask that my colleagues support adequate funding for the commission so that they have the staff he resources to carry out this and other outstanding rule makings under both the wall street reform act and the jobs act. this is very important. the s.e.c. has a great responsibility carrying out the rule making for all that we have placed on them. and so i know that they like to do this rule making in a timely fashion, but we must recognize that they don't have all the resources they need. that as we are

taking a chance with our colleagues on the opposite side of the aisle hoping that this bill is going to produce the kind of jobs that have been indicated, we want our friends on the opposite side of the aisle to reciprocate with support for the s.e.c. and the funding that they need. he so i thank you, mr. speaker, and i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from california reserves. the gentleman from north carolina is recognized. mr. mchenry: 418% increase since the late 1990's with securities and exchange commission in terms of funding, i think that's adequate. i certainly appreciate my colleague's concerns. but we passed this provision in the fall of 2011 in this house with a vote of 421-1. this enhances this provision, and provides for a deadline that is 19 months after the original act was signed. i think that's more than generous and sufficient. with that i'dike to yield 2

1/2 minutes to my colleague from florida, mr. ross, who is quite vocal proponent of getting capital to small businesses. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from florida is recognized for 2 1/2 minutes. mr. ross: thank you, madam speaker. thank you, mr. chairman. as my colleague mentioned earlier, the jobs act passed into law with broad bipartisan support. it hasn't been easy for republicans and democrats to agree on a lot of things, but when it came to directing the s.e.c. to get out of the way and allow small public companies to raise capital and create jobs in america, we agreed. now over a year later we are still waiting for the s.e.c. to implement several portions of a bill that should have been noncontroversial. this isn't the first instance. in title 2 of this act the s.e.c. failed in a time certain to follow the will of congress and promulgate rules. so that's why we are here today. now it's unclear when the s.e.c. is going to promulgate the rules

under title 4 which will allow faster capital formation for smaller public companies. but like the job creators and the unemployed in my district, i'm tired of waiting. we are down here today urging members to support legislation to require the s.e.c. to do their job, do their job, and implement the rules under this title by the end of october. it's disheartening we have to waste taxpayer dollars to do this, but i urge members to vote in favor of h.r. 701. madam speaker, it's time for the s.e.c. and all the regulators to stop stalling and stop ignoring the will and direction of congress. it's time for regulators to do their jobs so americans can go back to work and do their jobs. it's time that congress hold all regulators accountable. thank you, mr. chairman, for this bill, and thank you, mr. speaker, i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentlelady from california is recognized. ms. waters: mr. speaker, i ask

unanimous consent that the gentleman from texas, mr. green, control the time for the remainder of the debate. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman from texas will control the time. the gentleman from texas is recognized. mr. green: mr. speaker, continue to reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. mr. mchenry: we are prepared to close. mr. green: i'll wait for closing. mr. mchenry: if the gentleman yields back his time, as the majority party we have the right to close. mr. green: i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. mr. mchenry: thank you, mr. speaker. i would like to just simply close by saying we should help small businesses. ow, there is a -- when we have congressional members acknowledging pop culture as it is, as i did in committee, there is always a debate about that,

but as beyonce once said, if you like it, you should have put a ring on it. likewise we should put a deadline on it, and that's what this bill is all about. th that i will not quote jay z, but will i close by saying we should help small businesses and i urge my colleagues for their support. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the question is, will the house suspend the rules and pass the bill h.r. 701, as amended. so many as are in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, 2/3 of those voting having responded in the affirmative -- mr. green: i demand the yeas and nays. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas. mr. green: on this i demand the yeas and nays. the speaker pro tempore: the yeas and nays are requested. all those in favor of taking this vote by the yeas and nays will rise and remain standing until counted. a sufficient number having arisen, the yeas and nays are ordered.

pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20, further proceedings on this otion will be postponed. for what purpose does the gentleman from north carolina seek recognition? mr. mchenry: i move the house suspend the rules and pass h.r. 384, as amended. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: h.r. 384, a bill to establish the position special assistant for veterans affairs in the office of the secretary of housing and urban development by transferring special assistant for veterans affairs to the office of the secretary of h.u.d., and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from north carolina, mr. mchenry, and the gentleman from texas, mr. green, each will control 20 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from north carolina. mr. mchenry: mr. speaker, i ask that all consent that members may have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks, and smith extraneous materials for the record on h.r. 384, as amended, currently under consideration. the speaker pro tempore: without

objection, so ordered. mr. mchenry: thank you, mr. speaker. today i rise in support of h.r. 384, the homes for heroes act of 2013. this bill introduced by my colleague from texas, congressman al green, who i had the pleasure of having served alongside of me as ranking member of the oversight investigation subcommittee on financial services committee, this bill would establish the position of special assistant for veterans affairs within housing and urban development to coordinate services provided to homeless veterans and serve as h.u.d.'s liaison to the department of veterans affairs. u.s. interagency council on homelessness, state and local officials, and nonprofit service organizations. the physicians currently in the office of deputy assistant for special needs. this transfer highlights the importance of addressing the housing needs of our veterans. h.r. 384 would also require h.u.d. to submit a comprehensive annual report to congress on the housing needs of to meet

those needs. h.r. 348 is a version in part for the homes for heroes act of 2011, 2009, 2008, which passed this house with well over 400 votes each. . as our service member and women continue to serve our country here and abroad, the least we can do is ensure they have proper access to the services that are offered to them when they return. this bill represents a step in that direction and i urge my colleagues to support this worthy endeavor and with that i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from texas is recognized. mr. green: thank you, mr. speaker. i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. green: thank you. i would like to start by