area we have been working on is around hospitals and community benefits. hospitals want to keep their community benefits a mystery. and the value of those benefits to consumers. community organizations wanted them to have that information. getave been working hard to a database of information around which provides that benefits data to george washington university. we are looking to move forward in improving that kind of data for consumers. consumers need to understand that on the basics of health care the idea of some of the broader trends in health care are a black box to consumers. government and consumer organizations need to push hard

for opening up that black box. >> thank you. >> you can see all of this event from the brookings institution later on c-span two. the house is coming back in now. ncurs objection under clause 6 of rule 20. record votes on postponed questions will be taken later. for what purpose does the gentleman from virginia seek recognition? >> mr. speaker, i move that the house suspend the rules and pass h.r. 5421, financial institution bankruptcy act of 2014, as amended. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: h.r. 5421, a bill to amend title 11 of the united states code in order to facilitate the resolution of an insolvent financial institution and bankruptcy. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from virginia, mr. goodlatte, and the gentleman from michigan, mr. conyers, each will control 20 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from virginia.

mr. goodlatte: thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent to that -- that all members may have five legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous materials on h.r. 5421 currently under consideration. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. mr. goodlatte: mr. speaker, i recognize myself for such time as i may consume. today we take an important step toward preventing the taxpayer-funded bailouts that characterized the 2008 financial cry sills. the legislation before us -- crisis. the legislation before us, the financial institution bankruptcy act, enhances the bankruptcy code to facilitate resolution of a failing financial institution through the bankruptcy proelse is. in doing so, this will help to ensure that private creditors, not taxpayers, bear the losses related to a failing financial institution. the financial institution bankruptcy act is the culmination of years of research by the judiciary committee, other committees and experts from the financial

regulatory, legal and academic communities who helped to examine how best to prevent another financial crisis from occurring and avert the use of taxpayer moneys to bail out failing firms. the judiciary committee has participated in and promoted this review with the aim of examining whether the bankruptcy laws could be improved to enhance the prospects of resolving a financial institution through the bankruptcy process. during the course of two oversight hearings, this congress, the subcommittee on regulatory reform, commercial and antitrust law, received testimony that the bankruptcy code could be improved to better facilitate a resolution of a financial firm and that an amendment to chapter 11 to provide for a specialized subchapter would be the most efficient approach to that goal. following these hearings, the committee worked in bipartisan fashion to draft legislation that built on this record and integrated witnesses and leading experts'

recommendations. these efforts culminated in a discussion draft of the financial institution bankruptcy act of 2014 which was the subject of a legislative hearing on july 15, 2014. all witnesses act the hearing testified that, subject to a few modifications, the financial institution bankruptcy act should be enacted into law. in connection with the july 15 hearing, the committee circulated the draft legislation to a number of interested parties, including the federal reserve, the federal deposit insurance corporation, the office of the controller of the currency, the administrative office of the united states courts, the national conference of bankruptcy judges, and the national bankruptcy conference and the international swaps and derivatives association. the committee again in a bipartisan fashion received, review and incorporated multiple comments submitted by these and other parties. the bill was introduced and approved by the committee by

voice vote on september 10 of this year. the bill on the floor today is a reflection of the careful, deliberate, thorough and bipartisan process the bill received and is the product of a verse range of views from a variety of interested parties. the financial institution bankruptcy act makes several improvements to the bankruptcy code in order to enhance the prospect of an efficient resolution of a financial firm through the bankruptcy process. the bill allows for a speedy transfer of the operating assets of a financial firm over the course of a weekend. this quick transfer allows the financial firm to continue operating in the normal course which preserves the value of the enterprise for the firm's creditors without a significant impact on the firm's employees, suppliers and customers. the bill also requires an expedited judicial review by

judges designated in advance and selected by the chief justice for their experience, expertise and willingness to preside over these complex cases. furthermore, the legislation provides for key input from the financial institution's regulators during the process. the financial institution bankruptcy act is a bipartisan, balanced approach that increases transparency and predictability in the resolution of a financial firm. i am pleased that the ranking member of the house judiciary committee, mr. conyers, joined in introducing this important legislation and want to thank him and his staff for working hand in hand with us during the development of this bill. i also would like to thank the chairman of the subcommittee on regulatory reform, commercial and antitrust law, mr. bachus, for introducing the financial institution bankruptcy act. it is no mistake that the former chairman of the financial services committee is the lead sponsor of this legislation.

mr. bachus has been a long standing champion of the bankruptcy process that was reflected in the multiple subcommittee hearings he chaired on this issue. this legislation is a tribute to his many years dedicated to financial services and bankruptcy issues and he will be sorely missed next congress. i wish him all the best during the next chapter of his life. i urge my colleagues to support this important legislation and reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from michigan, mr. conyers. mr. conyers: mr. speaker, i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. conyers: ladies and gentlemen, -- ladies and gentlemen of the house, i rise in strong support of h.r. 5421, as amended, the financial institution bankruptcy act of 2014. it is intended to ensure that the resolution of large,

complex financial institutions on the verge of insolvency can be better facilitated under the bankruptcy code. and i support this legislation for several reasons. first, it addresses the real need recognized by the regulatory agency, bankruptcy experts and the private sector that the bankruptcy law must be amended so that it can expeditiously restore trust in the financial marketplace after the collapse of a mainly financial institution. -- major financial institution. such was the case with the failure of lehman brothers in operate, for example. which caused -- in 2008, for example, which caused a worldwide freeze on the availability of credit, wreaking havoc on wall street, as well as main street. the near collapse of our nation's economy that resulted from lehman's failure revealed

the current bankruptcy law is unfortunately ill-equipped to deal with complex financial institutions in economic distress. this legislation accordingly creates a court-supervised, orderly liquidation mechanism that will be guided by the regulators. in some, -- in sum, this process will allow a failing financial institution to transfer its assets to a newly formed bridge company over a single weekend, which will promote confidence in the financial marketplace. the institution's equity and debt will remain in the bankruptcy case to be administered by a trustee under court supervision. as a result, value assets will be maximized for the benefit of creditors and the marketplace will be stabilized.

additionally, i support the legislation because it appropriately recognizes the important role of the dodd-frank act, that it has in the regulation of large financial institutions. without a doubt, the great recession was a direct result of the regulatory equivalent of the wild west. the dodd-frank act goes a long way toward reinvigorating a regulatory system that makes the financial marketplace more accountable and hopefully more resilient. the act also institutes a long-needed consumer until ons that have up now not been available. title two of the dodd-frank act establishes a mandatory administratively driven resolution process to wind down

large financial institutions. title two is a critical enforcement tool for the bank regulators to facilitate compliance with the act's heightened regulatory requirements for large companies. nevertheless, dodd-frank act clearly recognizes that bankruptcy should be a first resort and that the title two's orderly liquidation process should be a last resort. in fact, title one of the act explicitly requires these companies to write so-called living wills that must explain how they will resolve their financial difficulties in a hypothetical bankruptcy scenario. this is because bankruptcy laws for more than 100 years enabled some of the nation's largest companies to regain their

financial footing and i have to , being from detroit, remember general motors and chrysler corporation were major beneficiaries. so h.r. 5421 will ensure that bankruptcy is a truly viable alternative to the dodd-frank act's resolution process. and i'm pleased to note, as has been referenced by the chairman of judiciary, that this legislation is the product of a very collaborative, bipartisan and deliberate process which should be the norm, not the exception, when it comes to drafting legislation. so i tip my hat to chairman goodlatte and the subcommittee chairman for the work that they have done in bringing this to this point. now, for example, this bill,

unlike the similar legislation in the senate, doesn't include any controversial provisions aimed at undoing the important protections of the draud frank act -- dodd-frank act. and i should also note that h.r. 5421 does not include any provisions allowing companies to have access to lenders of last resort. nearly every expert recognizes that such access, even if it is the federal government, is a necessary element to ensure financial stability. so i acknowledge the excellent level of corporation -- cooperation on both sides of the aisle, in the judiciary committee producing the legislation that is pending before us, and today i urge my colleagues to support this

measure and i would like to just add that my friend, spencer bachus of alabama, is a long-time member who has been particularly active in the areas of administrative law over the years, as well as immigration and criminal justice. i find him an individual of principle who's worked on many bipartisan initiatives and i understand representative adage, father used the if you can't say anything nice about a person, don't say anything at all, and mr. bachus has adhered to that advice as he was a consummate gentleman used fairness at all time. so, mr. speaker, i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the

gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from virginia. mr. goodlatte: mr. speaker, at this time it's my pleasure to yield five minutes to the gentleman from alabama, the chairman of the subcommittee on regulatory reform, commercial and antitrust law, and the chief sponsor of this legislation, mr. bachus. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. bachus: first, let me thank chairman goodlatte and ranking member conyers, former chairman conyers, for those kind remarks. . i have been fortunate to associate with both you gentlemen over the past few years and appreciate the confidence you've entrusted in me and i take those kind words to heart. thank you. i want to thank both of you for this legislation, because it

absolutely, as we know in the legislative process, this went by regular order which is how ll bills should proceed. and mr. cohen, who was then my subcommittee ranking member and then mr. johnson, were both very cooperative. we also know that good legislation has to have a good staff, and on the subcommittee e were blessed by three fine individuals and their support staffs, anthony grossy and daniel flores on the majority side and sitting over there next to mr. conyers is susan jensen and they worked together. they worked for what was best. i saw no partisanship, no gangsmanship.

it was a group effort. they were also backed by the national conference of -- national bankruptcy conference, administrative office of courts, the bankruptcy judicial conference as well as the attorney's bar both for creditors and debtors. both for consumers and for the institutions. they all came together. we had many people from the academic world, experts in bankruptcy, and they pretty much identified how we ought to go. and the history of all this really is the financial crisis of 2008 which none of us want to go through again. now, we may go through something similar but we want to do everything we can do to avoid that and that's what this bill is all about. and it's to proceed under an

established procedure, rule of law, which separates the united states from many, many countries. this bill follows rule of law. stearns and t bear lehman brothers and look at the different paths that were taken, if you see in other bankruptcies were people were put out of jobs unnecessarily, and there was tremendous job losses, there was a consensus in looking back that that could have been avoided, much of that. except that bankruptcy didn't give us the tools to address it. now, there were two reasons, things that we heard often during the financial crisis. one was that term derivatives, credit default swaps, new les, but all these financial instruments and the

bankruptcy code simply had not been updated to address derivatives. and then the global economy. you have almost every large bank holding company, almost every large financial company, it has both foreign subsidies and domestic subsidiaries. so you got multiple jurisdictions trying to handle pieces of this, and through really a consensus, we came together and said we're going to let the u.s. operating subsidiaries and the foreign operating subsidiaries and that's where 99% of your employees work and probably where 99% of the transactions with customers, creditors, debtors, the general public, that's why they transact.

we allow that to continue. e put the bank holding company , it alone, through a single point of entry goes into bankruptcy. so they're not these tremendous disruptions that we saw first with bear stearns and then in a ascading effect we hopefully can avoid a lot of that. i see my time is almost up. let me close by saying this, dodd-frank said let's go to g.a.o., let's go to the federal reserve and let's come up -- the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. mr. goodlatte: i'm happy to yield two additional minutes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for two minutes. mr. bachus: they actually called for us to have this procedure and that part of dodd-frank -- sometimes said the good, the bad, the ugly -- that was a good part. we needed to avoid -- we needed

to structure bankruptcy where they could handle these situations if at all possible. we consulted with comptroller of the currency, with the fdic reserve, with the and this is a rare consensus. there is a bill over in the and i y senator cornyn think the senator from similar to that is this bill. hopefully we'll have a conference with the senate and get this done. some people may say, well, it's not enough. well, we need to do what we can do in a consensus way and do what we can. it's probably never enough. sometimes it's too much but at least this is in general agreement, and with that i do want to do this for the record

only. i want to introduce a memorandum on this bill which includes a section by section comment and this is basically for the courts and those that would look at this and give illumination to exactly how this works. and without objection, i'd like to introduce that detailed narrative which again -- the speaker pro tempore: so ordered. r. bachus: i thank the chairman and ranking member and their staffs for putting this together. i'd introduce this, but the resolution process for financial institutions is one of the unfinished businesses of the 2008 financial crisis. and we will finish some of that business, hopefully, before the year's out. the american people are hungry for us to do some good things in a spirit of bipartisanship and they are getting that today. thank you.

the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from michigan. mr. -- seek any time? mr. conyers: i yield back, mr. chairman. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan yields back his time. the gentleman from virginia. mr. goodlatte: mr. speaker, i yield back and urge my colleagues to support this important legislation. the speaker pro tempore: the question is will the house suspend the rules and pass the bill h.r. 5421. 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 washington state seek recognition? mr. hastings: mr. speaker, i move to suspend the rules and pass h.r. 4924, as amended. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: h.r. 4924, a bill to direct the secretary of the interior to enter into the big sandy river-planet ranch water rights settlement agreement and the hualapai tribe bill williams river water rights settlement agreement, to provide for the lease of ertain land located within planet ranch on the bill williams river in the state of arizona to benefit the lower colorado river multi-species conservation program, and to provide for the settlement of specific water rights claims in the bill williams river watershed in the state of -- planet ranch on the bill williams river in the state of arizona to benefit the lower

colorado river multi-species conservation program, and to provide for the settlement of specific water rights claims in the bill williams river watershed in the state of colorado and provide for the settlelement of specific water rights claims in the bill williams watershed in the state of arizona. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from washington, mr. hastings, and the gentleman from california, mr. lone that will, each will control -- mr. lowenthal, each will control 20 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from washington. mr. hastings: mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent 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. hastings: i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. hastings: mr. speaker, our colleague from arizona, mr. gosar, is the author of h.r. 4924, which is co-sponsored by the entire bipartisan arizona house delegation. the bill authorizes and codifies two water rights settlement agreements. the bill will provide some ter supply certainty for the hualapai tribe, the arizona game and fish commission and the federal government. due to federal trust responsibility for the tribe,

congressional authorization ratification of these agreements are necessary. the bill does not impact winters doctrine rights which are tribal water rights set forth in a landmark 1908 supreme court case, nor does it authorize federal expenditure of any kind since this bill involves just the first phase of an agreement. this creative bill provides benefits to all parties involved in the settlements without any federal expense. i urge my colleagues to support the legislation, and i reserve my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves his time. the gentleman from california. mr. lowenthal: thank you, mr. speaker. i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman may proceed. mr. lowenthal: mr. speaker, h.r. 4924 would approve a water rights settlement agreement in the bill williams river basin and settle a long-standing water rights dispute between e hualapia tribe and the

freeport minerals company. under this agreement, the tribe will confirm its water rights claims in the bill williams river basin, receive protections for culturally significant springs and secure a nonfederal contribution to enable future settlement of its water rights claims in the other river basins. the freeport company will also receive greater water certainty at one of its sites. this legislation approves a fair settlements in the bill williams river basin without requiring any new spending authorizations. i support adoption of h.r. 4924 and urge my colleagues to support this legislation as well. i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from washington. mr. hastings: mr. speaker, i'm very pleased to yield five minutes to the author of this legislation, the gentleman from arizona, mr. gosar. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from arizona is recognized for five minutes. mr. gosar: thank you, mr. chairman. mr. speaker, i'd like to start by thanking house committee on natural resources, chairman doc hastings, and his staff for all

their efforts on h.r. 4924. as many of you are already aware, chairman hastings is leaving at the end of this congress. doc has served honorably since 1995. during my relatively short tenure in congress, i've had the pleasure of working with chairman hastings on important matters like protecting western water rights, improving our nation's forest health and increasing our access to american energy resources. since this could be the last time i work with doc on the bill, i'd like to thank him for his leadership and everything he's done to make our country a better place. chairman hastings, i'm proud to call you a friend and mentor. you will most certainly be missed. water in the west is critical to our future economic prosperity and of course is a limited resource on which there are many existing demands. h.r. 4924 is important legislation that will facilitate a fair and equitable settlement of certain claims within the bill williams watershed in arizona, amongst the hualap ambings, tribe,

freeport mining company, the arizona game and fish commission and the federal government. my bill is good for property owners, good for local jobs and will result in a net water benefit to the basin. the first of the two agreements codified by this legislation allows for certain private water rights owned by freeport to be settled and transferred to provide water certainty for one of the company's mining operations. the baghdad mine has an economic impact of $339.1 million to the state of arizona and sustains nearly 4,000 direct and indirect jobs. under this first agreement, freeport will also donate 3,400 acres of private land to the arizona game and fish department to be managed as part of the multispecies conservation program. and finally, the first agreement will benefit water users throughout the west as free -- freeportes that agreed o cap the 10,055 acre-feet

despite being entitled to nearly 40,000 acre-feet of existing water rights. thus my bill will result in an overall net water -- 30,000 acre-feet per year. the second of the two agreements approved by h.r. 4924 will secure certain water rights for the hualapi tribe as well as two nonfederal contributions that will be provided by freeport to the tribe for an infrastructure fund and economic developmental fund. in addition, there is a provision in h.r. 4924 that will allow for new public access for hunting and fishing on the land involved in this legislation. furthermore, the local county's benefits from good-paying jobs and tax revenue associated with the continued use of the mine. natural passed the resources committee by unanimous consent on november 19. preliminary congressional budget office estimates indicate the bill costs nothing to the federal government and will not score.

we strongly support h.r. 4924 and signed on as original co-sponsor of this legislation. i appreciate the opportunity to discuss this legislation, it's extremely important to the state of arizona. i urge immediate adoption by the house and hope my colleagues in the senate will follow our lead and pass this critical bill in a timely manner in this congress. thank you, mr. speaker, wands that i yield back the balance of my time -- and with that i yield the balance of my time back to the chairman. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california. >> i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from washington state. mr. hastings: this is a good piece of legislation. i urge its adoption and a i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: -- and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: all time is yielded. the question is will the house pass the bill. 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 upon the table.

for what purpose does the gentleman from washington state seek recognition? mr. hastings: mr. speaker, i move to suspend the rules and pass h.r. 5050. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: union calendar number 471, h.r. 5050, a bill to repeal the act of may 31, 1918, and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from washington, mr. hastings, and the gentleman from california, mr. lowenthal, each will control 20 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from washington state. mr. hastings: mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the bill under consideration and i yield myself as much time as i may consume. thank you, mr. speaker. first i would like to thank the gentleman from idaho, my colleague, mr. simpson, for his hard work and leadership on this h.r. 5050. he will be speaking on the bill later so i'll just provide a brief summary. under the act of may 31, 1918,

the secretary of interior was authorized to set aside land for town site purposes within the fort hall indian reservation in the state of idaho. the town site envisioned under the 1918 act never came to fruition. and the land is now owned by a account. the tribe seeks restoration of the land into tribal ownership because a parcel is located on their reservation and can be used for economic development. this bill removes this unused reservation so that the land may be fully utilized by the tribe. and again i want to thank my colleague, mr. simpson, for his work on behalf of the fort hall indian reservation and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from california. mr. lowenthal: i yield the balance of my time. no, no, i'm sorry. i yield myself as much time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. lowenthal: mr. speaker,

h.r. 5050 would repeal the act of may 31, 1918, and give the tribe of fort hall indian reservation the exclusive right of first refusal to purchase at fair market value any land within the fort hall town site which is often for sale. by repealing the 1918 act, more land within the reservation's boundaries would be available to the tribes and the secretary would be prevented from possibly selling land within the designated town site area. this bill would not affect current landowners and provides the tribes only with the right of first refusal for any future transactions involving the lands. i support adoption of h.r. 5050 and urge my colleagues to support this legislation and i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from washington state. mr. hastings: thank you, mr. speaker. i'm very pleased to yield three minutes to the author of this

legislation, the gentleman from idaho, mr. simpson. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from idaho is recognized for three minutes. mr. simpson: i thank the gentleman and i thank chairman hastings for bringing this bill and the subsequent bill that will follow to the floor, seeing rapid action on, it i thank you for your support of this. let me also say that this is the last year that chairman hastings will be in congress. he's chosen to retire at the end of this year. and it's been a pleasure to work with him on both resource issues and on energy and water issues that i'm involved with and we're going to miss him and his 20 years of service representing washington. and all of the people in this country. so i appreciate the work that you've done and we will miss you. mr. speaker, i rise today in support of h.r. 5050, the may 31, 1918, act repeal act. this is simple but a significant piece of legislation addressing issues that impact the tribes in idaho. as its name subjects, h.r. 5050 would repeal the 1918 act that gives the federal government authority to unilaterally take

tribal land out of trust and transfer it to a local government for use as a township. this act is antiquated and any purpose it may have served toward, its stated goal of providing trading opportunities for the tribes, has long since expired. today thanks to an m.o.u. dating back to 2009, the local county government has granted jurisdiction over the remaining town site to the tribes for law enforcement, emergency services and roads and infrastructure. it's time to wipe this 1918 law off the books from a practical standpoint, the tribes are already managing the land in question for which the county has no interest in being responsible. for a -- from a more general point of view, allowing the federal government the authority to unilaterally take tribal land out of trust violates the spirit of the relationship the government should have with the tribes. repealing this act is the right and sensible thing to do. as i conclusion today, i would like to take note that h.r.

5050 has been introduced by my colleagues in the senate and was unanimously passed out of the committee and i'm hopeful that the senate will take action on this quickly so that this bill and the subsequent bill can be signed into law and the tribes can move on these issues. i thank you, mr. speaker, 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 california. mr. lowenthal: i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california yields. the gentleman from washington state. mr. hastings: mr. speaker, this is a good piece of legislation. i urge its acooperation and i yield back the balance of my time -- its aa doppings and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: -- its adoption and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: all time has been yielded. does the house agree to h.r. 050. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, -- the yeas and nays are requested. the yeas and nays have been requested.

all those in favor of taking this vote by the yeas and nays will rise and remain standing until counted. a sufficient number having arisen, the yeas and nays are ordered. pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20, furlt proceedings on this question -- further proceedings on this question will be postponed. for what purpose does the gentleman from washington state seek recognition? mr. hastings: mr. speaker, i move to suspend the rules and pass s. 2040. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: senate 2040, an act to exchange trust and fee land to resolve land disputes created by the realignment of the blackfoot river along the boundary of the fort hall indian reservation and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from washington state, mr. hastings, and the gentleman from california, will lowenthal, each will control -- mr. lowenthal, each will control 20 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from washington state. mr. hastings: mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent 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. hastings: i yield myself as much time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. hastings: thank you, mr. speaker. first, i'd like to once again acknowledge the work of the gentleman from idaho, mr. simpson, for his work on the house companion to this bill, reported which was -- reported from the natural resources committee by unanimous consent. h.r. 2040 addresses a land dispute caused by the realignment of the blackfoot river along the boundary of the fort hall indian reservation in idaho by requiring an exchange of indian lands for nonindian lands. specifically, s. 2040 authorizes the federal government to take into trust certain non-indy and lands on behalf of the -- non-indian lands on behalf of the tribes in idaho. in exchange the government would convey certain indian lands. finally, in recognition of this land exchange, the bill extinguishes claims that would be asserted by the tribes against the federal government. it's a complex solution, mr. speaker, to a complex problem

and i'm glad we'll be able to resolve that problem with this bill. with that i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from california. mr. lowenthal: mr. speaker, i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. lowenthal: mr. speaker, s. 2040 would resolve border changes to the fort hall vessvation after the realignment of the blackfoot river by the army corps of engineers in 1964. this bill settles the boundary disputes for the tribes of the fort hall reservation and directs the secretary of the interior to transfer the indian land to the blackfoot river flood control district number seven for use or sale and requires that the non-indian land be held in trust for the tribes. the bill allows the local flood control district to compensate non-indian landowners at fair market value. the disposition of the remaining lands after the sale of the lands is left to the discretion of the flood control district number seven.

mr. speaker, i support passage of this bill and i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from washington state. mr. hastings: mr. speaker, i'm very pleased to yield three minutes to the author of the companion bill, house bill of thisless legislation, the gentleman from -- of this legislation, the gentleman from idaho, mr. simpson, three minutes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for three minutes. mr. simpson: thank you, mr. speaker. again i thank the chairman for bringing this piece of legislation to the floor. i rise today in support of senate bill 2040, the blackfoot river land exchange act of 2014. this important bill provides a needed fix to a long standing problem regarding the northern boundary of the fort hall reservation of the tribes in idaho. when i grew up in blackfoot, which was on the northern side of the fort hall reservation, the blackfoot river was the designation of the northern boundary of the fort hall indian reservation and the southern part of the city of blackfoot. as a i was growing up, i can remember in the early days, it used to ice up because it was a

meepedering small river and it would ice up and flood and everything and cause havoc. since its designation, however, in 1960, the corps of engineers flood control project clanged the flow of the river, leaving some tribal land located north of the river and some non-indian land located south of the river. for years the tribes and affected land owners have collaborated to find a solution to this problem that works for all concerned. senate bill 2040 is that solution. the bill is simple land exchange that would make both the tribes and the affected landowners whole. senate bill 2040 is the result of cooperation and give and take. the bill passed the senate in september with unanimous consent. the house version of the bill was passed unanimously by the committee this fall. i look forward to seeing it signed into law before the end of this year and will solve a long standing problem for the fort hall indian reservation and the city of blackfoot and i thank the gentleman and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from california. mr. lowenthal: thank you, mr. speaker. i yield back the balance of my

time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california yields. the gentleman from washington state. mr. hastings: thank you, mr. speaker. once again, this is a good piece of legislation addressing a complex issue. i urge its adoption and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the question is, will the house s. end the rules and pass 2040. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, 2/3 of those voting having responded in the affirmative -- mr. hastings: mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman -- for what purpose does -- mr. hastings: on that i ask for the yeas and nays. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman requested the yeas and nays. all those in favor of taking this vote by the yeas and nays will rise and remain standing until counted. a sufficient number having arisen, the yeas and nays are ordered. pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20, further proceedings on this uestion will be postponed. for what purpose does the gentleman from washington state seek recognition? mr. hastings: mr. speaker, i move to suspend the rules and pass h.r. 2455 as amended.

the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: h.r. 2455, a bill to provide for the sale or transfer of certain federal lands in nevada and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from washington, mr. hastings, and the gentleman from california, mr. lowenthal, each will control 20 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from washington. mr. hastings: mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent 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. hastings: i yield myself as much time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. hastings: thank you, mr. speaker. first, i wouldlined to commend the sponsor of this bill, mr. amodei from nevada, for his tireless work on this important piece of legislation. because he will speak further on the details of this legislation, i will provide a very brief summary of the bill. h.r. 2455 as amended requires that 45,000 acres of federal land be held in trust by the u.s. to expand the reservations of several tribes residing in

nevada while requiring that this land may now be used for gaming purposes. the bill also directs the secretary of interior to convey 275 acres of federal land to the county of elco in nevada, to be used only as a motocross, bicycle, offroad vehicle or stock car racing area. again, i'd like to thank our colleague from nevada, mr. amodei, for his legislation and i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from california. . mr. lowenthal: i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. lowenthal: mr. speaker, h.r. 2455 would convey 275 acres of bureau of land management, or b.l.m. administered lands to the elko county, nevada, at fair market value. it conveys the elko motocross to be used as a motocross,

bicycle, offhighway vehicle or stock car racing area. if the land is not used for these specific purposes, then it may be used for any other public purpose that's consistent with the recreation and public purposes act. the bill would also transfer several thousand acres of b.l.m. administered land to seven nevada tribes in trust. the te-moak tribe of western shoshone indians, fort mcdermitt paiute, shoshone ibe, the shoshone-paiute tribe. and the reno sparks indian colony and the pyramid lake paiute tribe. this bill was amended by subcommittee chairman representative don young from alaska to address the administration's concerns about sadge grass habitat. i thank my colleagues, representative markham day and representative don young for their efforts to address these concerns.

i support the passage of these bills and i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from washington. mr. hastings: thank you, mr. speaker. i'm pleased to yield four minutes to the author of this legislation, the gentleman from nevada, mr. amodei. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for four minutes. mr. amodei: thank you, mr. speaker. i want to thank the chairman of the subcommittee for yielding the time. i want to also thank my colleague from california, the ranking member, and also the subcommittee chairman, mr. young from alaska, for processing this bill. i want to also associate myself with the remarks of my colleague from idaho earlier regarding the departure of the committee chairman, mr. hastings from washington, and while he talked about who's going to miss who more, i think it's accurate, mr. speaker, to say i will miss mr. hastings more than he will miss me. this is a prime example of what happens when we work together. this is several tens of thousands of acres which have, by the way, some of it have been waiting since i was in the eighth grade, the original

legislation for the fort mcdermitt paiute tribe was introduced in 1971 by then united states senators bible and cannon who represented nevada so those folks get the patience award. this bill does such housekeeping things that we should all be happy to have been part of to finish up. see, you have multiple issues of law enforcement. you're on the reservation, you're off the reservation. economic development. jobs for some of the most economically challenged cultures in our nation. multiple use. cultural resource protection. all those sorts of things which i am proud to be associated with. i want to thank the chairman and the tribal councilmembers who have brought this to our attention at a meeting originally with mr. young in nevada several years ago. and we're looking forward to since the committee and the subcommittee did great work, along with the minority on changing some of this since it

now conforms with the senate wishes to the senate processing this expeditiously. thank you, mr. speaker. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from california. mr. lowenthal: i yield back, mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california yields. the gentleman from washington. mr. hastings: thank you, mr. speaker. again, this is a -- a lot of these bills can be very complex. i'm glad there is a solution to it. i urge adoption and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: all time has expired. the question is will the house suspend the rules and pass the bill h.r. 2455, 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 washington seek recognition? mr. hastings: mr. speaker, i move to suspend the rules and pass h.r. 3572, as amended. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: h.r. 3572, a bill to revise the boundaries of certain john h. chafee coastal barrier resources system units .n north carolina

the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from washington, mr. hastings, and the gentleman from california, mr. lowenthal, each will control 20 minutes. and the chair recognizes the gentleman from washington. mr. hastings: mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days to revise and on the heir remarks bill under consideration. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. mr. hastings: i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. hastings: in 1982 congress enacted the coastal barrier resources act and eight years later significantly expanded a number of acres contained within the coastal barrier resources system. the fundamental goal of this law was to discourage development along fragile and shifting coastal barriers by prohibiting participation within the federal flood insurance program and to deny certain subsidies. to qualify for inclusion within the system, coastal land had to be undevelopment and conserved as part of the national

wildlife refuge, federal or state park, national seashore, a military installation or conservation land owned by private organizations. inclusion in this system is through maps which historically were hand drawn by individuals who used magic markers to distinguish property lines. really, magic markers. as you might expect, mistakes were made and congress has corrected those errors by provided legislative relief to homeowners whose property was mistakenly incorporated within the coastal barrier resources system. what we have before us today is a bill that corrects mistakes in certain coastal barrier units in florida, north carolina, rhode island and south carolina. this affects both republican and democrat districts. in total, the legislation affects maps in 10 of the 857 units of the system. 56 acres of t, 1 the 3.1 million acres would be removed from the system.

however, because digital technology is now being used, 4,737 new qualifying acres will be added to the system for a net gain of 4,580 acres. each of these changes have been exhaustively reviewed. there is no dispute that these lands are mistakenly included within the coastal barrier resource system. there are no objections to correcting this mistake. and the congressional budget office has in each case stipulated that, and i quote, enacting the bill would not affect revenues, end quote. so mr. speaker, i urge an aye vote on this bipartisan, noncontroversial collection of changes to the coastal barrier resources system, and i compliment the sponsors for their work on this legislation. with that i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from california. mr. lowenthal: thank you, mr. speaker. i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman may proceed. mr. lowenthal: mr. speaker, the coastal barrier resources act,

or cobra, requires areas on the atlantic and gulf coasts and makes federal subsidies off-limits to people who choose to develop those lans. particularly in this time of rising sea levels and increased storm surge brought on by global warming, cobra is critical to helping protect american taxpayers and sensitive coastal ecosystems. h.r. 3572 would adjust the boundaries of several coastal barrier resources systems units in north carolina, south carolina, rhode island and florida. i'm particularly pleased that this long, overdue remedies that constituents of my friend, representative cicilline and representative mcintyre, are included in this package. these changes have been carefully mapped by the fish and wildlife service and reflect improvements in technology that have allowed us to show with great ackrass is i

which parcels -- accuracies which parcels do and do not constitute coastal barrier resources under the law. numerous properties that were originally included by mistake will be removed and other properties that have been identified as at-risk will be included. these changes to the coastal barrier resources system are protective of private property rights, the environment and the taxpayers, and i support passage of this bill and i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from washington state. mr. hastings: mr. speaker, i reserve my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from washington. mr. lowenthal: mr. speaker, i'd like to yield three minutes to my colleague from rhode island, representative cicilline. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for three minutes. mr. cicilline: i thank the gentleman for yielding. mr. speaker, i rise today in strong support of h.r. 3572, which includes the provision that i introduced as h.r. 277, to revise the boundaries of

coastal barrier resources system units in rhode island. i want to begin by thanking chairman hastings and ranking member defazio for working with me to bring this important fix to the floor today. i want to extend a personal thank you to chairman hastings for his ongoing cooperation in helping to advance legislation to make the blackstone river valley the birthplace of america's industrial revolution a national park. i want to say, mr. speaker, that this legislation represents the culmination of several years of evaluation, research, study, public input and review regarding the existing map for the coastal barrier resource system in my state. all four units in rhode island that would be replaced with a modernized revised map under this legislation were included will be the cbrs, according to the coastal barrier improvement act of 1990. it's been discovered that various private lands were inappropriately included and otherwise -- in otherwise protected areas within the cbrs and that there were other technical inaccuracies. the proposed revisions were improved by local cities and

towns including the norman bird sanctuary and the autobahn society. and identified wetland of albany and lillian pond are essential to protecting local habitat. the revisions would remove eight privately owned structures that were inappropriately included within the coastal barrier resource systems. the changes in this bill will positively impact my district and my constituents. particularly the ones whose private property was inadvertently included within the original map. the passage of this legislation will benefit the surrounding communities that have long anticipated a more core heernt comprehensive system that protects critical aquatic habitat and protecting sites used for recreational purposes. philip howl cannot obtained federal flood insurance for his property that was incorrectly included in the cbra map. as a result, his coastal

property has gone without flood insurance during serious flood events like superstorm sandy. and it has caused mr. howl to take on serious -- mr. howell to take on serious financial risks that will be unable to recover from his own pocket. moreover, without flood insurance coverage, he's found it difficult to purpose regular homeowners insurance from competing brokers at affordable rates. while mr. howell and most of my constituents support of the intent of the coastal barrier resource system to protect neighboring habitat and recreation, they have overly burdened by mapping mistakes that were made more than two decades ago. as a result, i ask my colleagues to support passage of after 3572 to ensure this is rectified and the system works as it was intended. i, again, thank chairman hastings and ranking member defazio for their assistance. with that i thank the gentleman for yielding and yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from california. mr. lowenthal: i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california

yields. the gentleman from washington. mr. hastings: mr. speaker, i yield back the balance of my time and urge adoption of the bill. the speaker pro tempore: all time has been yielded back. the question is will the house suspend the rules and pass the bill h.r. 3572, as amended. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, 2/3 having responded in the affirmative -- mr. hastings: mr. speaker, i ask for the yeas and nays. the speaker pro tempore: the yeas and nays are requested. all those in favor of taking this vote by the yeas and nays will rise and remain standing until counted. a sufficient number having arisen, the yeas and nays are ordered. pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20, furred proceedings on this question -- further proceedings on this question will be postponed.

the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from pennsylvania seek recognition? >> mr. speaker, i move that the house splulls and -- suspend the rules and pass h.r. 5629, as amended. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: h.r. 5629, a bill to amend the homeland security act of 2002 to strengthen the domestic nuclear detection ffice, and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from pennsylvania, mr. meehan, and the gentleman from -- the gentlewoman from new york, ms. clarke, each will control 20 minutes. and the chair recognizes the gentleman from pennsylvania. mr. meehan: thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, i 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. mr. meehan: thank you, mr. speaker, and i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. meehan: thank you, mr. speaker. i rise today in support of h.r. 5629, the strengthing domestic nuclear security act of 2014. we know extremist groups such as al qaeda and isis have shown interest in acquiring nuclear and radiological materials and in july of this year, the islamist insurgents seized nurke materials which were used for scientific research at mosul university in iraq. fortunately, the material was not enriched to the point it could be used in weapons form but shows that our enemies are seeking materials that could be turned into a dirty bomb. the domestic nuclear detection office is the lead agency within the united states government for coordinating efforts to detect and intercept radiological and nuclear devices that threaten to come into the united states. .

d.o.d. coordinates these effort lose it an interagency system and a collaborative framework nown as the global network detection architecture. d.n. -- dndo works with the department of homeland security components including customs and border protection, as well as state and local law enforcement to provide these entities with the equipment and training which is needed to interdict radiological or nuclear material before it can enter into the united states. dnda has had its share of struggles in the past but over the past several years, it's made significant improvements from top to bottom and today is one of the best functioning components in the department of homeland security and we have done the oversight, according to an internal review that was done by the department. this actual division has the highest morale of any department in homeland security. and they're to be commended for

their good work and this legislation looks to build on the momentum that has been created by making modest improvements to better help dndo carry out its mission. specifically h.r. 5629 strengthens their engagement with other d.h.s. components and stakeholders and codifies acquisition procedures and guidelines to prevent the breakdowns that have occurred in the past. through my subcommittee's oversight, the gentlelady from new york and i have had the ability to determine that the performing the joint interagency review of the global nuclear detection architecture annually was not necessary. so h.r. 5629 also changes the review to require it for every o years instead and the dndo has advised us that by making this change, d.h.s. could save up to $800,000. i think it's important to be --

important to fiscal stewards of the dollars that are under our oversight. this diminishes -- accomplishes that. the legislation also codifies and strengthens the security and cities program, a program to enhance the ability to detect and prevent radiological or nuclear attacks in high-risk u.s. cities. this program's been very successful in building up the resources of new york city and it's being expanded to the national capital region and to los angeles and long beach. my colleagues to support this important legislation, to build on the capacity of the department of homeland security to protect the homeland against such an attack. mr. speaker, with that 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 -- mr. speaker, i rise in support of h.r. 5629, the strengthening domestic nuclear security act of 2014, and yield myself such time as i may consume.

the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized. ms. clarke: thank you, mr. speaker. the bill under consideration today would essentially codify important existing authorities and programs within the department of homeland security's domestic nuclear detection office or dndo as it is known. congress has long emphasized the need to detect and interdict smuggled nuclear radiological material before it enters the united states, funding investments in nuclear detection, domestically and abroad. since 2001, the department of homeland security has adopted a strategy of securing the border through the use of radiological port monstering and nonintrusive imaging equip. under the leadership, dndo leads the department's efforts at developing, testing and evaluating next generation detection equipment. for the record, this measure is

being considered today outside regular order, without any formal legislative action taken on it in committee. given that we are in the waning days of the 113th congress, i support bypassing regular order so that the house is afforded the opportunity to consider this legislation. the timing is important, as the secretary's expected to transmit to congress analysis about how efforts at addressing chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear threats could be streamlined as part of the, quote, unity of effort, end quote, campaign. i would note that in advance of the introduction of h.r. 5629, the subcommittee on which i serve as ranking member did conduct an oversight hearing in july where we received wide ranging testimony about dndo's programs and activities from the department and the government accountability office.

testimony from g.a.o. underscored dndo's historical challenges with the advanced a.s.p. program. back in 2006, one of the urgent initial activities of dndo when it was stood up was the development and placement of technology to detect illicit nuclear materials and devices that could be shipped in cargo entering the united states. the plan was for advanced a.s.p. portals to be installed at all u.s. ports and selected border trossings -- crossings, to screen cargo shipments for nuclear materials. that acquisition turned out to be a bebackle with dndo moving forward -- debacle with dndo moving forward on acquisitions before the technology had been demonstrated to live up to its promise. those missteps cost taxpayers billions of dollars. subsequently, the a.s.p. program was canceled. the current dndo leadership,

and for that matter d.h.s. leadership, seemed to have taken these tough lessons to heart and put in place some significant new processes and controls in the acquisitions process to help avoid another such debacle. one of the important features of this bill is the authorization of the securing the cities program. this program represents a real success for dndo. under the securing the cities program, dndo works with local, state, city and a tribal leaders to bolster technological, nuclear detection capabilities, nuclear forensics efforts and coordination of nonconventional threats. as a new yorker, i have special interest in this program. which has done so much to help keep my city secure from nonconventional terrorist threats. mr. speaker, i want to thank the chairman for his bipartisan approach to working with -- ex cue me, approach in developing

-- excuse me, approach in developing this language and work forward to working with him in the future on this important program. with that, mr. speaker, i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady reserves the balance of her time. the gentleman from pennsylvania is recognized. mr. meehan: mr. speaker, i have no more speakers and if the gentlelady has no further speakers, i'm prepared to close nce the gentlelady does. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from new york. ms. clarke: thank you, mr. speaker. before i yield back, i'd like to take a moment to acknowledge my partner on this subcommittee, the gentleman from pennsylvania, mr. meehan. you have been a great collaborator and a friend to me on this committee. together we have amassed a record of bipartisanship to be proud of, particularly in the

area of cybersecurity. i wish you well in all of your future endeavors and i thank you once again. with, that mr. speaker, i urge support -- with that, mr. speaker, i urge support for h.r. 5629, the strengthening domestic nuclear security act of 2014, and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady yields back the balance of her time. the gentleman from pennsylvania. mr. meehan: mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent that the letter exchange between the committee of homeland security and the committee on science, space and technology be inserted into the record. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. meehan: mr. speaker, i want to also take a moment to thank the ranking member for her engagement and collaboration on the many issues that we have -- we had the opportunity to work on together, to share this collaboration and engagement on important matters before our committee on homeland security, particularly the work we were able to do, as you've identified, on cybersecurity

and i think also on chemical facilities and the protection which is so important to our homeland in that area as well. i have genuinely enjoyed the collaboration and look forward to hoping that we not only pass the bills that we have before this congress, but that we can continue to work together into the future and i urge all members to join me in supporting this bipartisan bill and 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. 5629 as amended. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. mr. meehan: mr. speaker, may i ask for the yeas and nays? the speaker pro tempore: in the opinion of the chair, 2/3 of those voting having responded in the affirmative, the rules are suspended -- mr. meehan: i request the yeas and nays. the speaker pro tempore: the yeas and nays are requested. all those in favor of taking

this vote by the yeas and nays will rise and remain standing until counted. a sufficient number having arisen, the yeas and nays are ordered. pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20, further proceedings on this uestion will be postponed. 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. 3410 as amended. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: h.r. 3410, a bill to amend the homeland security act of 2002, to secure critical infrastructure against electromagnetic pulses, and 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 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. mr. meehan: mr. speaker, i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. meehan: thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, i rise today in support of h.r. 3410, which is the critical infrastructure protection act or cipa. in 1962 the united states conducted a test named star fish prime where the military detonated a 1.4 megaton thermo nuclear bomb about 25 miles above johnson atoll in the pacific. in space, six american british and soviet satellites suffered damage and 800 miles away in hawaii burglar alarms sounded. street lights blinked out. and phones, radios and televisions went dead. while only 1% of the existing street lights were affected, it became clear that electromagnetic pulse or e.m.p. could cause significant damage. e.m.p. is simply a burst of

electromagnetic radiation that results from certain types of high energy explosions or from a suddenly fluctuating magnetic field. an e.m.p. can be generated by nuclear weapons, from naturally occurring sources such as solar storms or specialized non-nuclear e.m.p. weapons, an e.m.p. event could range from a small scale incident with little or no permanent damage to a large scale event with dire consequences. in fact, successful large scale e.m.p. event could damage electrical power systems, electronics and information systems and these affects could cascade into other interdependent infrastructures such as telecommunications, gas and water. repeated studies, including the congressional e.m.p. commission and lloyds of london, have warned that the u.s. electric grid is vulnerable to damage from e.m.p. events. and this is a significant risk and we need to be bretter

prepared. h.r. 3410 takes commonsense steps to address the e.m.p. threat. specifically this legislation compels the department of homeland security to include e.m.p. events in their national planning scenarios. it conducts research to mitigate the consequences of an e.m.p. event and to develop a recommended strategy to protect critical infrastructure and to perform outreach to raise awareness of the threat. i urge my colleagues to support h.r. 3410 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 support of h.r. 3410, the critical infrastructure protection act, of which i am a co-sponsor, and i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized. ms. clarke: thank you, mr. speaker. recently there's been increased interest in bolstering the resilience of our nation's electrical power distribution and delivery system. in particular, there is growing interest in looking at the

damage that could naturally occur to that system through powerful weather storms and geomagnetic disturbances, as well as through intention alma lishes physical and suret -- intentionalmalicious physical and cyberattacks. the house approved legislation authored by my committee colleague and neighbor, mr. payne, to broadly research the threats to our electric grid. . today we have the opportunity to foster progress on low probability but high consequence threats to the grid electromagnetic pulse and geomagnetic disturbances or g.m.d. today our nation's power grid operates at such a high level of probability that any threat makes headlines. our system is the most extensive

of any system on the globe, consisting of transformers, switches, central control centers and computer control. the main risk for weather related damage or a terrorist attack is a widespread power outage that lasts for an extended period of time. the damage that such an outage could have to the welfare of citizens and our economy is hard to measure but it would certainly be very significant. with that in mind, h.r. 3410 seeks to gain ground against this homeland security challenge. it does so by directing the department of homeland security to include e.m.p. and g.m.d. in national planning scenarios, conducts outreach to critical infrastructure owners and operators, emergency planners and emergency responders on the threats posed. conduct targeted research and develop a strategy for

addressing the threat. i'm disappointed that the bill provides no new resources to the department to carry out these activities but i am appreciative of the majority's willingness to work with me to refine the language to provide needed flexibility to the department in how it carries out these activities. that said, since h.r. 3410 had to bypass regular order to be here today, we did not have time to include some small but key refinements, specifically, the definitions in this bill for electromagnetic pulse, e.m.p., and geomagnetic disturbance, g.m.d., would benefit from further fine tuning down the line so risk of these two distinct events being conflated is avoided. an e.m.p. is an electromagnetic pulse caused by means such an an act of war or terrorism. a g.m.d. is a geomagnetic

disturbance caused by solar storms or other naturally occurring phenomena. while some have gotten into the habit of calling them both e.m.p., they're not the same and require different mitigation and resiliency responses. like my colleagues, mr. meehan and mr. frank, i'm concerned about the potential impact and the types of threats posed by e.m.p.'s and g.m.d.'s. however, i think we should take care to make clear that the distinct -- that there are distinct differences between the two. we also know that the public-private partnerships are essential to addressing the challenge of fully understanding the threats caused by e.m.p.'s and g.m.d.'s, especially because the overwhelming majority of our electric grid is privately held by large investor-owned utilities or are part of the rural electric cooperative system or members of the american public power network that represents not-for-profit

community-owned electric utilities. i would note that the department currently has a variety of solar efforts for weather geomagnetic disturbance events and other e.m.p. damage, include regular search on technologies to improve resiliency in the electric grid sector. additionally, the department's science and technology directorate has co-sponsored with private utilities and exercised in a fast turn around replacement project this effort is known as recovery transformer project and it hopes to increase the resiliency of the transmission power grid through the use of more mobile and modular transformers. again, i want to thank chairman mccaul and chairman meehan for working with me and to representative frank who has been a tireless and relentless proponent of this legislative

easure to protect our nation's electrical structure. he is internationally known for his unwavering pursuit of this concern and has been viewed as a go-to ledge slay -- legislator on protecting our nation's infrastructure. it has been a pleasure to engage in a moment of bipartisan interaction, particularly on a matter of such great import nationally and internationally and i thank the gentleman. as we enter the waning days of the 113th congress, i sincerely hope this measure gets enacted into law, but in the event that it does not, i look forward to working with the majority on advancing this bill through regular order next congress to ensure a more robust examination of the bill's impact on the department and on industry. with that, mr. speaker, i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady reserves. the gentleman from pennsylvania.

mr. meehan: mr. speaker, i yield five minutes to the distinguished gentleman from arizona, the sponsor of this legislation, mr. franks. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. franks: i thank you, mr. speaker. i want to thank chairman mike many mccall and certainly subcommittee chairman pat meehan and of course ranking member yvette clarke for their principled and unwavering leadership in bringing this legislation to the floor. i am touched by the gentlelady's words as well. i would also especially like to personally thank chairman pete sessions, the sole original co-sponsor of this bill, for being a tireless champion of protecting our nation's critical infrastructure against e.m.p. without objection, i would ask that the chairman sessions' entire statement to be entered into the record. the speaker pro tempore: that request is covered under general leave. mr. franks: back in august of 2003, a large section of our

electric grid was knocked out across the eastern united states. 50 million people were affected after 21 power plants shut down in just three minutes. office workers streamed into parking lots and many commuters were stranded inside their trains. in a matter of moments, those things that make up our critical infrastructure, from the electric grid to water pumps to cell phone service to computer systems were disrupted. life suddenly changed that day in new york, mr. speaker. as well as in cleveland, detroit, and all the way into canada. in new york city alone this short blackout was estimated to cost more than a half billion dollars. mr. speaker, a worst case natural or manmade electromagnetic pulse or e.m.p. event represents a dangerous threat that could have a prolonged catastrophic impact on our electric grid, our most critical and our most

interdependent infrastructure. there are at least 11 major government reports and studies describing our vulnerabilities to electromagnetic pulses. our defense department has widely hardened many of our most critical defense assets like our strategic nuclear triad and nuclear defense systems. however, our civilian grid remains fundamentally unprotected against severe e.m.p. whether catalized by nonnuclear intentional electromagnetic interference or a major solar storm or a high altitude nuclear blst, e.m.p. is an invisible force of ionized particles with the ability to overwork our power grids which would impact our civilization. the national intelligence university of the united states translated an iranian mill fair doctrine called passive defense which referenced the use of

e.m.p. as a weapon more than 20 times. it stresses that power grids are vital to national existence and includes a formula for calculating the value of power plants and selecting the targeting. mr. speaker, we know all too well the obama administration has just extended talks with the world's leading state sponsor of terrorism allowing thepping even more time in their inexorable march toward nuclear weapons capabilities. after the terrorist attacks on 9/11, the department of homeland security was founded and it created a presidentially appointed position for assistant secretary for infrastrubblingture protection. among the main duties of the position is the responsibility to, quote, develop a comprehensive national plan for securing the key resources and critical infrastructures of the united states, including power production, generation, and distribution, end quote. yet 12 years later, mr. speaker,

no such plan is in place. and our nation's critical infrastructure, including those key resources like power production, generation, and distribution systems, are still extremely vulnerable to large scale blackouts from severe electromagnetic pulse and geomagnetic disturbances. now for all of these reasons, mr. speaker, we are here this night to pass the critical infrastructure protection act, which if signed into law will represent the first time in history that congress will be specifically addressing this dangerous threat of electromagnetic pulse. this legislation will enhance the d.h.s. threat assessments for e.m.p. through research and reporting requirements and will hen the united states prevent and prepare for such an event by including large scale blackouts into existing national planning scenarios, including educational awareness for the first responders, all to protect the critical infrastructure. most importantly, mr. speaker,

it will require specific plans for protecting and recovering the elect rig rick grid and other critical infrastructures from a dangerous electromagnetic pulse event. mr. speaker, there is a moment in the life of nearly every problem when it is big enough to be seen by reasonable people and still small enough to be addressed. those of us in this chamber and across america live in a time where there still may be opportunity for the free world to address and mitigate this vulnerability that naturally occurring or weaponized e.m.p. represents to the mechanisms of our civilization. this is our moment. with that, mr. speaker, i would yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from pennsylvania. mr. meehan: mr. speaker, i want to express my appreciation to the gentleman from arizona for his leadership on this issue. i have no more speakers and if the gentlelady has no further speakers, i am prepared to close once the gentlelady does. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from new york.

ms. clarke: i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized. ms. clarke spak thank you, mr. speaker. -- ms. sleark: thank you, mr. speaker. -- ms. clarke: thank you, mr. speaker. while the threat of an e.m.p. or g.m.d. is real, we need to use risk based commonsense plans and exercises to give us a clearer picture of how to prevent and respond in the event of an e.m.p. or g.m.d. incident. this bill will give congress a more complete understanding of preparedness, response, and recovery activities related to any type of e.m.p. or geomagnetic disturbance incident and could provide a thoughtful background that can assist the nation's response and resiliency if events do occur. with that, i urge members to support h.r. 3410, the critical infrastructure protection act, and i yield back the balance of

my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady yields back. the gentleman from pennsylvania is recognized. mr. meehan: i ask unanimous consent that a letter exchanged between the committee on homeland security and the committee on science, space, and technology, be ensertintod the record. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. meehan: mr. speaker, i want to conclude my remarks by once again tchanking the gentlelady from new york for all of her bipartisan work on the important matters before this committee and i urge all members to join me in supporting this bipartisan bill and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from pennsylvania yields back the balance of his time. the question is will the house suspend the rules and pass the bill h.r. 3410 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 n the table.

e the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlelady from indiana seek recognition? >> i move that the house suspend the rules and pass h.r. 3438. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: h.r. 3438, a bill to amend the homeland security act of 2002 to authorize use of grants under the urban area security initiative and the state homeland security grant program to work in conjunction with a department of energy national laraer to. -- laboratory.

the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rulet, the gentlelady, ms. brooks and the gentleman, mr. swalwell, will each control 20 minutes. ms. brooks: i ask that all members 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. ms. brooks: i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized. ms. brooks: mr. speaker, this bill simply clarified that state and local governments and emergency management officials may use existing fema state homeland security grant program and urban area security initiative funds, known as uasi, work with the national lab or research facility. h.r. 3438 amends the homeland security act of 2002 by inserting clarification into the allowable utes section of the homeland security grant program title, providing the clarification will allow the state and local first responders to leverage the expertise at

national labs should they choose to do so. . this is a good measure. this bill will allow state and local officials to cut through fema's red tape which makes it harder for first responders to work with federal, national labs and make the best decisions for their homeland security needs. this bill will eliminate hoops that state and local grant erecipients have had to go through in order to gain access to this expertise. h.r. 3438 is a commonsense, bipartisan bill. it's similar to a bill sponsored by former congressman dan lungren in the 112th congress, which passed the house by voice vote. and i want to thank my colleague from california, mr. swalwell, for continuing to work on this issue and i urge passage of this bill. i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady reserves. the gentleman from california is recognized. mr. swalwell: thank you, mr. speaker. i yield myself as much time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized.

mr. swalwell: i rise in strong support of h.r. 343, the national laboratories mean national security act, legislation that i have introduced that would expand the way in which national laboratories can help protect our homeland. i want to thank the chairman of the homeland security committee, mr. mccaul, the ranking member, mr. thompson, for aa louing this bipartisan bill to move to the floor. i also want to thank my colleague on the committee, a fellow freshman, mrs. brooks, for working with me on this bill. she's leaving i understand the committee and will be going to the committee on energy and commerce. we're going to miss her. i've enjoyed working with you also as a fellow prosecutor and as someone who has been an active participant in the united solutions caucus, trying to find ways that freshman republican and democrats can work together. we're fortunate in this country to have a system of department of energy had national laboratories at which some of the brightest scientists in our country can work on some of the most complex issues of our time. they're keeping our national nuclear defense secure,

advancing clean energy sources and changing ways to protect us from the threat of chemical, biological, radiological or nuclear terrorist attacks. now it's time to make sure that we maximize the way that our national laboratories and the gifted minds who work there can protect and secure the homeland. i'm honored to represent two of these national laboratories. and i look forward to representing them again in the 114th congress. i want to take this opportunity to thank the thousands of employees at the laboratories and our laboratories across the country for their commitment to country and their faithfulness to science and advancing human progress. lawrence liver moore, sandia and the other labs are truly unique institutions. one of their uniquenesses is their operating structure. this operating structure has caused an issue and that's what this bill is designed to fix. it's to maximize and utilize

the national laboratories in every way possible to keep us safe and secure at home. to maximize efficiency and agility at our national laboratories, almost all of the laboratories are what's called government-owned, contractor-operated. goco. while the federal government owns the labs, they are operated by private sector organizations. only one is government owned and government operated. here's the issue. the department of homeland security issues millions of dollars in grants every year to state and local agency as. some state and local homeland security grant recipients have expressed uncertainty about whether or not they can work with department of energy national laboratories on homeland security issues with these grant funding sources. as a members know, fema offers grant programs like the urban area security initiative to help states, local governments and other public servant entities to prevent and respond

to terrorist attacks. in fact, in my district a sheriff's office uses this grant, the uasi grant, to support urban shield, which is a comprehensive region-wide preparedness exercise that prepares first responders in the case of a natural or man -made disaster. the confusioner to some recipients may have been caused by the fact that they believe that they cannot use government owned contracted-operated aboratories with federal funds . fema may have been under a similar impression or been unclear to recipients on this point as well. these concerns are misplaced. there's no prohibition against using these funds. and my bill will make sure once and for all that we use and we fully maximize our national laboratories and make sure that every recipient knows these dollars can be used there. my bill would clarify the issue by explicitly including in law d.o.e. national labs as

entities with which fema homeland security grant recipients can work. providing this clarification would allow or d.o.e. national labs to fully use their knowledge and experience to improve our homeland security. for example, at sandia national laboratory, they're providing simulations to help jurisdictions develop threat hazard risk identification assessments and lawrence-livermore has a sent which are provides tools that help us predict and map how chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear threats might spread in the atmosphere. h.r. 3438 is an important clarification in the law which would allow our scientists across the country to more fully contribute to homeland security. as mrs. brooks pointed out, it's also a bipartisan idea and it's a measure that was sponsored by former republican congressman and former prosecutor dan lungren, so i think it's fitting that it takes two prosecutors to bring it back to the floor here today

to fix this and it passed in the last congress by a voice vote. some of the best and brightest minds in the world are toiling away right now at our national laboratories. today let's make sure that nothing stands in the way of maximizing these public servants' ability to keep our country safe. i urge all members to support h.r. 3438 and a i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentlelady is recognized. mrs. brooks: mr. speaker, i have no more speakers. if the gentleman from california has no further speakers, i'm prepared to close once the gentleman does. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. swalwell: i have no further speakers, mr. speaker, and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentlelady is recognized. mrs. brooks: mr. speaker, this is a bipartisan bill and i too want to thank my colleague from california for picking up the torch that congressman lungren started, that will permit this very important security coordination between our first responders who work day in and day out on our behalf and the

national labs, as the congressman from california has so eloquently stated. they have such incredible scientific expertise that needs to be shared with our first responders and there is much good that can come from the passage of this bill. and while fema is very careful in the manner in which it administers its grant dollars, we believe that this is one of those commonsense pieces of legislation that will make it much more efficient to allow this first responders to gain the incredible knowledge from our national labs. so i urge its passage and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady yields back the balance of her time. the question is, will the house suspend the rules and pass the bill, h.r. 3438. 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 upon the table. mrs. brooks: mr. speaker, i request the yeas and nays.

the speaker pro tempore: the yeas and nays are requested. all those in favor of taking this vote by the yeas and nays will rise and remain standing until counted. a sufficient number having arisen, the yeas and nays are ordered. pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20, further proceedings on this uestion will be postponed. pursuant to clause 12-a of rule 1, the chair declares the house

>> here are some reason ads from the race. >> i am mary landrieu and i reprove this message. >> bill cassidy tape a speech that was nearly incoherent. >> she may get -- >> his record is crystal-clear -- voting to cut social security benefits to pay for tax breaks for millionaires like himself. thatll it be a senate -- -- a senate. >> for this? >> thank you. year,ore the end of the we are going to take whatever lawful actions i can take -- >> as barack obama is granting executive amnesty, we must stop them. we will fight his amnesty plan.

your tax dollars should benefit you, not those here illegally. remember, mary landrieu barack obama -- 97%. of i will stand up to obama. message. this >> every morning, i say a prayer for my kids. i just want them to be happy and to do their best. tor. cassidy is a doc million fromut $86 louisiana schools to pay for a tax break for millionaires like himself. i don't know what kind of doctor would do that to their kids. i approve this message because louisiana's children should never pay the price for millionaires tax cuts. >> i am bill cassidy and i approve this message. >> a few words for mary landrieu and obamacare. >> i will vote again tomorrow. >> on voting for barack obama on 97% of the time --

to see they happy president defend what is really an extraordinary record. >> if you dare disagree with her -- >> vacant can unelected us because i am up for reelection right now. >> you know what to do on election day now. >> recent polls have listed the louisiana senate race as leaning republican. you can see tonight's debate live at 8 p.m. eastern on c-span2. communicators,he the cofounder of paypal. >> i will say the overarching theme of my class and of the book is that people should rethink competition. most business books tell you how to compete more flexibly. mine tells you that perhaps you should not compete at all. you should always aim for something like a monopoly. that is such a breakthrough and

you have no competition at all. >> tonight at 9:00 eastern on the communicators on c-span2. >> on tomorrow morning's washington journal, i will congressman steve king discusses president obama's executive order on immigration and republican lawmakers have vowed to stop it. washington representative jim mcdermott looks of the federal government spending which is set to expire on friday. plus, your phone calls, facebook comments and tweets. live tuesday at 7 a.m. eastern. testimony from homeland security onretary jeh johnson immigration policy and border security after president obama's executive order. he will speak in front of the house homeland security committee and you can see it live at 90 and eastern on c-span3. the domesticg on

violence policies and professional sports leagues, including the nfl and nba. that starts live at 2:30 p.m. eastern on c-span3. now, today's white house briefing with press secretary josh earnest. he spoke about immigration policies and racial tensions after the ferguson decision. i trust you all had a peaceful and relaxing thanksgiving holiday. glad to hear it. it was very nice. not put out a week ahead so why don't i just aren't the briefing today by hitting some highlights on the president schedule and a whole page of things i will spare for you. we will keep it short. there are a couple of things are important i want to make sure our something you are paying attention to. the president will travel to walter reed national medical center and visit with you wounded warriors who are treated

at the hospital and their families. the presidenting does about three times a year and this will be the latest installment. following the visit, the president will deliver remarks at the national institutes of health to congratulate dr. fauci on their phase one clinical trials on the ebola vaccine candidates and to discuss other parts on the fight against ebola. the president will use the visit to make a case for product congressional action on his emergency funding request to combat ebola here at home and abroad. visit to the national institutes of health tomorrow. those of you who may recall that the results of this phase one clinical study were published on wednesday evening, i believe, which is a pretty in our trip to -- inopportune time to make

significant news like that available when it is the day before thanks giving. we will talk about that more tomorrow. willdnesday, the president answer questions from a group of business leaders at the quarterly meeting with the business roundtable. he has done this a couple of times in the past. what will be different about this visit is not only will you have the opportunity to hear the president deliver his opening remarks, he will have the opportunity to hear from him as he takes questions from those in the audience. it should be an interesting opportunity. on thursday, this is something you heard us talk about before, the president will host a summut on college opportunity. it'll build on the effort for the first college opportunity summit last january while launching initiatives in new areas. focus on summit will building sustainable collaborations with communities with strong k-12 and education partnerships to encourage college going. we will have a little more on that. that evening, the first family will attend the national christmas tree lighting.

the ronald reagan, just across the street. the president will hold the king at the white house to find a critical solution in syria, provide humanitarian sions ine to the ten jerusalem. they have a pretty full agenda when the king will visit on friday. we will have a full meeting in conjunction where both leaders will deliver statements. we have a busy week ahead. why don't you get us started with the briefing today? >> i wanted to talk about today's focus on ferguson. does the president have any plans to go to the community anytime in the near future? >> there are no scheduled announcements to make. the president was asked a direct question on monday evening when he spoke about the grand jury's

findings. the president indicated an openness to travel to ferguson but no specific plans. that continues to be the case today. commitment and the situation is so fluid or is it that you don't want to highlight one particular case with a fax might still be in dispute? it is evident from some of the announcement you have seen from us today and from the comments you would hear the president make at the stakeholder meeting later this afternoon is that the president and his administration are very focused on the underlying issue uncovered in a wrong way -- raw way. these kinds of issues, the nature of the relationship between law enforcement agencies and the communities they are

, it iso protect is something a lot of communities are dealing with. cities large and small. the president thinks it is important for us to have a broader discussion on these issues. of thely, some announcements we have made today in terms of community policing initiatives that this administration has rolled out and the task force on policing that will be led by the philadelphia chief of police and the former doj official with the civil rights background. some of these initiatives are meant to try to address those underlying concerns that are evident not just in ferguson, but in communities all across the country. . regarding militarization in police departments, in august when the president first address this he said there has to be a distinction between military and investing law enforcement.

he said he didn't want those lines blurred. today's announcement is don't deal with the issue of those programs. why not? >> we found that in many cases these programs serve a very youthful -- useful purpose. what is needed however is much greater consistency in oversight of these programs. primarily in how these programs are structured. how they are implemented and how the programs are automated. the concerns that have been expressed in the past has focused on the equipment and the way it is used. that is why a lot of the focus that you will see in this report is on training. and on transparency, the way in which these acquisitions are communicated to the public or made clear to the public. there are certain situations in which these kinds of programs have been useful and contributed significantly to public safety.

the best and the most high-profile example that comes to mind is the use by the boston police department of some military equipment in their response to the boston bombings. that was equipment that was properly used and was done in a way that was protecting the community and protect the law enforcement officers. clear that there is a consistency with regard to the way these programs are if lamented, structured and audited. that is something that needs to be addressed. asked ispresident has after the completion of the law enforcement equipment review, the president is asked the team to come back within 120 days with specific recommendations about where oh better oversight can be implemented to make sure there is greater consistency in these programs. president's view on the tax expansion, does it

suggest that the president does senatee confidence in democrats having a proper deal? >> i think the veto to those issues by white house officials last week was predicated on the idea that the emerging agreement was wanted in a whole lot more for well-connected corporations than it did for working people back home. the president has been very clear that he believes that our economic policies need to be focused on what we can do to benefit middle-class families and those try to get to the middle class because our economy grows best when it is going for the middle out. point of ourocal efforts and that was not reflected in the outline of the deal that was reported on capitol hill. withand ready to work democrats and republicans to make progress on this and other economic policies that would grow the economy in the right way.

wayhe right way, i mean the the benefits middle-class families and those try to get into the middle class. it is a reflection of the kinds of values that have been on display by democrats for quite some time now. the democrats have worked hard. even just going back -- looking at recent history and going back to the efforts led by this administration to help this country recover from the worst economic downturn since the great depression. the priority in the recovery act was making sure that working people were getting the kind of help they needed to recover from the economic downturn. it did not mean that there was not also assistance provided to the companies. to assist the efforts the american auto industry meant that significant sums of money was -- were committed to the auto industry but that was in a way that led directly to job creation.

we have since seen the auto industry, those individual auto companies, they have repaid's essential -- substantial sums back. >> usually those messages are conveying and on -- conveyed in ongoing talks with participants. it seems to suggest that somehow the white house was out of those talks and needed to convey this message publicly. --i cannot confirm for you it was evident from the report, these were conversations that were taking place among people who work on capitol hill. certainly, the white house is eager to participate in discussions about economic policies come including the tax extenders. putting those policies in a help that would not just the well-connected corporations, but actually offer substantial assistance to working people, too.

>> any plantings on a secretary of defense? >> i don't have any updates for the timing. >> i want to talk about nih. why does the president feel he needs to make the case for prompt congressional action on the spending request? is the white house concerned that is not going to happen? i will leave it to members of congress to express their own view on what we consider to be a pretty urgent national priority. there is a need for us to focus the government's response or continue to focus the government's response not just on domestic preparedness and the ability of domestic agencies to respond to ebola and other disease outbreaks like this, but also to make sure we are mobilizing the necessary resources overseas to stop this ebola outbreak in its tracks in west africa.

the president believes that is important and the president believes that it is necessary for congress to take prompt action on this. fair-minded any look at the recent track record of the top national security indicates that occasionally these priorities need a little pushing and prodding to get through the process in a timely fashion. we know that tomorrow's announcements or events and activities will serve as an effective catalyst for the completion of that very important work. expressionsady seen of the bipartisan support for this proposal. i would expect that that bipartisan support will indoor. -- endure. >> there is no sort of signal that there is pushing and prodding? >> not any more than other national security priorities. confirm the u.s. is

closing in on a deal to allow the u.s. and allied forces to use turkish airbases for the fight against isil and there will be a no-fly zone along that turkey-syria border? >> for specific operational questions for the use is referred to the department of defense. the united states is a very close working relationship with turkey. they are a nato ally. turkey has a significant vested interest in the resolution of the situation and turmoil along their border. they have this long border with syria. that border has been the site of skirmishes already. that border is also an area where there was a significant humanitarian need. there are hundreds of thousands, maybe even more than a million of people that have been fleeing to the border with turkey to try to avoid violence.

that has created a pretty terrible humanitarian situation there. deservessh government to be recognized for the significant resources and effort they have made to try to meet those basic humanitarian needs. they have done that with the full support of the national community. it continues to be the largest source of bilateral assistance the try to meet the monetary and situation that has been caused by the violence in syria. as it relates to the specific no-fly zone proposal, we have made pretty clear on a number of while we are open to discussing a range of options with the turks and we certainly value their opinion, we do not specific no-fly pointroposal at this would best serve the interests we have all identified in terms

of trying to resolve the situation. these talks are ongoing and we will continue to be open to proposals from our allies in turkey. at this point, we don't believe that a no-fly zone -- visit was meant to narrow in a range of options that you just alluded to. >> i'm sorry? >> of the syrian vice president's recent visit -- for the u.s. and turkey able to narrow in the range of options when it comes to doing something about that? >> i understand based on the readout of the vice president's trip that he spent a lot of time discussing this and a whole range of other matters with the prime minister and the president. both in small one-on-one settings and broader meetings as well.

i know they had intensive discussions overall of these issues but i don't know -- i cannot characterize for you in any detail what kind of progress was made. ok? april. >> reverend jesse jackson is sending a present -- sending a letter to president obama. he says ferguson is one of those donald's to ensure that this reality is not simply discussed in passing and allocated to the top of the national agenda. president obama should come to ferguson. what are the considerations of going to ferguson for presidential visits? particularly after the grand jury has made its decision and there is no fear of any kind of influence and that decision? >> it is evident that now seven days after the grand jury issue

this is the first question i am asked for the briefing and this that iss to be a story prominent in newspapers across the country. that it no doubt continues to be the top of the agenda for public discussion and communities across the country. that is evident. evidence youther have is to look at the announcements that were made by the administration today. certainly the community policing initiative that was announced to offere years assistance to law enforcement agencies that are purchasing body worn cameras to expand training for law enforcement agencies to add resources to police departments that want to pursue reform efforts, these could also be used to facilitate

the expansion of programs immunity leaders and law enforcement agencies that could strengthen the effectiveness of law enforcement agencies and build trust to the communities they are sworn to serve and protect. in some of those communities where the lack of trust is most evident, exactly the same communities where intensive law enforcement presence is needed because the crime rates are really high. irony whereortunate this community where the crime rate is the highest that sometimes the trust is lowest between members of the community theyhe police force believe those issues are worthy not juste examination,

by federal officials, not just by officials at the state and local level, and by the broader public that we should have a debate about some of these issues. they can better a dress these concerns that have been laid bare. pretty genetically and ferguson over the last several months. about irony, ik want to go to an issue in this debate, there are people on the hill that are concerned about militarize asian. thing whenis a good their situations in this country -- when there are situations in this country that need those types of forces and equipment to come in. could beher hand there overextending of the use of these types of equipment in situations like ferguson. would you tell the congressional leaders on the hill?

how would you find to legislation to make a deal with half the good size and try to wrong witht has gone militarization? >> the first is it is important. the reason we do these reviews is to dig into the facts and have a clear understanding of what is contributing to the problem that us identified. the majority of the funds used for some of these programs that have raised the concern for matters of congress has not had to purchase law enforcement equipment but rather office equipment. materials can be useful in the administration. it is the first thing that is important. the key to the success of these to ensurerograms is that local law enforcement officials who are using the equipment are doing so properly, that they are using this equipment consistently with

excepting guidelines. some of these proposals relate to expanding training, they also relate to changing the way these folks and programs are structured and implement it and audited so we can make sure those individuals who are using the equipment have been properly trained to use it in a way that protects their own safety and the safety of people in the community. the last thing i will say about this is the law enforcement equipment review conducted by lmb is just the first step. what we anticipate and what the review suggests is that more specific recommendations, and maybe even some best practices, be put forward and an additional report. be done of what should to it you with some of the problems that members of congress have raised. we will have some are specific recommendations on that in the

next four months or so. >> everybody has a microscope on the police department because they are not able to provide competent law .nforcement i'm hearing from various persons in this administration and on that they have a chance for reorganization or dissembling of that police department. what can you say about this? >> i don't know anything about the specific proposals. as a generalu matter many of the programs we termslking about here in of the community policing initiative that has been announced today and other toposed reforms, in addition

local law enforcement agencies that would help those agencies feel like they are in need of reform, carry out those reforms. to make sure the have the training and resources that are necessary to enhance crime prevention wall strengthening the bond they have with their community they are sworn to serve and protect. >> president obama came out when we do not expect to see a verdict. he said he would not be the one leading the discussion, talking about the race discussion. has he changed his mind because this has reached the level of the white house in ways many did not expect? bill clinton had a conversation on race. >> i think the first thing is this is evident from the series of announcements that have been made here today.

the underlying issue is broader than just race. the foundational relationship between law enforcement agencies and the communities they are sworn to serve and protect. discussions of race are an important part of that relationship. it is more than just that. more -- means there is more we can do to address some of these underlying problems. it is also part of the task force review the chief ramsey and miss robinson are conducting. it is also part of the review that will be released by omb in terms of specific recommendations on the use of specific law enforcement agencies obtained by the military. then my recommendations are made

from the military vision of place. is there any feeling in the that those recommendations would have made a difference in ferguson? >> i think that is difficult to judge -- to pass judgment on in any conclusive way. let me say it this way, many law enforcement agencies will sign from the federal government that they are prepared to offer additional men and womeneir in uniform as they use this equipment, get trained on this equipment, properly use it. in a way that protects the safety of the officers using the equipment but those in the community that are being protected by this equipment. i think that is the biggest part of this. tell, ord for me to

hard for me to communicate publicly, about any conclusions that have been reached about whether or not additional training would have substantially affected the wake local law enforcement responded to some of the protests we have seen. >> this whole effort comes out of what happened in ferguson. issue parttarization of the problem? ofre was this question militarize asian from the ferguson police department. >> i know there are some who are critics. this is an issue relevant to other law enforcement agencies. there are other local police departments obtaining equipment from the federal government to supplement their existing equipment. this review found the majority of that equipment wasn't actually military combat

equipment. that said i think there are -- it stands to reason that additional law enforcement benefit fromd additional training about the use of this equipment. more importantly the federal government and the report reflects this. bears responsibility to ensure that this variety of programs in a way thated makes consistent the need for oversight in terms of the way this program is implemented and structured. >> i assume some of those are from ferguson. >> we will have a full list of those attending the meeting this afternoon when the meeting starts. >> the money the white house is

proposing for use to local law yourcement, just to clarify are asking congress to appropriate this money. money that will be included in the president's budget proposal. >> we will go back to executive actions and what republicans are doing on the hill. if republicans passe funding bill, if congress passed the funding bill and it ties the president's hands on immigration , would therder president veto such a bill? >> yes. >> with president be willing to if the government shutdown congress -- >> i see it differently.

i don't believe members of congress or the majority are going to be able to go along and shut down the government. the president announced about 10 days ago and entirely consistent with what was established by previous theidents as well as within legal confines of the law as it relates to prosecutorial , it is sarah mcconnell, the incoming majority leader who set himself just a week or so after the election we will not be shutting the government down or threatening to default on the national debt. pretty clearis a statement from among the most influential members of congress. >> are they willing to go along with the idea that republicans are basically funding all of the government through october next department for the

of homeland security, which would be implementing immigration changes? >> there are a variety of proposals we have seen on capitol hill. congress should fulfill their responsibility and pass a year-long extension -- pass a year-long budget. it is congress's responsibility to do that. it also has significant and positive benefits for the economy. economyalking about an than a global economy. -- wereg all we can doing all he can to boost our domestic economy. it is certainly top priority of the president. congress can do this and it substantial way.

>> basically funding everything except for homeland security, making it the one part of the budget that would be funded on a temporary basis. are a lot of ideas. some of them are more creative than others. ist we would like to see eliminate any uncertainty and pass it on. >> you made it clear that people will not get obamacare subsidies. a white house spokesman says they would be eligible for medicare and social security benefits? >> essentially when it comes to social security benefits, if you pay into it for 40 quarters you

can begin to collect benefits based on what you paid into the program. in that case it would make sense. that would different writ -- differentiate programs from social security to other , taxams like medicaid credits related to the affordable care act, that kind of stuff. >> a lot of illegal immigrants aren't paying in. does that count? tickingthe clock starts when they get their letter? >> my understanding is once they have paid into the social ,ecurity system for 40 quarters that is when they would qualify for social security benefits because this is a program they paid into.

again, it is not exactly clear how on such a detailed level this program is implemented. it does seem to me this program would be verified if you are using a fake social security number. if there is a way that you could do it then maybe there is a way to do it. obviously the president is spending a real amount of time. you have been answering questions about why a trip to ferguson is not the right thing to do now. >> we haven't decided that. >> you haven't decided if he should go to ferguson. >> correct. >> no plans? >> that is correct. if that changes, we will let you know. >> but you must have considered whether going now is a good idea

or not. you are leaving open the possibility of this in the future. >> i wouldn't characterize it that way. have asident wants to discussion about some of these issues that have been laid bare in ferguson. that directly applies to communities all across the country. that's a national conversation. it is certainly one that is relevant in ferguson. from the kind of conversation the president will convene today. officials be state and law enforcement officials all across the country. there will be civil rights leaders from communities across the country. reflective of the kind

of conversation the president believes is warranted at this point. this the president worried will make things more explosive and cause greater reaction? >> i think the president is interested in making sure we are focused on these issues that are into minuteresonant he said across the country. >> we have seen the white house and administration officials working a long time on this now. where is the prevention in the response there has been so far? they could prevent the kind of continued response we have seen. there are a lot of meetings with local leaders. those leaders don't seem to do

much within their communities to stop the kind of violence that continues to go on. >> it is important to acknowledge a couple of things. majority of individuals in ferguson who were protesting did so in a peaceful responsible way. i know enough number of your colleagues were on the ground. i think that is certainly true. there have been a number of that have been organized in communities across the country. issues --the kinds of the 13th seeded issues that go years, if not decades of

concern and mistrust between some law-enforcement agencies and officials and some members of the community they are sworn to serve and protect. that means these are problems that are not going to caps off overnight. that is why we need for sustained commitment to addressing these challenges that the president has proposed. he recognizes this is not just one presidential trip to ferguson but rather a sustained commitment to underlying issues. to try to create the kind of asliament -- particularly communities where law-enforcement resources harmless, close places we need to double our efforts to bring about some greater understanding and trust between one agencies, police officers, and the people who live in these communities.

>> they cannot really use it because we are now seeing that could ask him -- that could escalate the situation. onre is not an emphasis looking at what was given and taking it back. is there a possibility some of these communities will need to give back to the equipment? withencourage it to check the office of engagement and put the budget together. the conclusion of the report indicates the overwhelming need is to address two things. one is the way these programs are structured and implement it and audited. making sure appropriate equipment is being sent to the appropriate law enforcement agency. the second thing is making sure that those law-enforcement officials at the local level have the proper training.

that is what we think will address the vast majority of the problems. issues came up during the trayvon martin shooting. that didn't involve law enforcement at first. what you think was learned during fat. what was the outcome of that and what was learned about that? >> there is a lot going on in that investigation. you to the department of justice about that ongoing investigation. >> [indiscernible]

can you confirm there is a --ort that the united stance united states is training iraqis to fight takes -- to fight isis. >> i can european the first part of your first question? -- can you repeat the first part of your question? meetingaware of any like that. there is not one on the president's schedule. i need to check with my colleagues of the national security council. consider that by the united states and our coalition partners. there has been a proposal from some of the political leaders for the creation of these

elements which would essentially be based in the community where these individuals live. the united states have been supportive of that kind of creative thinking in terms of supporting the central government. the only way we are going to address the situation in iraq. they will select -- successfully take responsibility for the security situation in the entire country. that is difficult work and the it kind of work that would only be achieved with a sustained commitment from the united states and our international partners. we will be involved in ongoing training efforts on the ground. for the details about the status of that training program i refer you to the department of defense, who was responsible for administering that program. any force you are going to

train is going to be correlated with the central government? >> what i was trying to say earlier is the national proposal is one that has been promoted by other members of the iraq central government. we are supportive generally of the iraq central governments securityo build up capacity of forces in iraq. what they envision, based on the way i described, our national guard units that are based in communities all across the country. they essentially will be staffed by individuals who are from that region. we have spoken favorably of in the past. it reflects the central governments commitment to ensure the iraqi people take responsibility for their own people.

that kind of inclusive governing strategy would be critical to their ongoing success. that is why our coalition partners have been so supportive of that strategy. to the specific programs targeted to what role the u.s. officials would play and training national guard units, i refer you to the national department of defense. >> the idea of body cameras is that mostal view officers in most businesses with the public be wearing a body cameras? >> there are benefits to police officers wearing body cameras. if this is a position that the administration originally took, that there was a grassroots movement on our website where people signed a petition about fornding funding

law-enforcement officials so they can afford to purchase body cameras for their officers, the way this program works you can , you cante house.gov examine all the petitions put forth by people across the country. once the number of petition signatures reaches a certain threshold a response is given. it is way to get direct feedback on anhe admin station initiative they care about. a group of individuals organized a petition drive on whether or not federal funds should be used to make it easier for law-enforcement agencies to purchase body cameras and have their officers wear it on a regular basis. thate context of answering position, the administration made clear there are some benefits associate with having officers who wear body cameras. thinks think anybody that will solve every single problem or that is going to a every issue related to mistrust and might exist to train some

communities and local law enforcement officials. somethingto reason like that could have a positive impact on strengthening those kinds of relationships. that is why you're seeing specific commitment from the federal government to partner with local law enforcement agencies interested in purchasing those cameras. >> are there any members from the ferguson police department or city government attending? >> i have not seen the final list. the reason we have awaited to start to put up we wanted to make sure had an accurate up-to-date list. --s was a complicated ease comic it a piece of business we were working on over the holiday. -- complicated piece of business we were working on over the holiday. what i do know is there were individuals involved with the situation in for dissent. i don't know if they were government officials. we will find that out once it's finalized. african-american

president, doesn't he feel a greater responsibility to resolve issues of trust between police and minority communities? an initiative they have worked on throughout public service. back to 20 years ago when the president was a state senator, one of the principal legislative achievements he discussed in that legislative body was finding bipartisan ground on legislation that would address concerns of racial profiling. been concerns by some civil rights leaders in illinois and law enforcement organizations. then state senator obama brokered an agreement between enforcement and civil rights organizations to address those concerns. this is an issue the president has been focused on for a long time. he talked on a number of locations -- minutes in the briefing, which you can see c-span.org. we're going live to the house.

5438. and remaining votes will be onducted as five minute votes. >> the clerk: a bill to amend the homeland security act of 2002 to strengthen the nuclear detection office and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: the house suspend the bill and pass the bill. his is a 15-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]

the speaker pro tempore: on this vote, the yeas are 374, the nays are seven. 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. the unfinished business is the vote on the motion of the gentlewoman from indiana, ms. brooks, suspend the rules and pass h.r. 3438, on which the yeas and nays are ordered this eclerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: h.r. 3438, a bill to amend the homeland security act of 200 under the urban area security initiative and the state homeland security grant program to work in conjunction with the department of energy national laboratory.

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 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 his vote the yeas are -- the speaker pro tempore: on this vote the yeas are 386, the nays are zero recorded as present. 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 upon the table.

the speaker pro tempore: the chair lays before the house the following personal requests. the clerk: leave of absence requested for mr. ater hold -- aderholt of alabama for today.

the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the request s granted. the chair will now entertain requests for one-minute peeches. for what purpose does the gentleman from florida seek recognition? for what purpose does the gentlelady from florida seek recognition? ms. ros-lehtinen: i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute, revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentlewoman is recognized for one minute. ms. ros-lehtinen: thank you, mr. speaker. >> mr. speaker, the house is

ot in order. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady may proceed. ms. ros-lehtinen: there is once again an effort being undertaken by some in congress to restore at least partial funding for unesco. despite being prohibited by u.s. law to do so. in october of 2011, unesco chose to welcome a nonexistent state of palestine to its membership. it did so knowing that this would trigger u.s. law that prohibits us from funding any entity at the u.n. that grants membership to the p.l.o. yet since that law was triggered, and funding was cut, the administration and some of its congressional lackeys have been attempting to circumvent and undermine this decades' old law. as we continue to work to put together funding measures to take us past the pending fiscal

deadline, i will oppose and fight all efforts to insert language into bills that would restore even a portion of funding to unesco or give the president authority to waive this provision of the law. thank you, mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from california seek recognition? without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. swalwell: today i rise to recognize kim as a he completes his term tomorrow as mayor of our hometown, dublin, california. i've worked with tim in many roles. he's been my high school teacher, my coach, friend and mentor, and i learned a lot from him over the years, but i felt most honored when i worked with him as a colleague on the city council. tim served as mayor from 2008 to 2014. and presided over dublin during some of our city's most trying and troubling economic times. but even during tough times, tim's steady leadership led

dublin not just to a balanced budget but a surplus and enable aed the city to open new parks and provide affordable housing to its residents. tim did all of this while working collaboratively with his colleagues. he always shared the successes and put dublin first in every decision. due in large part to tim, dublin was recognized as an all american city by the national civic league in 2011. thank you, tim, for your years of leadership in dublin. our all american city was lucky to have an all american mayor. thank you and i yield back the alance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: will members please take their conversations off the floor of the house. for what purpose does the gentleman from pennsylvania seek recognition? mr. thompson: mr. speaker, request unanimous consent to address the house for one minute, revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. thompson: mr. speaker, last

week the united states energy information administration published its today in energy report which illustrated that shell gas provided the largest share of u.s. natural gas production in 2013. according to the report, gross withdrawals from shell oil wells increased the 33 billion cubic feet in twirlt, representing 40% of the total natural gas production and surpassing production from nonshale gas wells. 79% of the e.i.a., total shale gas extraction nationwide. in pennsylvania has become the second largest shale gas producing state. i should note that in 2007, shale gas made up just % of the total natural gas produced in the united states, with texas alone accounting for 63% of the total production nationally. continuing the trend, production gains have enabled a decline in natural gas imports for the sixth straight year,

reaching the lowest level since 1995. mr. speaker, due to the innovation of private industry, our domestic energy resources are now easier to aa dane at a much lower cost which is benefiting the american consumer and our nation's competitive -- economicive competitiveness. i yield back -- economic competitiveness. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentlewoman from texas seek recognition? without objection, the gentlewoman is recognized for one minute. ms. jackson lee: thank you, mr. speaker. today is world aids day and i'm very pleased to come from a city of which so many celebrated and commemorated the progress and the challenges. thank you to the thomas street clinic that i visit and have seen the treatment that is given. thank you to the aids foundation that has always been on the front lines providing information and resources and the montrose clibic -- clinic that treats world aids day as an enormously important day. i remember being here as a civilian if you will in the united states congress in the

senate when the ryan white treatment act was introduced by senator kennedy and our distinguished senator from utah as well. and so we are here today to say we have not done all that we need to do. pepfar has cared for millions around the world, work that we've done here in the united states congress. deaths have declined. but yet hiv-aids and transmission from mothers to infants still exists. it is important to continue to work and not ignore the success but not ignore the challenges. i am very glad to work with organizations in my district and hope that the funding in the omnibus or the appropriations process is not diminished in fighting to eliminate hiv-aids in our lifetime. with that i yield back the balance of my time and thank all of those who have sacrificed and lost their lives. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady's time has expired for what purpose does the gentleman from illinois seek recognition? >> to address the house for one minute and ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the

gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> mr. speaker, i rise today to congratulate dr. may baronbaum for being named a recipient of the national medal of science. she's a world class scientist whose exceptional contributions to insect research have earned her this top award which she received at the white house last month. a leading voice on the issue of pollinator health, her research has been critical to policymakers and to peers alike. mr. davis: after all, we have pollinators to thank for one out of every three bites of food of that -- of food that we eat and we have the doctor to thank for being a leading researcher and enthusiastic voice in helping us sustain the pollinator population. as a supporter of the national science foundation research in agricultural research, i come to the floor today, mr. speaker, to again congratulate the doctor. our area is very proud of you for receiving this honor and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the

gentleman yields back the balancof his time. for what purpose does the gentleman from minnesota seek recognition? without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. paulsen: mr. speaker, i rise today to honor bloomington, minnesota, resident jim carol who was awarded the knight of the legion of honor medal by the government of france. that is the highest honor given by the government of france to a foreign national. jim was honored for his actions as a u.s. army par trooper during world war ii. his first combat jump with the 101st airborne division was at normandy beach where he helped secure a critical bridge. jim then went on to fight in operation market garden and the battle of the bulge. his willingness to put his life in danger in service to our country and our allies is absolutely worthy of our respect and deserving of thes remain special recognition. after leaving the military, jim married his wife and moved to bloomington, minnesota, where he's lived now for 70 years.

mr. speaker, we're all thankful for jim's service and congratulate him on receiving the french knight of the legion of honor medal. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from pell seek recognition? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> my constituents know american made means american jobs. whether it's the medical device manufacturer that employs hundreds or the family small shop down the road, the jobs and products created by american businesses in our communities are what drives our economy. mr. fitzpatrick: december is made in america mont and a perfect time for leaders in both parties to come together around commonsense policies that put american businesses and the american worker first. the bipartisan made in america act is just that kind of policy. this legislation would connect the american consumers to american manufacturers by creating a definitive

standardized labeling for american goods. by incentivizing businesses and manufacturers to meet certain made in america benchmarks for domestic production and providing consumers with reliable and easy to understand information, the made in america act can meet two valuable goals, increasing american purchases of american goods and reshoring american businesses and american jobs. making it in america is crucial to ensure better jobs and more opportunities for our families across the nation so during this made in america month, let's work together and get it done. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. are there further requests for one-minute speeches? under the speaker's announced policy of january 3, 2013, the gentleman from new york, mr. jeffries, is recognized for 60 minutes as the designee of the minority leader. mr. jeffries: mr. chairman, i ask for unanimous consent that all members be given five days

to revise and extend their remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. jeffries: hands up, don't shoot. it's a rallying cry of people all across america who are fed .p with police violence in community after community after community. fed up with police violence in rguson in brooklyn, in cleveland, in oakland, in cities and counties and rural communities all across america. and so tonight, the c.b.c. will stand on the floor of the house of representatives and for the next of minutes speak on the -- for the next 60 minutes, speak on the top exof black in america. what does ferguson say about

where we are and where we need to go? people are fed up all across america because of the injustice involved in continuing to see young, unarmed african-american of a lled as a result gunshot fired by a law enforcement officer. people in america are fed up with a broken criminal justice totem that continues to fail deliver accountability when law enforcement officers engage in the excessive use of police force. people are fed up with prosecutors who don't take seriously their obligation to

deliver justice on behalf of the victims of police violence. instead, as we recently saw down in ferguson, missouri, choose to act as a defense attorney for the law enforcement officer who pulled the trigger and killed michael brown. people are fed up. this is a problem that congress can't run away from and the c.b.c. stands here today to make sure that congress runs toward the problem. that we come up with constructive solutions to breaking this cycle, this epidemic, this scourge of police violence all across america. so i'm pleased today that we've been joined by several of our distinguished colleagues, including the chair of the congressional black caucus who for the last two years has led

the charge on behalf of the c.b.c. in dealing with issues of social and racial and economic justice, i'm proud to serve under her, i'm proud that she's on the floor today, we're thankful for her service, and let me now yield to the distinguished gentlelady from cleveland, congresswoman marcia fudge. ms. fudge: thank you very, very much. i thank you, congressman jeffries, for leading the congressional black caucus special order hour for the 113th congress, for your weekly advice, your weekly message, i thank you. we owe you a debt of gratitude. it is a pleasure to have worked with you for the last two years. mr. speaker, we are running out of patience. last week, the nation waited and hoped that justice would finally be served in the case of michael brown. we waited to hear our country say loud and clear, there are

cons agains for taking the lives of others. we waited to hear some reassurance that black and brown boys' lives do matter. but again, we are terribly disappointed and discouraged. the ferguson grand jury's decision not to indict officer wilson was another slap in our face. it was a painful reminder that just like with trayvon martin and so many others that law enforcement officers feel that our -- kill black and brown boys without repercussions. while some see it as the system working as it should, others see it as a blatant miscarriage of justice. where is the closure for michael brown's parents? for the he closure outrage of the black community?

that we remain mired in racial issues in 2014 is an embarrassment. we should consider taking a long look in the mirror before we go to other countries lecturing them about the need for democracy in politics, when here at home we are unable to fully address our own issues. mr. speaker, the house is not in order. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman is correct. the house will be in order. please proceed. ms. fudge: if we are to learn anything from the tragic death of michael brown, we must first acknowledge that we have a race issue we are not addressing. we must have open, honest, transparent conversations about prejudice, racism and racial threats. we must also lead conversations with law enforcement about transparency, accountability and police and community -- and community policing. i want to thank the president today for once again putting a focus on the need for community policing in our country. mr. speaker, all lives have

value. as members of congress it is our responsibility to clearly communicate this message to our voters, our constituents, and our neighbors. mr. speaker, enough is enough. i yield back. mr. jeffries: i thank the chair for her eloquent remarks. people have asked all over the country, in some corners, perhaps in congress and this city, why are people upset? well, you had an unarmed dividual, michael brown, who had no criminal record, just graduated from high school, on his way to college, killed in what appears to be the excessive lieof police force, left to in the hot august sun for 4 1/2 hours. the immediate response by the police chief is to engage in character assassination of the

deceased while refusing to release the name of the officer who pulled the trigger. the ferguson police department responds as if this was a military campaign on foreign soil, not in an american city. the prosecutor decides to get involved and does a document dump. doesn't engage in responsible prosecutorial behavior, fails to ask for specific charge. allows the officer to testify unabated, doesn't point out inconsistencies between his initial telling of the events on that fateful day and what he said before the grand jury. and then announces all of this late at night and behaves as if he was the defense attorney for darren wilson. why are people upset? those are just a few of the reasons. it's my honor to yield time now to the distinguished delegate from the district of columbia,

representative eleanor holmes norton. ms. norton: i want to thank my good friend for his leadership this evening, it's the kind of leadership he has provided since he has come to the congress and for the critique he has just offered. but i come to the floor this afternoon to try to convert that critique into an understanding of the big picture. demonstrations have been going on even though we're days away from when the indictment did not come down. why in a country where you haven't seen demonstrations a-- you have been seeing demonstrations across the united states for some time, why have demonstrations of young people broken out all across america? there is a message here that

comes from the demonstrations and from the words of the parents of michael brown. his father pleaded that michael brown not have died in vain. people in the streets are there to see that michael brown has not died in vain. that proximate cause once again becomes color blind. to see that when a young black is os into the street, he not consistently and constantly profiled because of the color of his skin. that emonstrations show and issue, detention

stopping of black men, especially black men, in the streets, has been simmering below the surface. until this tragedy became a way for it to find an outlet. the provocative stop in the streets, eric holder, a former u.s. attorney, now the attorney general of the united states, has been stopped in the streets of the nation's capital and i say to my friends, this is a progressive city. i cannot imagine what it must be like across the united states. a young black man in st. louis held up a poster which is all about the big picture. it said, we are all mike brown. when my son go into the street, he is michael brown.

we want america so that when he go into the street he's like everybody else until he does something wrong and there's proximate cause to show it. that does not occur in any city, in any small hamlet of the united states today, and so yes, this great tragedy has become a vehicle to express that grievance. there are things that can be done, the president has just come forward with a request for n appropriation for cameras, $260 million. they work. we have found that when police have body cameras, they protect the police as well as protect members of the public. so as we come to grips with the fact that there was no bill new york indictment, i hope we will not lose our focus on the big

picture that we are in essence sending a message to police departments all over the united states, even though you think you may not be doing it, what we're talking about is endemic throughout the united states. people are laying down in peaceful protest, yes, they're blocking the streets, when i was a youngster in the civil rights movement, we tried not to inconvenience people but this is a whole different day and they never-before-seen draw the attention of the entire public nd yes, of police around the united states, to just how much of a festering sore this has been. so i thank my good friend from new york for leading this special order, i thank the chair of the congressional black caucus for leading us off tonight, and in the spirit of michael brown's father, who asked that his son not have died in vain, let us make sure that

we support the president's request for pilot programs for body cameras, that you send that message back home to your police departments and we work together to make proximate cause color blind. i thank my good friend from new york. mr. jeffries: we're here as a members of the congressional a black caucus to have an open, honest and direct dialogue with america. and in a democracy, there has to be a balance between effective law enforcement on the one hand and a healthy respect for the constitution and the civil rights of others, particularly african-americans, on the other. if we're honest, we haven't gotten that balance right. and as a result we see young, unarmed, innocent african-american men gunned down in city after city in

america and we're here to say enough is enough. i'm pleased now to yield to someone who has served this institution incredibly well as a member of congress, served the country well as a member of the military, the lion of lennox avenue, the distinguished gentleman from the great state of new york, and the village of harlem, representative charlie rangel. mr. rangel: i never felt more proud of my colleague from new york for the great leadership that he's provided since his arrival in this august body. this is such a great country and i love it so much. i was raised in the shadow of the statue of liberty and when i graduated from law school,

having been the only one in my family having gone to college, i think my mother said, thank you, jesus, and i said something like thanks for the constitution and thanks for being born in america. like anything else you love, if there's an illness, if there's a problem, you would want to know what can you do to cure it? how can you make it all that our country can be? how can we say that we have a cancer until we recognize that then we don't really love our country? how can we be able to say that white and black in this country are equal and that those who work hard and live by the rules have the same opportunities as each other when we know that we have this cancer that sometimes we're able to make the country

do a lot better than it has since our people were the only ones that were actually brought here in chains, but i marched from selma to montgomery and things that i never had the opportunity to dream because equality never was on the list in my community. but if as a result of this i've been able to live long enough to see african-american men and women be elected to local and state offices around this untry, to come here and join with nine african-american embers of congress in 1970 and to walk tall and know that in that short period of time we've grown to over 40, 45 members of

congress, does that mean that we've rid ourselves of the cancer? i think not. and how can we do it? by admitting that we do have that problem. because whether we're talking bout ferguson or harlem or somewhere else, until we admit that we have this illness and we have this problem, then singling out the success of ome of us in this country does not heal the wounds that have been left through the centuries f racial hatred and prejudice. we've been able to say we were freed by the emancipation proclamation, but the truth of the matter is, our people have been enslave -- in slavery more than we've been so-called free people. and the fact that they said that you were no longer a slave didn't mean that you were an

american, with all the rights and the privileges of it. and it hasn't been that long that i can remember my grandfather from virginia talking about innocent people being lynched in virginia. and it hasn't been that long that our people have been granted the constitutional right to what? to vote. and it hasn't been that long ago that -- even said that our schools should be desegregated or the military desegregated. d until we reach the point that african-american parents don't have to tell their kids to act differently just because of their color, that they have to succumb to the type of conduct that you teach on one hand be a man and stand up for your rights, but if he's in uniform, then beg and plead and don't move, don't say anything that might irritate him -- i

think, i really believe that the people who unconsciously don't know and don't care about the heavy weight that black folks have carried in this country over the centuries that they were brought here cannot possibly love the country as much as they would if they say it was not a ferguson problem. it's an american problem. and they should be able to ask, what is it that they could do? and i would humbly suggest the first thing you do is to acknowledge, acknowledge that you have that problem. me people may talk about payment for restitution for past crimes committed against human beings.

but that restitution could be the ability to say that we're going to make certain that people of color in this country would be able to have access to the same type of education, live where they want to live, compete against anybody for the job and not feeling that they're inferior because people have been taught that just because they have a different complexion that they are superior. and they take that because they were born on third base, that just being born means they can hit a home run. fact is that all of us collectively would know that whether you're black or brown or yellow, whatever the complexion is, that the greatest benefit and asset that we have as a nation is that we

bring in all of these cultures together to build the greatest nation on earth. we have ferguson in another 10 or 20 years, it doesn't have to be. what has to be is that we cut this poison out of the system of this great country and openly say that we have this problem and then, as the parents and mr. brown would want, that death would have been just another sacrifice that one of us has made to wake up this wonderful country to do what has to be done. so let me thank you for constantly reminding us that we've come a long, long way from how we got here, but we have a long way to go. thank you so much. mr. jeffries: i thank the distinguished gentleman from new york for his always

eloquent and poignant observations. let me now yield to one of my dynamic colleagues on the judiciary committee, the distinguished gentleman from texas, representative sheila jackson lee. ms. jackson lee: allow me to add my appreciation for the continued leadership of my friend and colleague from new york and to thank the previous speakers. we all associate ourselves with the passion, the commitment, the determination that has been expressed. but let me, as i stand, acknowledge that i am particularly pleased to be associated with distinguished legislators. many people in this nation have their particular roles as pastors and civil rights leaders. and in a meeting held right before the thanksgiving holiday, members of the congressional black caucus were reminded of the giant role that they have played over the years in combining passion with legislation. hearings with pain.

as early as the 1990's we held hearings on the questions of excessive force, as well as the issues of racial profiling along the highways of america. the issue of excessive sentencing in the crack cocaine disparities. the issue of dealing with the overincarceration of minorities and the overfilling of jails. today, mr. speaker, i rise to ead to my colleagues, we are legislators. we cannot legislate without the partnership of republicans. and so i stand as a democrat and a member of the congressional black caucus that has always been cited as the conscience of america to say hat we need to work in step on the conspicuous achilles heels of america. that is, the criminal justice system. as we stand here today, every one of us has applauded a police officer, has mourned at

their passing in the line of duty, has given them awards, has stood alongside of them, every one of us and certainly i will not take a back seat to anyone on my respect for law enforcement across the gamut. i recognize that they are here to protect and serve. and i think it is very crucial that our friends in law enforcement recognize the work that members of the congressional black caucus have done, if not individually but collectively. let me say that i also admire the young st. louis rams players who raised their hands, to be able to share in the dignity of those young peaceful protesters. if we don't affirm nonviolence, then who will? and i think everyone, law enforcement and others, who agree or disagree should recognize young people like the ones in houston, texas, don't shoot. that does not in any way denigrate or disrespect our law

enforcement officers. so for just a few minutes i want to speak about that aspect and how we see the justice system. to my colleagues, this is 2,500 pages. those documents issued by the d.a. in st. louis county were 10,000 pages. i am continuing to grow this stack. it is clear that what happened in the grand jury system for many who don't know that system, those individuals are appointed by a judge. a single judge says, who do i know in the community? let me see if i can appoint 12 of them. in st. louis county, it took nine to indict. and if you listen to new york state chief judge who famously remarked that a prosecutor could persuade a grand jury to indict a ham sand witch. when i served on the municipal court, there were many probable cause hear thags we held and many efforts by police officers

to get a warrant to be able to go when they thought there was suspicion of a crime. we worked with law enforcement officers. in fact, data says according to the bureau of justice statistics, u.s. attorneys prosecuted 162,000 federal cases in 2010, the most recent year for which we have data. grand juries declined to return an indictment in 11. that's federal, that's not the state of missouri, but i can assure you it is comparable. so what happened in missouri when it relates to the justice system, the criminal justice system? first of all, a grand jury system is not a jury of your peers. a grand jury indictment is not a conviction it. would not have meant, if there is an indictment, that the officer in question was convicted. it would simply mean that we would transition to the jury system and we'd be able to address the question of michael brown's rights. for michael brown was protected under the constitution, the first amendment not only talks about freedom of religion and

speech, it talks about the rights of association and the right of movement. michael brown, an 18-year-old big boy, as his mom and dad lovingly called him, had a right to move, had a right to move on the streets of america. but he was denied that right. he was denied that right with seven shots. and so there has to be a question, no one would deny that there is a reason to have a full trial and the question would be, why didn't the st. louis district attorney act like many other district attorneys? and i know there are some who were in that role here in this particular floor tonight, which is presenting a case and let the jury ultimately decide and the facts and the grand jury, evidence that a question remained. let me say these few points as i close. i am a supporter of the

executive order of the president with body cams, but we need a broad view of what we're going to do in this situation. as i indicated to you a grand jury is something different from peers. by jury of your i would say what happened in st. louis was not the way that the rocess usually goes. on a grand jury, you needed nine and unfortunately the configuration of that jury made it very unclear that there was not going to be an indictment. so today i think it is very important that we address federal question -- several questions. we need to look at the grand jury system across the nation. we need to look at it in the me of shawn bell, abadu, trayvon martin, a civilian,

michael brown, and the 12-year-old boy. we need to look at it from the perspective of why isn't community-oriented policing used? why wasn't it used in ferguson? under the urban justice act this i introduced, communities that rely on fines and other means of funding their government, their federal funding should be diminished accordingly. if their whole base of living and funding is just to stop people along the street. i said racial profiling, the expanding of civil review boards, the increasing of diversity which is being tried, unfortunately, a little late in ferguson, the use of conserve -- conservatorships, of taking over police departments until they get it right and educational reformation in teaching our young boys, our minority boys, along with things like my brother's keeper. to my colleagues today, this is only the beginning. i believe as martin king said, where do we go from here?

it is imperative that legislation joined with ompassion. it should be not only democrats or members of the congressional black caucus, we want partners, realize that the justice system as it penetrate into local communities must be enhanced or reformed. how long can we tolerate the shooting down of children in our streets? it has nothing to do with respect or lack of respect from law enforcement. from the levels of the f.b.i. to d.a. to a.t.f. to local constables and sheriffs. tonight my question is, where do we go from here. it's a reformation of the jury system. the special prosecutor should have been the roult in missouri and i would hope we would look to legislative fixes with our colleagues to make america better. the congressional black caucus will not be silenced. those of white house serve on the respective jurisdictional

committees will not be silenced because america is better than this, a country that we love. where do we go from here? we must fix it and fix it now. i yield back to the gentleman. mr. jeffries: i thank the gentlelady from texas for lending her powerful voice to this issue. we want a fair, impartial, color blind criminal justice system. but if we're honest with ourselves that doesn't exist for all americans today. and that undermines the integrity of our democracy. that's not just a black problem, or a white problem, or a democratic problem, or a republican problem. that's an american problem. and that's why the congressional black caucus stands on the house floor here today to jump start, not just a discussion, but a march toward making meaningful progress as we move forward perfecting this great union. it's my honor and privilege to now yield to my good friend and colleague from the great state of new york, someone who himself

is a former prosecutor, and who has been involved in the fight for social and racial justice during his tremendous tenure here in the united states congress. let me yield to the distinguished gentleman from new york city, the borough of queens, congressman gregory meeks. mr. meeks: thank you. i want to thank my friend and colleague, great attorney, great legislator, for leading this discussion this evening, for not only here on the floor of the house of representatives but what you do every day. in fact, it's an example of what we can follow, how you lead in your district, especially in brooklyn, rallying around, as i will talk about later, when you saw a prosecutor not do his job, you were one that led in brooklyn to say the people were getting people's -- will get a people's prosecutor and folks went to the polls, when someone said it couldn't be done, you

led and helped make it happen where an incumbent forgot his way and was not representing the people, you helped people get together and go to the polls and have a new prosecutor in brooklyn to move forward. we thank you for that leadership. today we talk about black in america. what ferguson says about where we are and where we need to go. now, as congressman jeffries has said, i'm a former prosecutor, i know about the grand jury system. and i know the failure of the grand jury process as directed or as some would argue, prosecutor to the indict officer wilson in the shooting ground of michael brown

jr., an unarmed ferguson, missouri, teenager, undermines public confidence and the very notion of equal administration of justice. now, when you go before the grand jury, all you have to show is that there is proximate cause , is probable cause, probable cause, the lowest standard there is, that a crime was committed. and when you see the process that this prosecutor went through, he tried to try a case. came in with a preconceived thought that he did not want an indictment here. for i don't know of any prosecutors that go into the grand jury and don't at least after it's all done ask for an

indictment. he never asked for an indictment. in this case. so the tragic circumstances in ferguson and other unfortunate instances around the country have sparked a movement for justice, equality, and change that i believe is critical to the communities affected by ms. carriages of justice. -- by miscarriages of justice. but this movement is not just for those communities. indeed, the united states of america needs this movement. this is as others have said an american problem. as dr. martin luther king jr. once said, injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere. racial disparities of any kind are troubling for our entire nation. and so though we've elected

president barack obama here in the united states, i heard some say we were in a post-racial america. no. we are not. for racism is still alive and well in the united states. of america. -- in the united states of america. we've got work to do. so where do we go? this movement with its courageous contingent of young activists is quickly learning, adapting, applying, and innovating on the most effective methods and models of the civil rights movements of previous generations. as this movement continues to grow and takes every opportunity to focus its demands, expand its outreach, develop its activists in the discipline of peaceful, direct action, and deepen its understanding of how to apply

mass pressure on policymakers, it will cascade not simply to interrupt businesses as usual, but to generate electoral participation on levels unseen in generations. this movement has the potential to transform the tragedy in ferguson into a historic turning point in the centuries-long struggle for freedom, justice, and equality. the congressional black caucus is part of this moment and part of this movement. tens of thousands of federal, state, and local elected officials, civic leaders, civil rights organizations, activists, clergies, lawyers, educators, artists, athletes, business owners, and hundreds of thousands if not millions of ordinary working people of all ages from all over america are

part of this movement. so now is the time for america to come together to reform police practices, redress patterns of racial disparities in the justice system and hold police accountable for the use of excessive force, especially deadly force. now is the time to match nonviolent direct action with meaningful legislative and administrative action. now is the time for the federal government to act, for congress to act, for courts to act, for state legislatetures to act. r country -- legislatures to act, for county and other governments to act. now is the time, my friends, to register to vote, because soon, very soon, it will be time to act at the ballot boxes. only then will these voices be truly heard and every -- in every corner of every county and throughout this country.

and then the world would know that unwarranted violence and abuse of power has no home in america. injustice has no seat in our democratic institution and only then will we honor the sacrifice of those who have paid the ultimate price and begin to heal a nation of men who -- of many who aspire to become one. yes, indeed, we have come a long way. but yes, indeed, we have a long, long, long way to go. thank you for your time. mr. jeffries: i thank my good friend, the distinguished gentleman from new york, for his very eloquent and thoughtful remarks, as always. now it's my honor and privilege to yield to the great civil rights leader, former judge, and distinguished gentleman from the great state of texas, representative al green. mr. green: thank you very much. i thank the speaker as well.

i want to make mention of mr. horsford, he is not here tonight, but i always associate him with mr. jeffries. they have been a great dynamic duo and they have done outstanding work with these special order hours. in his absence, i want to let him know we still greatly appreciate him and miss him. mr. speaker, i had a john carlos moment. for edification purposes, john carlos was the athlete at the 1968 olympics who went to the podium along with tommy smith and raised his hand in what was called at that time a black power salute. at that time, much was said about john carlos and tommy smith, many people criticized them for taking the podium and for making this gesture.

they were said to be outside of the mainstream. but i believe that history has vindicated them. because they were a part of the avant-garde. they actually were cause manage people to understand that the black -- causing many people to understand that the black power movement at that time was much bigger than many thought. i had a john carlos moment because i saw this clip where the rams players came into the arena, hands up, don't shoot. it was a john carlos moment because this has become the new symbol, a new statement, a statement wherein people around the country now are calling to the attention of those who don't quite understand that this is a movement that will not dissipate. it will not evaporate. it's a movement that is going to

continue because young people, a new generation, has decided that they're going to engage themselves in the liberation movement, the freedom movement if you will, the continuation of what happened in 1968 with john carlos and tommy smith. i want to make sure that those who participated on the rams team, that their names are chronicled in history. i want people who look back through the time to know who they were when they search the congressional record so i want to add their names to this record. . i want kenny brit to be recognized. tayvon austin to be recognized. steadyman bailey to be recognized. jared cook. craig gibbons. and tray mayson. these are persons who in the years to come will be acknowledged as a part of the

avant-garde. and i want people to know also that i appreciate and support what the president is doing with his executive action. i support what he's doing with body cameras. and i support what he's doing with body cameras because i believe that body cameras can exonerate and they can as well incountry -- incriminate. they can exonerate officers who are falsely accused. they can provide empirical evidence of what actually transpired. there won't be he said or she said. there will be the empirical evidence of what the camera actually saw. they can also incriminate those who would try to perpetrate a fraud upon the american people. body cameras can identify those who would engage in criminal conduct and then try to excuse

their conduct with words that don't match what the camera will reveal. i believe in body cameras. this is why i have filed h.r. 5 407, the tip act, transparency in policing. the i.p. act would cause justice department to examine the circumstance in this country, the cost for body cameras, and would then allow those jurisdictions that cannot afford to incorporate body cameras into their police departments, there would be an exemption for that. but would require those generally speaking who receive federal dollars to move to body cameras. i regret that we are getting to point now where we are getting it right after the fact. we shouldn't get it right after the fact. this is what's happening in ferguson. after the fact ferguson is moving to body cameras.

but we don't need another ferguson. there are other communities around the country where after the fact they are moving to body cameras. we don't need to have an injustice take place before we move to a just circumstance and incorporate these body cameras. my hope is that we will follow the president's lead, that we will incorporate body cameras into police departments across the length and breadth, the scope of this country, if you will. but i also pray that this bill, h.r. 5407, will get a hearing. it is overwhelmingly supported by members of the c.b.c., as well as others. it is not a c.b.c. initiative, but it is supported overwhelmingly by the c.b.c. my hope is that this bill will get a fair hearing, because we should not get it right after the fact. we should have an opportunity to get -- to eliminate a lot of what we see as a confusion and

chaos. we need not continue to add fuel to the flame of confusion. that flame can be eliminated if we but only had these body cameras. they're not a cure-all, they're not a panacea. but they are a positive step in the right direction. i absolute the president and thank him for what -- salute the president and thank him for what he's doing and a i pray we get a fair hearing on h.r. 5407. god bless you, brother, and i hope you continue to do what you're doing on the floor of the house. mr. jeffries: thank you. it's now my honor and privilege to yield time, mr. chair, how much time do we have remaining? the speaker pro tempore: approximately 14 minutes are remaining. mr. jeffries: let me now yield to my good friend, the distinguished congresswoman who represents the neighboring district at home in brooklyn, she's a fighter for justice, a voice for the voiceless, and it's now my privilege to yield to congresswoman yvette clarke.

ms. clarke: hands up, don't shoot. i thank my colleague and friend, mr. jeffries of brooklyn new yorker for his tremendous leadership both -- from brooklyn, new york, for his tremendous leadership both here in washington, d.c., and in new york. i rise to join my colleagues in the congressional a black caucus to discuss being black in america and what the injustice in ferguson, missouri, says about where we are and where we need to go as a civil society. i first want to once again offer my condolences to the family of michael brown whose efforts to secure justice on behalf of their son were undermined by the decision of the grand jury. the killing of michael brown and aa tacks by the ferguson -- and attacks by the ferguson police department on protesters demonstrate an assumption that young women and men who are african-american are inherently suspicious, a false assumption with deadly consequences.

so where do we go from here? we must not allow this false assumption to prevail in our nation in our society. we cannot and will not accept the deval situation of african-american -- deval situation of after a can -- devaluation of after a can american lives. in my hometown in brooklyn, new york, where we are still reeling from the recent killing an unarm aed young man shot by a probation -- unarmed young man shot by a probation ary city police officer, this killing on the heels of the homicide by a choke-hold of eric garner on statin island, again in new york city. mr. speaker, it's deeply disappointing that as we observe the 50th anniversary of the civil rights act of 1964 we are still trying to fulfill the

promise of the 14th amendment, of equal protection under the law, while the civil rights act of 1964 transformed our nation by prohibiting discrimination based on race, religion, color, sex and national origin at work, in schools and in other public facilities, we still must transform the perceptions, vices and a prejudices -- biases and prejudices that some people still carry with them like luggage from generations past. the incidents in ferguson and cities across this nation reminds us that communities that have been disproportionately and unjustly targeted by police departments demand recognition of their humanity. young people of color refuse to live in a democratic society, in a state of fear, and we have an obligation as a nation to rid ourselves of the scourge of

racially biased state-sanctioned terrorism. i fully support the steps announced today by the obama administration to strengthen community policing and fortify the trust that must exist between law enforcement officers and the communities they serve. i've been a vocal advocate for better relations between the community and law enforcement community. given the police officer's sole mission is to serve and protect the people with dignity, integrity and respect, we must focus on achieving that mission. i pledge to work with my constituents, the obama administration, my colleagues and officials across this country, especially in new york city, to restore public trust and to establish a more enlightened policing strategy and to prevent surge incidents in the future. so again i'd like to thank mr.

jeffries for his leadership. i want to thank the c.b.c., the conscience of the congress, for holding this timely special order. to all americans who are disturbed by the demonstrations that are taking place across this nation, i want you to remember these four words. no justice, no peace. and i yield back. mr. jeffries: thank you, congresswoman clarke. mr. speaker, the man in brooklyn did not deserve to die. tamir rice in cleveland did not deserve to die. michael brown in ferguson did not deserve to die. the congressional black caucus is determined to make sure that these and many other deaths at the hands of law enforcement resulting from the use of excessive force will not be in vain. it's now my honor and my privilege to yield to one of the mighty voices of the hip-hop generation here in the united states, who powerfully

represents his midwestern district, the distinguished gentleman from the great state of indiana, congressman andre carson. mr. carson: thank you very much. i have to acknowledge my colleague, my friend, my rother and leader not only nationwide and internationally, but especially of brooklyn for his boldness, his tenacity, mr. speaker, his intestinal fortitude and his ability as a city member of congress to still speak truth to power, congressman jeff rills. mr. speaker, i rise tonight -- jeffries. mr. speaker, i rise today to -- tonight to express my deepest con domences to the brown if -- condolences to the brown family who lost their son far too soon. as a parent, i can only imagine their pain and grief, mr.

speaker. no parent should have to go through such an ordeal. as a young an african-american man, i can relate to the frustration being felt on the streets of ferguson and streets across our country. the history of this great nation, mr. speaker, past and with t is plagued incidents of bigotry and discrimination in our justice system. racial injustice continues to afflict our communities and with each incident like this ne, old wounds are reopened. he feeling felt in ferguson is

real and cannot, should not be discounted. mr. speaker, many right now feel abandoned by our justice singled out irly for suspicion. these are very legitimate concerns that cannot be ignored or overshadowed by those who have turned to violence. as a former police officer, mr. speaker, i want to say i do respect our system of justice, but i also recognize its shortcomings. we certainly have a long way to go to guarantee our country's children of color are protected equally under the law. every instance, every neighborhood all across this great nation, mr. speaker, no community should have to doubt whether justice has prevailed when a decision like this one has been handed down.

we must not let michael brown's death be in vain. that would be a disgrace. that would be a tragedy. is still our nation struggling to heal. but this cannot truly happen until we honestly assess how justice is provided across our country. this process starts with peaceful protests, yes. but it ends with lasting reforms that protect all americans equally, mr. speaker. this will not be easy or quick. but what is clear is that this march toward a better, more equitable country must begin with a unified front. through this tragedy we should bring about lasting change and

so tonight on that note i want to ask, mr. speaker, all of my colleagues, my fellow americans, to stand with the congressional black caucus to make this dream a reality. mr. speaker, i yield back. mr. jeffries: i thank the distinguished gentleman for his eloquent remarks. let me now yield to the distinguished gentleman from maryland, the great aline of scrimmagea cummings -- elijah cummings. mr. cummings: thank you very much. i want to thank mr. jeffries for calling this special order tonight. and let me say to america, whenever law enforcement officers -- a law enforcement officer shoots and kills an unarmed citizen in this great country, america has a problem. and i want us to be very careful that we don't become distracted and not address the issues. and i know that we in the congressional black caucus make sure that we don't get involved

in motion, commotion, emotion and no results. and that's what this is all about. because the things that we're talking about is trying to bring about change, not just for our young people today, but for generations yet unborn. and so let me just briefly state that i'm very pleased with what the president did today. i think it's a step this the right direction -- a step in the right direction. the effort to get body cameras, 50,000 of them, to establish a task force. ight i along with 100 other leaders wrote to the president and we just asked for certain things and i'll yame them and then yield back to the gentleman. we asked d.o.j. develop the training for law enforcement officers to counteract racial bias. and retention among law

enforcement professionals. grants to support youth in the communities that these officers serve. reduction of excessive republicry among community police departments. call for d.o.j. oversight of law enforcement practices. and increase accountability through national standards through investigation into cases of inappropriate behavior. we will continue this fight. and you know, to the brown mily, you have our condolences, but we know you want to make sure that change is brought about. and we promise you that we are going to do everything in our power to do that. and i yield back. mr. jeffries: let me now yield to one of my colleagues in the freshman class, soon to be a

dynamic sophomore, the gentlelady from the great state of ohio, congresswoman joyce beatty. mrs. beatty: mr. speaker, thank you. it is my honor to stand here not only with the congressional members of the black caucus. today, i have a heavy heart. if we stand here ases members of the congressional plaque caucus on the topic, being black in america, what ferguson says where we are and where we need to go. mr. speaker, i would like to express my condolences to the family of michael brown. the gentle giant will not be forgotten nor will what his loss represents. michael brown had a promising future before his life was cut

short that saturday afternoon in august. and i realize my time is probably up. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. mr. jeffries: thank you, mr. speaker. we have come a long way and we look forward to marching toward a more perfect union and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. under the speaker's announced policy of january 3, 2013, the gentleman from texas, mr. gohmert, is recognize dollars r 60 minutes as the designee f the majority leader. mr. gohmert: mr. speaker, there are some people that wanted to be heard and didn't have a chance and i would be glad to ield such time as they need.

be glad to yield. yield to my friend. mr. jeffries: i thank my good friend for yielding a few moments for us to close this very important special order. and let me just yield to congresswoman joyce beatty to finish her remarks as we prepare to conclude this c.b.c. special order. and let me thank congressman gohmert for yielding a few moments of his time. mrs. beatty: thank you to my colleague. let me continue and be very brief with saying, michael brown had a promising future before his life was cut short before his life was cut short. he was supposed to start

technical college, planning to be a heating and cooling engineer one day, hoped to start his own business. strove to set a an example, teaching them to stay in school. instead, another loss. michael brown fell victim to a criminal just tim system that too often fails people of color. unfortunately, he is another black male, whose full promise and potential will never be realized because his life was taken too early by the very department created to protect and serve his community, the ferguson police department. mr. speaker, i think it is appropriate that the congressional black caucus us is on the floor today discussing being plaque in america. and in many circumstances, the conscience of america on issues

of race relations, struggles and inequityies. e are or are our brother's keepers. and today, december 1, we are celebrating the 59th anniversary of rosa parks giving up her seat on a bus in month gentlewoman erie, alabama. her civil disobedience on this day should be celebrated. we see in the majority, a peaceful protest in refusing to give up her seat, she sparked a civil rights movement, a movement highlighted by incremental progress such as the civil rights act of 1964, the voting rights act of 1965. about where a nation came together with eliminating discrimination against blacks and providing equal rights under

law. the civil rights movement is ongoing. a great distrust between local residents and law enforcement remains today. too many young black men are left behind and are seen as objects of fear and we have a pipeline that tears our communities of color apart, leaving them forever incomplete, but as dr. king said, human progress is neither automatic or inevitable. every step towards the goal of justice requires suffering and struggle. the tireless ex ergses and compassionate concerns of dedicated individuals. lastly, mr. speaker, i'm hopeful that initiatives like the president's my brother's keeper, which is implementing cradle to

college and programs will allow us to continue the rosa progress that shell sparked 59 years ago. should we work harder to get people registered to vote? yes. but it takes more than that. this congress should work with the president. and i fully support his request to some 263 million in part equip police officers were cameras. mr. jeffries, mr. speaker. thank you. and i yield back. mr. jeffries: let me thank congressman gohmert for this act of bipartisan. et me yield two minutes to congresswoman robin kelly. mr. kelly: as we re--

>> i offer my prayers to the family of michael brown and the entire ferguson community. we stand before the house as representatives of our communities and as concerned citizens. we stand here to say we mourn michael brown. we mourn his loss and what it represents. he very real fear. we are here to speak for those who are weary of another young black man killed by police. ferguson speaks to the broader challenges we face, race relations, but the fraught relationship between the black community and the police. members of my family have and do serve in law enforcement. and i'm fortunate that for most of my life, i have been able to have many positive experiences with that community. my grandparents, a grocery store in harlem had officers checking

in. those who put their lives on the line are good, but doesn't negate the fact that in america today, we still have too many in the plaque community who fear the police or feel disrespected by the police including my son and his friends. and we have too many police officers who fear the black community. this is a dynamic that colors every encounter and paves the way for tragic outcomes. regardless of your perspectives of the events in ferguson we can agree that no community should live in fear. we must hold our law enforcement officials to the highest professional standards and provide them with the training they need to police diverse communities. this training must address the stereotypes and create obstacles to mutual understanding.

and we can and must strive twars a just system that treats all americans fairly and values american lives equally. i'm encouraged by the peaceful protests calling for change in the way our country views and values young black men, but this is the beginning and not enough. a mother and wife and a member of congress, this change must begin today. we must look for ways they can prevent a similar tragedy from happening in your community. don't let this issue fade. get involved with your local government. go to your meetings, know who represents you and who is policing your streets. be a part of the change and lend your voice to the discussion of your community.

vote. exercise your right. demand, expect accountability. that's how we work together community. kind of thank you. mr. jeffries: we are here today to begin a conversation about a fair and equitable and color-blind criminal justice system. that should be something all americans embrace and that's what we are going to walk toward as we move towards the next congress in 2015. to close. i yield one minute to the distinguished congresswoman from texas. ms. jackson lee: i thank mr. jeffries and might i thank the speaker. i'm sorry we were racing across the floor. and we thank you for your clarification and to my good friend on the judiciary

committee, judge gohmert, who has engaged in the criminal justice system. i want to leave two points behind as we clarify how we can move forward and recognize crises but not yet be overcome by such. might i thank the former mayor of new york. i disagree with some of the interpretation of why officers are in the african-american community. a statistic does say in fact hat over 2005 and 2012 a white police officer used deadly force two times a week. there are broader ways of addressing these questions. let me say to you why there is such ire as what happened to michael brown. the grand jury system raises the fact question. why was his hands up and why was

he shot these many times. it is a criminal justice system o matter what, a body by the constitution, you can say a question has been raised and justice needs to answer that question. that is what we are asking for, a simple justice that allows everyone to stand at the table of opportunity, equality and rightness. i would make the argument tonight, we have laid out a road map, whether it is cameras, supporting the president's request for moneys, whether it is legislation dealing with the utilization of tickets and citations and stopping people from moving, whether or not it is my brother's keeper, the judiciary committee along with my colleagues, can raise the constitution and no matter who we are, we can look at those men, st. louis rams, applaud them for their work and law

enforcement and make a purposeful commit mountain that we will follow in the pathway and use the tools to make our criminal justice system work for all of us, whether we are poor, whether we are rich, in unique communities. we are going to say to mr. brown and say to mike's mother that justice is going to come not respecting whether or not we stand on one side or another. we are one ray or another. i have faith in the constitution and have faith in this congress and the very reason that judge gohmert yielded us, i know we will be engaged in a pathway forward to make america rise to hire angels and the constitution we love. i thank you, mr. jeffries, and i yield back. mr. jeffries: thank you, judge

gohmert. i yield back. . mr. gohmert: i thank you, mr. jeffries, my colleague and friend. i knew that words that were going to be spoken were from the heart and i'm glad to be able to facilitate that. thank you. and it does take me back, again, i was just a little kid when -- a little bitty kid, when martin luther king jr. was standing up for civil rights for all people and we've heard over and over, well, he did wonderful things for african-americans but i happen to know as a white christian boy growing up in east texas that the work he did and the life he gave actually enabled me as a little white boy to treat my brothers and sisters

like brothers and sisters. nd that's the ultimate goal. is when, as dr. king said, we judge each other by the content of our character and not by the color of the skin. that's a goal to shoot for. t also meant that when i was a quarterback and captain for the j.v., junior varsity, team in our high school, it meant i got to have coach williams as my head coach and just loved coach williams. but it was tough when he put both hands on your shoulder pads and got right in your face. you knew you were in for a lesson. but he was imminently fair and we had no race problems. he was just a fair man. and though i didn't vote for president obama and certainly might have had other people in

mind for attorney general, i'd hoped that there would be a peace that would come out with eric holder as attorney general the way i experienced with coach williams, an african-american. but great coach, great winning season and he made football fun. great leader, great teacher. loved having him for a coach. i'd lope that that might be true as cross -- i'd hope that that might be true across the country. we've seen so many people hurt, around jefferson, i was reading about minority business owners who had their businesses burned. i so hope that the words that y friend, ms. jackson lee, were saying would ultimately come true. that protests would be nonviolent, so people don't lose their stores and lose their homes or lose their

lives. just before coming over i was hear being a bosnian man that was breath to death with a hammer -- beat to death with a hammer. it's senseless. just senseless. don't even know the cause of his being killed there in missouri. protests are what dr. king knew would do the greatest good for the greatest number of people. and he certainly did a great deal of good. but basically most people, what they want is to make sure that they get fair treatment. that's it. be treated fairly. we do have some that want to engauge in crony capitalism and -- engage in crony capitalism and have all kinds of advantages. we saw that with tarp. people wanted to have their cake and then when they finished with that, have your cake too. that was very unfortunate. but overall most americans just want to be treated fairly.

they want the law to be treated -- everyone to be treated equally and fairly under the law. which brings to the subjects i wanted to take up tonight. we know that the president before thanksgiving announced hat, gee, since congress hasn't passed or hasn't -- hadn't passed or hadn't changed the law as he wanted them to, he'd indicated he'd waited long enough. he'd waited for congress to change the law and since congress had not changed the law, he decided to do it for congress. the trouble is, that's not equal and fair under the law. some have said, well, they don't think there's a way that congress can defund this legal executive order that

provides amnesty and actually the law is clear. if you're he will legally in the country, you're not -- if you're illegally in the country, you're not allowed to work in the country and the president, regardless of whether or not he has the power to provide amnesty or a pardon in a single case, there is no law, there is no authority, constitutional or legislative, that allows a president to provide benefits across the not that are illegal and authorized under the law. you just can't do that. so what do we do about that? some have said we can't defund the president's illegal actions . an article here by matthew boil, 26 november -- boyle, 26

november, and this is a quote to start the article. in light of congress' constitutional power over the purse, the supreme court has recognized that congress may always sir come scribe agency discretion to allocate resources by putting restrictions in the operative statutes. unquote. the c.r.s., a legislative authority on capitol hill, wrote, in a report sent to incoming senate budget committee chair, senate jeff sessions -- senator jeff sessions of alabama, quote, where congress has done so an agency is not free simply to disregard statutory responsibilities. therefore if a statute were enacted which prohibited appropriated funds from being used for some specified purpose, then the relevant funds would be unavailable, to

be obligated or expended for those purposes, unquote. the article goes on, sessions' team provided the c.r.s. report which is not made public unless members of congress who request such reports decide to make them so. rogers last week argue aed that -- oh, apparently it's talking about house appropriations committee chairman rogers, argued last week that congress could not block funding for obama's executive amnesty because the agency that will be printing the work authorization and other documents for illegal aliens, u.s. citizenship and imgrathes services, operates -- immigration services, operates primary on fears it collects rather than tax revenue collected by the federal government. so as i understand it, the

appropriations committee was ncerned that since the citizenship and immigration services or c. simple. -- c.i.s., a great deal of their funds from fee, perhaps we couldn't defund them. but the c.r.s. report goes on to say this, and i'm quoting, a fee-funded agency or activity typically refers to one in which the amounts appropriated by congress for that agency or activity are derived from fees collected from some external source. importantly amounts received as fees by federal agencies must still be appropriated by congress to that agency in order to be available for obligation or expenditure by the agency. in some cases this appropriation is provided through the annual appropriations process.

in other instances, it is an appropriation that has been enacted independently of the annual appropriations process such as a permanent appropriation in authorizing act. in either case, the funds available to the agency through fee collections would be subject to the same potential restrictions imposed by congress on the use of its appropriations as any other type of appropriated funds. mr. speaker, i know that's a long quote from c.r.s. but the bottom line is right there at the end. it doesn't matter whether fees are generated or revenue is generated through fees or whether it's a direct appropriation, congress has the authority to restrict how that money is spent. anyway, that's a very helpful c.r.s. opinion and matthew

boyle did a good job of covering that. noticed an article by the twitchy staff, that would be my dear friend, michelle malcolm. she has a series of tweets that people have sent out in response to the amnesty that this president is going to provide and the illegal right to work that's going to be legalized by fiat by the president. but this is from november 20. one tweet says, excellent point made on talk radio 1210, will all the immigrants who came here legally get a refund from obama for the fees they had to pay? of course the labor secretary

tom perez previously with the saw e department when we racial relations deteriorate dramatically, but tom perez said in his tweet, this is a moral imperative, a national security imperative and an economic imperative. and he's talking about the need for the president to act like a king and just dictate new law and allow people who are not allowed to work here legally to work here legally, though it's against the law. tony pelt says, are you going to refund all the money i spent doing it legally, huh? ben schapiro says, our nanny is from guatemala. she arrived legally five years ago. tomorrow she takes her citizenship oath. boy did she waste her time.

-- boy, did she waste her time. hey @barack obama, i want a refunds of all my legal fees plus 10 years worth of interest. i have all receipts. i came here legaly. another tweet says my family has paid fees to the u.s. immigration system and followed the law. i'd like are refund, please. another says, so who's going to refund the $18,000 i spent to ring my wife here legally? there's another invoice, apparently they're seeking refund for all the money they were out. another -- well, this says, hey, are you going to chip in for my refund for doing it legally? another said, lots of dollars

for husband to imgration to u.s. legally. attorney, mounds of paperwork, interview, etc. do we get a refund now? another says -- i'm not going to read. that used a bad word. another says, so, five million illegal immigrants get short cut visas. do i get a refund of the $50,000 i spent over 14 years egally becoming a citizen? a different person in a tweet aid, my wife came here legally . if obama amnesty happens, can we get a refund? for all the money we spent on her green card application? another says, does this act refund all the filing fees of those legally at this time? does it relieve us sponsors of our legal obligations?

there are a lot of people that are upset about this. and understandably. because they went about becoming citizens the right way. and my office continues to help people. one worked for seven years in order to get admitted legally. we've had people work for 10 ears to get here legally, be authorized legally. and the message that is sent when a president just by speaking new law into existence, because he's not happy that congress didn't do what he told them to, that sends a message to those who abide by the law, just as these tweets indicate, that america that has tried to be fair across the board, fought against the worst blight on american history, slavery, ought for civil rights and now

we're fighting to have the law completely disregarded so that it's an encouragement to people coming illegally. the word he was getting today from law enforcement friends on he the president's promise of an illegal amnesty is once again eating a lure to people that coming in illegally in the united states. there are those who say, we have to make sure you have been here for five years. how about that? isn't that amazing? the message of the president is, if you are good at violating the aw and doing it at over five years, we want you to stay.

and good at violating the law. if you are new at violating the law, we don't want you here working. , if e question arisinges someone is willing to break the unions law to come here illegally, whether it's a desire for a job, the desire for benefits, desire to come here and hurt us, whatever their desire, they are willing to break the u.s. law to come, does anybody seriously think that eople that would break the law some of them not be willing top -- sign the paper. don't speak english.

i mean, we have been out there, all hours of the day and night grand, order on the ryo i have seen people look at the copy with some mention of a copy they are from and say, here, and they switch papers. they don't come with identification cards. they don't come with government driver's licenses. they come with no legitimate identification. in a omeone pointed out holding facility near the border, gee, that guy says, he rarely nager, but you see beards developed on somebody that's 15, so they can lie about

their age and no question that some of them have, i have no identification. and why would this administration want to require any kind of real identification to come into the u.s. we have the right to vote. this administration has been fighting tooth and nail, spending massive amounts of money to fight any state that wanted to make sure that people were voting legally, lawfully, they were the person that they were representing they were. and some say, it's just rick lust to think -- lick cluss there is fraud. there are people in louisiana telling democrats to go out and vote again. myi'm tongue and cheek urged republican friends that there is

no group no matter that they vote traditionally, well over 90% for democrats, we just can't assume they will vote democrats, that we need to be going after the deceased vote, just because people may vote republic cap, they shouldn't vote democrat after they pass away. we know people don't always get sarcasm around this town. but the fact is there are plenty of people that chief assist ant, whether it's voting, whether it's legalization and it's certainlyly going to happen that people have nothing but their word to say they have been here for five years so the the president: that the new law that he spoke into existence and

people said, they are good at violating the law, so i want them to stay. there is an article written by rian preston and it recommends watching a clip from president obama's state of the union address in 2009, he says representative wilson, joe wilson, who was timely vindicated, but points out that ecretary of human health services secretary held a blog on november 11, 014. the bloggers asked him about benefits. obamacare he said that so-called dreamers, people brought to the united

states illegally when they were eligible re not ell but she and president obama would like to change that. but then she said, quote, mixed families should come. everyone should come on and folks should not be scared. no questions will be asked and it's not about an immigration issue, unquote. medical come to get nefits, the secretary of health and human services is saying, and i quote, no how in s will be asked, the world are they going to avoid violating the law by

providing medical care -- not medical care -- that's required, for anybody illegal here, but insurance that the rest of america is paying for? this article points out that despite zsh the secretary saying it's not about an immigration issue. it is an immigration issue and it is a fiscal issue and rule of law issue and deeper than that, t is an honesty issue. american taxpayers, a majority of whom never supported obamacare in the first place, will now be forced to subsidize health care for millions who are not even in the country legally.

my alternative health care proposal -- i offered before obamacare ever passed and became law. rovide temporary work visas, when we need temporary workers to harvest crops, whatever. but that doesn't mean that the rest of america should subsidize their health care. in other words, if someone wants to bring in people temporarily under a temporary work visa, they ought to be required to make sure that they have health care. either the employer buys a health insurance policy while they are here or the individuals have to and some nations have required that before they come into their country, since they

can't afford and be providing everyone in the world free health care and come into their country, you have to show that you will be covered by health insurance and don't have to pick up the tab. that continues to be a problem here however. an article from "national review" online, peter says, you have been working hard to support your family, paying taxes, including social security and medicare taxes for nearly 20 years and now you found out that the five million i will yell aliens will be eligible for social security, medicare and social security benefits, you know, the programs you have been supporting with your tax dollars. the plant you have been working at is considering layoffs and benefit cuts due to the cost of

new regulations imposed by bureaucrats who never so much ran a pop stand and know absolutely nothing about your business. hire ey are forced to cheaper labor and the company $3,000 e to pay the obamacare penalty on illegal aliens by not providing health care cooverage. so to keep your job, you try to make yourself more valuable to the company by getting additional training and skills. but the schools supported, rejects your application in favor of the illegal alien and likely 170 times more that they will be admitted over

you. and a grant funded in part by your tax dollars. and what if that may be unconstitutional and when one of the schools suggest you might be raceist thinking this is somewhat unfair. you thought that, if push came to shove, you could get a job at shopbrother's tool and die and it is burned down water flow, failed to deploy law enforcement personnel to control the riders that the law enforcement officials. no worries. trally ke your -- nat neighbor who never seems to have

worked a job, you will be able to access benefits to keep your family afloat at least for a while. you became nervous about -- all the newly smart people, hollywood and washington say it is all good for america. the funnelly transformed states of america, happy thanksgiving. and it is and interesting point that my friends, my colleagues have been talking about the tremendous problems in missouri to too many ed -- it will pay them

so they can live, help a family live and now think are going to be competing with five million people who didn't even come into the country legally. but the national chamber of commerce wanted this. the super rich in the country, that in the last six years, or t least the first fire -- five years of this president's administration, set a record, never before in the history of he country mass 95% of all income in america gone to the top 1%. under president obama and his policies, that happened. people in this administration

n talk about the disparity between the poor and the rich and the unfairness to the middle be much ere just can't more unfair to the middle class, more devastating to the middle class, more devastating to the nation's poor than to suddenly announce you're now going to compete with five million people that are here illegally that are going to take jobs than you are willing to. not that many jobs, under a free costs the em, it market whatever it takes toe get