1880's and 1886 and it was real important for galveston historical foundation to find a vessel that had a connection and the fact she was a sailing vessel was all the more important. >> watch all of our events from galveston saturday, march 7 "book tv" and sunday, march 8, on "american history tv" on c-span3. and now live to the floor of the u.s. house for brief speeches. the speaker pro tempore: the house will be in order. the prayer will be offered by our chaplain father conroy. chaplain conroy: let us pray. loving god, we give you thanks for giving us another day. as we meditate on all the blessings of life, we especially pray for the blessing of peace if our lives and in our world. our fervent prayer, o god is

that people will learn to live together in reconciliation and respect so that the terrors of war now raging in ukraine, syria, and threatening to spread will be no more. may your special blessings be upon the members of this assembly and the important often difficult work they do. give them wisdom and charity that they might work together for the common good when issues on so many fronts present seemingly impossible roads to cooperation. may all that is done this day in the people's house be for your greater honor and glory. amen. the speaker pro tempore: the chair has examined the journal of the last day's proceedings, and announced to the house his approval there of. pursuant to clause 1 of rule 1, the journal stands approved. the pledge of allegiance will be led by the gentleman from michigan, mr. kildee. mr. kildee: please join me in

the pledge. i pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under goivib, thibty andusce fll the speaker pro tempore: the chair will entertain requests for one-minute speeches. does the gentleman from south carolina seek recognition? >> ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. revise and extend my remarks. mr. wilson: during the break, i was grateful to chair a delegation to visit with the president of afghanistan, king abdullah the second of jordan, and the president of iraq. along with the defense minister of iraq. each leader clearly wants to protect their citizens from terrorism. i was joined by the dynamic --

i was joined by ms. stefanik of new york, and brad ashford of nebraska. it is more clear than ever that isil is a growing threat to the american people and we must force fully defeat the barbarian murderists with our courageous allies abroad. radical islam has declared war on americans and targets fellow muslims as evidence during our visit. we have seen in the last 10 days the slaughter of 40 worshipers at a mosque in pakistan, the burning of over 30 innocent civilians in iraq, the beheadings of 21 egyptian coptic christians in libya and jews murdered in copenhagen. in conclusion, god bless our troops and may the president by his actions never forget september 11 and the global war on terrorism. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. for what purpose does the the

gentlewoman from minnesota seek recognition? >> unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentlewoman is recognized for one minute. >> mr. speaker over the weekend minnesota's mall of america was the subject of threats from the terrorist organization al-shabaab. the department of homeland security is a vital partner in state and local law enforcement in protecting our nation from terrorist threats. yet in 72 hours funding for the department of homeland security will run out. republicans decision to use the d.h.s. budget to fight with the president is jeopardizing our national security. ms. mccollum: the department of homeland security must have certainty in their budget to plan, prepare and protect our country from threats like the one made against the mall of america. my democratic colleagues and i have proposed a clean budget for d.h.s. that would provide the tools they need to protect the american people from very

real harm. he we must pass the d.h.s. bill immediately. then congress can focus on our efforts on good jobs, strong wages to create an even more economic growth for the american people. mr. speaker, i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from michigan seek recognition? mr. kildee: i seek unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. kildee: thank you mr. speaker. well there are only four days left until the department of homeland security shuts down. so i urge all my g.o.p. colleagues to please take up a clean funding bill for the department of homeland security and take away the threat of another government shutdown, take at that threat off the table. but if you won't listen to us and the democratic side of the

aisle, listen to some of your own colleagues. listen to senator ron johnson who said, the political impasse on d.h.s. funding must end. unquote. or listen to representative mike mccaul who is chairman of the house committee on homeland security, he said quote, we should not be playing politics with national security like d.h.s., particularly given the high threat environment we are in right now. unquote. let's stop the gamesmanship. let's get back to governing the way the american people want us to. bring a clean d.h.s. funding bill to the floor. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from maryland seek recognition? >> unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. ruppersberger: as we saw from the horrific terrorist attack in paris, now is not the time to be cutting funding for

programs that protect americans from enemies intent on doing us harm. i am dismayed that some lawmakers are supporting punitive and ilinformed legislation to defund the department of homeland security because they disagree with president obama's recent executive action on the deportation of undocumented immigrants. it is wrong to play political football with something as sacred as our national security. even if you disagree with the president's immigration policy, it is irresponsible to withhold funding from the agencies that protect americans from terrorists. i know from my experience as ranking member of the house intelligence committee that this is a dangerous world. we must fully fund homeland security priorities, including secret service, the coast guard, and border security through a department of homeland security appropriations bill while separately debating comprehensive immigration reform. let's stop the ideological partisan politics and do what the american people want us to do.

protect our homeland, our communities, and our families. it's time to be constructive not obstructive. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. for what purpose does the the gentlewoman from maine seek recognition? ms. pingree: to address the house for one minute. revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentlewoman is recognized for one minute. ms. pingree: thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker i think just about every one of us in congress went through security at an airport in our home state this week. and like millions of americans who fly every day, we are protected by 40,000 t.s.a. officers that we depend on to keep us safe, but now we are on the verge of stopping paychecks to all of those officers. and 50,000 border patrol agents, and 40,000 active duty coast guard members who are needed to protect our shores. and in my state and many others this winter they are being called upon to break up the ice and keep our harbors open. and it's not just the people who keep us safe, it's fema. much like much of the country

we suffered one of the hardest winters in maine, but if the department of homeland security is shut down, fema will not be able to process any new disaster relief application from our states. this winter has create add crisis for my state and many local governments. let's not add to that with a manufactured crisis of our own by forming -- forcing the department of homeland security to shut down just because some people don't like president obama's immigration policies. we have the votes right here in the house to pass a bill to fund d.h.s. just let's take a vote on it. i yield back my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from florida seek recognition? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> thank you. mr. speaker, i rise today to honor mary kalish, a dear friend and constituent who last week celebrated their 902nd birthday.

mr. deutch: he has served on the boards of the county planning and zoning commission, his synagogue board. he's shown a strong political acue m.e.p. throughout his career. founding the important south county democratic club and possessing an uncancy ability to spot up-and-coming leaders and direct them into elected offense. a mentor to many, he's been the gatekeeper of the palm beach county political landscape. as an aspiring politician you simply cannot hope to succeed and insight that only murray can provide. it is a privilege to work with so many citizens who work tirelessly every day. thank you murray, for your friendship and to you and your dear late wife, rozz, you have been a molesting to me and i'm pleased to stand here representing our community on the house floor to say thank you for your remarkable achievements in our community that has been strengthened as a

result. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: yields back. the chair lays before the house a communication. the clerk: the honorable the speaker, house of representatives. sir, this is to notify you formally pursuant to rule 8 of the rules of the house of representatives that i have been served with a grand jury subpoena for documents issued by the united states district court for the eastern district of virginia. after consultation with the office of general counsel, i have determined that compliance with the subpoena is consistent with the privileges and rights of the house. signed sincerely, ed cassidy, chief administrative officer. the speaker pro tempore: the chair lays before the house a communication. the clerk: the honorable the speaker, house of representatives. sir pursuant to the permission granted in clause 2-h of rule 2 of the rules of the u.s. house of representatives, the clerk received the following message from the secretary of the senate on february 23, 2015, at

4:44 p.m.. appointments commission on care. senate national security working group for the 114th congress. with best wishes, i am, signed sincerely, karen l. haas. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to clause 12-a of rule 1, the chair declares the house in recess until approximately

a keep track of the members of congress using congressional chronicle on c-span.org. the congressional chronicle page has lots of useful information there, including voting results and statistics about each session of congress. new congress, on c-span, c-span2, c-span radio, and c-span.org. >> secretary of state john kerry is on capitol hill today before the senate foreign relations committee. he's going to explain the state department's budget request for the next fiscal year. c-span3 will have live coverage of that starting at 2:30 eastern. veterans' affairs secretary robert mcdonald has apologized for making false claims about having served in the u.s. military's elite special forces. during a visit with the homeless veterans last month. secretary mcdonald will hold a

briefing with reporters this afternoon to further clarify we believe. start at 3:00 p.m. eastern. we'll have live coverage here on c-span. senate democrats held a briefing today on their agenda. it was led by minority leader harry reid who wore dark glasses. this is about 20 minutes. >> i'm going to say a few words. we are going to hear from our ranking member on the appropriations committee and the ranking member of the subcommittee that deals with homeland security. on appropriations. we are then going to hear from amy klobuchar who has an interesting twist on what's happened over the weekend. we'll hear from michael kelly, who is here representing the fire department in sandy spring,

maryland. he's volunteer fire department. also with us today is fire chief richard bowers, fairfax county fire and rescue. neither mr. kelly or bowers will be speaking but they are here to support what we are doing. with america facing threats from terrorists determined to attack us here at home, it's hard to believe that we are four days away from the department of homeland security shutting down. not being funded. what does that mean? as senator mikulski has spoken so well the last couple weeks about how important the coast guard is we have secret service, we have customs, we have the people who take care of us in our airports, about 220,000 of them. that's what we are talking about. it's not funding something so essential to protect the homeland. we need a real resolution to this problem, not a stopgap measure. last night the majority leader

moved to bring a bill to the floor that does absolutely nothing, nothing to fund homeland security. nothing. we need a real resolution to this problem, not more showboats and window dressing. we have always said that we are more than happy to have an immigration debate here in the senate floor as long as we first fully fund homeland security. this is the bottom line, with terrorists threatening to attack america, we must fund homeland security and fund it now. senator mikulski. >> hi, everybody. i'm so pleased to be here with not only my colleagues in the senate, but to stand with chief michael kelly, one of our really wonderful, brave volunteer firefighters and chiefs from the state of maryland. he has been in sandy springs where they have had to respond to everything from 9/11 to the

incidents in our own community. and that's what we are talking about here today. we need to pass the homeland security fiscal appropriations for 2015. we have the right money and the price to be able to do it with the right policies to be able to do this. and when we talk about defending america and defending our homeland, it comes back to local communities, to our local law enforcement, and to our local fire departments who are on the first scene, any scene, any time 24/7. whether there is an attempted attack on a mall or whether there is a 9-year-old trapped in a burning building, our first responders, our fire department is there. they need the money to have the resources to buy the right equipment to get the right

training to save us. they need us to do our job so they can do their job. they need the resources of the federal government to be able to be there on their side so they can be at your side in your own community when trouble hits you. the funding for the department of homeland security involves very big agencies like secret service, dealing with big issues like cybersecurity. but ultimately all protection is local. local law enforcement local response to crisis. this is why we are advocating this. in the homeland security bill. that would be pending there is $2.5 billion in grants, in fema alone. federal emergency management. they range from $100 million to protect ports, but they also have $680 million for assistance

to fire grants. five grants in local communities that are won competitively. i am really partial to this program because i created it. not only do i like it because the fire departments like it and need it. when president bush came in, i worked with president bush -- president bush came in in 2010, i worked with senator bond. we have been traveling down mutual states, missouri and maryland, and then we have been meeting with national fire chiefs associations. they were saying to us there is so much need for equipment, for a fire truck, for a water truck for breathing apparatus. we can't do this on fish fries,

pancake suppers. these equipment cost a lot of money. can you help us? ken and bash teaming -- barb teaming up with hoyer in the house passed this bill. i announced the first fire grant in maryland on september 10, 2001. we all know where we were the very next day. climbing chairs in the world trade center. others will speak for it. and now those brave people are still out there. they are still trying to do their job. i want them to have $680 million in the federal checkbook that they can are compete for. but homeland security can't put out the grant money unless we pass full funding. they can't do it on the c.r. we are five years into the fiscal year and these fire departments, these states that run ports and others, can't

apply for the money until we put the money in the federal checkbook. we need to put our money where our mouth is. we are always saying we stand on the side of our first responders. we go to all the meetings. now it's time to meet our responsibility and fund this bill. i'm really proud of what has happened in this program. and i'm really proud of what we have done in maryland. but you need to get a picture of this. a new fire truck costs $1 million. i don't care how many crab cakes and oysters you sell in maryland our local volunteer fire departments can't come up with it. the people of kensington, how many games of bingo can you play to come up with $1 million for a fire truck? then there's the breathing apparatus. when they go in they need to wear it. breathing apparatus cost $7,000 each. the protective gear, $2,000. this is where the people want us

to spend their money. and i believe we can do it. in maryland alone we have had over 653 awards in 10 years. we have been able to fund 1,500 sets of breathing apparatus. i think we need to take a breath and really do our job. we need to make sure these men and women have what they need to do their job. we need to do our job. pass the homeland security fiscal 2015 appropriations. let's get on with it. i'd like to now turn to my very able subcommittee ranking member senator jean shaheen, from new hampshire. who will even tell you more. >> thank you, senator mikulski. i am proud to stand here with my colleagues with chief kelly,

and chief bowers who have worked so hard on the frontlines to once again call for fully funding a clean bill for our department of homeland security. it's time for congress to take responsible action before it's too late. as we have all said, we are just days away from shutting down the department of homeland security. and those who are blocking action have a clear choice -- are they going to prioritize politics, or are they going to prioritize national security? in the last week, as i was home in new hampshire, hi a chance to travel the state -- i had a chance to travel the state and to meet with first responders. as senator mikulski said so well it is those firefighters, e.m.t.'s, local law enforcement officials who are on the frontlines when there is an emergency. they understand what it would mean if we don't fund the department of homeland security

or if we pass a continuing resolution. yesterday i hosted a round table in hampton new hampshire. and i heard from a number of our local police chiefs about their concerns if we don't get this funding done. they said a couple things to me that i thought were really important. they stayed you know -- they said, you know, we share these resources. in new hampshire we have a lot of very small communities. we don't have a lot of big cities. so having the ability to have support from the department of homeland security, to share resources, is absolutely critical. we now have interoperable communications between our fire, our safety, our emergency management and our police officials because of the department of homeland security. the other thing they said to me is that we can be proactive with these resources. so we don't have to wait for an attack of some kind. we can get out in front of it. and when i was in our sicked

largest city, they talked to me about an effort where they are doing that. they are using homeland security funds to develop software that can go in police officer's car so that any time there is a potential attack on a school, that police officer, whether it's from the sit where the attack is happening or from some place else in the state and the offer just happens to be going through, the closest officers get notified and they can respond immediately. they have the floor plans of the school, they know exactly where things are happening. this is the kind of emergency planning that we can do because of the department of homeland security. what we are hearing now from folks is that they are willing to shut down that kind of emergency response, that kind of planning, because they want to have an ideological fight about

the president's action on immigration. we can't afford to do that. we have a ghail we should act on. it would avoid a shut down. it fully funds the agency without any extraneous policy riders. it reflects the bipartisan framework that was agreed to last december by the house and senate. republicans and democrats. let's bring it to the floor. let's pass it. let's fully fund our security. keep the department of homeland security open. and then let's debate immigration reform. the american people are counting on us to put safety ahead of partisan politics. >> i want to thank senator reid, senator mikulski, senator shaheen for their leadership. i'm here to say you don't have to go further than your own states to see why this is important. you certainly don't have to go further than the state of minnesota. the people of my state on sunday morning woke up to a video, and it was a video of a terrorist, a

member of al-shabaab, a group very familiar to our state, because we have had 20 indictments from people of our own state involved in going from this terrorist group. thanks to our smalian community we have been able to make those cases and get nine indictments. they woke up to a video of this terrorist telling the world that they should go in and attack the mall of america in minnesota a mall in canada, and mall in london. that's what they woke up to. what happened? our security got beefed up at the mall. we have been ready for these kinds of things. we have local, state, federal security. they beefed up the security. homeland security secretary said people should feel free to go to the mall. that they should feel safe going to the mall. and the f.b.i. issued a statement saying that people should go on with their lives. that happened. but think about the people that work there every day. they stood tall. they went to work. and when i spoke to 500 of them on sunday night and they were asking what in the world's going on in washington, i told them

that we would stand tall for them. these people were pizza delivery men. these people are people that work at the front desks of the hotels attached to the mall much these are people that work at the restaurants every single day. they were gathered together to get hospitality awards for their work. they had o to wake up to that video. now is the time to pass this bill. to fully fund our homeland security. when we look at what happened in paris, the cybersecurity attack in north korea, we know that this is a time when we should be stepping up our security not stepping down our security. so i thank my colleagues for their work. i call on our republican friends to get this bill done, to get these firefighters funded, to fund our security, and not to send a message to al-shabaab that we are just going to shut down homeland security. that cannot be what's coming from the people of america.

>> take a few questions. >> does this mean that democrats are going to be rejecting republicans stand this year -- >> sorry, rejecting what? >> the republican's newest gambit here, even if that does mean eventually you could be voting on a clean c.r.? >> i don't know what you mean. we'll see what they are going to do. right now here's where here. we have said for going on five weeks, that it's extremely important as has been outlined here so well, that we have a fully funded kept of homeland security -- department of homeland security. to fund all these necessary things senator mi cull skirks and senator sha mean, and senator -- mikulski, senator shaheen, and senator klobuchar has talked about. we are saying that we are willing to debate anything they want on immigration as long as we have a bill that the president of the united states signs funding homeland security. that's where we are.

>> are you ruling out a c.r.? >> i think it would be a shame to do a c.r., but i'm not here for hypotheticals. i think what we need to do is make sure that the -- make sure that homeland security is funded. isis is funded. we see that every day on tv. american people care about a lot of things, but at the top of their list they know that our homeland needs to be secure. they can't take out of their mind's eye any bert than can i watching a video of 22 minutes while someone in a cage is burned to death. 21 christians in egypt are behead add few days ago. this is something that i can't imagine why we have fiddled around here for four weeks and not a thing has happened to homeland security. and what senator mcconnell said last night has nothing to do with homeland security. >> a lot of the republicans

after 2013 said -- what does it say to you about the political strategy -- >> it appears to me that the ideologues are still running the republican party. i understand why they are not taking the advice i have given them. they are not taking the advice that the president's given them. they are not taking the advice the fraternal order of police has given them. they are not taking the advice the council of mayors has given them. they are not taking the advice of the "wall street journal." who says that what they are doing is -- it's leading to a disaster for them. i agree with george will. i agree with senator graham. that this is a -- the burden is on the republicans. what they are doing is wrong for the country and they not only will be blamed they should be blamed for what's going on. last question. >> why should --

[inaudible] >> we have said that the department of homeland security should be funded. we are willing to debate. we have said time and time and time again, i say this here today, we are happy to debate immigration. there are a loft issues we would like to debate. it's something that is full of great amendments that we want to offer, but we are not going to do that until the department of homeland security is funded. the republicans should down the government once, and it appears they are willing to shut it down again, which is too bad. >> senate minority leader harry reid earlier today with other leaders of the senate. also getting some reaction from twitter today because of his sunglasses. we also learned a short time ago the senate majority leader, mitch mcconnell, is offering democrats a deal for a clean d.h.s. bill that would fund the department through september 30 of this year. he announced the offer during remarks after scheduled lunches

today. it's unclear when a vote on that proposal could happen. watch the senate live on c-span2. here's a look what senate republicans leaders had to say after their lunches. this is about 10 minutes. >> good afternoon, everyone. as all of you know i have put on the calendar last night what we call the collins bill which would, if enacted, prevents the president's executive actions from last november from going into effect. procedurally a vote on that will occur on friday. it would be cloture on the motion to proceed to that bill. in the meantime, i have indicated to the democratic

leader that i would be happy to have his cooperation to advance the consideration of a clean d.h.s. bill, which would carry us through until september 30. with democratic cooperation on a position they have been advocating for the last two months, we could have that vote very quickly. but in event we will have the vote on the collins bill on friday. with that let me turn to senator cornyn. >> over the last week recess, a very important decision was handed down by the federal court in brownsville texas, ruling in a case brought by 26 states, including texas, claiming that the president's executive action was illegal. the court wrote a lengthy opinion in excess of 100 pages

long and issued a temporary injunction barring implementation of the executive action. as you know, the administration now is seeking a stay of that at the federal district court. if they don't get it there, which they won't, they will then go to the fifth circuit court of appeals in new orleans. but the most important point i think we need to acknowledge is that with this federal court injunction in place, any money that the united states congress appropriates for the department of homeland security will not go to fund the president's illegal executive action. because it's barred by a federal court injunction and subject to a contempt of court finding if that was attempted, that's why the administration has stood down and seeking the stay. but what we need to do this week is the majority leader has said, we need to make sure that the

department of homeland security is funded. we will do that. we are going to have some very important votes. we would have already done it if it hadn't been for the filibusters on four occasions by our democratic colleagues. but in the -- at the end of the day, once we fund the department of homeland security under the current temporary unjunction that's in place, no money can be used to implement the president's illegal executive action. >> i know there is a lot going on this week, but i want to draw your attention to something that's maybe gone a little below the radar. on thursday morning the federal communications commission on a partisan line vote will vote out something that's called an order in support of net neutrality. the thing that concerns me about that is that this would be the first time that the f.c.c. and 332 pages, this wasn't a transparent process, where the

internet is going to be subject to the heavy hand of regulation as opposed to the light touch that's been utilized for so long up until this point. i hope that february 26 doesn't go down in history as the time when the internet moved from something that was driven by free market innovation to something that's driven by bureaucratic decisionmaking. but that's essentially what we are looking at. it is going to be a very partisan, nontrnt way in which the f.c.c. has carried out their business, there is a much better alternate. i have been working with my colleagues -- alternative. i have been working with my colleagues on the house side on a piece of legislation that's only six pages long that prevents many of the things that the s.e.c. said they wanted to present. very explicitly presents those things but doesn't ham the s.e.c. carte blanche authority to do whatever they want in the internet. it can be changed by a future

s.e.c. commission. this is a very bad precedent and one that doesn't have to happen. we have told the press and the president, we told the f.c.c., we told democrats here on capitol hill we want to work with them on a solution to this 245 address -- that addresses the concerns people have. the problems that could be out there but doesn't cede to the f.c.c. unlimited authority for them to do whatever they want and put at great risk and in jeopardy something that has been an incredible success story for this country and the world. that's the internet. >> today with strong support of the american people a bipartisan bill has been delivered to the president, the keystone x.l. pipeline. after six years of delay and obstruction, the president is finally going to have to decide where he stands. does he stand with the american people, the great majority of people, who support this bipartisan bill and the energy and the jobs that come with it? or is he going to stand with

special interests and washington lobbyists. the president likes to talk but it's time for him to listen. he should listen to his state department who said this is safe. it provides jobs as well as energy to the american people. he should listen to american voters and people all across the country who want the jobs and the energy. the president does have his pen and by choosing to veto this piece of legislation, he is choosing washington lobbyists and special interests over the needs and desires of the american people. i will tell you the this piece of republican party will continue in the house and senate to put bipartisan bills on the president's desk that focus on energy, focus on jobs and will help america move forward. >> our friends in the house have been saying it was up to the

senate, and they're right. senate democrats have been preventing us from going forward on the d.h.s. bill. my hope is that the senate will act. i don't know what the house will do. but i do think we have a responsibility to act here. we have a solution to the problem. that deals with both things. number one, giving senators an opportunity to express their disapproval of what the president did in november and some democrats, as you know, have already announced they agreed with me on that. and the other gives senate democrats an opportunity to have what they have been saying for two months they wanted which was to fund the department of homeland security through the end of the year. i don't know what's not to like about this. this is an approach that respects both points of view and gives senators an opportunity to go on record on both. both funding the department of

homeland security and expressing their opposition to what the president did last november. that would depend on some level of cooperation from the democrats in going forward to pass what they have said for two months they wanted to pass. you might ask them whether they intend to prevent us from achieving passage. very quickly. and before friday. of a bill they have been saying that they wanted for the last two months. [inaudible]

>> i'm not sure what your question s i think the issue before us is this. do you want to fund the department of homeland security through the end of the fiscal year so we are fully up and running and capable of dealing with all the threat that we have around the world including those against us here at home? and would you also like to express your disagreement with the president's overreach last november? this gives us an opportunity to do both. it gives senators an opportunity who said they are in favor of funding the homeland security bill to fund it. and it gives senators who have said they object to what the president did last november the opportunity to express their objection. and as i said earlier, i know there are at least a number of democrats who said publicly since i put the bill on the calendar last night that they agree with me. they appreciate the opportunity to go on record.

and will have that opportunity on friday. thanks. >> i had a nice pleasant meeting with senator mcconnell this morning. he has announced to his caucus that he is willing to have an up or down vote on d.h.s. full funding. and some kind of a vote on collins. the problem is everybody, i'm waiting to hear from the speaker. we have to make sure that people understand the bicameral nature of this congress we serve in. so to have senator mcconnell just pass the ball over to the

house isn't going to do the trick. i'm waiting to hear from the speaker. he's indicated to me through his staff that he'll be in touch sometime soon. and until that time comes, i think we are where we were. that is we are willing to debate anything they want dealing with immigration after we fund homeland security. this is extremely important. we talked about it today on many different occasions. we need to protect our homeland. we have people being beheaded. people being stacked in cages. one of them has been burned in a wage. we have the direct threat to our malls around america. and we have to be as prepared for these bad people as isis is prepared and these other terrorist groups to do harm to us. senator durbin. >> it's hard to believe we are

talking about another government shut down. think about that. in less than four days the prospects of shutting down the one agency that's supposed to keep america safe. how did this new republican majority reach this point? frankly, they forgot the obvious. first, defend america. protect america. pass the homeland security bill. second, it's within their power to call anything they wish for us to consider next. if it's immigration, so be it. but our first responsibility is to protect this country and to protect it against the threat of terrorism. the department of homeland security can do that. only if it's fully funded. why they decided to choose this department as the whipping boy when it came to this whole immigration debate is beyond my. but now we know how dangerous this strategy is to the security of this country. if we are going to avoid a government shutdown on the department of homeland security we need a commitment from speaker boehner that we have a

bipartisan, bicameral approach to end this deadlock. >> our position stays the same. we are happy to debate any immigration bill that senator mcconnell wants when there is full funding of homeland security. as any fourth grader in his civics class can tell you, it takes two houses to fully fund departments, as well as the president's signature. so where's the house? where's speaker boehner? is he willing to fully fund homeland security? or will he stick to a position oh, no, we are going to hold homeland security hostage unless we get our way on immigration? so now all eyes are on speaker boehner. will he fully fund homeland security? in a separate bill? send it to the president for signature and both houses can debate immigration as long as a majority in each house wants to? or is he going to go back to his old way and say, i'll do this, that, or the other thing, but i won't fully fund homeland

security. without speaker boehner saying that he will fully fund homeland security senator mcconnell's offer does not get the department funded. and we need the department funded. we don't need a bill. we need money to go to our police, our firefighters, and the people protecting us. especially during these times when security is at risk. >> a year and a half ago the republicans shut the government down. the entire government down because they were holding the funding bills hostage to a political issue. they found out how that worked for them, not well. we need to do today what we did last time, fund the government. only this time it is a critical agency that protects every single america that they are holding hostage to a political issue. we are willing to debate political issues but we are not going to hold funding bills hostage to those issues like we didn't last time or this time or

in the future. the issue is very simple. fully fund the department of homeland security. that's up to speaker banetory make sure that he does just what he did a year and a half ago, fund department of homeland security. [inaudible] >> let's be very clear. we want to make sure as we have -- there is a consent agreement on the floor, they rejected it. the president sign a bill we come back and start debating immigration in 10 minutes if you want. the answer to your question is yes. if he says will he agree to full funding, we'll be happy to debate anything he wants to with immigration. [inaudible]

>> unless the speaker's in on the propose arblings of course we have to make sure we get bail to the president. not that we send a hot potato to boehner. that doesn't do the trick. we are being very hypothetical here. we have said for four weeks now we must fund homeland security. we can't do it alone. it's a bicameral legislature. unless boehner's in on the deal it won't happen. if speaker boehner says that, i'll take his word for it. >> is your bandage gone for good now? is this a sign you're getting better?

>> we are working on my beauty here. i got these on. tomorrow we are going to try some other things. i can see out of my right eye. not very well. and it hasn't healed. i have to be very patient patient. i appreciate your interest. best i can do. [inaudible] >> you're making things up. what the judge in texas has said the administrative procedures act was not passed. never, ever said that anything that the president did was unconstitutional. [inaudible] >> i'm sorry, what? i don't know what's popular. i know what's the right thing to do in my mind. the right thing to do is to make

sure that we don't run up another -- increase the debt by $7.5 billion. we don't want to do that. we want to continue moving forward and improving the economy of this country. we are going to do a lot of he said they say, who says. when speaker boehner wants to talk to me, i'll talk to him. and with his permission, i'll share his conversation with everybody here. until then, we are where we are. we need homeland security fully funded. remember, we are a matter of hours away from that -- being totally shut down. unless there is agreement, there is no way we can get that done by saturday at noon. there is no way. procedurally there is no way it can get done unless there is an agreement to get it done. we are waiting to hear from the

speaker to make sure that the government security protecting our homeland is funded. period. >> senate democrat leaders this afternoon led by minority leader harry reid. along with the debate over the stalemate of spending for homeland security, the minority leader's sunglasses got a lot of reaction on twitter today. steve washington bureau tcheef of the las vegas review journal sent this out. got to say, this makes reid look pretty slick. senator reid said he injured his eye when comper a equipment broke in his home over the holidays. the keystone x.l. pipeline bill has been sent to the white house for signature. president obama has repeatedly said will he veto the bill. the white house sent out this tweet this afternoon confirming the expected. white house said, keystone x.l. beato coming today. this will be the third veto of the obama presidentcy. this afternoon, veterans'

affairs secretary robert mcdonald will hold a briefing with reporters. we are moments away from that. he has apologized for making false claims about having served in the u.s. military's elite special operations forces, an assertion he made cure during a viss wit homeless veterans last month. the meeting set for 3:00 p.m. eastern. we'll have live coverage here. north carolina republican congressman walter jones was on c-span this morning to discuss the house agenda. he touched on the authorization of military force requested by president obama to fight isis. and the senate stalemate over homeland security funding which runs out on friday. he also says that will he not attend when israeli prime minister benjamin netanyahu addresses congress next week. we'll show you as much of this as we can before we bring you remarks i by the v.a. secretary. >> washington journal continues. host: we are joined by a familiar face on the c-span networks, congressman walter jones. you have been asking for a full debate on the war powers

resolution the fight against isis. now that we are starting the hearings this week, including in your committee, the armed service committee, are you confident we will get the full debate here? guest: i hope so, john. jim mcgovern and members of the different parties about 18, including john boehner, join me in getting to a full and open debate meaning the amendment process and not having a close process. in 2002, when we debated the iraq a ums, we only had two amendments -- the iraq aumf, we only debated to amendments. this is important and we should have an open process. in addition, mr. mcgovern and i had written a few weeks ago to mr. boehner also to ask him

let's have a full three-day debate eight hours a day, or six hours a day, on this issue. it's too important to the security of our country and it's too important that we are spending absolutely billions of dollars with little accountability. host: and we have the letter that you and mr. mcgovern worked on together, noting in that letter that was and over $1.5 trillion and lost over 6800 brave men and women in the wars in iraq and afghanistan. you have called the two dozen to vote for the aumf that you made one of the worst mistakes in congress. is there something new you would look for in the vote against isis? guest: john, obviously that was a different administration and a different time. i sincerely believe that the previous administration had

manipulated the intelligence to justify an unnecessary war. so i'm very cautious, and again i'll use the were dubious. -- the word dubious. i know what the president sent to us was very vague and he probably did that in -- intentionally, because the committee on jurisdiction will start debating the a ums --aumf before it gets to the floor. six years ago, i had sent to the commandant of the marine corps and i asked him what he advised because of my limited knowledge on military issues. he said he would. he asked me not to use his name publicly, because active-duty generals do not care what retired general thing, but i disagree. i see no end to this resolution talking about the aumf.

host: the one that just came down. guest: right. this is one of the basic tenants of an effective strategy that determines success. and it is very restricted in some areas, and open-ended and others. congress needs to be wary. i would like to see more specificity on what is being requested. and this is the close. at the end of the day, we are going to spend a good deal of money on something that is unclear in both mission, measures of effectiveness, in state and exit strategy. haven't we been down this road before? i appreciate this general for his leadership. he is retired, obviously, but this is how i feel as well. we spent over 1.7 joined dollars -- $1.7 trillion in iraq and afghanistan. our nation is in debt. do i want to eliminate isil?

absolutely, but we have to have the benchmarks for s >> we'll get to calls in just a second. i want to ask you, is the debate that you want to have, a debate on the empty's war powers, is that getting lost amid the daily youtube videos of atrocities by isis and are members of congress and congress focusing on the right issues here? guest: i think so and i would like to thank the king of jordan and thank the president of egypt for taking the lead to attack isis after they've done so much damage to the pilot in jordan and also the coptic

christians. this is what needs to happen. the middle east countries, they're muslim countries. they need to take the lead. let america support and back them but not america continue to send our young men and women on the ground. so i hope this will be as we asked speaker boehner an open debate. it is our responsibility based on the constitution to make these decisions, to commit our young men and women to war. we need to have a full debate on this issue. host: let's get to calls. janet is up first. poland maine. line for independents. you're on with congressman walter jones. >> thank you very much. kevin: walter jones, -- caller: walter jones, i wanted to call you the last time you were on c-span. then i tried to email you but i know you can't seven emails from somebody -- accept emails from somebody out of state. what i wanted to tell you was, do you remember the greek story

about the guy who carried a way of looking for an honest man? and then it was said that if he found an honest man, he wouldn't need a lantern? i thought that described you. you were so honest. i was stunned. i couldn't find enough people to say that to. [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2015] >> thank you. good afternoon and thank you for coming. i'm bob mcdonald. as you know, when i was in los angeles, engaging in a homeless man to determine his veteran status i asked the man where he'd served in the military. he responded that he had served in special forces and in an attempt to connect with that veteran, to make him feel

comfortable, i incorrectly stated that i too had been a special forces. that was wrong and i have no excuse. i have great respect for those who have served our nation in special forces. they and all veterans deserve a department of veterans affairs that provides them the care and benefits that they have earned. we at v.a. are working hard to restore trust and again i apologize to those who may have been offended by my misstatement. we remain very focused on continuing our progress to better serve veterans. i'd be glad to take your questions at this time. >> mr. secretary, -- [inaudible] >> hi, dave. >> have you had time to think a little more deeply about what caused you to burst out like that and what was your motivation? >> as i said, my biggest

motivation was to connect with the veteran. as all of you know in my first national press conference, i gave out my cell phone number and many of you have been kind enough to publish it and repeat it and i get calls from veterans every single day. my whole purpose in this job is to try to connect with veterans and to better serve veterans. that's what i was trying to do. >> a lot of people are wondering, mr. secretary with your experience, your service to the military then and now how could you possibly say such a thing? >> i made a mistake. i apologize for it. i was in the army, i went to west point. i was an army airborne ranger. went to jungle warfare school in panama, desert warfare school. when i was in the 82nd airborne division we were the rapid deployment force for the u.s. military.

>> did you even realize that you had made that mistake as you call it? and did you ever think to correct it? >> i was talking to a homeless veteran. i was concerned about getting that homeless veteran, if they were a veteran, the kinds of cares and services that they needed. what i said was not on my mind at the time. i was trying to connect with him and we had people with us that could help get them into a home if they were a homeless veteran. >> [inaudible] special forces say they feel a bit insulted, even with your service even with your ranger -- [inaudible] >> i apologize to them. >> mr. secretary do you think -- >> suzanne. >> you say -- [inaudible]

>> what you try to do when you connect with someone is try to find common ground. and with veterans, my common ground is my veteran experience. so what i was trying to do is find a way to connect with that veteran. and as i said, i made a misstatement. i apologize for that. i have no excuse for it. but if you look at my 61 years, you'll never find anywhere in any of my biographies that i've claimed to be a part of special forces. i've never claimed that. it was a misstatement. it was a mistake. >> did anyone tell you that you had spoken -- [inaudible] >> the question was, did anyone around me tell me i had misspoken. the answer is no. >> you also recently stated that 60 people had been fired from the department based on misconduct around the scandal allegations before you were secretary. now about the misstatement, are you concerned that these are going to -- [inaudible] >> for my 61 years, integrity

has been one of the foundations of my character. it's the reason i was a boy scott, the reason i went to west point the reason i went in the infantry at the 82nd airborne division, i reason i joined the procter and gamble company and the reason i'm here. the reason i want to be here is to care for veterans. so integrity, character is part of who i am. and i will do better to make sure that i don't make mistakes like i did in los angeles. >> right now capitol hill lawmakers are expecting your apology. do you feel like you've used your one free pass you have -- [inaudible] >> trust is something that is gained every single day, one veteran at a time. when i get these phone calls from these veterans or text messages they tell me the problem they have, i go away and work on it with a team of people that i have and if i can solve that problem i've earned one bit of trust. now, i may give up a bit of trust the next day, but my job is to work for these veterans

every single day, 24 hours a day, seven days a week, and get them the benefits that they've earned. i served with them. >> did you ever consider resignation? >> i want to serve veterans. i'm here to try to prove that we can make v.a. work and that the veterans who we serve can get all the benefits that they've earned. that's what we're working for and we're making progress. wait times are down 18%. backlog is down, the claim backlog is down about 60%. homelessness is down 33%. great progress made during general shinseki's time. we're trying to keep that going. i can't hear. >> [inaudible] -- of the number of people who have been fired, you said 900 people were fired. 60 were correctly related to the wait scandal when in fact

temperatures a much smaller number there. might be a pat herb of credibility -- pattern of credibility. >> chairman miller and meet frequently. we talk on the phone frequently. we have a great relationship. we work together to help solve veterans issues. i think what you saw in our last committee hearing was tremendous unanimity from all the members of congress and the v.a. around what we need to do. we're here to serve veterans. everybody wants that. nobody can dispute that. thank you very much for your questions. thank you. >> what were you trying to say? [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2015] >> v.a. secretary robert mcdonald apologizing again and responding to criticism he's been receiving over a claim made to homeless veterans last month in los angeles that he served as a special forces operator. that claim has been found invalid. mcdonald was approved lead the v.a. to help fix credibility problems and address long waiting times for treatment for veterans. another item we're watching today, the congressionally approved keystone x.l. pipeline bill has been sent to the white house.

president obama's repeatedly said he won't sign this bill and intends to veto it. the white house sent out this tweet this afternoon confirming what the president just said. the white house says -- again this would be the third veto of the obama presidency. we also learned a short time ago senate majority leader mitch mcconnell has offered democrats a deal for a clean d.h.s. bill that would fund the department through september 30 of this year. he announced the offer earlier today during remarks after scheduled lunchings. it's unclear when a vote on that proposal could happen. the u.s. house will be back for elective work at 4:00 p.m. eastern today. three bills on the agenda. including one adding computer science to stem education. also consolidating f.c.c. reporting requirements and requiring an e.p.a. plan for dealing with algal toxins in drinking water. later this week we expect action on education bills and a possible revised homeland security spending bill. live coverage of the house when members gavel in at 4:00 p.m.

eastern here on c-span. a member of congress on the house homeland security committee regarding the debate over the department's spending that runs out at the end of this week. we'll show you that until the house returns at 4:00 p.m. "washington journal" continues. host: we are joined now by another familiar face to c-span networks. august woman sheila jackson lee. congresswoman, the texas judges order on the executive action. how do you see the judicial side of this playing out before we get to the legislative side? guest: obviously i am a fan of the constitutional framework which the president used to determine which cases needed to prosecute under immigration law. i think his effort under the

executive action was legitimate. however, many states, republican governors, in particular, have decided, along with our friends in congress, that they will not cede to the president authority. that is what it is. in this instance, they were shopping. i think your listeners need to know that lawyers can look for a course that will be friendly. this court has spoken out against the practices of the administrations border security plan. probably without noting knowing tha details of the plan. what he said is it was a question of process. host: administrative procedure. guest: i beg to differ somewhat with his perspective. there have been many executive actions.

many executive orders where that has not been the case. this state, then, was to flesh out these issues. now, the justice department is asking the judge to stay his order. which can be asked. it may come out today or tomorrow whether he does so. and they will have their arguments as to the legitimacy of the executive action. then, the justice department has been asked to immediately appeal to the fifth circuit. that is a conservative circuit. host: of former municipal court judge for the city of houston. this day that the federal judge in texas issued, did he overstepped, should it just have been for the texas cases or did he have the authority to talk about all these other states across the country? guest: i think it is a very good point. my concern is that it was brought in his determination. those were parties to the suit.

therefore, his action could impact and could hold for parties of the soup. the argument that he cited was the argument that the state of texas made -- i think the public should know that all of the is being paid by the individuals who will be seeking a drivers license. you do not get a drivers license for free. for the service that you render through the state, you are then paid by the people seeking that jarvis license. it is well noted that texas under this executive action will be rallies of money. the other thing is that if that were the case, he limited his decision to the impact on texas. yes, it is expanded to all the other states. the justice department did say when he just limit his order to the state of texas. that would be a fair request. i think it would be in order that the judge should render. host: that is the judicial side

of this. let's talk about what is happening this week over the fight over the presence executive action and the issue of funding the department of homeland security. what is the endgame in your mind? guest: let me add that the endgame, or in that, for some a families in my district, in texas, and across the nation. first of all, we have hurting families. those who have began to line out and prepared to pay fees. we are making sure that there is not fraud. the government has been working very hard to that this office. what has happened is last night, the senate failed again to pass the dhs bill that the republicans put forward, which is to defund dhs and eliminate the presence executive action. you could almost say that that bill is looped because there is

a core proceeding as we speak and the court has rendered a temporary judgment, if you will. now, rightly so, the majority leader, which i think should have been done weeks ago in the climate that we are in, with heightened action of isil, this is a full is discussion. last night the senate, rightly so, the democrats, held at and dropped. the bill was not successful to have dhs funding tied to the elimination of the executive order -- action. rightly so. now, majority mcconnell is offering a compromise, a separate upper down vote on eliminating the executive action and finding the $40 million that is needing to keep parts of the faa functioning, ice officers that is so important to the internal process of those who

have come to the country illegally. how so for this to say the administratio is not doing its job, and then you want to defund it. border security officers for the northern and southern border, who are again on the front lines. those of us who live in texas have visited the border a number of times but also the northern border, a porous border, if you will. it is interesting that all the focus is on the southern border. if all the workers, who are deemed essential, have to come to work without being paid -- and i know because of their patriotism, i see their work every day, i thank them every day for their work, they will be there. but how full is it is for the legislator, which is a partner in the executive for ensuring our security of this nation, would block these born sermons

-- these foreign servants. executives guiding, and steering, if you will, the works of those on the front lines. i've hoping, i would like to vote today. i would like to vote tomorrow to fund the department of homeland security the $40 million that is a bipartisan, legislative initiative that came through the congress and the appropriations committee. why not just passive tomorrow? if i'm too early for tonight why do we present tomorrow so that this nation can be protected. host: if you want to talk to congresswoman sheila jackson lee about these issue, she is with the for the next 40 minutes or so. phone numbers. republicans can call (202) 748-8001. democrats, (202) 748-8000. independence, (202) 745-8002. if you are outside the united states, (202) 748-0003.

derek is up first calling from here in washington dc. he is on our line for independents. thencaller: i do live in d.c. but the close as i get to any congressperson is right here on c-span. thank you for taking my call. my big thing is that we really need to pass some type of immigration bill, but also secure the border. a couple of years ago when the senate passed the immigration bill, the house, they would not consider it at all. some of the biggest people there were saying let's secure the border. why don't we just get that out of the way, particularly the southern border, just because that is where a lot of people are crossing. secure the border so that

right-wingers do not have the argument anymore. secure the burdenorder. let's have an immigration bill. it is really difficult. i'm a property manager, and i see a lot of people here without papers and all they want to do is work. it's not right how we operate. what exactly do we show other countries. we have not gotten anything done in eight years, basically. nothing. guest: first of all, i greet agree with you 100% thank you for your astuteness. i just what is that we have worked really hard with present obama and passing the affordable care act and this issue of terrorism, returning soldiers. i want the caller to know that we have tried to work in a bipartisan manner. he is right. we past the border security

building he would have been proud of. i remember a because we worked on it in a bipartisan fashion. many of my colleagues added amendments and changes. it would have major operational control of the southern border with enhanced resources for our border patrol agent. frankly, are republican leadership would not allow it to come on the floor of the house. i am committed to border security. he is absolutely right. i think we can come together on a border security bill. a bill that was just as recently, that was not bipartisan, it was voted solely out by republicans. that bill has been viewed as too liberal and not being allowed for an upper down vote on the floor. i would argue that the gym and is obsolete right.

of course, they are deporting 5000 persons, which is the argument of our friends in the congress who are not supporting the idea of border security legislation and comprehensive immigration. apprehension of these people would cost 5.4 billion. the detention of them 10 billion. transportation 5.4 billion. the total would be $10,000 per person. these people are investing in our country. they have families. as the dominant indicated, they are trying to work. host: we will go to judy from florida. caller: good morning. i have a question. my question is why do we have to put those bills together?

homeland security and immigration. why can we not separate them? vote on them separately. we need an immigration bill, absolutely. we have mothers that will be set back and children will be left here. it would be a burden on our country. the second one is we need homeland security. our country is very important. we have families, children here. we do not want the war here. we need to fight isis separately, and we also need to fight to do something about immigration. not to blackmail, hold one against the other, if we do not get one, we do not get the other. host: judy, it seems like the senate is moving in the direction of having these two separate vote. one on the present executive order on immigration, and the other on the department of homeland security funding. congressman, -- commerce woman i will let you respond. guest: you are right. she has a great idea, and we can all agree to that which is a

separate vote. i think what is important is that we reach the house of representatives speaker boehner to except the compromise that the majority leader is now moving forward, or attempting to move forward on a separate vote. she is so right. there are mothers that would be separated from their children. $50 billion to the port -- deport these 5 million. people probably know that this president has already deported more people than past presidents already. in this in since, he is trying to show -- instance, he is trying to show america's heart and commipassion. host: does the president have the will of the american people behind him? jake sanders brings up on twitter, the president exceeding his authority. here is a post from the washington post that came out

earlier this week. the question was -- among all adults, 47% said yes. guest: they have demonized it, the honest with you. we know that president eisenhower, clinton, reagan, among others have used executive action. particular reagan, in the instance of immigration reform, when he thought that congress had not gone far enough. i think if we explain to the american people that once these executive actions are given a chance to be an place, they will

see the orderliness of what we are trying to accomplish. my perspective is -- is it better to not know who is in this country or to know who is in this country? what we are trying to do is have regular order under the effect of action. that is to give the families agency to deport criminals and drug dealers, but not families. felons over family. when you hear the painful story of mothers who are working, but still hiding, who want simply to be old to take their children to school, to watch a school play without the fear of deportation that is all we are doing. i think the american people will agree that that is a good approach. host: in our last segment, congressman jones brought up the 22 times that president obama said he could not create his own immigration law by issuing

executive action. one of those was on march 20 8 esident said, the notion that i could send immigration through executive action, that is not the case. how do you explain those statements? guest: the president indicated that he could not massively suspend deportation. he is not. every day, persons are being deported. the executive action does not in any way stop deportation. what they do is defined and discern who may be eligible under the discretion that agencies have. the determination is whether or not you fit an extensive criteria. you may have a citizen child, or a green card child. that means the child would have the ability to make their parent

eligible. it does that mean the pair will ultimately be approved. it means that they are eligible. the president was absolutely right. what his team did was constitutionally that whether the writing of his executive action fit within his basic authority. i believe that they did a thorough job. his executive actions are streamlined, narrow, detailed as to specific elements of eligibility. and allowing that to go forward under a well-known term of the nation's prosecutors, who are very much aware of utilizing it, prospect inventory -- host: bruises up next. bruce, good morning. caller: good morning. thank you miss jackson for

fighting for the immigration bill. i work with these people out there. they are very hard workers. you are right there are families that have feared to come out because of this. the president is doing the right thing by doing this. he is not breaking the constitutional law on doing this. the other president in the same thing. a lot of them signed declarations -- what i was trying to say is executive orders. you know. it is wrong what they are doing against the law. the president has begged them before all this. he kept telling them, come on let's do this immigration law. together. they kept playing with him. do you agree with that? guest: first of all, it is good

to hear a good friend from texas. host: is he in your district? guest: pioneer that area. i'm in houston. it is always good to hear from a texan. let me offer my sympathy to the family of one of our firefighters who lost his life over the last few days. a great leader and hero to our community. i know that whenever wheatle -- whenever we lose a first responder of his caliber, not only does the community mourn, the state more and, the nation mourns. the collar is absolutely right. first of all, the executive action would generate millions of dollars for the economy. this is not a free ride. this is not a process that will be easy. there will be a number of checks and vetting on the individuals that apply. host: is economic impact just in

the fees that these. the pay in registering, or are you talking about economic impacts in taxes? guest: taxes, the already paying sales tax. there will be some determination about other taxes, if you will, determination on investing in social security, and other aspects of what consumers do when they spend money. i also think it is important when people are listening and saying that these people might be taking their job. many of them are already employed. in addition to that, we, as a congress, are beginning, and should be beginning to looking at further job creation through science, engineering, math. the president's announcement about extending our community college degree to every american who desires to have it. job creation through a number of

industries, increasing manufacturing, increasing production in the auto industry. we are mindful that we need to create jobs for a myriad of americans, including veterans returning, to students graduating to the unemployed. i don't want anyone to think that we are unconcerned. the investment -- including a pathway, as ecologist at -- as the college is said, encouraging them to come out of the shadows. it helps to turn the economy. host: let's go to new york. ellen is waiting. alan, you are on with congresswoman sheila jackson lee. caller: good morning, congress wanted. the reason we are in such bad shape with immigration is because the law that was passed in the 1986.

we were promised a lot of things. we were lied to at the time. a lot of what was promised never came through. we were promised that the border would be secure. that never happened. we were promised that an employee of, who employed illegal aliens, would be fine. and maybe even jailed. we were promised that they would know who they would have -- they would have a situation where they would know who was illegal. we did not get e-verify until four years after that. at that time, it was made voluntary. you people in congress are not worthy of my trust anymore. i have been lied to to many times. you are not trustworthy. guest: i'm disappointed in her disappointment. we own the american people the

truth. as well, the implementation of what we promise. i know the 1986 legislation was not as sure as it should've been. i have served on the immigration subcommittee and we have seen the results of that law. we have attempted, since that time, to make efforts. unfortunate, we've not been able to do so in a bipartisan manner. what i would say to the caller is that no one disagrees that there must be strong border security. we need to find a bible -- a bipartisan initiative. i indicated that a house resolution was ready to go to the floor last congress. it is ready to go to the floor again and be voted on by the house and the senate in a bipartisan manner. we need to have a prospect of technology where employees can have the technology to be able to determine who is eligible to

work and who is not. we are working on that, to coordinate between the employer and the system. the system is not as perfect as it should be. to the caller, what i think should -- she should be calling on is for congress to work in a bipartisan manner. more than two decades plus after 19 six, we have the technology to do immigration reform correctly, and we have the ability to do border security. we need to have the "will you go i have the will. host: are you can't lay of that we would not be back in a similar situation 25 years down the road? guest: what we have now that we did not have in 1986, and tragically, the department of homeland security came out of 9/11, is a copper heads of

department that now has all of the elements under one roof to provide oversight to our administration to make sure works for the american people. another aspect of what we have is increasingly improved technology. not where it needs to be, but it is an improved and the sd check the balances are much more viable. i would say to the american people, yes, we have the ability to do what they are asking too. i would say to my colleagues, it is important that we do it together, in a bipartisan matter. host: sheila jackson lee, i guess. on the judiciary committee, she serves on the immigration subcommittee and has been working on these issues for a long time. her 11th term in congress. joining us for the next 20 minutes or so. james is joining us from apple valley california. james, good morning. caller: good morning to you. host: go ahead with your

question or comment, james, we can hear you. caller: congress lady, i have been watching often on for years. every time she comes on, she is talking about immigration. i would guarantee that the majority of her constituents are african-americans, otherwise she would not be eating there. that black caucus of their in washington is not worth the salt on the earth. we need to get rid of all of them. host: do you want to respond? guest: i do. i want to wish him a wonderful morning. i hope that he will take either to the internet or choose to read some books because the congressionaa steadfast legislating entity that has served this nation very well. it has served this nation as democrats, who have been strong advocates of immigration reform who have likewise been strong

advocates of increased opportunity for education, increased opportunity for income -- closing the gap of wealth and inequality. certainly, the congressional black caucus has been a major leader in civil rights reformation, if you will. including, the voting rights act , although there were a few members in 1965, and the successes of re-authorization the fight that we are waging now to fight against voter id laws and for the authorization of the voting rights. i served now as ranking member on the crime, terrorism, and homeland security committee. with a great commitment to criminal justice reform, an issue that all of america cares about. all lives matter. as well, over the years, as a member of that committee, i have worked on issues as far ranging

from copyright and patent law to immigration reform to issues dealing with early release for the federal system. memories of the congressional black caucus and have spread their talents on the energy and commerce committee, the judiciary we have leadership roles and committees across the congress and we have been effective advocate for the rights of all people and african-americans through presidents as long as we can remember from the time that the congress -- congress -- caucus was founded. i encouraged him to read up and seek to those who we have actually intervened and change their lives. host: congressman butterfield from north carolina. have you led that organization? guest: our chairperson as have

others are great leaders on issues of concern to the nation of african-americans. in particular, we had a powerful meeting with the president to speak about crucial issues like education, the issues dealing with ferguson, on the issues dealing with wealth inequality. we are a working caucus and we work with the democratic caucus and we work with republicans for the betterment of this nation. host: let us go to dennis and tennessee. good morning. caller: good morning. here is what i have a problem with. it is two things. if the president of the united states is supposed to be a commander-in-chief, why did he secure that border -- why did you not secure that order?

isn't his response ability to secure the borders? he did not know how many people were coming over here. his responsibility is to secure the border. then, if they want to deal with immigration, they should deal with it. the other thing i have a problem with is we have a 11,000 people here. now, the president is wanting to say that there are too many to transport over. yet, there wanting to send 4000 people from another country or they can send 4000 of them back over here knowing that we have 11,000 immigrants already here. host: i think dennis was talking about 11 million -- 11 million being the estimate of undocumented aliens and united states. the question of securing the borders first before dealing with the immigration question. do you want to take that on? guest: i do not think there is

one member of congress who disagrees with securing the border. it is a very constructive pathway. a major reformation of the immigration system is in the senate. and hill was passed out with republicans and democrats conservative to and it was writing to go last year -- a bill was passed out with republicans and democrats and it was ready to go last year. chairman maccoll and myself as the ranking members of the subcommittee and the last congress as the chairperson of that committee passed a bipartisan border security bill. what the caller is saying -- i want to offer a correction. this president has reported more persons -- deported more persons. i think he might be talking about the surge of children.

this expedition is a clear excavation. i was down at the border. i watched children's children get off the buses. they were four years old and five years old. they were in diapers. they were documented, fleeing persecution from their respective central american countries. documented murders and killings in the street. some of their family members have been murdered. mothers who were fearful that their children would be captured by gangs. almost as horrible of a situation as going on with isil and taking children into children's camps and training them on the horrors of terrorism. that was the circumstance where the administration ways a major effort to educate in those countries that this was not a place to come. these children are being processed of those who are being eligible to stay because their

family members are here and staying. this is a country that abides by laws. it is also a country that has compassion. those who cannot stay have been sent back. and large numbers have been set back. i would say that the president has been an effective leader in securing the border. we must have an effective partner in the united states congress. i think it is important that my friend on the republican side of the aisle work with us as the legislative body of this nation to deal -- do what the american people have asked -- to secure the border and in -- in an intelligent, staff manner and they move on to copperheads of immigration reform. i think we can do all things together. we can explain to the people passed reform. democrats are ready. leader pelosi is ready.

we are working with the leadership of the house. mitch mcconnell has now offered a compromise, if you will, to pass the funding of dhs. again, i'm calling right now today that we've boat on that legislation, if not tonight tomorrow morning. host: houston, texas is up next. hattie is calling on our line for democrats. you are on sheila jackson lee -- with sheila jackson lee. caller: i'm so glad that i've got on with sheila jackson lee. she is in my district. i agree with her on immigration has nobody -- because nobody should be discriminated against. i've got friends with that. they work and they want to pay taxes. they want to be legal. the republicans -- they have got to realize that we have more tax

money and everything. if they are working and they are saving money so they will not have to pay these taxes, it is like a personal check to them. they will not even have to pay that tax and do cheap labor. this is not right. another comment that i have with ms. leahy -- miss sheila jackson lee here is that my husband is a veteran. he has not been treated equally at the va hospital and everything. this man from california -- that is what he is saying. sometimes, you do not step up. some of them are not doing what they are supposed to do. host: congresswoman. guest: i think here -- i think her so much for her comment. what a generous spirit that if

we can find an eligibility process or immigrants that they can come at the shadows and be eligible for being paid fair wages and paying their fair share of taxes. they will be contributing to the community. i want to say to her personally and i hope she will reach out to my office, that we want no veteran turned away from service in the veterans affairs department or the veterans hospitals. i was the first member of congress that went on the ground of the veterans hospital in houston to challenge and ask about service there and have continued over the years to work on issues in our veterans community. i would ask that she reach out to our office and to determine how we can be of help to her husband and any other ventures -- veteran. our obligation and duty has never ended with a whether it --

a veteran who has put on that uniform to serve for our nation. we are completely honored by their service and obligated to them for the services they have rented to this nation. host: we have been talking about president obama during the segment. you had a tweet over the weekend that caught my attention. i want to ask you about it. it is in the wake of rudy giuliani's comments about the president and that he does not love america. your tweet -- "if rudy giuliani doubts the president love of the usa and willingness to protect americans, he just site -- should seek a second opinion from osama bin laden." would you like to go further? guest: i viewed him in the horrors of 9/11 as america's mayor. he led that city and showed himself as a great american. i have great disappointment in his assessment and willingness

to determine a man or woman's heart. how does he know the president's heart, commit the -- commitment and passion? i think it lowers his own status. i was very disappointed. my suggestion there was that this president as i've watched them loves his country and less his family. he has evidenced it by the dogged way that under his command of the united states military move forward to find osama bin laden and bring him to justice. his many visits to the many men and women in the united states military, overseas in iraq and afghanistan, are his outpouring of sympathy to the victims of floods and hurricanes and the horrible explosion in waco texas. those citizens took to the

president as he came to comfort them. and his commitment to being the president and bringing the affordable care act or health care to all of america. the statistics have shown that this is the lowest number of uninsured americans in the history of this nation. by next year, more americans will become in short under the affordable -- insured under the affordable care act. that is what he has tried to do in refining his words -- fully constructed words, a fortunate words -- unfortunate words, untimely words in a time when a nation should be joined in a fight against a terrific -- a horrific terrorist group that continues to snatch people christians, and others, that threatens the world. this is a time where we need to be united. it is not a time to challenge the president's patriotism. for me, i was hurt and many of

my constituents were hurt. it is something that we have not seen before. we only ask mayor giuliani to find it in his heart to apologize. and to find it in his heart to speak about unity and for us to come together. i still hold him as america's mayor for his stunning and dedicated service to the most trying times that not only new york has gone through, but this nation. host: we just have a few minutes left with congresswoman sheila jackson lee of texas. auburn, alabama. mo, you are on the washington journal. caller: i have a question. i'm a legal immigrant that has promised not to be a burden to this country. now, we talk about the current tax credit. the white house never asked what would happen. that means that illegal aliens can go back four years.

that becomes a lot of money. many of them -- also, they have american children which means they get food stamps. as a legal immigrant, that is not something that i can do because i promised not to be a burden to my new country. what about the child credit that a lot of illegal aliens have been in program? have they paid that back? are they going to stay in that country? host: congresswoman? guest: first of allguest: -- guest: first of all, the executive actions. the individuals under the executive actions will not get in line in front of those who are online through the legal immigration process. we thank our caller for her commitment to being part of the american dream, which this is a

nation of immigrants, but also aid -- a nation of laws. the executive action does not differ any immigration status on these individuals. they will not have any status that is by law. what they will have is the ability to delay deportation. and so, i would say to the caller that much of what she has indicated in the income tax relief is to a status person. they will not have a status. we will continue to look to how we can improve immigration reform or the immigration system so that it can be fair to those who are in line already through the legal immigration policies -- process so that the distribution of benefits to those citizens are fairly distributed so that americans understand that there is a

distinction between not being deported versus having an immigration status. these individuals -- 5 million -- will not have an immigration status. they will not be eligible for the benefit. host: congresswoman sheila jackson lee, we [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2015] >> in washington today

veterans affairs secretary robert mcdonald said today that the integrity and character, quote, is part of who i am. he apologized anew for claiming he had served in the military special forces. the a.p. says that at a news conference outside v.a. offices mcdonald's told reporters he made the mistake with a homeless veteran he was trying to connect with. a tweet from the hill on that news conference. we'll show that to you later in our program schedule. homeland security funding will be on the senate floor this week. plitch mcconnell saying he will allow a vote on a clean bill to fund the homeland security agency the senate democrats have asked for. followed by a second stand-alone vote. a bill that would halt president obama's 2014 executive action on immigration. but writes "the new york times," the fate of that legislation, as well as a partial government shutdown, now rests with house of representatives -- the house of

representatives. senator reid, harry reid, the democratic leader, said the democrats would not allow any immigration legislation to come to a vote unless they had an assurance auto from house speaker boehner that the house would take up and pass the clean spending bill. the house is coming in shortly at about 4:00 eastern here on c-span. in the meantime, we'll show you the comments from the majority leader and republican leaders today before the senate gaveled in for the afternoon. >> good afternoon everyone. as all of you know, i put on the calendar last night what we call a collins bill, which would, if enacted, prevent the president's executive actions from last november from going into effect. procedurally a vote on that will occur friday. it would be cloture on the

motion to proceed to that bill. in the meantime, i've indicated to the democratic leader that i'd be happy to have his cooperation to advance the consideration of a clean d.h.s. bill, which would carry us through until september 30. with democratic cooperation on a position they have been advocating for the last two months, we could have that vote very quickly. but in any event, we will have the vote on the collins bill on friday. with that let me turn to the senator. >> so over the last week recess, a very important decision was handed down by the federal court in brownsville, texas, ruling in case brought by 26 states, including texas

claiming that the president's executive action was illegal. the court wrote a lengthy opinion and excess of 100 pages long and issued a temporary injunction barring implementation of the executive action. as you know, the administration now is seeking a stay of that, at the federal district court, and if they don't get it there, which they won't, they will then go to the fifth circuit court of appeals in new orleans. but the most important point i think we need to acknowledge is that with this federal court injunction in place, any money that the united states congress appropriates for the department of homeland security will not go to fund the president's illegal executive action. because it's barred by a federal court injunction and is

subject to a contempt of court finding, if that was attempted. that's why the administration has stood down and is seeking this stay. but what we need to do this week is we need make sure that the department of homeland security is funded. we will do that. we're going to have some very important votes. we would have already done it if it hadn't been for the filibusters on four occasions by our democratic colleagues. but at the end of the day, once we fund the department of homeland security under the current temporary injunction that's in place, no money can be used to implement the president's illegal executive action. >> i know there's a lot going on this week, but i wanted to just draw your attention to something that may be a little bit below the radar. on thursday morning the federal communications commission, on a partisan-line vote, will vote out something that's called an order in support of net neutrality. and the thing that concerns me

about that is that this will be the first time that the f.c.c., in 332 pages, of course this wasn't a transparent process, where the internet is going to be subject to the heavy hand of regulation as opposed to a light touch that's been utilized for so long up until this point. i hope that february 26 doesn't go down in history as the time when the internet moved from something that was driven by free market innovation to something that's driven by bureaucratic decision making. but that's essentially what we're looking at. it is going to be a very partisan nontransparent way in which the f.c.c. has carried out their business. and there's a much better alternative. i've been working with my colleagues in the house side on a piece of legislation that's only six pages long that prevents many of the things that the f.c.c. says they want to prevent. paid priorization, blocking, throttling very explicitly prevents those sorts of things but doesn't hand the f.c.c. carte blanche authority to do whatever they want when it

comes to regulation of the internet. even if this survives in the courts, it can be changed by a future f.c.c. commission. and so this is a very bad precedent and one that doesn't have to happen. we told the president and the white house, we told the f.c.c., we told democrats in capitol hill that we want to work with them on a solution to this that addresses the concerns that people have, the problems that perhaps could be out there, but that doesn't cede to the f.c.c. unlimited authority for them to do whatever they want and to put at great risk and in jeopardy something that has been an incredible success story for this country and for the world. that's the internet. >> today with the strong support of the american people, a bipartisan bills that been delivered to the president, the keystone x.l. pipeline. after six years of delay and obstruction, the president is finally going to have to decide where he stands. does he stand with the american

people, the great majority of people who support this bipartisan bill and the energy and the jobs that come with it? to or is he going to stand with special interests and washington lobbyists? the president likes to talk but it's really time for him to listen. he should listen to his state department who has said this is safe. he has -- he should listen to american vetters who want the jobs and the energy. but the president does have his pen and by choosing to veto this piece of legislation, he is choosing washington lobbiest -- lobbyists and special interests over the needs and desires of the american people. i will tell you the republican party will continue in the house and senate to put bipartisan bills on the president's desk to focus on energy, focus on jobs, and will help america move forward.

>> [inaudible] >> well our friends in the house has been saying that it's up to the senate and they're right. senate democrats have been preventing us from going forward on the d.h.s. bill. my hope is that the senate will act. i don't know what the house will do. but i do think we have a responsibility to act here. we have a solution to the problem that deals with both things, number one, giving senators an opportunity to express their disapproval of what the president did in november and some democrats, as you know, have already announced they agree with me on that. and the other gives senate democrats an opportunity to have what they've been saying for two months they wanted, which was to fund the department of homeland security through the end of the year. i don't know what's not to like about this. this is an approach that respects both points of view and

gives senators an opportunity to go on record on both. both funding the department of homeland security and expressing their opposition to what the president did last november. >> [inaudible] >> i would be happy to do that. that will depend on some level of cooperation from the democrats and going forward, to pass what they have said for two months they wanted to pass. you might ask them if they intend to prevent us from achieving passage. very quickly. and before friday. of a bill they've been saying that they wanted for the last two months. >> billionaires are making life more difficult for the american working people.

[inaudible] >> i'm not sure what your question is, but i think the issue before us is this, do you want to fund the department of homeland security through the end of the fiscal year so we're fully up and running and capable of dealing with all the threats we have around the world, including those against us here at home, and would you also like to express their disagreement with the president's overreach last november. this gives us an opportunity to do both. it gives senators an opportunity who have said they're in favor of funding the homeland security bill to fund it and it gives senators who object what -- to what the president did last november the opportunity to express their objection. >> we leave this as the house

dwavels in takesing up three bills. live coverage of the house now on c-span. later. for what purpose does the gentleman from ohio seek recognition? mr. latta: thank you, mr. speaker. i move the house suspend the rules and pass the bill h.r. 212 as amended. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: h.r. 212, a bill to amend the safe drinking water act to provide for the assessment and management of the risk of cyanotoxins in drinki weranfootr purpos. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from ohio, mr. latta, and the gentleman from new jersey mr. pallone, each will control 20 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from ohio mr. latta. mr. latta: thank you, mr. speaker. i ask unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and insert extraneous materials in the record on the bill. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. mr. latta: mr. speaker, i yield

myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from ohio is recognized for as much time as he wishes to use. mr. latta: thank you mr. speaker. mr. speaker, i rise today in support of h.r. 212, the drinking water protection act, which i reintroduced from last congress in january. this important bipartisan legislation requires the e.p.a. to develop and submit a strategic plan to congress for assessing and managing risks associations with algal toxins in drinking water provided by public water systems. unfortunately from the great lakes to other surface fresh waters across the country, algal toxins produced by harmful algal blooms are bad to health safety. many of my constituents weren't able to utilize their drinking water for over two days without having harmful effects.

during that time questions and concerns were of health effects data testing protocols, treatment processes and appropriate short and long-term responses. furthermore, during hearings in the house energy and commerce committee, witnesses testified before the further complexity of this issue due to the numerous other algal toxins and variants that may have potential negative health effects which present -- when present in public drinking water. i commnd the work that the u.s. e.p.a., the state of ohio and others have done since the toledo water emergency to ensure public safety. however, the situation demonstrated a need for a more strategic, comprehensive and strong scientific approach to protect our citizens' public drinking water. i believe h.r. 212 does just this. specifically, the legislation calls for the e.p.a. strategic plan to include steps and

timelines that evaluate the risk to human health from drinking water provided by public water systems contaminated with algal toxins establish, publish and update a comprehensive list of algal toxins which the administrator determines may have an adverse effect on human health when present in public drinking water and provide a summary of those adverse effects. publish health adviseries and testing methods if the e.p.a. determines it is warranted based on the public -- recommend feasible treatment options, enter into cooperative agreements and provide technical assistance to affected states and public water systems to manage risks associated with algal toxins and identify gaps in the e.p.a.'s understanding of algal toxins. mr. speaker, i want to thank all the co-sponsors of this bill as well as chairman upton, subcommittee chairman shimkus and all the other staff and stakeholders who have worked diligently on this important legislation.

mr. speaker, i urge full support of my colleague -- from my colleagues for h.r. 212 and thank you, mr. speaker, and i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from ohio reserves his time. the gentleman from new jersey, mr. pallone, is recognized. mr. pallone: thank you mr. speaker. i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for as much time as he wishes to use. mr. pallone: mr. speaker, harmful algal blooms are harmful to public health. it threatens opportunities that draw their water from coastal areas and the great lakes. they also pose risks to those who swim in contaminated waters or eat contaminated fish. health impacts include skin and eye irritation gastrointestinal illness, cancer, paralysis and even death. economic is affected, including recreation and fishing. costs of algal blooms in the u.s. are in billions of dollars. this summer toledo, ohio, had a profound disruption when

citizens woke up to a do not drink ur order. the problem is not limited to ohio or lake erie. harmful algal blooms have been a recurring problem in my home state of new jersey for decades. so i appreciate the majority's taking up this bipartisan legislation to begin to address this most important environmental problem. this bill is a good step, more needs to be done. i'm happy to say that language reported from the energy and commerce committee reflects several changes sought by democratic members of the committee. the bill was broadened to ensure that e.p.a. will look at all algal toxins that may have an adverse effect on human health and consider source water protection measures which is the preferred and most effective approach to managing harmful algal blooms. i thank the chairman and majority staff for working with ranking member tonko, myself and the democratic staff to improve the bill. for too long republicans in congress have been more interested in attacking the e.p.a. than supporting the important work the agency does to protect human health. and safe drinking water should

be a bipartisan issue. unfortunately, this bill does lack resources. addressing cyanotoxin in drinking water is very expensive for states and water utilities. if congress doesn't make funding available at the federal level, the money will have to come out of already-strained state budgets or out of consumers' pockets. the cooperative agreements envisioned in the bill can address some of these costs mr. speaker, but only if they are funded and the strenalic plan will have no impact -- strategic plan will have no impact. so i hope this bill will address important threats like climate change fracking, security and aging infrastructure. as we continue our drinking water work this congress, i hope the majority will recognize the importance of funding in addressing these needs. resource is essential to the conversation about safe drinking water. much of our nation's drinking water infrastructure is well beyond its useful life and in desperate need of replacement. alguy and other threats spurred by climate change and other

factors add to the challenge. investing in drinking water infrastructure protects public health, creates jobs and boosts the economy. and this is something we should all support. so mr. speaker, i thank my colleagues on the energy and commerce committee, mr. latta and my good friend, ms. kaptur, for their hard work to address an important environmental threat. i support the bill, i urge its adoption and i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new jersey reserves his time. the gentleman from ohio. mr. latta: well, thank you mr. speaker. we have no other speakers on the bill, and i reserve and i'm ready to close if the gentleman is ready to close. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new jersey. mr. pallone: yes, i am. i'm sorry. the speaker pro tempore: and the gentleman from new jersey is recognized. mr. pallone: yes, thank you, mr. speaker. i don't have anything more to add. i would again, support the bill urge its adoption and yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new jersey yields his time back. the gentleman from ohio. mr. latta: well thank you mr. speaker. i would ask the house to pass h.r. 212, and i appreciate all -- again, all the work from all

the members and the staff in putting this bill together and getting it on the floor and also chairman upton for his work on the legislation as well as chairman shimkus. and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back his time. the question is will the house suspend the rules and pass the bill h.r. 212 as amended. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, 2/3 having responded in the affirmative -- the gentleman from new jersey. mr. pallone: mr. speaker, i would like to ask for the yeas and nays. the speaker pro tempore: the yeas and nays are requested. all those in favor of taking a vote by the yeas and nays will rise and remain standing until counted. a sufficient number having arisen, yeas and nays are ordered. pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20 further proceedings on this question will be postponed.

the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from oregon seek recognition? >> i move that the house suspend the rules and pass h.r. 734. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: union calendar number 19 h r. 734, a bill to amend the communications act of 1934, to consolidate the reporting obligations of the federal communications commission in order to improve congressional oversight and reduce reporting burdens. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from oregon, mr. walden, and the gentleman from new jersey, mr. pallone, each will control 20 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from oregon. mr. walden: i ask unanimous consent that all members have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and

insert extraneous materials on the bill. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. mr. walden: i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. walden: in a multiyear effort toup date the communications act, one of the converging themes we have heard is the convergence of the marketplace. both technology and consumer expectations have changed the game. however the agencies tasked with regulating the communications sector still exist in the outdated and siloed structure that replects decades-old assumptions, even how they eevaluate and report on the industry. while that will be the focus of our calm act update process, this bill will take an important first step in how we look at the sector and its regulators. it consolidating eight separate reports that require tele-- require the f.c.c. to evaluate

the sector, combines those eight report into a single biennial report to congress on the marketplace as a whole. it also takes the step of elimb dating out-- eliminating outdated report -- reports that only served to junk up the act. reports like the orbit act. it's aimed at ensuring that satellites that were long ago privatized are pro competitive, something the f.c.c. and industry recognizes as outdated, unnecessary and burdensome. there are law thopes books that address such outdated technologies as telegraphs. this is a small step in cleaning up the laws and the agency that control this is very dynamic marketplace. ensuring that all the reports on the books are necessary and effective hetches redeuce the burden on the agency. it also helps the regulatory agency make more informed decisions. i'd also like to take a moment

to thank my colleagues representative scalise, ranking member eshoo and ranking member of the full committee mr. pallone, for their work to make this bipartisan bill a success both today and in the last two sessions of congress. i'm hopeful that the first bill to pass out of our subcommittee this congress is an indication of the work we can get done when we collaborate and i urge my colleagues to vote in favor of this legislation. thank you mr. speaker, and i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves his time the gentleman from new jersey, mr. pallone is recognized. mr. pallone: thank you mr. speaker. i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for such time as he wishes to use. mr. pallone: i rise in support of h.r. 734, the f.c.c. consolidated reporting act of 2015. congress is charge -- has charged the federal communications commission with overseeing industries that make up one sixth of our national demism communications and technology sectors are driving economic growth across the

nation, connecting businesses to markets large and small and delivering innovative new products and services to consumers. a part of this -- as part of this critical mission, congress has tasked the f.c.c. with compiling reports to provide the public with information about these dynamic markets. democrats and republicans agree that the f.c.c. needs to collect good day tafment consumers and businesses rely on this information. and we here in congress need this information too in order to make sound policy decisions and conduct effective oversight of the f.c.c. by consolidating certain reports and eliminating references to other outdate red ports, this bill allows the f.c.c. to quse the agent cease -- agency's limited resources more wisely and present a more holisticage soifs the marketplace. at the same time we've worked together to make sure this attempt to promote efficiency doesn't remove authority.

it -- we worked hard to make sure it does not alter the f.c.c.'s authority over broadband under section 706. i want to thank tech knoll subcommittee ranking member eshoo for her leadership on this issue, chairman upton, chairman walden and representative scalise for working with democrats to address their concerns during the committee's consideration of the bill. in short this bill is an example of the progress we can make when we engage in a truly bipartisan process. the consideration of h.r. 734 should be a model for legislative efforts in our committee and the entire house. working together through regular order we crafted legislation that addressed concerns from both sides of the aisle and i look forward to continuing to work with our republican and democratic colleagues in the senate to help this bill become law. i reserve the balance of my time, mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new jersey reserves his time. the gentleman from oregon. mr. walden: i now yield such time as he may consume to the

distinguished gentleman from louisiana, the chairman of our -- our majority whip and a terrific member of our subcommittee, mr. scalise. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for as much time as he wishes to use. mr. scalise: thank you, mr. speaker. i want to thank the chairman of the subcommittee, mr. walden, for his leadership in bringing this forward and the ranking member mr. pallone as well as ms. eshoo, the ranking member of the subcommittee, who has been working very closely with myself and others to bring a good, bipartisan bill that actually gets rid of outdated regulations and reports. this fcc consolidate red porting act actually reduces the workload that the f.c.c. has placed for years and years that's been outdated. if you look at the reports that have been required for years that they're supposed to go and consolidate and accumulate they have reports on the telegraph,

competitiveness within the telegraph. clearly, mr. speaker it's been long pastime that we update these laws and get the f.c.c. reform in place that will finally bring some consolidation so that industry can look at a full picture instead of a bunch of different silos and reports that are so outdated like the telegraph that they're not even being done yet these laws are still on the books. this is an important reform and a -- and it's a good bipartisan reform that shows that congress can work to get these kind of things done and make things simpler in the real world and make an agency like the f.c.c. more efficient in their operations. i urge passage and yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from oregon reserves. the gentleman from new jersey. mr. pallone: i have no other speakers. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from oregon. mr. walden: i have no further speakers. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new jersey. mr. pallone: i urk support of the bill and yield back my time.

mr. walden: i also urge passage of this legislation and yield back my time. the speaker pro tempore: the question is will the house suspend the rules and pass the bill h.r. 734. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, 2/3 being in the affirmative -- mr. walden: on that i ask for the yeas and nays. the speaker pro tempore: those in favor of taking the vote by the yeas and nays will rise and remain standing until counted. a sufficient numbering are viz -- having risen -- a sufficient number having risen, the yeas and nays are ordered. pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20 further proceedings on this question will be postponed.

the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from texas seek recognition? >> i move that the house suspend the rules and pass h.r. 1020. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of

the bill. the clerk: h.r. 1020, a bill to define stem education to include computer science and to support existing stem education programs at the national science foundation. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from texas, mr. smith, and the gentlewoman from connecticut, ms. esty, will each control 20 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from texas, mr. smith. mr. smith: i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. smith: and i ask unanimous consent 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, so ordered. mr. smith: mr. speaker the stem education act of 2015 is bipartisan legislation that includes computer science in the definition of stem education for programs and activities at our federal science agencies. the bill also supports and strengthens ongoing stem education efforts at the national science foundation.

similar legislation passed the house last year by voice vote. i thank representative esty for co-sponsors the bill again this yearism also thank our new research and technology subcommittee chairwoman barbara come stack, ranking member danica pinsky, and representatives hultgren bucshon mckinley and herrera beutler for their sport. last congress, the science, space and technology committee held several hearings on stem education. each hearing highlighted the importance of stem education to keep america on the cutting edge of new products and ideas. our hearings discussed the merits of ensures -- ensuring computer science is included as a component of the science, technology, engineering and mathematics that make up stem education. today a variety of jobs in industries from banking to engineering to medicine require

familiarity with computer science. according to the bureau of labor statistics, computing and mathematics will be one of the top 10 fastest growing major occupational groups from 2010 to 2020 with a growth rate of 4% annually compared to 1% for all other industries. . unfortunately, american students ranked 21st in science and 26th in math. that must change for the better. we need to ensure that our nation's youth have the scientific and mathematical skills to strive and thrive in a technology-based economy. but we have to capture and hold the desire of young adults to study stem subjects so they will want to pursue these careers. h.r. 1020 includes language suggested by mr. lipinski to support informal stem education programs and activities at the national science foundation. these activities reach students

outside of the classroom and strengthen a student's engagement in stem subject areas. the stem education act also ensures that teachers working towards a masters degree program in stem subjects can participate in the robert master teacher fellowship program and i thank ms. esty for this good addition to the bill. this program provides opportunities for teachers who want to bolster their teaching skills. through the fellowship individuals receive training in order to become highly effective mathematics and science teachers. with this bill the program will now encourage more teachers to pursue advanced degrees. a healthy and viable stem work force, lit rate in all stem subjects, including computer science, is critical to american industry. a well-educated and trained stem work force ensures our future economic prosperity. most graduates with stem degrees means more advanced

technologies and a more robust economy. support for this bill from organizations like the stem education coalition stem for us and codedash.org, are important with work force needs. we must work to ensure that students continue to go into these fields so that their innovative ideas can lead to a more innovative and prosperous america. i encourage my colleagues to support this bill and mr. speaker, i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas reserves his time. the gentlelady from connecticut, ms. esty, is recognized. ms. esty: thank you mr. speaker. i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from connecticut is recognized for as much time as she wishes to use. ms. esty: thank you mr. speaker. i want to begin by thanking my friend, chairman smith, for his leadership on the science committee, particularly on stem education. for the second congress in a row, we are considering the stem education act on the house

floor. i am grateful that we are advancing these important efforts in a bipartisan fashion. thanks in large part to the chairman's willingness to work across the aisle. i would also like to thank and recognize the work of representative lipinski for his diligent work on this and many other bills and my good friend, ranking member eddie bernice johnson, for her thoughtful leadership on stem education and on all issues facing the science committee. the stem education act of 2015 supports teachers who are preparing students to be the engineers, manufacturers and scientists of tomorrow. we all know that students, particularly elementary school students, learn best when they are engaged and interested. however, any parent knows that it can be difficult to spark a student's passion for stem subjects without innovative and creative learning environments. and with more and more jobs of the 21st century requiring stem skills, we need to better

prepare our children for these good-paying jobs. as a mother of three, i remember when my children had incredible teachers who made science and math accessible and fun. and we should do all we can to support innovative, passionate teachers for every child in every school. this bill today includes sections of my stem jobs act, a bill expanding the robert noise master teaching fellowship at the national science foundation. currently master teaching fellowships provide mentoring, training and financial support to stem professionals who want to enter the teaching profession. in connecticut we have two scholarship programs. uconn's teachers for tomorrow program prepares teachers throughout the state to teach math, biology, physics and chemistry to students of all ages. and at the university of

bridgeport the master teaching fellowship program places masters physics teachers in high need high schools in southwestern connecticut. our bill today expands the master teaching fellowship so that those who are working towards a master degree not just those who already have a masters degree, are also eligible to apply, supporting more passionate teachers and in doing so allowing more students to benefit from excellent stem instructors. our bill also promotes learning outside of the classroom. in connecticut we have the wonderful connecticut science center with incredible creative exhibits like one called "grossology" where children can explore how to keep their bodies healthy by crawling through an enormous digestive system and experiencing a larger-than-life sneeze, perfect for inspiring our nation's future doctors and biomedical researchers. in addition to educating and

inspiring our children, science centers planetariums and aquariums across the country also provide invaluable teacher training. last year alone, the connecticut science center trained nearly 1,200 teachers who then went on to teach and inspire tens of thousands of their students. the bill today directs the national science foundation to continue to award competitive grants for out-of-school stem learning experiences for both students and teachers. finally, our bill takes the important step of expanding the definition of stem for federal programs and grants to include computer science. as a member of the science committee and representative lipinski's stem caucus, i have been a strong advocate for increasing literacy in computer science. this winter i joined students from across the state and more than 100 million worldwide to

participate in an hour of code. we learned basic computer programming skills and discovered it's a lot of fun. i also helped create the congressional stem app competition and hosted this competition in my district where students created and built apps for their smartphones. the entries submitted by these high school students were incredibly innovative and useful technologically advanced as well as terrific examples of the problem solving we need all of our students to learn. the winning apps included an app to keep teachers informed during a school emergency, a program to help students know if they are going to be able to catch their bus on time, an app i know my children would have benefited from greatly on those cold connecticut winter mornings like this morning, and an app to help high school freshmen learn their way around a big new school. the stem app competition helped students experience for

themselves how important and fun computer science can be. but for example, in connecticut where only 65 schools across the state have dedicated computer science programs it is critical that we continue to expand access to computer science education for all students. mr. speaker, i am proud that we are rising above partisan politics to advance the bipartisan stem education act of 2015. this bill demonstrates that we can come together to help our children to help them thrive and to help ensure that they will be competitive in the 21st century global economy. i want, again, to thank chairman smith and representative lipinski for their leadership and the committee staff for their hard work on the stem education act. and i will also like to thank my friend ranking member johnson, a dedicated stem champion, who is leading all of us on the science committee to truly recognize the importance

of a robust and multidisciplinary stem education and inspire us to do more across the board to support stem. i look forward to working with ranking member johnson and the rest of the committee to further advance our priorities in congress. mr. speaker i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from connecticut reserves her time. the gentleman from texas, mr. smith, is recognized. mr. smith: mr. speaker, i am told there is a member who is on his way to the house floor to request time and who should be arriving momentarily and until he arrives, i'll reserve my time as well. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas reserves. the gentlelady from connecticut. ms. esty: mr. speaker, i yield three minutes of my time -- such time -- as much time as i may consume to my friend, the ranking member of the science committee from texas the gentlelady, ms. johnson.

the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from texas is recognized for as much time as she wishes to use. mrs johnson: thank you very much, -- ms. johnson: thank you very much, mr. speaker. i rise in support of h.r. 1020 although reluctantly i must qualify my support. i will begin with the parts of the bill that i strongly support. i want to thank ms. esty for her language to amend the master teacher fellowship program. this is an important update to the program to ensure that we are tapping into our entire pool of talented math, science -- math and science teachers who might serve as master teachers in their schools and districts. i also want to thank mr. lipinski for his language to authorize the national science foundation's informal stem education portfolio. while we know that informal stem education meaning learning holds great promise to increase engagement in stem by diverse

populations and to enhance learning of stem content there's still more r&d to be done to make sure we are developing and implementing the most effective programs. my support for those sections of this bill is unqualified. however, i must express my concern about the definition for stem including in this legislation -- included in this legislation which differs in a significant way from the definition of stem that chairman smith proposed in last year's version of this same bill. specifically, the current version would define stem as science, technology, engineering and mathematics, including computer science. last year's version developed in collaboration with the stem education coalition read as science, technology, engineering and mathematics, including other academic subjects that build on these

disciplines, such as computer science. this second definition, the one this entire house agreed to last year, was agreed to because it left the door open for other critical fields such as statistics and geology, that don't cleanly fit into s-t-e-m, or stem, in k-12 teacher certifications and curricula. i think we can all agree to the importance of computer science education. the current disconnect between the high demand for information technology jobs and limit the opportunities for students to be exposed to computer science at k-12 levels put american students and american companies at a significant disadvantage. however, it baffles me as to why we would implicitly deval such fields such as statistics

and geology in order to highlight computer science. statistics is an essential tool across all fields of science. without good statistics the biomedical research results that we count on to develop new diagnostics and therapeutics for diseases would be meaningful. without geology oil and gas companies would not be able to locate and drill for new sources of energy. without geology we would never achieve early warnings for earthquakes to save lives. so whether we are from texas or california, we ought to place high value on geology. i am also baffled why this bill is so urgent that we had to skip regular order to bring it to the floor. i requested that the committee hold a hearing or a markup on this legislation so that we might sell the deaf -- settle the definition dispute in committee after an open and public debate but my request

was denied. mr. speaker, i will support this bill today but i hope the senate will be wiser than what we are being today in defining stem. is is not simply semantics. how and what science is taught in our nation's classrooms is essential to our future economic competitiveness national security and overall well-being. i thank you and yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from texas yields back her time. the gentlelady from connecticut reserves. the gentleman from texas is recognized. mr. smith: mr. speaker i have no other requests for time so i'm prepared to yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas reserves. the gentlelady from connecticut. ms. esty: i'm prepared to yield back my time. the speaker pro tempore: does the gentlelady yield back her time? ms. esty: yes, i do. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from connecticut yields back her time. the gentleman from texas. mr. smith: i yield back my time as well. the speaker pro tempore: and the gentleman from texas yields back. the question is will the house suspend the rules and pass the bill h.r. 1020. those in favor say aye.

those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, 2/3 having responded in the affirmative -- the gentleman from texas. mr. smith: mr. speaker, ask for the yeas and nays. oh, mr. speaker -- mr. speaker, parliamentary inquiry. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas. mr. smith: is it too late for me to yield time to the gentleman from michigan who i mentioned a while ago was on the way to the house floor to speak on this particular bill and -- the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas ask unanimous consent to reclaim his time? mr. smith: i ask unanimous consent to reclaim my time. the speaker pro tempore: is there objection? mr. smith: mr. speaker, i'll yield three minutes -- the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas is recognized. there are 16 minutes remaining for the gentleman from texas. mr. smith: thank you, mr. speaker. plenty of time. mr. speaker, i'll yield three minutes, therefore, to the gentleman from michigan mr. mull nar who is a member of the science committee and is also vice chairman of the science and space subcommittee. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan is recognized for three minutes. .

mr. moll far: thank you, mr. speaker. -- mr. mulnar: thank you, mr. speaker. -- mr. medical school far -- mr. moolenaar: thank you, mr. speaker. whether it's a hand on museum a science competition, or an internship as a lab assistant finding the best ways to teach these critical subjects outside of the classroom will help students who might not learn these subjects in a traditional setting. as our nation's employers look to fill good-paying jobs, stem education has applications across the board including skilled trades and construction manufacturing, and welding. every student who learns these skills will have the solid academic background to secure employment in a career field.

this important legislation will benefit bright young minds outside of the classroom and help our country remain the world leader in research and innovation. i urge my colleagues to vote yes. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the gentleman from texas is recognized. mr. smith: 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. 1020. 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 -- mr. smith: i ask for the yeas and nays. the speaker pro tempore: the yeas and nays are requested. those in favor of taking the vote by the yeas and nays will rise and remain standing until counted. a sufficient number having risen, the yeas and nays are ordered. pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20, further proceedings on the question will be postponed.

pusuant to clause 12a of rule 1, the chair declares the house in recess until a

his press office, the president vetoed the bipartisan keystone x.l. jobs bill. the senate will soon vote on an override. reports say the vote on the override may come as early as a week from today, march 3. elsewhere on capitol hill today, federal reserve chair janet yellen delivered the bank's semiannual monetary policy report to congress. she spoke before the senate banking committee. we'll show as much of this as we can until the house returns at 6:30 eastern. >> the committee will come to order. we have a quorum.

the committee will briefly hold an executive session on the awarding of the congressional medal of honor for those who marched in bloody sunday and other acts that led to the voting rights act. i understand that there are no amendments and no objections to a voice vote. >> mr. chairman. i'm pleased we can mark up this important piece of legislation today, a bill that has strong bipartisan support as chairman shelby said. it honors those americans who fought so hard for civil rights with a congressional gold medal. i want to thank senator scott, a member of this committee, for working with me in co-chairing this year's bipartisan congressional pilgrimage to selma to commemorate the 50th anniversary of the march for voting rights. this is my third trip. i know a number of other

senators will be on this trip. i think we best honor those marchers not just with a medal but by remembering their purpose. electoral responsibility used to be my responsibility, i've followed voting laws since then. it used to be we were in the business of expanding voter roles -- rolls but lately too many states have thrown up blocks, ostensibly to prevent in-person voting fraud, which is virtually nonexistent. let's honor the foot soldiers not just today and on march 7 but in everything we do. thank you, mr. chairman. >> all those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the ayes clearly have it.

now order 527 without amendment be reported favorably by the banking committee. i also ask unanimous consent that the staff be allowed to make any technical and conforming changes and that we waive the cordon rule. hear nothing objection, so ordered. we will now move to a hearing on the federal reserve's semiannual monetary policy report to the congress. today, the committee will receive testimony from federal reserve chair yellen as has been required by statute since 1978. although the federal reserve chair has been using this venue for decades to communicate dectly to congress and the american people, i, and many of my colleagues, have been calling for greater accountability and more effective disclosure for years. in response, we've heard the chorus of current and former federal reserve officials who have lined up to defend the structure and the degree of transparency of the fed. further accountability to

congress some have argued, is not needed. i'm interested to hear whether the current chair shares this view and whether she believes that the fed should be immune from any reforms. as far as monetary policy is concernedmark question whether the fed can rein in inflation and avoid a destabilizing asset prices when the time comes to unwind its massive $4.5 million -- trillion balance sheet. the minutes posted online do little to answer the questions of when and how this will be done and the most recent fomc transcript available to the public is from 2008, over seven years ago. even though the fed has several monetary policy tools at its disposal, an action of this magnitude has never before been taken to my knowledge. the federal open market committee continues to report

it can be patient in keeping the federal funds rate near zero. too much delay could lead to a more painful correction down the road. what the fomc is thinking and how they're analyzing this very difficult problem set remains a mystery, however. yet some continue to dismiss calls for change or more transparency at the fed. i would argue, however, that there's an even greater need for additional oversight by congress and further reforms. our centralback is expanding its influence over households businesses and markets in recent years. not only has it pushed the boundaries of traditional monetary policy but it's also consolidated unmatched authority as a financial regulator. as the fed grose larger and more powerful, much of this authority has become more

concentrated in washington, d.c. nand new york. the fed emerged from the financial crisis as a super regulator, with unprecedented power over industries it had not previously overseen. with such a delegation of authority comes a highn't re-- responsibility i believe, for congress to know the impact these new requirements place on our economy as a whole. the role of congress is not to serve on the federal open market committee. but it is to provide strong oversight and when times demand it, bring about structural reform. as part of this process, the committee will be holding another hearing next week to discuss options for enhanced oversight and reform in the fed. senator brown. >> thank you, mr. chairman. chair yellen welcome back. it's good to see you gep good to have you in front of our committee. our economy continued to see strong employment gains and economic growth at the end of 2014 but we know the improvements in the economy are not being felt by enough americans.

the gains we have made over the past five years 11.5 million net private sector job growth come on the heefls nine years when we lost 4 1/2 million jobs. some pundits and politicians have been predicting runaway inflation for years. they clearly don't have a grasp of what is happening for most americans low wage growth has continued for most americans. decline in participation in the work force is troubling. as you pointed out, the new york inequality gap has widened in this recovery. it's good, mr. chairman, that we begin our session by commemorating the selma foot soldiers. but we must remember that the income gap between white and black americans has widened. workers with stagnant wages have trouble safing for a down payment, their retirement or their children's education.

this is something congress should be address bug it needs to be part of the fed's consideration in making monetary policy, too. i appreciate your announcement last month of plans to create the community advisory council that will have 15 members meet twice a year with the board in washington to offer perspectives on their economic circumstances and the needs of low and moderate communities and consumers. i hope the entire federal reserve system, the 12 regional banks as well as the board in washington, will engage community leaders way more than they have in the past. will do what you have done by setting the tone in washington and incorporate diverse perspectives into their decision making. we often dewe too of often hear concerns that the fed is a system that's run by and to benefit the largest banks. last november, i held a subcommittee hearing on one facet of this, regulatory capture. it explored concerns about the

culture of the banks and the regulators. our regulatory culture that's fair and tough that challenges group think, that produces rules and regulations designed to strengthen the financial stability of our economy and protect americans' financial interest. i applaud the fed for finalizing rulers in nation's largest and riskiest institutions. i encourage you to move forward to finalize outstanding proposals so everyone will benefit from the certainty of having appropriate rules in place. it's been more than a year since the fed released an advance notice of proposed rule making on commodities trading and physical asset ownership for example. in today's papers there are reports of a d.o.j. investigation of 10 banks for activities in the precious metals markets and we have yet to see a proposed rules. the job doesn't end there, you must then send the message to examiners that these rules must be implemented and enforced. while some of my colleagues are eager to help you and the fed

decide monetary policy, i think that's the wrong role for congress. i'm all for transparency, i think more is better as a general rule. but every one of us knows there are times when you can do better by having a candid discussion in private. our real goal must be to have a central reserve that works for all americans, toof strong economy ha benefits low anded my -- low-wage workers and the middle class as much as the wealthiest and to have a stable and diverse financial system that provides opportunities for all americans, not one that threatens their savings. that is why your duel mandate to promote -- dual mandate to promote price stability and employment and i so appreciate, perhaps more than -- that you, perhaps more than any of your predecessors or at least as much, understands the dual mandate, including employment, how important that is. >> we look forward to your

testimony and question and answer period. your written testimony will be made part of the record in its entirety and you can proceed briefly to what you want to tell us. >> chairman shelby, ranking member brown and members of the committee, i'm pleased to present the federal reserve's semi-annual monetary policy report to the congress. in my remarks today, i will discuss the current economic situation and outlook before turning to monetary policy. since my appearance before the committee last july, the employment situation in the united states has been improving along many dimensions. the unemployment rate now stands at 5.7%, down from just over 6% last summer and from 10% at its peak in late 2009. the average pace of monthly job gains picked