applying for asylum and now is living in virginia and may very well want to stay in virginia. so i urge the defeat of this amendment and reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from virginia is recognized. mr. moran: mr. chairman, how much time do i have remaining? the chair: the gentleman has 2 1/2 minutes. mr. moran: i'll speak -- i will at this point yield two minutes to the gentleman from new york, mr. nadler, from the judiciary committee. the chair: the gentleman from new york is recognized for two minutes. mr. nadler: i thank the gentleman. mr. chairman, i understand that there is an irrational fear of bringing guantanamo detainees nto the united states. even though we'd only do so to bring them to justice. the military to courts which have not been successful at prosecuting them. one of the 9/11 terrorists is in a u.s. prison. the shoe bomber is in a u.s. prison. the underwear bomber is in a

u.s. prison. the times square bomber is in a new york prison -- is in a u.s. prison. we have tried and convicted terrorist master minds in u.s. considerate -- courts in my own district. others are being held at guantanamo without any prospect of a trial. ever since magna carta, we have denied the government the power to imprison and punish people on mere accusation. just because the government labels someone a terrorist doesn't make him one. the government must be asked to prove the accusation in court. that's always been a bedrock american principle, until we opened guantanamo. now we imprison people indefinitely without trial. by what claim of right do we do this? how can we be sure we're punishing actual terrorists and not innocent people when we hold no trials. mr. wolf said someone may be acquitted. if he's acquitted, he should be released. that's ours byic principle of justice for the last thousand years. guantanamo should be closed and its inmates tried or released.

it's time to close guantanamo so it can no longer be used to recruit -- by you are enemy to recruit terrorists and violate american principles of due process of law. i'm astonished, frankly, that i'd hear on the floor of the united states congress someone say that people might be acquitted, therefore they should be held in jail forever because maybe the evidence doesn't exist because someone in the government, in the all-powerful, all-knowing bureaucracy, says someone is a terrorist, that person must be held in jail indefinitely because maybe we don't have the proof. that's not america. yield become. the chair: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from virginia is recognized. mr. wolf: politico talks about this case. it said the failed prosecution of allege sod mali pirate and the fact that failure could leave him living freely and

permanently in u.s. borders highlights the risk of trying terrorism suspects in american courts. weeks ago, he was facing a mandatory life sentence after shipjacking, an incident like the one in the film "captain phillips." now he's seeking permanent asylum in the united states. one current federal tourism -- terrorism prosecutor said the ali case and the possibility of his eventual release is one reason why terrorism suspects picked up overseas should not be brought to the united states but should instead be detained at guantanamo or some other facility. i personally would think the sheik ught of khalid mohammed or some of the people when you go to guantanamo bay and see them walking the streets here in the united states should they be acquitted

would be, they ought not to be brought to the united states. i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. mr. moran: mr. chairman, the person that my good friend refers to is not a guantanamo detainee and the reality is that khalid s hembings ikh mohammed is not the -- is not representative of the vast majority of gitmo detainees who were brought 13 or 14 years ago. there were a handful several years later who are really bad guys. they're kept separately. but i'm talking about the ones, 86% of them turned in for bounty, most of them not sfloved combat activity against the united states or its allies. we ought to look at the guantanamo population and do what this country, our founding fathers intended taos do. give them a trial, prosecute and punish them. the chair: for what purpose does the gentleman from pennsylvania seek recognition? >> i move to strike the

requisite number of words. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. fattah: i rise in support of this amendment. now, as for myself, i believe hat america and our ideal, the notion that someone could have their liberty taken be held with secret evidence be denied an opportunity to appear before court of law, be denied counsel, or outside contact is something that our country would never engage in. the problem with this theory is that we are engaged in it. the problem is that we had under president bush sr., he would say about china, he said, y'all are arresting people with no charges, no public evidence,

no tribunal of any sort. and this is not part of the civilized world. i remember questioning the former speaker of the house, newt gingrich who appeared in a -- we had a talk right after 9/11, and you know, he was talking and i said, well, if we're a nation of laws, how are we going to reconcile that in this new circumstance? he said it's going to be very difficult. and here we are. it's very difficult. we're spending $3 million per prisoner to house people on a foreign land under charges that we're not prepared to make public, no offering of a trial, most of whom were turned over for bounty, for a ransom paid out by our government and i don't know how it is that we suggest that we want to project to the rest of the world what a

nation of laws actually looks like but as for me and my district, i'm going to cast a vote in favor of this amendment. because the constitution of the united states was drafted and written and signed in philadelphia and somehow i believe that the notion that our country would ever come to this moment is the voice from the source of those who wrote that document at that time. i yield back the remainder of my time. the chair: the gentleman yields back. the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from virginia, mr. moran. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the noes have it. the amendment is not agreed to. mr. moran: i ask for a recorded vote. the chair: pursuant to clause 6 of rule 18, further proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from virginia, mr. moran, will be postponed.

the clerk will read. the clerk: page 94, line 24, section 529, none of the funds may be used to construct or modify any facility in the united states to house any individual described in subsection c under the effective control of the department of defense, section 530. funds should be used to purchase light bulbs that are energy star qualified. section 531, the director shall instruct any department receiving funds to track undisbursed balances and expired grant accounts and include in its annual performance plan the following. details on future actions the department will take to review undisbursed balances in unexpyred grant accounts. section 5 2. none of the funds made available may be used to develop, design or execute a bilateral policy with china unless specifically authorized by a law. section 533. none of the funds may be used

to pay the salaries or expenses of personnel to deny an application for the importation of any model of shotgun if the other requirements of law with respect to the proposed importation are met. section 534. none of the funds may be used to maintain a computer network unless such network blocks the viewing, down loading or exchanging of pornography. section 535, the department shall submit spending plans to committees of the house an the senate within 60 days after the date of enactment of this act. section 536. none of the funds may be used to enter into a contract with any corporation that was convicted of a felony criminal violation within the proceed -- preceding 24 months where the awarding entity is aware of the conviction. section 537. none of the funds may be used to enter into a contract with any corporation that has any unpaid federal tax liability

that has been assessed. section 538. none of the funds made available may be obligated to implement the arms trade treaty. section 539. none of the funds made available may be used to require a person licensed under section 923 of title 18 united states code to report information to the department regarding the sale of multiple rifles or shotguns to the same person. the chair: for what purpose does the gentleman from connecticut seek recognition? the gentlewoman from connecticut seek recognition? >> i have an amendment at the desk i would like to offer and withdraw my amendment. the chair: the clerk will report the amendment. the clerk: amendment offered by ms. esty of connecticut. move to strike lines 7 through 11. the chair: for what purpose does the gentlewoman seek recognition? ms. esty: i seek recognition to speak on the bill for five minutes. the chair: pursuant to thed orer of the house for today, the gentlewoman from

connecticut, ms. esty, and a member opposed each will control five minutes. the chair recognizes the gentlewoman from connecticut. ms. esty: thank you, mr. speaker. my amendment strikes section 539 of the bill. section 539 is an unnecessary and harmful gun rider that would bar the a.t.f. from using any funds to investigate straw purchases or trafficing of certain highly dangerous weapons this long gun requirement, which has been in effect since 2011, is an esenable tool for law enforcement to combat drug cartel and weapons trafficking. in fact, in the first eight months after the rule was enacted, more than 100 criminals and traffickers were identified for prosecution. it is clear that the reporting requirements is keeping guns out of the hands of criminals and the a.t.f. must be able to continue to do this important work. i thank my leagues who are in support of our gun violence prevention efforts today and every day.

i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentlelady reserves. for what purpose does the gentleman from texas seek recognition? >> mr. chairman, i speak in opposition. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. >> -- mr. carter: i don't understand why they want to take the people who stand on the border and take this onslaught of the ailure of the admrgs to defend and prosecute those who violate the laws of our country and they want to have something that prevents -- that imposes on us our right to privacy and the right to exercise our

second amendment rights. law enforcement tools are not taken away by the fact that we have limited this intrusion upon the rights of the people in the states that are on our southwestern border. in fact, law enforcement has the right to at any time walk into a federal firearms dealer and request any sales records nd they must provide them. they can walk into a federally licensed firearm record every day. the amendment doesn't prohibit gun dealers from reporting multiple sales or purchasing. it just doesn't mandate on four states of this union a violation of their right to privacy. the playing field should be level. anything we do under the law. but the facts are, we're unleveling the playing field for the very people that stand down in the direct onslaught of

the invasion coming across our southern boarder. as a result of this administration's failure to properly enforce immigration policy. this is something that we shouldn't even be discussing, limiting the ability and make regular porting requirements on four states and involving their right of privacy, contrary to the rest of the union. i don't understand why this is even being discussed. i oppose the attempts to toss out the second amendment rights of the people of the state of texas, new mexico, arizona, and california. i yield back -- i reserve. the chair: the gentleman reserves. the gentlelady from connecticut is recognized. ms. esty: mr. chairman, i yield three minutes to my colleague, the gentlewoman from connecticut, row la -- rosa

delauro. the chair: the gentlelady is recognized for three minutes. ms. delauro: i rise in support of congresswoman esty's amendment which strikes a dangerous rider that would bar the bureau of alcohol, tobacco, firearms and explosives from enforcing a reporting requirement of semiautomatic weapons in four southwest border states. it's over 16 months since the tragedy in newtown, connecticut, where six adults and 20 children were murdered in cold blood. it's been almost a week since the latest mass tragedy that occurred in california. 19 people were shot and four killed in new orleans last weekend. even before what happened at uc santa barbara over 80 americans were killed by guns last week and all the families who have lost loved ones, families in newtown, santa barbara, and all across america are still waiting for the congress to act. these bills have been used to chip away at the federal government's ability to enforce gun laws and protect the public

from gun crime. this is yet another example of the same bad behavior. currently licensed gun dealers in arizona, california, new mexico and texas are required to report to the national tracing center when adaler sells multiple assault rifles to one individual. just as all dealers have reported multiple handgun sales for over 20 years. this requirement is narrowly taylored a-- tailored, applying only to sales of rifles that are semiautomobile, greater than a .22 caliper and hold a detachble magazine. multiple assault rifle sales reports helps law enforcement crack down on gun trafficking along the southwest border where dealers are disproportionately fueling cartel violence. this reporting requirement is effective. during the first eight months it was in effect, a.t.f. initiated 120 investigations based on reports of multiple sales of assault rifles and recommended prosecution of more than 100 defendants in 25

separate cases. furthermore, every federal court has addressed this issue, has found that requiring dealers in these four border states to report multiple assault rifle sales is well within a.t.f.'s authority. this requirement is critical to identifying straw purchasers who put guns in the hands of criminals. i urge my colleagues, support this commonsense amendment that will continue to give a.t.f. the trools -- the tools it needs to combat gun trafficking and to keep the public safe. i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentlelady yields back the balance of her time. the gentleman from texas is recognized. mr. carter: caret thank you for recognizing me. i want to point out that this record keeping is directed at multiple rifle and shotgun sales, of a semi-automatic character. it becomes a habit around here to call anything that will fire six shots when you pull the

trigger as an assault rifle. in fact this requires reporting of semi-automatic shotguns as well as semi-automatic rifles of which people all over the united states, but in particular in our state, people hunt every day with these whelms -- weapons, families have these weapons in their homes, they are not assault welf -- weapons, they are semi-automatic shotguns and rifles and this reporting requirement is upon those weapons. it doesn't say anything about assault weapons. so i question the logic of this whole thing when we're looking at the privacy of the individual under the second amendment and the right for americans to keep and bear arms and so therefore i think that the language that is in place today is the right language for policies of the united states.

the chair: the gentleman reserves. the gentlelady is recognized for one minute. ms. esty: mr. chairman, i yield one minute to my colleague from new york. the chair: the gentlelady from new york is recognized for one minute. mrs. maloney: mr. chair, i rise in support of representative esty's amendment to remove this misguided rider that will only prevent law enforcement from doing its job. since a.t.f. launched this initiative, the so-called long gun rule, to track multiple purchases of rifles and assault weapons, it has become a crucial tool to investigate and prosecute straw purchasers who enable the flood of illegal guns to cities and towns across our nation. in my home city of new york, 85% of guns used in crimes were originally sold in a different state. when we see the toll that illegal guns take on our streets, why do we in congress

stand idle? now blocking law enforcement from addressing this crisis. in the first eight months of this initiative, the bureau launched 120 investigations into gun trafficking and high-powered assault weapons and a former special agent has called this rule, and i quote, a huge tool to combat illegal sales. the chair: the gentlelady's time has expired. mrs. maloney: so why do we want to stop this ability to -- i thank the gentlelady for yielding. please vote no on this misguided rule. the chair: the gentlelady's time has expired. the gentleman from texas is recognized. mr. carter: i would point out that this law portrays only to the southwestern border states and my friends from connecticut and new york are not affected by this rule. there's no reason why you can't buy long guns in new york or connecticut and ship them down to the border. this is discriminatory against four states and four states only. it's bad policy.

the chair: does the gentleman yield back? mr. carter: yes, i yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentleman from pennsylvania seek recognition? mr. fattah: i rise to strike the very last word. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. fattah: i want to make a couple points. one is that this requirement is in place now, has been in place , it s not disrupted life has saved lives, however. and i think that what's important to note is that this requirement does not actually apply to normal shotguns or hunting rifles. and i think that it's important for the house to understand that it applies to semi-automatics that are greater than a ..22 caliber and can hold a detachble magazine. all it says is, if somebody shows up, buys a thousand of these, the federal license

firearm dealer needs to report that multiple sale. it's a reasonable thing. i'd like to yield to the ranking member on appropriations, the gentlelady from new york, mrs. lowey, 2 1/2 -- well, the time she may consume. mrs. lowey: and i want to thank the outstanding ranking member of this committee for your work on this bill. mr. chairman, i rise in strong support of this amendment. let me be very clear. the long gun rider currently in this bill makes it easier for drug cartels to smuggle weapons across the border. and more difficult for law enforcement to identify straw purchasers and get weapons out of the hands of dangerous people. the reporting of multiple purchases for powerful semi-automatic firearms is the same policy we have had for

handguns for decades. and it saves lives. let me be very clear, my friends. the long gun reporting requirement would not stop a law-abiding person from purchasing a firearm. it only allows the reporting of multiple sales of powerful semi-automatic rifles greater than the .22 caliber -- .22 caliber and only if it can hold the detachble magazine. the justice department found that more than half of guns recovered in mexico in connection with drug cartels, more than half of these guns originated in the united states of america. a case study of firearms trafficking by one drug cartel found that during a 15-month eriod the cartel purchased 251 assault rifles from u.s. gun

dealers, all but one of which was purchased as part of a multiple sale. law enforcement needs more, my colleagues, not less to fight drug cartel violence. support this amendment, help law enforcement stop the trafficking of weapons and save lives. mr. fattah: reclaiming my time. i'd also like to yield to the gentlelady from connecticut, an opportunity to close, i would yield my remaining time. ms. esty: thank you, mr. ranking member, and thank you for your leadership on this issue. i appreciate the kind words of my colleagues and their support for this amendment. and with that i ask unanimous consent to withdraw the amendment. the chair: is there objection to withdrawing the amendment? without objection, the amendment's withdrawn. the clerk will read. the clerk: page 100, line 12, spending reduction account,

section 540, the amount by which the applicable allocation of new budget authority made by the committee is zero dollars. the chair: for what purpose does the gentleman from pennsylvania seek recognition? for what purpose does the gentleman from washington seek recognition? mr. hastings: mr. chairman, i have an amendment at the desk. the clerk: amendment offered by mr. hastings of washington. at the end of the bill, before the short title add the following, section, none of the funds made available by this act under the heading pacific coastal salmon recovery may be used for grant guidelines or requirements to establish minimum buffers. the chair: pursuant to the order of the house of today, the gentleman from washington, mr. hastings, and a member opposed each will control five minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from washington. mr. hastings: mr. chairman, i yield myself as much time as i may consume. the chair: the gentleman is

recognized. mr. hastings: mr. chairman, for the past 15 years, a large part of the success of the salmon recovery in the northwest and other states has been through locally driven solutions funded through the pacific coastal salmon recovery fund. and i continue to support this program. this amendment will ensure, however, that these funds continue to benefit salmon through on-ground projects but without questionable buffer guidelines imposed by the national oceanic and atmospheric administration or noaa, as to a condition of their use. agriculture is the background of my central washington district and it is estimated that these and other similar imposed lands set-aside guidelines by noaa could restrict the use of vital crop protection tools on as much as 50 acres of farm land per mile. i'm not alone in my concern about noaa's use of unverifiable salmon recovery --

buffer requirements. last year the fourth circuit court of appeals found similar noaa salmon buffer requirements in a biological opinion that were based on scientific standings that, and i want to quote directly, did not always appear to be logical, obvious or even rational, end quote. in my home state of washington, over two dozen agriculture associations strongly oppose noaa's recommendation of large buffers on agriculture lands. and one local recovery board that has successfully used these funds to improve salmon survival in the upper columbia river opposes mandatory buffers tied to these important salmon grant funds. now, mr. chairman, let me be very clear. this amendment won't cut pacific coast salmon recovery funds, nor will it prohibit repairing buffers where they are appropriate. but it will ensure that noaa

does not make them a prerequisite for these funds to be awarded for on the- on-the-ground projects, respecting agriculture areas and locally driven solutions to salmon recovery. so, mr. chairman, i ask that this amendment be approved so that the federal pacific coast salmon recovery funds, which have proven effective over the years for farmers and local projects, are not used as a backdoorway for noaa to implement other controversial guidelines for these buffers. with that i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentleman from pennsylvania seek recognition? mr. fattah: i claim the time in opposition. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. fattah: now, this is a, in every respect, an attempt to authorize an on a -- on an appropriations bill. these buffer zones that have been put in place under the expertise of noaa have been part and parcel to, you know, making sure that the salmon and

the hatchry system work properly and i think for us to delve into this at this point is difficult. so i think that the worrying is challenging -- wording is challenging and i'd ask that rather than deal with it here, if we could talk about it, see what we can do in conference, that would be a good thing. i'd hate for us, after investing tens of millions of ollars in the salmon, right, to be making a rash action here on the floor. mr. hastings: will the gentleman yield? mr. fattah: i'd be glad to yield. because i'd like to work with you on this. mr. hastings: i respect that. but let me clarify what is going on here. because, the gentleman in due respect, represents an urban area and i represent a rural rea. mr. fattah: the point is true that i represent an urban area. yes. i continue to yield. mr. hastings: i thank the gentleman for that clarification. i want to make this point.

these are suggested guidelines and we've gone through this before. in fact, e.p.a. is working on this precisely. i oppose what e.p.a. is doing, as a matter of fact. and most people on the ground. i'm just simply saying that through the funding mechanism, noaa should not be able to impose these guidelines that have a great deal of controversy in the pacific northwest. now, i know this is the start of the process, if the gentleman -- i know noaa had some problems with the initial language, we changed that language now, there's no opposition or they can't say they oppose this because this only affects particularly, particularly these guidelines that are being proposed. so i think the amendment is something that needs to be passed frankly to send the message. if they want to, by the time we go through this process, have some other adjustments, i'd be

willing to talk. i think this amendment should be passed so we can send a message to noaa. mr. fattah: the united states taxpayers invested a lot of money in the health of salmon in your neck of the woods, right? i'm all for it, i'd like to make sure whatever we're doing is correct. we've got treaty obligations, hatchery, we have got all kinds of stuff going on with both the native americans and the commercial fishermen operations there. all i'm saying is i don't want to come at the end of the night, after we've been debating this bill for two days, right, and rush something forward that may not be the way to go. it's interestingly worded, right. i know that you have good intentions. i like to work with you, with the majority staff, and see where we are. i just can't support this given the complexities of the issues and my -- the limitations of me being from an urban area, i want to make sure i have a complete grasp on the issue.

mr. hastings: if the gentleman will yield if he still has time. mr. fattah: i'd be glad to. mr. hastings: these are issues that i know are unique to mainly western parts of the united states but in many respects the gentleman made a statement that really supports my amendment. because he said the american taxpayers are spending billions of dollars on salmon recovery. that is true. so are the rate payers in the bonneville power system. they are paying billions of dollars for salmon recovery. the good news is, the good news is, the fish runs in the last five years have come back in record numbers. to be very honest with you, these guidelines haven't been imposed. and the salmon are coming back. so why would you want to impose these buffer zones when it probably wouldn't add anything and when a federal court said it's questionable science anyway. mr. fa to: a lot of us would

love to go out and have dinner tonight have salmon, and the ssh for the science of this is you can't make a mistake. it's a multiyear process, you've got a lot going on here and if you blow it, you're going to blow it far big industry that's important to america. i'd like to work with you and make sure we get it right and that the expertise of noaa i think should be helpful in that process. i yield back the remainder of my time. the chair: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from washington is recognized. mr. hastings: how much time do i have? the chair: two and a half minutes. mr. hastings: i yield myself the balance of the time. i appreciate the ranking member working with me. i think this is sufficiently important that we should adopt this amendment and again i will point out, we have spent billions of dollars, the american tax pay hears spent billions as has the rate payers spent billions of dollars recovering salmon. and the good news in the pacific northwest as i mentioned, they are coming back in record numbers, some of the salmon runs.

so if there's something that before the final part of this bill becomes a law and there needs to be some justice, i'd be more than happy to talk about it. i think it's officially important to send a message to noaa to not impose these guidelines when the evidence is contrary to what they're trying to do i urge adoption of my amendment and yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman yields back. the sque on the amendment offered by the gentleman from washington. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair the as have it. the amendment is agreed. o -- is agreed to. for what purpose does the gentleman from pennsylvania seek recognition? >> i have an amendment at the desk. the chair: the clerk will read. the clerk: amendment offered by mr. doyle of pennsylvania. at the end of the bill before the short title add the fol logue, section, not later than 60 days after the date of the enactment of this act, the secretary of commerce, the united states trade representative and the united states international trade commission shall jointly submit to the congress a report on the

following. one, the authorities of the department of commerce, the united states trade representative and the united states international trade commission respectively to impose sanctions against corporations or other legal entities that benefit from utilizing trade secrets or other information, a, obtained by such corporations or entities through cyberintrusions or other illegal methods or b, provide to such corporations or entities by a national government, foreign intelligence service or other entity using such means. two, if the department of commerce, the united states trade representative or united states international trade commission does not have sufficient authority described in paragraph one recommendations to improve or broaden the scope of such authorities to address the matters described in paragraph one. the chair: for what purpose does the gentleman from virginia seek recognition? mr. wolf: i reserve -- i reserve a point of order on the amendment. the chair: a point of order is eserved.

ursuant to clause 6 of rule -- pursuant to aned orer of the house of today the gentleman from pennsylvania and a member opposed each will control five minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from pennsylvania. mr. doyle: thank you, mr. speaker. i want to start off by saying to my good friend the chairman that i plan to withdraw the amendment. mr. speaker, my good friend and colleague, timur fi and i are offering this bipartisan amendment that directs the department of commerce, the united states trade representative, and the united states international trade commission to report to congress on the sanctions they can bring against companies that benefit from information acquired by hacking into private computers in the united states. the justice department recently indicted five chinese military officers for stealing commercially valuable information from a number of companies in the united states.

these indictments highlight what we have known for a long time, namely, that china and governments around the world are hacking into computers into the united states and using that information they steal for their own economic advantage. these hackers have targeted the offices of westing house, u.s. steel, the united steelworkers union, algony technologies and solar world, five of which are located in pittsburgh, pennsylvania. the information they stole helped chinese companies in negotiations or trade disputes with each of the targeted organizations. while these indictments are the first of their kind, businesses in the united states have been facing cyberattacks like this for years. i'd like to think that these cyberspies will prosecuted and imprisonednary -- for their actions at some point but that won't reverse the damage they've done. congress needs to focus right now, today, on protecting the american workers and businesses

who face these attacks every day. i would urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to support our amendment and begin taking the necessary measures to counter science espionage. this amendment would take the first step by determining if the u.s. government as the tools it needs to do just that. let's send a clear message to the bad actors around the world that the united states has the power and the will to punish these ezz -- those that engage in criminal trade practices. mr. chairman, at this time i'd like to yield to my good friend and colleague, mr. murphy of pennsylvania. mr. murphy -- the chair: the gentleman veck nighed. -- is recognized. mr. murphy: on monday, charges were filed against members of the communist chinese military affirming what i as chairman of the congressional steel caucus and other members have contended for quite some time. it proves we're losing manufacturing jobs not because the u.s. stopped making great products but because the chinese government is stealing ideas, inventions and

intellectual property straight out of western pennsylvania. the chinese government has hacked into our computers, stolen blueprints, erected trade barriers all to give state-owned enterprises an unfair and illegal advantage in the american marketplace. for example in 2010 as american factories were shutting down because of dumped and illegally traded chinese pipe, chinese agents were trying to cheat import as well. they hacked into computers at u.s. steel and the united steelworkers union to obtain privileged communications about the crucial unfair trade case being litigated before the commission on the oil company tubular goods from china. this will help us apply the same crackdown on crimes. by dumping these goods into the u.s. market, countries like china are in clear violation of trade agreements. western pennsylvania nor the rest of this country won't be a welcome mat for the chinese or any foreign competitor to walk

over. with that, i yield back to mr. doyle. mr. doyle: thank you. i would like to ask unanimous consent to withdraw my amendment and i want to thank chairman wolf for his efforts in support. hopefully we can work together to achieve the goals of this amendment with language in the conference report or some other means. mr. wolf: if the gentleman would yield. mr. doyle: gladly. mr. wolf: this is one of the better amendments offered today. i will do everything i can to make sure this is in the bill. if the members would take the time to go out and look at the place where you can see all the companies that are being hit, the chinese are stealing jobs and so i thank mr. doyle and mr. murphy for offering this. i will do everything i can, i think the staff knows how strongly i feel. mr. fattah has been a great help on these issues. if it is ruled out of order, we will make sure that we try to put it in the bill. i thank both of you for offering it. mr. doyle: i thank the chairman and i yield back.

the chair: for what purpose does the gentleman from pennsylvania seek recognition? mr. fattah: i move to strike the last word. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. fattah: i thank my colleagues from pennsylvania and the case that was referenced is centered in pennsylvania. it is a case that is pending before our courts, i won't have much to say about it other than under our system, an indictment is merely a charge. we have to go through the process. but the one thing we do know has nothing to do with the case, is that chairman wolf has worked on this for a number of years, he's exposed all of us to information about this and arranged briefings from our highest levels of law enforcement officials in our country and clearly there's a great deal of cybersnooping going on and it emanates from a number of different places, china included, ukraine, nigeria, we can go through the

laundry list but we have to do more to protect ourselves. i want to thank the gentleman from pennsylvania, mr. doyle and mr. murphy, for bringing this amendment forward and as the chairman indicated, we will work with them in a way that make this is as concrete as possible as we go forward. i yield back the remainder of my time. the chair: the gentleman yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman rise? >> i would like to ask unanimous consent to withdraw my amendment. the chair: is there objection? without objection, the mendment is withdrawn. for what purpose does the gentlewoman from tennessee seek recognition? >> i have an amendment at the desk. the chair: the clerk will report. the clerk: -- the chair: the gentlewoman will specify which amendment. mrs. blackburn: 14. the chair: the clerk will report. the clerk: amendment number 14 offered by mrs. blackburn of tennessee. the chair: pursuant to the order of the house of today, the gentlewoman from tennessee,

mrs. blackburn, a a member opposed each will control five minutes. the chair recognizes the gentlewoman from tennessee. mrs. blackburn: thank you, mr. chairman. i want to begin by thanking chairman wolf for his patience. every single year, as he has shepherded this appropriations bill, i have come to this floor and had offered the bill that would include a 1% across the board spending cut. and he has been very gracious and very kind, even though he opposes this and even though i appreciate the good work that the committees have done to reduce spending and to get these levels down, i believe that we can do more and that we should be doing more. i think it's admirable that the committee is showing us a .8% reduction. but if we would pass my amendment, we would save another $400 million. and that is a step that we need to take.

now, i think it is important to realize that this amendment exempts the $8.5 billion budget that is for the f.b.i. we think it's important that they get that for their vital mission which they conduct every single day and pro-- in protecting american citizens at home and abroad and in conducting the activities that do help to keep the homeland and our people safe. my amendment will not affect the efforts that are combating terrorism, cybercrime, human trafficking, violent gangs. it is a targeted spending cut that will result in a savings to the taxpayers of over $400 million. given the $51 billion price tag of this bill, i do not feel that it is asking too much to cut a little bit more. i think it's important to note also that across the board spending cuts have worked at the state level. there is no reason not to

utilize them here in washington. we have heard from so many of our governors and our mayors that have trumpeted the use of across-the-board spending cuts. we have heard chris isaak tee a 9% across -- chris christie a 9% across the board spending cut. rick perry in texas a 5% savings. we have governor cuomo who was looking at reducing 10% across the board. schweitzer in montana, 5% across the board. they work. and there's a reason they do. because an equitable cut. mr. chairman, we are $17 trillion in debt. this is something we can do for our children and our grandchildren. and begin to responsibly roll back the amount that the federal government spends. at this point in time, we are spending the money that our

children have not made for programs that they do not want nd will never, ever use. what we need to do is be wise stewards of the taxpayer dollar. now and in the future. i also think this is an idea that the american people are beginning to support. noted a recent poll, "washington post"/abc news poll. this was march 6, 2013. 61% of the american public actually supports not a 1% or a across-the-board cut in all federal spending. it is time for us to do a little more, to save a little more, to make a few more spending reductions and to think about what the addition of debt piling -- debt, piling

on more debt, does to our children and our grandchildren and to their futures. it is indeed tapping and trading our children's futures to the people that hold our publicly traded debt. with that, mr. chairman, i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentlelady yields back the balance of her time. for what purpose does the gentleman from virginia seek recognition? mr. wolf: to strike the requisite number of words. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. wolf: thank you, mr. chairman. i reluctantly rise in opposition to the amendment. i understand what the gentlelady is saying and i think she makes a powerful case but i think to bring it back to this bill, the allocation for the bill already represents a cut of $398 million below the f.y. 2014 level. 33 individual programs have been terminated in the bill. and moreover, and i'll end with this, since the beginning of the 112th congress, the

allocation for commerce, justice, science appropriations has been cut by $13.1 billion or over 20%. so you've had a 20% cut since the 112th and as a result of that i would ask for a no vote. and yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the question is on the offered by the gentlewoman from tennessee. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the noes have it. mrs. blackburn: mr. chairman. the chair: the amendment is not agreed to. mrs. blackburn: i ask for a recorded vote. the chair: pursuant to clause 6 of rule 18, further proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from tennessee will e postponed. for what purpose does the gentleman from new york seek recognition? mr. engel: mr. chairman, i have an amendment at the desk. the chair: the clerk will designate the amendment. the clerk: amendment offered by

mr. engel of new york. at the end of the bill, before the short title, insert the following, section, none of the funds made available by this act may be used to lease or purchase new light-duty vehicles for any executive fleet or for any agency's fleet inventory except in accordance with presidential memorandum, federal fleet performance, dated may 24, 2011. the chair: pursuant to the order of the house of today, the gentleman from new york, mr. engel, and a member opposed each will control five minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from new york. mr. engel: thank you, mr. chairman. on may 24, 2011, president obama issued a memorandum on federal fleet performance that requires all new light-duty vehicles in the federal fleet to be alternative fuel vehicles. such as hybrid, electric, natural gas or biofuel, by december 31, 2015. my amendment echoes the presidential memorandum by prohibiting funds in the

commerce, justice, science and related agencies appropriations act from being used to lease or purchase the new light-duty vehicles except in accord with the president's memorandum. this amendment has been supported by the majority and minority on appropriations bills eight times over the past few years and i understand it will receive similar support today. our transportation sector is by far the biggest reason we send $600 billion per year to hostile nations to pay for oil at ever-increasing costs. but america doesn't have to be dependent on foreign sources of il for trfings fuel. alternative -- television fuel. -- transportation fuel. the federal government operates the largest fleet of light-duty vehicles in america. there are over 660,000 vehicles in the federal fleet. by supporting a diverse array of vehicle technologies in our federal fleet, we will encourage development of

domestic energy resources including biomass, natural gas, agricultural waste, hydrogen, renewable electricity, and ethanol. when i was in brazil a few years ago i saw how they diversified their fuel by greatly expanding the use of ethanol. when people drove to a gas station they saw what a gallon of gasoline would cost and what ethanol would cost and could decide which was better for them. they can do this in brazil, we can do it here. we can educate people on using alternative fuels and let consumers decide which is best for them. expanding the role these energy sources play in our transportation economy will help break the leverage over americans held by foreign government-controlled oil companies and will increase our nation's domestic security and protect consumers from price spikes and charges in the world's oil markets. congresswoman ileana ros-lehtinen and i have a bill which would mandate that by a

certain amount of time all cars in america would be flex fuel cars. we can build these cars for under $100 per car and i think it is ridiculous that we don't do it. i want to thank mr. wolf and mr. fattah for their courtesies and i ask that the engel amendment be supported. i yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentleman from pennsylvania seek recognition? mr. fattah: i seek to strike the last word. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. fattah: so, i want to thank the gentleman for bringing this amendment forward. it's so very important that our country move aggressively in this area. as you travel around the world you see other countries doing so much more in terms of renewable energy and utilizing cleaner energy sources. in ireland it's wind energy, in france there's nuclear and in israel you have solar along the dead sea.

morocco has one of the largest solar operations. one of the things that our government can do to save money , as was mentioned in the last discussion about the need to save money, is that we could be moving to a different type of fuel and we also could be improving the circumstances under which the air that our grandchildren will breathe will be healthier. so i want to thank the gentleman for bringing this forward. there are vehicles that are coming forward that are going to be solar powered and powered by other types of alternative fuel. our military has been investing very significantly in this regard in terms of aviation fuel, so there's work for us to do. we can actually do it together, democrats and republicans, and therefore i rise in support of this amendment. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from new york.

those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. the amendment is agreed to. for what purpose does the gentlewoman from tennessee seek recognition? mrs. blackburn: mr. chairman, i have an amendment at the desk. the chair: the clerk will designate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 15 printed in the congressional record offered by mrs. blackburn of tennessee. the chair: pursuant to the order of the house of today, the gentlewoman from tennessee, mrs. blackburn, and a member opposed each will control five minutes. the chair recognizes the gentlewoman from tennessee. mrs. blackburn: thank you, mr. chairman. i do rise in support of my amendment to shut down the thompson correctional center in illinois. the amendment would prohibit any funds being made available for operations, renovation or construction at thompson correctional. section 529 of our c.j.s. bill prohibits funds to construct,

acquire or modify a facility in the u.s. to house detainees. however, my amendment goes further by not allowing any funds for operations at thompson. in addition, i recognize that c.j.s. also prohibits the use of funds to transfer guantanamo detainees to the u.s. however, the administration has proven resourceful at finding pots of money to achieve their goals. thompson correctional center is ground zero in this debate. as long as it remains operational, we run the risk of seeing guantanamo bay detainees on american soil. one of the president's first acts in office was signing executive order 13492 of january 22, 2009, to close guantanamo bay detention center. the administration has attempted to purchase the facility since 2009 to hold these detainees.

we have the letter from december 15 to illinois governor pat quinn which was signed by several administration officials including secretary of state hillary clinton, stating the following, and i'm quoting, as the president has made clear, we need to continue to detain some individuals currently held at the guantanamo bay detention facility. to securely house these detainees, federal agencies plan to work with me and other state officials to acquire the nearly vacant maximum security facility in thompson, illinois. it later adds, the defense department will operate part of the facility to house a limited number of detainees from guantanamo, end quote. congress passed language in subsequent bills to prevent the transfer of detainees from guantanamo prisons to the u.s. however, the administration once again went behind the intent of congress and purchased, purchased the

thompson facility in 2012 for $165 million, using money from various d.o.j. accounts. supposedly that was to combat prison overcrowding, mr. chairman. today the prison is still empty. president obama also requested $43.7 million in his fiscal year 2014 budget to begin activating thompson. i think that we all know that this administration intends to close the guantanamo bay detention center. when it is shut down those detainees are going to go somewhere. the hand writing is on the wall. president obama, hillary clinton and other democrats have clearly stated their intent to bring those detainees to america's soil. i think that it is imperative that we accept this amendment and make certain that there is

no money for operational funds for the thompson facility and i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentlelady reserves the balance of her time. for what purpose does the gentlewoman from illinois seek recognition? >> mr. speaker, i rise to oppose the amendment and seek time in opposition. the chair: the gentlelady is recognized for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i rise to voice my strong opposition to the amendment offered by the congresswoman from tennessee. the amendment she offers that aims to deny funding for the hompson correctional center in thompson, illinois, would not only negatively impact public safety and put our hardworking prison guards in harm's way, but it would also be a big disservice to our nation's taxpayers. mrs. bustos: on a personal level, it would also be another setback for thompson, illinois, and the surrounding community that has been thirsting far too long for the good-payinging jobs and the economic -- good-paying jobs and the economic opportunity that will come from the long-awaited opening of this dormant facility. when fully opened, the thompson

prison will create 1,100 jobs and will infuse more than $200 million into our local community. but making sure the facility remains on track to open has very important ramifications for communities across our country as well. due to the shortage of prison bed space, high security prisons are today operating at 53% over capacity. this is especially alarming when considering that nearly nine out of every 10 high security inmates have a history of violence. this overcrowding has put our hardworking prison guards and staff at facilities from coast-to-coast at risk of harm every day while theron the job. my husband ran our county jail for more than a decade and i can tell you i understand this at a very personal level. let me quote the government

accountability office. which says that overcrowding has affected bureau of prison en's institutions, institutions staff, and the infrastructure of bureau of prisonen's facilities and -- prison's facilities. opening the thompson prison will add critical high security beds that will help alleviate overcrowding and make our prisons safer for guards, for staff and inmates. in addition to increasing safety, opening the thompson correction alpha silt would also save taxpayers hard earned money. the cost of constructing a new facility comparable to thompson would exceed $400 million and take three to four years to complete. . that is more than double the funding needed to open the existing thompson