whether the published reports that have been widely reported in the media are true or not. and i appreciate the gentleman's allegiance to the underlying principle that americans deserve privacy. how much time do i have repraining -- remaining? the chair: the gentleman from florida has 2 -- mr. grayson: all right. i yield to the gentleman from new jersey. the chair: the gentleman from new jersey is recognized for how long? the balance of the time? mr. grayson: for two minutes. the chair: the gentleman from new jersey is recognized. > i thank the gentleman. this came about because the national security agency has a dual role of developing encryption standards and breaking encryption. mr. holt: and the reports widely circulated, and i think generally verified, show that

these two dual roles cause real problems for american standards and hence for american technology and american companies. t's unfortunate that nist, which is supposed to be an arbiter of national technology, was effectively used to propagate defective encryption standards. and this amendment, i think, will help correct that. it is important that we keep high standards and that everyone knows it. this is an important amendment. i thank the gentleman for offering it and aalso -- and i also appreciate the comments of the chair of the committee. the chair: the gentleman from new jersey yields back. the gentleman from florida eserves. this gentleman from new jersey yields back. the gentleman from new jersey

has three minutes remaining. mr. frelinghuysen: i think the national institute of standards and technology, nist, has always enjoyed a good reputation i have served on the committee as a ranking member and we heavily invested in the work they do. they enjoy an incredible reputation and the suggestion that somehow they have lost their luster and their reputation is totally inappropriate. but let's move on. i support the bill with the reservations i have made about some of the earlier assertions that have been basically within the media, have been pumped up, maligning not only nist but the national security agency which i think does an incredible job of protecting national security and all of us. i yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from florida is recognized. mr. grayson: i join the gentleman in his desire to move

on and i appreciate his fair consideration of the amendment on the merits. thank you very much, i yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields back. the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from florida. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair -- in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. the amendment is agreed to. for what purpose does the gentleman from virginia seek recognition? >> i have an amendment at the desk. the chair: the clerk will report the amendment. the clerk: amendment offered by mr. wittman of virginia. at the end of the bill, before the short title, add the following. section 1002, none of the funds in this act may be used to propose, plan for, or carry out an additional closure round. the chair: the gentleman from virginia and a member opposed each will control five minute. the chair recognizes the gentleman from virginia. mr. wittman: thank you, mr. chairman. this amendment is pretty simple. it says that we're not going to use any funds at this particular time to propose, plan, or

execute any additional base , brac. ent and closures the reason is it was adopted in the defense authorization act by -98. erwhelming vote of 395 so now is not the time to begin this it's also in the senate language. i want to make sure, too, people understand that this is a process. a process where we want to make sure we're understanding how decision making takes place. force structure comes before decisions on infrastructure and as you know, the service branches are still making a decision about what end strength should be, how many people we should have in our military that will determine what our infrastructure should be. also we're undergoing an overseas base and housing assessment to determine what should our presence be overseas. that's ongoing. that should be completed before

we entertain consideration about what our base structure needs to be here at home. theals cost estimates for the last base realignment and closure commission in 2005 indicated it would cost $21 billion. now we see it costs $35 billion. the 2005 brac, as we see, hasn't saved money at all at this particular point and it won't save money until 2018. 10 now is not the proper time to pursue a base realignment and closure. with that, mr. chairman, i'd like to reserve -- i yield. mr. frelinghuysen: if the gentleman would yield. let me thank the gentleman for his incredible service in the house armed service committee and may i say, the defense appropriations committee has worked closely with chairman mckeon as well as you and as you know, and our bill contains no funding for a future brac. i think all of us are still digesting the last brac and how -- understand how expensive it

was and i think it's important for you to know that we will repeat in our bill, through your amendment, what you put in the authorization bill, which would make it quite leer to the administration. thank you for yielding. the chair: thank you. i thank the chairman -- mr. wittman: thank you, i thank the chairman for his leadership. i yield back. the chair: for what purpose does the gentleman from indiana seek recognition? mr. visclosky: i ask unanimous consent to claim time in opposition to the gentleman's amendment, although i'm not opposed to his amendment. the chair: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. visclosky: i appreciate the recognition. i wish to make a couple of points. the gentleman noted that the last brac if i'm correct new york 2005, is not going to save money until 2018. that implies it's going to save

money in 2018. and the concern siff, we do have to think about the future budgets for the department of defense and sometimes we have to make hard decisions in years like 2014 so that we can begin to accrue savings in the out years. i mentioned in my opening statements, and more than once over the last couple of days, but i feel compelled to do it again, that i do have a concern about congress' continued failure to confront our long-term fiscal challenges relative to the department of defense. the department of defense proposed significant nearbytives, including military pay adjustments, restructuring tricare, changes in commissaries, retirement of several weapons programs, the a-10, the kiowa warrior and others, to provide for future flexibility and to meet our

national security strategy. a number of the proposals, i'm not saying they all have incredible value, do possess merit. but with few exceptions, these proposals have not gained any traction in congress. most have been excluded in language prohibiting or postponing the start in the most recently passed national defense authorization act. i certainly don't dismiss the resulting impacts in many members' congressional districts but again, i don't think we should foreclose any options to consider to possibly save money in the out years and would make that observation, although i'm not going to vote against the gentleman's amendment that we have got to stop saying no to everything. we have got to start saying yes to some things.

but unfortunately, for the last few days all we have been doing is saying, don't do anything. i appreciate the gentleman's amendment and i would yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from virginia is recognized. mr. wittman: i'd like to yield two minutes to the gentlelady from missouri. the chair: the gentlelady is recognized for two minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman, i want to thank the 1kwre89 for his leadership on this issue as well as the chairman for his support on this amendment. now is not the time for brac. due to passage of the budget control act, our military is facing unprecedented cuts which i believe could jeopardize our national defense. maintenance is being deferred. force structure is being reduced to levels we haven't seen before world war ii. training is being deferred as well. a brac would siphon precious defense dollars away from our

military at a time when the ultimate end strength is uncertain. mrs. hartzler: we should learn from the past lessons. we are still paying for the last brac. in 2005, a brac was approved. it was supposed to cost $21 billion. but in fact it is actually costing taxpayers $35 billion. we are still paying off the last brac. now is not the time to take the precious dollars that need to be going to our men and women in uniform and spend it on a brac. especially when we have not determined the ultimate force end strength at this point. what are we not going to spend money on for our defense if we ok a brac? our men and women -- are men and women in uniform not going to get equipment they need? are we going to cease even more training? are we going to just mothball further platforms? are we going to cut benefits to our families, our military

families? we need every dollar in defense right now going to protect our national defense, not reducing our future option that we may need. with all the threats facing our country and as we watch tv now, you see all the threats that are in the world. we need to make sure we have a strong national defense, not further weaken it, not weaken our options, and i urge my colleagues to support this amendment and i yield back. the chair: the gentlewoman's time has expyred. the gentleman from virginia reserves. mr. wittman: how much time do i have remaining? the chair: the gentleman has 30 seconds remaining. the gentleman is recognized. mr. wittman: i yield myself the balance of the time. i will say this. we are at a decisive point. right now we are bringing equipment back from afghanistan. we're resetting our force. training them for the next missions they're about to face. those efforts take resources. we cannot forget that we have to devote those resources on the list of priorities making sure

that our men and women are properly trained and that the equipment they have is properly operated and maintained is critical to this nation's readiness that should be job one. not to say we shouldn't look at saving money elsewhere through infrastructure but we must restore lost readiness now. that's where the funds need to go. now is the time to make sure we maintain readiness. with that, i yield back. the chair: the gentleman's time has expired. the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from virginia. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it, the amendment is agreed to. who seeks recognition? for what purpose does the gentlewoman from texas seek recognition? the clerk will report the amendment. the clerk: amendment offered by ms. jackson lee of texas, 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 in contravention of article 2 section 2 of the constitution. the chair: purr suvente to house resolution 628, the gentlewoman from texas and a member opposed each will control five minute. the chair recognizes the gentlewoman from texas. let me thank e: the chairman and let me again thank the chairman of the subcommittee and as well the ranking member for the courtesy of your staff and for the work that this committee is doing on behalf of our nation. i rise today as the ranking member of the homeland security, border security and maritime security committee working on human trafficking and smuggling and coming from a city that has been called the epicenter of human trafficking, houston, texas. so i thank both the chairman and the rank -- ranking member for this opportunity to 3u forward

this simple -- to put forward this simple and straightforward amendment that affirms the example of the national goodness that makes america the most exceptional nation on earth. the amendment says, none of the funds made available by this act may be used in contravention of article 2, section 2 of the constitution. i'm joined in this amendment by congressman steve stockman, lois fran tell, congresswoman frederica wilson and congressman john conyers. mr. chairman, i was proud, recently, to support resolutions 573 and h.r. 617, strongly condemning the ongoing violence and systematic gross human rights violations against the people of nigeria carried out by the militant organization boko haram. especially the april 15, 214, kidnapping of more than 200 young girls kidnapped from a school by boko haram. this is what the people of

northeast nigeria are facing every single day. men, 2014, more than 2,400 women, and children have been slaughtered by boko haram. it took the united states months ter the -- years after the first americans were attacked to declare boko haram a terrorist organization. it took the united nations 33 months after the united nations headquarters in nigeria was bombed before boko haram was sanctioned as an al qaeda-linked terror group. on june 2, 2014, the european union finally designated boko haram as a terror group. n.g.o.'s have indicated that in april the average deaths for 100 a week high by boko haram and later it was an average of 00 deaths a day. so they couldn't do enough killing, killing of christians

and muslims and journal is and health care prviders and relief workers and schoolchildren. they had to kidnap 200 children. 200 girls. the international community is assisting the government of nigeria in locating and recuing the missing girls, bringing an end to boko haram's reign of terror and ensuring they are brought to justice. on may 21, 2014, the president notified the congress that pursuant to the authority vested in him by article 2, section 2 of the commander in chief and to conduct foreign relations he directed deployment of approximately 80 u.s. armed forces personnel to chad as part of the u.s. efforts to locate and support the safe return of our 200 girls report to have had been kidnapped in nigeria. the president informed the congress that these personnel would support the operation of intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance aircraft for missions over northern nigh yeara and the surrounding area. the force will remain in chad until its support in resolving

the kidnapping situation my simple amendment indicates that nothing in this bill will contravene the president's authority while these girls are missing. four members of congress went to nigeria and went in northeast nigeria. we visited with the victims fpks the girls who escaped from the school. they drove two days to meet with us to tell us about the outrageous violence and how they were laid on the ground and ak-47's were pointed at their heads. and then we met with a woman whose throat was slice. the enforcement, the military and the police officers of nigeria need our help. no, this is not an encouragement or suggestion for boots on the ground. it is a collaboration that will

stop the siege of boko haram that is spreading across africa. it is almost like the unknowing understanding of the taliban by many in america before 9/11. boko haram is a disaster waiting to happen in a continent in a state lige nigeria that is about to be 440 million and 7% growth rate and one of the most prosperous countries in trick. and they are burning schools, hospitals, christian churches and mosques. so this amendment is to remind us just as hubert humphrey said, people are the great issue of the 20th century. it is time to treat our boys and girls and women with respect. as i close, i ask to stop the headlines like this as boko

haram continues to rage. i ask support for the jackson lee amendment. the chair: the gentlelady's sime time has expired. does anyone seek opposition. 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 gentleman from iowa seek recognition? mr. king: i have an amendment at the desk. the chair: the clerk will report the amendment. the clerk: amendment offered by mr. king of iowa, at the end of the bill before the short title insert the following, section, none of the funds may be use todd transfer weapons to the palestinian authority. the chair: pursuant to house resolution 628, the gentleman from iowa, member opposed each will control five minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from iowa. mr. king: this amendment says as

the gentlelady read, none of the funds available made by this act may be used to transfer weapons to the palestinian authority and i would like to express why i brought this amendment. and i take you back to april 30, 2014 when fattah and that ause unified within the palestinian authority and that unification brought about a terrorist designated organization, a foreign terrorist organization, joined together with fattah. 2014, state said we t spokes woman will fund the palestinian government authority government. they have decided for the first time that our taxpayers' borrowed money is going to be committed to a terrorist

organization. and since 1997, hamas has launched tens of thousands of rockets. hamas said the reconciliation of the two organizations, will consolidate their resistance and not bring about peace but consolidate the resistance. we can't afford a palestinian government that includes hamas. and woy bring to the attention of the floor, mr. chairman, that the palestinian anti-terrorist act of tw 2006, by bans funding to a government. one is they recognize israel. two, they renounce violence and september agreements. they have done none of those three things and can't qualify

for this funding. with we cannot fund them because they are organizations and do not recognize the jewish state. prior to june 2 of 2014, u.s. has never recognized a government that includes hamas. that's why i bring this amendment. and the administration has been isolating israel in a number of ways. secretary kerry in april of this year compared israel to an apartheid state. i have not seen that. i don't think it's true and israel would reject that and i would encourage them to do so. in may of 2011, president obama said that israel should return to its 1967 borders. that would be indefensible for israel to do that. we need to stick with the existing statute.

and this amendment cuts off funding to that military supply and support and i reserve. the chair: the gentleman from iowa reserves. does anyone rise in opposition to the amendment? the gentleman from iowa is recognized? mr. king: i urge adoption of my amendment and yield back. the chair: the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from iowa. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it and the amendment is agreed to. for what purpose does the gentleman from florida seek recksnigs? mr. grayson: i have an amendment at the desk, grayson eafment number 5. the clerk: amendment offered by mr. grayson of florida, at the end of the bill before the short title. section, none of the funds made available by this act may be used to detain any person at the

united states station, guantanamo bay cuba. the chair: pursuant to house resolution 628 and the chair recognizes the gentleman from florida. mr. grayson: the amendment is simple. guantanamo was open for business, so to speak in january of 2002 and now june of 2014. my amendment seems to give some kind of clue as to how long we, a free people who respect freedom are willing to incarcerate and imprison people who have been accused of no crime, faced no judge, no jury and not been subject to the american system of justice. as it says, it is limited to perps who served 15 years or more at guantanamo bay. the facility is only 12 years old. what this amendment does do

witness is ensure that no funds are carried over to future fiscal year and imprison anyone 15 years or longer if they haven't been accused much less convicted of any crime. i would hope we as a free people would understand this principle and agree this is reasonable. nobody, nobody, foreign or american should be subject to the imprisonment without ever facing his accusers much less being convicted of a crime and true under the ause pass cease of the u.s. government. this amendment is silent as whether they could be convicted under article 3 court, a commission or some other form of authority to render any judgment. it simply says that a person must be convicted of a crime or must be released from guantanamo

if they served 15 years, 15 years, mr. chairman, of detention. we have speedy trial trials in this country to face their accusers in six months. these prisoners, both the innocent and guilty ones have been incarcerated without hearing any charges against them from foreign a decade. i urge my colleagues to support the dignity. nize in the year 1209 in a french city, a monk oversaw the crusade, and the crusade to deal and a monk wascs asked what should we do with these people, christians who are like us who don't believe like

we believe and he said kill them all and let god sort it out. that has stood for many years as a signal that we must expect more from civilized people. we are holding people in that prison, all of them, the innocent and the guilty apparently for ever and ever and ever. what is worse, killing them all or holding them forever and let them never meet their god but remain in prison. i submit to you that we americans are better than this. there has to be some kind of limitation. this amendment will not release anyone but be a signal that we, the american people, we retain our dignity and our humanity. i reserve. the chair: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentleman from new jersey seek recognition?

mr. frelinghuysen: i claim time in opposition. i strongly oppose the gentleman's amendment. our nation has invested in building safe and air conditioned facilities to detain and prosecute the detainees at guantanamo. in order to close that facility we need to know what the president intends to do with those detainees who are too dangerous to release but cannot be tried. they had an opportunity to prosecute. what's been going on for the last six, seven years. how will he ensure the terrorists don't return to the fight? of y they can reassure us that, but they have killed a lot of our soldiers in the process. and what will they do with terrorists we capture in the

future, like the one we captured the other day in libya. he brings them back to this country and they are prosecuted as common criminals, not as enemy combatants. he hasn't answered those questions. so our committee is just as adamant as the authorizing committee in opposition to this amendment and i strongly oppose this amendment and i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from florida is recognized. mr. grayson: i would submit on the gentleman's logic there is no longer any distinction between the innocent and guilty. those at guantanamo bay contain both innocent and guilty. but those categories do not even apply to them any longer. they are captaintives for ever and ever, going untried until

they decide to end their life and we permit it. unbiased fundamentally view. they are not just proven guilty. they are guilty, guilty, guilty, no matter what. and that is something that is fundamentally unfair to them and us and casts a blotch on the american reputation. i'm not saying they need to be released but need to be tried and let's get to the bottom of it and determine if they are guilty or innocent and let's stop punishing the innocent. i reserve. the chair: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from new jersey is recognized. mr. frelinghuysen: let's remember the innocent people

killed on september 11, 2011. i yield back. the chair: the gentleman from florida has 15 seconds remaining. mr. grayson: as president lincoln once said, it is we the living who carry forth the value of justice. i yield back. the chair: the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from florida. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the noes have it, the amendment is not agreed to. for what purpose does the gentleman from kentucky seek recognition? >> i have an amendment at the desk. the chair: the clerk will report the amendment. is the gentleman offering amendment number one? >> that is correct. the chair: the clerk will report the amendment. the clerk: amendment offered by

mr. massie of kentucky. at the end of the bill before the short title, except as provided in subsection b, none of the funds made available by this act may be used by an officer or employee of the about foreign intelligence information acquired understood they are foreign intelligence act of 1978 using a united states person identifier. b, subsection a, shall not apply to queries for foreign intelligence queries authorized under section 105- 03, 704, or 705 of the foreign intelligence urveillance act of 19 -- 1978. regardless of under what foreign intelligence surveillance act authority it was collected. c, except as provided for in

subsection d, none of the funds made available in this act may be used by the national security sthirgete central intelligence stiget mandate or request that a person as defined in section 1801-m of title 50, united states code, alter its product or service to permit the electronic surveillance as defined in section 180146 f of title 50 united states code of any user or said product product or service for said agency. d, subsection c shall not apply with respect to mandate or requests authorized under the communications assistance for law enforcement act 47 u.s.c. 1001. the chair: pursuant to house resolution 628, the gentleman from kentucky and a member opposed each will control five minute. the chair recognizes the gentleman from kentucky for five minutes. mr. massie: our founding fathers wrote an important provision in

the bill of rights for the fourth amendment, requiring proximate cause and a warrant before government agent -- agents can snoop on any american. freedom bait on the act we knew protection was needed, we want to shut the back doors that do not protect our stites or the standards set by the constitution. at this time i'd like to yield one and a half minutes to my colleague from california, ms. lofgren. ms. lofgren: thank you, mr. speaker. i think it's important to know that the director of national intelligence has confirmed publicly that the government searches vast amounts of data, including the content of emails and telecalls without individualized suspicion or proximate cause when it comes to u.s. persons. last week the director of the f.b.i. testified under oath before the judiciary committee that this information is used for prosecution and without a

warrant. this amendment is simple. i et -- it allows taos get the bad guys but it also says use proximate cause and the fourth amendment. it also closes a back door to a technology hole. the broad support for this, i think, shows why it's important for mr. sensenbrenner of wisconsin, myself, mr. conyers of michigan, mr. poe of texas, ms. gabbert, mr. jordan of ohio, mr. o'rourke, mr. amash, mr. massie, mr. holt, mr. nadler, mr. petri, mr. delbene, mr. farenthold, mr. sanford, mr. butterfield, this is all over this house of representatives, right to left, saying, yes, we need to protect our country but we also need to honor our constitution. and especially the fourth amendment. we started this congress by reading the constitution of the

united states allowed -- aloud in these chambers. let's finish this bill by making sure that we honor that constitution by adopting this amendment. i would yield become to mr. massie so he may yield further to other members. mr. massie: thank you. the chair: the gentlewoman's time has expired. the gentleman is recognized. mr. massie spb i ask unanimous consent to submit for the record the letter from the director of national intelligence that my colleague from california referred to. the chair: that question has been covered under general leave. mr. massie: at this point, i reserve. the chair: the gentleman reserves his time. does any member rise in pposition to this amendment? mr. frelinghuysen: i claim time in opposition. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. mr. frelinghuysen: this is an appropriations bill. there's nothing in this amendment about funding.

you won't see one $sign or numeral, the goal is to change policy. that's why they're here. and the application of the law without the oversight of the authorizing committee. the authorizers ought to be dealing with this issue. it's my pleasure to yield time to the distinguished chairman of the judiciary committee, mr. goodlatte of virginia, to respond to this amendment. the chair: for how much time? mr. free leng hughesen: such time as he may consume. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. mr. goodlatte: last month, the house passed h.r. 3361, the u.s.a. freedom act work overwhelming bipartisan support. this amendment undoes the carefully crafted reforms that this body passed with overwhelming support. a similar amendment regarding section 702 was offered and rejected by the house judiciary committee in its markup of h.r. 361. the bipartisan legislation

passed by the house last month was closely negotiated on a bipartisan basis with the house intelligence committee, house leadership and the intelligence community to create a product that provides real, meaningful reforms to intelligence gathering programs while ensuring that the operational capabilities of the intelligence community are protected. h.r. 3361 explicitly codifies existing minimalization procedures of the fisa amendments act that requires the intelligence community to minimize the collection and prohibit the retention and dissemination of wholly domestic communications. h r. 3361 also prohibits the government from using communications to or from a united states person or a person who appears to be located in the united states, except where the communication relates to a target under section 702 or to protect against an immediate threat to human life. the intelligence community is strictly prohibited from using section 702 of the fisa

amendments act to target a u.s. person. if a u.s. person is the target of intelligence gathering under fisa, this must at all times be carried out pursuant to an individualized court order based pon proximate cause. mr. frelinghuysen: would the gentleman yield? mr. ruppersberger would like to engage in responding. i'd like to yield to mr. ruppersberger and maybe then you'd be kind enough to finish up. the chair: the gentleman from virginia yields become to the gentleman from new jersey. he neeleds to the gentleman from maryland, the ranking member of he intelligence committee. mr. ruppersberger: i urge my colleagues to reject this amendment. our bill last month passed be an overwhelming bipartisan support.

now we have an amendment to an appropriations bill that makes major legislative changes to fisa with only 10 minutes of debate and it make ours country less safe. it would prohibit the urningts search of lawfully collected , a bomb threat against a synagogue in los angeles or a church. there's no emergency exceptions and it says what you can do to stop a criminal in this country you can't do to stop a terrorist. that's long. we'll continue to work on fisa and other national security laws to maximize privacy and civil lib per -- liberties but we must do so carefully and deliberately and we must make sure to keep our country and allies safe from terrorist attacks. ultimately, while i aud -- applaud members for continuing to look for ways to reform our intelligence laws, we shouldn't be doing this on an appropriations bill with only 10 minutes of the bait. the chair: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time

the gentleman from kentucky is ecognized. >> this was in the original freedom act and it was stripped out by many of the member -- but many of the members who sponsored the freedom act did not vote for the foinl version. mr. massie: the final version of the freedom act was done behind closed doors and when it came to the floor we would have love to have had offered amendment bus the rules were written such that we could not amend it. legislators from 435 districts had no say in the final bill and that's why we're here tonight with this amendment, to reinsert this provision which over 150 members of the body sponsored. at this point, i would like to yield 20 seconds to -- 30 seconds to my colleague from hawaii, ms. gabard. the chair: the gentlelady is recognized for 30 seconds. ms. gabard: our number one priority, keeping the american people safe. we do that by focusing our

resources on those who actually suppose pose a threat to our safety while upholding the freedoms and civil liberties of the american people, not by continuing this dragnet spying on millions of americans. there's no ed to date that those programs have made our country more secure. not a single taxpayer dollar should be used to fund a program that spies on innocent americans, violating the principles of liberty and freedom that so many have fought and given their lives for. i yield back. the chair: the gentlewoman's time has expired. the gentleman from kentucky reserves. to massie: i would like yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from texas, mr. poe. mr. poe: the n.s.a. has shown they'll always interpret the law to the extent that allows them to seize the information. that's why the law has to be much more clear to the n.s.a. we all must remember that the n.s.a. was violating the patriot act as written. this amendment does something

that's very concrete. it tells the n.s.a., get a warrant. get a warrant through the front door, you get a warrant through the back door, you can't spy on americans, unless you get a warrant. that's what this legislation or this amendment does. i support this amendment. i yield back. the chair: the gentleman's time has ex-peered. the gentleman from kentucky reserves. both the gentleman from kentucky and the swrelt from new jersey have one and a half minutes remaining. the gentleman from new jersey reserves. the gentleman from kentucky is recognized. mr. massie: my friend from texas is correct. the american people can be kept safe and we can follow the constitution. we don't have to disregard it. that's what this amendment would allow us to do, to keep the american people safe while protecting their civil liberties. there are two provisions here and they both close back doors. one backdoor allows -- currently allows without proximate cause or a warrant for the n.s.a. to query a database of american

persons' information. this is wrong. they should have a warrant. the other part of this amendment would prevent money from being spent to fund companies to put back doors into products. when we -- when the goth causes these companies to intentionally make defects in their product, they make americans less safe. they make americans' data less safe. and they compromise the quality of american goods overseas. but ultimately this is about the constitution. if you believe in the constitution, if you believe that it's still valid, if you think we can honor the fourth amendment and that we can still keep people safe, i urge you to vote for this bill. thank you. the chair: the gentleman's time has expyred. the gentleman from new jersey is -- has expired. the gentleman from new jersey is recognized. mr. frelinghuysen: i yield to the gentleman from virginia. the chair: the gentleman is

recognized for one and a half minutes. mr. goodlatte: the bill passed by this house honors the fourth amendment and protects the rights of american citizens. at the same time, islamic radical terrorists are on the march in iraq and the leader has publicly threatened to attack america. syria has become a vortex of jihaddists from across the globe and the director of national intelligence and the director of homeland security have warned of the growing threat jihaddists pose to our homeland. state control has collapsed in libya and rival gangs of radical terrorists have established safe havens that rival those in afghanistan prior to 2001. meanwhile in afghanistan, the taliban, and al qaeda continue to fight. the administration has released the taliban five from guantanamo. the terrorist danger is grave and growing. the terrorist threat is not contained overseas. the u.s. homeland remains a prime aspiration and target. this amendment would create a blind spot for the intelligence

community tracking terrorists with direct connections to the u.s. homeland. it would impose greater restrictions on the intelligence community's ability to protect national security than constitutionally required and create an impediment to the government's ability to locate threat information already in its possession. such an impediment would put american lives at risk of another terrorist attack. i urge my colleagues to reject this amendment, stand by the legislation passed, it is also being considered in the senate, and there will be further negotiations, but this, this contradicts the intent of the house and endangers america's national security. the chair: the gentleman's time has expire. all time being expired, the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from kentucky. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the chair: the amendment is not agreed to. pursuant to clause 6, rule 18, further proceedings on the

amendment offered by the gentleman from kentucky will be postponed. for what purpose does the gentleman from georgia seek recognition? >> i have an amendment at the desk. the clerk: amendment offered by mr. barro, insert the following, section, none of the funds made available may be used to one, disestablish or prepare to disestablish a senior reserve training corps program with instruction number 1215 or two, place owngrade from or on probation a senior officer training program with the department of the army titled. 27, p c review january 2014. the chair: the gentleman from

georgia and member opposed each will control five minutes. mr. barrow: i want to thank the chairman and ranking member for their work on what is the most important bill we pass on an annual basis. i rise in support of my amendment, the department of appropriations act. this is a straightforward amendment that provides the serpt that our army reserve needs to select, educate and commission college students. in the coming days, the army is expected to initiate rot crmp programs. on that list could be 275 programs located in every state in the union. the thousands of cadets is too short. according to the plans. the army would close the programs as early as next up. that is not fair are to the students or their host

universities. this mendment would delay by one year. they are the next generation of army leadership and would give us the certainty we need to do so and i yield to my partner in this measure, mr. benishek. the chair: mr. benishek is recognized. mr. benishek: i rise in support in support of this amendment to prevent the closure of the training programs across the country. they not only benefit the army but provide opportunities to promising young students. however, in october of this past year, the army released a list of programs slated for closure following a 2014-2015 school year. we were able to instead get the

army to institute a new evaluation system. this amendment holds the army to their promise to give enough time to institute changes. one is located at northern michigan university. over the history of the program, northern michigan has seen 400 students graduate and go on to military service. the closure of the program would prove unfair to the cadets in the program. they have worked hard to be accepted and maintain their spot. let's give them a chance to succeed and serve the country they love. support this amendment. i yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from georgia reserves. does anyone rise to claim time in opposition. mr. barrow: i urge a yes on the

amendment. and i yield bang. the chair: the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from georgia. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the amendment is agreed to. for what purpose does the gentleman from texas rise? mr. conaway: i have an amendment at the desk. the clerk: at the end of the bill, insert the following, section, none of the funds appropriated or otherwise made available in this act may be used to enter into a contract planning, redine or construction of a refinery until such planning is specifically authorized by law. the chair: pursuant to house resolution 628, the gentleman from texas will control five minutes. mr. conaway: this is a treat straightforward amendment that would require any amendment

under the defense production act to build a refinery for biofuels could not happen until it was authorized by this body. to stop this from happening means that the department of defense and department of agriculture who both are funding this misguided attempt in my opinion, couldn't do that until they bring a business case before this body for consideration. i think my colleagues would be offended by this back-door approach to sending hundreds of millions of dollars on a project of dubious value. this is a post-world war ii program not the defense. there is currently a refinely that is being proposed to be joint funded to build a biofuels

refinery. neither of these agencies is in this arena. they have their core competencies and nothing to do with biofuels. the department of energy should be the one to authorize this work but they have to make decisions of making the decision. the other side will argue that this somehow protects the department of defense from price shocks on oil and gas that they purchased. they never brought us that business case. they have no clue against some equivalent cost more. they are spending between $16 and $20 a gallon. this also -- these folks who are proponents of biofuels are not proponents of alternative

resources. i urge my colleagues to vote yes and require an authorization for the spending of $300 million on a refinery that is of dubious distinction. and i reserve. the chair: for what purpose does the gentleman from indiana seek recognition? mr. visclosky: to claim the time in opposition. this is the third iteration of a very similar amendment some my comments will mirror those i offered earlier in the debate. i'm not going to suggest in any way shape or form that his amendment is offered to protect the oil and gas industry of his state. as i mentioned earlier this evening, the largest inland oil refinery is in the first congressional district of indiana and i'm very proud of that. i told my constituents we need a

matrix of fuels and while we work from carbon, we are a coal state in indiana, we are not to close our options, particularly those in the department of defense, giving the department is the largest consumer of energy. i do think we ought to also allow them to examine what is the best matrix and mix of fuels in particular locations that they find themselves in. and for these reasons i'm opposed to the gentleman's amendment. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from texas. mr. conaway: i would not take offense, i should, but i won't take offense that somehow this amendment has anything to do with anything of oil and gas

produced in texas. i understand that technique. the department of defense can, in fact, make judgments for themselves once a product. this builds on something on building a fuel that no one wants. it would not be available anywhere else in the world to fuel our airplanes or our ships or tanks or other things. this is a misguided attempt by the white house on this initiative that is spending illions of dollars by taxpayer money. the better argument is to say no and allow the department of defense to spend their dollars on gungs, tanks and ships and salaries for our soldiers. it ought to be authorized by the house and the senate equivalent and these two subcommittees on

sprotion appropriations ought to be offended by spending dollars on a program that has no oversight. and i yield back. the chair: the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from texas. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it and the amendment is agreed to. mr. visclosky: i move to strike the last word. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. visclosky: i want to correct a statement that my colleague made. >> mr. chairman, the house is not in order. the chair: the house will be in der the house will be in order. the gentleman is recognized. mr. visclosky: i was careful to note, the gentleman noted that some would suggest that he offered his amendment to defend the oil and gas industry.

and i said that he is not doing that amendment and the largest inland oil refinery is in my district so i would in no way to infer that. i'm not impinging the motives of the gentleman. i rows to rise in disagreement. mr. conaway: i did misunderstand you you said i was disqualified because i represent west texas. if i misunderstood you -- mr. visclosky: i appreciate the gentleman's remarks. the chair: the amendment is agreed to. the chair: pursuant to clause 6, rule 18, proceedings will now resume on those amendments which further proceedings were postponed. an amendment by mrs. miller of

michigan, amendment number 2 by mr. cotton of arkansas. amendment number 31 by ms. lee of california. amendment number 33, amendment by mr. massie of kentucky, amendment by mr. grayson of florida, amendment number 34, by ms. lee of california, amendment by mr. ellison of minnesota. the chair will reduce to two minutes after the first vote in this series. unfinished business is request of the vote on which further proceedings were postponed and the ayes were postponed. the clerk: amendment offered by mrs. miller of michigan. the chair: a recorded vote has been requested. a sufficient number having arisen, a recorded vote is ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device. this is a 15--minute vote.

? [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]

the chair: on this vote, the eas are 300 and the nays are 194. the amendment is adopted . unfinished is request for recorded vote on amendment number 2 offered by the gentleman from arkansas, mr. cotton on which further proceedings were postponed and the eyes prevailed.

the clerk: amendment number 2 printed in the congressional record. the chair: those in support of a recorded vote will rise and be counted. a sufficient number having arisen, a recorded vote is ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device. this is a 2-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]

the chair: on this vote the yeas are 230, the nays are 184. he amendment is adopted. the unfinished business is the request for a recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from virginia, mr. moran, on which further proceedings were postponed and on which the noes prevailed by voice vote. the clerk will redesignate the amendment. the clerk: amendment offered by mr. moran of virginia. the chair: a recorded vote has been requested. those in support of the request for a recorded vote will rise and be counted. a sufficient number having risen a recorded vote is ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device. this is a two-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]

the chair: on this vote, the yeas are 163, the nays are 249. the amendment is not adopted. the unfinished business is the request for a recorded vote on

amendment number 31, printed in the congressional record, offered by the gentlewoman from california, ms. lee, on which further proceedings were postponed and on which the noes prevailed by voice vote. the clerk will redesignate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 31, printed in the congressional record, offered by ms. lee of california. the chair: a recorded vote has been requested. those in support of the request for a recorded vote will rise and be counted. a sufficient number having risen, a recorded vote is ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device. this will be a two-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]

the chair: on this vote, the yeas are 165, the nays are 250. the amendment is not agree -- is not adopted. the unfinished business is the request for a recorded vote on amendment number 33 printed in the congressional record, offered by the gentlewoman from

california, ms. lee, on which further proceedings were postponed and on which the noes prevailed by voice vote. the clerk will redesignate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 33, printed in the congressional record, offered by ms. lee of california. the chair: a recorded vote has been requested. those in support of the request for a recorded vote will rise and be counted. a sufficient number having risen a recorded vote is ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device. this is a two-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]

the chair: on this vote, the yeas are 182, the nays are 231. he amendment is not adopted. the unfinished business is the request for a recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from kentucky, mr. massie, on which further pr seedings were postponed and on which the noes prevailed by voice vote. the clerk will redesignate the amendment. the clerk: amendment offered by mr. massie of kentucky. the chair: a recorded vote has been requested.

those in support of the request for a recorded vote will rise and be counted. a sufficient number having risen a recorded vote is ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device. this will be a two-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]

the chair: on this vote, the yeas are 293, the nays are 1 the r 23 with one answering present. he amendment is adopted.

the unfinished business is request for a recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from nebraska on which further proceedings were postponed and the nays prevailed. the clerk: amendment offered by mr. fortenberry of nebraska. the chair: a recorded vote has been requested. these in support of a recorded vote will rise and be counted. northward. this is a two-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]

the chair: on this vote the yeas re -- the chair: on this vote, the yace are 167 and the nays are 244. the amendment is not adopted. the unfinished business is request for a recorded vote on amendment offered by mr. grayson on which further proceedings were postponed and the noes

prevailed by voice vote. the clerk: amendment offered by mr. grayson of florida. the chair: a recorded vote has been requested. snim, a recorded vote is ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device. -minute vote.- [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]

the chair: on this vote, the yeas are 62 and nays are 355. the amendment is not adopted . unfinished business is request for recorded vote offered by the gentlewoman from california, ms. lee, on which further proceedings were postponed and the neast prevailed by voice vote. clirk clerk amendment number 34, offered by ms. lee of california. the chair: a recorded vote has been requested. raise.n favor, will is

members will record their votes by electronic device. this is a two-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]