[video clip] >> obviously, we hope we can get a sustainable quite as soon as possible. adopt an agreement that has no conditions, except thatdress -- a cease-fire addresses all underlying issues, security for israel, which means miller to rising -- militarizing gaza. >> you can to the rest of this conversation online at c-span.org. live now is the u.s. house is gaveling in for legislative business. the speaker pro tempore: the house will be in order. the prayer will be offered by our chaplain, father conroy. chaplain conroy: let us pray. dear god, we give you thanks for giving us another day. as we begin the final week before the august recess, we give you thanks as well for the

recent progress -- progress made over the weekend and ask your blessing on the members of the people's house in completing their work on the important legislation that demands their attention. may good will and common love for our nation and its people abound in this assembly. bless the work of the members, their staff, and all who labor to complete the unfinished work at hand. as always, they all ma is done today and for the rest of this week, be for your greater honor and glory, amen. the speaker pro tempore: the chair has examined the journal of the last day's proceedings and announces to the house his approval thereof. pursuant to clause 1 of rule 1, the journal stands approve the pledge of allegiance will be led bier the gentleman from tennessee, mr. cohen. mr. cohen: will members and

those in the gallery join us in the pledge. i pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america and to the republic for which it stands, one nation, under god, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. the speaker pro tempore: the chair will entertain requests for one-minute speeches. for what purpose does the gentleman from virginia seek recognition? the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> the picture on the front page of this morning's "new york times" is about the latest deadly outbreak of ebola in africa. this horrible disease knows no borders and has already claimed the lives of 660 people in four countries since first detected in march. mr. wolf: the white house needs to pull together the c.d.c., n.i.h., state department, usaid and the world health organization and other western governments and stave off this

outbreak before it spreads further. i'm concerned there's not a sufficient plan in place either in africa or in the event it spreads to the u.s. we live in a global world. we need a clear plan and strong leadership now. we cannot wait until a case shows up in the united states. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from tennessee seek recognition? the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. cohen: thank you, mr. speaker. sunday's "new york times" editorial page, the entire page, a very unusual circumstance, dedicated to ending our crazy and unsuccessful and expensive war on marijuana. emphasizing that the war on marijuana costs us much money in prosecuting and ruins peoples' lives. it costs us more than it protects. it has a disparate impact on african-americans and minorities as they are much more likely to

be arrested have a scarlet m on their chest for the rest of their life, denying them public housing, scholarships and often jobs. it's time we left the situation to the states like we did with alcohol, the last prohibition we had in this country and at the he -- and let the states make this decision as colorado and washington have, the laboratories of democracy. let's make sense of our drug policies and drug laws, not have marijuana and heroin in the same class. thank you, mr. speaker and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from texas seek recognition? without objection, the gentleman s recognized for one minute. mr. burgess: thank you, mr. speaker. as everyone knows, there's a crisis on the texas border. what is the proximate cause of that crisis? the president's decision to defer adjudication for childhood approval -- arrivalles a little over two years ago. when the president issued his

memorandum stating that deferred adjudication was now possible, the flood gates opened. to make that call was irirresponsible but once again we hear evidence this weekend that the president is again thinking of overstepping his authority. mr. speaker, this would only throw gasoline on the fear. we need legislation that will allow for more sensible solutions to be put in place. the executive overreach effectively calls for no holds barred at the border and has caused great strain on our system. no one by the president has the power to remedy this situation by issuing the order -- this situation. by issuing the order two years ago, the president opened the flood gates. it's up to him to staunch the bleeding. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from oregon seek recognition? the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> the end of this week begins the august recess or district work period, some of us will go home working, and i'm going home to a state that's on fire.

mr. defazio: we have four major fires and many dozens of other fires burning in oregon, washington, california, nevada utah, the forest service, the b.l.m., have about exhausted their budget for fighting fires, they can't stop fighting fires, so they'll have to gut their other budgets, including budgets that would mitigate future fire risks. they'll also cut recreation and other things people really care about. congress has not seen fit to give them adequate money. there's a bipartisan, bicameral proposal supported by the president, that's about the rarest thing in washington, d.c. these days, to give the forest service and b.l.m. the tools they need, an adequate budget and for these extreme fire the ones that cost 30% of emergencies, treat them like emergencies, like floods, hirnings, or tornadoes. what have the republican dons with -- done with this? nothing. not one mention, except in the

ryan budget that said he doesn't support that approach. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from texas seek recognition? without objection the gentleman s recognized for one minute. mr. smith: it's not too late to do the right thing, and that is hold the president accountable -- responsible for his immigration policies. his ignoring immigration laws and weakening immigration laws to exec -- through execive orders has caused the border crisis. it's encouraged tens of thousands of illegal immigrants to undertake a dangerous journey north. the burden rests on the president to enforce immigration laws. otherwise he, will continue to reap the whirlwind of displaced families and an unsecured border. to those who say we have to do something, the answer is yes. tell the president to uphold the constitution and faithfully execute the laws. the president doesn't need more

power he, doesn't need more money, he just needs to keep his oath of office. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlelady from texas seek recognition? without objection the gentlelady is recognized for one minute. ms. jackson lee: mr. speaker, let me welcome the african young leaders that are here from all over africa. they came because they view america as a working government, a government of democracy and collaboration and coalition system of i welcome them. but i also ask my colleagues to show them that government. and pass the emergency supplemental now. the issues at the border, the unaccompanied children are not the fault of president obama or any of us who believe in immigration reform. they're the fault of people fleeing violence, prepared to flee from losing their lives. just like the unfortunate circumstances in nigeria where

boko haram is terrorizing people, people are fleeing for their lives. boko haram needs to be addressed because they just kidnapped the vice minister's wife in cameroon. and as well, we need to be table to -- need to be able to bring about some solution to the devastation of ebola in liberia. there are many issues. we should not go home. we should address them. we need to get to work and do what is right by the people of the world and the american people. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady's time has expired. pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20, the chair will postpone further proceedings today on motions to suspend the rules on which a recorded vote or the yeas and nays are ordered or on which the vote incurs objection under clause 6 of rule 20. record votes on postponed questions will be taken later. for what purpose does the gentleman from pennsylvania seek recognition?

>> i move to suspend the rules and the bill h.r. 44 6. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the bill. e clerk: a bill to allow solicitations for passenger air and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from pennsylvania, mr. shuster and the gentleman from oregon, mr. defazio, each will control 20 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from pennsylvania. mr. shuster: i ask unanimous consent that all members have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous materials for the record on h.r. 4156. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. shuster: i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognize. mr. shuster: i rise in support of h.r. 4156. let me begin by thanking my colleagues on the democrat side of the aisle for their help and support on this bill. congressman defazio, rahall,

congressman rick larsen and on the republican side i'd like to thank congressman lobiondo and congressman griggs for their help and bipartisan crfting of -- crafting of this bill. a special thanks to congressman tom graves who in the 112th congress introduced similar legislation he reached out to us early in the process and been a true leader in helping taos craft and move this legislation forward, helping us provide transparency to the flying public. i ask unanimous consent to enter into the record letters, including from the airline pilots association, a letter from the teamsters, a letter for airlines for america that represents the entire airline industry and a coalition which has included in it flight attendants, machinists and other. a broad spectrum of support on business and labor that supports h.r. 4156. i ask unanimous consent to put

those letters into the record. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. shuster: h.r. 4156, the transparent airfares act is a commonsense, bipartisan bill that provides airfare transpair en-- transparency to the flying public. in 2012, the department of trps t in place a rule to require -- ines -- airline prices require airlines and travel agents to bury government taxes and fees in the fare. he rule states that it's not unfair to show the beas fare as long as the fees are clearly exposed in the solicitation. that will allow airlines and travel agents to display the

cost in a transparent way, in order to allow customers to see the base airfare and government taxes and fees. right now, airlines and travel agencies are required to advertise a $279 ticket at $311. it's only fair that consumers know what they're paying for. i urge my colleagues to support this bill. with that, i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from oregon is recognized. mr. defazio: mr. speaker, i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. defazio: bipartisan, the so-called bipartisan budget act of 2013, which i oppose for many reasons, but buried deep within it, they were sitting down, crunching numbers, they had the ryan-murray budget deal and they had to meet certain targets. they were short. can't raise taxes around here. well, yeah, maybe you kind of

can. things that are taxes that don't look like taxes. so the deal that was cut was a 125% increase in the t.s.a. passenger security fee. now many americans probably wouldn't object too much to a passenger security fee increase if they thought it was going to enhance passenger security, especially with better through put for the long lines at the airports. but no, that's not where the money is going. it's just going somewhere in the federal treasury, maybe it will help reduce the deficit, maybe it will be spent on something else, no one knows. but airline passengers will pay it. a flight from ewe never-before-seen so san francisco used to be $2.50, the tax will now be $5.60. that's a pretty steep increase. and that's what really drove me to support this legislation. i'm tired of, you know, i'm happy to talk about increased taxes and have an upfront debate

about it, where it's needed. and where it needs to be reformed. but these invisible things like this, where some back room deal between a senior house republican and a democrat in the senate, where they just stick it on to airline passengers, that's -- that shouldn't happen. it can happen in part because nobody knows. they weren't watching the debate. it was buried in the bill. and they don't see it in the required full fare advertising. there's just one big number. where does all that money go? guess what. a lot of it goes to the government and as of this week, on a one-way flight to san francisco, another $3.10. will go to the government. so i think if we had good disclosure of the tax part, then, you know, it wouldn't be as easy for some of my colleagues to sneak that stuff flu. secondly, you know, the -- we're kind of looking at the nanny state here. you know what the current rule

is? the airlines can advertise the taxes at the -- after the full fare, the aggregate fare, but it has to be in smaller print. it has to be in smaller print. i mean, talk about the i have trouble with small print and a lot of people do, too. so they will be squinting to read the number. and third, why airlines? why did they go after the aviation industry? there a lot of complaints? no, there weren't. in may, 2011, there were four complaints, four, about fare advertising out of 1,62 complaints. if they wanted the f.a.a. to focus on things, look at customer service, baggage, boarding problems, refunds, et

cetera, et cetera, et cetera. so the f.a.a. somehow went out in search of a problem that didn't exist. but guess what? did they fix the problem, did we go from four complaints to zero? oops. no. actually, may, 2014 with the new full fare advertising rule with the tiny print, they had 12 complaints. complaints are up 300%. i wonder what that's about. i would say this was a nanny state rule in search of a problem that didn't exist that may have created a problem that does exist. there are a whole issues of price sensitivity and other things. so it is detrimental to the industry. t's confusing and deceptive. in march, i was going to hike the grand canyon and rent a car. i didn't want to pay a lot for a

rental car that was going to sit for seven days. got a car for 19 bucks a day. wahoo, pretty good. the next page is going to tell me what i'm going to pay. any informed consumer knows that. you have to click and agree at the end. you are going to see the whole thing. same thing with airline tickets. you will see first what the airline is charging you, next, you will see what the government is charging you and then you'll see what you'll pay, and that's just like i paid for this rental car, just like a hotel room, just like for cruises and everything else. i don't want to give anybody down at.or any other jurisdictions in those areas. maybe we you in a nanny state because we don't have one for ental cars or cruises.

consumers are pretty smart. we aren't concealing anything here and help me prevent people sticking fees on to airline passengers that have nothing to do with aviation in secret budget deals. i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from pennsylvania is recognized. mr. shuster: i thank the gentleman for enlightening those facts that i'm not aware of, complaints going up 300% in the new law, quite shocking, but i do agree with the gentleman completely on his argument that there needs to be transparency. it is not fair and not right that the government can hide those fees when there are other modes of transportation that have to put them out there in full, plain view of the traveling public and the gentleman is correct that the traveling public, the consumer, if they understand, they can look, read, add and subtract. so i think this is a fair and prudent piece of legislation that's going to make sure it's

transparent for the trfling public and i thank the gentleman from oregon for being a big supporter on this as well as the ranking member of this subcommittee on aviation, mr. larsen and full committee ranking member, mr. rahall and mr. lobiondo, the chairman of the subcommittee and tom graves who has been effective in working with us to put forth this bill that is bipartisan today. with that, i reserve -- did the gentleman have any other speakers? mr. defazio: i have no requests for time. apparently we have done something unusual around here, created something that doesn't seem to be controversial except among a few talking heads out there. mr. shuster: i reserve. mr. defazio: i would be happy to yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from pennsylvania is recognized. mr. shuster: i thank the gentleman for working with me and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the question is will the house suspend the rules and pass the

bill h.r. 4156. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair 2/3 being in the affirmative, the rules are suspended, the bill is passed and without objection, the motion to reconsider is laid n the table. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from pennsylvania seek recognition? mr. shuster: i move to suspend the rules and pass the bill h.r. 4838. the clerk: h.r. 4838 a bill to redesignate the railroad station located at 2955 market street in philadelphia, pennsylvania, commonly known as 30th street administration as the william h.

gray iii 30th street station. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule the gentleman from pennsylvania and the gentleman from oregon each will control 20 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from pennsylvania. the gentlewoman from florida, ms. brown will control 20 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from pennsylvania. mr. shuster: i ask unanimous consent that all members have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous materials on h.r. 4838. the speaker pro tempore: mr. shuster: i yield myself such time as i may consume. i rise in support of h.r. 4838 and i'm honored to rise in which of h.r. 4838 renames the amtrak station to william h. gray iii. i'm proud to have known mr. gray.

mr. gray lay a life of service in his church and to the 2nd district of pennsylvania, to the education community and to america. representative gray served for six terms and first african-american house budget committee chairman and first african-american house majority whip. he also helped provide federal resources for the renovation of the 30th street station and so it is only appropriate today that we have a bill on the floor that would rename the 30th station for him. as i understand, this will have no cost to the taxpayers but a station that i probably use the 30th street station more than any other station traveling from union station to philadelphia or from traveling to from the harrisburg terminal to philadelphia, again, it's a beautiful building and with the renaming of it, it is very appropriate that we rename it for william gray. i urge the support of h.r. 4838

and i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentlelady from florida is recognized. plounploun i yield myself such -- >> i rise today in strong support of h.r. 4838 which designates amtrak's 30th street station in philadelphia, pennsylvania, as the william h. gray iii 30th street station. for those who did not know him, bill gray was a tireless advocate for both the people of the 2nd district of philadelphia and amtrak. he was first elected to the u.s. house of representatives in 1978 and served with distinction until 1991, when he went on to serve as president of the united negro college fund before funding gray global advisory. during his tenure in the house, bill gray served as the first

african-american to chair the budget committee and the first to serve as the majority whip from 1989 to 1991. his role on the budget committee and later the appropriation committee and helped boost federal spending on public housing and revitalize the amtrak 30th street station of the business intercity passenger rail system in the united states. want to thank representative fattah for introducing this legislation recognizing mr. there accomplishment and was the joseph biden railroad station. amtrak was able to accomplish this without any disruption to operations, including ticketting and reservation systems, training schedule and we expect

amtrak will carry this renaming in the same manner. again, i want to congratulate and thank congressman fattah for honoring the legend of bill gray's strong leadership and steadfast support of amtrak. i urge my colleagues to support this bill and i reserve the balance. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady reserves. mr. shuster: our side has no more speakers. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentlelady from florida is recognized. >> i yield to congressman fattah. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. fattah: i thank the gentlelady and the chairman of the transportation and infrastructure committee. we had as an appropriator, we were going to proceed in an appropriations bill with this naming, but after consulting with the chairman, he felt that it was important that we proceed under regular order and that this was important enough that we have an actual piece of

legislation and he got it through this process and i thank the chairman for his advice on the matter and also, we were able to round up every single member of the federal delegation from our state who were enthusiastic in their support for this and our co-sponsors and our two united states senators have introduced a companion bill in the senate, senator toomey and senator casey. and we thank them for their support. as i rise today, bill gray served for 12 years, but as budget committee chair and asthma the gentlewoman reserves the balance of her time. whip, he was an accomplished lawmaker and leader in a bipartisan way. he helped to lead the budget negotiations with the -- president reagan's administration, which had first sought to eliminate amtrak, but n the conclusion, it was the

secretary who said it was bill gray's leadership that allows for necessary cuts to be made in other areas of the budget, but for amtrak to continue to receive the necessary support so it could be a vital part of our transportation infrastructure. and he also, as the chairman has indicated, directly impacted the station in philadelphia by arranging for some urban development action grants to be revitalization of the station at 30th street. have the betsy ross bridge, walt whitman bridge and to add the bill gray station at 0th street i think appropriately recognizes the historical contribution of a young man who was elected at 38, who served in this congress, provided extraordinary service. on to left here he went

lead the most aggressive effort for students to pursue colleges that were coming from underrepresented categories and served as a special envoy for president clinton in terms of interacting around challenges in haiti. and on a day where we have the young african-american summit here in washington, gray is most remembered in africa because he championed and passed successfully the divestiture of south africa, the legislature apart thideave ends and he created the african- development bank and i think it's a great thing that we have come to this moment and even though i have passed other important pieces of legislation,

i'm personally honored to be able to carry this bill. i thank the gentlelady from florida, the ranking member, and the chairman and all of the courtesies that have been extended. and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentlelady from florida. ms. brown: i have one quick question for you, were you aware, mr. fattah, that the gentleman was raised at florida a and m university where his father was the president? >> -- mr. fattah: i was aware he was raised by educateors and his father was the president of this great university in florida and appropriate that you would come in from florida to help move this bill forward. bill gray loved you and loved he state of florida and made your state his home. ms. brown: he was one of the

most outstanding preachers this country has ever known? mr. fattah: very few people who could claim the manner that he claimed as pastor of bright hope baptist church and he was an extraordinary figure and so many stories on a bipartisan basis that could be told. i think it's great that years, decades after his service and before a year has passed since his passing that the house is taking to honor his service. it honors us that he served here. thank you. ms. brown: i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady yields back. mr. shuster: i thank the gentlelady for yielding back so i get the final word. i don't know if you knew he was

a graduate of a school in pennsylvania. we like to take some credit. mr. fattah: i was aware of this us fromeminded those of pennsylvania that it wasn't penn that hether big schools graduated in. mr. shuster: i graduated from dickinson, also part of the m.a.c. conference. his family moved to philadelphia in 1949. his father took over the church of his grandfather, then bill gray led the church, third generation pastor at the bright hope baptist church in philadelphia. pointing that out, as some folks know my heritage, i spoke to my father this weekend and asked him what he remembered ability bill gray he said he was smart, he was tough, he was a true gentleman. he sent his best down here for

this debate also. finally, i want to thank amtrak for working with taos move this forward. the president of amtrak and his staff were very diligent, working hard to make sure this became a reality. i thank the gentleman for his kind words, being able to name it far pennsylvanian, someone with such tremendous background and experience, it's been an honor for me to take part in this i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: all time having expired, the question is, will the house suspend the rules and pass the bill h.r. 4838. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, 2/3 being in the affirmative, the rule -- the rules are suspended, the bill is passed and without objection the motion to reconsider is laid on the table.

the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from ohio seek recognition? >> i move to suspend the rules and pass h.r. 935. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title. the clerk: h.r. 935, a bill to amend the federal insecticide, if you thinkside and rodent-cide act and the water pollution control act to clarify congressional intent regarding the regulation of the use of pesticides in or near navigable waters and for other purposes.

the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from ohio, mr. gibbs, and the gentleman from oregon, mr. defazio, each control 20 minutes. mr. gibbs: i ask unanimous consent that all members have five legislative days to revise and extend their -- their remarks and include extraneous materials on h.r. 935. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. gibbs: i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. dibs: i rise in strong support of h.r. 935, the reducing regulatory burdens act of 2013. it clarifies the intent of how pesticides in or near navigable waters should be regulated. it is not the clean water act -- that governs the use of safety and pesticides in the united states. more recently, as we saw the number of lawsuits, the clean water act has been added as a

new and redundant layer over use of pesticides. h.r. 935 is aimed at reversing a decision in the sixth circuit court of appeals in the national cotton council vs. the e.p.a. which proposed limits on pesticide use. that violated a rule that codified e.p.a.'s long-standing interpretation that the application of pesticide for its intended purpose and in compliance with the requirements of the law was not a discharge of pollutant and therefore a permit is not required. in vacating the rule, the sixth circuit substitute judge made policy choices for reasonable agency interpretation of the law. in the process, the court undermined the traditional understanding of how the clean water act interacts with other environmental standards, statutes and judicialy -- judicially expanded the scope of the clean water act further in areas not intended by kuok.

as a result of the decision, e.p.a. has not been required to develop or impose the permitting process in the clean water act to permit pesticide use. e.p.a. estimates that about 5,000 pesticide users, including mosquito control districts, ranchers, scientists and even everyday citizens that perform some 5.6 million pesticide applications annually would be affected by the court's ruling this substantially increases the number of entities subject to permitting. federal and state agencies are expending vital funds to issue and maintain permits in a wide range of public and private pesticide users are facing increased financial and administrative burdens to comply with the new permitting process. despite what the fear mongers suggest, this comes with no additional environmental protection.

compliance costs and fears of potentially rues now legislation associated with complying with the new requirementers in use of pesticides are facing -- are forcing mosquito control and other pest control programs to reduce operations and redirect resources to comply with regulatory requirements. in many states, routine preventive programs have been reduced through the mpds requirements this most likely impact of the west nile virus in 2012 in response to west nile virus outbreaks, they had to declare public emergencies, resulting in pesticide use to control mosquitoes without the delay caused by the permitting process. t remains to be seen how the mosquito control will be affected this year. h.r. 935 will enable the communities to resume conducting

routine preventive mosquito control programs in the future. h.r. 935 exempts if the permitting process a discharge to waters of a pesticide authorized for sale, distribution or distribution with a pesticide used for its intended purpose and in compliance with the label requirements. the e.p.a. already protect this is ehuman health and the environment under this rule. when it reviews the safety of pesticides it determines whether or not to approve or not approve the pesticides for use and sets rules of use under the product label. h.r. 935 was drafted very narrowly to address the cotton council case and return it to the status quo before the court got involved. e.p.a. provided technical assistance in drafting this bill to achieve the objectives. over 150 organizations, representing a wild variety of public and private entities and thousands of stake holders

support a resolution to this issue. just to name a few of these organization the national association of state departments of agriculture, national water resources sork, the american farm bureau federation, the national farmers union, farm family alliance, national rural electric cooperative association, crop life america and responsible industry for a sound environment. i want to thank chairman shuster and ranking member rahall for tea the leadership of the committee as well as chairman lucas of the ag committee and ranking member peterson for their leadership. i urge members to support h.r. 935 and reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from oregon. mr. defazio: i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. defaws yoke spst it's groundhog day again here on the house of the floor -- on the floor of the house of representatives. much of that speech was read three years ago. there was a new rule, the uncertainty if this would be an

undue burden on individuals, in the end it isn't, on individual farmest, no, except the largest farms over 6,000 acres. or on forestry, and no it's not been a problem. i have a heavily forested state system of there was tremendous uncertainty. and the house republicans moved this legislation. of course it went nowhere in the senate. here we are three years later, we've been living around the permit and yen permit process and i'm going to look forward to hearing some very specific problems, denials or lit dwation from the other side. should've, e, would've stuff. the farm bureau support this is, that's great. the napo says sure, but it's not anything we have on our priority

list. but you know, here we are. now fires are burning in the west. we don't have time for a hearing or bill to get money to the forest service and the interior department but we do have time to do pretend legislation that isn't going anywhere in the senate again to deal with a problem that doesn't exist. why doesn't it exist? well, first off, all individuals and small applications by farmers are exempt under a permit. you follow the label, you're fine. you're -- no one can sue you. then you have, you're a bigger aply kator, you're like someone who is paid to apply herbside and pesticide, you have -- herbicide and pest site, you have to get a general permit. file it online. not too burdensome. most aply kators, i think, have access to a computer. is there an approval process? no. is there a waiting period in? no. you just file it. then you are exempt from litigation. if you follow the label.

so why would we have this then? because there have been a few instances of problems. and we want to be able to track where those problems originated system of if you have a general permit out there for an industrial application or a commercial application of a certain herbicide and it starts showing up down xtreme with dead fish, you know probably where it came from and can trace it back and you'll probably find out they violated the label. why did this all come about? well, far real reason. 92,000 seal heads were killed in southern oregon because an irrigation district chose to -- chose to use a powerful herbicide in its irrigation canal and didn't follow the label in terms of the waiting period for it to degrate. they ran the water through, killed 92 -- killed 9 ,000 fish. that's where it all started.

we're not saying they can't use it, they can't apply it. you know, they can. but we want to know where it's coming from. in that case it was easy to track back the trail of dead fish led back to the irrigation canal. in other cases of impaired waters, and i have a long list in my state and i'm sure there are many in other states, we're not sure how they got impaired or where they're being impaired and we'd have a better indication if we have this notice requirement. there'd be a lot of fear mongering here today, you won't be able to use stuff on your lawn. you'll be liable. it won't be available. not true. farmers won't be able apply their own herbicides and pesticides, not true. very large farms, commercial aply kators won't be able to use it, no, not true, but they'll have to put a notice online that they're using it. and they are supposed to follow the label. so i really find this, you know,

unfortunate that we're spending time on this instead of getting some additional allocation of funds to fight fires in the west. my state is burning up, washington state is burning up, california is burning up, other intermountain states are burning up. forest service is running out of money this week or next. and they will -- they've got all their -- they will gut their other budgets to pay for fighting fires because they can't stop fighting the fires. can't stop. but congress, you know, has a bipartisan, bicameral bill, agreed to by the president. there's nothing else like that in washington, d.c. the partisan activity, the conflict between the house and senate, here's a bill agreed to by democrats and republicans, 52 r's, 5 d's the bill, here's a bill pending in the house and senate, bicameral, also bipartisan on that side and it's supported by the president. but we can't find time to take action on that and get the forest service and b.l.m. money this week because we're doing stuff like this about pretend

problems that don't exist and scaring people who use these products legitimately. it's a sad waste of our time. i reserve the balance of my time. . the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from oklahoma is recognized for three minutes. mr. lucas: i rise in support of this legislation and ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. lucas: mr. speaker, this piece of legislation before us today is very familiar to many of us. as many of you will remember we stood here three years ago voting on this same bill text. that bill h.r. 872, was passed by this body with overwhelming demonstration of bipartisan support. the legislation was the product of a collaborative work between two house committees and technical assistance of the obama administration's environmental protection agency. this is the way legislation should be handled and i was proud of our efforts in the

house. to refresh your memory, this problem stems from an uninformed court decision in the sixth circuit court of appeals. this decision invalidated a 2006 e.p.a. regulation that are in compliance with the federal insecticide act from having to also comply with the costly and duplicative permitting process under the clean water act. the effort to these -- the effect to these same products regulated through the clean water act is unnecessary, costly and undermines public health. it amounts to duplication of costs to public agencies and double their legal jeopardy. additionally, more than 40 states have endured increased financial burdens in order to comply with the new permitting

requirement process during the time when many states are being forced to make difficult budget decisions. should vector agencies cease control, it will expose a vast new unprotected population to mosquitoes and carrying diseases such as west nile. some will argue that costs have been small. as it stands, some people believe that millions of dollars to be a small amount, but i think most of our constituents would disagree. what nobody can document and let's think about this, what no one can document is a single benefit this burden has offered. in a time when our economy is struggling, regulatory burdens that add costs while providing no benefit, need to be eliminated. this is unnecessary, costly, duplicative permitting

requirement. it's a poster child for regulatory reform. and now, my friends, if you can only look at one thought, simply bare this in mind, this court ruling requiring the double permitting process, you're causing states to waste money. they don't have the money to waste. i encourage my colleagues to support the legislation and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from oregon. mr. defazio: i yield to the gentlelady from connecticut such time as she may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized. >> i rise today in opposition to h.r. 935 and seek permission to revise and extend my remarks. ms. esty: when the house considered this bill in the 112th congress before i was elected to serve here, proponents like mr. gibbs argued that unless congress acted, the

process for getting a general permit under the clean water act would cause agriculture, forestry and other activities to grind to a halt. however, after almost three years of implementation, i'm confused about the need for this bill. the sky has not fallen, farmers and forestry operators have had successful growing seasons and public officials have addressed multiple threats of mosquito-borne illness while at the same time complying with the sensible requirements of the lean water act and the federal act. i say sensible because as we should clearly understand the intended focus of the clean water act. fifra is intended to address pesticides on a national scale, preventing unreasonable adverse

effects on human health and the environment through uniform libbles indicating approved uses and restrictions. however, the clean water act is focused on restoring and maintaining the integrity of the nation's waters with a focus on the protection of local water quality. it is simply incorrect to say at applying a fifra-approved pesticide is a surrogate for protecting local water quality. any farmer knows, complying is as applying the pesticide in accordance with its label. farmers don't have to lool at the impact on local water quality. if fifra is an adequate substitute to the clean water act permitting requirement, why is it pesticides show up from both ground and surface waters?

if flying a an approved pesticide is protected, then why is it that so many states continue to report significant numbers of pesticide-impaired waters? i urge my colleagues to note that according to a 2006 study of u.s. geological survey, at least one pesticide was detected in waters from all streams tested throughout the nation. let me repeat that. pesticides were detected in every single stream tested by he u.s. -- usgs. some agencies have identified surface waters that are contaminated by pesticides. states have identified 16,800 les of river and streams and 372,acres of lakes that are currently impaired or threatened by pesticides, meaning that that

particular water body cannot or should not be used as a source of drinking water and the appropriate for fish propagation or recreation. it is telling that states continue to identify waters that remain impaired by pesticides, pesticides that have been banned by this country for decade. some have questioned the clean water act with the application of pesticides, however, many of the benefits are so obvious that perhaps they have overlooked them. the clean water act and not fifra requires plaketors to minimize pesticide discharge through pesticide measures. it is the clean water act that requires pesticide plaketor to monitor and report any adverse incidents that results from spraying. monitoring for large fish kills or wildlife kills as my

colleague from oregon has noted would be an agreed-upon benefit and it is the clean water act that requires pesticide aply indicators to keep records where they are being applied throughout the nation. if data is showing that a local water body is contaminated i would think our constituents would want to quickly identify the likely source of the pesticide that is causing the impairment. finally and perhaps most important, i'm unaware of any specific example where the current clean water act requirements have prevented a esticide applicator from performing his or her services. the clean water act is not being used to ban the use of pesticides. let's summarize a few points. the clean water act provides a valuable service by ensuring an appropriate amount of pesticides

are being applied at appropriate times and pesticides are not having an adverse impact on human health or the envirlte. second and to the best of my knowledge, the pesticide general permit has not impeded them from services both agricultural and public health communities. most applications are automatically covered under the pesticide general permit either by no action or by the filing of the electronic notice of intent. federal and state data make it clear that pesticides alone as was the case for many years was insufficient to protect bodies of water throughout the united states from being contaminated by pesticides. if we care about water quality, we need to do more. so, mr. speaker, i have to question what this legislation is really trying to accomplish. is it really about the so-called regulatory burden of applying for clean water act permits?

as we noted earlier in the majority of cases, small stale use of pesticide is automatically covered by the clean water act under the general permit provide they apply them in a commonsense manner. is it about the threat of lawsuits? if they are applying it in compliance with the permit, they are immune from lawsuits under the clean water act. is it about compliance costs? no evidence in the hearing or the record to demonstrate that the clean water act is increasing the cost to the average person. the reality there is no substantive reason why this legislation is necessary except to limit the scope of the clean water act protections from pesticide pollution that is impairing water quality across the nation. i urge a no vote on h.r. 935 and i yield back to the gentleman from oregon. the speaker pro tempore: the

gentleman from ohio. mr. gibbs: may i inquire how much time? the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from ohio has 12 minutes. the gentleman from oregon has 7 1/2 minutes. mr. gibbs: i would like to talk about some of the questions that were raised by my good friend from connecticut. 2012, american mosquito control association polled their members and that a lot of the public entities in the control districts for mosquitoes were holding off on the control programs and we had a number of west nile outbreaks in 2012. seasonly, we don't have the pressure in 2013. we'll see what happens in 2014. because of the additional permitting and the costs and time, they didn't -- a lot of districts did not do their

preventive control and caused the outbreak of mosquitoes more severe than it would have been and that was from the american mosquito control association. with regard to the pesticide application in the agricultural sector, most states have required them to have training and they know they have to abide by the label and if they don't, they could use their license and i would also raise the question if you don't follow the label if you are certified, you might not follow the permit requirements either under the clean water act. so it all comes down to additional costs and delays and we all know that you don't get a permit just overnight. the cost factor is a major issue. another issue that needs to be talked a little bit about is why do we find in some water bodies pesticide residue? and the main reason we do is

because we have something called legacy and fl pesticides used long ago and in a lot of cases that aren't on the market or if they are, they aren't being used by the industry, because the agriculture industry has done a wonderful job of research and development in developing new pesticide that are biodegradeable and we have come a long ways. as a farmer, i know that because i experience every growing season in the new technologies in the pesticides that we have available to us. we need to address that legacy issue and separate that out what is happening in these water bodies. and lots of times, too, in some of the data, the data is old from the united states geological service and things have changed. some of the testing that has been done, some of the levels

are well below what the human health benchmark standards are. i think there is a scare tactic out there. but we got to make sure that we are applying these pesticides under label, which i think the industry is working well, because as a farmer, we drink the water first that comes through our wells and also the streams through our property. where we live around it. we want to make sure that water's clean. so we need to assess this data things to histicated handle that and all this does is add time and costs and more head aches for our mosquito control districts, farmers and others. i want to make that point clear that we got to have these pesticides and do it in a safe way in improving the pesticide use. this bill is necessary to turn a

very ill-advised court decision. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from oregon. mr. the depaws -- mr. defazio: i ask the gentleman how many speakers he has left? mr. gibbs: i think zero. mr. defaws yoke: i tried to get a volunteer on this side, but he won't volunteer. so we have zero. in conclusion, i think we've heard arguments on both sides, i am convinced more by the arguments i've heard on our side, i don't believe it's an live urden on states, i in a mosquito control dwrict they had concerns, last year they went ahead with their general program, this year they're going ahead with their general permit which they filed online so i don't see where the big deal is, unless we have states that don't own computers

or whatever. i can't figure out where the millions of dollars comes from. so i don't believe we created an egregious problem and given some of the past problems and the number of impaired waterways in my state, we just want to know where the stuff is being applied, we certainly want to be certain it's applied a-- applied according to the label but if it's not, then we have some capability of tracing it back and finding the responsibility -- respondable party and obed preventing future problems and potentially penalizing those people. with that, i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from ohio. mr. gibbs: i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. gibbs: that raises the question, if it's going to good the last three years and there's no need to pass the bill, why have the american mosquito control association think this

bill is needed? american farm bureau, farmer's union, crop life america, those are -- especially crop life america, those are our experts out there that want to make sure the pesticide use is under label and we're protecting the environment and not endangering the environment. so i guess i would take issue with the comment that this legislation isn't needed because it's gone so great the last three years. we're finding out maybe it isn't going some great. i think that's rhetoric from the other side. we know in 2012 that a lot of our mosquito control districts did not initiate their preventive programs in the early spring and i know some of them had to declare an emergency and the irony of this is, when you declare an emergency, you do aerial spraying and everything else and not have to get permit at all. the environment is more at risk. if they'd done the preventive treatment, they might not have had to do aerial spray. i know at least one major

metropolitan area that had to do that. so these organizations think this is important. things aren't going so well. and we are -- we have a duplication to do more permitting, more red tape, more headaches and add the cost. so i strongly support this bill legislation. last congress, i think this bill had 294 yay votes, went over to the senate, unfortunately, the majority leader over there wouldn't take it up. it was put in the farm bill and there was pressure from one or two senators to take it out. i think it would have passed strongly in the senate if we'd been able to have the vote. with that, mr. speaker, i yield back my time and i urge a yes vote on 935. the speaker pro tempore: the question is will the howls suspend the rules and pass the bill h.r. 935? those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, 2/3 being in the affirmative -- the gentleman from oregon. mr. defazio: i ask for the yeas and nays.

the speaker pro tempore: yeas and nays are requested. those in support of the yeas and nays will rise. a sufficient number having risen, the yeas and nays are ordered. further proceedings on this measure will be postponed. the chair lays before the house enrolled bills. the clerk: senate 517, an act to permit consumer choice and wireless competition by permitting consumers to unlock wireless mobile devices and for ther purposes. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from arizona seek recognition? >> i move that the house suspend the rules and pass h.j.res. 105, conferring honorary citizenship --

the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title. the speaker pro tempore: house joint resolution 105, conferring honorary citizenship on bernardo degalvez y madrid, vis count of galveston and gount of gal vezz. the speaker pro tempore: the chair recognizes the gentleman from arizona. all anks: i ask that members have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. franks: i yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from florida. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. miller: i appreciate my friend, mr. franks, for yielding. h.j.res. 105 would confer

honorary citizenship on general galvez. he was a true friend to our country who play and integral role in playing -- in eskewering the independence of this nation. as governor of spanish louisiana he, provided funds and ammunition and provided military intelligence to the american commanders. after spain's entry into the war, general galvez recruited an army of american, spanish, and french troop and set about a multiyear campaign that decimated british forces all along the gulf coast. general galvez led successful campaigns in louisiana in mississippi, and alabama before embarking on his seminal victory at the siege of pensacola where he captured the capital of british west florida after a bloody, two-month-long battle in which we was he was wounded by

gunfire. his victory left the brit wish no naval forces or bases along the gulf coast and prevented british troops and supplies from reaching the battles along the eastern seabord. general galvez's efforts to assist the formation of our country were recognized by president george washington, president john adams, and by the united states continental congress. president washington cited general galvez's efforts as a deciding fact yacht in the outcome of the war. honorary citizenship is rare. extraordinary recognition granted to foreigners who rendered great service to the yeats of america. only seven individuals have been granted on hair -- honorary citizenship, including two volutionary war hero the marquis de lafayette and general pascon.

when our country declared independence, they knew they were going up against programs the -- perhaps the most preeminent power. they did it because they believed in liberty and freedom but they needed support of the great men like the marquis de pulaski and bernardo degalvez. i want to thank our majority leader for bringing this bill to the floor. i encourage my colleagues to support this measure to recognize general galvez's immense contribution to his -- to the history of our country by granting him honorary american citizenship. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from virginia.

>> i rise in support of h.j.res. 105, house joint resolution 105 proclaims bernardo de galvez to be an hon mare member of the -- an honorary united states citizen. mr. scott: though he was born in spain he, led masterful military campaigns against the british and played a crucial role in securing land and sea ports on behalf of american colonists he helped negotiate terms of the treaty that ened the american revolution and secured america's independence from british rule. this is the only -- this is only the eighth time the congress has bestowed posthumous citizenship, most recently in 2009 when we honored the polish military officer who like general galvez fought alongside american colonists in the revolutionary war. this is reserved for the most highly deserving individual bus it is purely symbolic and does

not have any substantive effect and has no effect on the immigration status of surviving family members. he played an important role in the american revolution. the time has come for congress to recognize him by granting him posthumous citizenship. i urge my colleagues to support the resolution and yield ba. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from arizona. mr. franks: i thank the gentleman for his support and i now yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. franks: h.j.res. 105 confers honorary united states de enship upon bernardo galvez y madrid. in recognition of his contributions to and sacrifices for the cause of american independence. i want to commend again our colleague jeff miller for introducing this legislation and certainly urge my colleagues to support it. american citizenship, mr. speaker, is the highest honor that our country can confer upon

a person who is a citizen of another land. the granting of honorary citizenship is a symbolic gesture that welcomes the recipient into our national family. honorary citizenship is and should always be an extraordinary honor, not lightly conferred. congress has granted honorary citizenship to only six occasions in the past, upon only seven individuals. the seven recipients haven't pulaski, the marquis de lafayette, mother theresa, lliam and hanna penn, raul wallenberg, and winston churchill. the last two recipients, pulaski and the marquis de lafayette both played crucial roles in the united states' victory in our revolutionary war. general galvez's contributions to the war effort compare favorably with those of pulaski and the marquis de lafayette.

h.j.res. 105 says that galvez provided supplies, intelligence and effort to the war effort, end quote. due to the blockade of sea ports, galvez secretly coordinated smuggling operations and efforts to clear the mississippi of british ships helped ensure that washington's -- washington's army received provisions. h.j.res. 105 states that galvez, quote, recruited an army of 75,000 men and led the effort to help the colonists. he and his troops seized the port of new orleans and defeated the british in several cities. commentators and historians have uniformly lauded general galvez's bravery, tenacity and

tactical military skill in rapidly assembling and leading a diverse, multiethnic unit. his troops were victorious in every battle into which he led them. he led the successful two-month siege at pensacola, florida where his troops captured the capital of british west florida and left the british with no naval bases in the gulf of mexico. the historical narrative surrounding gal vess to -- galvez's actions leding up to and into the battle of pensacola, florida, head to the object -- contributed to the objective of pinning down british fores and driving them from the gulf of mexico. there's no question that keeping the british occupied on a second front during the war was crucial to the success of general washington's campaign. some historians have noted that the length and timing of the battle of pensacola, in particular, impacted the numb of forces and ships the british could commit to the battle of

yorktown, which was the final campaign of the revolutionary war. finally, h.j.res. 105 states that galvez's victories against the british were recognized by george washington as a deciding fact yacht -- factor in the outcome of the revolutionary war. i believe that bernardo de galvez y madrid deserves honorary citizenship. i urge my colleagues to support this bill and reserve my time. the speaker pro tempore: does the gentleman yields back. mr. franks: i yold back the balance of mur time. the speaker pro tempore: the question is, will the house suspend the rules and pass house joint resolution 105? those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair 2/3 being in the afirmtive, the rules are suspended, the joint resolution is passed and without objection the motion to reconsider is laid on the table. . for what purpose does the gentleman from arizona seek recognition? mr. franks: mr. speaker, i now

move that the house suspend the rules and pass s. 1799, the victims of child abuse act, re-authorization act of 2013. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: senate 1799, an act to re-authorize subtitle a of the victims of child abuse act of 1990. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from arizona, mr. franks, and the gentleman from virginia, mr. scott, each will control 20 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from arizona. mr. franks: mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days to revise and and their remarks include extraneous materials on s. 1799, currently under consideration. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. franks: now, mr. speaker, i'd yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. franks: mr. speaker, i rise today to speak in favor of s. 1799, the victims of child abuse act re-authorization act of 2013. this bill, introduced by

senators coons and blunt, re-authorizes the funding streams for child abuse advocacy centers which are the first line of providers for victims of child abuse, sexual crimes. there are over 750 child advocacy centers in all 50 states and the district of columbia and four regional centers that provide training and technical assistance to the centers. they are designed to limit additional trauma to victimized children by bringing all of the necessary law enforcement and encies and service providers to sanging, safe place. depend pending on the case they can include child protection and social services, medical care and mental health services. in addition to limiting the trauma for the children, this is an efficient and effective approach to investigating child abuse cases. in 2013 alone, mr. speaker, over 294,000 children were

served at child advocacy centers and over 200,000 of those children were victims of sexual abuse. more than 1/3 of the victims seen at the center are under the age of 6 years old and 2/3 are under the age of 13. despite being unauthorized since 2005, the child advocacy center programs have received appropriations every year. s. 1799 re-authorizes the funding at its current authorization level and provides additional accountability measures to make sure that federal funds are spent appropriately. the house companion to this legislation was introduced by representative ted poe and was included in the justice for victims of trafficking act, which passed the judiciary committee and the house floor unanimously earlier this year. in addition to re-authorizing the child advocacy centers, s. 1799 clarifies that the f.b.i. for victim services under the crime victims funds may only be

used to directly benefit victims and not for administrative purposes. this provision was contained in the house bill, the justice for crimes victims act of 2014, which i introduced in march of this year. mr. speaker, the purpose of section 3 of this bipartisan legislation is simple. to reassert congress' control over the use of the crime victims fund which is so critical for crime victims. victims specialists, along with their supervisors, victim witness coordinators, should be improving services for the benefit of crime victims and not be diverted to other purposes. o quote jo ann gance cooney, cherishing children is the mark of a civilized society. s. 1799 will re-authorize an important tool in our ongoing fight against child abuse. i'd commend all of my colleagues to dedicated -- who

dedicated their evers to this legislation. -- efforts to this legislation. i ask that we pass this and i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from virginia is recognized. mr. scott: i i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. scott: i rise in support of s. 1799. this bill passed the senate last month and provides important services and funding to protect and heal the most vulnerable of all crime victims, our children. it will provide and improve resources available to assist children who are victims of crime during their participation in the federal criminal justice system. the child victims will be supported through this often lengthy and difficult process by designated victims coordinators, specialists and advocates. surplus funds in the victims fund will be used for a victim notification system which preserves and protects the victims and important steps during the criminal justice process. in addition to these services and programs, the bill also

authorizes appropriations for children's advocacy programs, development and implementation of multidisciplinary child abuse investigation and prosecution programs, grants to provide training and technical assistance to attorneys and others who are instrumental during the criminal prosecution of child abuse cases and state and federal courts. in these fiscally lean times, it's important to note that the bill authorizes the inspector general of the department of justice to audit grant recipients to prevent waste, fraud and abuse. it will -- that will also ensure that all of the funds are used to protect our most vulnerable people in the process and that is the crime victims. in closing, as we have repeatedly recognized, children are our most vulnerable in our society and warrant unique country. we need try and a -- to provide them with the

protections and resources they need even under the best circumstances. our responsibilities and moral imperative to act are at the apex when these children are victimized and at our mercy. i therefore urge my colleagues to support the bill and reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time is reserved. the gentleman from arizona. mr. franks: i'd also reserve, mr. chairman. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman continues to reserve. the gentleman from virginia. mr. scott: mr. speaker, i'd yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from california, mr. costa. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california is recognized. mr. costa: thank you very much, mr. speaker. i rise today in support of senate bill 1799, the victims of child abuse re-authorization act of 2013. this bill has been noted -- as been noted by the previous speakers is a senate companion of h.r. 3706, which i sponsored along with congressman ted poe and congressman fitzpatrick of

pennsylvania. congressman poe and i co-chair the child victims caucus. he wanted to be here today to express his deep support for this legislation. and as been noted, the children in our society are the most dear and precious to all of us and they're also the most vulnerable. as a society, therefore, we must do all we can to ensure to protect -- the protection of these children. tragically, physically or sexual abuse of a child is a horrific crime that touches, sadly, every community in america. in response to these unconscionable acts, congress passed the victims of child abuse act in 1990 to provide funding for a network of children's advocacy centers across the country that do great work. over 700 of them. these centers are essential tools to allow communities to care for our children when they

are harmed and delivered justice for the child abusers. children's advocacy centers are a unique model and focus on team work. they bring together law enforcement officials, prosecutors and child service professionals under one roof, to do what is best for the child. the community action partnership of madera county in my district is an accredited child advocacy center in the heart of the san joaquin valley. i have visited with them. i have met with those who work there together to help our children. i know of the good work they do. the madera community action partnership or madera cap, as they like to refer to themselves, depends on funding from the victims of child abuse act to create for victims and bring justice to the perpetrators of these heinous crimes. however, this important law

expired in 2005, and the president has eliminated or reduced funding for these centers in the last three budgets. yet, congress on a bipartisan basis has chosen to continue to provide funding. that's why senator conns of delaware, senator blunt of missouri, congressman poe, congressman fitzpatrick and i introduced the legislation to re-authorize the victims of child abuse act and therefore protect these children's advocacy centers across the country. the bill includes strong accountability language to improve oversight of the program and ensures that the money from these crime victims' fund is spent only for the victim assistance purposes. the bill before us today once again is a product of a bipartisan, bicameral negotiation, and i thank my colleagues, again, senator coons and blunt and congressman

poe and fitzpatrick for their hard work and their staff on this bill. mr. speaker, finally i want to urge all of our colleagues to strongly support senate measure 1799. let's do the right thing by our nation's children and swiftly send this bill to the president's desk. and i thank congressman scott and i thank congressman franks for their time and their effort today and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from arizona. mr. franks: mr. speaker, i would just join with the gentleman in urging passage and yield back the balance of our time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from virginia. mr. scott: i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the question is will the house suspend the rules and pass senate 1799. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, 2/3 having responded in the affirmative, the rules are suspended, the bill is passed, and without objection the motion to reconsider is laid on the table.

the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from california seek recognition? >> mr. speaker, i move that the house suspend the rules and pass h.r. 1771, as amended. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: h.r. 1771, a bill to improve the enforcement of sanctions against the government of north korea and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from california, mr. royce, and the gentleman from virginia, mr. connolly, each will control 20 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from california. mr. royce: i ask unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and to include any extraneous materials in the record, mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. royce: i also ask unanimous

consent to place in the record the letters exchanged with the other committees of jurisdiction on this piece of legislation. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. mr. royce: thank you. thank you, mr. speaker. i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. royce: mr. speaker, north korea, which is one of the nuclear proliferators on this planet, having proliferated missiles to iran and having proliferated to syria, the construction some years ago of a site in order to create nuclear weapons, this particular regime remains today one of the most signal security threats that we face. and it's an enduring threat to us and our allies in northeast asia and it is an enduring threat, not just because of that proliferation.

but also because of the attitude of the regime there and frankly, america's policy over the last 25 years, whether we're talking about a republican administration or a democratic administration, has been a bipartisan failure for that whole period of time. this year marks the 20th anniversary of the clinton administration's agreed framer, the first in a long line of failed agreements where north korea holds out the promise of cooperation only to game the negotiations for more time and more incentives and using that opportunity to continue to expand its nuclear program. today we're no closer to the goal of disarming those nukes than we were in 1994. the only difference is there is a whole lot more of them, and meanwhile north korea continues to make progress on its nuclear weapons program, conducting three tests in recent years.

it has actively worked on intercontinental ballistic missile technology to deliver a three-stage icbm and to underscore the threats that we face, let us not forget that in 2007 a north korean-built nuclear reactor was destroyed in syria along the banks of the euphrates river. mr. speaker, we need a new approach, frankly, to north korea and it's time for congress to lead. recent events around the world underscore the foolishness of the inaction. we need a clear framework for sanctions to deprive kim jong-un of his ability to build nuclear weapons and repress and abuse the north korean people. you know, the way a regime treats its own people will tell you a lot in life about how they may end up treating their neighbors.

the enforcement act seeks to apply the same type of pressure the treasury department used back in 2005, when it caught the regime counterfeiting $100 bills. treasury at that time targeted the bank in macao that was complicit in counterfeiting with north korea. this action sent a ripple throughout the international financial system and it seriously hindered north korea's financing. this was one of the most effective steps in 20 years that we took against north korea. i can tell you some of the results because we talked with defectors afterwards about what they had seen in terms of the fact that production lines had closed, the regime could not pay their own generals and that is not a good position for dictate -- dictators to be in. unfortunately, though, the sanctions were liffletted by the state department in the naive hope that the north koreans

would negotiate away its nuclear program. it is time to open our eyes. this legislation enables our government to go after kim jong-un's is list act tiff to -- activities like we went after organized crime in our own country by interdicting shipments and stopping the flow of money, stopping the flow of currency he uses for his weapons program. these sanctions target north korea's money laundering, their counterfeiting, their narcotics trafficking organization and the only way to stop north korea is cutting off its access to this hard currency to stop kim jong-un to from being able to pay his generals or conduct research on nuclear weapons. critically, the north korean sanctions enforcement act also includes the bay -- imposing sanctions based on north korea's deplorable human rights abuses by directly targeting individuals in positions of

power, we will finally hold north korea responsible for the horture, the gulag the extrajudicial killings that were recently exposed by that high level u.n. inquiry. for far too long, the world has turned a blind eye to human rights abuses in north korea. by supporting this bill, we'll take a critical step toward stopping this type of abuse. this bipartisan piece of legislation, by the way, has over $140 co-sponsors. it's garnered the support of humanitarian groups around the world and i note that humanitarian aid is in no way affected by this legislation. again, humanitarian societies worldwide support this. and i urge my colleagues to support the bill. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from virginia. mr. scott: thank you, mr. speaker. i rise in strongest support of .r. --

mr. connolly: i rise in strongest support of h.r. 2013. i thank the distinguished chairman, we had a conversation several months ago where i encouraged we put this on the schedule in the house foreign affairs committee and he did so with alacrity. i appreciate his leadership this legislation, which i'm pleased to have co-sponsored, provides us with the opportunity to communicate that the house of representatives is resolved to ld the orwell -- orwellian north korean regime accountable for its brutality against its own people and the erratic and dangerous manner in which it conducts itself on the world stage. the bill imposes comprehensive sanctions on the north korean regimes and those in other countries who abet its arms struggling, weapons of mass destruction, and ballistic missile development, human

rights abuses and terrorism support. it opposes asset freezes and seizures and visa denials on persons who materially cricket their w.m.d.ute to development, their human rights abuses and support for terrorism. h r. 7871 require thinks state department to determine if north korea is engaged in money laundering and if so, it blocks from their banks. it requires a public report on north korean human rights violators. it call farce feasibility study providing north korean nationals with internet communications devices that can overcome the incredible censorship in that country. these sanctions are warranted. north korea is a reckless,

inter-- a reckless international actor that's amassed a litany of violations and abuses of international law that one would think belong in a fictional novel. it continues to develop nuclear weapons programs in defiance of the security council and worldwide condemnation. north korea supports the development of iranian missile technology and nuclear capabilities. --as and hezbollah designate designates as terrorist groups y the yeats government, have given support to the north korean regime. miss eel tests and launches are routinely flouted. it's clear a pattern of behavior has developed in north korea that should be concerning to all in the international community, not wrust this body. the u.s. will not and cannot

allow an authoritarian regime to operate with impunity and threaten our national security and that of our allies. the united states and the international community should not only address the aggression north korea has projected outward, the atrocities committed within the borders are within equal concern and deserve similar condemnation. the status of human rights seems o have regressed under kim jong-un if that's possible. a recreant united nations report accounts the horrifying details of of offenses that land people in labor cams, including the misspelling of kim jong il. deplorable conditions exist in the nation's sim of gulags that reports say contain as many as 200,000 prisoners. people seeking refuge from the oppressive regime must disregard public executions used to intimidate the populace and

brave a shoot to kill set of orders that are leveed against citizens simply a-- levied against citizens simply attempting to make a living somewhere else. reunification of families in north creegra -- north korea and those on the other side of the d.m.z. remain limited to fleet regular unions. i thank chairman royce for working with us on an amendment that makes the suspension of sanctions in this legislation conditional on north korea making significant progress in planning for unrestricted family reunification meetings, including for those individuals among the two million strong korean american community who still have relatives in north korea. the lives of north koreans must be imprusmede i applaud this legislation, the levying of sanctions against bad actors in the north korean saga, while recognizing the urgency of

humanitarian and food assistance for north korean citizens. again, i commend my colleagues and the chairman and ranking member of the committee for finding once again common ground on the north korea sanctions issue and for taking decisive action against this despotic regime. i thank the seeker -- speaker and reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california. mr. royce: i reserve the right to close. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from virginia. mr. connolly: i will close. we have no speakers on this side. i urge passage of this legislation. i think it can send a very important message to our allies and to our foes and to the north korean regime itself. i think the timing is right. with that i yield back the balance of our time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from california. mr. royce: thank you, mr. speaker. for far too long the world has ignored the significant human rights abuses that occur almost

every single day in north korea. increasingly, as people escape, we begin to get some sense of what life is like for the hundreds of thousands that live in these concentration camps. by turning a blind eye on what is going on in north korea, we -- the rest of the world -- world rifpk missing an opportunity to punish the regime for crimes against humanity. this legislation is a chance to hold them responsible for crimes against their own people. we have an opportunity here to cut off the hard currency that goes right to the leadership in this regime. they depend on that hard currency. earlier this year, the urn commission of inquiry laid out the most damning case against north korea. internationally, communities were shocked by the revolution -- revelations in this commission.

of inquiry. as chairman of the foreign affairs committee, i have met with a number of north korean defectors and refugees over the years. i have heard their stories. we have had some testify here in the house of representatives. i have seen north korea with my own eyes. i have seen the malnutrition. engineered by the regime. while the money goes in to their nuclear arms program. and their military buildup. listen, the message from the defectors and the survivors are remarkably similar. what they tell us is, please help us. by supporting h.r. 1771, we send an unmistakable message that the united states will no longer tolerate a regime that tortures and kills its own people. we will not tolerate, either, nuclear weapons and unchecked proliferation being developed

with the hard currency that this regime gets its hands on by violating international law and being involved in the type of smuggling and illegal activities that they're involved in. north korea is undoubtedly one of the most significant security threats that we here face and our allies face and i urge my colleagues to support this legislation. the speaker pro tempore: does the gentleman yields back? mr. royce: i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the question is will the house suspend the rules and pass the bill h.r. 1771 as amended. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair 2/3 being in the affirmative, the rules are suspended, the bill is passed and without objection the motion to reconsider is laid on the table. for what purpose does the gentleman from california seek recognition? mr. royce: i move that the house suspend the rules and pass h.r. 4490 as amended. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: h.r. 4490, a bill to

enhance the mission, objective and effectiveness of the united states international communications and for other purposes of the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california, mr. royce, and the gentleman from virginia, mr. connolly each will control 20 minutes. mr. royce: i ask unanimous condition sent -- consent that members have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material in the record. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. royce: thank you, mr. speaker. i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. royce: the world has been watching eastern ukraine following the downing of a civilian passenger plane by russian-backed separatists. we watched as families have grieved. we watched as thugs have blocked access to the crash site. i say thugs because a lot of these individuals are recruited in the russian speaking world on the social websites and frankly

every malcontent, every skinhead that they could enlist in this cause has been given a weapon and their behavior as we've watched on television is unconscionable. but what isn't so well known is the information battle that's being waged and that we are losing. we're losing on this front in the information war. listen to what "the economist" magazine says. russia has again become a place in which truth and falsehood are no longer distinct and facts are put into the service of the government. mr. putin sets hymn up as a patriot but he is a threat to international norms, to his neighbors and to the russians themselves who are intoxicated by his his tore -- hiserical brand of anti-western propaganda. that analysis followed russia's latest cry that malaysia airline's flight 17 was shot down by the ukrainian military. look, i was in eastern ukraine.

i had an opportunity to talk to many russian-speaking ukrainians. i'll tell you what they shared with me, and this was whether they were civil rights groups, the local governor, minority groups, women's groups, the jewish community there, which is very vibrant community. all shared the same concerns. they felt that this crisis was being engineered. by president putin. and that he was sending in and recruiting malcontents and crying to create a crisis and they felt that the reason he was doing it was to try to break off eastern ukraine to become part of russia. . and they resisted this. they felt it important that

elections go forward. now, you have a new government in ukraine that is trying to push a peace plan and instead you have the propaganda every night and the question is, who's going to offset that propaganda? our best weapon in this information battle, the broadcasting board of governors, the b.b.g., is totally defunct. this is not just my observation. former secretary of state hillary clinton and others have observed, you know, that that's the world we live in now. we've known this for years based on report after report from the government accountability office and the office of the inspector general. this has real consequences. one newspaper rightly noted, the b.b.g. has greatly diminished america's capacity to fight the putin propaganda machine. if we don't put the truth out there, if we don't put a reality out there, if there isn't a surrogate-free radio and television for people to listen to, all they're going to hear is the conspiratorial note

of propaganda. former b.b.g. governors, voice of america directors, staff and those that follow international broadcasting have repeatedly called on congress to step up and reform the b.b.g. we must act with urgency. yes, russia's propaganda machine is saturating the airwaves with false information designed to incite violence, designed to stoke sectarian fears, to create a pretext for russian military engagement in eastern ukraine. but i'll share with you in the middle east hezbollah's television station, al-manar, continues to broadcast lies and propaganda and incitement designed to destabilize the region and build support for a terror war on israel and on democracy there. china's cctv now broadcast in over 100 countries and recently established its new africa

bureau in nairobi, ken the gentleman from you know, when our country dominated the international airwaves. now we are a voice among many but that voice is really on the defensive and in many places it's no longer heard. our competitors highlight our failings. they minimize our successes. they're working 24/7 to discredit america in a well-orchestrated game of chess. and we have a part-time broadcasting board. this legislation, the united states international communications reform act of 2014, is a bipartisan effort to reform the b.b.g. and make it more effective and efficient in efforts to confront this propaganda. the legislation cuts the bureaucracy so that more funding is spent fighting foreign propaganda instaying paying inflated salaries in washington. the bill brings accountability to our international broadcasters, installing a full-time c.e.o. empowered to

make decisions. the current dysfunctional board of nine part-time presidential appointees is reduced to an appropriate capacity. the voice of america is once again an integral part to make sure that all three parts of the charter must be emphasized. radio free europe, radio free asia, the so-called surrogates have a different mission. that's to provide uncensored local news and information to people in closed societies and to be a megaphone for internal advocates of freedom. whether it's in iran, north korea or elsewhere, our surrogate broadcasters will be at the tip of the speer in this information battle and are given a global mandate to go after the most dess podic regimes, -- despodic regimes, tell them the story of what's really going on in the country. and these critical reforms come with a benefit of a cost savings to the taxpayer here. h.r. 4490 will result in a cost

savings of $160 million over five years. the legislation mandates that no future funding will be provided unless cost-saving reforms are implemented, including administrative consolidation, right sizing and leverage public-private partnerships. ripping away the bureaucracy will reduce administrative overlap and allow both organizations to strife. to be clear this legislation isn't about creating a u.s. government propaganda effort, v.o.a. is not being turned into a version of russia's r.t. or china's cctv. this bill is about communicating america's message tolerance, transparency to foreign audiences. there was a time when we did that really well but we lost it. this bill gets us back on track. we can't afford anything but high performance with the world's crisis seemingly multiplying. thank you, mr. speaker.

i reserve the balance of my time, mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from virginia. mr. connolly: thank you, mr. speaker. i grant myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. connolly: i thank the speaker. i rise today in support of h.r. 4490, the united states international communications reform act. i want to congratulate, again, the chairman and the ranking member eliot engel on their bipartisan legislation on the broadcasting board of governors. i'm pleased to join them in co-sponsors these commonsense reforms that will result in a more clearly defined mission of the broadcasting board of governors and its components and a more efficient operation on behalf of taxpayers. like many of my colleagues, i was troubled to hear former secretary of state clinton tell the house foreign affairs committee that the broadcasting board of governors had become brackettly a defunct agency in terms of capacity to be able to telemessage around the world. as the chairman of the house foreign affairs committee just

said, we need that ability right now given the events going on in russia and the ukraine. as my colleagues know, this bill responds to critical reports issued early last year by the government accountability office and the state department office of inspector general which were the subject of a hearing before our committee last june. these reports highlighted structural deficiencies and overlapping functions within the broadcasting board of governors of voice of america and the office of cuba broadcasting and the private but federally funded radio free africa and radio free asia. this legislation clarifies the mission statementses of the federal and nonfederal broadcasters. voice of america, for example, will now confine itself to the public diplomacy mission to foster positive relationships between the united states and the rest of the world. there were concerns about mission creep within the voice of america, blurring the lines

between it and the mission of the international broadcasters to provide uncensored and optive news and analysis on a local and regional level in those places lacking a free press. the bill also includes necessary structural reforms, including a new international communications agency with a c.e.o. to manage the day-to-day operations of v.o.a. and other federally -- federally run operations. as we learned during last year's hearing, there was growing concern about micromanagement by the -- by the broadcasting board of governors and achieving a quorum at the board meetings to make operational decisions. this will put the board of governors in a more advisory role. further, the bill consolidates the nonfederal broadcasters into the same umbrella known as the freedom news network achieving economies of scale and saving money, as the chairman indicated, and allowing for closer

collaboration on other more global efforts. importantly, this legislation maintains the requirement that u.s. federal programs serve as an objective source of news and information and not as a mouthpiece for u.s. foreign policy. this bill has been a collaborative effort that included outreach and input from key stakeholders, including the board itself, the broadcasters and agencies staff. this is the kind of bipartisan oversight on which we should be focusing. i wish more committees in this body would follow this example, and i thank, once again, the chairman and ranking member eliot engel for their bipartisan leadership and for bringing our committee once again together on this very important piece of legislation. i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from california. mr. royce: i'll reserve the right to close, mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from virginia. mr. connolly: we have no speakers on this side, mr. speaker. i yield back the balance of my time.

the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from california to close. mr. royce: you know, i'd just close with this because we had testimony before the foreign affairs committee last summer by the former b.b.g. governor. and i wanted to quote what he said. he said, today's problem is not enough information but the opposite. most places, even some enduring the repressive regimes get plenty, much of it junk. this is the new competitive landscape for u.s. international broadcasting. our competitors, too, have multiplied while our allies have retreated. one would think that american strategists would sharpen their speers to compete in this world. yet -- spears to compete in this world. it is doing the opposite due to the b.b.g. it is incapable of setting a set of strategies and it has no way to attach whatever measures it does adopt to larger u.s. national objectives, unquote.

as you see, this is deeply flawed. that's why this bill is so important. we need our international broadcasters to succeed in their mission. we want the voice of america to -- i'm going to quote president kennedy here -- to tell america's story to the world. we want our surrogate broadcasters to tell the stories to people in closed societies that their own governments won't tell them, and we want the american taxpayers to see a return on the generous investment they have been making into international broadcasting. this legislation does that, and i urge all of the members to support it. thank you, mr. speaker. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the question is will the house suspend the rules and pass the bill h.r. 4490, as amended. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, 2/3 having responded in the affirmative, the rules are suspended, the bill is passed, and without objection the motion to reconsider is laid on the table.

the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlewoman from michigan seek recognition? mrs. miller: mr. speaker, i move that the house suspend the rules and pass h.r. 3202 as amended. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: h.r. 3202, a bill to require the secretary of homeland security to prepare a comprehensive security assessment of the transportation security card program, and for other purposes the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule, the gentlewoman from michigan, mrs. miller, and the gentlewoman from texas, ms. jackson lee, each will control 20 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentlewoman from michigan. mrs. miller: mr. speaker, i'd ask unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include any extraneous material on the bill under consideration. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. mrs. miller: and i'd yield myself such time as i may consume.

the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman is recognized. mrs. miller: thank you, mr. speaker. i rise in strong support of h.r. 3202. it's called essential transportation worker identification credential sessment act, commonly referred to as twic. that's a mouthful. i'd like to thank the gentlewoman from texas, ms. jackson lee, for introducing this thoughtful legislation. she's worked very diligently on this in a bipartisan way. we worked together, moved this legislation through our subcommittee, through the full committee of homeland. this will allow congress to better determine the twic program and to proceed with the long-awaited card reader rule. i mentioned i'm a co-sponsor rule because this really responds to key recommendations of the g.a.o. that the twic program should have a baseline security assessment before the program moves forward. as many of my colleagues with ports in their districts know, twic is a port security program that has been wrought with

constant delays and questions about its overall security value. last year the border and maritime subcommittee that i'm honored to chair held a hearing with the coast guard, with the t.s.a., with the g.a.o. on the twic program and the ongoing concerns that we have with it. and this legislation, mr. speaker, is really the result of that oversight. now, it might be hard to believe that more than a decade after the legislation that required twic was first enacted, there's been no security or effectiveness assessment of the program to assess the underlying assumptions of the security and assessed control concerns that the card was intended to mitigate. this bill seeks to answer the simple question, how, if at all, does twic improve maritime security? it should have been one of the very concerns that the department did when it began to implement this program, and this bill ensures that it finally gets done. it was initially designed to prevent terrorists from gaining access to sensetive parts of our

nation's ports through biometric regulations. rules work no uniform for biometric system in place, it's used as a flash card. the lack of biometric readers limits the effectiveness of the program. for several years, members of the homeland security to department have called on the department to release the card reading rule and we finally received notice of the rule making over a year ago, to require the readers to be used at the riskiest 5% of all the regulated vessels and facilities this comes nearly six years after workers were first required to pay for and obtain a twic card. the delays are so significant that workers have already had to renew their biometric credentials in the time it has take ton issue regulations on credential readers to utilize

this biometric enabled technology. while we all agree there's huge room for improvement with the twic program, putting it on hold several more years would do more harm than good. the business community has been preparing for this rule for several years this bill will give them certainty about the requirements of the program. it also allows the coast guard and t.s.a. to continue their efforts to deliver the port security program that congress enacted several years ago. finally, h.r. 3202 requires the g.a.o. to perform consistent reviews of the twic program and to follow the changes the department makes as a result of the required assessment. the added level of review will provide congress, especially the members of our committee, with progress updates for huche legislative action. the proposed rule and open g.a.o. recommendations led to basic questions about mitigating threat, risk, and vulnerability at our nation's ports and how the twic program should be used

effectively to eliminate terrorist attack. we have an obligation to get this right. i urge my colleagues to support h.r. 3202 and reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from texas is recognized. ms. jackson lee: thank you very much, mr. speaker. i rise in strong support of h.r. worker e essential trps cre -- identification credential assessment act and yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the -- without objection, so ordered. ms. jackson lee: i rise in strong support of this bill and again want to offer my appreciation to chairwoman miller of the committee that i am the ranking member of for her collaboration and cooperation and commitment to america's security and working together in a bipartisan manner, not only at the subcommittee level but at the full committee level, again,

thanking mr. mccaul the chairman of the full committee and mr. thompson, ranking member of the full committee. i offer to say that homeland security has put national security first, beyond any of our partisan desires. soy am grateful for that. as we move this legislation forward, i'd like to think that both chairwoman miller and myself believe that there is a value to the twic card. even this weekend, as i was in my district, canvassing an area about crime issues, a gentleman came out and said, i have a house here, i'm training individuals how to apply for the twic card, i couldn't believe it. in a neighborhood, there was someone trying to get a resource to train people to get a twic card because they knew how valuable it was if you want to work in the nation's ports. and it is valuable. but i want to acknowledge the card reader pilot results are unreliable, security benefits need to be reassessed. this was done by the g.a.o. in

may, 2013. i'd like to read these words from this the -- from what the g.a.o. recommended. congress should halt efforts to promulgate a final regulation until the successful completion of a security assessment of the effectiveness of using twic. there's an issue where congress rose to the occasion. that is this legislation. to be able to respond to make something better. when congress enacted the safe ports act in 2006, we directed the secretary of the homeland security to implement a biometric identification program to make sure individuals with unescorted access to sensitive areas of ports and vessels were known. i think there's enough evidence for taos know terror can come in many forms and we know that by some of the terrible incidents that have occur, the incident in yemen, where one of our ships were attacked.

so we know how difficult securing these large areas and vessels are. however, we learned that as implemented by t.s.a. and the coast guard, that there are weaknesses in the program. indeed, the government accountability office has identified serious shortcomings with the twic program as implemented that may undermine the program's intended purpose and make it difficult to justify costs, particularly the cost to workers. i want to emphasize workers because when we first began this program, there were a number of us on the committee who wanted to do several things. wanted to provide more incentives where twic cards could be accessible because many longshoremen and others were finding it difficult to secure one. i secured a twic card to determine how the process worked. the report from the nen suggest bide yo metric would be the way to go, so the twic card was designed that way, to deal with

biometrics. unfortunately, the efforts of making it accessible didn't answer the question of whether or not it was going to besquive. i remember trying to get around the clock places, sites, where longshoremen and others who worked in these areas could get it according to their shifts. some of them are out for many day and months at a time. but specifically, g.a.o.'s review of the pilot test aimed at assessing the technology and operational impact on using the twic with card readers show that the test results were incomplete, inaccurate and unreliable for informing congress and for developing a regulation about the readers. g.a.o. found that challenges related to pilot planning, data collection and reporting affected the completeness, accuracy and reliability of the pilot results. they determined that these issues call into question the program's premise and effectiveness at enhancing security. in response, i introduced h.r. 3202 with the support of

subcommittee chairman miller as an original co-sponsor to ensure that congress received an independent -- i want to make it very clear, this is very important, independent scientific assessment of the program and to require the secretary to ensure that corrective action plan in response to the assessment. the required assessment should give congress the information it needs to determine how best to proceed with the program. i want to point out that in committee, language was integrated to ensure that clarified that any pending rule making would not be impacted by this bill and refined the scope of the assessment we are seeking. made it more pointed and made it very clear that any rule making would not be interfered with. i think that is the right way for congress to work. the department has said that the final rule for biometrics readers will be published in january 20 15. mr. speaker, i'm hoping that we can continue to be on that schedule. we were hoping it was going to be earlier.

but we hope that this report will be more help to feel congress in determining how ultimately this program will work. there is great interest in the final rule, particularly there is interest in how many ports and vessels will be required to install readers for biometric cards. if the final rule requires only a limited number of vessels and ports to have biometric readers as was previously proposed by the department, we'll need to have a discussion about what this means for the approximately two million truckers, longshoremen and port workers who today are required to carry biometric cards to do their job. we want an effective system. i believe it is -- could be effective. i believe it's valuable. i believe people should be carded going into security areas or sensitive areas. and and -- and i think we've gotten our workers to understand it as well if it works right for them. we look forward to this process where we continue to collaborate and this legislation will be

helpful. i reserve my time at this time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman reserves. the gentlewoman from michigan is recognized. mrs. miller: any of further speakers. i reserve my time. unless the gentlelady is prepared to close -- if the gentlelady is prepared to close, i'm prepared to close. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from texas is recognized. ms. jackson lee: i have no further speakers, i'd like to have some closing remarks to emphasize that the idea of the transportation worker identification card, the twic card uh, was to promote security and standardization. it was a common credential that enabled facility and vessdz el operators as well as federal, state, tribal and local authorities to identify individuals, a step that was not feasible prior to twic implementation with thousands of different credentials, which is why many of us support it. i want it to work. it allows workers to move among facilities, vessels and

geographic regions as needed while still maintaining security. in the interest of security and in order to provide proper stewardship of appropriated funds and collected twic funds or fees this legislation was introduced. the transportation worker identification credential assessment act, to get better investment for our money. i'm looking forward to a comprehensive assessment that will be done by a not for profit laboratory so that the many problems and vulnerabilities that persist in this program can be either eliminated or corrected. we want to work with our, if you will, our partners, the coast guard, the transportation security agency and many others. and as we all know, national security has to be for all of us, our highest priority. particularly members of congress. and it certainly is for those of us in the homeland security committee. i ask my colleagues again to support h.r. 3202, the official

transportation worker identification credential act, and move us closer to completing our commitment after 9/11 to make this country the most secure country in the world. i thank again my chaioman, collaborator, mrs. miller for her assistance and with that, i yield back my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman yields back. the jerusalem from michigan is recognized to -- the gentlewoman from mmp is recognized to close. mrs. miller: thank you, mr. speaker. i want to share the -- associate myself with many of the comments of the ranking member on the subcommittee has made in regards to maritime security. it's interesting on the homeland security, both our committee and the full committee as well, we do work in a bipartisan fashion. the first and foremost responsibility of the federal government is to provide for the common defense. with all the issues facing our nation, we think about the potential for terrorist attacks and this piece of legislation really focusing on the security, our maritime security of our

ports throughout our nation, is, i think so incredibly important and so i'm just delighted that we finally were able to bring it to the floor and i would certainly again urge all of my colleagues to support this very strong, very bipartisan piece of legislation and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman yields back. the question is, will the house suspend the rules and pass the bill h.r. 3202 as amended? those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, 2/3 being in the affirmative, the rules are suspended, the bill is passed and -- >> i ask for the yeas and nays. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas. mr. gohmert: i ask for the yeas and nays. the speaker pro tempore: the yeas and nays are requested. those in favor of taking this vote by the yeas and nays will rise and remain standing until counted. a sufficient number having risen, the yeas and nays are ordered. pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20, further proceedings on this uestion will be postponed.

for what purpose does the gentlewoman from michigan seek recognition? mrs. miller: i move that the house suspend the rules and pass h.r. 3846 as amended. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: h.r. 3846. a bill to provide for the authorization of border, maritime, and transportation security responsibilities and functions in the department of homeland security and the establishment of united states customs and border protection and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule, the gentlewoman from michigan, mrs. miller, and the gentlewoman from texas, ms. jackson lee, each will control 20 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentlewoman from michigan. mrs. miller: i ask unanimous consent that all members have five legislative days within

which to revise and extend their remarks and include any extraneous material on the bill under consideration. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, ordered. mrs. miller: i yield myself such time as i might consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman is recognized. mrs. miller: i rise in support of h.r. 3846, the united states customs and border protection authorization act and i certainly want to thank my colleague, first of all, the chairman of the full homeland security committee, mr. mccaul and our ranking member, mr. thompson and my ranking member on the subcommittee, ms. jackson lee. the homeland security committee, again, has a strong history of collaboration and bipartisanship, as you just saw with the last bill we discussed. this bill illustrates our ability to find consensus as we work to strengthen the homeland. this is a very important day, not only for the men and women of the customs and border protection, c.b.t. but also for the u.s. house of representatives this past week marked the 10th an verse roif the rethreefs 9/11 commission's recommendation to congress and while most of the recommendations were implemented, unfortunately,

several remain unfulfilled or incomplete. and among one of the most important incomplete recommendations was for congress to create a single principal point of oversight an review for homeland security. the fractured jurisdiction over the department of homeland security has certainly limited congress' ability to provide effective guidance as a third largest agency in the federal government. they never had a comprehensive re-authorization and components such as customs and border protection have never been authorized in statute because being transferred -- since being transferred to the department of homeland security through the homeland security act of 2002, and while there remains several committees with overlapping oversight of the department of homeland security, i believe that this legislation that's on the floor today is a testament that this body can still work together to fulfill congress' primary

responsibilities under the constitution. as i mentioned, mr. speaker, c.b.t., with more than 44,000 -- c.b.p., with more than 44,000 officers, and as a result they operate on deinvolved authority granted by the -- devolved authority granted by the secretary, rather than specific authority by its authorizers. h.r. 3846, again, the united states customs and border protection authorization, is the first attempt by the congress since the passage of the homeland security act of 2002 and the creation of the department of homeland security to clearly delineate the current authorities and responsibilities of the largest federal law enforcement entity in our nation. the fact that this agency has been operating for as long as it has without a clear statutory mandate from congress and the american people certainly is a problem that needs to be corrected. the homeland security act, when

passed nearly 12 years ago, was sort of a snapshot in time that reflects the choices made by congress to quickly cobble together 22 agencies. now is the time to update the statute and to make changes where necessary to reflect the current security missions of the department within c.b.p. which has significantly evolved over the last decade. i'll give you an example. after d.h.s. was created, most of the authority for the work c.b.p. currently performs was vested actually in a position called the undersecretary of border and transportation security. and if you haven't heard of it lately, it's because it was eliminated by then-secretary chertoff in 2005. nonetheless, this position remains in law. so this bill, i use that as an example, but this bill is the first step in updating from the source legislation that created the department. congress has the responsibility to give the department of homeland security and its components the necessary direction through the regular

authorization process, and this measure is a very important fist step in doing so. this bill provides a basic outline of the missions and responsibilities that we give to the commissioner of c.b.p. and its subcomponents such as the office of field operations, the united states border patrol, the office of air and marine operations, the office of intelligence and investigative liaison, the office of international affairs so they know what this congress expects. in addition to fixing outdated provisions in the law, this legislation goes a long way to ensuring transparency and oversight in c.b.p. this bill also contains strong accountability measures to ensure that agents and officers respect civil rights, civil liberties and use force policies especially with regard to the use of deadly force. with the ongoing crisis of unaccompanied children crossing the border in ever greater numbers, making sure we understand the root causes of the surge is vitally important as well, and this bill includes

a provision that takes a very hard look at why these children are coming so that we can provide the men and women of the border patrol and c.b.p. the tools to stem the tide. issues like the recent surge remind us of why we need to continually update the authorities of key law enforcement agencies within the department of homeland security. c.b.p.'s mission continues to change, and this congress has a duty to give our officers and the agents proper authorities to carry out their important work. finally, i want to commend the work and the assistance of c.b.p. and the department of homeland security over the past wo years as we started the intricate task of cleaning up the homeland security act. their assistance helped this bill. and i urge my colleagues, mr. speaker, to support this good commonsense legislation. i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman reserves her time. the gentlewoman from texas is recognized. ms. jackson lee: again, mr. speaker, i rise in strong support of h.r. 3846, the

united states customs and border pa tex authorization act that came -- protection authorization act that came out of the committee on border security and maritime security and i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman is recognized. ms. jackson lee: thank you, mr. speaker. i'm a proud original co-sponsor sponsored by the gentlelady from michigan, mrs. miller. as indicated, we're working throughout this congress in a bipartisan manner and it seems that our particular subcommittee has been particularly energized by a number of issues that have come to the attention of the american people. this is an authorization bill that is long overdue. u.s. customs and border protection is among the largest and significant of the department of homeland security's components. c.b.p. is charged with ensuring america's border while ensuring america's trade and travel. i want to offer my appreciation for the hardworking men and women that come under c.b.p. they're on the border, they're

on the northern and southern border. they're in our ports, both airports and as well our ports that face the sea. and so i think it is appropriate for us to take a moment and express our appreciation. might i also, just as another aside, express my appreciation for the transportation security work, t.s.o.'s, as we were working on their issues, we lost one of our very brave agents in the last year. all of them should be appreciated. again, despite the essential nature of c.b.p.'s mission, it has not been authorized in law since the recognition of the department of homeland security announced by secretary of homeland security michael chertoff nine years ago this month. it is imperative that c.b.p. is authorized in law, to ensure that congress can conduct proper oversight of the agency and its program.

the legislation does just that, and i'm very pleased to have been part of crafting legislation that really responds to an important need, giving the guidelines and infrastructure and structure to make sure that we have a security arm of the d.h.s. that really works, that we appreciate, that has the guideline to operate effectively. i'm pleased that the bill includes several amendments offered by democratic members during consideration of the homeland security committee, and again, i want to thank chairman mccaul of the full committee and ranking member thompson for their bipartisan efforts, working with chairman miller and myself on this legislation. i was particularly pleased that the committee accepted an amendment i offered to help address the recent surge of the number of unaccompanied children entering the u.s. at increasingly younger ages, particularly in my home state of texas. let me be very clear, it's a humanitarian crisis and issue that i think we are finding our way forward, and i hope that as we are passing this legislation, we'll also pass

the emergency supplemental that is needed for this issue and many others. this issue requires immediate attention from congress, given that the welfare of so many children are at stake. i'm also pleased that during committee consideration an amendment offered by the gentlelady from california, ms. sanchez, was adopted to enhance c.b.p.'s oversight of an adherence to short-term detention standards at its facilities. while these facilities are not intended to house individuals for long-term immigration detention, it is imperative that basic standards are adhered to in order to ensure the health and well-being of people, including children in c.b.p. custody. so many of us that went to the border but in years' past, those of us who have been at the border over the years, as i have, and been in many detention facilities as i have since serving on this committee, we know that standards are important for whatever facility that we have. whether they are detention facilities for adults who are coming across illegally or other resources needed, we must

have a standard. i'm also pleased that the committee accepted an amendment offered by the gentleman from california, mr. swalwell, stating that c.b.p. may not enter into or renew a trusted traveler program agreement with a foreign government unless that government reports lost and stolen passport data to interpol. we know that passengers on malaysian airline flight 370 were traveling on stolen passports and that enormous tragedy is still unsolved. while the u.s. has relatively limited ability to ensure foreign governments utilize interpol's database, encouraging them to report their own lost and stolen passports improves the quality of interpols list used to screen travelers to and from our country. that said, i was disappointed that they did not accept an amendment i offered to increase by 2,000 officers deployed at our ports of entry. i think we're seeing that there have been a number of state efforts that this number of c.b.p. officers might have

countered, and i look forward to us continue to pursue opportunities to increase those numbers. congressly recently provided the resources necessary to hire additional 2,000 c.b.p. officers but still more are needed. i understand current budgetary constraints but so many challenges that c.b.p. faces are related to our affected by persistent staffing shortages. congress has a responsibility to do its part, to alleviate these shortages, and i hope to continue to work with my colleagues on both sides of the aisle on this important issue. that said, i strongly support the bill and pleased the crust oms and border protection for the first time in -- customs and border protection for the first time in this year 2014 and under the present chairman and myself, the ranking member, be authorized in its current form. with that, mr. speaker, i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman reserves. the gentlewoman from michigan is recognized. mrs. miller:: mr. speaker, i'd certainly yield so much time as he may consume to the chairman

of the homeland security, mr. mccaul, who has been passionate for this particular piece of legislation and it really has been under his direction that we have worked on this very much together. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas is recognized. mr. mccaul: i thank you, mr. speaker. i first want to commend the chairwoman of the subcommittee on border and maritime security and the ranking member, ms. jackson lee, for their hard work and efforts in trying to secure the border first and foremost. but also in achieving what has never been achieved before and that's an authorization bill for customs and border patrol. in the history of the congress, this is the first time. it's very important, mr. speaker, that we do this. it's very important that we support our men and women in blue and in green, customs and border patrol, for the hard work and dedication day in and

day out and what some would say is a thankless job. and what we are doing -- what chairwoman miller and ms. jackson lee, the ranking member, has done is for the first time congress has recognized them and validated them in their mission to secure the border, that they do day in and day out. i do not need to go into the details of the border crisis we're suffering through. certainly, ms. jackson lee, coming from texas knows, as well as i do. this is a crisis that demands action, a call to action and a solution from congress. i believe that authorizing c.b.p. is the first step. but it's already the first step towards this committee authorizing the entire department of homeland security. it is my goal within the next year for the first time in the

history of congress to authorize the department of homeland security. and shame on us, shame on congress for never authorizing this department. you don't think that impacts morale, you don't think that gives a misguided message from the congress that we don't support them? i think above all what this bill does is it says we support you. we support you in your job -- and your job. these border patrol officers that i see down there, their agents, they get rocks thrown at them, they get shot at, they have to deal in harsh conditions in the heat and the customs agents at the ports of entry, i can't think of not -- someone would say thankless but i can't think of a more important job in terms of protecting the sovereignty of the united states and protecting our borders day in and day out from threats that

can come in. you know, mr. speaker, it's -- if 60,000 children can walk across our rio grande sector, what does that say about our border security? i met the general of southcomm, general kelly, and he said if they were coming in, what else is coming into the united states? that is why this bill is so important. that's why border security is so important. i pledge to my committee members and to this congress that we're going to get this job done. this is the first step, the beginning and the first step of finally getting this job done. we can report back to the american people that we have finally, once and for all, secured the border of the united states of america. with that, i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentlewoman from michigan reserves. the gentlewoman from texas is ecognized.

ms. jackson lee: let me offer just a few thoughts and i'm delighted to associate myself with a very important point that the chairman of the committee made, and i will use the terminology authorization equals affirmation. it is important for us in this congress to affirm an agency that is handling some of the most precious responsibilities alongside the intelligence community, alongside of the united states military, defense, it is homeland security. and that's why this is a first start toward making sure that we affirm, t looking to re-authorize, the importance of this particular agency. what i will say is that when we were crafting this bill, along with my chairwoman as she introduced this legislation, we

were somewhat before this rising surge and we began to think about what we needed to do to get in front of it. and i'm very glad that i laid the framework in my language in the bill dealing with having d.h.s. find out what are the causes, how do we address the issue of unaccompanied children that are coming? we might have used the term surge, it was a surge but it wasn't at that point. so i believe that facts are crucial and i think it is important that this bill will encourage some of the thing that was already been done, the president has met with three of the -- three president of the -- honduras, guatemala and el salvador but to determine and assess what the reasons are, how extreme the violence is the stories are horrific. then of course, to separate out children who are running toward the men and women in green and begin to look at the border and

securing the border which none of us quarrel with. we realize that there have been some strides. we worked with the mexican government. but we also know that drug cartels, drug smugglers, sex traffickers, human traffickers, dill prevail because bad guys are always prevailing. we have to make sure that mixed into those bad guys that have those particular desires are not terrorists that are coming to disturb this community, or this nation. and i think this bill lays a good framework for us to collaborate with so many others. i want to thank the -- thank chairman miller for the bipartisan nature of the work on this issue and the bill that originated from our committee. i would like to say that this is only the beginning. i'm looking forward to our committee partnershipping with judiciary and that we look to a re-authorization of i.c.e. which is a partner to the work that's being done on homeland security.

i think it can be done. we set a good model here today. and as we make our way through department of homeland security, we have set a very god model on how we can affirm the vitality of the -- vitality, the vigorousness, the crucialness of these subagencies in providing for domestic security. so with that, i reserve. doif the right to close? the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman reserves. the gentlewoman from michigan is recognized. mrs. miller: i would just advise, i have no further speakers, so if the gentlelady would like to close, i'm prepared to close. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from texas is prepared to close. s. jackson lee: -- ms. jackson

lee: are you yielding back? mrs. miller: no, i'm reserving, i have the right to close. ms. jackson lee: i want to again express my appreciation for the work we have done as a houstonian and as the chairman indicated, we are texans, we see this, we have seen it, we've lived with our neighbors, but more than importantly we have lived with our friends on the border. members of congress are our friends, are our neighbors and they are part of this great nation as well. it gives me a special sense of pride and responsibility to be able to work with their needs. as someone who has representation over one of the largest ports, along with some of my other colleagues in houston, the houston port, these are very important issues that i think america needs to realize when we safe forward our ports -- safeguard our port, provide for these agents and give them an infrastructure of authorization, we affirm them, we are securing the homeland.

i think the border towns have handled this humanitarian crisis with great valor and a great sense of what america is all about. we need to respond to their needs but we also need to address this question from a perspective of the humanitarian issue that it is and a balanced perspective of securing the border. i think we have begun that process with legislation and i ask my colleagues to support it and i yield back the rest of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman yields back the balance of her time. the gentlewoman from michigan is recognized. mrs. miller: thank you, mr. speaker. i would just say in closing, i thought that the chairman of the homeland security committee, mr. mccall, made some excellent remarks, and one of the thing he is said that's absolutely true and i know all of us feel this s every time we talk to c.b.p. officer the men and women who secure or board they can't believe that congress has never authorized atheir agency.

it is not a great thing for their morale that we've never paid them the attention they deserve. so i think this bill is, as i said at the beginning of my remarks, such an important first step for this congress to be able to do that. and with the humanitarian crisis that is happening at our southern border with this zunino of unaccompanying chern coming in, and we all see the video each and every day of our brave men and women, our c.b.p. officers, trying to handle that, they have responsibilities there, things they are doing there that are taking them away, quite frankly, as they're handling the children, taking them away from their duties and responsibilities of stopping the drug cartels, etc., from entering our borders. i just think that this bill is incredibly important. and i would also mention as well, as we talk about the issues on the southern border, which are certainly in our -- all of our news each and every day, but america has more than

one border. we have the northern border as well. and i see the dean of the house, mr. dingell, is on the floor. he and i both being from a northern border state of michigan, have worked together diligently on northern border issues. we have in michigan the two busiest northern border crossings on the entire northern tier of our nation. again, the c.b.p. officers have stop sod many that wish our nation harm whether that's human smuggling or drug smuggling or what have you, we have unique die nam exs on the northern barder -- border as well. mr. speaker, this is a very, very important bill. again, securing the homeland is certainly foremost of all of our responsibilities and i would once again urge our colleagues to support h.r. 3846, the united states custom and border protection authorization act and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman yields back the balance of her time. the question is will the house suspend the rules and pass the

bill h.r. 3846, as amended? those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, 2/3 being in the affirmative, the rules are suspended, the bill is passed and without objection the motion to reconsider is laid on the table. for what purpose does the gentleman from texas seek recognition?

>> i move that the house suspend the rules and pass h.r. 3696, as amended. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: h.r. 3696, a bill to amend the homeland security act 2002 to make certain improvements regarding cybersecurity and critical infrastructure protection and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from texas, mr. mccaul and the gentlewoman from new ork, ms. farr, each will control 20 minutes. the gentleman from texas is recognized. mr. mccaul: i ask unanimous consent that all members have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. mccaul: i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. mccaul: i rise in support of .r. 3696, the national cybersecurity and critical infra

structure protection act of 2014. i've worked on this for a long time with my colleague, the gentleman from pennsylvania, congressman meehan. i'd like to thank ranking member thompson as well as ranking member clarke of the cybersubcommittee for their hard work in forging this bipartisan bill. these efforts once again prove that we can work together despite our differences to craft legislation that improves our national security and help prospect american critical infrastructure from devastating cyberattacks. just last week, the homeland security committee heard testimony that we in a pre-9/11 mindset, when it comes to cybersecurity, the government needs to do a better job of warning users about attacks on networks. that was from the 9/11 commission itself. cybervulnerabilities in our nation's critical infrastructures are our achilles

heel in our homeland security defenses. let me be clear, the cyberthreat is real. it is happening right now. the internet has become the next battlefield for warfare. but unlike land, sea, and air, cyberattack occur at the speed of light. they're global. and they are more difficult to attribute. criminals, activists, terrorists, nation state actors such as russia, china, and iran are increasingly using malicious mall wear to hack into u.s. companies for espionage purposes for financial gain. our defense systems, to steal our sensitive military information and our critical infrastructure to gain access to our gas lines, power grids and water systems. iranian actors -- hackers, for example, continue to attack the american financial services sector to shut down websites and restrict america's access to their bank accounts.

additionally, iran can'ts -- continues to build more sophisticated cyberwps to target u.s. energy companies hand has demonstrated these capabilities when they attacked saudi erased critical files on 30,000 computers. we cannot allow rogue nations like iran to be able to shut things down and have capabilities that match our defenses. that would be a game changer for our national security. the chinese in particular are hacking into major u.s. companies to give their industries competitive economic advantages in our global economy. i applaud the recent efforts taken by the justice department for indicting five members of the chinese government for conducting cyberespionage attacks against u.s. industry, but more needs to be done. those indictments send a clear message to our adversaries that cyberespionage and theft of --

and theft of american intellectual property, trade secrets, military blueprints, and jobs -- jobs will not be tolerated. a recent mcafee and strategic for strategic and international studies report on the economic impact of cybercrime found an annual effect of roughly $455 billion globally. with 200,000 jobs lost in the united states alone as a result. in fact, former director of the n.s.a., general keith alexander, described cyberespionage and the loss of american intellectual property and innovation as the greatest transfer of wealth in history. a recent poll conducted by defense news revealed that our top nation's top security analysts see cyberattacks as the greatest threat to our nation. in fact, director of national intelligence james clapper testified earlier this year that critical infrastructure,

particularly the systems used in water management, oil and gas pipelines, electrical power distribution and mass transit provides an enticing target to malicious actors. a cyberattack on u.s. critical infrastructure such as gas pipelines, financial services, transportation and communication networks could result in catastrophic, regional or national effects on public health or safety, economic security and national security. high-profile breaches like the ones at target and nimeson marcus that affect over 10 million american consumers resonates. but as bad as those breaches were, a successful cyberattack on our critical infrastructure could cause much more damage in terms of lives lost and monetary damage. we cannot and will not wait for a catastrophic 9/11-scale

cyberattack to occur before moving greatly needed cybersecurity legislation. the national cybersecurity and critical infrastructure protection act ensures that d.h.s., and not the military, is responsible for domestic critical infrastructure protection. specifically, h.r. 3696 ensures that there is a civilian interface to the private sector to share real-time cyberthreat information across the critical infrastructure sectors. particularly in light of the snowden revelations, and importantly the bill protects civil liberties by putting a civilian agency with the nation's most robust privacy and civil liberties office in charge of preventing personal information from being shared. while also prohibiting any new regulatory authority. this bill builds upon the

groundwork already laid by industry and d.h.s. to facilitate critical infrastructure protection and incident response efforts. this bipartisan bill, which is rare in this day and age, mr. speaker, is a product of 19 months of extensive outreach and great collaboration with all the stakeholders, including more than 300 meetings with experts, industry, government agencies, academics, privacy advocates and other committees of jurisdiction. we went through several drafts and countless hours of negotiations to bring this commonsense legislation to the floor with support from all of the critical infrastructure sectors. at this time i'd like to enter into the record the 19 letters of support representing over 33 trade associations from across industry sectors, u.s. businesses, national security

experts and privacy and civil liberty advocates. specifically -- the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. mr. mccaul: thank you, mr. speaker. and specifically we have received support letters from the american civil liberties union, the aclu, from the american chemistry council, from at&t, from boeing, conhe hadton, the repository trust and clearing corporation, grid-wise alliance, multiple trade associations in the energy sector, molt am trade associations in the financial services sector. information technology industry council, the internet security alliance, rapid 7, national defense industrial association, professional services council, could he, rgy, pep verizon and semantec. i believe -- pepco, verizon and

semantec. i believe that's great on behalf of the private sector and i want to give a great deal of thanks not only to the members involved but to the staff on this committee on both sides of the aisle who've worked countless hours to bring this bill to its fruition, to the floor of the house. i'd like to bring special attention to the endorsement from the aclu. he aclu refers to h.r. 3696 as both pro-security and pro-privacy. when have we heard these two groups coming together? pro-security and pro-privacy. striking that balance between security and privacy, i believe is one of the most difficult challenges in developing cybersecurity legislation. and i am so very proud that this committee and this bill achieves that goal.

i want to close with the threat that i see out there from cyber. people asks you, what keeps you up at night? we can talk about al qaeda. we can talk about mr. putin. we can talk about isis in iraq and syria. we can talk about our border and the threats south of the border. t when i see our offense capability and what we can do offensive and knowing we can't stop attacks, not only to steal things, not only criminal i.t. theft, not only espionage, but the power to shut things down and to bring this country to s knees with a cyber-9/11, mr. speaker, that's what really keeps me up at night. my father was a world war ii bombardier and supported the d-day invasion, battle of the bulge. in his days, bombs won that war. we have a new kind of warfare out there.

it's a digital warfare. and the game has changed. it's done anonymously. it's done not just -- there are no boundaries to this cyberthreat anymore. it can come from anywhere at anytime without being able to attribute back to the source from where the attack came from. this bill will for the first time codify d.h.s.'s ability in the in-kick, which is their cybercommand, to better defend and support critical infrastructures in the united states that we so heavily depend on and it will ultimately protect not only our economy and our infrastructures but ultimately protect the american people. and with that, mr. speaker, i ask my colleagues to support this important legislation, to protect america and i reserve

the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentlewoman from new york is recognized. ms. clarke: mr. speaker, i rise in strong support of h.r. 3696, the national cybersecurity and critical infrastructure protection act of 2014, and i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman is recognized. ms. clarke: thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, i am pleased to be here today as an original co-sponsor of this legislation. this bipartisan legislation gives the department of homeland security the legislative authority it needs to carry out its cybermission and to help protect our nation's critical infrastructure from cyberattacks and intrusions. the approach taken in this bill is very much in line with d.h.s.'s approach since 2007 when president bush designated the department as the lead ederal civilian agency for

cybersecurity. this is a duo mission. d.h.s. is responsible with working with federal civilian agencies to protect federal i.t. networks and the .gov domain. at the same time, d.h.s. is responsible for effectively partnering with the private sector to raise its level of cyberhygiene and foster greater cybersecurity. am pleased that h.r. 3696 authorizes the 4/7 operations of the national cybersecurity and communications integration enter, also referred to as n ccic. the nccic has been the epycenter of sharing of the activities of cyberterrorists and criminals and the reporting of cyberincidents by critical infrastructure owners and operators. additionally, the bill codifies

ongoing efforts to raise the level of cybersecurity within sectors. tructure in coordination with the private sector a voluntary risk-based security standard. this provision essentially codifies the process that the national institute of standards and technology, also known as nist, undertook pursuant to an executive order that president bama issued in february of 2013. under the approach taken in this bill, we are asking business and government to come together to find an adaptable and cooperative cybersecurity framework, not an off-the-shelf or a check-the-box solution but to raise the level of cybersecurity across the nation. i am pleased that the measured and targeted approach taken to working with the private sector was supported by the american

civil liberties union, which called our bill pro-security and pro-privacy. the president said it best, it is the policy of the united states to enhance the security and resilience of the nation's critical infrastructure and to maintain a cyberenvironment that encourages efficiency, innovation and economic prosperity while promoting safety, security, business confidentiality, privacy and civil liberties. while i am also pleased about all we do with respect to the department's mission to work with the private sector on cybersecurity, i'm a bit disappointed that the key language that clarifies d.h.s.'s roles with respect to other federal agencies and protection of the .gov domain is not in the bill before you today. unfortunately, the striking of these provisions appear to have been the price that the committee on homeland security

had to pay to get this important legislation to the floor. it seems that the provisions would have -- that would have given d.h.s. specific authority to respond in a more timely manner to federal network breaches were opposed by another committee chairman. unfortunately, that chairman has willfully chosen to ignore reality. the reality is that in 2008, d.h.s. has assumed responsibility for working with agencies to protect the dot-gov domain, not the office of management and government. it is my hope that as this legislation moves through the legislative process there will be progress on efforts to ensure that the law reflects this reality. with that, mr. speaker, i urge passage of h.r. 3696 and reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman reserves the balance of her time. the gentleman from texas is

recognized. mr. mccaul: i thank you, mr. speaker. i yield as much time as he may consume to the distinguished gentleman from pennsylvania, the chairman of the committee on homeland security subcommittee on cybersecurity infrastructure protection and security technologies, my good friend and colleague, mr. meehan, who has spent i must say countless hours advancing this bill, meeting with the private sector, meeting with the privacy groups to get to this point where we are today. i want to commend you, sir, for a job well done. and i yield to the gentleman from pennsylvania. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from pennsylvania is recognized. mr. meehan: i want to thank the gentleman from texas and i want to thank my colleagues from both sides of the aisle. mr. speaker, i rise in strong support of h.r. 3696, the national cybersecurity and critical infrastructure protection act of 2014. before i really talk about the substance, i want to attach myself for a moment to the

comments and i thought the very effective commentary of the gentleman from texas, mr. mccaul, but his closing i think really summed it up. it's not just what we're doing but why does this matter and why does this matter now. you know, we have generated tremendous economic prosperity by virtue of the creation of a global internet, but the fact of the matter is while that has closed our world and instain taint yuss communications and other kinds of benefits, it's also created the situation for the first time in the history of our nation in which we aren't protected by two oceans and effectively two friendly countries on our borders. and now we are able to be accessed from anywhere in the world at a moment's notice. it was instructive to me that i thought -- i often used to say when we were handling the case, you let the evidence be put in through the words of the witnesses and if you pay attention to the words of the

witness, that is more powerful than what you can say and it's instructive to me that the former c.i.a. director and the former secretary of defense, leon panetta, the first thing he did when he stepped down as secretary of defense was to travel to new york and to warn, not just new york but this nation, about the potential impact of what he termed a cyber-pearl harbor. this is a critical and timely issue we are working on and as importantly it has been addressed in an effective bipartisan fashion. in the wake of escalating cyberattacks on our nation's infrastructure, including our financial systems, nasdaq and the recent nimeson marcus and americans' personal information, we bring h.r. 3696 to the house floor. cyberattacks and cyberhacks are now front and center on our homeland and the media reporting more now than ever

that cyberattacks about something we already know, that the threat is constant and evolving. and americans expects congress to act. we who serve in congress and government know all too well that the cyberattack is real and imminent and could do catastrophic damage to our nation's infrastructure, bridges, tunnels, oil and gas pipelines, water systems, financial systems and their markets, air traffic control systems and more. today, the u.s. house of representatives takes the significant step, a step forward in protecting and securing cyberspace through the cyberinfrastructure act that we put on the floor today. i'm very proud of this bill and all the good work and due diligence that went into it. chairman mccaul and i and our staffs held over 300 stakeholder meetings to ensure we got this legislation right. . i want at that thank the

members on the other side of the aisle as well for their leadership and their work collectively on this. this is bipartisan legislation. but not just those of us working together here within the house. it's also been supported by private sector stakeholders, as the chairman identified, by the aclu. in fact, as the uclu called it and the chairman identified this as well, both postsecurity and pro-privacy. and that is because very notably this bill puts the department of homeland security, a civilian agency, with the nation's first created and most robust privacy office in charge of preventing personal information from getting narcotic verntly caught in the net -- inadvertently caught in the net. a big important part of the work that's been done here. this built on the department of homeland security's unique public-private partnership in securing the nation's critical infrastructure it. codifies the department's critical cybersecurity mission. public-private is important.

90% of the assets in the cyberworld are in the private sector. the department of homeland security works with the other federal government programs -- partners in the collaboratetific effort to secure our nation against cyberattacks and this bill cements d.h.s.'s critical role. and specifically this bill requires the department to collaborate with industry, to facilitate both protection of our infrastructure and our response to a cyberattack. the bill very importantly strengths d.h.s.'s civilian transparent interface to allow realtime cyberthreat sharing across the critical infrastructure sectors. this legislation also strengthens the integrity of our nation's information system and it makes it more difficult for online hackers to compromise consumer and personal information like we saw in target. and prevents hackers from stealing americans' business and intellectual property, another point well driven home by the chairman talking about

jobs and billions, hundreds of billions of dollars in research and development that are stolen from america by virtue of these cyberattacks. these attacks take place at a level of sophistication nextworks. probe criminal enterprises have spent years and invested billions of dollars into crafting and securing the tools and intelligence necessary to target american citizens. whether it's the theft of wealth or intelligence or launching a malicious attack on our nation's energy, transportation or chemical networks, american lives and livelihoods remain at risk without sufficient security. last year president obama issued an executive order on cybersecurity because congress failed to act on this issue. but the threshold of securing our nation in the 21st century cannot rely on executive orders. and presidential trecktifics.

as members of congress, we have the responsibility to act in a way that best protects the american citizen. our enemies live and breathe to catch us asleep at the switch. and i'm unwilling, as my colleagues are, to stand by speechless when they're asked, what did you do to prevent a cyberattack? now's the time to show them what we have and can do. this bill doesn't address every issue in cybersecurity and it's not a comprehensive cybersecurity fix, but it's a giant and critical step forward. together we can unite our nation against those who wish to do us harm and i have no doubt we can get it done. in fact, we have no other choice. i thank you, mr. speaker, and i urge the support of h.r. 3696 and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from texas is recognized. >> mr. speaker, i have no more speakers. if the gentlewoman from new york has -- i believe a few additional speakers. i'm prepared to close once the gentlewoman does.

the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentlewoman from new york is recognized. ms. clarke: mr. speaker, i yield to mr. payne. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new jersey is recognized for two minutes. mr. payne: thank you, mr. speaker. i rise in support of h.r. 3696, the national cybersecurity and critical infrastructure protection act. in october, 2012, hurricane sandy wreaked havoc up and down the east coast, including in my home state of new jersey. according to the department of ergy, between 2003 and 2012, close to 700 power out ands occurred due to weather-related events, costing the national -- the nation an annual average of $18 billion to $33 billion. even worse, in 2012 hurricane sandy carried an estimated

price tag between $40 billion and $52 billion. and as we have seen recently, our power systems are exposed to cyberattacks more than ever before. disasters, whether manmade or by mother nature, are drained -- draining our nation's economy and exposes us to other potentially more harmful attacks on our financial industry, water and waste systems, chemical, telecommunications and energy sectors. put simply, it is clear that our electrical grid needs an undergrade. -- upgrade. that's why i'm pleased that during the committee process, the committee unanimously supported my amendment, h.r. 2962, the smart grid study act. the study will be conducted by the national research council in full cooperation with the department of homeland security and other government agencies

as necessary. and will provide a comprehensive assessment of actions necessary to expand and strengthen the capabilities of the electrical grid, to prepare for, respond to, mitigate and recover from a natural disaster or cyberattack. further, it will support -- it was supported by the national electrical manufacturers association, the demand response and smart grid coalition, and the american public powers association. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from new york is recognized. ms. clarke: i yield the gentleman another minute. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new jersey is recognized for one additional minute. mr. payne: thank you, mr. speaker. in closing, i just want to thank chairman mccaul and ranking member thompson, chairman meehan and ranking member clarke, for really showing us what a bipartisan effort is all about. at homeland security, we all

have a common goal, and it's to keep the homeland and the nation safe. so i urge my colleagues to support this bill and with that, mr. speaker, i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentlewoman from new york is recognized. ms. clarke: mr. speaker, i yield two minutes to the distinguished gentleman from rhode island and the co-chair of the house cybersecurity caucus, mr. langevin. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from rhode island is recognized for two minutes. mr. langevin: i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection ex--- without objection, so ordered. mr. langevin: i thank the gentlelady for yielding. and, mr. speaker, i rise in strong support of h.r. 3696, h.r. 2952, and h.r. 3107. i want to thank ranking member thompson, chairman meehan and ranking member clarke for their hard work on bringing these bills to the floor today. but most especially in particular, i want to thank

chairman mccaul, i chairman of the full homeland security committee, who also serves with me as founder and co-chair of the congressional cybersecurity caucus and i want to thank him for his dedication to bringing these bills to the floor today and his commitment to bringing -- tone acting strong cybersecurity -- to enacting strong cybersecurity legislation. in today's political climate, moving significant reform in a consensus manner is exceptionally difficult and this reflects chairman mccaul's bipartisan approach. so, mr. speaker, we all know that we depend on cyberspace and the internet every day. it's vitally important to the american people. it is an inseparable part of our everyday lives and everything that we do, vital to everything from banking to national security. but it is also highly contested and unfortunately the pace of the threats are ever-increasing. we see it every day, whether it's theft of personal

information or credit card information that's used for criminal intent, the theft, the theft of intellectual property that costs america its competitiveness and jobs, and we also know the threats to our critical infrastructure in particular, both to our electric grid and to our financial system. things that i have been calling attention to for years now. mr. speaker, we must tap into our creative and innovative spirit to address today's challenges and position ourselves to be agile in the face of both today's threats as well as tomorrow's. i believe that the three bills that are before us today in conjunction with the information sharing and other measures passed by this house earlier in this congress, will help to enable the better future for our nation's cyberspace capabilities. i know, mr. speaker, that we will never be 100% secure in cyberspace. it is an ever-evolving and moving threat and we'll never be 100% secure. but i do know this, that we can close that vulnerable down to

something that's much more manageable and i urge my colleagues to support the bills before us today. i thank the gentleman from texas for his leadership and i strongly urge support of these three bills and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentlewoman from new york is recognized. ms. clarke: mr. speaker, i have no more speakers. if the gentleman from texas has no more speakers, then i am prepared to close. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman is recognized to close. ms. clarke: i thank, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, i urge passage of 3696, legislation that will enhance d.h.s.'s ability to execute its cybersecurity mission. i am particularly pleased that it includes language i authored to help ensure that d.h.s. has the cyberwork force it needs to execute that mission. i'd like to thank chairman mccaul and ranking member thompson, as well as subcommittee chair, mr. meehan,

for their leadership and their vision, their understanding that this is something that keeps us up at night, this is something that this body must move forward to address, this is the 21st century threat that we can not sit idly by and not do anything about. their leadership on h.r. 3696 cyberlegislation on the floor today speaks volumes to moving us in the right direction. with that, mr. speaker, i urge passage of h.r. 3696 -- 3696 and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman yields back the balance of her time. the gentleman from texas is recognized. mr. mccaul: thank you, mr. speaker. let me echo the sentiments of the gentlelady from new york. i want to thank you for your work on this bill. mr. meehan, you were truly the work horse -- the workhorses, the engines behind this bill.

i want to thank you for helping us get to this point where we are today. congressman langevin, we were talking about cybersecurity before it was cool to talk about cybersecurity. forming the cybersecurity caucus, i think raises awareness to members of congress about how important this issue really is. because i think when you talk about this issue, mr. speaker, people's eyes tend to glaze over. they don't understand how important this is to protecting the american people. this is a national security bill. i don't believe partisan politics has a place in that. i was at the aspen institute with james harman who served on our committee and the intelligence committee for many years, who also believes that the -- our adversaries don't care whether wire democrat or republican -- whether we're democrat or republican. they care about the fact that we're americans and they want to hit us. and we haved a never air ises who want to -- adversary -- and we have adversaries who want to hit us in the cybersecurity space. this is a prosecurity and

pro-privacy bill. i had a reporter ask me, how could you possibly get the aclu to agree on any security bill? it protects americans' privacy, but also their security through the private civilian interface to the private sector. and that's how we do it. it's not the military. d.h.s. has a domestic critical infrastructure role. of course director alexander called cybersecurity and what has happened in recent years, the largest transfer of wealth in history. so when the american people say, why is this so important, the largest transfer of wealth in american history, why that's so important? because cyber can bring down things, can shut down things in a 9/11-style. we have a historical moment in this congress to pass the first cybersecurity bill through the house and senate and be signed into law in the history of the

congress. and i, as this bill passes, i hope in a few minutes, and we send it over to the senate, i hope our colleagues on the senate side will respond to this. they made great progress on the senate side in getting work done on cybersecurity. we have a unique opportunity and a great moment here to pass this bill out of the house, get it married with the senate bill in a bipartisan way, to protect the american people, and get it signed into law by the president, something that we very rarely have seen in this congress. so i think it's a very historic moment and to close, mr. speaker, you know, when 9/11 happened, a lot of people did a lot of finger pointing around here and pointed to members of congress and to the executive branch and said, what did you do to stop this? what did you do to stop this? and we had a 9/11 commission that pointed out all the vulnerabilities and the things that we didn't do as members of congress. i don't want that to happen again today.

i want to be able to say, mr. speaker, if god forbid we get hit, and we get hit hard in a cyberattack against the united states of america, that we, as members of congress and members of this committee, did everything within our power to stop it. and so with that, mr. speaker, i'm proud of the great work we've done together. i look forward to the passage of this bill and with that i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the question is will the house suspend the rules and pass the bill, h.r. 3696, as amended. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. . in the opinion of the chair, 2/3 having responded in the affirmative, the rules are suspended, the bill is passed, and without objection the motion to reconsider is laid on the table.

the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from pennsylvania seek recognition? mr. meehan: mr. speaker, i move that the house suspend the rules and pass h.r. 2952, as amended. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: union calendar number 241, h.r. 2952, a bill to amend the homeland security act of 2002 to make certain improvements in the laws relating to the advancement of security technologies for critical infrastructure protection, and for other , -- for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from pennsylvania, mr. meehan, and the gentlewoman from new york, ms. clarke, will

each control 20 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from pennsylvania. mr. meehan: mr. speaker, i ask that he can that all members may have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the bill under consideration. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. mr. meehan: thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. meehan: mr. speaker, i rise in support of h.r. 2952, the critical infrastructure research and development advancement or what we call the cirda act. this legislation was passed out of the full committee with bipartisan support. unanimous bipartisan support and i'd like to thank my good friend, the ranking member on the cybersecurity and infrastructure technologies committee, ms. clarke, for co-sponsoring and supporting this legislation. one of the committee's most important duties is to protect our nation's critical infrastructure. the cirda act will change the way the department of homeland security develops protections

for infrastructure by creating and facilitating access to new and existing technologies. currently there are barriers within the department that inhibits strategizing for and ultimately the purchasing of the best tools that our country has to offer. the cirda act will direct d.h.s. to facilitate the development of a research and development strategy for critical infrastructure security technologies as well as explort feasibility of expanding use -- explore the feasibility of expanding use of r&d consortiums. we must have access to new technologies and a public-private partnership can elp spur innovation to protect other defense systems, essential networks, americans' financial information, chemical facilities and the many other areas of our economy that are vital for the protection and confidence of americans and our

way -- in our way of life. this is important, mr. speaker, because the fact of the nature, when we're dealing with cyber, what we're dealing with is not just the ability of what we can do today to create a defense but the recognition that those on the other side who are looking to try to exploit our defenses, it's a constant chess game that is taking place. and whatever we are able to do immediately, somebody's looking for a way to try to get around those protections and compromise them. and as a result, we have to be able to have the best capacity generated either in the private sector or in the government sector and the ability to get those best protections to the places where they need to be, the quickest and most importantly. finally, the legislation will designate a technology h nothing clearing-house where proven -- technology clearing-house where we can keep pace with the rapidly evolving variables of the threat to our nation and the

technological achievements only enhances our ability to combat attacks to the u.s. critical infrastructure. i urge support for the cirda act, and i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentlewoman from new york is is recognized. ms. clarke: mr. speaker, i rise in strong support of h.r. 2952, the critical infrastructure research and development advancement act, and i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman is recognized. ms. clarke: thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, i'd like to thank the gentleman from pennsylvania, the chairman of the cybersecurity infrastructure protection and security technologies subcommittee for introducing this very vital legislation. i appreciate him working with me and the rest of the committee to bring a thoughtful and bipartisan bill to the floor today. in may, the department of

justice released the names of five members of the chinese people's liberation army that are suspected of carrying out cyberattacks against american companies for over eight years. these indictments underscore the significant cybervulnerabilities that the department of homeland security works to identify and to thwart. some of the department's most important efforts are targeted at protecting our critical infrastructure systems, such as communication systems and the elect trick grid. these systems -- electric grid. these systems have components that americans suspect will function without a glitch. to carry out this mission, d.h.s. is constantly researching and developing new technologies and defenses to help protect our infrastructure. this r&d is extremely important to the safety of american

infrastructure. at the same time, congress must do proper oversight to ensure that it is done in an effective and efficient and focused way. that is why i co-sponsored this act which requires d.h.s. to have a research and development strategy for critical infrastructure protection. this strategy is to be focused on identifying the most immediate threats and then developing a comprehensive set of initiatives to address them. it directs d.h.s. to employ public-private partnerships, intergovernmental collaboration, university centers of excellence and national laboratory technology transfers to make sure that d.h.s. is working with state-of-the-art researchers and facilities. this strategy will help d.h.s. keep ahead of the rapidly evolving cybersecurity attacks that we hear about each and

every day. i am confident that with the focused measures set forth in this bill and increased attention to the importance of science and technology in our anti-terrorism efforts, we can be better equipped to defend america's critical infrastructure. with that, mr. speaker, i urge passage and i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman reserves the balance of her time. the gentleman from pennsylvania is recognized. mr. meehan: i thank you, mr. speaker. at this time, mr. speaker, i have no more speakers, and if the gentlewoman from new york has no further speakers, i'm prepared to close once the gentlewoman does. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentlewoman from new york is recognized. ms. clarke: mr. speaker, i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman is recognized. ms. clarke: i thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, cyberterrorists and cybercriminals are constantly innovating. we must do more to protect against these threats and foster great resilience of

critical infrastructure networks to such threats. h.r. 2952 will make sure that we fight the new threats of this era with the most advanced technology solutions. i urge my colleagues to join me supporting h.r. 2952, the cirda act, and i thank the gentleman from pennsylvania, mr. meehan, for making it possible for us to have this on the floor today and to bring this new piece of legislation into fruition. with that, mr. speaker, i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman yields back the balance of her time. the gentleman from pennsylvania is recognized to close. mr. meehan: i thank you, mr. speaker. i want to express as well, as i close, once again my appreciation for the tremendous collaborative working relationship with my colleague, ms. clarke, and her staff and the staffs from both committees who have worked extensively to put these bills in the position

that they have. it's a joy to be part of something here in this congress in a bipartisan fashion which people are working together to solve problems that challenge us all. in my closing, i'd like to be able to ask unanimous consent to include in the letter a -- record a letter in support of h.r. 2952 that is written by the security industry association. and these are the folks that represent over 470 suppliers of electronic physical security and other kinds of solutions. but the essence of what -- the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. mr. meehan: i thank the speaker. the essence of what this is the recognition of those who are in the industry, the department of homeland security needs to be able to set clear and measurable r&d priorities that will accelerate the development of cutting edge security technologies to protect the critical infrastructure. when we are out there so frequently, what we hear from people is the concern, i've been attacked, what do i do to protect myself?

and they turn to the department of homeland security for advice, and as i said in an earlier point, the reality is that while the responsibility rests with the department and in the government to be able to facilitate the protection of the homeland and our assets, the reality is that 90% of these assets are placed within the private sector. and it's in fact there where much of -- as much of and in fact maybe some of the most pie nearing research and development is -- pioneering research and development is accomplished. one of the realities that is faced, and i think the gentlelady pointed to the concept of innovation. we often think of innovation in a positive way and it usually is a positive thing. it means somebody is always thinking of a new and better way to accomplish a task. but criminals do that too, and so do those who want to do us harm. and no matter how good our protections are, there's the

reality that somebody else the moment that it goes online is looking for a way to get around it. and that means that we have to have the capacity to have the ability to work quickly and effectively and then once those who are na position to know what's best to be able to communicate down the line, -- in a position to know what's best to be able to communicate down the line, the small manufacture in the middle of kansas who is still worried about their r&d can have access to the same kinds of protections. this bill allows that kind of collaboration to take place, working through the clearing-house in the committee on homeland security -- the department of homeland security and that is why i think it's so important that we take this step forward and i urge all members to join me in supporting this bill and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the question is will the house suspend the rules and pass the bill h.r. 2952, as amended.

those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, 2/3 having responded in the affirmative, the rules are suspended, the bill is passed, and without objection the motion to reconsider is laid on the table. for what purpose does the gentleman from pennsylvania seek recognition? mr. meehan: mr. speaker, i move that the house suspend the les and pass h.r. 31 07, as amended -- 3107, as amended. the clerk: the clerk will report the title of the -- the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: h.r. 3107, a bill to require the secretary of homeland security to establish cybersecurity occupation classifications, assess the cybersecurity workforce, develop a strategy to address identified gaps in the cybersecurity workforce, and or other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from pennsylvania, mr. meehan, and the gentlewoman from new york, ms. clarke, each will control 20 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from pennsylvania. mr. meehan: mr. speaker, i ask

unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days to revise and and their remarks include any extraneous material on the bill under consideration. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. mr. meehan: mr. speaker, i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. . mr. meehan: mr. speaker, i rise today in support of h.r. 3107 which is the homeland security boots-on-the-ground act and it's sponsored by the cybersecurity infrastructure and protection and securities technology's subcommittee ranking member, ms. yvette clarke from new york. this critical piece of legislation is necessary to ensure that the department of homeland security can address gaps in the department's cybersecurity work force. i'm proud to co-sponsor this legislation, as it will direct the department to assess its cyber work force, create occupational classifications and development a cybersecurity work force strategy. throughout the past year, our subcommittee has worked in a

bipartisan fashion to identify the cyberthreat to our nation's critical infrastructure, as well as to assess the department's ability to prevent major sishe attacks -- cyberattacks. we've identified areas where congress can act to neutralize this evolving threat. i'm particularly proud of the work that we did to tweak this legislation and to incorporate it into the larger committee cyber bill. i believe today's markup will go a long way in supporting this mission and i urge support for this crucial piece of legislation. i thank you, mr. speaker, and i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentlewoman from new york is recognized. ms. clarke: mr. speaker, i rise n strong support of h.r. 3107, the homeland security cybersuret boots-on-the-ground act and i yield myself -- cybersecurity boots-on-the-ground act and i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman is recognized. ms. clarke: thank you, mr. speaker. this is a bill i introduced to address fundamental challenges

in the cyber work force at the department of homeland security. it has gained bipartisan support as acknowledged by our chairman, mr. meehan. since the attacks of september 11, the urgent need to fill critical national security positions at times has led to actions that may have inadvertently heightened our vulnerability and fostered an overreliance on -- over-reliance on private contractors. from a recruitment and retention standpoint, it is critical that the department of homeland security clearly identifies job classifications for the cyber positions it seeks to fill. that was one of the major conclusions of the task force that the homeland security advisory committee assembled at the request of then d.h.s. secretary janet napolitano in 2012. i introduced the homeland

security cybersecurity boots-on-the-ground act to implement a number of the task force's key recommendations. first, the bill directs d.h.s. to develop and issue comprehensive occupation classifications for persons performing activities in furtherance of the department's cybersecurity aye admissions. secondly, -- admissions. secondly, the bill requires the secretary to assess the readiness and capacity of the department to meet its cybersecurity mission. as part of the assessment, the department has to identify where positions are located, whether these positions are vacant, and whether they are held by full time employees or contractors. thirdly, the bill requires the secretary to develop a comprehensive work force strategy. this strategy will be implemented to enhance the

readiness, capacity training, recruitment and retention of the department's cybersecurity work force. finally, the bill requires the secretary to establish and maintain a process to verify the individuals employed by private contractors who serve in cybersecurity positions at the department, receive initial and recurrent information security training. h.r. 3107 takes a holistic approach to the challenge of recruiting, training and retraining the cybersecurity work force that d.h.s. needs. with that, mr. speaker, i urge adoption and reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman reserves the balance of her time. the gentleman from pennsylvania is recognized. mr. meehan: thank you i thank you, mr. speaker -- thank you, mr. speaker. at this time i have no further speakers. i'm very grateful for the gentlelady's presentation of this issue. if she has no further speakers, then i'm prepared to close once the gentlelady does. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance

of his time. the gentlewoman from new york is recognized. ms. clarke: mr. speaker, i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman is recognized. mr. clarke: i thank you, mr. speaker -- ms. clarke: i thank you, mr. speaker. and i also thank the ranking member, mr. meehan, for all of his support and all of the work that we have done together in a bipartisan way to bring this legislation to the floor, as well as the sweep of cybersecurity legislation that we brought forth to the floor fod -- today. i want to also thank both the staff of the committee and of my office for the work and the diligence that they have put into bringing forth what i call real 21st century legislation. it's very important legislation and our very way of life depends on its success. since 2008, the department of homeland security has held the lead federal civilian agency for cybersecurity. it has been responsible for

working with federal agencies to secure their i.t. networks, the private sector, particularly critical infrastructure owners and operators, to raise the level of cyberhygiene and address the threats in a timely manner. my legislation will help ensure that d.h.s. has the work force it needs to execute these critical responsibilities. for that reason, i urge all of my colleagues to support h.r. 3107. with that, mr. speaker, i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman yields back the balance of her time. the gentleman from pennsylvania is recognized to close. mr. meehan: thank you, mr. speaker. i just want to conclude my remarks on this by pointing to e preparation that went into this bill, out of a recognition of the importance of not just this issue and the challenges that we face, but the complexity of this issue, but

the recognition in order for the department to fulfill its mission as they have to have the kind of work force that's capable of doing it. and in areas like this, it requires a skilled work force and some would say a uniquely skilled work force. and i think the gentlelady's wisdom in recognizing that once you develop that skilled work force, when 90% of the assets are out in the private sector, it does not take too long before that private sector comes knocking on the door. and starts to say, we want your people out here. and so wisely the gentlelady has pointed to allowing us to have a plan in place that looks at the three r's. readiness, recruitment and retention. and that's the essence of what we want to try to do by this very, very important legislation, to give some flexibility and control within the department to not only train and make sure we've got

the best next-generation of those who will commit themselves to our nation by service through the department in protecting our homeland, but once they've developed those skills, that we're able as much as possible to retain them within here by virtue of allowing them the capacity and the flexibility to do the work that they do best. there will still be plenty of opportunity to find right people in the private sector as well, but we've got to make sure the mission of homeland security is not affected and so for those reasons i urge all members to join me in supporting this bill and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the question is, will the house suspend the rules and pass the bill, h.r. 3107, as amended. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, 2/3 of those voting having responded in the affirmative, the rules -- yes, the gentleman from pennsylvania is recognized. mr. meehan: mr. speaker, i object to the vote on the grounds that a quorum is not present and i make a point of order that a quorum is not present.

the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20, further proceedings on this uestion will be postponed. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from connecticut seek recognition she -- kentucky seek recognition? >> mr. speaker, i move that the house suspend the rules and 250 as bill h.r. 4 amended. the speaker pro tempore: the

clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: union calendar number 418, h.r. 4250, a bill to amend the federal food, drug and cosmetic act to provide an alternative process for review of safety and effectiveness of nonprescription sunscreen active ingredients and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from kentucky, mr. whitfield, and the gentleman from michigan, mr. dingell, each will control 20 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from kentucky. mr. whitfield: i ask unanimous consent that all members have five legislate of -- legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and insert extraneous materials in the record on the bill. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. mr. whitfield: mr. speaker, i would yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. whitfield: mr. speaker, i rise today in support of h.r. 4250, the sunscreen innovation act, which seeks to address an important area of public concern by strengthening the sunscreen ingredient review process at the food and drug administration. i would like to remind everyone

that skin cancer is the most prevalent kind of cancer in america. each year there are more new cases of skin cancer than breast, prostate, lung and colon cancer combined. by 2015, it is estimated that one in 50 americans will develop mel noema in their life -- mel noema in their lifetime. it also happens to be one of the most common forms of cancer in young adults, particularly young women. even though the food and drug administration has listed action on sunscreen ingredient application as a private, since 2008, no new sunscreen ingredients have been improved by the f.d.a. in fact, none have been approved in 15 years. this is despite the fact that eight sunscreen applications have been pending at the f.d.a.

, some as far back as 2002. i might add that we find ourselves in this predicament even though in europe and other places around the world, new sunscreen ingredients are being introduced into the sunscreen product. this past april, the energy and commerce committee held a hearing on the sunscreen innovation act, where all of the expert witnesses, including the f.d.a., were in agreement that the current approval process is broken and in need of reform. so the objective of the sunscreen innovation act is two fold. first, two expedite the review of pending applications at f.d.a. and, second, to create a timely and transparent process for new applications to be reviewed and acted on. the framework outlined in this legislation strikes an

appropriate balance between consumer safety and access to the very best sunscreen product. the bill we have before us today reflects a bipartisan agreement reached in consultation with the food and drug administration and outside stakeholders such as the past coalition and environmental working group. i want to give particular thanks to my colleague, mr. dingell from michigan, for sponsoring this legislation with me. i'd also like to thank chairman upton who worked with us closely throughout the entire process, and ranking member waxman, for their assistance in reaching the agreement that allows this legislation to come to the floor. i want to urge all my colleagues to support the bill and i at this time would reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from michigan is recognized. mr. dingell: i yield myself such time as i may consume.

the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. dingell: i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. mr. dingell: mr. speaker, i rise in support of h.r. 4250, the sunscreen innovation act. this legislation proves that this body can work together, not only across the aisle, but with the agencies under our jurisdiction. and also with the industries concerned. this legislation has support of everyone. there is no opposition to it. and that includes the industry, it includes the health people, it also includes the environmentalists. and it includes the administration. u.v. rays from the sun are -- it is understood -- increasing the amount of melanoma amongst

our people enormously. 800% amongst young women. 400% amongst young men. over the past 40 years. sunscreen sold in the united states today do not offer the same level of protection as sunscreens sold in europe, canada, australia and other countries. in fact, the last over-the-counter sunscreen ingredient was approved by f.d.a. in the 1990's. some sunscreen ingredients have been waiting for review by f.d.a. for over a decade. this is inexcusable because f.d.a. has taken so long to review these applications. it's sure that increased accountability is needed at the agency to ensure these pending sunscreen applications are reviewed in a timely and speedy manner. i want to comment and

congratulate my colleague, mr. whitfield, for his leadership and fine work on this. and also chairman upton for his outstanding work. nd i want to congratulate my friends, mr. pallone and mr. waxman, for the good work they have done on this legislation. indeed, the staffs on both sides of the committee have been remarkable in what it is they have done on this matter. and it's interesting to note that we have the strong support of the american academy of dermatology, the american cancer society action network, the melanoma research alliance, the environmental working group and the melanoma research foundation. and i ask unanimous consent to insert letters from those agencies into the record. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. mr. dingell: i'd like to

observe that the staff has performed extraordinary work on this matter. i want to congratulate and thank greg on my staff as well as taylor, john, carley, eric for their hard work on the legislation. and i want to recognize members p-a-s-s, t coalition, for their hard work on this coalition. i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from kentucky is recognized. mr. whitfield: mr. speaker, at this time i'd like to yield five minutes to the chairman of the energy and commerce committee, my colleague from michigan, mr. upton. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan is recognized for five minutes. mr. upton: well, thank you, mr. speaker. you know, mr. speaker, i rise today in support of this very important bipartisan legislation to indeed help protect the public health. h.r. 4250, the sunscreen innovation act, is just that.

the growing rate of skin cancer in the u.s., including melanoma, is indeed alarming. according to the american cancer society, more americans are diagnosed with skin cancer every year than breast, prostrate and lung and colon cancer combined. one in every 50 of our constituents is going to be diagnosed with melanoma. we got to take every step that we can to combat this public health crisis. sadly, advancements in sunscreen have failed to keep pace with the increased awareness of the harm overexposure of the sun can cause and f.d.a. has not approved a new nonprescription sunscreen ingredient for nearly 20 years. despite the fact that several applications have been pending at the agency for products that have been used safely and effectively in europe and other parts of the world.

the review process that these products have to go at the f.d.a. is quite simply broken. it needs to be fixed, and that's what this legislation does. i particularly want to commend the work of my good friend from the great state of michigan, mr. dingell, and mr. whitfield, and with members of our entire committee as this bill passed with unanimous support as we moved through the process. we wanted to come up with a solution to allow the f.d.a. to fix the problem, and that's what this bill does. the sunscreen innovation act is going to address the current backlog of applications pending at the f.d.a. as well as establish a predictable and transparent review process for new applications. incorporating meaningful input from experts in the public, the bill also establishes a number of time frames for decisionmaking at the f.d.a. and remove administrative hurdles identified by the

f.d.a. to the sunscreen approval process. more importantly, it's going to allow americans to benefit from these products sooner while ensuring they are indeed safe and effective. you know, we had great success in our energy and commerce committee this congress. with over a dozen public health bills that have already been signed into law, obviously all bipartisan, and i'm confident that this commonsense bill which received, again, unanimous support in our committee, will soon be part of our strong record of results. in fact, i'm told that this is the 61st bill that our committee has reported out that will be approved on the house floor. that's a pretty good record of achievement. this one really, like the others, has a real impact on all of our constituents. it gives the f.d.a. the rightful tools so that we can get to the bottom of the problem which impacts one in 50 americans.

so, again, i want to compliment mr. dingell, mr. whitfield, mr. pallone, mr. waxman and others for helping deliver this bill to the house floor, and i look forward to a strong vote, hopefully voice, in a few minutes and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from kentucky is recognized. mr. whitfield: i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from michigan is recognized. mr. dingell: mr. speaker, i have no further requests for time. and so if the gentleman, my good friend, mr. whitfield, is ready i'm just prepared to yield back with the strong urging to my colleagues to support this bill which is is strongly bipartisan, unanimously brought forward to the congress and which has the strong support of both industry, government and the health groups. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from kentucky is recognized. mr. whitfield: i want to once again thank mr. dingell and i

appreciate him naming the staff because there was a lot of negotiations with f.d.a. on this bill. and taylor booth on my staff and other members of the energy and commerce committee staff, as named by mr. dingell, i want to give special thanks to them and also we appreciate the efforts of mr. pitts who is the chairman of the health subcommittee. and without the help of he and mr. pallone and their staffs we would not have been able to bring this bill to the floor. and so i will urge everyone to support it and yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the question is will the house suspend the rules and pass the bill h.r. 4250, as amended. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, 2/3 having responded in the affirmative, the rules are suspended, the bill is passed, and without objection the motion to reconsider is laid on the table.

for what purpose does the gentleman from texas seek recognition? mr. burgess: mr. speaker, i move that the house suspend the rules and pass the bill h.r. 594, as amended. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: union calendar number 416, h.r. 594, a bill to re-authorize and extend the paul d. wellstone muscular dystrophy community assistance, research, and education . endments of 2008 the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from texas, mr. burgess, and the gentleman from michigan, mr. dingell, each will control 20 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from texas. mr. burgess: mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days to revise and insert heir remarks and extraneous materials in the record on the bill. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. mr. burgess: mr. speaker, i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. burgess: thank you for the

recognition to discuss this bipartisan, bicameral legislation that was introduced with mr. engel of new york, h.r. 594, the muscular dystrophy community assistance, research and education amendments of 2014, or the m.d. care act. h.r. 594 has 113 bipartisan co-sponsors. this bill makes targeted updates and improvements to legislation first passed by congress in 2001 and then re-authorized in 2008. in each instance, these bills, including h.r. 594, have passed both subcommittee and full committee on voice votes and passed overwhelmingly on the floor under suspension, a trend i hope we can continue today. this legislation is supported by the totality of the muscular dystrophy community with over 20 organizations writing letters of support, including the muscular dystrophy association and the parent project muscular dystrophy. in short, the underlying law is a success story.

since the enactment, this law has successfully targeted limited federal resources to improve clinical care across the muscular dystrophies. muscular dystrophy is not a single disease. it's a group of genetic disorders characterized by progressive weakness and the loss of voluntary muscles that controls movement. it affects hundreds of children and adults throughout the world. some are seen in infancy and childhood while others may not appear until adulthood. the extent of muscle weakness as well as the rate of progression varies on -- among a spectrum of muscular dystrophies on where on a spectrum of muscular dystrophies a patient falls. since 2001, this law has successfully changed the lives of families impacted by all forms of muscular dystrophy. it has coordinated and focused federal biomedical research on nine forms of muscular dystrophy, developed data and

created patient care guidelines. and here's the good news. it has made a real difference. since 2001, there have been 67 clinical trials of drugs or therapies for muscular dystrophy and many can be traced to the basic research fforts stemming from this law. in duchenne, many are living into young adulthood. sometimes the law does not keep pace with science and medicine. for example, when the original law was written, those children who are now going into adulthood, would not have been able to look forward to such a favorable timeline. it does not make sense that we have developed care guidelines that have helped these patients live longer and then stop when they turn 18. this bill will address these issues with small targeted updates to current law. mr. speaker, let me be very clear about this. this bill creates no new

programs. this bill creates no increases of authorizations of appropriations nor does it create additional authorizations of appropriations. and it simply proposes a small set of improvements intended to ensure that the program is focusing on the most critical areas that funding being provided today reflects current scientific and medical knowledge. it is fiscally responsible because it makes the updated need in law to make sure that any money spent is not held back by an outdated statute. i'd like to chairmanupton and pitts as well as waxman and pallone for their help. i also want to thank the staff on both sides of the dieas and -- dias and committee. and i want to thank clay, katie and brenda with the energy and commerce majority and hannah with the minority. from mr. engel's staff, mark and heidi who negotiated with

my staff in good faith from day one. and on my staff, i particularly want to thank my deputy chief of staff, j.p., who led negotiations as well as katie and my former staffer, sarah. this bill is bipartisan. it has a history of consensus. it's fiscally responsible and will benefit all americans suffering from muscular dystrophy. i urge everyone to support it and i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. without objection, the gentleman from new york, mr. engel, is recognized. mr. engel: thank you, mr. speaker. i claim my time from mr. dingell, and i rise in strong support of h.r. 594, the paul d. wellstone muscular dystrophy community assistance, research and education amendments, and i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. engel: thank you, mr. speaker. i worked with the gentleman from texas, dr. burgess, to introduce this bill and i would personally like to thank him for his hard work with his

partnership and bringing it through the energy and commerce committee. d also like to thank representatives waxman, pallone, upton and pitts for bringing this bill to the floor today. the m.d. care act has always enjoyed full bipartisan support. congress first approved it in 2001. we updated it in 2008, and we're doing the same now. i'm pleased to see that its bipartisan tradition remains strong as we continue the fight against muscular dystrophy by taking up this legislation today. as i'm sure many of my colleagues already know and as dr. burgess pointed out, muscular dystrophy is not a single disease but a spectrum of genetic disorders resulting in progressive muscle weakness and degeneration. hundreds of thousands of children and adults currently suffer from various forms of muscular dystrophy in the united states and around the world. although there is still no cure, the m.d. care act has played a critical control in improving the lives of those suffering from these lethal

disorders. the m.d. care act has successfully coordinated and focused biomedical research, established clinical care standards, improved data collection and helped generate more than 65 clinical trials, more than 30 of which are still ongoing. as a direct result of this law, the life span of the average american living with duchenne muscular dystrophy, the most common form of muscular dystrophy in children, has increased by a full 10 years. that is a statistic of which we can be proud. as people live longer, their needs evolve. the legislation we're considering today respondses to the changing needs of muscular dystrophy patients without requiring authorization from appropriations. it will make targeted updates to the m.d. care act, bringing our programs in line with the scientific advancements we've

made since 2008, when the law was last updated. the bill allows the director of the national institutes of health to expand and intensify programs targeted at the nine most common forms of muscular difficultyny -- dystrophy. it also enhances research at the wellstone centers of excellence, strengthens the muscular dystrophy coordinating committee, updates data collection and increases awareness of treatment options among medical professionals. this bill is supported by 113 bipartisan co-sponsors and it has the full backing of the muscular dystrophy community. it is not a controversial bill at all. passing this will make a huge difference in the lives of all those affected by muscular dystrophy and i urge my colleagues to give it their full support. i want to conclude by thanking majority and minority staff, of which dr. burgess mentioned, and also once again thank him for his partnership on this bill and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from texas is

recognized. mr. burgess: mr. speaker, i'll yield five minutes to the chairman of the full committee, chairman upton. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan is recognized for five minutes. mr. upton: thank you again, mr. speaker. so i rise this afternoon in support of yet another very important health bill advanced by our committee, energy and commerce. this bill, h.r. 594, the paul d. wellstone muscular dystrophy community assistance, research and education amendments of 2014, or the m.d. care act. the bill again demonstrates the continued bipartisan achievements of our committee and particularly of the health subcommittee which has a proven tack record of getting solutions put into law that have a profound, positive affect on americans all across the country. muscular dystrophy, it is a complex group of diseases that affects the mobility and life expectancy of so many americans. current treatments can alleviate symptoms of the muscular dystrophies like duchenne and slow muscle

deterioration. but there is no treatment to reverse it. it's very sad. even with the progress made by researchers, obviously a lot of work remains. this legislation is going to help us find the answers to these diseases. the bill ensures the continuation of critical research at the n.i.h. and updates language in the public health service act to reflect the latest scientific advances. in addition, the muscular dystrophy coordinating committee of h.h.s. is going to be strengthed to accelerate the understanding of the impact of muscular dystrophy on patients. and more importantly it's going to work to find ways to expedite the approval of emerging therapies that will hopefully someday lead to a cure. i want to particularly thank dr. burgess and he will yet engel for their leadership -- eliot engel for their leadership on this bill. also chairman pitts, ranking member waxman and palofpblete i have to say that -- pallone.

i have to say that this is now the 62nd bill that our committee will have passed out of full committee that will pass on the house floor. we've got more than a dozen bipartisan committee bills, public health bills that have already been signed into law. we hope there will certainly be one of those. as we advance this bill, as well as the sunscreen innovation act which we just passed a few minutes ago. i know that this congress can be remembered as the public health congress, and i would urge my colleagues to support this important legislation, which passed on a voice vote unanimously in our committee. it sends the strong signal to those individuals and their ems impacted by muscular difficulty -- and their families impacted by muscular dystrophy that congress, yes we are, committed to finding a cure. we'll find the resources to do this. this legislation is yet another step and i would urge my colleagues to vote yes and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from texas is recognized. mr. burgess: i'll reserve my

time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new york has already yielded back the balance of his time. mr. burgess: then let me simply close by saying this is a good bill i urge all members to support. and i will yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the question is, will the house suspend the rules and pass the bill, h.r. 594, as amended. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, 2/3 of those voting having responded in the affirmative, the rules are suspended, the bill is passed and, without objection, the motion to reconsider is laid on the table. without objection, the title is amended.

for what purpose does the gentleman from michigan seek recognition? >> mr. speaker, i move that the house suspend the rules and pass h.r. 3635 as amended. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: union calendar number 421, h.r. 3635, a bill to ensure the functionality and security of new federal websites that collect personally identifiable information and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from michigan, mr. bentivolio, and the gentleman from massachusetts, mr. lynch, each will control 20 minutes the chair recognizes the gentleman from michigan. mr. bentvolio: thank you, mr. speaker. i yield myself such time as i may consume. i ask unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the bill under consideration. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. the gentleman is recognized. mr. bentvolio: mr. speaker, we as members of congress have been sent here to protect the people's right to privacy. not take them away.

my bill, h.r. 3635, will help to instill confidence in americans that their privacy and personal information is secure. h.r. 3635 will help ensure the functionality and security of federal websites. the escalation of security breaches involving personaly identifiable information -- personally identifiable information has contributeded to the loss of millions of recordses over the past few years. both within and outside the federal government. websites that fail to meet their intended function are a waste of taxpayer dollars and can result in needless frustration to the end user who's trying to access a federal service or benefit. the harm to the federal government is the loss of public trust, as well as potential legal liability or remediation costs that the taxpayer may ultimately bear. h.r. 3635 guards against the loss of the public's trust by requiring agency chief

information officers certify that federal websites collecting personal identifiable information are fully functional and secure. in addition, the bill requires agencies to notify affected individuals at their personal identifiable -- that their personal identifiable information may have been compromised within 72 hours of a known or suspected data breach. i'd like to thank chairman issa, ranking member cummings, and congressman connolly for their support of the bill, along with chairman mccaul and committee staff. i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from massachusetts is recognized. mr. lynch: thank you, mr. speaker. i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. lynch: thank you. i think we all agree that federal agency websites must be secure in order to protect taxpayers from being the victims of an information security breach. for that reason, i support the measure before us, the safe and secure federal websites act. the recent data breaches at

target, niemann marcus and other retail establishments affected more than 100 million americans. the importance of information security can be be overstated -- cannot be overstated. it is the responsibility of congress, as my friend from michigan has noted, to ensure that the federal government is not the source of these types of data breaches and to ensure that the personally identifiable information of american citizens is not compromised through federal websites. this bill would require agency chiefs -- chief information officers to certify to congress that the functionality and security of new or substantially modified websites that will contain personally identifiable information. it would also require that existing websites that contain personally identifiable information meet these security requirements within 90 days. we are not known for our speed around here. so i am not entirely sure that that will be enough time for agencies to secure existing

websites. and i hope that this bill, as this bill moves forward in the legislation, the timeliness issue is addressed. however, overall these requirements are positive beginning steps in preventing harmful data breaches within the federal government. i also want to take special time to mention and to thank congressman jerry connolly from virginia for his positive contribution to this legislation, for his work on data security issues. mr. connolly's amendment to this legislation closes the loophole in federal privacy requirements and streamlines federal oversight of agency implementation, of privacy policies and procedures pertaining to agency responses to security incidents involving personally identifiable information. i join with the gentleman from virginia in sincerely hoping we can continue to work together to move this bill forward in a bipartisan manner. i also hope we can work together to ensure that this bill is compatible with the existing framework of the

federal information security management act. with that, mr. speaker, i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from michigan is recognized. mr. bentvolio: i'm prepared to close, mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from massachusetts is recognized. mr. lynch: i have no further speakers and i yield back the balance of our time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from michigan is recognized. mr. bentvolio: mr. speaker, i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. bentvolio: this bill has 126 co-sponsors and passed out of committee with bipartisan support. i strongly urge passage of this bill, to protect the privacy of americans accessing federal websites and support this bipartisan legislation. with that, mr. speaker, i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the question is, will the house suspend the rules and pass the bill, h.r. 3635, as amended. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, 2/3 of those voting having

responded in the affirmative, the rules are suspended, the bill is passed and, without objection, the motion to reconsider is laid on the table. for what purpose does the gentleman from michigan seek recognition? the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: a bill to designate the facility of the united states postal service located at 715 shawan fals drive in dup -- falls drive in dublin, ohio, as the lance corporal wesley g. davids and the captain nicholas j. rozanski memorial post office. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan and the gentleman from massachusetts each will control 20 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from michigan. mr. bentvolio: thank you, mr. speaker. i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the

gentleman is recognized. mr. bentvolio: i ask unanimous consent that all members may have five elective days within which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the bill under consideration. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. mr. bentvolio: thank you, mr. speaker. i yield as much time as he may consume to my distinguished colleague from the state of ohio, mr. tiberi. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from ohio is recognized. mr. tiberi: thank you. i thank the gentleman and chairman issa for their ability to pass this through committee and bring it to the floor today. mr. speaker, i rise in support of my bill, h.r. 4919, to designate the united states postal facility located at 715 shawan falls drive in dublin, ohio, as the lance corporal wesley g. davids and captain nicholas j. rozanski memorial post office. marine lance corporal wesley davids was 16 years old and still attending dublin high

school, dublin high school, when he was inspired to serve our nation following the terrorist attacks on september 11, 2001. he was killed the day after his 20th birthday in may of 2005 while fighting in iraq. he was a member of the columbus-based lima company. 23 total service members from lima company died in iraq. marine lance corporal davids died during a 96-hour period, mr. speaker, in which six members died and 15 were wounded. marine lance corporal davids was also willing to lend a hand. his family and friends say he was full of energy, especially when it came to driving or working on cars. he was also a stand-out rower in high school and well loved by his community. with crowds lining street following his memorial service. he is survived by his parents, jodi and michael, and brother

steven in dublin, ohio. cap lynn -- captain nicholas rozanski was a life-long resident of dublin which he called god's country. he proudly served on multiple deployments to kosovo and iraq as a member of the ohio national guard before he was killed on april 4, 2012, while fighting in afghanistan. . he was described as a model leader who genuinely cared about the people in his chand. captain rozanski was also very proud, a proud graduate of the ohio state university and made a difference in his community by coaching youth soccer for nearly 15 years. he was an accomplished runner, having completed three marathons, and was described by his loved ones as mischevious and witty with a sparkle in his eye who loved nothing more than doting on his young daughters.

he's survived by his wife jennifer, his daughters emma katherine and anne liz beth, along with many other family and friends in dublin, ohio. these two heroes, mr. speaker, put their country before themselves and made the ultimate sacrifice. today we honor their sacrifice and that of their families by naming this postal facility in dublin, ohio, after them, their bravery and honor will never be forgotten. mr. speaker, i yield back the balance of my time and encourage my colleagues to support the bill. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from michigan is recognized. >> i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan reserves, the gentleman from massachusetts is recognized. >> thank you, mr. speaker. i'm pleased to join my colleague

in support of h.r. 4919, to designate the facility of the united states postal service located at 715 shawan falls drive in dublin, ohio, as the lance corporal wesley g. davids and captain nicholas j. rozanski memorial post office. nce corporal davids graduate from the ohio state university in 2003. after september 11 he was inspired to join the marine corps. just one day after his 23rd birthday he was tragically killed while conducting combat operations in iraq. so a native of dublin, ohio, captain nicholas rozanski graduated from the ohio state university in 1999. his family honors military

service he, signed nirp national guard in 2003. after assignments to kosovo and iraq, captain rozanski was deployed to afghanistan as part of the 27th infantry brigade team in 2012. on april 4, 2012, he was killed by a taliban suicide bomb for the northern afghanistan. mr. lynch: he's surprised -- survived by his loving wife and two daughters. mr. speaker, we should pass this bill to honor these two fallen heroes, these sons of ohio, who have made the ultimate sacrifice on behalf of our country. i urge passage of h.r. 2919 -- of h.r. 4919 and reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan is recognized. >> mr. speaker, i'm prepared to close. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan reserves. the gentleman from massachusetts is recognized. mr. lynch: i have no further speakers and i yield back the balance of our time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from michigan is recognized to close.

>> i urge my colleagues to support this bill and yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the question is, will the house suspend the rules and pass the bill h.r. 4919. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, 2/3 being in the affirmative, the rules are suspended, the bill is passed and without objection the motion to reconsider is laid on the table. without objection the tiflet h.r. 544 is amended to read as follows. the clerk: a bill to amend the public health service act on research on muscular dystrophy and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to clause 12-a of rule 1 the chair declares the house

in recess until approximately 6:30 p.m. today. >> legislation negotiated between the house and senate aimed at improving veterans' access to health care. during have more about the votes coming about 10 minutes from now on c-span. john kerry this morning called for a sustainable cease-fire

between israel and hamas. his remarks came from the state department briefing room. >> i just returned from the parise east and and where i had a series of discussions aimed at ending that attacks against israeli civilians and easing the suffering of innocent people gaza, in israel, in the west bank. today, we are continuing to work toward establishing an unconditional humanitarian honorfire, one that could eid that begins, and could stop the fighting, allow desperately needed food and medicine and other supplies into gaza, and enable israel to address the threat with which we fully

understand and which is real, as a threat posed by total attacks tunnel attacks, and doing so without resorting to combat. that is what will come from a cease-fire. we believe momentum generated by a humanitarian cease-fire is the best way to be able to begin to negotiate and find out if you can put in place a sustainable cease-fire, one that addresses all of the concerns, the long-term concerns as well, begin to talk about the underlying causes of the although thosea, obviously would not be resolved in the context of a cease-fire, sustainable cease-fire discussion. but it is important to try to build, to begin, and to move in

a process, and that is what we are trying to achieve. that is the only way alternately this conflict is going to be resolved. hopefully, if we can make some progress, the people in this region who deserve peace, can take one step towards that elusive goal by stopping the violence which catches innocents on all sides in the crossfire and begins to try to build a sustainable way forward. we also believe that any process to resolve the crisis in gaza in a lasting and meaningful way must lead to the disarmament of amas and all terrorist groups, and we will work with israel and regional partners and the international community in search of this goal. we continue to have these discussions.

therescussions over succeeded in putting a 12-our humanitarian cease-fire in place. ofn, as the rollover time that occurred, regrettably, there were misunderstandings versus 24, four hours versus 24 hours, and so we are joined to work hard to see if these issues could be clarified in a way that allow the parties, the israel, the palestinian authority, the palestinian factions, the other countries involved, working through the egyptian initiative, to be able to find a way to silence the weapons long enough to be able to begin to negotiate. >> also at the united nations, spokeecretary ban ki-moon to reporters about his recent

trip to the middle east. the secretary-general called for israel and hamas to agree to a cease-fire. >> good morning, ladies and gentlemen. i am about to brief the security council on the vital role of the regional delegation of the united nations peacekeeping operations. i just wanted to update the the middleuation in east. let me begin by reinforcing last night's call of the security council, calling for an immediate, unconditional cease-fire. as you know, i issued a statement yesterday calling for a 24 hour extension of the humanitarian cease-fire.

and i did the same this morning, early this morning. it is time for an immediate, unconditional humanitarian cease-fire. in the name of humanity, the violence must stop. i just returned from the region. over the course of six days, i have extensive consultations with the leaders in the region, in eight countries in the middle east, as well as u.s. secretary of state, john kerry, who has been working tirelessly and valiantly to end the fighting. since my return during the weekend, i have continued with a number of calls to world leaders, including prime minister netanyahu of israel this morning. i had a long talk with him, urging him to stop this violence and agree and honor of the international community's common efforts and call for an

unconditional humanitarian cease-fire. gaza is in critical condition. israeli missiles have pummeled gaza. hamas rockets have randomly struck israel. no country would accept the threat of rockets from above and tunnels from below. at the same time, all occupying powers have an international legal obligation to protect the civilians. i was deeply disappointed that dangerous hostilities resumed on sunday, but since sunday evening, a relative and very fragile calm underground has been established. a temporary weekend pause in fighting brought a brief respite for civilians. it also shows how much this is

devastated the lives of people in gaza. we saw scenes of indiscriminate destruction. some described it as a man-made hurricane. a whole neighborhood reduced to debris, rubble, blocks of flattened apartment buildings, scores of bodies still buried under mountain of twisted wreckage. the fighting has claimed well over 1000 palestinian lives. most of them civilians. hundreds of them children. hamas rocket fire has claimed the lives of three israeli civilians. at least 16 palestinian civilian deaths, and more than 200 injuries came as a result of an appalling assault on a u.n. school.

we were sheltering families, women and children who had sought refuge from the fighting. ongoing hostilities have prevented establishing conclusive responsibility. it is imperative to do so, and have accountability for these outliers of crime. indeed, there must be accountability and justice for crimes committed by all sides. on friday, i spoke with some of our staff to thank them for their heroic work. one of our colleagues told me there is no safer place in gaza. the people in gaza have nowhere to run --

[no audio] raises serious concerns about proportionality. today more than 173,000 gazans are seeking protection in u.n. facilities. that means 10% of the entire population is sheltering under the u.n. flag. i repeat yet again, my call for israel and all parties to do vastly more to ensure the safety of these u.n. sites, and the security of the people who have sought sanctuary there. israelis and palestinians have a responsibility to stop the fighting now. to start the dialogue now, and progress the root causes that will finally break the endless

cycles of senseless suffering. that means securing peace through mutual respect, and then -- we will go live to the house. remaining electronic votes will be conducted as five-minute votes. the unfinished business is the vote on the motion of the gentleman from ohio, mr. gibbs, to suspend the rules and pass h.r. 935 on which the yeas and nays are ordered. the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: union calendar umber 346, h.r. 935, a bill to amend the federal insecond side, fungicide and rodent side act and the federal water pollution act control act to clarify congressional intent regarding the regulation of the use of pesticides in and near navigable waters and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: the question is will the house suspend the rules and pass the

bill. members will record their votes by electronic device. this is a 15 minute -- 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 speaker pro tempore: on this ote -- the speaker pro tempore: on this vote, the yeas are 253 and the

nays are 148. 2/3 not being in the affirmative, the rules are not suspended and the bill is not passed. the unfinished business is the vote on the motion of the gentlewoman from michigan, mrs. miller, to suspend the rules and pass h.r. 3202, as amended, on which the yeas and nays are ordered. the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: h.r. 3202, a bill to require the secretary of homeland security to prepare a comprehensive security assessment of the transportation security card program and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: the question is, will the house suspend the rules and pass the bill as amended? members will record their votes by electronic device. this is a five-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 speaker pro tempore: on this vote the yeas are 400, the nays are zero. 2/3 of those voting having responded in the affirmative, the rules are suspended, the bill is is passed and, without objection, the motion to re consider is laid on the table. the unfinished business is the vote on the motion of -- the unfinished business is the question on suspending the rules and passing h.r. 3107 as amended which the clerk will

report by title. the clerk: h.r. 3107, a bill to require the secretary of homeland security to establish cybersecurity occupation classifications, assess the cybersecurity work force, develop a strategy to address identified gaps in the cybersecurity work force and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: the question is, will the house suspend the rules and pass the bill as amended. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, 2/3 of those voting having responded in the affirmative, the rules are suspended, the bill is passed and, without objection, the motion to reconsider is laid on the table. the gentleman from georgia is recognized. >> mr. speaker, on that i ask for a recorded vote. the speaker pro tempore: a recorded vote is requested. all those in favor of taking this vote by the yeas and nays will rise and remain standing until counted. a sufficient number having arisen, a recorded vote is ordered. members will record their votes

by electronic device. [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 speaker pro tempore: on this vote the yeas are 395, the nays are eight. 2/3 of those voting having responded in the affirmative, the rules are suspended, the bill is passed and, without objection, the motion to reconsider is laid on the table. for what purpose does the gentleman from utah seek recognition? mr. bishop: mr. speaker, i send to the desk a privileged report from the committee on rules for

filing under the rule. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title. the clerk: report to accompany house resolution 693, resolution providing for consideration of the bill, h.r. 4315, to amend the endangered species act of 1973, to require publications on the internet on the basis for determinations that species are endangered species or threatened species and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: referred to the house calendar and ordered printed.

the chair lays before the house the following personal request. the clerk: leave of absence requested for mr. culberson of texas for today. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the request s granted. the chair will now entertain requests for one-minute speeches. for what purpose does the gentleman from pennsylvania seek recognition? >> unanimous consent to address the house for one minute,

revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one inute. >> thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, i rise to remember demi. she was a student and a cheerleader at gateway high school in monroeville, pennsylvania, with an outgoing personality and big aspirations for a successful future. next month, on all 15, we will -- august 15, we will mark the seventh anniversary of demi's tragic death. she was murdered just one day after her 16th birthday. teen dating violence like stalking and other kinds of physical, emotional or sexual abuse are reprehensible. no child should be subjected to abuse and violence. as a father of six, my heart goes out to demi's family and friends, especially her parents, dr. gary and jodi. the family is working to educate western pennsylvania students and families about how

to recognize and prevent teen dating violence through the demi awareness organization. it is my hope that their efforts can help spare other families from the tragedy of teen dating violence. please join me in remembering demi and in thanking her family for their commitment to ending teen dating violence. i thank the speaker and yield ack. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlewoman from illinois seek recognition? without objection, the gentlewoman is recognized for ne minute. >> more than 21 million children nationwide rely on free or reduced price meals during the school year. unfortunately we forget that these children can go hungry in the summer months when they're not in school. recently, i visited the share our strength summer meal site in

illinois. they provide meals for those who normally receive school breakfasts and lunches during the school year. as someone who was on the school breakfast and lumpling program as a child, i know it's important to make sure no child misses a meal. but our local communities can't fight hunger on their own. that's why i'll be co-sponsoring an act to help more children access healthy meals in the summer months. ms. duckworth: i believe no american child should go hungry and no parent should make the difficult decision between paying rent and paying for grocery. let's work together and stand up for our children by supporting summer nutrition programs. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from texas seek recognition? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one hin. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. poe: mr. speaker, it was called the war to end all wars. it began on july 28, 1914.

100 years ago today. it concluded in 1918, only after millions had died. it was just the first of many wars in the last century. it was at a steal mate in the bloody deadly trenches of europe in 1917 when tenacious american doughboys entered the battle. it was world war i. over 100,000 young american warriors never returned. one was president teddy roosevelt's son quinton. thousands more died from ethis spanish flu they contracted. the last american survivor was frank buckles jr., who hied to be 110. i got to know buckles. his dying wish was that a memorial be erected on the wall to honor those who fought in the great war, those that returned, those that returned with the wounds of war and those that did not return. it's infortunate and tragic that

the memorial has not been erected because as has been said, the worst casualty of war is to be forgotten. that's just the way it is. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from florida seek recognition? without objection the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> mr. speaker, i rise in support of improving education opportunities for groups of students that are -- that our education system has left behind, english language learners or e.l.l.'s. even though english language learners are the fastest growing student population in the united states, they score far behind their english speaking peers and more likely than others to lack the resources needed to succeed in our schools. that's why i'm introducing the english learning and innovation act, which will create two grant programs to enable schools to better provide high quality education to students working to

learn english. mr. garcia: as someone who grew up in miami, i recognize the value of students who don't yet speak english but are building a vibrant community together this bill has the support of a number of organizations, including the the t a., the nclr and national association of bilingual educators. i urge my colleagues to join me in strengthening english language education. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from florida seek recognition? without objection the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> i rise in defense of israel and their defensive war against hamas. hamas is a terrorist organization, it's an arm of the muslim brotherhood, its reason for existence is to destroy israel and hamas desires a second holocaust though they won't actnology that the first happened. to uses human shields to protect from terror.

they pulled out of the gaza strip, including uprooting more than 10,000 of their own zit sean -- sit certains from their homes 10 years ago. hamas has used the last decade to design a complex infrastructure, including tunnels designed to kill as many israelis as possible. the u.s. shouldn't be pressuring israel to give hamas breathing room the complete defeat of hamas will be good for israel's security and will be a decisive blow against international terrorism and the global jihad which is good for our national security. we need to stand with israel at this critical juncture. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from pennsylvania seek recognition? without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. thompson: thank you, mr. speaker. i rise today to recognize our nation's military chaplains. 239 years ago this week, at the

behest of george washington, the army chaplain's core was created by the continental congress. these brave men and women who served in each branch of the military and are from all faiths and denominations have serbed in every one of our nation's wars. today i would like to acknowledge one of our chaplains, captain mike cirillo, currently serving with the 2nd airborne at fort bragg he defloyd iraq in 2011 , was previously acting brigade chaplain. military chaplains represent some of the best this country has to offer. favorite bible verse of , a ravens rillo's is man avails much. we thank you for your work to support the spiritual strength and wellness of those who serve in uniform.

i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from florida seek recognition? without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> thank you, mr. speaker. i rise today to honor my old high school football coach, ron reem who was recently voted into the florida athletic coaches' association hall of fame. i can't think of a man more deserving of this recognition. coach reem has -- is going on his 38th season as head coach of the benjamin buccaneers, hi alma mater, making him the longest serving coach. his mportance isn't in help g record, but in the he gave his students. mr. rooney: coach reem not only helped me succeed on the field, but he showed me the traits of a great leader and the value of

hard work which helped me succeed professionally well into my adulthood. i know that i wouldn't be where i am today if it wasn't for coach reem. congratulations, coach. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: under the speaker's announced policy of january 3, 2013, the gentleman from new york, mr. jeffries is recognized for of minutes as the designee -- for 60 minutes as the designee of the minority leader. mr. jeffries: i ask that all members be given five days to revise and extend their remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. jeffries: it is my honor an privilege to co-anchor today's c.b.c. special order along with my good friend and colleague from the silver state, representative steven horsford. every monday when congress is in session, we have an opportunity to speak directly to the american people for 60 minutes.

the so-called c.b.c. hour of power where we get a chance to discuss an issue of relevance to this great country. today, the members of the congressional black caucus are here to talk about halting the g.o.p. march toward impeachment. we're going to address the troubling fact that the g.o.p. appears to want to move forward this week with a lawsuit challenging the president's authority. now i think most legal scholars will come to the conclusion, the house g.o.p. lawsuit is baseless, it's frivolous, it is without merit. but the american people should pay attention to what is going to take place this week, because the lawsuit is part of a continuing effort to delegitimize the president of

the united states of america. i recognize, unfortunately, that there are some folks in this chamber who believe that the president exceeded his authority on january 20, 2009 when he took the oath of office and they have continued to accuse him of presidential lawlessness ever since. now, during this special order hour, we're going to discuss the alleged lawlessness that's taken place, and i think we'll be able to dismiss these allegations as nothing more than political broadsides level -- leveled against a president who was elected by the people of this great country and re-elected by the people of this great country. and then we're also going to deal with the fact that there's so many other things that we as

a congress could be doing other than wasting tax -- taxpayer money relating to a lawsuit that's sure to be thrown out of court. it's going to be thrown out because there is no congressional standing to sue the president. the supreme court has said this over and over again. there must be a particularized injury in order for one to get standing in federal court and members of congress lack it. that's what the supreme court has concluded. there's also the issue of the political question doctrine. disputes between the two branches of government, the executive branch and the congressional, legislative, branch, are not to be resolved by the article 3 courts. they are to be resolved by the

normal governmental processes put in place by our constitution. we're joined today by the distinguished chair of the congressional black caucus, a tremendous leader of our c.b.c. over the 113th congress, it's now my honor to yield to the distinguished gentlelady from ohio, congresswoman marcia fudge. ms. fudge: thank you very, very much for yielding. i again want to thank my colleagues, congressman jeffries and horsford, for again leading the congressional black caucus special order hour on an issue that should never have made it to this house floor. we shouldn't have to consider halting the republican eadership, an irreverent and irresponsible march toward impeachment of the president of the united states. mr. speaker, since his election, republican leadership has shown nothing sport of outright disrespect and disdain for the current president of the united

states. in an effort to prevent the president from getting anything done during his first term or his second, republican leadership have completely ignored the democratic process. they prefer obstruction and destruction of our federal government over working toward what's best for the american eople. now republicans are going to waste millions of dollars for doing something they asked him to do they're claiming to take issue with the president because he deloyed the employer mandate. if i remember correctly, house republicans wanted to do with a-- do away with that provision, not to mention the entire a.c.a. the president delays the employer mandate from taking effect for one year in an effort to hear and act on republicans' more reasonable concerns and now they're trying to punish him for it. this makes absolutely no sense.

instead of focusing on the many issues facing our nation, republican leadership is choosing to pull another political stunt that waste ours time and our tax dollars. through consistent obstruction dysfunction and a steadfast unwillingness to serve the american people, republican leadership continues to abuse their power while they demean and disgrace this house. when will they recognize that by attempting to damage the president's leadership and his legacy, they are only hurting the people we are all sworn to swerve? -- to serve? when will they wake up and realize that this job is not about political gamesmanship. it's about doing the work we are asked to do by our constituents, and that work is to propose and pass legislation that creates opportunity for the american people. not to distract them with the silliness that republicans have stirred up since day one of this administration. their inaction and petty behavior has caused this to be the least productive congress in

the history of this nation. the president should sue the congress for not doinger that job. mr. speaker, the american people deserve so much more than republican leadership has given them. it's time to stop the ridiculous games and get to work on the real and serious business of this house. i yield back. mr. jeffries: i thank the distinguished chairlady of the c.b.c. the people of america deserve a congress that does the business of the people. that deals with real issues to impact work and -- working family, the middle class, senior citizen the poor, the sick and the afflicted. instead, we get an agenda from the majority in the house of representatives that is all about delay, destruction, and delegit myization of the president of the united states -- delegitimizeation of the president of the united states of america. this is a frivolous lawsuit that

lacks any basis in law or in fact, and we need to get beyond the political gamesmanship and get back to doning the business of the people. . i'm pleased that we've been joined by a champion for working families and the poor and the middle class, the distinguished gentlelady from the badger state, representative again moore. ms. moore: thank you so much, representative jeffries. and i was wondering if i could ask you to yield for some questions. you certainly are an officer of the court. you're an attorney. and so i wanted to ask you to expand a little bit on your contention that constitutional experts and legal scholars have commented that the lawsuit will fail for the lack of standing. that there is no injury here

that anyone could point to. and to explain that to me a little bit more. mr. jeffries: i thank the gentlelady for yielding back. chief justice scalia, in an opinion in 1997, i'm sorry, chief justice rehnquist, made the point that individual members of congress do not have standing to bring lawsuits in court if they cannot point to a particularized or personal injury. which the g.o.p. in this case will not be able to do. because the injury that's being claimed relates to policy disputes such as the a.c.a. and the employer mandate, such as daca and such as the welfare work requirements. these are broad policy disputes, not particularized injuries. and the court went on to point out that if one of the members

of congress were to retire tomorrow, he would no longer have a general claim. the claim will be possessed by his successor instead. the claimed injury, referring to policy disputes, attached to the members -- member's seat, a seat which the member holds as trustee for his constituents, not as a prerogative of personal power, in other words, there is no standing for members of congress to bring a lawsuit against the president in the context of a policy dispute. ms. moore: thank you so much for that clarification, mr. jeffries. so this doesn't pass a constitutional test, it doesn't pass the legal test. and it doesn't even pass the laugh test. because i can tell you, for folk who have sued -- who have pursued repeal of the

affordable care act for over 50 times, not wanting to implement the employer mandate, to turn around and say, we've been injured because the president delayed it does not pass the laugh test. i tell you, i have been elected to and served as a public servant since 1988. and i can tell you that republicans have continuously chastised democrats for their frivolous lawsuits. republicans have continuously claimed that people who have been injured by products, consumer products, should have a cap on their claims. d yet this frivolous lawsuit will cost hundreds of millions of dollars. so, while it may not have any

standing, mr. jeffries, it certainly will -- it certainly will cost hundreds of millions of dollars before that ruling will be made. as a matter of fact, in this do-nothing congress, we have in fact wasted money. it's not only that we've wasted time, we have wasted money. some examples on what we have done so far. we've spent $79 million so far in over 50 attacks on the affordable care act. we've even shut the government wn for $24 billion, that's $24 billion with a b. so how much is it going to cost us to once again promote this frivolous lawsuit? we're in session, this is the last week of congress, and are we going to talk about helping young people with unaffordable interest rates on student

loans? no. are we going to talk about extending and re-authorizing the export-import bank to help manufacturers that are in my district? no. are we going to talk about providing unemployment compensation for people who are suffering with no income and no fault of their own because the economy is delayed? no. are we going it talk about raising the minimum wage, are we going to talk about re-authorizing terrorism risk insurance? no. and are we going to talk about whether or not we will provide neys to humanely and adequately discuss the crisis on the borders of our country, the influx of children escaping violence in their home countries? no, no, no. we're going to sue the president of the united states. this does not pass the legal test, constitutional test and it doesn't pass the laugh test.

mr. jeffries: i thank the distinguished gentlelady from wisconsin for her very eloquent and sharp observations. ith respect to the lack of merit to the g.o.p. lawsuit that they're going to proceed with this week. we've now also been joined by another distinguished member of the budget committee, someone who is a voice for the voiceless, a champion for the poor, a fighter for the district that she represents in congress, the distinguished gentlelady from california, representative barbara lee. ms. lee: thank you very much. let me thank you, congressman jeffries, first of all, for your kind words and also for your continued leadership on this issue and so many other issues. especially in helping us once again beat the drum on behalf of the american people. to make sure that people know exactly what the republican tea

party members are engaged in in this body. so thank you very much to you and congressman horsford for this. also, i just want to say to congresswoman fudge, our chair of the congressional black caucus, i want to thank her for her diligent work as chair and especially in her continuing efforts to fight against the extreme ideology that deters us from the real work our constituents sent us here to do. once again we're calling now tonight on congress to get back to work putting americans back to work. rather than working together to create jobs, my republican colleagues are pursuing a completely baseless lawsuit against president obama at the expense of the american taxpayer. mind you, never before has a sitting president been sued. not once. this lawsuit is nothing more than a political ploy designed for those who really want impeachment without cause.

these tea party republicans are driving the republican party to become so extreme and too conservative for the american people. to provide just one example, instead of voting on bipartisan immigration reform that will keep our families together, grow our economy and enhance national security, the house has voted more than 50 times to repeal real health care reform that provides 54 million people with vital preventive health services like cancer screenings. we were sent here to washington to help enhance the quality of life for the american people, not to engage in these lawsuits against the president for no reason. we were sent to washington to make america a better place, to create jobs, to grow the economy, to lift up the most vulnerable, and to build ladders of opportunity for the 46.5 million americans, including six million children,

living in poverty today. this lawsuit is another example of the unfounded and wasteful and really unconscionable attacks on our president who was twice elected by the henry people. -- american people. it does nothing to help the american people. i tell you, it's really troubling to see the extremists in the republican party marching down a path that's not based on fact. but, again, it's really nothing more than a political side show aimed at building its base. but it's a serious effort, i must say. remember when president obama, congressman jeffries, remember when he was first elected? senator mitch mcconnell said their goal was to make president obama a one-term president? well, they didn't accomplish their goal. so now they're trying something else. and really it's quite shameful and the fact is that it's being funded with taxpayer dollars.

this is nothing short of a violation of our constituents' trust. it's exactly like the $2.3 million spent to preserve discrimination during the doma case. there's no constitutional or judicial precedent to adjudicate political disputes in the courts. we're ready and willing and able to have a serious conversation about creating opportunities into the middle class for people who are fighting and aspiring to become part of the middle class, who are living on the edges and on the margins. we're ready and we've been fighting for this. and we want to have some consensus with the republicans so we can move forward on this. rather than filing lawsuits to detract from the real work that the republicans once again refuse to do. every day i hear from my constituents about their real struggles. too many of our constituents are looking for work, too many are working full time and

they're still living on the edge in poverty. one in five american children still lives in poverty. too many people in my district and throughout the country face real challenges. challenges that republicans continue to ignore while pursuing an ideologically motivated lawsuit. it's about time we put these political ploys aside and get back to work. we need to stop this politically motivated, extreme and disturbing march toward impeachment, because that's where this is going, and hopefully the public understands that, and we need end to this lawsuit. instead we need to pass comprehensive immigration reform and fix a broken system that's tearing families apart. also we've got to pass a voting rights act and protect the voting rights of all americans. we need to put workers back to work, raise the minimum wage. we need to stop wasting taxpayer dollars on lawsuits and roll up our sleeves and get back to work. i believe that the american

people are going to see right through this. so i want to thank the congressional black caucus, congressman horsford and jeffries, for giving us the chance to really pull back the veil on what's really taking place with regard to this lawsuit. thank you again. mr. jeffries: i thank the distinguished gentlelady from california. in the 113th congress, we've had sequestration, $85 billion in randomly spread-out cuts across our budget, impacting the american economy. we've had a government shutdown that was unnecessary, unreasonable and reckless. cost us $24 billion in lost economic productivity. we've had a flirtation with the debt ceiling, threatening the full faith and credit of the united states of america. and now we've got a frivolous lawsuit against the president of the united states. it leads me to ask the question, is there such a thing as a four-ring circus?

let me now yield to my good friend and colleague from the freshman class, a distinguished champion for her district, the gentlelady from illinois, representative robin kelly. ms. kelly: thank you, congressman jeffries. i want to thank congressman horsford and the congressional black caucus for this special hour, a very, very important special hour. it is absolutely ridiculous what speaker boehner and his party want to do. it is a waste of time, as many of us have said, a waste of time, a waste of taxpayers' money, and it looks like nothing but a side show. there are so many things we should be working on. things like immigration reform, y equality, helping stop gun violence in urban areas, unemployment insurance that people so desperately need. again speaker boehner has shown he does not pay attention to what the public wants and cares about. 90% of the public thinks we should expand background

checks. 74% of n.r.a. members think we should expand background checks. but he's not bringing that bill to the floor. this s going to bring bill to the floor when there's not even the public appetite for a lawsuit. and many americans quite frankly don't feel the president has abused his power. because we don't listen and we do things like this, it is no wonder only 8% of the public thinks that congress is doing a great job or even a good job. from day one there's been a great disrespect for this president, unlike any other in history. some of my colleagues are shock head won the first time, and can't believe he won again the second time. well, we need to get over it, you need to get over it. there are so many issues we need to be working on. we need to improve the lives of our constituents, this country and this world. as a freshman this is not what i

came to congress to vote on. i came to congress, like i assume most of us did, to make a difference, to have a public agenda, and not a personal agenda, and not an attacking agenda, and an agenda where even though we disagree we still show respect for each other. i again applaud you, congressman, for sponsoring this. this is extremely important and i hope the public is truly paying attention because this is shameful and as i said in the beginning, ridiculous. thank you. mr. jeff reese: i thank the -- mr. jeff reese: i thank the -- mr. jeffries: i thank the gentlelady from illinois. let me yield to another member of the freshman class, though he does not have on one of his signature ties right now, he's the chair of the boe tie caucus, at least informally, but certainly someone who has been a champion for the district that he -- of the bow tie caucus, at least informally, but certainly

someone who has been a champion for the district he represents. let me recognize mr. donald payne, jr. mr. payne: thank you, mr. speaker, to my colleagues, the gentleman from nevada and the gentleman from new york who have done an outstanding job managing these special orders, i'd like to thank them for the opportunity to come out and speak on this matter, this issue, this frivolous issue. of where we find our nation. the lack of respect for a man who won an election, as we have had elections throughout this nation's history. but we come to a point in history now where there's something wrong with this esident, something about him

is illegitimate. something about him just isn't right. omething about him has members of this institution disrespecting him on a daily basis. he is the president of the united states of america. the greatest nation in the world. the most powerful man in the world. and deserves the respect that we have given every other president that has held that office. while millions of americans are still out of work, my republican colleagues are wasting time and money again. this time it's on a partisan lawsuit waged against the president and talk of impeachment. these actions are frivolous and

they're shameful and they pander to the most extreme wing of the republican party. every serious constitutional scholar sees the republican lawsuit against the president for what it is -- a desperate political stunt. and they've tried many. as was stated by my colleagues to to me, 50 times tried repeal the law of the nation, the affordable care act. 50 times. ey will not stop at anything in order to have this president defeated and look as if he's a failure. when has that been our history in this nation? when has it come to that? this great democracy that we

ave has been a battle over ideas and a coming together in a bipartisan manner, you're over we i'm over there, but come together on common issues, to come to what is in the best interest of all americans. to hould a president have have members of this body or the senate stand in front of him and ay that, i can't even stand to look at you? when have -- where? where in this nation? the home of the free, the land of the brave. we hold these truths to be self-evident. are they self-evident these days?

are they? the humanitarian issue we have at our border. i remember a saying, give us your tired, your poor, your huddled masses. now we saying stop the bus at the border and go back. where is this nation going? it is a sad time in this country that we find ourselves at this point, ok this didn't work. we couldn't get him on that. the birth certificate he, showed up with that, ok, scratch that. i know what, let's repeal the affordable care act. try 50 times. that didn't work. i got a new one. et's just sue him. ladies and gentlemen, mr. just because

republicans disagree with the president's policies or political persuasion doesn't ive them the right to sue him. even the nation's most conservative supreme court justices have said that the congress cannot sue the president in these circumstances. meanwhile, millions of americans are out of work, including nearly 300,000 people in my home state of new jersey. instead of working together to create jobs, new jerseyans are learning that the republicans are at it again. wasting taxpayer time and money on frivolous lawsuits. my constituents are outraged. but just because republicans won't do their job, the president and democrats in congress will. i can remember prior to coming to congress, president obama extend his hand on numerous occasions to work with the congress, to work with the other

side of the aisle. he was just rebuffed. now that he says he will use executive privilege, executive order, now there's a problem once again. if you can't work with him, then he's going to have to go it alone and do what he needs to do to make sure this nation has the things, the laws to be -- continue to be the great nation that it is. the democrats have a real jobs plan, the make it in america plan, to put america back to work, to bring jobs back to our shores, to build roads and bridges, to create better education systems -- a better education system, and to lead the world in innovation. my bill, the green jobs act, is part of that plan and will expand access to capital for small businesses to create good-paying jobs in low-income communities. we're ready to work.

we're ready to work with this president. think it's high time that our colleagues on the other side of the aisle say ok, we tried everything. there's one more thing to try. working with this president to move this nation forward. with that, mr. speaker, i yield back the balance of my time -- of my time. mr. jeffries: i thank the gentleman for those poignant observations. i think as you've pointed out, you know, we're in a divided government context, and i understand there are going to be policy disagreements. but the objective amongst all of us should be to work toward finding common ground so we can improve the lives of the people who we were sent here to washington to represent.

instead, we're in the midst of a campaign to continue to try to delegitimize the president. it's over. the battle has been lost. the president was elected in 2008. he was re-elected in 2012. it's time to put aside the political gamesmanship and figure out where we might be able to find common ground to advance an agenda that makes sense for the american people. we said earlier that this lawsuit was a frivolous one, and i quoted chief justice rehnquist, a leading conservative former supreme court justice, as it relates to his position with respect to congressional standing.

i now want to quote another justice of the supreme court, who said, in an opinion he wrote just last year, united states v. windsor, that our constitution rejects a system in which congress and the executive can pop immediately into court whenever the president implements a law in a manner that is not to congress' liking. that was an opinion -- that wasn't written by ruth bader ginsburg. that wasn't an opinion that was written by justice sotomayor, though i have great respect for those two particular justices from the great state of new york. hose words were written by ant

anyone scalia -- by antoni scalia, one of the most conservative justices in the history of the supreme court. you can't just pop into court because you have a policy disagreement with the president. and so i think we've dealt with the issue of the frivolous nature of this lawsuit, the fact that we're wasting the time and the treasure of the american people on a political joyride that will ultimately crash and burn in an article 3 court. but in the meantime, we're neglecting our constitutional responsibilities here in the house of representatives to actually deal with issues that impact the american people, and to touch upon what some of those issues could be, let me now the to the co-anchor of

c.b.c. special order mitigating circumstance good friend, representative steven horsford from the great state of nevada. mr. horsford: let me thank my good friend and co-anchor for this hour, the gentleman from the empire state, mr. jeffries. every time we have the opportunity to come to this floor, it is a humbling experience. o all of my colleagues, led by our chair, the honorable representative from the state of ohio, the chair of the congressional black caucus, marcia fudge, thank you for your leadership and for demanding that we have an opportunity to be heard in this very important special order hour. i want to thank all my

colleagues who have come here tonight and tonight, at some level, my heart is heavy. because as many of my colleagues have expressed tonight, we came to congress to get things done on behalf of the american people and the constituents that we serve. and we understand, as congressman jeffries just indicated, that this is a divided government. and as the minority, we have to work within this honorable institution to try to advance the issues that we feel are important. but what we do not believe is that the majority should be able a nilaterally obstruct governmental process that is the foundation of our democracy as a nation.

and so tonight, this is a very important discussion. because later this week, if the speaker and the majority house republicans have their way they will do for the first time in history something that has never been done which is to sue the american president, because they on't agree with him. and this lawsuit against the president, has been characterized by many, the u.s.a. today editorial board said it was a political side show, at a time when the american people are urging us to act on a number of important and serious and time-pressing matters, you, mr. speaker, and house republicans, are sacrificing, precious taxpayer

resources and time that we could be tackling a number of important issues that the american public want us to tackle. now i just held a telephone town hall last week in my district. i had over 4,000 people. my district covers 52,000 square miles and it's a diverse district. not everybody agrees with the president or his positions. but not one person on that call asked me to support you, mr. speaker, or the house republicans, in suing the president. in fact, many of them said, how is it that you have the june ty to unlatleal -- laterally act to obstruct this process and we would like to have to come before this body. we understand we are in the

minority and we may not win. but in this democracy, the minority deserves to be heard. now, unfortunately, this body is about to take a five-week recess. my constituents don't really understand how after we've really accomplished really little, we can take a quote, unquote, recess. and the thing you want to act on this week is to sue the president. well, that shouldn't be. we shouldn't be going on recess. we shouldn't be wasting taxpayer money or time on frivolous, baseless lawsuits, because we have plenty of work to do. so my question, mr. speaker is, whose side are you on? are you on the side of the majority of americans who want

middle mp-start the class and maybe pass the make it in america or the infrastructure bills that are so desperately needed? whose side are you on, mr. speaker, when americans have demanded a raise so they can have their wages keep up with the cost of living? whose side are you on, mr. speaker, when you have already denied, the extension of unemployment benefits for 3.5 million americans since last citizens of 00 nevada, who need a bridge to stay afrote? whose side are you on. are we going to honor our veterans and six broken v.a.

systems? are we going to pass the re-authorization to the voting rights act to ensure that our most right to vote is protected? i know you want to recess so you can run home and have elections, but people need to vote and we need to make sure that that vote is protected. why can't we bring that bill up this week, mr. speaker? mr. speaker, whose side are you on? when overwhelmingly the american public has asked us to reform comprehensive immigration reform, to secure our border, to actually put the necessary resources on the border and to make sure that no other children are torn away from their mothers and their fathers?

so while house democrats are working on these important issues and many, many others, the american people just simply don't understand how it is that this week, of all weeks, the majority would decide in this house to spend precious time and resources suing the american president for the first time in history. instead of doing any of this, house republicans are focused once again on partisan stunts that contribute nothing to the well-being of our nation. voting to sue the president is an insult to the hard-working american families who need this congress to act, act on something, on anything and to vote. have an up-or-down

this lawsuit has little respect of what this house has left. as new members, we are pleading, give us our congress back. let us work with our colleagues ho want to work with us. there are republicans who support some of these bills, but the leadership, the speaker, and the house republican leadership won't let them. that's the truth. now my colleague, and i'll yield back has talked about there is little constitutional basis for this lawsuit. let me add to a couple of those remarks and i'll yield back. constitutional law experts have wargdel weighed in, there was one who described the lawsuit as wholly meritless to invoke the jurisdiction of the federal

judiciary. feie s pf >> called it an embassing loser. it has tainted by tactics as well. nking member, representative slaughter and other members introduced 11 amendments during markup of this baseless, unness lawsuit against the president and their only request was to allow more transparency and accountability if this were to go forward on how much money is being spent, taxpayer money, by the way, in funding this lawsuit. so whose side are you on, mr. speaker? when you talk about fiscal responsibility and you won't even disclose or allow the rules

of this vote to have a level of transparency or accountability. let me just highlight a few of the amendments that these democrats proposed, requiring the house general counsel to disclose how much has been spent on the lawsuit each week. prohibiting the hiring of any law firms or consult apartments that lobby congress, because if they lobby congress for a living, congress should not be paying them on the side. prohibiting the hiring of any law firm or consultants who lobby on the affordable care act or have any financial stake. requiring disclosure on all contracts with lawyers or consultants, requiring disclosure of where taxpayer money is coming from and which

programs and office budget are being reduced to pay for it. these were the commonsense amendments that house democrats on the rules committee proposed and on a party-line vote, 7-4, house se majort, the to be ans denied these included. what's the rush? >> it shows that they are not serious and not making this a transparent process because they know it is nothing more than a waste of time and money. this is a stunt. it's a stunt that has a price and the american public deserves to know just how much this is going to cost. i yield back to the gentleman. mr. horsford: i thank the gentleman for his observations and pointing out the many issues

for we in the house of representatives could be addressing this week, designed to deal with quality of life concerns with the american people, but instead, we have been forced to come to the floor of the house of representatives this evening to talk about this frivolous lawsuit that if the majority gets its way, will be authorized later on this week. i also want to point out, this is troubling undercurrent that is also taking shape in the house of representatives and amongst the conservative entertainment complex related to the allegedly unlawful actions of the president in what many of us view as a march towards impeachment. now, some are going to say, well, this is a democratic conspiracy to rile up certain

parts of the country, that's why we are raising the impeesmment question. no. let's go to the record. the the gentleman from from the 17th congressional district in texas at a town hall meeting, i look at the president and i think he has violated the constitution and the law and he has abused his power. at the end of the day, if the house decides to impeach hymn, they would probably impeach the president. that's not my words, the words of the the gentleman from the 17th congressional district of this house, the distinguished the gentleman from from the 3rd congressional district in utah. this is an administration scandal that they have created. it's a cover-up.

i'm not saying impeachment is the end game, but it's a possibility, especially if they do little to help us learn more. i can go on and on, but you've got the distinguished the ntleman from iowa, from my standpoint. if the president referencing executive actions, proceeds with ore, here's the quote, we need to bring impeachment hearings immediately before the house of representatives. these aren't our words. these are the words of people elected to the 113th congress. so that's why we are here to have a conversation with the american people. do you think this is the issue that we should be debating and discussing as we are still

trying to revive large segments of our economy still struggling to recover from the aftermath of the great recession? now, this last statement from a member of the impeachment caucus here in the house of representatives, congressman from iowa, he referenced executive action. let's have a discussion about executive action. this chart illustrates that president obama actually has been a president in modern history who has been conservative in his approach with respect to executive action . upon entering his sixth year in office, president obama issued

167 executive orders. as the chart illustrated, at this very same point, george w. bush issued 198 executive orders. where was the outrage when eorge bush was engaging in his orgy of executive orders? where was the outrage? where was the outrage when president ronald reagan issued 181 executive orders, a pace that no way that president obama can match? it's just not clear to me where this is all coming from. let me now yield to the distinguished the gentleman from nevada and/or the distinguished the gentleman from new jersey for any parting observations.

mr. horsford: may i inquire how much time we have left? the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman has eight minutes remaining. mr. horsford: and thank you to the gentleman from new york, as you indicated, this frivolous lawsuit should not be surprising and we should not under12i789 estimate the length that the house republicans are willing to take against this president. this week, it's a vote to sue. after recess that we shouldn't be taking, maybe it's impeachment. so this is a very serious issue and one i wish every member of this body will take seriously, because what the speaker and house republicans are asking us to do is a direct affront to our constituents who elected us to do a job.

now, republicans can disagree with the president, that's not shocking, nor is it inappropriate. there are plenty of differences that divide many of us here in washington. many of them needlessly so. but republican opposition during this presidency has hit historic levels. many of my colleagues this evening have talked about from the very day that this president was being sworn in, the obstruction that has occurred by those in the majority in this blockho have attempted to him. i believe in an america that still can do good things and big things. i believe in an america that honors its institutions and respects them. i believe in the institutions of these offices even when i may not agree with the person who holds that position.

but what i cannot stand by as a member of congress is someone who is here to serve the 700,000 people from my -- as someone who is here to serve the 700,000 people from my district who elected me, is to allow the speaker and house republicans to tear down this institution. it's too honorable. the work we are supposed to be doing is too great. it's significant to the lives of the people who are counting on taos do something that is important to their lives. and so again, i ask, mr. speaker, whose side are you on? because there is nothing in this lawsuit that is going to create a job, that's going to educate a child, that's going to help a small business owner, that's going to address the issues of health care in this country, that's going to fix what's broken with immigration, nothing this week that you or the house republicans are doing with this

baseless lawsuit is going to solve a problem. in fact, it's going to create new problems. constitutional problems. nd it's going to create a debt that this institution and future generations will have to cover. so we're here raising our voices against what we believe to be an affront to the integrity of this body as a whole and to bring a focus back to the issues that the american people so desperately want this congress to work on. so we're here tonight, we'll be here working and willing to work, we're willing to cancel our recess to stay here and do the american public's business because that's what they expect us to do. i yield back my time to the gentleman from new york. mr. jeffries: i thank the distinguished gentleman for those observations.

under the house majority, the agenda has constituted the following -- delay, destroy, defund, and delegitimize. we just want to tackle issues relevant to the american people. let's tackle the fact that america needs a raise. let's tackle equal pay for equal work. let's tackle infrastructure funding. let's tackle our broken immigration system. let's tackle the fact that we've got a gun violence problem in america. et's address the fact that the supreme court invalidated portions of section 5 of the historic voting rights act. let's stop the political gamesmanship. in the remaining time that we have, let me now yield to a champion distinguished member of the homeland security committee

as well as the judiciary committee, the distinguished gentlelady from texas, representative sheila jackson lee. ms. jackson lee: i thank the gentleman from new york. i just want to take a moment to compliment both mr. horsford and mr. jeffries for this special order, among others. i could not imagine, as we end this session, to have a more especially important statement to the american people. we want to work and in a few days we'll be voting on an action to sue the president of the united states. et me refer you to justice antonin scali what -- scalia who says that we reject a system in which the congress can pop into court in when the president implements a law in a manner not to congress' liking. former chief justice william rehnquist similarly wrote that while some european countries

allow one brampling of government to sue another, that is obviously not the regime that our constitution establishes. our constitution contemplates a more restricted role for article 3 courts and in fact, our constitution clearly states the separation of the three branches of government. judiciary, legislature, and of legislature, the the judiciary and i just lost the other branch of government. mr. jeffries: executive branch. ms. jackson lee: executive branch of government. that is the way it's supposed to be structured. now we come and find ourselves with the legislature trying to ep into the leading of the executive. the president has made it very clear. what has he done wrong? we just heard the speaker of the

house tell the president that with respect to the unaccompanied children you can handle it. frankly, i would make the argument, you're right. there are executive powers. and so the basis upon which this wsuit is about to be projected, to me, evidences that we have lost our way. as my colleagues have said, as i was walking onto the floor, the extension of unemployment insurance, the raising of the minimum wage, the implementation of the affordable care act. the fixing of the veterans' health system which i hope we'll be able to do this week. to if not, we should stay here and fecks it for our veterans. but the constitution is clear. i want to say those branches of government again, the judiciary, the legislateture and the executive are separated and scholars, conservative jurists have indicated that there is no reason, no reason for us to jump into court on the

responsibilities of each particular branch. mr. speaker, i would make the argument that this week is going to be three days of wasted time. i know there are people who disagree with the affordable care act, with immigration reform, with the unaccompanied children, not one of those issues is attributable to the malfeasance of the president of the united states. i don't know whether this is a substitute for impeachment, but i would make the argument that the president has neither committed anything equal to impeachment, and at this second class level, i call et second class citizenship of the lawsuit, it's inappropriate. i believe the american people are much more interested in making sure that we follow what is good for them, creating jobs, protected children, providing for education, mr. speaker. ending wars. fighting for what is right. this is not the way the people of the united states value their

principles to be misused. executive, judiciary, and legislature. three separate branches, we are expected to do our separate duties. with that, i thank the gentleman for yield bug i would again ask that we adhere to the constitution by respecting these three separate branches of government. do our job. provides for the american people. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has ex-peered. -- expired. under the speaker's announced policy of january 3, 2013, the gentleman from arizona, mr. franks, is recognized for 60 minutes as the designee of the majority leader. mr. franks: mr. speaker, 30 ears ago, soviet marshal ogorkov announced that a flight

has been, quote, terminated, that the societys shot down an airliner, killing all those on board. president reagan immediately resolutely called for justice and action he proceeded to accelerate work on america's missile defense system, work on congress, woking on the defense buildup, building relationships with european allies and enforcing strong sanctions that ultimately bankrupt and brought down the once unshakeable soviet union. last week, mr. speaker, another civilian airliner, flight m. h.-17 was shot down with 280 innocent people on board. it was shot down by russian separatists osm than same day "the new york times" reported president barack obama's schedule as, quote, a cheeseburger and fries at the charcoal pit at dwir and two fundraisers in new york city. mr. speaker, where would america be today if we had elected

barack obama in 1980 and where will this president's leadership take us tomorrow? with that, mr. speaker, i yield ack. the speaker pro tempore: under the speaker's announced policy of january 3, 2013rks the chair recognizes the gentleman from michigan. >> mr. speaker, there are not many people in this country acare of the persecution that christians are facing in the mideast. some people have a vague idea, but they can't identify the specific groups that are being targeted. today, i want to talk about coptic christians in egypt. the coptics are the native christians in egypt. they trace their origins nearly all the way to the beginnings of christianity. at one point they were the largest religious group in egypt. -- bent voleyow: but now -- but now they're

a minority. i have quite a few coptic christians in my district and i hear the same thing, that their family and friends are feasing persecution and violence and many question whether or not it's worth staying in egypt. there's a -- they're a yupe whose history, culture and language is rooted in -- rooted in egypt. over the last couple of years, they faced an increasingly violent environment. for example, on january 1, 2011, over 20 coptic christians were killed when a bomb went off in front of the church of st. mark in alexandria. such a devastating attack sent shock waves through the coptic community. the bombing was officially decleared the work of a suicide bomber. after president morrissey was removed from power last year, many had held out hope that life for coptic christians under a new regime would bring change, stability, and security. under president morrissey, they were not treated as equals and

the muslim brotherhood was certainly not a friend. in 2013 there was a wave of violence and destruction following the ousting of president morrissey. christian churches were attacked and burned. however, the real fer -- reality for coptics under their newest president isn't much different. i think there's a serious question that needs to be asked, what role the u.s. should play in protecting religious and ethnic minorities in countries to which the united states gives sufficient and significant foreign aid. the united states gives on average more than $1.5 billion in aid to egypt annually. the united states commission on international religious freedom has recommended that egypt be officially recognized as a tier one country of particular concern. however, the state department has not made that distinction. last year, i introduced the support democracy in egypt act to suspend further delivery of

f-16's and abrams tanks to egypt, upon further review to ensure they were promoting democracy and stability in the region. even with a new government, after the coup that ousted president morrissey, there hasn't been enough progress in egypt -- president morsi, there hasn't been enough progress in egypt. i don't think most americans would be pleased to learn that their tax dollars are being sent to egypt when that country continues to persecute religious minorities, including coptic christians. in the united states, religious free tom is protected in the constitution. it would seem to be in conflict with our morals, values and beliefs that are so supportive of -- to be so supportive of regimes that failed to give the same rights to their citizens. if we were providing security government but

not for those who are being persecuted, we should reconsider. at one point, i believe the yeats had the will to stand up to tyrants, dictators and oppressive regimes. but the stories i hear from constituents about what's happening in egypt counterdict that belief. if we aren't pressing hard to establish a stable society in egypt, one that won't persecute religious and ethnic minorities, egypt itself will never really realize stability. egypt will always be in a flux, vulnerable to religious elements that would seek to undermine and destroy any progress that is made. we should be worried greatly about the continue exs in egypt. why should -- they shouldn't have to flee their homes and leave their country behind because of their faith. they shouldn't have to worry

about car bombings, suicide bombers, shootings, abductions or any other kind of violence for which they've been targeted. we should support egypt in its transeducation to a more democratic state, but also keep in mind that religious persecution is still very real. as i said in a previous floor speech, if we want friends in the middle east, we have to encourage respect for religious freedom and diversity and not just build strong governments and militaries. if we do this in egypt, they will be more stable and its people can live in greater peace. thank you, mr. speaker, i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. under the speaker's announced 13, the january 3, 20 speaker announces.

mr. king: and we had a lot of debates and discussions over the 4th that i had to serve the district of iowa and coming into this year, earl yesy in the ear, late january, we held a town hall in cambridge, maryland and to discuss our strategy for this calendar year which is the balance of the year that we are in. and the discussion came around to the immigration issue. the immigration issue is a political issue and perhaps the most complex issue. it has implications and ramifications that go well eyond things that we face.

and it became very clear that house republicans didn't want to move on anything that would give the opportunity by the majority leader in the senate, senator harry reid and those who were in bill.ng of eighth o the consensus clearly, was not to take up the immigration issue this year because the sovereignty of the united states was put at risk. and there was no upside and the other beneficiaries would be the president of the united states, the people who are hiring cheap labor and the people who are on the other side of the aisle in the political party that recognizes that this country has 11 or more million people that

are undocumented democrats and they would like that thumb to be larger and they would like that number to be greater. i understand the motive of the people of the other side of the aisle. without assigning a motive, it appears to me that the policies that the president has advocated for brings in millions of people united nlawful in the states. arrivalsy on childhood and that policy has turned into a huge magnet. a magnet that has been attracting people from south of the border for a long time. the president issued an order in june of 2012. it is an unconstitutional order

in my opinion and i have put my own personal capital on the line to insert such points in the past and have prevailed. i understand this will constitutionality issue. and when the congress establishes the law and part of that federal immigration officer when they encounter someone, they have an object ever obligation, the language is shall she shall place them in amolve proceedings. it commands the officers to violate the law or to ignore the law. this is what we're up against. we have a president that taught constitutional law at the yuft of chicago school of law. 10 years of teaching its

constitution and all of these years to contemplate his oath of office to protect and defend the constitution of the united states and to take care -- this is the linching to the president's oath but exactly the language in our constitution, that he should take care that the laws are executed. he mismisinterpreted the laws. it didn't mean when written in the constitution to kill off the law, what it meant out was implement the law, and you would think that any professor of the constitutional law professor would know that. and i know that he does and he still issued the daca language and morton members. when janet

mrs. napolitano: came before the judiciary committee to testify on these memos, she repeated that many times in her testimony, the language that's in the member oover that came on that is on an individual basis only, four different classes of people. four classes of people and if people came into the united states of america before their 8th birthday or successfully alleged they did and arrived here before 2011 and confirms with the language, they would be granted a legal status and they were granted a work permit, manufactured out of thin air. and i say out of thin air because it is unconstitutional for the president to manufacture

immigration law. the constitution reserves the immigration law for the united states congress, not the president of the united states. in fact, there is a reason because of article one. we are the most important of the three branches of government and wanted the president to carry it out. the president has lectured to that effect. over here at a high school in march 28 of 2011, when they asked him, why don't you pass the dream act by executive order ed inch crmb t and the president said you are smart people. you know that congress' job is to pass the law and my job is to enforce the law and the judiciary's branch is to enforce the law.

it was an analysis of the three branches of government. the president delivered that in 2011. and by down, 2012, the president had gone back and decided he could after all manufacture immigration law. it is law less. the supreme law of the law doesn't allow him to do that. and what's the restraint? what's the restraint that this congress has? how do these members go home and these constituents stand up and say he restrain this president, put the immigration law back in order, do not not this president commange the law. and they believe somehow that this congress has the tools to restrain a president who has so

little respect for the language that we have passed into law here in this congress. there is no way to get around certain pieces of language. he will get around. he has lawyers that are doing that. but he gets to a certain place where the law doesn't allow it. for example, the work component with tan ff. work and the people that were collecting benefits deposit have to work. the work requirement was suspended even though then president clinton couldn't suspend the work component. that is a big component. president obama granted waivers and suspended the work come pept -- component. that is not lawful. that is not constitutional and

you have to legitimate this thing through the courts and to get an answer out of the courts before the president goes to his perptral golfing outings and the more federal judges are appointed by this president who agree with him. nd that is temporary assistance. no child left behind, waiver, waiver, waiver. tass all been left behind and the president has left it behind. even though it was a big piece of legislation and negotiated and supported by then senator teddy kennedy and signed by president bush. this reflected the will of the people. i'm not taking a position that i support this, but i'm suggesting this, the constitution is the

supreme law of the land. when the president signs the law, that is the law and any subsequent president has the obligation to enforce that law and carry it out, unless and until the congress should a amend it. and if the president wants to see the president appeal the law, the congress should introduce a piece of legislation that reflects the will of the president. there is a means to change it as well as there is a means to change the constitution. this constitution ace the supreme law of the land and it guides us and there is a provision to amend it. if we don't like the policy that results from this constitution, the base document or the various amendments that are attached to it now after this course of history, we can amend the

constitution. we can bring it before the house and senate with a 2/3 viet and message to the states and the states can ratify an amendment to the constitution. until then, i would say this, to the president of the united tates, all those who aspire in the united states house or senate or the people, understandings that this supreme law of the land, you are bound by it until such time as it will e amended, you cannot ignore it. you cannot violate the supreme law of the land and it is the framework upon which all of our laws are written. it is an important document. it sets about and defines the separation of powers. the executive and legislative and executive. we have a president who has gone

beyond the imgidges and beyond the fears that our founding fathers used when they drafted such a beautiful document that has survived in beautiful good health, the president has gone to a place where he decides whether he is going to enforce the law or not. and he has the audacity to seek to change the law by press conference. he did this on obamacare and stood out on the rose garden and said, i'm not going to make an accommodation to the religious organizations and rather than requiring them to do what the rules of obamacare were required to do, is now going to require the insurance companies to do that at no charge. now i wept back and checked the

law, obamacare, i checked the rules that were written and if there had been a public comment period, nothing. there is not an i differently or t crossed differently, there is nothing that the president commanded them to do by voice verbally in a press conference. that's not law. that is a republic. that doesn't result in a civilization and now we have this tragedy going on in the southern border as a result of the president that he can suspend law and decide not to enforce the law, mr. speaker. at this point, i would ask how much time i have remaining. . the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman has 35 minutes remaining. mr. king: thank you, mr.

speaker, i appreciate that. let's see. i will -- i'll try to conform my comments into that time period. the -- mr. speaker, the immigration issue has emerged now as the number one topic in front of the american people again. i had hoped that -- we had set it aside, i had hoped we'd go through this year and focusing on the things that are so important to us. this is a topic that has emerged because of the human trafficking and human suffering that's taking place. i'd like to deliver a report on what i have seen just over this past weekend and how it fits in with some of the other things i've been involved in, especially on our border. and as i listen to the dialogue emerge and i heard ideas emerging in our conference, it was important that i go down to the border and take a fresh look at the most po rouse component of our border where they have the most illegal crossings along

our 2,000 mile border with mexico. this was a portion of the border i have not traveled in the past. if i add up the miles -- the places i have traveled along the board e, it includes all of california, arizona and new mexico. some of those times it's sitting down there at night, listening and waiting for people to come across the border. i've been involved in the interdiction of illegal drugs, i've unloaded drugs out of the false beds of trucks and been there as part of the, i'll say an observer in the team, that is interdicting illegal ail generals who are drug smugglers who are ms-13. and that carries me on over into the texas board wrer i've done several segments of it, but i had not been to the southern tip of texas. i hadn't been to mcallen, i hadn't been to brownsville and the region down there so since that is the most po rouse section now, or the highest

trafficking section now, i headed down that way last friday night and arrived there relatively late friday evening. got up early in the morning and went out to the mouth of the rio grande river. of course the rio grande river is the dividing line through there between the united states and mexico, between texas and mexico, and there's a road that leads out to the gulf and once you get out to the gulf, there's -- you can take about a three-mile drive down the beach to the south to get to the outlet of the rio grande river. so we drove down that three miles of sandy beach and down to the mountain -- mouth of the rio grande river to observe that location where i would say once we are forced into, once this congress concludes we should, build a fence, a wall, and a fence on the southern border, i wanted to go to the place where you would set the furthest, most easterly corner point to build the fence, the wall, and the

fence, near the mouth of the rio grande river. set a flag there to locate the perimeter of the yeats of america. observed as people from mexico were waiting around, out around the outlet of the rio grande river and easily can wade across that into the united states as they can in many places along the river up and down the rio grande. from there, traveled back again and into brownsville where we visited three ports of entry in brownsville and also a not for profit entity that was working under the auspices of health and human services that were in the business of housing unaccompanied alien children until such time as they were relocated someplace into the united states. from there, we traveled then to mcallen, where we received a briefing at the sector center,

the border patrol sector, mcallen sector center in the conference room with good people at the table and then from there out into the detention area where they are incarcerating individuals that they're interdicting along the border. those numbers are demenishes substantially over the last three to four weeks, mr. speaker, into some number i recognize to be a little less than half of the peak amount pouring through into the united states illegally. from there, we went into the hold fag silties. we were freely able to walk through and look at everything that was there. we went over to a location of a large building that the border patrol had retrofitted in a very fast and looked to me like a very efficient setup turn around to be prepeared to handle a lot of unaccompanied alien children who were -- they were in a, now a huge building with dividing

segments in there all of it air-conditioned with health and human services workers there playing barefoot soccer, indoors, in air-conditioning, which i'm sure was a new experience for -- for those kids that were there. from there we went out for a briefing with the department of public safety and the texas rangers to get a different perspective a perspective from the state, and the state officials and the law enforcement officers that are eyes on, hands on, they're engaged and they're working hand in glove with the customs, border patrol and i.c.e. i've opinion impressed with our professional officers all the way along the warke everybody in a uniform i encountered was a good, solid, squared away professional individual that inputted good information to us. after the texas department of public safety and texas rangers gave us their briefing, which lasted nearly two hours, then we

went on out and rode with a department of public safety officer who took us out to observe the night operations of helicopter surveillance overhead and spotlights from the helicopters and other devices they have to help them locate people that are sneaking into whether - into america they're being trafficed as humans or bringing drugs in. the next morning we went up toward laredo. i should mention i went to church in sacred heart church in city, a spanish lang --

-- and they give them a meal before they bus them out. then we went to a park that's been in the national news consistently, consistently the name of the park starts with the letter a, i can't repeat it from memory, mr. speaker, but there we saw many, many enforcement officer well, saw border patrol, we saw county sheriffs, nstable, and we also saw unmarced, undercover officers that were there. they had the park pretty -- pret the well covered. there were a lot of people a lot of mexicans on the other side of the river, playing in the water on the river, jet skis were going back and forth, and we know those secret sees -- skis -- those jet skis are often used to move people

across the river. from there we poked our way up the river to a small town, ramos is pretty close to the spelling of it, it's a small -- it's a short lettered town, a relatively small town, an old town. there as we pulled up to the port of entry and took a look across the bridge into mexico, there was an officer there that gave us a piece of information which is, if you're here from the united states congress, thank you, thank you for coming and to see what's going on, and if you want to see illegals crossing into the united states, take a right down there and drive up along that ridge and there'll be a place there where you can look out over the river and if you sit there and wait an hour or so, you'll see people crossing the river into the united states. so we did pull up there and met with a couple of police officers and then border patrol came along and while we're there wait, we were able to watch on

the other side of the river where a team of two on the mexico side inflated a relatively large inflatable raft, larger than i expected, at least, about the size of a pool table would be my guess and they loaded a female, turned out to be a pregnant female into this raft and you could watch as they -- late afternoon, roughly 4:00 or 4:30, just brazenly started across the river and ran that raft right on over into the united states side where they go out of sight buzz of the brush but they came directly over across the river and border patrol knew where they were, they could watch them, the city police could watch them. and that's how -- illegal immigrant that came into america in that raft was helped onto the shore by one of the two coyotes in the raft and was handed the two bags of her personal item

she is had with her and the coyote that got off on the shore got back in the raft and they pulled away from the shore and went back to mexico. the border patrol didn't get there in time to interdict the raft. they didn't seem to be as animated as i thought they would, which told me it's a regular experience, not an irregular experience. they did interdict the illegal who appeared to be pregnant and likely came over to the united states to claim credible fear and asylum and of course if she has the baby here, that baby will be an american citizen and as soon as that baby is of age that child can start the reunification process to bring all its family here to the united states. that's what's going on on the border and the officers that we were with, while that happened, said they believe that the distraction that was created by bringing per over was a distraction that likely gave them an opportunity to smuggle a significant amount of illegal drugs across the river, probably upstream a ways, just out of

sight of where we were and in a place where you can't drive. that was, i think, the most significant observation that we had, to see that brazen crossing of the river. they knew, the border -- they knew the border patrol was watching them. they knew the city police were watching them. that didn't deter them they've went across the river anyway, dropped her off and ski daddled back to the mexican side. we have video of them deflating the raft and folding it up, putting it in their vehicle. surveillance would put a license number on that vehicle, it should be traceable and should be easy enough to identify the people doing this. but we don't have that level of cooperation across the river in mexico, according to the questions that i asked. and we have a border that's not completely open but it's a long, long ways from being closed, mr. speaker. from there, we went on up the river and followed the border clear on into laredo where we

took a tour from customs and border protection in that very busy laredo crossing there in laredo of the land freight, semitrailers as i took it, coming into the united states or leaving the united states, 46% of them in the southwest border come through laredo. it's a huge crossing. people there are professional. they use new technology to the extent they can. there's just a lot of traffic. nd as i look at this overall policy, we also visited with or were able to observe the processing of people who are, say, interdicted and apprehended for illegal entry into the yeats. here's what it comes down to, mr. speaker. along these lines. the high number of unaccompanied isle yen children has been a problem we have not encountered anywhere near this magnitude