the clerk will read. i'm sorry. for what purpose does the gentleman from arizona seek recognition? >> i have an amendment at the desk, 178. the chair: the clerk will report the amendment. the clerk: amendment offered by mr. gosar of arizona. page 10, line 7, after the dollar amount insert, reduced by $353 million. page 152 line 15, after the dollar amount insert, increased by $353 million. the chair: pursuant to house resolution 661, the gentleman from arizona and a member opposed each will control five minutes. the gentleman from arizona is recognized. mr. gosar: thank you, mr. chairman. i rise today to offer a simple but important amendment which will save taxpayer money and demand accountability for one of the federal government's most invasive and rogue agencies, the i.r.s. this amendment reduces overall appropriations for the internal revenue service in the bill by approximately 3% and brings funding for the i.r.s. down to the f.y. 2007 appropriations.

current funding is between 2007 and 2008 levels. additionally, my amendment still allows for more than $10.5 billion to go to the i.r.s. in this time where we have over $17 trillion in debt, and a deficit this year exceeding $50 billion, this is a modest reduction at best. again, this amendment only makes a 3% reduction to bring the appropriations in line with the 2007 appropriations. more directly than financial consideration or condition of the country is the fact that this agency has shown contempt for the american taxpayer. it has ignored congress and ignored subpoenas. it has stonewalled and destroyed evidence, it has lied, it has abused its powers and targeted honest americans for exercising their political beliefs. the list of scandals and examples of mismanagement within the i.r.s. seems to grow every day. this agency, which aggressively pursues american citizens it believes deserves it, must understand that the i.r.s. is first and foremost accountable to the american people.

not the other way around. john adams said, facts are stubborn things. in april, this body held former i.r.s. commissioner lois learner in contempt of congress for her role -- lerner in contempt of congress for her role in the i.r.s. targeting of political groups. she acted in disregard of the constitutional rights of united states citizens while working at the i.r.s. and she must be held accountable. the blatant disregard of basic civil liberties and the use of government agencies to harass, target, intimidate and threaten lawful, honest citizens was the worst form of authoritarianism. president obama claimed that there isn't even a smidgen of corruption in the i.r.s. targeting scandal and yet a trail of emails proves otherwise. further, ms. lerner is still refusing to testify on the grounds that she feels criminal prosecution -- fears criminal prosecution. she should. she lied to congress, she abused her position, she violated the rights of americans, she tried to harm the electoral process and intimidate voters. getting the truth and demanding accountability from president

obama's i.r.s. should be not too much to ask for. yet officials in this administration continue to offer excuses and have-truths for what has developed -- half-truths for what has developed into a disturbing trend of waste, fraud and abuse. tax information about the president's political opponents has been leaked, and senior executives were given bonuses for their work. waste and inefficiency has plagued the agency for years. the treasury inspector general has reported the i.r.s. has been wasting upwards of $15 billion a year, yes, that's $15 billion with a b. more than $140 billion since 2003, due to its failure to comply with federal law to curb improper payments. democrats and republicans across the country have been demanding congress do something about something other than holding hearing after hearing about the problems at the i.r.s. this amendment does something the congress has the complete power to do. it uses the power of the purse. as you know, you don't have a lot of other options, but we do know that the i.r.s. scandal is one of the most serious

scandals engaged in by any administration. how can the american people trust the federal government to use their taxpayer money efficiently when the agency collecting it squanders billions? this brings i.r.s. funding to the 2007 levels. the i.r.s. must prove that it can be trusted with the hard-earned tax dollars of the american people before it asks congress to increase its budget. if you disapprove of the i.r.s. targeting conservative groups for their political beliefs, then support my amendment. if you disapprove of the i.r.s. ignoring the congressional subpoenas, then support my amendment. if you disapprove of this agency stonewalling congress, destroying evidence and lying to the american people, then support my amendment. i thank the chairman and ranking member for their continued work on the committee and 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 new york seek recognition? mr. serrano: claim time in opposition. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. serrano: thank you, mr. speaker. the good news is that the whole bill is not on the i.r.s.

so eventually we'll move on to something else. and we won't see nymph these attacks -- nymph these attacks -- indemnify of these attacks - any more of these attacks. helping those who are attempting to obey the law. the taxpayer advocate has even side that insufficient funding of the i.r.s. is one of the most serious problems facing taxpayers. this underfunding will force the i.r.s. to operate with 9,500 fewer staff, which means that less than 50% of taxpayers who reach out to the i.r.s. for assistance on the telephone helpline will be able to get it. with waiting times for those who do get answers rising to 35 minutes or longer. as many as 24 million taxpayers would be unable to reach the i.r.s. for assistance and that is unacceptable. the cuts in this bill will also result in $2 billion in

uncollected revenue compared to what could have been collected at the request level. thereby increasing the deficit by that amount. and i think what is being missed here tonight, with all these amendments, is that, yes, there is a concern on the other side and there was a concern here also, there still may be, in terms of what went on and what needs to be straightened out. but the answer is not to cut the i.r.s. down to a bare bone, because our next problem will be that the deficit will continue to grow because we won't be able to do the proper collecting of tax dollars in this country. so i oppose this amendment and urge that everyone else do so as well and i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentleman from arizona seek recognition? mr. gosar: i'd like to point out that this is a 3% reduction and it brings it back to 2007 levels. the treasury inspector general has reported the i.r.s. has been wasting upwards of $15

billion a year, more than $140 billion since 2003, due to its failure to comply with federal law to curb improper payments. what we can do is save taxpayers a lot more money if they just didn't call the i.r.s. this is a blatant disregard of basic civil liberties and the use of the government agency to harass, target, intimidate and threaten lawful, honest citizens and we need to bring the i.r.s. into compliance. and with that i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from new york wish to be recognized? mr. serrano: i'm sorry, i yielded back my time. the chair: the gentleman from new york yielded back his time. the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from arizona. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. chair, inion of the the ayes have it. this amendment is agreed to. for what purpose does the gentleman from michigan seek recognition?

>> mr. chairman, i have an amendment at the desk. the chair: the clerk will report the amendment. the clerk: amendment offered by mr. hughes enger of michigan. age -- hue zenger of michigan. -- huizenga of michigan. the chair: pursuant to house resolution 661, the gentleman from michigan and a member opposed each will control five minutes. the gentleman from michigan is recognized. mr. huizenga: thank you, mr. chairman. i appreciate this opportunity and my friend from new york was pointing out that at some point we're going to move on from the i.r.s. but i want to point out that this section is specifically about the enforcement of what the i.r.s. has been doing. and we know that last year the i.r.s. has been targeting american taxpayers, as we've learned, for their political beliefs, for the last four or five years. during this period a culture of shading the truth was fostered

and developed by directors and administrators throughout the i.r.s. now this culture within the i.r.s. has grown to one of stonewalling, double talk and mistrust. it's up to congress to use the power of the purse, mr. chairman, to rein in the i.r.s. and force them to conduct their analysis in an unbiased manner. this is our constitutional tool. the i.r.s. has proven itself to be unable to do so, which is why i'm introducing this amendment that cuts more than $788 million from the i.r.s. budget. with a combined cuts in the underlying bill of $341 million this will approximately cut the i.r.s. budget by 10% from its current funding levels. the underlying legislation takes a good step in the right direction and many of the amendments including the last one that was just adopted are a step in the right direction. but i unfortunately believe this doesn't go far enough. we need to keep in mind that the i.r.s. is one of the most feared agencies within the federal government. left, right or center. they can freeze bank accounts, garnish wages and seize assets

with the flick of a pen. congress needs to utilize the power of the purr -- the power of the purse, our constitutional tool and responsibility, i might add, to send the i.r.s. a message to put an end to this newfound quote-unquote business as usual. it is up to congress to prevent the i.r.s. from ever slipping back into the targeting practices. the best way to do that is to force them to consolidate its resources and prioritize. congress itself has been forced to do this. our own offices, mr. chairman, have been forced to do this over the last number of years. and there's no reason that the i.r.s. cannot follow suit. we cannot allow the i.r.s. to be used as a political weapon. because it doesn't matter if an american's political views are left of the spectrum, right of the spectrum or somewhere in between. the i.r.s. is one of the most powerful agencies that we have and for them to be injected into this process as a political weapon is simply wrong. attacks -- political target something not the only example, however, and this is not the

real problem i'm trying to get at. because i believe there's another problem, which is attacks on those who cannot defend themselves. political targeting is only a part of the story. the other one is in 2012 the taxpayer advocate service report found that 69%, 69%, my colleagues, of individuals who claimed the adoption tax credit were audited by the i.r.s. ok. well, that seems like a pretty aggressive move. unfortunately for the i.r.s., only 1.5% of the credits claimed were ever disallowed. the taxpayer advocate services and government accountability office, the g.a.o., have both noted that the adoption credit claims represent less than .1% of all individual returns for the 2011 filing season. by comparison, the i.r.s. spent approximately 3.5% of its total staff days on initial review

and audit of these adoption tax claims. let me repeat that. .1% are the total claims, yet the i.r.s. spends 3.5% of all of its staff days pursuing these. this is not about tax cheats. this is about harassment. in essence, the i.r.s. spent 35 times the amount of work hours investigating adoptive parents than compared to other tax filers. west michigan is blessed to have one of the highest adoption rates in the entire nation. hardworking families who want to bring another into their home. someone who's been abused or neglected. and they should not have to be burdened by the echoing footsteps of the tax man. i'm angry, mr. chairman. the american people are angry. and they should be. clearly the i.r.s. has too much time on its hands and is not -- and not enough focus. the recklessness with which the i.r.s. is acting by targeting americans by their political views or whether they've

adopted a child is simply wrong and must be stopped immediately and with that i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from new york is recognized for five minutes. mr. serrano: thank you. i claim the time in opposition. if rly math tells me that the amendments that we just passed stick in conference, we 1,154,000,000 ut $ from enforcement. those are the folks that go and collect taxes from people who don't want to pay taxes. so, i continue to make my omments, again, sounding repetitious, that there has to be a moment when this stops, when we realize that, yes, there are issues that have trb -- that have to be dealt with at the i.r.s. there have always been issues that have to be dealt with at the i.r.s. but the idea of zeroing out this account and zeroing out the enforcement account just

does not make any sense, mr. speaker. and i would hope that we would just pay attention to that and pay attention to the fact that while we may have differences with an agency, we've never, ever, in the years that i've been here, seen any one, any party, any group go after a particular agency the way we've gone after the i.r.s.. not only tonight but in the last few months. and i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from michigan has 30 seconds remaining. the gentleman from michigan is recognized. mr. huizenga: thank you, mr. chairman. i'm stunned that my amendment would be characterized as zeroing it out. in fact, my amendment provides $4.16 billion for i.r.s. enforcement budget. i want to know what employer would reward unacceptable behavior? i think we have the answer, mr. chairman. and that's my colleagues across the aisle. this is a 19% cut to the enforcement budget, 10% cut overall this brings us back to

2004-2005 levels, and in fact this house approved a budget last year of $3.87 billion, so this -- my amendment doesn't even bring us down as low as what had been passed by the house just last year. and i urge passage of my amendment, mr. chairman, and with that i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman's time has expired. the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from michigan. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. . the chair: the amendment is agreed to. >> e clerk: $3 billion of which $300 million shall remain available until september 30, 2016. the chair: for what purpose does the gentleman from michigan seek recognition? >> i have an amendment at the defbling. the clerk: amendment offered by mr. camp.

insert reduced which $2 million. after the dollar amount insert increased by $2 million. the chair: the gentleman from michigan will each control five minutes. mr. camp: on friday, june 13, the i.r.s. admitted they destroyed documents at the very center of the investigation. the i.r.s. buried this fact on a 27-page document, for months after the political appointees were informed that they were destroyed. there was transparency stating ash i quote, when i found out something, you will be the first to know. that is not true.

as the i.r.s. has misled congress and misled our investigation, the i.r.s. promised the ways and means committee they would receive documents in may even though documents were destroyed and they could not fulfill our request. this is inexcuseable. once they learned it, we learned that the emails and make employees available. the imple r.s. has refused thisry questions and will not make them available for interview. to reduce by $2 million the funds for the office of the commissioner and legislative affairs who have attempted to obstruct this investigation and misled congress and the american people. the committee will pursue this investigation until we unsd the

full scope of the targeting. the american people have lost trut in the i.r.s. and those targeted. and i yield to the distinguished the gentleman from florida. mr. crenshaw: i just want him to know that i rise in strong support of this amendment. talked about the i.r.s. has betrayed the trust of the america cab people and i urge adoption of this amendment. mr. camp: i yield to the gentleman from louisiana. >> we launched this investigation two years ago into the farthering. and it's unseptemberble and cracks are now showing that agency tolerates minnesota vaded

activity. ability.st and the american people demand truth and justice in this matter and so do i. no american should live in fear that the i.r.s. inflict pain on those who they do not gry with. this amendment will solve some of that, by reducing the office of the legislative affairs by $2 million we will use them to put them on notice. we will not stop. a i yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentleman from new york seek recognition? mr. serrano: in opposition to the amendment. the chair: jacked. mr. serrano: this amendment is

irresponsible and unnecessary. my colleague may be angry at the internal revenue service but to fund the agency is not going to get him that information any faster. these officers have nothing to do with setting the policy with regard to email retention. this amendment is another tempt to find a conspiracy where they have not enable to find one. dele spent $14 million and providing hundreds of thousands of information to the committees of jurisdiction and instead of providing them with more money, the majority wants to cut the i.r.s. further. this is not a well-thought out or responsible amendment and i urge my colleagues to oppose it because it does the opposite.

and i yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from michigan is recognized. mr. camp: i yield to the gentleman from texas, mr. brady. braid bride chairman cam's amendment seeks the truth, what they noo, what they targeted and make available with those on the staff hole dealt with the loss of these emails. no government should every try to silence the voice of america cans who americans disagree it. we seek to seek the truth who violated the law and make sure happen again. 't and we deserve the truth. this amendment gets to the truth and it should be anticipate accepted by republicans and democrats. i yield back. the chair: the question is on

the amendment. mr. camp: i yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from michigan. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it and the amendment is agreed to. the clerk: page 11, line 17, bavek systems modernization to remain available until september 30, 2017. add tive provisions includesing transfers of funds not to exceed of any appropriation made available may be transferred appropriation. section 102, shall maintain an employee training program which include employ yesees' rights.

shall inforce possibility and identity theft. section 104. improved false to provide 1-8000 help line. none of the funds may be used to make a video determines that making a video is appropriate. section 106. the internal revenue service .hall shsh a notice section 107, none of the funds may be used to target citizens to exercise any right to any amendment guaranteed. section 108, none of the funds may be used to regulatory vute any. section 109, nonof the funds shall be used and policies

issued by the chief financial officer and agency-wide services. section 110. none of the funds may be used to pay the expenses of any individual to carry any transfer f the funds under the patient. section 111. none of the funs may be used to implement 5,000 hinche a. section 112. none of the funds may be objectly indicated or any been us that does not conduct 9 federal tax come ploins. add tive employees including transfer of funds section 113. appropriations in this act shall be uniformed. section 114. not to exceed 2 prgs of any appropriations made viable.

office of inspector general may be transferred upon the advanced approval of the committee. section 115. not to exceed 2% of any appropriation may be made made for tax administration. upon the advanced approval. section 116. none of the nunds may be use todd redesign the dollar federal reserve note. section 117, the secretary may transfer funds from the bureau of fiscal service salaries and salaries. section 118, none of the funds made available may be used by nited states to construct or any new mexico. none of the funds may be used to consolidate any all and mint without exclusive approval. section 120. funs aprofit appropriated for

the department of treasury are deemed to be specifically authorize by the congress. section 121, not to exceed $0 tharbgs shall be made available for industrial row vfling fund. section 122, the secretary shall submit a capital investment plan not later than 30 days later than the budget submitted by the president. section 1223. the office of financial stability shall schmidt reports to the committee. ction 124, within 45 days of enactment the secretary shall schmidt an itemized report to to the fran exiced fund. a public law 111-2303 as

amended. section 126, none of the funds may be used to approval of prove her transactions to academic exchanges. secretary of homeland security shall provide a joint report regarding travel pursuant to code 31. section 128, during the fiscal year 2015, none of the funds may be used to issue or any regulation regulating to the standard which is used to determine whether an organization is operated exclusively for the social welfare. none of the funds may be obligated to provide for the enforcement of any guideline pursuant to the guideline, provision on engaging with developing countries on coal-fired generation when the enforcement would prohibit the

coal-fired project. the secretary shall provide a report to the committee on economic warfar eric. each calendar, the secretary shall submit an accounting to the individuals who have not paid the amount of any amount owed under a qualified health plan through an exchange of title i of and this title may be cited the department of treasury. tilte, executive office of the president funds aappropriated to the president. ,850,000. million. census, 12 reimburseable expenses for the expenses for the executive expenses, such sums as may be

necessary. white house repair and restoration, $500,000. council of economic advisers, salaries and expenses, a national security council and homeland security salaries and expenses delrks 12 million. office of add tive, $111 million. office of management and budget, salaries a expenses, $6839 million. office of national drug policies, $22 million. federal drug control programs, high intense yent, including transfer of funds, to remain available until september 0, 016. other programs including transfer of funds, $108 million.

information technology oversight and reform, $9 million. special assistant to the president, $4 million. sfirble residence of the vice president, includesing trr of unds, $1 of 290,000. executive office of the president, including transfer of funds, section 201, funds made available may be with advanced approval of the committee. not to -- such appropriation to any such appropriation toe section 202 after 90 days. the director shall submit a eport regarding the dodd-flank reform. section 20 p. none of the funds may be used to pay the officer or employee of or approve statements abrogating

legislation passed by house and senate. section 204. none of the funds may be used to pay the salaries of any officer or employee of the executive ffice. this title may be cited as the executive office of the president appropriations act, 2015. title 3, the judiciary, supreme court of the united states, laries and expenses, $74,937,000. in addition, appropriated sums as may be necessary for the salaries of the chief justice and associate justices of the court, care of the building and grounds, $11,640,000. united states court of appeals for the federal circuit,

salaries and expenses, $30,192,000. in addition, appropriated sums as may be necessary -- for the salaries of the chief judge and judges of the court, united states court of international trade salaries and expenses, $17,807,000. in addition, appropriated sums as may be necessary for the salaries of the chief judge and judges of the court. courts of appeals, district courts and other judicial services, salaries and -- enses, $4,784, 4,784,659,000. the chair: for what purpose does the gentleman from arizona seek recognition? mr. gosar: i have an amendment at the desk, number 182. the chair: the clerk will report the amendment. the clerk: amendment offered by mr. gosar of arizona. page 41, line 10, after the dollar amount insert, increased by $42 million. page 67, line 16, after the dollar amount insert, reduced

by $43 million. page 71, line 3, after the dollar amount insert, reduced by $43 million. the chair: pursuant to house resolution 661, the gentleman member zona and a opposed each will control five minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from arizona. mr. gosar: thank you, mr. chairman. i rise today to offer an amendment to the financial services and general government appropriations act for the fiscal year 2015. my amendment is simple. it transfers resources from the government services administration, also known as g.s.a., to the u.s. court of appeals, the u.s. district courts, our nation's bankruptcy courts, and other related judiciary programs. specifically, it gives the u.s. court system an additional $42 million and it comes directly from the wasteful spending within g.s.a. the $42 million transfer to the courts will put their budget in line with the budget request for fiscal year 2015. let me say that i have taken issue with the government waste since my very first days in congress. i knew it was bad, but i did

not fully comprehend how bad things were until i actually got here. and started to get my hands dirty while digging around for waste, fraud and abuse. i take particular issue with the g.s.a. the g.s.a.'s mission is to, and i quote, deliver the best value in real estate acquisition and technology services to government and the american people. given the major g.s.a. scandals involving the wasting hundreds of thousands of dollars on conferences with clowns and fortune tellers and on youtube rap videos, it's clear employees within this agency have lost sight of their mission. furthermore, by our government's own estimates, there may be 77,000 empty or underutilized buildings across the country. the office of management and budget estimates these buildings could be wasting hard-earned taxpayer dollars at a rate of $1.7 billion a year. yes, $1.7 billion. that's a-- astonishing.

we're even spending money on buildings that are completely empty because grass needs mowing, the pipes must be maintained, fences must be checked and repaired and the list goes on and on. i truly appreciate and applaud the excellent work this committee has done on this bill. it's particularly tough to craft this year in the wake of the i.r.s. scandals and others. but i do take issues with increases whatsoever to the g.s.a.'s budget for rental of space. we are wasting billions on empty buildings and we're worried about billions in rental agreements? $5.5 billion in rental agreements. i would also like to note the amount proposed in the underlying bill is over $700 million more than the entire court system of the united states. we're talking the supreme court, appellate court, circuit courts, bankruptcy courts and other justices offices and initiative -- justices' offices and initiatives. their budget is still less than $700 million less than the money spent on rental agreements. the judiciary enforces the rule of law and it administers justice in fair and impartial manner. in fact, it is our justice

system that is possible -- that america's most attractive component to others around the world that yearn to be free and have a fair day in court and those who yearn for rights under the law. you see there's something wrong with this appropriation. one is for billions in waste ile the courts struggle with ancreased case load. we're spending more than $700 million more on rent space than our courts and we're wasting nearly $2 billion a year on empty buildings, empty or underutilized. at this point, this amendment should speak for itself. we're wasting billions on rent when we have empty spaces all over the place. we must either tell the -- sell the empty buildings or cut g.s.a.'s rental space budget. i urge my colleagues to vote in favor of my commonsense amendment. i thank the chairman and ranking member for their continued leadership on the committee and 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 new york seek recognition?

the gentleman from arizona yields back the balance of his time. the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from arizona. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. the amendment is agreed to. the clerk will read. the clerk: page 42, line 1, in addition, appropriated sums may be necessary for the salaries of the circuit and district judges. in addition -- page 42, line 1, in addition appropriated sums may be necessary for the salaries of circuit and district judges. in addition, for expenses of the united states court of federal claims, $5,423,000. defender services, $1,044,394,000. fees of jurors and commissioners, $55,827,000. court security, including transfer of funds, $525, 763,000. administrative office of the united states courts, salaries

and expenses, $82,824,000. federal judicial center, salaries and expenses, $26,724,000 of which $1,800,000 shall remain available through september 30, 2016. united states sentencing commission, salaries and expenses, $16,556,000. administrative provisions, the judiciary, including transfer of funds, section 301, appropriations in this title for salaries and expenses shall be available for services as authorized by 5, u.s.c., 3109. none to exceed 5% of any appropriation made available for the judiciary may be transferred between such appropriations. section 303, salaries and expenses appropriations shall be available for official reception and representation expenses of the judicial conference. section 304, section 3314-a of

title 40, united states code, shall be applied. section 305, the united states marshal service shall provide for courthouses as its director may designate security services. 203-c 306, -- section of the jish improvements act of -- judicial improvements act of 1990 is amended. section 307, section 84-b of title 28, united states code, is amended. this title may be cited as the judiciary appropriations act, 2015, title 4, district of columbia, federal funds. federal payment for a resident tuition support, $20 million. federal payment for emergency planning and security costs in the district of columbia, $10 million. federal payment to the district of columbia courts, $234,400,000. federal payment for defender

services and district of columbia court, $49,890,000. federal payment to the court services and offender supervision agency for the district of columbia, $228,500,000. federal payment to the district of columbia public defender service, $41 million. federal payment to the criminal justice coordinating council, $1,900,000. federal payment for judicial commissions, $295,000. federal payment for school improvements, $45 million. federal payment for the district of columbia national guard, $375,000. federal payment for testing and treatment of hiv-aids, $5 million. district of columbia funds, funds appropriated for the current fiscal year as general funds, this title may be cited as the district of columbia appropriations act, 2015. title 5, independent agencies.

administrative conference of the united states, salaries and expenses, $3 million to remain available until september 30, 2016. bureau of consumer financial protection administrative provisions, section 501, section 1017-a-2-c of public law 111-203 is repealed. section 502 -- the chair: for what purpose does the gentlelady from wisconsin seek recognition? ms. moore: i have an amendment at the desk. the chair: the clerk will report the amendment. the clerk: amendment offered by ms. moore of wisconsin. page 59, beginning on line 20, strike section 501. the chair: pursuant to house resolution 661, the gentlelady from wisconsin and a member opposed each will control five minutes. the chair recognizes the gentlelady from wisconsin for five minutes. ms. moore: thank you so much, mr. chair. i tell you, mr. chair, if obamacare, affordable care act, so the called obamacare, is the ultimate tempest for the tea

party pot, then i guess the consumer financial protection bureau, the cfpb, is a very, very close second. since assuming the majority in 2010, house republicans have passed the bill -- has passed bill after bill to gut and undermine the consumer financial protection bureau. frankly, i have just lost track of all the bills and attempts of the majority to undermine our nation's top financial consumer watchdog. it's well documented that congress wanted its funding to be free of political influence when it created the bureau. in order to protect the consumers it needed to be free of political influence. so, mr. chairman, my amendment strikes the provision in the financial services appropriations bill, section 501, that the house is considering today, as it is

nothing more than yet another effort by the majority to derail the consumer financial protection bureau from its mission to protect consumers. originally i had my staff draft an amendment to delete sections 501 and 502. but after consulting with the c.b.o., i was -- wanted to make sure that there would be no cost on based on adding to the bill, scoring to the bill. so by merely -- so in order to make my amendment in order, my amendment just strikes section 501 and not 502. but just let me be clear, mr. chairman, both sections 501 and 502 of the bill before us today undermine the cfpb. they would alter the independent funding process and vision for the consumer financial protection bureau that was established in dodd-frank.

the wall street reform act. this is consistent with other independent banking regulatory agencies. other independent banking regulatory agencies are not at the beck and call of the appropriations committee and the political environment, whoever is in control of it. what has the consumer financial protection bureau, our nation's consumer watchdog, done for us lately? what has it done for consumers? well, mr. chair, the agency has refunded $3 billion to 9.7 million victims of unfair, deceptive and abusive practices in financial markets since 2011. the consumer financial protection bureau has helped millions of people and has stopped fraud. the dedicated mission of the consumer financial protection bureau to protect consumers

from financial products wrought with fraud and deceptive schemes inspires trust in our markets, which attracts capital and promotes allocation of capital to productive, legitimate endeavors. on he cfpb is a tough cop wall street, but it's also the fair cop on the wall street beat. . the amendment before you that i'm offering affirms the current independent enforces, which is the best way to preserve the integrity of the agency. i know that republicans plead that this provision is about oversight and transparency. but when you scratch the surface, you will realize that the claim is not credible.

yet another attempt to undermine the consumer protection bureau. and ultimately, it seeks to defund the agency and make it a paper tiger. it seeks the return to the bad old days, mr. chair, and bad old ways that sets the for the financial crisis. i urge members to support my amendment. so the agency may continue to ensure u.s. macts are the fairest and most rebus in the world. he chair: the the gentlelady reserves. >> i rise in opposition to the amendment. mr. crenshaw: congressional oversight makes agencies make more responsive and more responsible. he dodd-frank authorizes the

agency to fund money from the reserve to the extent that it deems it necessary. that's all he has to say. they don't oversee any exercise, but must transfer whatever funds the bureau requests up to $600 million. and since 2011, the bureau has diverted over $1.5 billion from the fed and those are funds that would be applied for deficit wre deduction. and listen to this, of that money that the bureau has received, they are now planning to respond more on renovating building than he the building is worth. the general reserve found that

it needs to improve its recordkeeping and conference cards, security and procurement. section 501 neither limits the bureau funding. it allows congress and all americans to understand what they do, how they do it and how much it costs. i urge a no vote and i would like to yield time to my ranking member, mr. serrano. mr. serrano: with all due respect to my colleagues, i rise in opposition to this amendment. when the bill was being written, i recall going to the sponsors in the bill and saying make sure that this agency is under agency under the supervision of the house of representatives. and i still believe that part of the fiscal crisis that we are

still living under was under lack of supervision and lack of wall street. i'm in support of having them answer to us and having input from the people's house and peoples to come before us and tell us what they are doing. it sounds great for many members to have an agency beyond its own, but past history shows us when we did that, when we did not supervise or have oversitheshes it did just the oversight. i'm from new york and wall street went beer serk, because we did not hold them account annual. i would hope we defeat this amendment. the chair: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentlelady from wisconsin is

erecognized. ms. moore: wall street went beer erk because we didn't fund the s.e.c. and these watchdog agencies are charged with an task and if we don't provide the appropriations this is what is going to happen under this bill. . the gentlelady yields back. the gentleman from florida is recognized. mr. crenshaw: accountability and transparency are good things and i urge a no vote on this amendment. i yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the question is on the amendment offered by gentlelady from wisconsin. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the noes have it, the amendment is not agreed to. ms. moore: i would request a

roll call vote. request the yeas and nays. the chair: does the gentlelady equest a roll call vote? further proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentlelady from wisconsin will be postponed. the chair: for what purpose does

gentlelady from california seek recognition? ms. waters: i have an amendment at the desk. the chair: the clerk will report the amendment. the clerk will note that the amendment is not in in the paragraph. the other amendments are a part of. are there amendments to this paragraph? does the gentleman from new jersey seek recognition? mr. holt: i have an amendment at the desk that affects line 18, i believe. the chair: the clerk will report -- the chair notes that the amendment addresses a portion that the amendment not read for

amendment. is there objection to the consideration of the amendment at this time? mr. crenshaw: yes,, there is objection. the chair: the objection is heard. the clerk will read the next paragraph. the clerk: page 59, line 22, section 05 , effective october 1, 2015, the board of governors shall not transfer amounts to zero consumer financial protection. the chair: for what purpose does gentlelady from california seek recognition. ms. waters: i have an amendment at the desk. the chair: the clerk will report the amendment. the clerk: amendment offered by ms. waters, strike and, page 60, strike lines 3-7 and insert the

following, the director of the bureau may collect a charge from any entity with more than $50 illion in assets or wlp to a dermings has been made of public amount 203 equal to the as necessary and appropriate to carry the responsibilities of the bureau. three, funds derived or payment made pursuant to this section shall not be could be strude to be funds and shall not be bject to purposes of chapter 31 and any proceedings provision of law and to determine the manner in which the obligations of the bureau shall be issue occurred and expenses allowed and paid in owe cordance with this section.

the chair: for what purpose does the gentleman from florida seek recognition? mr. crenshaw: i reserve a point of order. the chair: pursuant to house resolution 661, the gentlelady from california and member opposed each will control five minutes. ms. waters: i rise today to offer eanch amendment that will address provisions within this legislation that threaten the independent funding of the consumer consumer financial buyer aver, an agency that has been successful in standing up or consumers who have been victims. to those who have been fallen victim to a predatory loan or to those who have had a dispute over late fees or interest race and those who have had issues to

a credit score, the bureau is your watchdog. cop on r advocate and the beat and has done an outstanding job. 12.6 million consumers have received more than $3.8 billion indirect refunds because of the enforcement action. cfpb is able the to establish these tasks because of its political independence and prosecute bad actors. this is directly due to the cfpb funding stream. but this legislation to end the bureau's independence by tying its funding to the appropriations process. he result will be a weakened

cfpb and one not able to advocate. and if enacted into law we would be one step closer to the republican's goals to ending it all together and its work on behalf of students and seniors. my amendment would end this attempt to poll itized, by removing this provision and replacing it with language that allows the bureau to maintain its independent funding. unfortunately, the rules of the house make it impossible to current funding mechanism. this funds the bureau through a fee imposed upon banks and financial institutions that have more than $50 billion in assets. i hope my colleagues would agree at an approach that reserves

the wash dog without costing taxpayers a dame. mr. chairman, while it is certainly a possibility, ruling this amendment out of order would demonstrate the hypocrisy. i pressed my concerns about this in other provisions that are an appropriations bill. i asked them to protect this these. since he and his republican colleagues have refused, i'm forced to enter this amendment. i would like to enter this letter into the record. this ensures the consumer financial protection bureau is an advocate. it's an attempt to correct one of many brad provisions which

underfunds or regulators and impedes our ability to identify and harms the ability of regulators to properly our nation's investors and retirees. i'm saddened to be back here to preserve the cfb. our colleagues have aligned themselves with bad actors in our financial system. it is shameful that once again this house is forced to spend precious time and resources tearing down its first of its kind agency which ensures that consumers have a power to fight for them. i urge adoption of this amendment and i reserve. the chair: the gentlelady's request will be covered by general leave. the gentlelady from california

reserves. for what purpose does the gentleman from florida seek recognition? mr. crenshaw: i make a point of order against the amendment because it proposes to change existing law and it constitutes legislation in an appropriations bill and therefore violates clause 2 of rule 21. the rule states in pertinent part, an amendment to a general appropriations bill shall not be in order if changing existing law. the amendment confers new authority, and i ask for a ruling from the chair. the chair: does any other member wish to be head on the point of order? ms. waters: mr. chairman. i would like to be heard on the point ever order. as i said in my earlier presentation. i expressed my concerns about this that inappropriately legislating on an appropriations bill and while the gentleman

from the opposite side of the aisle is saying this is inappropriate, certainly it has been inappropriate to legislate on this appropriations in order to remove the protection from the cfpb and allow it to be at the mercy at the politics of the appropriations process in this house. so i would ask that my bill -- my amendment be recognized and that we would have a vote on this amendment. . choup the chair finds that this amendment includes language conferring authority. the amendment therefore constitutes legislation in violation of clause 2 of rule 21. the point of order is sustained and the amendment is not in order.

the clerk will read. the clerk: page 60, line 8, section 503, on the date that a request is made for a transfer of funds in accordance with section 1017 of public law 111-203, the bureau of consumer financial protections shall notify committees. the chair: the clerk will suspend. does the gentleman from new jersey seek recognition? the clerk will continue to read. the clerk: section 504, two weeks after the end of each quarter the bureau of consumer financial protections shall submit a report on its ctivities to the committees. consumer product safety commission salaries and expenses, $11 million. federal communications commission salaries and

xpenses, $322,748,000. federal deposit insurance corporation, office of the inspector general $34,56,000. federal election commission salaries and expenses $67,500,000. federal labor relations shorts salaries and expenses $25,500,000. federal trade commission salaries and expenses, $293 million. general services administration, real property activities, federal buildings fund, limitations on availability of revenue cluding transfer of funds, $,103,409,000 shall remain available until expended for construction and acquisition. general activities, governmentwide policy, $58

million. operating expenses, including transfer of funds, $61,049,000. office of inspector general, $65 million. allowances and often staff for former presidents, $1,672,000. ederal citizens services fund, $53,294,000. administrative provisions, general services, administration, including transfer of funds, section 507, funds shall be available for the hire of passenger motor vehicle, section 508. funds made available for fiscal year 2015, for federal buildings, fund, activities, may be transferred to the extent necessary to meet program requirements. section 509, funds made available shall be used for united states courthouse construction if the request meets the design guide standards. section 510, none of the funds may be used to increase the

amount of occupyble square feet where other service is provided through the federal buildings fund. section 511, claims against the government for direct construction projects may be liquidated from other construction projects. section 512, in any case in which the committee on transportation and infrastructure of the house adopt the resolution pursuant to a perspective, the administrator shall ensure that the delineated area of procurement is identical to the delineated area included in the prospeck tus for all lease agreements. protection board salaries and expenses including transfer of funds, $40,655,000 to remain available until september 30, 2016, together with not to exceed $2,345,000 to remain available until september 30, 2016. national archives and records administration operating expenses, $360 million. office of inspector general,

$4,130,000. repairs and restorations, $7,600,000. national historical publications and records, commission grant programs, $5. national credit union administration community development revolving loan fund, $2 million shall be available until september 30, 2016. office of government ethics salaries and expenses $15,420,000. office of personnel management salaries and expenses, including transfer of funds, $95 million -- $95,910,000. office of inspector general salaries and expenses, including transfer of trust funds, $4,384,000. in addition not to exceed $21,340,000 for administrative expenses to audit and provide oversight of the office retirement and insurance programs. office of special counsel, salaries and expenses

$21,452,000. postal regulatory commission salaries and expenses, cluding transfer of funds, $14,153,000. privacy and civil liberties oversight board salaries and expenses, $4,500,000 to remain available until september 30, 2016. recovery accountability and transparency board salaries and expenses $15 million. securities and exchange commission salaries and xpenses, $1,400,000,000. the chair: for what purpose does the gentlelady from california seek recognition? ms. waters: mr. chairman, i have and at at desk. the chair: the clerk will eport the amendment. the clerk: amendment offered by ms. waters of california. page 85, line 19, insert after the dollar amount, insert the following, increase by $300 million. page 86, line 16 insert after

the dollar amount, insert the following, increase by $300 million. the chair: pursuant to house resolution 661, the gentlelady from california and a member opposed each will control five minutes. the chair recognizes the gentlelady from california for five minutes. ms. waters: thank you, mr. chairman. i urge adoption of my amendment to fully fund the securities and exchange commission. of wall street's top sheriffs. the president's request of $1.7 billion and at no cost to the taxpayer. the united states has the most vibrant capital markets which are the envy of the world. both large and small businesses looking to raise capital are able to do so with incredible efficiency and at minimal cost. businesses are able to do this because their investors know that there are strong rules of the road and a regulate that are will hold them accountable -- regulator that will hold them accountable. the underlying bill however

undermines the s.e.c. by cutting nearly $300 million or nearly 20% from the requested level. wall street's cop is woefully underfunded already. and one need only look as far as its i.t. budget compared to just a few of the entities it oversees. in fiscal year 2013, the i.t. budgets of the six largest financial institutions equaled an amount more than 100 times that of the s.e.c. although my republican colleagues suggest that they are generously providing ancrease, they use budget gimmicks to mask real cuts to i.t. infrastructure. the world's capital markets have grown and -- at an ever-accelerating rate and likewise so have the s.e.c.'s responsibilities. today the s.e.c. oversees 11,000 investment advisors, 10,000 mutual funds, 4,000 --

4,450 broker dealers, the securities exchanges, clearing agencies, credit rating agencies and other self-regulatory organizations. the s.e.c. also reviews the disclosures of nearly 9,000 public companies. and following the 2008 financial crisis, congress significantly increased s.e.c.'s responsibilities by requiring oversight of hedge funds, municipal advisors and certain derivatives by passing dodd-frank. my amendment is needed to support all of these activities. the republican bill also includes substantial carveouts which will lead to cuts to enforcement and examinations. the s.e.c. will have to impose hiring freezes for lawyers that would have brought enforcement cases against bad actors.

last year s.e.c. recovered $3.4 billion in 2013 or twice the amount that would fully fund the agency. the s.e.c. will also have to furlough examiners under the republican bill. examiners that are needed to reduce the backlog of investment advisors that have never been visited by the s.e.c. there is broad opposition to the republican funding level. the white house says that at this level the s.e.c. would be unable to add critical positions in market oversight, compliance and enforcement to carry out its financial oversight responsibilities. what is really disappointing is that congress can fund the s.e.c. at any level without affecting the debt and deficit. there are no budget savings from cutting the s.e.c.

that is because the s.e.c.'s budget is paid through tiny fees on securities transactions. here's what the largest public pension plan in the united states says about s.e.c. funding. the commission's work can't be achieved without the resources it needs to be effective. the s.e.c. needs to be given the tools to do the job full and independent -- job, full and independent funding, quote-unquote. in addition, investor advocates like the aarp, the consumer federation of america, as well as industry groups like the investment advisors association and the financial planning association, all support fully funding the s.e.c. and so should you. a fully funded s.e.c. helps america's entrepreneurs raise funds to finance jobs and develop it. a fully funded s.e.c. ensures

that our markets operate efficiently. a fully funded s.e.c. protects the hard-earned savings funding our nation's retirement and our children's education. so i would urge adoption of this amendment and reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentlelady's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from florida seek recognition? mr. crenshaw: mr. chairman, i claim time in opposition. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. crenshaw: mr. chairman, this committee is not starving the s.e.c. for funds. the s.e.c. received an 11% increase in fiscal year 2012, they received an 8% increase over the sequester level in 2014. and this year the s.e.c. is asking for $350 million more than they did -- than they received in 2014. that's a 26% increase over fiscal year 2014. now, for fiscal year 2015 the

committee recommends $1.4 billion, that's $50 million above the fiscal year 2014. and it's specifically for critical s.e.c. information technology initiatives. and listen to this, since 2001 congress has increased the s.e.c.'s funding level by more than 200%. not many federal agencies can say that they've received that kind of increase the way the s.e.c. has. and you ask yourself, what did the commission get for that increased funding? well, the commission missed the madoff ponzi scheme. they signed the no-bid lease for almost a million square feet of office space that it didn't need. they produced inaccurate financial statements, they failed to conduct a really serious and thorough review of the agency's bureaucratic and siloed structure in order to become more efficient and more

effective. and they wasted over $1 million on unnecessary equipment. and i might add they've had some of their rules thrown out in court due to the lack of economic analysis. that's just the name -- that's just to name a few of the embarrassing moments that the s.e.c. enforcement and management has endured. so this is not about a lack of funding. throwing more money at the s.e.c. is not the answer. we knead to show real progress before we give them new money. the bill has targeted extra money. information technology and economic analysis. over the past three years, this committee has supported the this funding. if we could upgrade the technology systems, they will be better able to leverage their resources a catch the bad actors

and so the fact that this agency diminishnded is no way the way for oversight. the s.e.c. us not starved for resources. those are nice talkic points. i urge a no vote on amendment and i reeverybody is. the chair: the gentleman reserves. for what purpose does the new york seek recognition? mr. serrano: i yield one minute to ms. waters. the chair: the gentleman cannot yield blocks of time? mr. serrano: excuse me. the chair: the gentleman may yield but not olympic of time. mr. serrano: i yield to her.

the chair: the gentlelady is recognized. ms. waters: listening to my friend on the opposite of the aisle, you would think that the s.e. c has no additional responsibility, as i quoted, the world markets have grown and likewise so has the s.e.c.'s responsibility. it oversees 11,000 investment dvisers and 4,5,000 broker dealers and credit rating agencies and others organizations. the s.e.c. reviews the disscloshe issues of 9,000 public companies. congress increased s.e.c.'s responsibility by requiring oversight of hedge funds. my friend on the opposite

side of the eel disregards this. they certainly do. and they should be paid for and again, this does not increase any debt. this is fade for through the -- for the many companies that have to pay a small fee and will not allow those fees to support the work of the s.e.c. and i.t. needs they have. it does not make good sense. i yield back. mr. serrano: i rise in support of the amendment which is similar to the amendment i offered in full committee. bill provides $300 million less than what the administration has asked for and prohibits the which is ng the needs in effect another $70 million in

rediscs. the s.e.c. would reduce its current staff to hire new experts and to fully implement all of the rules and responsibilities required by dodd-frank. ur nation is feeling the financial meltdown. and the sfment e.c. needs adequate funding. in amendment deals with that issue. ms. waters' amendment is one that supplies the strength of creating and for supporting the cop on the beat that we alwaysed mentioned on wall street. the s.e.c. has its responsibility and we continue to cut its funding. i was around when we had the power to do oversight and we

didn't do it and the agency didn't do it and that resulted in the meltdown. so i support your amendment and i hope everyone votes in support of it. and i yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from florida is recognized. mr. crenshaw: as i pointed out in a little over 10 years, the funding for the s.e.c. has iran creased over 200 percent. so i think there is adequate job, they need to do it effectively and efficiently like other areas of government. and i urge a no vote on the amendment. and i yield back. the chair: the question is on the amendment offered by the gentlelady from california. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the noes have it. ms. waters: i ask for a recorded

vote. the chair: pursuant to clause 6, rule 18, further proceedings on the amendment offered by gentlelady from 6789 the clerk: selective service, $21 million. small business. $253 the chair: for what purpose does the gentleman from arizona seek recognition? >> i have an amendment 1 4 at the desm. the clerk: amendment offed by mr. gosar, after the first dl are ar amount insert reduced by $ million. page 88 line 21, insert increased by $3 million. the chair: pursuant to the house resolution 661, the gentleman from arizona and a member opposed each will control five

minutes. gross mr. gosar: i rise to offer a simple amendment and programs within the s.b.a. the amendment reduces a $3.8 million increase that with was slated to go towards the administration and bureaucracy. t redirects those funds that helps small businesses like the small business development centers, score, the state and rade export, native american outreach. if programs with the s.b.a. are going to get an increase, it should be for worth while programs. small businesses are the backbone and create a seven out of 10 jobs. the s.b.a. needs to foster

economic growth. they do exactly that. in 201, sml business development centers helped entrepreneurs start businesses providing scouge for 65,000 others. they assist more than clients annual any and helping small businesses grow. the score program assisted with the creation of 70,000 new jobs. a opened jobs. i could go on onor programs but i think you get my point. i will discuss hoifer, the offset of this amendment. the committee was critical of small business administration accompanying this bill. i would like to read from this report. the committee believes the s.b.a. should focus on these small businesses that have more

capacity and access to capital. programs s loan's rely on the programs. the s.b.a. office of inspector general found the dollars were .eing made used in an o.i.g. report, they oupped the loan gr and tee center emphasized quality over uantity or the 67-a loan reviews and they weren't provided guidance. the committee has been consistently with resources to fund the lg pmp c in order to provide a revie. loans made without an effective

review process. the committee expects them to conduct a review and continue to monitor it. i thank the chairman and ranking member for their work on the committee and i yield to the chairman. the chair: i'm pleased to support his amendment. the chair: does anyone wish to rise in opposition to this amendment? the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from arizona. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the pip of the chair, the ayes have it, the amendment is agreed to. the clerk will read. he clerk: page 88 line 18. 197,825,000 to remain available.

office of inspector general, $19 million. and business loan program account including transfer of funds, $45 million. disaster loan accounts, including transfer of the funds, $186 million. administrative funds, including ransfer of funds, section 513. not to exceed to any appropriation may be transferred. united states postal service, $58,34 2,000. safrls and spanses, 24 million. united states tax court salaries and expenses, $50 mill yol. section 5001.

none of the funds may be used to pay the expenses of nonfederal rties intervening in regulatory proceedings. obligation beyond the fiscal year. section 603, the ex pen difficult you are of any contract shall be limited. section 6104. none of the funds may be transferred to any department instrument talely of the united states government except transfer authority provided in this act. none of the funds shall be made available for any visit are paying the funds of any employee at would probt the enforcement. and section 606, no funds shall be expended that ex peppeding united states

code, section 607. no funds shall be made available of any person that has been convicted of title 1, united states code. none of the funds provided shall be prayed for available for reprogramming of funds that creates a new program. ction 609, jub obligated balance, from salaries and expenses for fiscal year 2015rks shall remain available for eptember , 1016. section 610, none of the funds may be used by executive office of the president to request any official background official report.

section 611, the cost accountings standards, title 41, united states code shall not apply to the benefits program. section 612, revolving obligation implementing settlement agreements cost of living program. section 613, no funds shall be made available to pay for an abortion. ection 614, the provision of 613, shall not apply with the mother of a mother is in danger. section 615, to promote government access to government information tknoling. the federal government of information technology. section 616, no fer officer or employee of regulatory

commission may accept on behalf of that agency, payment or reimbursement for travel or related expenses for the purpose of enabling an for to .articipate in an official zute section 618, not later than 45 days after the end of each quarter the department shall provide the committees the quarterly accountinging of the consumetive balances of any unobligated funds. section 619, an executive agency covered by this act authorized to enter into contracts for either leases or the construction of real property may consult with a general services administration before issuing a solicitation for offers. section 620, none of the faunds may be used by the federal trade commission to complete a draft report unless the interagency working group on

food marketed to children complies with an executive order number 13563. section 621, none of the funds may be used to pay the salaries and expenses for the following, director, white house office of health reform. section 622, none of the funds may be used to enter into a contract or cooperative agreement with any corporation that has any unpaid federal tax liability that has been assessed and that is not being paid in a timely manner pursuant to an agreement with the authority responsible for collecting the tax liability. section 623, none of the funds may be used to enter into a contract or cooperative agreement with any corporation that was convicted of a felony criminal violation within the preceding 24 months. section 624, there are appropriated for the following activities the amounts required under current law, compensation of the president, payments to

the judicial officers retirement fund. section 625, no funds shall be obligated from the securities and exchange commission reserve fund. the chair: the clerk will suspend. for what purpose does the gentlelady from california seek recognition? ms. waters: mr. chairman, i have an amendment at the desk. the chair: the clerk will report the amendment. the clerk: amendment offered by ms. waters of california. page 104, after line 21, insert the following. section, section 204 of the investment advisors act of 1940, 15, u.s.c., is amended by adding at the end the following new subsection. e, inspection and examination fees, 1, in general, the commission shall collect an annual fee from investment advisor -- advisors that are subject to examination, to defray the costs of such inspections and examinations. two, exceptions -- the chair: for what purpose does the gentleman from florida seek recognition? mr. crenshaw: i reserve a point of order on the gentlewoman's

amendment. the chair: point of order is reserved. the clerk will continue to report the amendment. the clerk: two, exemptions for certain state-related investment advisors, no fees shall be collected under this subsections for any investment advisor that is prohibited from registering with the commission under section 203 by reason of section 203-a. three, fee amounts, a, amount to be collected, i, in general, the commission shall seek to ensure that the aggregate amount of fees collected under this subsection with respect to a specific fiscal year are equal to the estimated cost of the commission in carrying out additional inspections and examinations for such fiscal year. ii, additional inspections and examinations defined for purposes of this subparagraph with respect to a fiscal year, the term additional inspections and examinations means those inspections and examinations of investment advisors under this title for such fiscal year that exceed the number of inspections and examinations of

investment advisors under this title conducted during fiscal year 2012. b, see calculation form lafment the commission shall establish by rulemaking a formula for determining the fee amount -- ms. waters: i ask unanimous consent to dispense with the reading. the chair: is there any objection? without objection, pursuant to house resolution 661, the gentlelady from california and a member opposed each will control five minutes. the chair recognize the gentlelady from california for five conscious recognizes the gentlelady from california for five minutes. ms. waters: thank you, mr. chairman. my amendment is a commonsense provision that would help reverse some of the damaging efforts directed at the s.e.c. we've seen this congress, efforts that have been squarely aimed at hamstringing the commission, including underfunding the s.e.c. by $300 million or 20% below the president's fiscal year 2015 request. bogging down the s.e.c. in

onerous cost-benefit analysis provisions that would diversity resources away from -- diverse resources away from important efforts like enforcement and mayered to limit the information available to retirees that make decisions about whether to put their hard-earned money into public companies. my amendment would help to counteract these efforts by providing the s.e.c. with the authority to impose and collect reasonable user fees on federally registered investment advisors for the purpose of increasing the number and frequency of s.e.c. examinations. this is consistent with my 1627, the investment advisor examination improvement act, which i have co-outing auggettered with representative delaney -- co-authored with representative delaney. today investment advisors may go more than a decade before being visited by the s.e.c.

it is absolutely essential that we improve the oversight of investment advisors. the people that manage the assets of millions of individual and constitutional investors across the country. this is particularly true if we are underfunding the s.e.c. by $300 million as this underlying bill proposes. the s.e.c. currently only examines approximately 9% of advisors annually. out of the almost 11,000 advisors registered with the commission. the legislation and this amendment provide the s.e.c. with additional resources to conduct more examinations and protect investors. i believe this amendment and our bill provides the simplest, most efficient solution to the problem of inadequate advisor oversight.

also, because the user fees contemplated in the amendment would only be used to fund the regulation of investment advisors and not to subsidize other functions at the s.e.c., i think that this option would be more cost effective for the industry. in fact, a study by the boston consulting group supports that point. this amendment will help the s.e.c. to close this resource gap. and by entrusting this responsibility to the commission, it will also leverage their 70-year history of experience in this regulatory role and prevent the establishment of a duplicative s.r.o. bureaucracy. in addition to consumer and retiree advocates, my bill is supported by the investment advisor industry, including the investment advisor association, the financial planning

association, the national association of personal financial advisors and the certified financial planner board. they support my bill because they know that clear rules are the road and robust examinations both serve public confidence in the market and ultimately help their bottom line. i urge the adoption of this amendment. i yield back. the chair: the gentlelady yields back the balance of her time. for what purpose does the gentleman from florida seek recognition? mr. crenshaw: mr. chairman, i make a point of order against the amendment because it proposes to change existing law and constitutes legislation in an appropriation bill. therefore it violates clause 2 of rule 21. the rule states in pertinent part, an amendment to a general appropriations bill shall not be in order if changing existing law. this amendment directly amends existing law and i ask for a ruling from the chair. the chair: any other member

seek recognition to speak on the point of order? if not, the chair is prepared to rule. the chair finds that this amendment directly amends existing law. the amendment therefore constitutes legislation in violation of clause 2 of rule 21 and the point of order is sustained and the amendment is not in order. the clerk will read. the clerk: page 104, line 22, section 626, none of the funds shall be used by the securities and exchange commission to finalize any rule regarding the disclosure of political contributions. section 627, section 2-c of the multinational species conservation funds imposing stamp ability of 2010, public law 111-241, is amended. section 628, the agency spess tied in subsection b -- --

specified in subsection b -- the chair: for what purpose does the gentleman from florida seek recognition in mr. crenshaw: i ask unanimous consent that the remainder of the bill through page 152, line 9, be considered as read, printed in the record and open to amendment at any point. the chair: is there an objection to the gentleman's request? seeing no objection, so ordered. is there an amendment to any ortions of the bill? the clerk will read. the clerk: page 152, line 10, spending reduction account, section 902, the amount by the committee under section 302-b of the congressional budget act of 1974 exceeds the amount proposed in budget authority is zero dollars. the chair: the clerk will suspend. for what purpose does the gentleman from florida seek recognition? mr. crenshaw: i move that the committee do now rise.

the chair: the question is on the motion that the committee rise. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the ayes have it, the motion is adopted. accordingly, the committee rises. the speaker pro tempore: mr. chairman. the chair: mr. speaker, the committee of the whole house on the state of the union, having had under consideration h.r. 5016, directs me to report that it has come to nos remain title of the resolution thereon. the chair: the chair of the committee of the whole house on the state of the union reports that the committee has had under consideration h.r. 5016 and has come to no resolution thereon.

the speaker pro tempore: the chair will now entertain requests for one-minutes. for what purpose does the gentleman from pennsylvania seek recognition? mr. thompson: mr. speaker, request unanimous consent to address the house for one minute, revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. the house will be in order. please remove your onversations from the floor. the gentleman may proceed. mr. thompson: mr. speaker, today i rise to recognize the retired captain marshall hanson, united states navy, who suddenly passed away at last week at the age of 63. i work closely with captain hanson in his role as the director of legislation in military policy at the reserve officers association. i know that so many of his friends and colleagues share my sentiments when i say that we ave lost a tireless advocate for america's reservists and men and women who serve in uniform. he was born in darby, pennsylvania, and raised in glen rock, new jersey, and seattle, washington.

a 1972 graduate of the university of washington, he was commissioned through naval rotc, later he earned an m.b.a. from the university of washington and graduated with distinction from the naval war college. captain hanson served three years in active duty. and 27 years as a naval reserve, retiring in august of 2002 before continuing his service to those in uniform through his advocacy on capitol hill. i offer my thoughts and prayers to captain hanson's family and loved ones. may he rest in peace. i yield back, mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. seeing no more requests, the chair lays before the house the following personal requests. the clerk: leave of absence requested for mr. culberson of texas for today and mr. danny davis of illinois for today and mr. gallego of texas for today and mr. marine o'owe he -- mr. marino of pennsylvania for today. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the requests are granted.

for what purpose does the gentleman from pennsylvania seek recognition? mr. thompson: mr. speaker, i move that the house now adjourn. the speaker pro tempore: the question is on the motion to adjourn. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the ayes have it. the motion is adopted. accordingly the house stands

>> what areas of the federal government does it fund? $21.3 funding level is billion. treasury, irs, they're also looking at funding the fcc and commissions and small businesses. a bill includes a spending for the internal revenue service, how have the recent congressional investigations expect it -- impact of what is in the bill? >> a lot. there's a good handful of writers taking aim. especially targeting people for their first amendment rights and they are laying it on pretty thick.

the ultimate level and this bill a 10.9 billion which is decrease from current funding levels. and this won't .5 billion less. -- it is $1.5 billion last. so last time that the funding actually increased year over year was in 2010 which was before they had to do a lot of the current responsibilities. there's a new tax evasion long and the federal health care overhaul where they have a 40 new provisions. direct has been frustrated with a strained resources and in addition to cutting the money, there are several writers saying things like you cannot have funding to destroy e-mails. >> you write about some of the other policy writers including a provision decriminalizing arijuana in washington, d.c.

tell us about it. >> it would decriminalize marijuana in washington, d.c. funds cannotsaid go to anyone who would legalize or reduce penalties for the possession of marijuana in d.c. the markup of the bill, democrats accused republicans of being hypocrites because when it , there are states rights versus federal rights. they have accused him of legislating through bills. it is not clear what the amendment would do once enacted. republicans passed it. tricks elizabeth norton is the delicate for d.c. and wade in and also speaking on the house floor.

why is she opposing it? onsort of an infringement government. it is who it up with the bills and single funding for the district of columbia and there's always a fight over an abortion provision, federal funds. ,nd it is just, she routinely thinks congress is overstepping its bounds. >> what are other key issues you would be looking at during the debate? cutse fcc gets a spending and democrats are opposed to it. the ranking member of the subcommittee of financials on the appropriations bill has said republicans are asking for another financial crisis. cut from300 million president obama's request. it continues at current levels

but the fcc said more money for the regulatory overhaul. there are provisions included in the bill that would require new reporting requirements for dodd frank and derivatives provision. and anything to do with fcc is always a flashpoint. abortions, a lot on the floor i am sure. theyhe irs, it is not like are processing on the irs but they may offer amendments to try and increase the funding. >> you can read katie o'donnell's stories at roll cal l. an interview with former vice president dick cheney and his wife and daughter. and then the house committee.

>> former vice president dick cheney and his wife, lynne and daughter, liz system down with mike allen. topics include the war on iraq and the midterm elections. the hour-long interview is interrupted by protesters. [applause] >> thank you so much for doing this. thank you for doing this. toolbar for being here. i appreciate it. -- thank you for being here. thank you for joining us. mr. vice president, you draw quite a crowd. >> a what makes you think it is him? , the are a month ahead

chinese will be celebrating 50 years of marriage. will be celebrating 50 years of marriage. mrs. cheney said if we have a marital squabble, it will be your dream. i will see how i do. we'll start with a question from margaret carlson, she always knows the right to think to ask. i will have each of you chime and i will plunge in. whoyou more like the bushs did not discuss politics at dinner or the kennedys who always did? family, liz and we tell old war stories of the campaign i was all soft in. involved in and the

train wrecks and web a lot along the way. cheney? >> that's a good description. it varies. was asked to be vice president, he thought it was a good idea. i was not sure. give up your house and a job and move. we were not dead or broken -- excuse me. broke -- excuse me. [laughter] [applause] liz would like to apologize was out painting. >> any actual fights? >> oh, sure. >> non-will talk about today. it is a real tribute to my mom and dad we talked politics at the dinner table and we talked about what was happening and the

news.and in the they treated mary and i like adults who had something to contribute from an early age. you were outy with a book -- criminal. >> 4 more years. >> i was backstage and i was saying -- it never gets old. [laughter] >> where is the money -- >> it looks like more than 2. >> backstage. q. you destroyed ira

>> it never gets old. >> it never changes. life "james madison" a reconsidered," you said he would've loved gridlock. explain. >> the james madison would have thought it was a try off of the republic. we have free speech. i am not sure he will put up with it. he thought this was a good principal. one of the things i took away from the madison book was his firm commitment to limited government. he honestly believed the constitution gave the congress certain rights, certain responsibilities and we should not go beyond those. when he sought government, alexander hamilton, moving the government in another direction,

he funded the post -- the first political party. with the idea, when the government is going in the direction you do not like, you need to plant your feet and protest. i think it and not see the end of the republic as passing legislation abut each of us taking a firm stand. you did a little investigative reporting in this book and you are one of the first scholars to seriously look at the idea that james madison may have had or certainly had epilepsy. and i ame describes certainly not the first scholar to see which is not been published by the way. i was not the first to see this but the first to take it seriously. talked to meteorologist about what he said which was he suffered to talk to eurologistsst -- n

about what he said which was he suffered. congress, serving as secretary of state during the louisiana purchase and the first president to take the nation to war under the constitution and disabilityribed the he did not lead to stand in his way. that made me admire him more. >> you are back on enemy territory. [laughter] thisr isaacson e-mailed me . this fantastic response. you take a series all full lessons in american history, how did it go? >> it is an interesting idea. the academy -- [shouting] >> as they are fine.

>> i wondered why the line was so long. [laughter] [applause] i worry about education. it has always been a concern of mine. cannes academy is online and you can find it on youtube. they have people giving lessons advancedthing from calculus to the constitution. i was happy to participate. >> a one more on james madison. >> i cannot believe we are donating all of this time. >> never saw crossfire. my favorite sentence is over the course of a long life, john madison -- james madison learned .

what we think of the dick cheney? politician, --d , one of then things, i am not going to answer your question. one of the things that strikes me of how current madison is and how current the constitution is wasthe founders are, there a recent supreme court decision about whether the police should be able to search your cell phones if they stopped you for a traffic violation. think about this. this is something they could not have imagined. cars? cell phones? the decision was made on the basis of the constitution. ands from the constitution the justices decided it'd did. i like to think even though our world is very different and in some ways our politics are different, the founders would

have a deep and penetrating understanding of what we are about. started, as part of justunilateral, you started the alliance for strong america. you and your father co-authored 2 recent pieces. one and the wall street journal. you do not need to write in the article. you said rarely has a u.s. president been so wrong about so much at the expense of so many. as you know, maybe action was people saying, takes one to know one including you sitting next to your father having megan kelly on fox, really let into y'all. called hert he reagan at one point. >> i was a couple of things. i cannot -- you cannot say that

as the main reaction it depends on whether it is the mainstream media. you aree are wonder why lecturing us on iraq. >> they need to read the weekly standard article. it is not about lecturing about about saying why are we where we are today? as we sit here, there is completely agreement or as a much asked is -- as is when 2009,agreement when barack obama took over, iraq was stable. and joe bidenama said iraq was in good shape and it was the rich -- the withdrawal of american troops which the administration is trying to blame it george bush and dick cheney for which we know is not the case. we walked a ways and we are seeing the rise of the most dangerous threat to our