ss today. members will be debating funding for intelligence agencies the c.i.a., the national security agency and the defense intelligence agency. they'll start with consideration of the rule for debating the bill which will include a provision that would allow the house to revote a portion of trade legislation that failed last friday. very quickly, in road to the white house news, donald trump has announced that he is running for president. we're taking your phone calls and comments on our companion network, c-span3. we're live on the floor of the u.s. house. members should be gaveling in in just a moment. this is c-span. the speaker: the house will be in order. the prayer will be offered today

by our chaplain, father conroy. chaplain conroy: let us pray. loving god, we give you thanks for giving us another day. guide the members of this people's house with the spirit of understanding which might lead them to their best judgment. we live in a world of human failure and broken promises. may they be tolerant of the faults of others because they are aware of their own. -- of their own shortcomings. bless all with a quiet respect for the diversity of opinions to be found here. through honest dialogue and contemplative listening, may your servants search all the avenues open to them to meet today's challenges with integrity and justice. may all that is done be for your greater honor and glory, amen. the speaker: the chair has

examined the journal of the last day's proceedings and announces to the house his approval thereof. pursuant to clause 1 of rule 1 the journal stands approve. for what purpose does the gentlelady from north carolina rise? ms. foxx: pursuant to clause 1, rule 1, i demand a vote on agreeing to the speaker's approval of the journal. the speaker: the question is on agreing to the speaker's approval of the journal. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair the ayes have it. the journal stands approved. the gentlelady from north carolina. ms. foxx: mr. speaker, i object to the vote on the grounds that a quorum is not present and make the point of order that a quorum is not present. the speaker: pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20, further proceed thonings question are postpone the pledge of allegiance will be led by the gentleman from pennsylvania, mr. thompson. mr. thompson: i pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america and to the republic for which it stands, one nation, under god, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. the speaker: the chair will

entertain up to 15 requests for one-minute speeches. for what purpose does the gentlelady from north carolina rise? ms. foxx: i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute mr. speaker. the speaker: without objection. ms. foxx: thank you mr. speaker. last week the house approved part of a legislative package on trade promotion authority, or t.p.a. there have been mischaracterizations of what t.p.a. is. every day i hear from constituents who want me to hold president obama accountable. well, t.p.a. does just that, by providing accountability to the president's trade negotiating efforts through enhanced congressional oversight and additional transparency. the allegations that t.p.a. is something for president obama is false. it is important to recognize that more than 95% of the world's customers live beyond u.s. borders and 1.2 million

jobs in north carolina rely on trade with them. trade-related employment in north carolina grew 3.8 times faster than total state employment from 2004 to 2013. while i heard many different perspectives on t.p.a. from my constituents, the argument from north carolina families, farmers and employers that negotiating these trade agreements is in the economic best interest of our state was a deciding factor for my vote in favor of t.p.a. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the time of the gentlelady has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from michigan seek recognition? >> mr. speaker, i seek unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. mr. kildee: thank you mr. speaker. well it's time long past time for congress to come together and pass a bold, bipartisan plan to rebuild our nation's infrastructure. right now china is spending 10 times as their percentage of g.d.p. what we are on infrastructure. they're making huge investments

in roads bridges ports, rail. meanwhile congress has simply not acted to put us on a competitive path in this global economy. now a lot of debate has occurred here in the last weeks and days about our position in global trade, and we should have a trade deal that protects american jobs. but meanwhile what are we doing about china outspending us on infrastructure, which makes us less competitive? how are we supposed to compete with them when we haven't done anything to deal with our crumbling roads and bridges that are essential to making our manufacturers competitive in delivering their products to market? it's time for bold action, big action on infrastructure like the development of a national infrastructure bank that would leverage public capital with private capital to rebuild our crumbling roads and bridges. mr. speaker, it's long past time for action. there's bipartisan support for

this. we need to bring a big infrastructure bill to the floor of the house. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from pennsylvania rise? mr. thompson: mr. speaker request unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. thompson: mr. speaker, a recent poll conducted by the robert morris university reveals that 57.1% of pennsylvanians support national gas production and hydraulic fracturing with nearly half saying they would welcome the industry into their hometown. this poll comes just two weeks after the environmental protection agency released a report indicating that fracking poses, quote no widespread systematic harm to drinking water, end quotes. mr. speaker pennsylvania's the third largest natural gas producer in the nation and continues to drive record breaking oil and natural gas production. the marcellus shale, which extends through most of pennsylvania has grown from

two billion cubic feet per day to 16 billion in 2014 and has jolted pennsylvania's economy. as co-chair of the bipartisan natural gas caucus, i will continue to explore and promote best practices so we can highlight the safety and the positive impacts of natural gas. thank you mr. speaker. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentleman from -- the gentlewoman from illinois rise? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentlelady is recognized. ms. kelly: thank you, mr. speaker. as we celebrate national men's health week i urge all americans to take action to reduce health risks and prevent disease. it can be as simple as exercising, eating right or setting up an appointment for a checkup. i also rise as the c.b.c. health brain trust chair to bring awareness to the critical state of black men's health and the need to expansion educational opportunities and treatment options to reduce incidence of disease in communities of color. black men suffer from many

chronic and infegs diseases many which -- infectious diseases many which are preventable. many are obesed. in 2015 black men were found to be twice as likely to die from prostate cancer as white men and have a higher incident and death rate from cholorectal cancer. together through legislation and community engagement we can reduce health inequities and provide a more healthier and pros press life for all americans. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from california seek recognition? >> i seek one minute to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. lamalfa: thank you. mr. speaker, i rise today in support of h.r. 160, the protect medical innovation act, that will be considered on the floor this week. one of the most fundamental flaws of what is known as the affordable care act is try to offset the trillion-dollar

price tag by imposing a 3.2 tax on life-saving medical devices such as pace makers and heart valves. it discourages the type of innovation that will improve our health care system for people needing these devices. hindered with these new high costs, small businesses are finding it increasingly difficult to innovate, curtailing medical advancements often delaying the availability for new treatment and care for patients. i personally visited a number of these companies and understand improving the health care system. these devastating taxes have reported a net loss of over 33,000 jobs. american families, small businesses deserve better and the house is committed to advancing commonsense ideas to ease the burdens of the president's health care law. h.r. 160 is one of those solutions. i ask my colleagues to join in support of this -- repealing this job and innovation killing tax that only limits options to those that need these life-saving devices. i yield back.

the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentlewoman from texas seek recognition? jackson lee mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. ms. jackson lee: mr. speaker as we rally around the obvious in the need for criminal justice reform and the in essence rehabilitation of our criminal justice laws as we deal with the interaction of law enforcement and civilians having a pathway for respect for both, one of the most forgotten aspects is that dealing with the treatment of juveniles in the criminal justice system. i intend over the next couple of weeks to introduce a series of legislative initiatives that address that form of the criminal justice system which we find as parents and family members that it touches all juveniles. one of the things that bill recognizes is that a young person's brain is still developing into his or her

early 20's and those that commit crimes before this point should be treated differently by the criminal justice system. the purpose of this effort is to improve the treatment of young offenders within the federal criminal justice system and to put them on a path towards successful re-entry by providing options for the sentencing judges. safety valve for young offenders which in essence break through the mandatory minimum and early release for young offenders and particularly alternatives such as massive use of home arrests. our children are our future. they get on the wrong path. let's not sull bright that wrong path -- celebrate that wrong path and force them to that wrong path. let's save their lives. with that i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the time of the gentlelady has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from new hampshire seek recognition? mr. guinta:ry ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. guinta: mr. speaker i rise today on behalf of the estimated 145 million americans

who are at risk of losing their employer-sponsored health care insurance due to an excise tax included in the president's health care law. beginning in 2018, employers will be required to pay 40% tax on their employee's health care plans due to obamacare. i am already hearing from constituents back home. we hear from their employers and employees alike that are preparing for this devastating tax by looking at increasing deductibles, reducing benefits and shifting costs to consumers and property taxpayers alike. this tax is set to cost new hampshire's largest city, manchester, over $5 million. americans simply can't afford another costly tax. that's why i introduced h.r. 879, a bill to repeal the so-called cadillac tax. as we prepare to vote on a series of health care bills this week i urge my colleagues to join me in co-sponsoring this commonsense bill. h.r. 879 is win for employers. it's also a win for our

municipalities and most importantly it's a win for all those hardworking americans who expect the president to keep his promise that if you like your health care plan you can keep it. and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the time of the gentleman has expired. for what purpose does the gentlelady from california seek recognition? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection the gentlewoman is recognized for one minute. >> thank you mr. speaker. in just six legislative days, the charter of the export-import bank will expire. mrs. torres: the ex-im bank has proven an important tool in expanding u.s. exports and creating american jobs. it's done that with bipartisan support at zero cost to the taxpayers. i like to mention two companies in particular that have received support from the ex-im bank. able industrial products in ontario and desicare in pamona. these aren't giant, faceless

corporations. they are very small businesses that provide jobs for the inland empire residents. the world economy is getting more competitive and the ex-im bank is helping to level the playing field for american companies. if my colleagues truly want to protect u.s. jobs and u.s. workers, we can't afford to let the ex-im bank expire. it's time to allow a vote, and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the time of the gentlewoman has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from california seek recognition? >> mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. >> mr. speaker i rise today to pay tribute to darela alexis anderson, a resident of riverside california, who passed away last month. mr. takano: she worked at the riverside settlement

association which provided help in the east side area of riverside. a lifetime member of the riverside african-american historical society darela worked to preserve the rich african-american history in riverside. . she worked on countless endeavors in the area, including toys for tots and helped the community in countless ways. she was a mother a grandmother, a great grandmother, a sister, an aunt and a friend. her life cements her legacy as one of our greatest residents. she will be missed. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from tennessee seek recognition? the gentleman is recognize for one minute.

mr. cohen: thank you, mr. speaker. last week the international air transport association recommended new guidelines to reduce the size of carry on luggage. it's 21% smaller than the size permitted by most major domestic airlines. eight major international carriers already adopted the size limits and the trade association is suggesting more airlines will be adopting it soon. if implemented by domestic carriers this will force consumers to spend more on checked baggage fees and purchase new luggage to meet the guidelines. airline passengers are sick of getted squeezed by airlines including fiscally and physically. this will would prohibit airlines who charge for checked baggage from reducing the size of carry-on baggage and protect consumers from even more cost to travel. i urge my colleagues to stand up for consumers and pass the carry on freedom act.

the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from north carolina seek recognition? the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. butterfield: prostate canser is a national epidemic, the most common cancer in men. there will be 221,000 new cases each year. 28,000 men will tie from prostate cancer this year. prostate cancer disproportionately impacts african-american men who have the highest impact of any racial or ethnic group. black men are twice as likely to be diagnosed with prostate cancer nearly 2 1/2 times as likely to die from that disease. last week, i introduced the national prostate cancer plan act, along with congressman mccall cummings, and walter jones. the bill would start the

prostate cancer counsel and would look for tools to treat the disease. enactment of this will be a giant step forward so men can live longer and healthy. my bill has been endorsed by the american neurological association the prostate cancer foundation and pcri. i urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this effort by co-sponsoring h.r. 2730. the speaker pro tempore: the trisme -- the time of the gentleman has expired. for what purpose does the gentlelady from ohio seek recognition? without objection, so ordered. >> the mesh people have spoken. i join over one million

americans who voted on an online pile conducted by women on 250rks nonprofit grass roots organization to put a woman on the $20 bill. to celebrate the amazing achievements of women throughout our history, i introduce the legislation to put a woman on the $20 bill act, h.r. 2174, which would empower the secretary of treasury to put a woman on the face of a $20 bill as soon as possible. mrs. beatty: since the first general circulation of paper currency in this country, no woman has ever held the honor of being featured on paper money. i would say to secretary lew that you need look no further than the people's choice winner harriet tubman, for inspiration. in her words, every great dream begins with a dreamer. in her dreams she always had a vision. more than ever, my vision is a

redesign of the $20 bill. mr. speaker, i ask my colleagues to join me in support -- and support putting a woman on the $20 bill. thank you and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the time of the gentlelady has expired. for what purpose does the gentlewoman from guam rise? ms. bordallo: to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection the gentlewoman is recognized for one minute. ms. bordallo: mr. speaker, i rise today to congratulate the guam men's national soccer team. they lead group d in the second round of the fifa world cup asian qualifiers. it was a david vs. goliath moment yesterday when the guam team defeated india with a 2-1 victory. this follows their win against with -- 1-0 victory over turkmenistan last week.

so i congratulate guam football association president richard lie coach gary white and the whole team on their great victory. viva guam. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from florida seek recognition? the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> mr. speaker i rise today for myself and on behalf of mir colleague, congressman lois fran tell, to honor one of south florida's most respected leaders in higher education. after 18 years of service, our friend dr. dennis gowan is retiring as president of palm beach state college. under his watch palm beach state college has become the eighth largest producer of associate degree graduates in america. from focusing on stem education

it flourished under his leadership. mr. deutch: palm beach state college offers the sixth lowest tuition rate nationwide. his commitment to high quality, affordable higher education is admirable and his tenure as president of palm beach state college deserves praise. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the time of the -- the gentleman has yielded back. for what purpose does the gentlelady from new york seek recognition? the gentlewoman is recognized for one minute. mrs. maloney: mr. speaker, there are just six more working days before the ex-im bank expires. given the critical importance of this program, i thought it would be useful to provide a quick index of hard numbers showing what this would mean to the united states economy. 60.

the number 60. that's the proximate number of ex--- the approximate number of ex-im credit agencies competing with us around the world, waiting for our bank to expire so they can grab the american export business. 3,340, that's the number of small businesses that are supported right now by the ex-im bank, helping them to export their goods and provide jobs. 164,000. that's the number of american jobs that are provided right now, this year, by the ex-im bank that we would lose immediately. 1.3 million, the number of private sector jobs created by the bank since 2009. with no additional cost to the american taxpayer. in fact, it makes money to help us pay down our debt. and finally, zero. that's what we gain by killing

our bank. zero. we don't get the revenue, we don't get the jobs, we don't get to export our goods. let's renew it. the speaker pro tempore: the time of the gentlewoman has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from massachusetts seek recognition? without objection, so ordered. >> thank you, mr. speaker. today i come to the floor of the house with a heavy heart. this past weekend, the city of lyn lost a dedicated public servant, a tireless local volunteer and an inspiring advocate for the people of our community. dominick dambrosio, known by many as dom was love loved by many for his ability to connect to people. his compassion for others was contagious, encouraging all of us to be better members of our community. at a time when public opinion of

congress was at an all-time low his belief in this institution and the power of the democratic process could not have been stronger. i thank him for bringing a reinvigorating energy to our nation's political dialogue and for reminding us why we are so fortunate to have a free and democratic government and why we should all take part in making it better. my fought -- thoughts and prayers are with his wife kelly, his family and friends. the sixth district of massachusetts lost a true champion. i know his legacy will live on through our shared commitment to public service. dom, you will be missed. mr. speaker, i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from texas seek recognition? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized. mr. green: i rise to recognize the month of june as alzheimer's and brain injury awareness month. approximately 4.5 million americans have alzheimer's disease.

one in nine americans over 65 is projected to develop alzheimer's and it's the sixth leading cause of death in the united states. the rapidly growing number of older americans will lead to a corresponding rapid growth in the prevalence of alzheimer's disease. the devastating emotional and financial impact of this debilitating disease is known by too many. my mother-in-law battled this disease, i know firsthand how difficult it can be for patients and their loved ones. i strongly support efforts to advocate and raise awareness and funds to find a treatment and cure for this disease. we have the ability to impact the lives of million os americans by funding research programs for alzheimer's. i rise to recognize the month of june as alzheimer's and brain awareness month. we can burn the world purpose frl alzheimer's and promote care and support for this disease. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for

what purpose does the gentlewoman from nevada seek recognition? without objection the gentlelady is recognized for one minute. ms. titus: i rise today to urge republican leadership to stop blocking the will of the house and immediately call for a vote to re-authorize the export-import bank set to expire june 30. this may, i hosted fred hawkburg, chairman of the ex-im bank new york my district to tour inovus technologies a lead for the civil structural engineering and one of 32 nevada companies working with the bank. at a time when our local economy was fighting to recover from the recession and unemployment ruzz rampant, the bank provided critical support that allowed inova not just to survive but near ler double its work force. in 2014 alone the bank supported 164,000 jobs and reduced the federal deficit by $675 million. in nevada, it helped increase our export value by $165

million. now is the time for a long-term re-authorization to renew reenergize and reform the bank. so it can continue supporting businesses and creating jobs in nevada and across the country. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady yields back the balance of her time. for what purpose does the gentleman from georgia seek recognition? >> i ask unanimous consent that it be in order at any time to consider house concurrent resolution 55 in the house. if called up by the chair of the committee on foreign affairs or his designee that the concurrent resolution be considered as read and the previous question be considered as ordered on the concurrent resolution on adoption without intervening motion or demand for division of the question except for two hours of debate divided and controlled by representative royce representative engel and their -- or their designee. the speaker pro tempore: is there snox hearing none so ordered. 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 june 16, 2015, at 11:02 a.m. that the senate passed senate 565. signed sincerely, karen l. haas. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from georgia seek recognition? mr. collins: by direction of the committee on rules i call up resolution 315 and ask for its immediate consideration. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the resolution. the clerk: house calendar number 41. house resolution 315. resolved that at any time after the adoption of this resolution the speaker may, pursuant to clause 2-b of rule 18, declare the house resolved into the committee of -- into the committee of the whole house on the state of the union for consideration of the bill h.r. 2596, authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2016 for intelligence and intelligence-related activities

of the united states government, the community management account and the central intelligence agency retirement and disability system and for other purposes. the first reading of the bill shall be dispensed with. all points of order against consideration of the bill are waived. general debate shall be confined to the bill and amendments specified in this section and shall not exceed one hour equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the permanent select committee on intelligence. after general debate the bill shall be considered for amendment under the five-minute rule. in lieu of the amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the permanent select committee on intelligence now printed in the bill, it shall be in order to consider as an original bill for the purpose of amendment under the five-minute rule an amendment in the nature of a substitute consisting of the text of rules committee print 114-19. that amendment in the nature of a substitute shall be considered as read. all points of order against that amendment in the nature of a substitute are waived. no amendment to that amendment

in the nature of a substitute shall be in order except those printed in the report of the committee on rules accompanying this resolution. each such amendment may be offered only in the order printed in the report, may be offered only by a member designated in the report, shall be considered as read, shall be debatable for the time specified in the report equally divided and controlled by the proponent and an opponent, shall not be subject to amendment, and shall not be subject to a demand for division of the question in the house or in the committee of the whole. all points of order against such amendments are waived. at the conclusion of consideration of the bill for amendment, the committee shall rise and report the bill to the house with such amendments as may have been adopted. any member may nand a separate vote in the house on -- demand a separate vote in the house on any amendment adopted or any amendment made in order as original text. the previous question shall be considered as ordered on the bill and amendments thereto to final passage without

intervening motion except one motion to recommit with or without instructions. section 2, notwithstanding clause 8 of rule 20, further proceedings on the recorded vote ordered on the question of reconsideration of the vote on the question of concurring in the matter comprising the remainder of title 2 of the senate amendment to h.r. 1314 may continue to be postponed through the legislative day of thursday, july 30, 2015. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from georgia is now recognized for one hour. mr. collins: mr. speaker, for the purposes of debate only i yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from florida pending which i yield myself such time as i may consume. during the consideration of this resolution, all time is yielded for purposes of debate only. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from georgia is recognized for as such time as he may consume. the speaker pro tempore: mr. speaker, i ask unanimous

consent that all members may have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks -- mr. collins: mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. mr. collins: thank you, mr. speaker. i'm pleased to bring forward today this rule on behalf of the rules committee. this rule provides for a robust amendment debate on a wide variety of issues related to the authorization of funds for 16 intelligence agencies. this rule provides for the consideration of h.r. 2596 the intelligence authorization act for fiscal year 2016. the rules committee met on this measure yesterday evening and heard testimony from both the chairman of the committee and the ranking member. in addition to seefings amendment testimony from mult -- receiving amendment testimony from multiple members. it is brought forward a structured rule. there were 29 amendments submitted in total. of those 29, i'm pleased a full house will debate 16 amendments over half, that were submitted. the amendments were bipartisan. in fact, demonstrated in the unity of this body and advancing funds that would go directly to fighting terrorism

proliferation and weapons of mass destruction. to provide for the common defense, it's a common phrase to us all, and one that clearly sets forth the most basic responsibility of our government. a responsibility that the members of the rules committee, the intelligence committee and, yes, i believe the entire house do not take lightly. this rule provides for one hour of general debate equally divided and controlled by the chairman and the ranking member of the permanent select committee on intelligence. as most of the intelligence budget involves highly classified programs, all members -- let me repeat -- all members were given to review the classified annexes to the underlying legislation prior to rules committee consideration. members should also be aware that section 2 of the rule provides that the motion to reconsider the vote on the trade adjustment assistance, or total 2 of the senate amendment to h.r. 1314, may continue to be postponed until thursday, july 30, 2015. this postponement was necessary

to allow the house and senate leadership and the white house to consider legislative options related to this action on trade adjustment assistance. i am proud of the work undertaken by the intelligence committee to advance this vitally important legislation whose consideration is provided for by this rule. there are a few key provisions that i want to ensure members are aware of because i believe they speak to the overwhelming awareness the intelligence committee possesses of the responsibility of congress to protect this nation from terrorism and also from our unwavering fidelity to the united states constitution. first, section 302 of the underlying legislation provides that the authorization of appropriations by this act shall not be deemed to institute authority for the conduct of any -- coninstitute authority for the conduct that is not otherwise authorized by the constitution or the laws of the united states. section 303 and 304 requires specific elements of the executive branch to provide congress a timely notification requirement on key intelligence activities. congressional notification requirements generally remain a

vital important mechanism to ensure that congress' able to conduct robust oversight. notification requirements specific to the intelligence community are even more essential given the classified and delicate nature of the situation of our intelligence agencies face every day. the classification of documents and the decisionmaking factors that go into such classification have historically been an area of great interest and are concerned by members of this body and the citizens we represent. in the interests by members and the public at large the intelligence committee's report on h.r. 2596, they specifically state that the committee seeks to improve its visibility into the classification process and better understand how the intelligence community determines the classification level of especially sensitive reporting and analysis. in the underlying legislation, the committee carries out this goal by directing the director of national intelligence to provide within 60 days of the

enactment a report to the congressional intelligence committee's outlying each instance in the past five years that office of director of national intelligence or any other entity within the executive branch directed an element of the intelligence community to begin disseminating existing, uncompartmented intelligence reporting through a compartment or subcompartment. this is one of several reporting requirements in the legislation to serve to enhance congress' role in and understanding of the classification process. again emphasizing congress' oversight role. the committee has done a good job in clarifying that the underlying legislation directs the central intelligence agency to provide the congressional intelligence committees based on the documents collected in the may 1, 2011 raid that killed osama bin laden. we live in a dangerous world and face constant and evolving threats from terrorist groups like al qaeda boko haram al-shabaab and isis.

these groups successfully use the internet to anonymously build their resources, both human and financial. the united states government must maintain and enhance their ability to counter extremists online by understanding how and where terrorist groups operate, we can more effectively fight for freedom at home and abroad. i am pleased to see strong provisions in the legislation that will further this goal. these provisions that i have just spoke of are just a few examples of the thoughtful and difficult work that intelligence committee undertook to bring forward this legislation that authorizes critical national security functions while staying within the funding constraints of the budget control act, or b.c.a. i want to thank the intelligence committee and their staff for their hard work on the authorization measure, and with that, mr. speaker i reserve the balance of my time . the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from georgia reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from florida is recognized. mr. hastings: thank you very much mr. speaker. i thank the gentleman, my friend from georgia, for yielding the customary 30 minutes for debate, and i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the

gentleman from florida is recognized for such time as he may consume. mr. hastings: mr. speaker, this rule provides for consideration of h.r. 2596, the intelligence authorization act for fiscal year 2016 as well as provides that the motion to reconsider the vote on passage of the trade adjustment assistance measure may continue to be postponed until the end of the legislative day on july 30. first, i commend the efforts of chairman nunes and ranking member schiff for their efforts in crafting a bill with largely bipartisan support that provides our nation's intelligence community with the resources they need to keep us safe. our national security relies on the continued strength of our intelligence community. as we face ongoing security challenges both at home and abroad from threats such as

isil, lone wolf attacks the emergeans of cybercrime -- emergence of cybercrime as well as the unknown challenges that may be awaiting us, a strong intelligence apparatus is of the utmost importance. this legislation will do much to meet those challenges. specifically, this bill supports investments in cutting edge technology like spy satellite enhances our nation's human intelligence capabilities provides resources to safeguard valuable signals intelligence collection and partners with our foreign allies to maximize the reach of our intelligence efforts. this investment in our country's intelligence infrastructure comes at a critically important time. as you know the office of personnel management recently suffered a disastrous breach. hackers were able to target

o.p.m. and gain access to personnel data, including employee's names, addresses, social security numbers and numerous other personal details. perhaps most disturbingly o.p.m. suggests houses the applications and files submitted by those applying for security clearances with data going back until 1985. these files were compromised as well leading some experts to suggest that the compromise of these files could have tremendous negative effects for our human intelligence gathering capabilities. the cyberattacks represent a critical threat to our national security. we all love the convenience of -- that technology provides us but we must also be prepared to invest in technologies that will protect us from those who

wish to sabotage our security in the virtual world. it is time for the o.p.m. to implement and abide by best practices so that we never face a data breach like the one we saw last week. to the extent that congress will play a role in securing our virtual infrastructure, we should work as quickly as possible to ensure that our employees and our most sensitive material are not needlessly exposed to those who wish to do us harm. mr. speaker while i support the strong national security protections this authorization provides, i am extremely disappointed yet again in how my republican colleagues have skirted the fiscal cuts imposed by sequestration in order to fund the things that they care about while ignoring the

effects such fool-hearted cuts have on the vital domestic programs that they don't seem to care about. we have people hurting all over this nation because of this irresponsible and senseless policy of sequestration. republicans claim to be using this policy as an important tool to rein in out-of-control government spending. yet when sequestration affects programs and areas of the budget they care about, they magically get around this dilemma by using accounting gimmicks. that is just what they've done here in this measure. the majority has yet again used the overseas contingency operations account to evade sequestration spending caps. wouldn't it be nice if republicans wanted to evade

spending caps for the department of education so that we can get around sequestration and properly educate our children? or if they could use accounting tricks to get around sequestration to fully fund and repair our crumbling infrastructure. or if they were also inclined to use their budgetary magic to get around sequestration caps to properly fund critically important agencies like the environmental protection agency so that our children and our grandchildren can continue to have access to clean water and clean air, but alas all we get from the majority is more of the same budgetary double standard. using tricks to get around spending caps on things you like to spend money on and then require sequester, sequester on things you don't like to spend money on.

let's stop pretending. that isn't a plan to rein in government spending. that's just spending taxpayer money on things you deem worthy of unfettered spending and ignoring programs for political reasons that you don't even like even though such programs remain vital to our country's success. . . mr. speaker, many on my side of the aisle have taken exception to the facility on guantanamo bay since day one. i certainly have. once again the republicans look to continue operation of this prison when we should be working to bring about its orderly closure. we are better than this prison. as a country dedicated to the rule of law, as a country that inspires people the world over to work for and even die for the establishment of democratic rules, we are better than this

prison. this prison is an exercise in kafkaesque justice, which has long worked to undermine our standing with our allies and help terrorist organizations recruit more and more fighters. look, i don't think that anyone is arguing that if we close the prison, then the myriad terrorist groups who use it as a recruiting tool would no longer have people joining their ranks. but it would be one less arrow in their quiver. and for that reason, we need to work together to close the prison as quickly as possible. in doing so we will not jeopardize the safety of our country, but will act more fully to reflect our commitment to democracy and the rule of law. we know, and i know, having been in the judiciary that our justice system is more than capable of handling the prosecution of terrorists no

matter where they are, including those held in guantanamo bay. we have successfully tried richard reid umar farq, faziel shazad and dzokar tsarnaev, the boston bomber, and we have either sentenced them to death or life imprisonment in our most secure prisons. at last night's rules committee meet, my friends on the other side of the aisle decided to make a last-minute change to today's rule. i might add further pollute today's rule. that last minute change allows for the postponement of the motion to reconsider t.a.a. over the course of my tenure in congress, i voted to support thousands of pieces of legislation. in the 20-plus years i have served in this body, i can think

of only three votes which i deeply regret making, and one of those was in support of nafta. in the years since, i've seen after nafta a decrease in american jobs, a rollback of critical environmental protections here and in mexico where i was promised that the environmental circumstances would be cleaned up and they were not. and a stagnation of wages that have prevented the financial upward mobility of working class and middle class americans and has ground poor american into poverty beyond belief. if we're going to create trade policy that is worthy of future generations then we must ensure that that policy strengthens, not weakens, labor rights.

it must strengthen, not weaken, environmental protection. it must ensure other countries' responsibility to adhere to basic human rights. it must expand and strengthen our middle class, not squeeze hardworking americans in favor of corporate interests. the legislation included in this rule today is part of a trade package that does nothing to bolster these important priorities. finally, as i stated time and again, i take issue with the man for the which these important measures are being considered. legislation as important as the one at hand deserve an open and transparent process where members of both parties and both houses of congress may debate and offer amendments as they please. this process envisioned and designed by our founding fathers

to serve as a safeguard to democracy continues to be eroded by the majority's insistence on grouping multiple unrelated bills together under one rule and limiting the number of amendments that can be made in order as well as the time available for debate. there were amendments offered last night, for example on congresswoman -- for example, congresswoman speier offered whistleblower protection not made in order. my colleague, representative schweikert from arizona, and i offered a very sensible measure under the intelligence provision to allow for, as a sense of congress only, say that we will participate with due knee shah's intelligence operation in a more pronounced manner. totally innocuous but at the very same time helping a country that may very well make the

bridge to democracy and certainly has been an ally in intelligence and a needed one in light of the number of people that come up from north africa through due knee shah and wind up fighting in the northeast. -- in the neevet. if we are truly to operate as a -- in the middle east. if we are truly to operate as a democratic body we must do more to make sure that our pieces of legislation are afforded the time and consideration they rightly deserve. thank you mr. speaker, and i reserve the plans of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from georgia is recognized. mr. collins: thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, i appreciate the gentleman from florida. if we want -- one of the things that i, coming onto the rules committee have found is the really, the vigorous debates we do have and the gentleman from florida, we have had many of them. that's a good place for them.

it's a good place also here on the floor to discuss what really is the focus on very clearly a rule for a bill, then there's a procedural issue that we are extending to t.a.a. reconsideration until july 30. i'm understand what he's saying but i want to make clear to members that is what is happening. we're working on the majority side for a process that's open. 16 amendments made in order, will be debated here on the floor of the house and voted. i think that's what the republican majority is focused on. one of the things that came up and i wanted to be clear mr. speaker is the gentleman brings up a point it's about priorities. about priorities and we're dealing with authorizations and spending bills is what we're dealing with in the majority here we have made it very clear i believe from the republican majority standpoint, although i personally and others may have discussions on how we use overseas con tinsen --

contingency funds and those have been debated on this floor and should be debated on this floor, however one of the things we are doing is we are putting priorities first. priorities for national defense. securing our national interest. and in light of this bill making sure that our country is safe abroad and here from tax -- from people who don't like us. i don't buy the argument. the debate on guantanamo is a different shmb but the argument that if we close it up, it takes away one recruiting piece. i'm sorry, boko haram and others do not hate us only because of the prison. they hate us because we're free. they hate us because we have a society that is open. i understand the debate that we want to have but let's make it crystal clear. there was no guantanamo when they ran -- rammed planes into the world trade center. there was no guantanamo at that time. they just don't like us. and let's make that very clear.

funding is appropriate. we will debate those entirely and we will continue to. the republicans will still look out for jobs and those working in the middle class and those that are trying to find their families, priorities, and their own economic sphere and looking at it in a country that's in debt and trying to make sure we make good fiscal decisions. our priorities are that we help businesses start. we encourage the creation of jobs. not a government strangulation of jobs. that's what resources do. with this bill, this is about our intelligence community. this is a rule that supports an authorization coming from a very difficult committee that does a very difficult job. we're supporting a rule that funds those to keep us safe and does the things that keeps america free. that's the argument we'll continue to have. i appreciate, mr. speaker, the other debate that we want to have here but let's be focused this rule is about that, also

about policy decision or procedural decision in this rule. with that, mr. speaker, i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from florida is recognized. mr. hastings: at this time, i'm pleased to yield two minutes to the distinguished gentlewoman from connecticut, my friend, ms. delauro. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from connecticut is recognized for two minutes. ms. delauro: mr. speaker, the vote on trade adjustment assistance failed in the house of representatives last friday by a 3-1 margin. yet, this rule today would extend the revote on trade adjustment assistance through the end of july. this is one more attempt to play games with the future of hardworking families. american workers demand and they deserve respect, they deserve a living wage, and the right not to have their job shipped

overseas. that is what we are united in fighting for. a vote for this rule is a vote for fast track a vote for fast strack a vote against jobs and against wages. the united states trade policy has been failing american workers. failing american consumers and families for 20 years. the u.s.-korea free trade agreement has already cost up to 75000 jobs. and it was just passed three years ago. up to five million jobs have been destroyed by currency manipulation. and a number of the signatories to this trade agreement, their policy is to manipulate their country, to have their goods sold at a lower price than american goods putting american

workers out of jobs and lowering their wages. joseph stieglitz, the noble laureate in economics has written, inequality is not inevitable. it is a choice we make with the rules we create to structure our economy. trade policy is one of those choices. and if we approve fast track we throw away our ability our constitutional authority, to represent the people who sent us here in good faith. we throw away that ability to be able to fix the flaws in the trade agreement like the transpacific partnership, to the detriment of millions of american families. i urge a no vote on this rule. the speaker pro tempore: the time of the gentlelady has expired. the gentleman from georgia is recognized. mr. collins: reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from georgia continues to reserve. the gentleman from florida is recognized. mr. hastings: thank you very much mr. speaker. at this time i'm very pleased to

yield two minutes to the distinguished gentleman from texas. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for two minutes. mr. doggett: friday we sent a message to the fast trackers, no so fast. 48 hours ago, republican leaders were telling the world that at this moment we would be voting to approve fast track. now the fast trackers have become fact trackers. pushing back the votes. the only reason that they seek this postponement in this rule of up to six weeks is that they do not have the votes to approve fast track today. and the only way they can get those votes today is to use this strange shenanigan of kecking it and cloaking it in a rule for the authorization of our intelligence agency. after friday's fast track vote

one official said, quote, vote against this trade adjustment assistance, those people are adding their names to the death certificate for it. let's play it straight for a change. t.a.a. is not authorized now. it expired last year. its future depends not upon this authorization, but upon an adequate level of funding. the elementary and secondary education act. the juvenile justice and delynn quincy act, and many more have not been authorized for years but they continue to operate perfectly well based upon appropriated funds. this t.a.a. argument is phony. you know, really, it doesn't take much intelligence to see what's happening here. these fast trackers are desperate and this postponement vote for this extend of this nature is unprecedented in the

history of this congress. it has never happened before in american history that someone has asked to postpone a vote for six weeks and understand what that means. understand that they are looking for the ideal time, morning noon, or night to muscle through a policy, do you have another minute? mr. hastings: i yield the gentleman 30 seconds. mr. doggett: they are looking for the ideal time to muscle through a broken trade policy that a majority of this house and the american do not want this rule provides that the speaker, any time of day, can come with no notice new york debate, and say we're voting to send this bill to the president's desk. . what really needs adjusting is not the trade assistance but the no compromise, that gives us broken trade policies. this vote wouldn't be so close if this process hadn't been so

closed. reject this rule. vote for democracy. don't change the precedents of the house. don't let this be muscled through. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from georgia is recognized. mr. collins: continue to reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from georgia continues to reserve. the gentleman from florida is recognized. mr. hastings: mr. speaker, i'm very pleased to yield two minutes to the distinguished gentleman from georgia, my good friend, mr. scott. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from georgia is recognized for two minutes. mr. scott: thank you very much, mr. speaker. ladies and gentlemen, what's about to happen on this floor with this rule is a direct violation of the united states constitution. for in the united states constitution it clearly says that it is the united states congress shall have the power to regulate commerce with foreign nations. and in this rule is a clear violation of that. we already voted down

overwhelmingly 302-126. republicans and democrats. it was the foremost bipartisan vote in this 2112 century -- 21st century. the very thing that the american people are crying for. now, why? why did hamilton, alexander hamilton and thomas jefferson and james madison all agree very strong very independent minds. alexander hamilton and thomas jefferson could hardly bear to be in the same room with each other but they agreed on this. because they knew that every state had representatives in congress to look out for jobs that could be shipped overseas. this is the primary reason, ladies and gentlemen, look at every trade agreement.

this country has lost over two million manufacturing jobs to china. as a result of the china deal. over 150,000 jobs to mexico. yeah, it created jobs. not in the united states. what kind of jobs? these are jobs that impacted at the lower and middle income levels of our economy. it is the middle class that is the heart and the soul of america. let this congress stand up and reject this rule. we proved our mettle with that 302 vote. congress i'm asking you, the american people are asking you, do what alexander hamilton and thomas jefferson and james madison asked us to do. and let it be the congress that regulates commerce with foreign nations.

the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from georgia is recognized. mr. collins: i continue to reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from georgia continues to reserve the balance of his time. the gentleman from florida is recognized. mr. hastings: mr. speaker, i yield two minutes at this time to the distinguished gentleman from california my friend, mr. sherman. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california is recognized for two minutes. mr. sherman: intelligence is critical to our national security. it should not be besmirched by a controversial and unrelated procedural shenanigan unprecedented in the annals of the house of representatives. in the words of the president of the united states it is time to play it straight. t.a.a. and t.p.a., that package was voted on. it was defeated. we're done. play it straight. write new legislation, put

together a new package, bring it to the floor of the house, see if it has the majority. that's playing it straight. instead it an unprecedented move, a vote we took last week is being held in never-never land to be revoted on as late as the end of july. that's right. early june votes tabulated in late july. if you're against unprecedented shenanigans, vote no on the rule. if you're for playing it straight, vote no on the rule. if you're against t.a.a., vote no on the rule. if you're against t.p.a., if you're against fast track, vote no on the rule. we should -- if you vote for an unprecedented procedural shenanigan, an unprecedented procedural mutation, today you can be sure it will be used against you and your district

and your beliefs tomorrow. and if you're not against fast track, you should be. because it gives an egormous ash ash enormous gift to china and we get nothing in return -- enormous gift to china and we get nothing in return. china does currency manipulation. this deal that's put on the fast track enshrines the view that currency manipulation is just fine go to it. a giant gift to china. in addition, the rules of origin provisions say that goods that the manufacturer admits are 50% or 60% made in china which means actually 70% or 80% made in china. get fast tracked into the united states. vote no on this procedural mutation. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from georgia is recognized. mr. collins: thank you, mr. speaker. just for a moment let's focus

back on the rule and the bill that is underlying and the procedural issue that's been discussed. it's out in the open. it's not the end or anything else. it's been there and discussed. i want to get back to the fact that the rule itself which is stand alone. we'll be voting on an intelligence bill. we'll have a debate on an intelligence bill. among other things a reminder of what this legislation does. it counters the prolive of w.m.d. that's a separate bill. this is what we'll be discussing. it has funds to end the efforts to recover unauthorized disclosures of intelligence capabilities. it sustains activities in afghanistan and iraq to continue to fight against isis, al qaeda and the taliban. it invests in the resiliency of our national security architecture. it provides policy discretion to sensitive operations. it enhances investment in military intelligence surveillance and reconnaissance aircraft.

it requires a report every 60 days on foreign fighters in syria and iraq. this is the bill. the underlying bill that we are discussing. i just wanted to make a reminder of that as we have discussions on different parts of this rule, let's be reminded also that we are dealing with a stand alone bill. with that i reserve. for a question. mr. hastings: all of the things you said are in the measure are true. but do you also agree that it is unprecedented that we have included a measure to delay an already voted on rule? never before has that been done, to your knowledge has it been? mr. collins: it is a fact part of this rule, the gentleman from -- mr. speaker, the gentleman states in whatever terms he wants to give, but it is in the rule. we have not made a secret of that. it is part of this rule. we can discuss either part. i was focusing on the intelligence part. mr. hastings: thank you very kindly.

the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from florida is recognized. the gentleman from georgia reserves the balance of his time. mr. hastings: thank you mr. speaker. at this time i'm very pleased to yield two minutes to the distinguished gentlewoman from texas, my good friend, ms. jackson lee. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from texas is recognized for two minutes. ms. jackson lee: i thank the gentleman from florida. let me thank the gentleman for the astute question that you asked which is one that i'd like to follow up on. mr. speaker let me say to the gentleman from georgia, he is quite right there are very serious and important components of the intelligence bill covered by this rule. and as many of us have experienced over the last couple of days, we are in and out of intelligence and security briefings because that is the era which we live. in most instances, members draw their concern from the responsibility they have for protecting the american people. i am on the homeland security committee. and have continued on that committee since the tragedy evenous act of 9/11 and before when the select committee was in

place. so i have no karl with some of the important el-- quarrel with some of the important elements of this legislation. the gentleman from georgia should recognize this is an aberration. there are three points i would like to make. first of all it is long overdue for getting rid of the sequester. this joke that was played on members and the american people only because the supercommittee not because any individual members, but there was a supercommittee structure put in plies, either the time ran out and could not come to a budget conclusion. so this was the ultimate end. members didn't vote on this. they voted on the supercommittee and then this was the hatchet that fell when the supercommittee did not work. sequester should be something that speaker boehner puts on the floor and immediately gets rid of. the reason why i say is i am going to talk about the shenanigans with the trade bill. what i am going to say is that the overseas contingency fund is being used to bolster up this

bill, the intelligence bill, but i can't get those resources to be utilized for infrastructure or summer jobs or fixing the education system that we have responsibilities for or providing opportunities for young people to finish their education or criminal justice reform. so this is -- 33% pumped up when used by funds that are not in this stream -- does the gentleman have another -- mr. mavings: i yield the -- mr. hastings: i yield an additional 30 seconds. ms. jackson lee: thank you. the funding is not in the stream of funding that other appropriators have to utilize. that is wrong. then i might conclude on the shenanigans of the trade fix, if you will i am for t.a.a., the trade adjustment assistance. i want it to be voted on straight up and down like many members do to provide for workers and not have

unfortunately, the addition that was added coming from the other body. so now we know that whatever shenanigans that will come up and it probably won't be in the way that will help american workers. mr. speaker, this rule should be voted down because we need an opportunity to work on behalf of the american workers, to get rid of see quester, and to find a way to move--- sequester, and to find way to move this country forward. the speaker pro tempore: gentleman from georgia is recognized. mr. collins: we'll reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from georgia continues to reserve. the gentleman from florida is recognized. mr. hastings: thank you very much, mr. speaker. quester, and to find

toward that end among the things that were sought to be included in we were going to include the t.a.a., measure, then the ranking member ms. slaughter, proposed on behalf of the minority that we also include a vote on the transpacific t.p.p. for the reason, one t.a.a. was overwhelmingly, 3-1 defeated. t.p.p. passed by a very thin margin. so if we are going to twist arms and find methodologies that

employ perhaps to try and change the minds of members over a six-week period of time, then perhaps it would be those of us that are opposed to the measure would have an opportunity to try to toward that end among the persuade some of those people who caused the thin margin to pass on t.p.p. we felt that was a fairness measure. at least if you were going to include it, that should have been included as well. now, where we are now is -- before proceeding, mr. speaker, perhaps i should learn how much time each side has at this time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from florida has 4 1/2 minutes remaining. the gentleman from georgia --

the gentleman from georgia has 19 1/2 minutes remaining. mr. hastings: then i will continue unless the gentleman from georgia -- mr. collins: if the gentleman will yield. we're prepared to close. we have no other speakers. if you're prepared to close, you can go ahead and prepare to close. mr. hastings: mr. speaker, at this time i'm waiting for one additional speaker but perhaps i can engage in a colloquy with my colleague from texas. you served both on the intelligence committee -- mr. doggett: you served on both the intelligence and the rules committee. there is reason to authorize intelligence but it has nothing to do with the sneak attack to put in a postponement that has never been done in american history, where never has anyone sought to delay for six weeks the consideration of this bill that we're doing today, isn't

that correct? mr. hastings: i think you're absolutely correct. it is unprecedented. at the very same time, as my friend from georgia pointed out they have done so transparently by putting it here. that does not mean it would not be used at some point in the future. mr. collins: and -- mr. dog get: does this rule provide any -- mr. doggett: does this rule provide any notice to the house? can they come out here at any time, perhaps when the floor is as empty as it is now, and give no notice to the members of the house that they're about to send this bill to the president's desk, have no debate on the rule, but then have a vote here perhaps a day when members are out on important business in their district basically picking the best time because they are so desperate to force through a bill that they know a majority of this house does not support and that the american people don't support because it will just foist off on us a

broken, failed trade policy that does not respect the interest of american people is that's what's happening? mr. hastings:s that certainly allowed any time before july 30, the measure could be brought to the floor and it could be brought to the floor without any notice to the membership because it is a motion to reconsider it is a part of this particular rule sought by the speaker of the house, i might add, and therefore it could be brought at any time under the aegis of the speaker's authority. mr. doggett: was the gentleman present in the rules committee when every single improvement to this rules committee was rejected by the rules committee, not with your vote of course but a majority of the rule committees said no to telling members of this congress as much as thbt bill as the vietnamese po lit bureau already knows --

politburo already knows saying no to at least the standards on environment that the bush administration agreed to, saying no to giving putting the foreign corporations on the same level as our american corporations and businesses, that foreign corporations wouldn't have an advantage to come in and attack health and safety and environmental rules that might be established by the congress or the state of florida or a city like san antonio or austin because under this fast track bill we're headed toward jeopardizing those rules and those state laws and those federal laws that deal with the needs of the american people and letting these foreign corporations circumvent them as they did in canada recently to demand millions of dollars of taxpayer money for a decision locally that -- to just prevent the expansion of a 1/4ry. we can't have that happen but the rules committee would not allow taos address those

problems. mr. hastings: many of those measures, i'm at this time going to have to close. i would urge that members understand we already voted on this measure and it was defeated as i say, 3-1. i'm prepared to close at this time, if my colleague is prepared to close. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from florida has one minute remaining. mr. hastings: that's enough. mr. speaker, robust funding for our intelligence infrastructure is clearly need and indeed welcome but enough -- but enough is enough. it's time for republicans to stop squeezing important domestic programs through their arbitrary implementation of sequester. we must invest in education in this country. we must invest in our decaying infrastructure. we must invest in a clean environment and we must invest in a strong middle class. republicans want to make

investments in our intelligence community, great, so do i. we all do. but at some point we have to start asking, what is it that the community is protecting? without investments in education infrastructure and our middle class, we risk undermining what make this is country so exceptional and worth protecting in the first place. i urge a no vote on the rule and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from florida has yielded back and close dead bait for the minority. the gentleman from georgia is recognized to close debate for the majority. mr. collins: thank you, mr. speaker. i appreciate the discussion we have had over the last little bit. i appreciate the gentleman from florida. again, although we have some differences those have been evident today the rule provides for ample debate on the floor and the opportunity to debate and vote on up to 16 amendments offered by a largely bipartisan group of members. i look forward to those debates. i look forward to debate on how best to provide cools -- tools for our intelligence community and combat the dangerous threats we face while still respecting

the constitutional and budgetary restrains. those are things that sometimes in the midst of a discussion today got lost in that this is a separate vote that we're going to be voting on the intelligence bill. there's a procedural issue that's part of this that is again not snuck in, it's been posted, it's been online. it's there for members to see. when we look at priorities, again, i think for us it goes back again to the overall budgetary and authorization process, the republican majority stands for protecting our national interest protecting and empowering voters who send us here, not for growing and embowering an ever encroaching federal government. this is what the budget reflects, that's the priorities of the american people and the priorities of the republican majority. with that, i yield back the balance of my time and move the previous question on the resolution. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from georgia yielded back the balance of his time and has moved the previous question. without objection the previous question is ordered. the question is on adoption of the resolution. those in favor say aye.

those opposed, no. the ayes have it this eare lees -- the resolution is agreed to. without objection the motion to reconsider is laid on the table. mr. hastings: mr. speaker, i ask for the yeas and nays. the speaker pro tempore: the yeas and nays are requested. those favoring a votey the yeas and nays will rise. a sufficient number having risen, the yeas and nays are ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device. pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20, this 15-minute vote on adoption of house resolution 315 will be followed by a five-minute vote on agreeing to the speaker's approval of the journal if ordered. this is a 15-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]

the speaker pro tempore: on this vote the yeas are 237, the nays are 188.

the speaker pro tempore: on this vote, the yeas are 236, the nays are 189. the resolution is adopted. without objection, the motion to reconsider is laid on the table. pusuant to clause 8 of rule 20, the unfinished business is the question on agreeing to the speaker's approval of the journal which the chair will put de novo. the question is on agreeing to the speaker's approval of the journal. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. the journal stands approved.

the chair lays before the house a message. the clerk: to the congress of the united states, i am pleased to transmit to the congress pursuant to section 12-p of 123-b of the atomic energy act of 1954 as amended 42 u.s.c. the text of the proposed agreement between the government of the united states of america and the government of the republic of korea concerning peaceful uses of nuclear energy. the agreement. i'm also pleased to transmit by written a-- my written approval concerning the agreement and an unclassified nuclear proliferation statement concerning the proposed agreement. in accordance with section 123 -- of the act designated --

designated by title 12 as amended by title 7, public law 105-277, two classified annexes to the mfa -- mpas prepared by the secretary of state in consultation with the director of national intelligence will be submitted to the congress separately. joint memorandum submitted to me by the secretaries of state and energy and a letter from the chairman of a nuclear regulatory commission stating that the views of the commission are also enclosed. aaddendum containing a comp rehence i analysis of the export control system of the republic of korea, r.o.k., with respect to nuclear-related matters, including interactions with other countries of proliferation concern and the actual or suspected nuclear or missile related transfers to such countries pursuant to section 102-a-w of the national act of

1947, 50 u.s.c. 30-24-w submitted separately by the director of national intelligence. the proposed agreement has been negotiated in accordance with the act and other applicable law. in my judgment, it meets all applicable statutory requirements and will be advanced to the nonproliferation and other foreign policy interests of the united states. the proposed agreement contains all the requirements established by 153-a of the act. it provides a comprehensive framework for peaceful nuclear cooperation with the r.o.k. based on a mutual commitment to nuclear nonproliferation. it would commit the transfer of materials, equipment, include regular actors, components, information and technology for nuclear research and nuclear power production. it would not permit the transfer of restricted data and sensitive nuclear technology or technology or information that is not in the public domain concerning fabrication of nuclear fuel

containing plutonium could only be transferred if specifically provided by an agreement to proposed agreement or a separate agreement. the proposed agreement would establish a high level commission, hlbc, to be led by the deputy secretary of energy for the government of the united states of america, and a vice minister of the foreign affairs of the government of r.o.k. the proposed -- the purpose of the hlbc is to facilitate peaceful nuclear and strategic cooperation between the parties and ongoing dialogue regarding areas of mutual interest in civil nuclear energy, including civil nuclear fuel cycle. the proposed agreement will have an initial term of 20 years and would renew for one additional period of five years unless either party noted that at least two years prior to its expiration, that it does not want to renew the proposed

agreement. the proposed agreement also requires the parties to consult as soon as possible after the 17th anniversary of entry into force to decide whether to pursue an extension of the proposed agreement. in the event of termination of the proposed agreement, key nonproliferation conditions and controls will continue in effect as long as any nuclear material, moderator material, byproduct material, equipment, or component for proposed agreement remains in the territory of the party concerned or under its jurisdiction or control anywhere or until such time as the parties agree that in the case of nuclear material or moderated material such items are no longer usable for any nuclear activities relevant from the point of view of international safeguards or have become tragically irrecoverable or in the case of equipment, component or byproduct material such items are no longer usable for nuclear

purposes. the r.o.k. has a strong track record of nonproliferation on its government and consistently reiterated its commitment to nonproliferation. the r.o.k. is a party to the treaty on nonproliferation of nuclear weapons as the international atomic energy safeguard agreement and additional protocol in force. is a member of the foreign multilateral nonproliferation export control regime and is an active participant in the proliferation security initiative. in more detailed discussion of the r.o.k.'s civil nuclear program and policies and practices including its nuclear export policies and practices is provided in the m.t.a. act and in two classified annexes to the submitted to you separately. as noted above the director of the national intelligence will provide an addendum to the npas containing a comprehensive

analysis of the export control system of the r.o.k. with respect to nuclear related matters. i have considered the views and recommendations of the interested departments and agencies in reviewing the proposed agreement and have determined that its performance will promote and will not constitute an unreasonable risk to the common defense and security. accordingly i have approved a proposed agreement and authorized its execution and urge that the congress give favorable consideration. this transmission shall constitute a submittal for purposes of both sections 123-b and 123-b of the act. my administration is prepared to begin immediately the senate foreign relations committee and the house foreign affairs committee as provided in section 123-b upon completion of the 30 days of continuous session review provided for in section 123-b the 60 days of continuous

session review provided for in section 123-b shall commence. signed, barack obama, the white house. june 16, 2015. the speaker pro tempore: will be referred to the committee on foreign affairs and ordered printed. for what purpose does the gentleman from california seek recognition? >> mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and insert extraneous material h.r. 2596 the intelligence authorization act for fiscal year 2016. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. pursuant to house resolution 315 and rule 18, the chair declares the house in the committee of the whole house on the state of the union for consideration of h.r. 2596. the chair appoints the gentleman from utah mr. bishop, to provide over -- preside over the committee of the whole.

mr. chermerinsky: the house is in the committee of the whole house on the state of the union for the consideration of h.r. 2596, which the clerk will report by title. the clerk: a bill to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2016, where intelligence and intelligence related activities of the united states government, the community management account, and the central intelligence agency retirement and disability system, and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule, the bill is considered as read the first time. the gentleman from california, mr. nunes and the gentleman from california, mr. schiff, will each control 30 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from california, mr. nunes. mr. nunes: mr. chair, i ask unanimous consent that my full statement be entered into the record. mr. chermerinsky: without objection. mr. nunes: mr. chair, the intelligence authorization act is the annual blueprint for the work of the intelligence community and america's military intelligence efforts. the bill sets priorities for our

critical intelligence efforts and the legal framework of guidance and oversight for those efforts. as you may recall the house has passed intelligence authorization bills with strong bipartisan support in the past several congresses. the ranking member, mr. schiff, and i worked in a bipartisan manner to draft this legislation in front of you today. passing annual intelligence authorization legislation is the most effective way for congress to exercise oversight over the executive branch and helps ensure that the country's intelligence agencies have the resources and authorities necessary to keep americans safe. this legislation passed unanimously out of our committee. as most of the intelligence budget involves highly classified programs, the bulk of the committee's recommendations each year are found in a classified annex of the bill, which has been available for members to review since june 4. among other initiatives, the bill provides authorization for critical national security functions, including fighting

terrorism countsering the proliferation of w.m.d., funding efforts to recover from unauthorized disclosures of intelligence capabilities, and investing in the resiliency of our national security space architecture. at an unclassified level i can report that the annex for fiscal year 2016 authorizes funding that is slightly below the president's budget request level. it's funding levels are in lined with the house passed defense appropriations bill for the national intelligence program, and with the national defense authorization act for the military intelligence program. overall, this bill sustained today's intelligence capabilities and provides for future capabilities while staying within the budget, the funding constraints of the budget control act, and the budget resolution. mr. chair we are currently facing one of the most challenging global environments in our nation's history, nearly 14 years after the 9/11 attack, the u.s. continues to hunt al qaeda and its affiliates. we have taken the fight to the enemy and achieved tremendous success, but despite various

strategies employed by two administrations to prevent the spread of radical islam that threat remains. the arab spring, civil war in syria, and the emergence of the islamic state of iraq in places such as north africa highlight only a few of the many events in the past several years that now define u.s. policy failures in the middle east. in just over a year, isil has exploded from largely localized norse in iraq to seriously challenge al qaeda as the vanguard of global jihad. moreover, nation states like russia and china continue to expand their spheres of influence and diminish u.s. clout worldwide. russia has takening advantage of indecisiveness -- mr. chermerinsky: the gentleman will suspend. the house is not in order. the chair would ask that members take their conversations off the floor and would give attention to the speaker. members again take their conversations off the floor.

the gentleman may proceed. mr. nunes: russia has taken advantage of indecisiveness in europe and exploited it on even leadership in the u.s. to pressure ukraine and its neighbors on poor russian interests. china bullies its neighbors in the south and east china sea and if left unchecked will likely exercise de facto control over maritime trade and its perceived territorial waters in the next decade. meanwhile, north korea and iran continue exercise to pose significant

proliferation risks and remains strategic threats to the u.s. and its allies. state actors can bring a tremendous amount of resources to counter u.s. policy. placing an immense burden on the intelligence community to collect information on, assess -- to assess these activities, carefully proliferation and accurately. perhaps more troubling, state and nonstate actors alike are developing new ways to protect power, particularly in cyberspace. cyberattacks are becoming so pervasive that network defenders are overwhelmed. attackers seem to gain access to sensitive systems at will. the most recent atacks on the office of personnel manage the servers possibly one of the most significant national security incidents in the past decade highlight the continued threat to our nation's infrastructure. mr. chair, in this year's intelligence authorization bill the committee has taken a great deal of care in addressing the wide range of issues described above. this bill is an essential tool in supporting our nation's efforts to tackle today's challenges while also directing the intelligence community mr. chair, in to make strategic investments in

the future. in particular, i believe the bill goes a long way towards encouraging the intelligence community to make much needed investments such as recovering from unauthorized disclosures-of strategic investments in the his help on the issues and look forward to working to the. i want to thank all committee staff on both sides of the aisle to support drafting this bill. the committee staff spent countless hours assisting members and finalizing the legislation. in particular, i would like to recognize our sandia labs fellow mr. randy smith. he's been with the committee for almost two years and will be leaving us soon to return to sandia. he has been a tremendous asset to this committee and i'd like to thank him for all of his hard work. i would also like to thank the men and women of the intelligence community for all

their efforts to continue to protect this nation. i look forward to passing this legislation. mr. chair thank you. i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman from california is recognized. mr. schiff: thank you, mr. chairman. i yield myself such time as i may consume. the chair: is recognized. mr. schiff: i want to say thank you to chairman nunes. this intelligence authorization act for fiscal year 2016 is our third major piece of legislation together and once again demonstrates the fruits of our commitment to bipartisanship. thank you, mr. chairman. we also have our difference of opinion from time to time, and on this bill we have some differences. now as long as we continue to work together, there is no end to the good we can accomplish. through our cyberbill and our surveillance reform bill, we have been guided by two core principles. first, that national security is truly the security of the entire nation and all americans. second, the national security can and must coexist through

privacy and civil liberties. i believe the bill today largely furthers these principles as well. the i.a.a. funds equips, and sets the priorities for the u.s. intelligence community and is a crucial vehicle by which congress provides oversight of the i.c. and ensures u.s. intelligence professionals and programs have the funds and authorities they need to keep us safe as well as our allies and partners. as the annual i.a.a. provides hundreds of pages of detailed guidance, strict authorizations and precise limitations it is also the single most important means by which congress conducts its oversight of the intelligence community. as in past years, this year's i.a.a. is a carefully considered bill and the result of thoughtful oversight. the fiscal year 2016 i.a.a. funds the intelligence community at about 1% below the president's budget request and about 7% above last year's enacted budget level.

the bill makes cuts to less effective programs. it adds money to underfunded programs. and requires intelligence agencies to regularly inform congress of their activities, ensuring funds are spent responsibly and lawfully. notably the bill today holds or fences significant amounts of money to make sure that congress as' direction is followed to the letter and on time. . i want to highlight a few particular aspects of the bill. it stand the long-standing emphasis on security reforms. it also continues to support our overhead architecture by funding our most critical space programs, investing in space protection and resiliencey preserving investments in cutting edge technologies and enhancing oversight of contracting and procurement practices. it also promotes enhancements to our foreign partner capabilities which are critical to multiplying the reach and impact of our own

intelligence efforts. it enhances human intelligence or humant capabilities which is understanding global events. it safeguards vulnerable signals intelligence while enhancing oversight of these and other sources of intelligence. it emphasizes collection to monitor and ensure compliance with treaties and potential international agreements. and it greatly enhances oversight of defense special operation forces activities worldwide. the bill also incorporates some excellent provisions championed by the democratic members of the intelligence committee as well as the republican members. in particular, i want to highlight mr. himes provision to enhance the quality of the metrics that receive to enable more thorough oversight. ms. sewell's multiple provisions to enhance security. mr. carson's provisions to have

f.b.i. allocation against domestic and foreign threats. and the role of the f.b.i. and d.n.i. in countering violent extremism, particularly in minors. ms. speieries provision to provide greater human rights oversight with certain foreign partners. mr. quigley's provisions regarding intelligence support to ukraine. and mr. swalwell's provision to ensure that department of energy national labs can work with local and state recipients of security grants. all this said while i bill largely reflects large choices i'm concerned that it uses the overseas contingencies operation's funding by the ill-conceived budget control act. i support the funding levels and the provisions which the i.a.a. offers but not how they fund them. we must undo sequestration not

just employ accounting tricks to evade its levels only for defense and national security-related items. even some domestic programs and agencies that contribute to our homeland security cannot qualify for o.c.o. dollars while vital programs like our children's education and our social services are left to languish. instead of arbitrary across-the-board cuts, let's do what this bill does substantively, make cuts to some areas, add money to others in a deliberate, well-thought out manner. it's time to forthrightly deal with sequestration for all of our national priorities and not just for defense. i'm also opposed to provisions in the bill which would tie the hands of the administration and prevent the orderly transfer of detainees from the detention center at combaunt bay. these restrictions have never been included in prior versions of the i.a.a. and there's no reason to introduce them into the i.a.a. process now. the bill goes even further than

restricting transfer of detainees to the united states, including a new provision which restricts transfers to, quote, combat zones unquote, a term that is so broad to include allies and partners such as jordan. as i've long said, keeping the guantanamo prison open serves as a recruitment tool for militants. it undercuts our relationships with our allies and undermines our international standing. all of that said the bill as a whole is largely a strong product and i appreciate the close partnership we've enjoyed with the chairman in working on it, but unfortunately i cannot support the bill so long as it includes these guantanamo restrictions and employs the o.c.o. budget gimmick at the expense of our domestic spending priorities. i look forward to a robust amendment process today, and i am acommitted to working with the chairman, the senate, the administration other committees of jurisdiction and members of congress to make critical improvements of the bill as it moves forward and

resolve issues. i thank you, mr. chairman, and i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from california. mr. nunes: mr. chair at this time i'd like to yield two minutes to the gentleman from north carolina mr. pittenger. the chair: the gentleman from north carolina is recognized for two minutes. mr. pittenger: thank you for your vital leadership on the committee. i rise in support of the authorization needed to protect and defending the united states and support critical national security programs, protecting americans from nation states and islamic terrorists. in december n.s.a. director admiral rogers warned that china has the capability of shutting down the american electric grid. secretary johnson warned the threat of attacks launched by sleeper cells in most of our states. isis continues to expand into new territory while americans are more at risk because president obama has no strategy

for defeating isis, who initially he referred to as the j.v. team. this is not the time to impede our tidges efforts. -- intelligence efforts. america faces grave danger from those who wish to destroy our way of life. please join me in this bipartisan support of this intelligence authorization act. let us be united in confronting the perilous threats of our adversaries. thank you and i yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from california. mr. schiff: thank you, mr. speaker. at this time i'd be pleased to yield two minutes to the gentleman from new york, mr. engel, the ranking member on the house foreign affairs committee. the chair: the gentleman from new york is recognized for two minutes. mr. engel: i thank my friend for yielding to me and i want to say that i appreciate the bipartisan hard work of chairman nunes and ranking member schiff, but i want to bring to the house's attention recent reports that this bill makes drastic cuts in our so-called covert support to the

moderate syrian opposition. a headline in the saturday "washington post" read, and i quote, secret c.i.a. efforts in syria faces large funding cut. if these reports are true, just as the moderate syrian forces may be starting to make progress, especially in the south of syria, then i'm afraid we may be making a big mistake. unfortunately, most members of the house don't know for certain if this legislation will reduce our support for the moderate opposition. those funding decisions are made behind closed doors and that's why i believe this bill is not the right place for us to be making decisions that have a major impact on our syria's strategy. i have no doubt that chairman nunes and ranking member schiff are determined to get the intelligence piece of syria response right but this merely is not an intelligence issue and our overall strategy in syria goes far beyond what is involved in a covert program. so i believe we shouldn't be

dealing with this problem in a piecemeal way. as we've been doing in the foreign affairs committee on a bipartisan basis, i urge my colleagues to take a step back, look at the big picture and address our syria policy in a way that makes sense and involves all the relevant players. i am troubled, if it's true, that this bill makes drastic cuts in our so-called covert support to the moderate syria opposition. i commend the hard work of our chairman and ranking member and thank them for letting me speak and i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman yields. the gentleman from california. mr. nunes: mr. chairman i'd just yield myself just to respond for a few seconds here. i'd urge my colleague, the vice -- the ranking member on the foreign affairs committee that we always shouldn't believe what's in the newspaper. there's been lots of reports about lots of different things. i would say that mr. schiff and i work in a bipartisan manner to look at all programs across all the spectrum of the 17

agencies and we'd be glad to spend some time with him down in the committee space to raise the concerns that he brought up about a newspaper article that, as i said, there's a lot of things we read in the newspaper. i yiled back. the chair: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from california. does the gentleman reserve or yield back? reserves. the gentleman from california. mr. schiff: mr. chairman may i inquire, we have no further speakers. does the majority have further speakers? mr. nunes: i'm prepared to get to the amendments, mr. schiff if you are. mr. schiff: mr. chairman, i yield myself such time as i may consume. the intelligence authorization act is the vehicle by which we ensure that u.s. intelligence professionals and programs have the funds and the authorities that they need. it's the single most important means by which congress can conduct its oversight. we need to pass this

legislation just as the committee has done over the last several years. it's my hope as the legislation moves forward we will be able to dispose of the guantanamo provisions. i will have an amendment to address that in a few minutes. and that we can also resolve the issues regarding the overseas contingency account. and i look forward to working with my colleague as the bill moves forward to address those issues, and i want to join the chairman in saluting the members of the intelligence community, the men and women who do such an extraordinary job for us each and every day. they have our sincerest gratitude and full appreciation for their dedication, their patriotism and their unpair lelled skills. -- unparalleled skills. i want to thank our chairman for his leadership, his commitment to bipartisanship and his determination to do what's right. i want to thank our colleagues

on the committee who have done an extraordinary job in helping to put this bill together. i also want to join the chairman in thanking our wonderful staff on our side of the aisle. i want to thank carley linda allison, robert, amanda rianne as well as patrick and to our shared technical and security staff including kristen, brandon and kevin. we have an extraordinary team on the committee. it's a great pleasure to serve and work with each and every one of them. and with that i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from california. mr. nunes: mr. chair, i want to thank the ranking member for his continued cooperation to work in a bipartisan fashion as i think most americans know, the threats continue to continue to add up every day and it's up to the men and women in the intelligence community to help keep us safe. i know the ranking member and i are committed to doing just

that. with that i look forward to debate on the amendments and passage of the final underlying bill. i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman yields back. all time for general debate has expired. pursuant to the rule, the bill shall be considered for amendment under the five-minute rule. in lieu of the amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the permanent select committee on intelligence printed in the bill, sthal be in order to consider as an original bill for the purpose of amendment under the five-minute rule. an amendment in the nature of a substitute consisting of the text of rules committee print 114-19. that amendment in a nature of a substitute shall be considered as read. no amendment to the amendment in the nature of a substitute shall be in order except those printed in house report 114- 155, each such amendment may be offered only in the order printed in the report, by a member designated in the report and shall be considered as read, shall be debatable for the time specified in the report equally divided and controlled by an proponent and opponent shall not be subject for demand for division of the question. it's now in order to consider the amendment number 1 printed

in house report 114-155. for what purpose does the gentleman from new york seek recognition? mr. israel: mr. chairman i have an amendment at the desk. the chair: the clerk will designate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 1 printed by -- mr. israel: i ask unanimous consent to dispense with the reading. the clerk: amendment number 1 printed in house report 114-155 offered by mr. israel of new york. the chair: now pursuant to resolution 315, the gentleman from new york, mr. israel, and a member opposed will each control five minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from new york. mr. israel: thank you mr. speaker. i yield myself such time as i may consume. i rise in support of my amendment with my friend from colorado, mr. lamborn, and my friend, ms. graham. this is with respect to tunnels using used by military tactic in asymmetric warfare. mr. chairman almost exactly a year ago when war broke out in the middle east, when hamas attacked israel, i visited

israel and saw for myself the sophistication of tunnels being dug from gaza into israel through which terrorists traveled, went to the other side of the tunnels popped up, tried to kill innocent civilians. these tunnels are not the tunnels that many of us characterize in our own minds. these tunnels are sophisticated. these are expressways underground. it's like the queens midway tunnels. they are ventilated. they are lit. they are massive. they are deep. they are huge. they are unpen trabble. they are very difficult to detect. now, mr. chairman, the f.y. 2016 intelligence authorization bill says the director of national intelligence will designate an official to manage the collection and analysis of intelligence regarding the tactical use of tunnels by state and nonstate actors. this bipartisan amendment simply asks for accountability. it requires a report from this new lead intelligence officer for tunnels describing the trends in the use of tunnels by

foreign state and nonstate actors and collaborative efforts between the united states and partner nations to address the use of tunnels by our adversaries. mr. chairman, you know, i talked about tunnels in the middle east, but in fact these tunnels are dynamic false -- force multipliers for our enemies and enemies around the world. they're used for terrorist attacks but they're also used to smuggle arms and contraband. we have learned that these tunnels are being used well beyond israel. korea is another example. tunnels have been found in north korea. here at home, more than 150 tunnels have been found since 2009. mr. chairman, we have plenty of enemies today looking for ways to atact the united states and our interests around the -- attack the united states and our interests around the globe. this amendment creates a lead intelligence officer for tunnels. this amendment simply encourages greater oversight by congress. it allows congress to make informed decisions on how and where to spend future funds in order to counter this threat

and protect u.s. national security interests and most importantly, mr. chairman, this report -- these reports will help shape the efforts of the newly created position, making it clear that congress expects accountability, transparency and that is something that the american people require. i ask my colleagues to support this bipartisan amendment, and i reserve the balance of my time. . the chair: the gentleman reserves. someone claim time in opposition? mr. nunes: i claim type in opposition though i do not intend to oppose the amendment. at this time i'd like to yield two minutes to my friend from colorado, mr. lamborn. the chair: the gentleman from colorado is recognized for two minutes. mr. lamborn: i want to thank congressman steve israel and congresswoman gwynn graham for working with me on a bipartisan effort in the defense bills as well as now the intelligence authorization act. i would also like to thank chairman nunes and his staff for working together with me on this

important issue. mr. chairman as representative israel just described there is a real and growing tunnel threat to american bases and embassies around the world, to our southern border, as well as to our ally, israel, both in gaza, as well as israel's northern border. language i authored in the base intelligence bill combined with this amendment will ensure that our intelligence committee -- community stays focused on this threat. there will be a dedicated person watching on this issue. going forward, partnership with israel is the best way to address this growing threat. as we have seen with iron dome and other missile defense efforts, partnering with a vital ally like israel enables both countries to learn quickly while sharing costs and new technologies. it's a win-win situation for israel and the u.s., and hopefully a bad -- a lost situation for the bad guys. i urge my colleagues to support this amendment and, mr.

chairman, i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman from new york. mr. israel: i thank my very good friend from colorado for his bipartisan support of this bill. i yield one minute to the the gentlewoman from florida ms. graham. ms. graham: i rise in support of steve israel's amendment to the intelligence authorization act to provide oversight for the joint u.s.-israel anti-tunneling defense project. the joint anti-tunneling project, which was added to the national defense authorization act in an amendment sponsored by my good friend, representative lamborn and myself, will help our closest ally in the middle east israel, protect its borders. the terrorist group, hamas has spent years developing a complex network of tunnels under the gaza strip. and israel to smuggle weapons, kidnap israelis, and launch mass murder attacks. this pro-r project will develop

new technology to detect and destroy these tunnels and it will send a clear message to our allies and enemies alike. the united states is committed to protecting israel and to rooting out and destroying the terrorist who is wish to do her harm. thank you mr. speaker. i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentlelady yields back. the gentleman from california. mr. nunes: i reserve. the chair: reserves. the gentleman from new york. mr. israel: i yield one minute to the distinguished ranking member of the committee, mr. schiff. the chair: ranking member is recognized for a minute. mr. schiff: i thank the gentleman for yielding. and i thank mr. israel, mr. lamborn, ms. graham for this very important amendment. this will call for a port on our adversaryry's use on tunnel and update in collaboration on international partners in ways to defeat tunnels. all of us remember the fear that set in in much of southern israel last summer as a complex network of tunnels were used to

attack israelis. they were used to capture a soldier in 2006. in addition to using them against military targets israel uncovered evidence that the tunnels are being prepared for large-scale attacks against israeli civilians. they are not just a problem for israel. for decades the north korean military has been digging tunnels under the d.m.z. to facilitate infiltration of south carolina. four tunnels from the north have been found at all though none since 1990. there may be 20 in all and they could pose a threat to koreans and american service personnel in the region. i strongly support the amendment and urge my colleagues to do the same. i yield back. the chair: the gentleman from california. mr. nunes: i'm prepared to support the am. yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from new york has 15 seconds. mr. israel: all that i can say

is thank you. yield back. the chair: 315 the gentleman from new york, mr. israel, and a member opposed, will each control five minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from new york. mr. israel: i will attempt to continue my win streak on the floor this morning. i rise to offer an amendment with my distinguished friend and partner from new york, mr. hanna. this bipartisan amendment addresses an issue that has concerned many of us for some time. that is the fact that when it

comes to cyberdefense and cyberwar, many federal agencies are doing something, it's just that they may not be aware of what each of them is doing. so we need closer coordination and slab budget reconciliation among all the federal agencies and entities dealing with cyberwar. mr. chairman, we recently found out that the united states office of personnel management suffered a cyberattack in pack -- impacting millions of federal workers. this attack in my view highlights a disconnect between agencies tasked to provide cyberdefense. foreign government hacking into a federal government system, taking the records of millions of government employees spanning the jurisdiction of several federal agencies. so it's clear that there's an obvious need for greater collaboration between these agencies to create a credible defense and if needed a deterrent to those wishing to attack through the cyberdomain. that's why i was very pleased in february of this year when the president directed the d.n.i. to establish the cyberthreat

intelligence integration center and this bill very properly authorizes that position. ctic will serve as the primary organization within the federal government for analyzing and integrating all intelligence possessed and acquired by the u.s. pertaining to cyberthreats and coordinate cyberthreat intelligence activities. this bipartisan amendment mr. chairman simply ensures congressional oversight of ctic by requiring an annual report detailing three things. number one cyberattack trends identified by the c particular -- ctic. two, an assessment of the collaborative efforts. and number three, recommendations for better collaboration between these agencies. mr. chairman, we have entered a new era of warfare, networks are being attacked daily. we need to do a much better job of coordinating, collaborating, and cooperating at the federal level. this amendment ensures oversight and accountability. i want to thank my partner on this measure mr. hanna, for his bipartisan assistance and

support. i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman reserves. for what purpose does the gentleman from california rise? mr. nunes: i claim time in opposition though do i not intend to oppose the amendment. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. mr. nunes: over the last several years cyberattack vs. become a pressing concern for the united states. the recent breach of the office of person personnel management has put the personal information of millions of current and former federal employees, including many of the men and women in our intelligence community, at risk. every day cyberthieves attack private companies stealing credit card numbers, accessing medical records leaking proprietary information, and publishing confidential emails affecting tense of millions of americans. the intelligence community has worked to improve our cyberdefenses by improving information sharing between the private sector anti-federal government through the support of h.r. 1560 the protecting cybernetworks act. while the senate has yet to act on this bill, the legislation we consider today will help improve the federal government's ability to detect and defeat cyberattacks by creating the new

cyberthreat intelligence integration certainty. this thoughtful note by mr. israel and hannah, will require the center produce a report on sishe threat trends and coordination on cyberthreats between different government agencies. i thank the gentlemen from new york for their work on this issue and urge my colleagues to support this amendment. i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from new york. mr. israel: i yield one minute to the ranking member of the committee, mr. schiff. the chair: the ranking member is recognized for one minute. mr. schiff: i thank the gentleman. i thank him for his excellent amendment and support in the intelligence process. with each passing day we are learning more about the cyberreach at the office of personnel management. the volume of personal information lost during these events is of tremendous concern. mr. israel's amendment will help us better inform congress on the effectiveness of the government's collaborative efforts to defend against future cyberevents. i thank my colleagues for their work on it.

i urge support of mr. israel's amendment. i yield back. the chair: the gentleman from new york still is recognized. mr. israel: i want to thank the distinguished chairman for his bipartisan leadership. the distinguished ranking member. appreciate their support for this amendment. with that i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: yields back. the question is now on the amendment offered by the gentleman from new york, so many as are in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. the amendment is agreed. it is now in order to consider amendment number 3 in house report 114-155. for what purpose does the gentleman from new york seek recognition? mr. crowley: i have an amendment at the desk. the chair: the clerk will designate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 3 printed in house report number 114-155. offered by mr. crowley of new york. the chair: pursuant to house resolution 315, the gentleman from new york, mr. crowley, and a member posed, will each control five minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from new york. mr. crowley: mr. chairman, i yield myself such time as i may

consume. mr. chairman, like many of my colleagues i'm focused on growing educational opportunities for young hispanic americans. particularly in the areas that will be so critical to our nation's success in the years ahead. last month the house approved bipartisan -- a bipartisan amendment to the americas competes re-authorization act designed to increase opportunities for latinos in these stem fields. the amendment i am offering today with my colleagues, mr. serrano and mr. curbelo, builds upon that effort and will further expand opportunities for hispanic students. our proposal would allow the director of national intelligence to offer grants to hispanic serving institutions of higher education for advanced foreign language education programs that are in the immediate interest of the intelligence community. it would also promote study abroad and cultural immersion programs in those areas which we

all know are crucial to truly understanding the intricacies of other languages and cultures. this is a time we need to be encouraging more of our young people to enter careers aimed at making our nation safer. of the nearly two million latino students enrolled in college today, the majority attend hispanic serving institutions. with these targeted grants, they would be able to help increase the ranks of latinos going into the intelligence community where they are underrepresented today. this amendment would not only promote diversity and national security -- in intelligence communities but would also strengthsen our youngest and fastest growing minority hispanic americans. we must ensure that these young people are prepared with the knowledge and skills that will contribute to our nation's future strength, security, and global leadership. because when education is available to everyone, our entire nation is a stronger nation. i want to thank my colleagues who have worked to be on this

issue, mr. serrano and mr. curbelo who have co-sponsored this amendment. mr. chairman, with that i retain the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from california, for what purpose? mr. nunes: i claim time in opposition though i do not intend to oppose the amendment. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. mr. nunes: mr. chair, i thank mr. crowley mr. serrano, and mr. curbelo for offering this amendment to include hispanic serving institutions in the grant program to improve recruitment efforts for the intelligence community. and at this time i would like to yield two minutes from the gentleman from florida, mr. curbelo. the chair: the gentleman from florida is recognized for two minutes. mr. curbelo: i thank the chairman for yielding. mr. chairman, i rise today in strong support of this amendment and thank my colleague from new york for allowing me to join in leading on this important issue. this amendment would allow the director of the national intelligence to provide grants to hispanic serving institutions of higher education to offer advanced foreign language programs that are important to

our intelligence community. these students in addition to the traditional classroom setting would also be able to travel and study abroad so they can gain a first hand perspective of the culture in which they are immersing themselves. . middle eastern dialects is the utmost importance of continuing our relationships abroad. i'm proud to advocate for hispanic-serving institutions like florida international university and miami-dade college in my district and will strive to provide them the opportunity to train their students so that they can go on to serve our country. i'm proud to be working with the gentleman from new york, mr. crowley, the gentleman from new york mr. serrano, to provide more opportunities for these young hispanic students that want to serve their country and -- and to provide

our intelligence community this special tool to recruit those that could be useful in advancing the cause of building the relationships that is so critical to our intelligence services operating throughout the world. with that, mr. chairman i'd like to yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from new york. mr. crowley: thank you, mr. speaker. i appreciate the gentleman from florida's comments on this bill and at this time i'd like to yield one minute to the gentleman from california, mr. schiff. the chair: the ranking member is recognized for one minute. mr. schiff: i thank my colleague mr. crowley, for his work on this amendment. i'm very happy to support it. diversity and language skills are critical to national security. together they allow the intelligence community to reach its potential and expand its reach, its access as well as its understanding. this amendment would further both goals by providing better language learning opportunities to students of hispanic-serving institutions. i'm very proud to support this amendment and urge my

colleagues to do the same. again, i want to thank my friend from new york, mr. crowley, as well as the other colleagues that worked with him on this amendment and urge passage and i yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from california. mr. nunes: mr. speaker, i'm prepared to yield back the balance of my time and i support it. the chair: the gentleman from new york. mr. crowley: i thank the chairman for his support of this amendment as well as the ranking member, your support, mr. schiff for your support as well and all the members who worked on this amendment. i think the amendment speaks for itself. it's providing a great opportunity for a growing minority community within our country who want to serve our country in this capacity. with that i'll yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman yields back. the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from new york. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. the amendment is agreed. it's now in order to consider amendment number 4 as reported -- printed in house report

114-155. for what purpose does the gentleman from massachusetts seek recognition? mr. keating: mr. chairman, i have an amendment at the desk. the chair: the clerk will designate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 4 printed in house report 114-155 offered by mr. keating of massachusetts. the chair: pursuant to house resolution 315, the gentleman from massachusetts, mr. keating, and a member opposed each will control five minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from massachusetts. mr. keating: thank you mr. chairman. i rise in support of this with representative mccaul, katko and loudermilk to help congress identify ways to improve intelligence sharing and the flow of foreign fighters around the world with particular attention to the travel to and from iraq and syria. already this legislation that we're considering today makes substantial strides in ensuring that intelligence surrounding the flow of foreign fighters are shared with congress. these continuous reports will shed light on the total number of attempted and successful fighters since the beginning of

2011. my amendment would require the director of national intelligence to report to congress on the intelligence community's progress and forging information sharing agreements with foreign partners and help congress identify the challenges including coordinated intelligence efforts. over 20,000 foreign fighters have traveled to join rebel and -- rebel groups in isis and their movements are proving increasingly difficult to track in our globalized world and particularly given the uneven and nonexistent trafficking efforts from some of our foreign partners. as ranking member of foreign affairs subcommittee on terrorism, nonproliferation and trade and as a member of the counterterrorism i have two perspectives. from our efforts to improve the intelligence community's coordination with state, local and other federal agencies and

for our work to better share our information practices with our overseas allies to prevent terrorist attacks and the flow of foreign fighters here and abroad. while sharing pertinent information with relevant state, federal agencies, there is a blind spot in our intelligence gathering effort on foreign fighters. that blind spot stems from the fameure of some governments to take commonsense steps and it's make the task of tracking foreign fighters even more challenging. the inability or unwillingness of some foreign governments to pass along even the most basic information about these individuals represents a major risk to our safety and the safety of the american people. in addition, threatens where some of these individuals return to their homelands from iraq and syria battle hardened and radicalized. once again back home some can travel between international borders with relative ease which makes tracking them a

truly difficult feat. this amendment will provide insight into our current intelligence sharing relationships and will give congress the opportunity to highlight best practices while also revealing areas of improvement. i want to thank chairman nunes, ranking member schiff for their cooperation. i yield my time to the gentleman from texas, mr. mccaul. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. mr. mccaul: thank you, mr. speaker. and i thank the gentleman for yielding. i rise in strong support of the keating-mccaul amendment and the intelligence authorization act. if adopted our amendment would require the director of national intelligence to support to congress on the state of intelligence information sharing with our overseas partners to help us identify security gaps so we can improve international monitoring of foreign fighter travel both in and out of syria and iraq. islamist fanaticing from more than 100 countries traveled overseas to fight with groups like isis and al qaeda.

thousands of these jihadists carry western passports and can exploit security gaps in places like europe to return to the west where they can plot attacks against america and our allies. last month i led a congressional delegation to the middle east to investigate the flow of these foreign fighters. and while progress is being made, i am still troubled by intelligence and screening gaps especially with our foreign partners. we need to make sure our allies not only share the identities of terrorists and foreign fighters with us but also with each other so that these extremists can be stopped before they cross our borders and into the united states. this amendment will provide congress critical information needed to close these security gaps and improve intelligence information sharing to defend our homeland. i applaud mr. keating for his hard work on the amendment, for his strong participation in our delegation overseas where we learned quite a bit. it's not very often you can

pass something you think can save american lives and i think this is one of them and i want to thank the gentleman again. with that mr. speaker, i yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields back. does someone claim time in opposition? the gentleman from massachusetts. mr. keating: thank you, mr. chairman. i want to thank the chairman of homeland security for his leadership on this issue. we really have established a very strong bipartisan effort, putting our national security first and realizing what holes there are in our system and our security for our country. mr. chairman i would like to yield one minute to mr. schiff of california. the chair: the gentleman can only yield 15 seconds. that's all you got. you got 15 seconds. mr. schiff: thank you. i thank the gentleman. i rise in strong support of the work of my colleague from massachusetts and from texas. this is a superb amendment that will help us track foreign fighters and i'm proud to support it and i yield back. the chair: all time having expired, the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from massachusetts.

those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. the amendment is agreed. it's now in order to consider amendment number 5 printed in house report 114-155. for what purpose does the gentleman from massachusetts seek recognition? mr. keating: mr. chairman, i have another amendment at the desk. the chair: the clerk will designate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 5 printed in house report 114-155 offered by mr. keating of massachusetts. the chair: pursuant to house resolution 315, the gentleman from massachusetts, mr. keating, and a member opposed, will each control five minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from massachusetts. mr. keating: thank you, mr. chairman. the recent events involving the planned of radicalized individuals in massachusetts to target law enforcement officials, police in particular underscore the truth that protecting america will require the efforts of local, state and federal law enforcement. since the boston marathon bombings the f.b.i. has made great efforts to improve their information sharing efforts with the joint terrorism task force and other federal agencies.

my work and the work of my colleagues investigating the congressional investigation of the marathon bombings through the homeland security committee, i can attest to the seriousness in which the federal bureau of investigation has set out to improve their information sharing practices. however the f.b.i.'s efforts to institutionalize sharing across law enforcement and intelligence are still a work in process. the current version of this bill eliminates the requirement that the f.b.i. to report to congress on their progress to implement information sharing principles, and this is a reporting that has kept aware of the f.b.i.'s information sharing practices since 2004. and it's been vital to understand what works and what can be improved. this amendment will reinstate that requirement with the recognition that f.b.i. has more work to do on information sharing, to better protect the american public. these necessary reforms include re-executing f.b.i. current

memorandums of understanding with local partners, improving training and accessibility for the eguardian platform and disseminating intelligence to relevant consumers up and downstream. without information on the progress the f.b.i. is making on these reforms, congress is hind nerd taking the critical steps -- hindered in taking the critical steps needed to protect the american people. i want to thank chairman nunes and ranking member schiff, and i yield my time to the gentleman from california, mr. schiff. mr. schiff: i thank my colleague from massachusetts who has been an active and important voice on national security since he joined the congress several years ago. in particular, he has worked to ensure that we maintain a strong focus on information sharing against and across agencies. one of the key lessons we learned from 9/11 is the need to tear down stovepipes and to ensure there is no inappropriate barrier to information sharing across agencies. mr. keating's amendment seeks to maintain our vigilance on this issue and would require

the f.b.i. to report to congress on its information-sharing progress. as a fellow native bostonian, very pleased to see my colleague do such great work. i want to thank him for his commitment to the issue and i'm very happy to support the amendment. and with that i yield back. the chair: does anyone -- does anyone claim time in opposition? is the gentleman from massachusetts ilk willing to yield -- willing to yield back? mr. keating: yes. the chair: the question son the amendment offered by the gentleman from massachusetts. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the amendment is agreed. it's now in order to hear to -- to consider amendment number 6 printed in the report house report 114-155. for what purpose does the gentleman from california seek recognition? mr. schiff: mr. chairman, i have an amendment at the desk. the chair: the clerk will designate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 6 printed in house report 114-155 offered by mr. schiff of

california. the chair: pursuant to house resolution 315 the gentleman from california, mr. schiff and a member opposed will each control five minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from california. mr. schiff: mr. chairman, my amendment would strike the sections of the bill which would undermine the administration's ability to close the prison at guantanamo by transferring the remaining detainees to the united states for further disposition of their cases or to third countries that agree to accept them, secure them and monitor them. i'm grateful that my colleague, adam smith, the ranking member of the armed services committee, has joined me in urging the house to make this important change to the bill. every day that it remains open, the prison at guantanamo bay damages the united states. because there are other better options for the prosecution and detention of these inmates, we are not safer for guantanamo's existence. in fact, it makes us more vulnerable by drawing new recruits to the jihad. the congress, the

administration and the military can work together to find a solution that protects our people even as we maintain our principles and devotion to the rule of law. under the provisions included in this bill the administration would be barred from transferring guantanamo detainees to a war zone. while i agree it would be fool hearted to transfer a person to yemen while that country is immersed into civil war, this is derived from the u.s. tax code and is extremely broad, ruling out countries like jordan, for example, that have successfully resettled and demonstrated a genuine commitment to helping detainees. these provisions also prevent the administration from transferring guantanamo detainees to the united states for further proceedings under the military commission's process or for trial in an article 3 court. the department of justice and our courts have proven themselves time and time again to be more than capable of

handling the toughest terrorism cases and doing so in a way that sets an example to the world that a great nation can safeguard its people and the rule of law. as a practical matter our civilian courts have much more adapt to handling our -- these cases. in fact, this past friday, a three-judge panel at the court of appeals for the d.c. circuit one of the most important aplate courts in the nation, narrowing the jurisdiction of the military commission's themselves that any utility as an alternative to article 3 courts has been called into further question. . while khalid sheikh mohammed and others ea await their day of justice, others including richard reid, the shoe bomber, the underwear bomber and the times square bomber have been

tried convicted and sent to the toughest prison in america. they are gone and they are not coming back. inclukes of these provisions is the first time that restrictions related to guantanamo have been included in the intelligence authorization act and i believe that alone sets an unfortunate precedent that could undermine what has been a largely bipartisan ert. these provisions are unnecessary and unwise and they don't belong in this bill. i urge the house to reconsider these provisions, to trust in american justice, diplomacy and the best military advice and to give the administration the means to shut aeroprison that both shames us and perpetrate -- perpetuates the threat to the nation. i thank you and i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. for what purpose does the gentleman from california rise? >> i rise in opposition to this amendment. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. >> though i appreciate the ranking member's concern i further appreciate that further

releases from guantanamo will harm our security. mr. nunes: they plan to move three more detainee this is month. three detainees released last month are counter to u.s. national security interests, not unlike their activities before they were detained, no intelligence element should enable any future transfers that endanger national security. furthermore, i note that these provision are substantially identical to those passed as part of the national defense association act. 26 of 27 democrats on that committee voted to advance an ndaa with similar restrictions. the provisions in our bill will complement these provisions and this committee's previous intelligence authorization bills the ranking member may have forgotten but in 2012,

there were provisions similar to this one that were included in the legislation. in sum these provisions represent a strong, enduring consensus in congress that guantanamo should remain open and that detainees should not be transferred to the u.s. for any reason. as everywhere -- as everyone here is aware, several detainees who have been released from fwauntaun moe have gone back to the fight and killed and wounded americans, including detain -- putting detainees in u.s. prisons would be disruptive and potentially disastrous. the threat is real and guantanamo is already equipped to hand they will detention and military trial of these individuals as appropriate. for those reasons i urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from california. mr. schiff spks may i inquire if the gentleman has any additional speakers on this amendment? mr. nunes: i do not. mr. schiff: in that case, i will close. i want to urge support for this

amendment. this is one of the few areas of disagreement between the chairman and myself. when we look at how we are progressing or the welcome of more progress in our struggle against isis and al qaeda in places like syria and iraq, we're often tempted to consider those that we take off the battlefield as a metric of our success. we've eliminate sod many combatants from the battlefield. but of course that number in isolation means very little and the challenge is that with every one we take off the battlefield, there are new foreign fighters coming onto the battlefield. the recruitment of those additional fighters uses a variety of images and issues to attract people to join the jihad. one of the issues that is continually used as recruiting propaganda is the presence of the detention center at guantanamo bay. s that recruitment vehicle for the jihad dees. it's a rallying cry for the jihad dees. the closure of this prison will not end the threat from isis or

al qaeda. there will be other efforts to recruit. but why give them this recruitment tool when there are other, better ways that these people can be incarcerated. why give them this recruitment vehicle when there are ways that we can secure the people at guantanamo bay uphold our highest standards and the rule of law, and remove at least one part of the jihad dee social media and other propaganda campaigns. and so i think it is in our national security interest to do so and i would urge support for the amendment and yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from california. mr. nunes: mr. chairman, i know that the gentleman believes every word he is saying. we have had robust debate in the intelligence committee behind closed doors and we have had robust debate out in open session and it's a debate i think, that will always continue. however, the concern remains from the majority of members of

congress that they would prefer to keep guantanamo open because no one wants to bring those terrorists to the united states their backyard, to try them in their state or county or their community. and so i respect the gentleman's concerns and we will continue to debate those but i will continue to oppose closing guantanamo or having our intelligence community participate in the removal of detainees from guantanamo. with that, i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from california. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair the noes visit -- have it. mr. schiff: on that i request a recorded vote. the chair: pursuant to clause 6 of rule 18 further proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from california will be postponed. it is now in order to consider amendment number 7 printed in house report 114-155. for what purpose does the gentleman from florida seek recognition? for what purpose does the gentleman from florida seek recognition?

>> i have an amendment at the desk. the chair: the clerk will designate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 7 printed in house report 114-155 offered by mr. rooney of florida. the chair: pursuant to house resolution 315, the gentleman from florida, mr. rooney, and a member opposed each will control five minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from florida. mr. rooney: as we debate this bill today, hackers across the world are trying to furiously to break into our cybernetworks, as we all know. and as we've seen in recent weeks, they are occasionally successful. the consequences are grave. these cracks in our cyberdefense put our security at risk. they also threaten american businesses and the privacy and credit of individuals across this country. for the sake of our national security and our economy, we must work together to improve our cybercapabilities. this requires a stronger, more capable cyberwork force which our bipartisan amendment will

help facilitate. the federal cyber scholarship program gives scholarships to students who scud any in the skiber security field. in exchange the students commit to serving in government cyber security positions after graduation. leaders within the intelligence community and d.o.d. told us they need to expand their work force and want to hire graduates from this program. unfortunately an outdated personnel rule and insufficient direct hire authority make it extremely difficult for them to do so. as a result, these students are unable to fulfill their work commitment and we are unable to meet our work force needs and our cybersecurity suffers. we believe congress should help renew those -- remove those obstacles and make it easier to bring these graduates into the cyber work force. our amendment starts that process by requiring a report

back taos on how many cyber corps graduates go to work for the intelligence community and how these agencies recruit them. this information will help us determine how to streamline the hiring process so we're capitalizing on the best cyber security talent available. this is a simple, bipartisan amendment but it will pay dividends to improve and expand our cyber work force and strengthen our national security. i'd like to thank congresswoman sewell from alabama for her assistance in this amendment, a with -- and with that, i reserve. the chair: the gentleman reserves. for what purpose does the gentleman from california rise? mr. nunes: i rise in opposition though i'm not opposed. -- >> i rise in opposition although i'm not opposed. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. >> i want to thank the gentleman from florida and the gentlelady from alabama for this amendment. mr. schiff: this will ensure

that a good number of students choose employment in the intelligence community and secondly, it will deepen the bench of our cyber defenders. as a recent series of serious security breaches have demonstrated, it is imperative that the protection of this nation's work force privacy, and central intelligence we strengthen the cybercadre with the best and brightest this amendment is a fine addition to the gentleman and gentlelady's other initiatives, already represented in the bill, particularly those that advance diversity in the intelligence community. again, i want to thank my colleagues for their work and i urge support for this bipartisan amendment and i yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from florida. mr. rooney: i yield back. the chair: the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from florida. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair the ayes have it. the amendment is agreed to.

it is now in order to consider amendment number 8 printed in house report 114-155. for what purpose does the gentleman from massachusetts seek recognition? mr. moulton: i have an amendment at the desk. the chair: clerk will designate ea the amendment. the clerk: amendment number eight printed in house report 113-155 offered by the gentleman from massachusetts, mr. moulton. the chair: pursuant to the rule the gentleman from massachusetts and a member opposed each will control five minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from massachusetts. mr. moulton: recently the office of personnel management disclosed a mass i security breach that may have leaked private information of many government workers including those who work in security. this breaks faith with those personnel who risk their lives to keep our country safe. though it's not been officially confirmed, many observers

believe that individuals in china, who may have been acting on orders of the chinese government, were responsible for hacking into o.p.m. databases. two things are clear, mr. chairman. first, we must ensure this does not happen again. we must protect our federal employees our foreign service officers, state department staff, members of the intelligence community, and many others. second, we must make clear to the rest of the world that these attacks will not be tolerated. and that there will be consequences. that is why my amendment takes the first of many critical steps to respond to this breach. my amendment starts the process of holding o.p.m. accountable. it makes sure we leverage the best data security practices that our intelligence agencies use to protect sensitive personal information about our military and civilian personnel who work day in and day out to keep our country safe. and finally my amendment ensures that the united states congress can play a constructive

role in developing a meaningful, forceful response to cyberattacks. especially attacks aimed at our nation's security. we must stop these attacks and protect those who commit their lives to our safety. this amendment is an important first step in doing just that. thank you, mr. chairman. i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman reserves. for what purpose does the gentleman from california rise? mr. new nunes: -- mr. nunes: the committee is prepared to accept the amendment. i yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman is recognized. mr. moulton: i yield one minute to mr. schiff. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. mr. schiff: we expect timely briefs on all major cyberattacks but in this case we need somewhere specific reports. we need to know what information they obtained and how to prevent

it happening again. and it will help us understand the impact on the intelligence community. our public and private networks are not sufficiently secure and they're a regular target for cyberattacks. we must do everything we can to shore them up and must do so now. i want to thank my colleague for his work and i urge support of his amendment and i yield back. mr. moulton: i yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields back. the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from massachusetts. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair the ayes have it. the amendment is agreed to. it is now in order to consider amendment number nine printed in house report 119-155, for what purpose does the gentleman rise? mr. turner: i have an amendment at the desk. the chair: the clerk will designate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number nine offered by mr. turner of ohio. the chair: pursuant to house resolution 315, the gentleman from ohio, mr. turner, and a member opposed each will control five minutes. the chair recognizes the -- the

chair recognizes the gentleman from ohio. mr. turner: mr. chairman, my bipartisan amendment requires the director of national intelligence to submit a report to congress on the funding of political parties and n.g.o.'s in former soviet states by the russian federation and its associated security and intelligence services. as congress well knows a resurgent russia, led by vladimir putin while i have seen -- while we have seen the blatant use of military force both in georgia and ukraine, russia has employed a variety of nontraditional methods to disrupt the west. these methods include the use of propaganda through state-owned media outlets such as russia today, the manipulation of european natural gas markets and the use of money to influence political parties and nongovernmental organizations throughout europe. in a recent "new york times" article, authors peter baker

and steven erlinger, highlights instances where they funneled money to organizations in europe in order to -- russia hopes to achieve incremental victories line influencing the e.u.'s renewing sanctions against them. as president of the native parliamentary assembly, i had the opportunity to meet frequently with my european counterparts to discuss this issue. in all instances, assembly members continue to validate and echo the concerns discussed here today. only through an increased understanding can we begin to effectively plan and combat president putin and a resurging russia. i ask all of my colleagues to rise in support of this bipartisan amendment, and i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman reserves. for what purpose does the gentleman from california rise? mr. schiff: mr. chairman, i rise in opposition even though i am not opposed.

the chair: the gentleman is recognized. mr. schiff: i want to thank the gentleman from ohio, alabama and new york of their amendment. this amendment requires an assessment on funding of political parties and n.g.o.'s in the former soviet states and countries in europe by the russian federation and its security and intelligence services. over the past few years we've witnessed a number of highly visible aggressive actions by russia, particularly in ukraine. but moscow's efforts to destabilize its neighbors are also settler and more nefarious. rush is funding political parties to grooment next generation of puppets which they can control from moscow. we must better understand what they are doing even if what they are doing is buried deep behind the scenes. so long as sources and methods are properly protected, i support this effort. again, i want to thank my colleagues for their work and urge support of the amendment. i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman yields. the gentleman from ohio is

recognized. mr. turner: mr. chairman, as the chairman well remembers with the cold war, there was a time when the conflict between the united states and russia was very tense. this amendment will help us bring to bear light on the actions of russia so that we can make certain our policies reflect the new aggressiveness of the russian federation. mr. schiff: if the gentleman will yield? mr. turner: i'll yield. mr. nunes: i really appreciate the gentleman. i know that his concerns are valid and i, too, share those concerns and would urge my colleagues to support the amendment. i thank the gentleman. mr. turner: with that i yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields back. the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from ohio. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. the amendment is agreed. it is now in order to consider amendment number 10 as printed in the house report 114-155. for what purpose does the gentleman from california seek recognition? mr. farr: mr. chairman i have

an amendment at the desk. the chair: the clerk will designate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 10 printed in house report 114-155 offered by mr. farr of california. the chair: pursuant to house resolution 315 the gentleman from california, mr. farr, and a member opposed, will each control five minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from california. mr. farr: thank you very much, mr. chairman. today i rise to offer an amendment which strengthens the process for granting security clearances to those working in the intelligence community. through a continuous evaluation process. this amendment directs the national intelligence director to provide the intelligence and defense committees a report on the status of its current efforts for continuous evaluation of security clearance holders, including timeline for its rollout. the report will also provide a cost-benefit analysis of d.n.i.'s efforts to similar efforts that are being carried on in the department of defense.

we learned after the tragic shooting in the navy yard and in september of 2013 and that -- that the d.o.d. should continuously evaluate their personnel rather than doing it once every five years. clearance starts by an initial vetting, determines a person's suitability and eligibility to have access to classified material by examining a person's past and making a judgment on future reliability. now once cleared, a continuous evaluation process is designed to examine a person's behavior to ensured its continued reliability. congress directed the d.o.d. to create a process that would be governmentwide solution for continuous personnel security evaluations. this solution is called automated continuous evaluation system. now the director of national intelligence is also seeking its own capability for continuous evaluation. while i support the intelligence community's

requirement, their efforts may be redundant. the d.o.d.'s system already has measurable successes. their system is also flexible enough to be tail ord to meet any specific -- tailored to meet any specific requirements that the intelligence community may need. my amendment simply assures that the d.n.i. does not work towards a continuous evaluation system in a vacuum. by working together to share lessons learned or build a common evaluation system, the d.n.i. and the d.o.d. can build a better program that ensures our national security and uses taxpayer dollars effectively. as we've all seen recently the insider threat to our national security is real. we must continue to ensure that we remain secure by only granting security clearances to those who are suitable and reliable. i ask for an i.a.a. vote on my amendment and -- i ask for an aye vote on my amendment and i reserve. mr. nunes: we rise in support

of the amendment and i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman from california. mr. farr: i yield one minute to my colleague from california, the ranking member of the intel committee, mr. schiff. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. schiff: this is to ensure our intelligence agencies protect sensitive information and protect taxpayer dollars. this amendment supports both of these goals by requiring that office of the director of national intelligence report to congress on its -- excuse me -- continuous evaluation process for security clearances and to compare those processes to those the department of defense uses. this comparative study will help identify places where we may be able to make improvements and save money. i want to thank mr. farr for his amendment and his diligence, and i yield back the balance of my time. mr. farr: thank you, mr. chairman. i yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields back. the question is on the

amendment offered by the gentleman from california. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. the amendment is agreed. it's now in order to consider amendment number 11 printed in house report 114-155. for what purpose does the gentlewoman from arizona seek recognition? ms. sinema: mr. chair, i have an amendment at the desk and i offer that amendment at this time. the chair: the clerk will designate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 11 printed in house report 114-155 offered by ms. sinema of arizona. the chair: pursuant to house resolution 315, the gentlewoman from arizona, ms. sinema, and a member opposed, each will control five minutes. the chair recognizes the gentlewoman from arizona. ms. sinema: thank you, mr. chair. i yield myself such time as i may consume. i want to say thank you to mr. fitzpatrick for co-sponsoring this amendment and his leadership of the chairman of the task force to investigate terrorism financing. thank you, also, to chairman nunes and ranking member schiff for supporting this important amendment. the purpose of the bipartisan cinema-fitzpatrick amendment is to choke off the revenue stream. it directs the intelligence

community to detect, deter and degrade islamic state revenue sources and the resources needed for success. the islamic state is one of the world's most violent and dangerous terrorist groups. its goals, to build a caliphate in the middle east and represent a new threat to our country and global stability. isil is also believed to be the richest terrorism group in history, controlling a huge territory in iraq and syria containing significant oil resources. in 2014 the islamic state generated approximately $1 million per day through the sale of smuggled oil, extortion and kidnapping for ransom. u.s. strikes have reportedly diminished isil's oil revenues but the breath of this terrorist revenue representing a serious challenge to our national security. a february report by the financial action task force estimated that isil now largely finances itself through extortion in the territory it controls. and another study, places

extortion revenue at $360 million per year. in iraq isil levees a 5% tax or all withdraws from banks and the organization also gains tens of millions of dollars from kidnapping on an annual basis. to defeat isil and to protect our country, we must cut off the islamic state's diverse and substantial sources of revenue. i encourage my colleagues to support this commonsense bipartisan amendment. mr. chair, i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentlewoman reserves. does someone claim time in opposition? mr. nunes: i claim time in opposition although i do not oppose the amendment and at this time i yield three minutes to the gentleman from pennsylvania, mr. fitzpatrick. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for three minutes. fithfith i thank the chairman and -- mr. fitzpatrick: i thank the chairman and i thank my colleague, ms. sinema, for her work on this amendment and for her work on the task force established to investigate terrorist financing. today the terror threat faced by our nation and our intelligence community is more diverse and sophisticated than

it has ever been before. organizations such like hezbollah, isis and boko haram can no longer simply be considered terrorist groups. they've grown into much more dangerous entities. ones with the abilities to self-finance their actions through means far beyond traditional methods. from illicit oil sales, to regional taxation and antiquities dealing. in order to effectively combat such a vial threat u.s. policy must also evolve. as chair of the bipartisan task force to investigate terrorism financing, established by the committee on financial services, i've worked with lawmakers and policy experts to guarantee the u.s. response to terrorist new revenue streams are quickly and effectively choked out. this amendment is important to ensure each level of our government from congress to the intelligence community, has dent find the problem as well as poe -- identified the problem and expressing the

sense of congress that our intelligence agencies must dedicate resources to eradicate terror revenue mechanisms as well as report to relevant committees on their strategies, this amendment strengthens the underlying bill and congress' understanding of our global response to terrorism. the threat to freedom and democracy posed by islamic state and groups like it circles the globe, and the united states can cannot afford to combat these on the field alone. we must attack not only militarily but at their funding source. organizations, no matter how complex cannot effectively function without requisite resources. mr. speaker our intelligence community is second to none, and i'm senior citizen that together we can formulate -- and i'm certain that together we can formulate and carry out long-term solutions to combat terror financing. i thank the chairman for his leadership on this issue and ms. sinema for authoring this

amendment and i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman yields back. the gentlewoman from arizona. ms. sinema: mr. chair, i yield one minute to the gentleman from california, ranking member schiff, and thank him for his leadership on national security issues. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. mr. schiff: i want to thank the gentlelady from arizona for her amendment as well as the gentleman from pennsylvania. i'm proud to support it. behind isil's rapid and dangerous -- this expresses the convinks of congress that the intelligence community should dedicate resources to finding and eliminating those financial resources and that the i.c. must report on its efforts to do so. again, i want to thank both of my colleagues for their leadership on this issue and i urge strong support of their amendment. and i yield back. the chair: the gentleman from california. mr. nunes: at this i am i'd like to yield one minute to the gentleman from north carolina, mr. pittenger. the chair: the gentleman from north carolina is recognized for a minute. mr. pittenger: thank you, mr. chairman. i congratulate congresswoman

cinema and mr. fitzpatrick, the chairman of the committee. this will help our terrorism task force efforts undermine the funding of isis. terrorism experts concur that isis is the most well-funded terrorist threat that we've ever faced. through the illicit sell of oil, kidnapping for ransom, extortion, bank robberies and useless taxation, isis continues to amass tens of millions of dollars. stopping this flow of money to terrorists must be a top priority if we are to defeat isis. unfortunately, earlier this month the president admitted he does not have a comprehensive strategy to defeat isis. this amendment will require the director of national intelligence to submit to congress the current efforts being used to undermine the funding of isis and increasing our ability to ensure these efforts are a priority. i urge my colleagues to support this amendment and will look forward to the continued bipartisan support the financial services task force investigate terrorism financing. thank you and i yield back my time.

the chair: the gentlewoman from arizona. ms. sinema: thank you mr. chair. as a member of the tafpk force to investigate -- task force to investigate terrorism financing i work with my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to keep money out of the hands of terrorists and find solutions like this amendment that strengthens america's security. again i'd like to thank mr. fitzpatrick for his partnership and leadership on this issue and thank you also, to chairman nunes ranking member schiff and mr. pittenger for their work on this important legislation. i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentlewoman yields back. the gentleman from california. mr. nunes: we are from paired to support the amendment and i yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields back. the question is on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from arizona. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the amendment is agreed to. it's now in order to consider amendment number 12 printed in house report 114--- for what purpose does the gentleman from new york seek recognition? mr. crowley: mr. chairman, i have an amendment at the desk. the chair: the clerk will designate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 12 printed in house report 114-155 offered by mr. crowley of new york. the chair: pursuant to house

resolution 315, the gentleman from new york, mr. crowley, and a member opposed, will each control five minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from. -- the gentleman from new york. mr. crowley: mr. chairman, i yield myself such time as i may consume. . mr. crowley: i yield myself such time as i may consume. i rise today to urge my colleagues to support this bipartisan amendment. i appreciate the support of my colleagues from california, ohio, north carolina, arizona and new york. who are co-leaders on this effort. they are mr. bexarrer, mr. engel, mr. schweikert and mr. holding. i also thank the chairman and ranking member of the committee for their support. this is about the cooperation between the world's oldest democracy and the world's largest democracy and a true democracy within the united states. that is, the united states india, and israel. in recent years, the united states expanded relations with israel as well as india in a number of areas. we have also seen india and

israel work more and more together on a bilateral basis. of course, that's because a lot of their interests overlap. but it's also because many of our values overlap as well. there is so much that our three countries can be doing together in the rem of scientific cooperation, research, best practices, national security implementation, defense, and much, much more. there is also a lot that we can learn from each other, whether it's about drip irrigation to build food supplies, desalination -- desalinization to prevent water shortage, and a way to prevent the kind of food smoilage that leads to hunger. not to mention how much potential there is in technological research and economic development. this amendment of course, just deals with a narrow portion of these areas. because the underlying bill is limited to security issues.

but it's a needed start. i truly believe that the united states-india relationship has the potential to be the world's most important big country relationship in the 21st century. so as our ties with india grow, it is important to see india and israel and their ties increasing as well. here in the united states, as a former co-chair of the congressional caucus on india and indian americans, i have met with many members of the indian american community and i have consistently heard from visiting members of india's government that there's a genuine desire to expand relations between india and israel now and in the future. it's already been reported that in the coming month india's prime min -- minister will become the first ever indian prime minister to travel to israel, we're going to see the leader of the most populous visiting with one of the

smallest nations. that's why the amendment asks the director of national intelligence to submit to congress a plan on how to grow the u.s.-india-israel national security relationship. this is a real possibility and i hope d.n.i. can ident fi ways to work together. with that i retain the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman reserves. frup does the gentleman rise? mr. nunes: i claim time in opposition though i do not intent to oppose the amendment. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. mr. nunes: mr. holding was just here but got called away he, wanted me to express his strong support for this amendment and i also urge my colleagues to support the amendment and i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman from new york. mr. crowley: i yield to the gentleman from california, mr. schiff. for a minute. mr. schiff: i thank the

gentleman for yielding. working with international partners is an essential element of the global community's mission to understand the strirmente and social and political trends around the world. for nearly 70 years israel has been a close friend and ally as well as a vital source of intelligence about the world east moe volatile region. in recent years india, the most -- the world's largest democracy, has upgraded its relationship with israel. they're exploring the -- exploring the possibility of bilateral work is important. i urge the house to support this amendment. i yield back. the chair: the gentleman from new york. mr. crowley: i'm prepared to yield back if -- the chair: he's already yielded back. mr. crowley: we thank mr. nunes for the support of this valuable amendment. i yield back the balance of my

time. the chair: the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from new york. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. ea amendment is agreed to. it is now in order to consider amendment number 13 printed in house report 114-155. for what purpose does the gentleman from north carolina seek recognition? mr. wilson: i have an amendment at the desk. the chair: the clerk will designate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 13 printed in house report 114-155 offered by mr. wilson of south carolina. the chair: the chair recognizes the gentleman from south carolina. mr. wilson: i would like to thank chairman nunes for yielding and i thank the chair for the committee's support. i'm particularly grateful to hear the presentation by congressman joe crowley relate i -- relative to promoting a better relationship with the world's largest democracy

india, by the world's largest democracy, the united states. he and i served as past co-chairs of the caucus of india and indian americans and i know of his commitment to promoting a better relationship between india and the united states. last week the office of personnel management revealed they were the targets of an extended cyber attack on federal employee personnel records. these attacks stole personal data such as social security numbers, financial information and security clearance documents. including the personal and financial security -- putting the personal information and security of our citizens at risk. this was not a novelty. recently, we have seen a growing number of cyber attacks from a -- on a growing number of companies. 60% of the those facing an attack in the last years were -- were small and medium-sized

businesses. s that reminder to congress that all government agencies need to work together to bet brother tect the public and private networks of after each of these attacks, we've had a number of questions. who is behind this? are they an agent of a foreign government or a nonstate actor? how many records were affected? what kind of information was accessed? as of now, we gather this information through various government agencies and each use a different measure to assess and quantify the damage of the attack system of we waste valuable time and resources when trying to piece together a response. we need a clear, unified system of measurement for cyberattacks that can be used across all government agencies and military branches. by putting government agencies and branches of the military on the same page, we can have an effective and rapid response. the -- this amendment directs the director of national intelligence in consultuation the secretary of homeland security, the director the

f.b.i. and the secretary of defense to conduct a study to define a method of measuring a cyberincident so we can determine an appropriate response. as chairman of the house armed services subcommittee on emerging threats it is apparent that cyberis -- cyber is the new domain of warfare. this amendment is a critical first step in building a more comprehensive cyber defense system. thank you and i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: for what purpose does the gentleman from california rise? mr. knew spessstk -- mr. nunes: i rise in opposition though i'm not opposed. -- mr. schiff: i rise in opposition though i'm not opposed. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. mr. schiff: i thank the gentleman from south carolina for his important amendment. there's a limit to how effective cyber security can be. while we have to defend everything at all times our adversaries get to attack everywhere and only need to be successful once. we need an effective deterrent

which this amendment would help further. it would require that the director of the office of national intelligence report to congress on how we measure cyberattacks so we best know thousand respond when we are attacked and how to respond if we were attacked. measuring the scale and effects of cyberattacks is no easy task especially as we must factor in second and third order effects. so i want to thank mr. wilson for his amendment, i'm proud to support it and yield back the balance of my time. the chair: all time has been yielded. the question is on the amendment offered by this gentleman from south carolina. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. it is now in order to consider amendment number 14 printed in house report 114-155. for what purpose does the gentleman from texas seek recognition? mr. poe: mr. chairman i have an amendment at the desk. the chair: the clerk will designate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 14 printed in house report 114-155 offered by mr. poe of texas.

the chair: pursuant to house resolution 315, the gentleman from texas, mr. poe and a member oppose will each control five minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from texas. mr. poe: i yield myself such time as i may consume. the chair: without objection. mr. poe: this amendment co-sponsored by the ranking member on the subcommittee, mr. keating of massachusetts, requires the director of the national intelligence to produce a report on wildlife trafficking and how terrorist organizations are involved and how they're making money off of wildlife trafficking. and the impact it has on u.s. national security. during our terrorism subcommittee hearing on this very issue in february, we learned that rhinos and eln'ts -- el fnts are on the path to extinction. for example, back in the 1970's, there were approximately 65,000 rhinos in africa. since then about 1,000 a year have been killed and now there are only 5,000 left in africa. that's a 94% drop in those

rhinos. and there are only five white rhinos in the whole world that are here. el frants are not very much -- not faring much better. from 2002 to 2010, the elephant population across africa dropped 66%. back in the 1930's and 1940's mr. chairman there were plks -- there were approximately five million african elephants. now there are about a half million african elephants. one of the most famous is this photograph of sato taken last year. he's presumably the oldest elephant in existence in africa. he was killed for his tusks that almost touched the ground last year. in fact, "national geographic" a year ago today did an article on him, he was killed for his tusks, how other elephants are being killed for their tusks. he was about 46 years old when he was killed for those tusks. the reason that poaching seems

to be on the increase over the last few years is because there's low risk of apprehension and it's easy to commit these crimes. also, even when someone is captured, penalties for wildlife trafficking are far less than for drug trafficking. who uses these tusks? who uses these rhino horns? the number one country in the world that is a consumer of illegal ivory trade is china. vietnam is the number one country in the world that uses the illegal trade of rhino horns. so those -- this is where these tusks and rhino horns go and it brings in a lot of money. for example a kilogram, if i remember my math correct that's 2.2 pounds, of rhino horn sells for $60000.

so there's a lot more money involved in the sail of rhino horns, elephant tusks, than even with gold and platinum. overall the illegal wildlife trade is about $10 billion to $20 billion a year. it should come to no sur -- should come as no surprise that terrorist organizations are also involved in this criminal enterprise. like al shabob, the lord's resistance army, they are cashing in on illegal wildlife trafficking. it's getting so bad that the poachers have become very sophisticated in a sense. they no longer just shoot elephants, for example. that makes a noise. that warns them. they're even being poisoned. so an elephant that's poisoned, elephant dies and then when people approach the elephant, they not only see the dead elephant, they see other animals that were feeding on the carcass of the elephant, they're all dead too. so that the poachers can get those tusks.

they're -- they've become very innovative. local park rangers are underresourced ill-equipped and some of them are corrupt as well. so we can't fight what we don't know. there's a lot about this issue and terrorist involvement in wildlife trafficking that's murky system of we need to find out. for example, how much money to terrorists get from wildlife trafficing? who are the facilitators of the trade? what government officials are complicit? and what impact does this va on u.s. national security? this amendment requires the director of the national sfwoges report to congress on these and other questions. the better we understand the threat, the better we understand what's happening and how terrorists are involved in the illegal killing of rhinos and elephants, the more effective ke within -- we can be fighting those terrorists. that's just the way it is. i reserve. the chair: the gentleman reserves. does anyone claim time in opposition? for what purpose does the gentleman from california rise?

>> i rise mr. schiff: i rise to claim time in opposition though i am not opposed. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. mr. schiff: i want to thank the gentleman from texas for his amendment. the trafficking of wildlife through terrorist organizations is an important issue not only because it threatens to wipe out elephants, rhinos and tigers but also because it can threaten our national security. the world wildlife fund estimates that the amount of money generated by the wildlife trafficking trade reaches into the hundreds of millions of dollars and much of this goes to fund terrorists, including the lords of resistance army,ial that back and boko haram -- army al-shabaab and boko haram. that's them seeking to do harm to us and others. so we must put our intelligence professionals to task. we must understand from beginning to end how they transfer, acquire wildlife trafficking. this is the first step to putting an end to it. i thank my colleagues for offering this amendment and i

urge support and i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman from texas. mr. poe: i yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields back. the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from texas. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the ayes have it. the amendment is agreed. it's now in order to consider amendment number 15 printed in house report 114-155. for what purpose does the gentleman from texas seek recognition? mr. poe: i have an amendment at the desk. the chair: the clerk will designate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 15 printed in house report 114-155 offered by mr. poe of texas. the chair: pursuant to house resolution 315, the gentleman from texas, mr. poe, and a member opposed each will control five minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from texas. mr. poe: mr. chairman, i yield myself such time as i may consume. the chair: so recognized. mr. poe: mr. chairman, terrorists use -- use of social media has exploded over the past several years. a recent study by the brookings institute found that isis had over 40,000 twitter accounts. terrorist groups from isis to the taliban use social media platforms to recruit to radicalize, to spread pop ganda and to raise money --

propaganda and to raise money. i've seen fan pages for the corazon group, an online press conference by al qaeda branch in yemen and we all remember al-shabaab live tweeting the murder of 72 people in kenya. all terrorists groups. the benefits of social media are clear. social media is easy to use, it's free and it reaches huge audiences across the world. we need to do better understand why terrorist use of social media is effective and what impact it is having on the world. this bipartisan amendment is co-sponsored by the ranking member on our terrorism subcommittee, mr. keating from massachusetts. this amendment requires the director of national intelligence to assess four parts of the social media problem. first, what role does social media play in radicalizing people in the united states and abroad? the rise of the lone wolf terrorism in recent years has been fueled in part by terrorist use of social media. just recently in garland,

texas, two individuals claiming isis connections were killed while they were attacking an assembly on free speech and peaceable assembly of religion. it shows -- evidence shows that they had some social connection, social media connection with isis. the boston bombers made two pressure cooker bombs. the recipes for those bombs were published before the attack in al qaeda's inspire magazine. that magazine was released and promoted on social media. second, how exactly are terrorists using social media? social media is constantly evolving just like terrorist use of social platforms. following online trends is an essential element. we need to make fast-pace improvements in this area as new trends and platforms emerge. and third what is the real intelligence value of terrorist posts?

in 2012, a number of my colleagues and myself sent a letter to the f.b.i. asking what intelligence value do terrorists use with social media? the f.b.i. has not come up with an answer. we need a detailed understanding from the whole intelligence community on just how valuable the intelligence is that we're getting from terrorist use of social media. finally, how does online fundraising and radical recruitment of terrorists impact national security? we know that social media is a valuable tool by terrorists just how often they use it. unfortunately, the united states is way behind on countering terrorists' use of social media so we should do more. terrorists like isis are out to defeat us. we must beat them on every battlefield, including social media. i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman reserves. who claims time in opposition? mr. schiff: mr. chairman, i rise to claim time in opposition even though i am not opposed. the chair: without objection so ordered. mr. schiff: mr. chairman

social media, like any other form of communication, can be exploited by bad actors for nefarious purposes. while we are lucky to live in a time of remarkable revolution, to bring us together, our adversaries use the same tools to spread hateful and dangerous messages across the globe. i therefore support this amendment that calls on the intelligence community to provide congress with greater information about how terrorist organizations use social media for fundraising radicalization and recruitment. armed with that knowledge we are more capable of stopping them. i thank you and i yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from texas. mr. poe: i yield back. the chair: yields back. the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from texas. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair the ayes have it. the amendment is agreed. it's now in order to consider amendment number 16 printed in house report 114-155. for what purpose does the gentleman from texas seek recognition? mr. poe: mr. chairman i have an amendment at the desk. the chair: the clerk will

designate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 16 printed in house report 114-155 offered by mr. poe of texas. the chair: pursuant to house resolution 315, the gentleman from texas, mr. poe, and a member opposed, will each control five minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from texas. mr. poe: mr. chairman, i yield myself such time as i may consume. the chair: so recognized. mr. poe: mr. chairman, this amendment requires a strategy to defeat isis and other like-minded groups. it is incredible that after four years of rise of isis we still have to talk about needing a strategy. but here we are. four years, mr. speaker -- mr. chairman, what is that? well, in four years the united states mobilized the whole country and had to fight two wars, one in the pacific and one in europe, during world war ii and we were successful in protecting the united states. but here after four years of the rise of isis we're not sure even what our strategy is. one thing we do know controlling land is a top priority for isis.

it's own credibility is wrapped up in the idea of establishing a caliphate. without land isis has no caliphate. and without a caliphate isis loses its legitimacy among the hard-core fighters. controlling land is also how isis makes a lot of its money. see isis extorts the people that it controls. it also taxes them, and isis is still bringing in millions of dollars a day by other illegal activities. the only way to stop that source of money is by taking back land that isis controls because isis is embedded in u.s. populations, u.s. air strikes is not enough to take the land back. they are still too unprofessional that they are up to the job and we've seen ourselves how the iraqis have dropped american weapons and ran. we have yet to give the kurds the weapons they need to fight for themselves and we don't expect the dictator assad to get the job done. the problem of isis is only getting bigger.

thousands of foreign fighters are still streaming into iraq and syria from other countries. outside of iraq and syria isis still has 10 networks, not including iraq and syria. there are three in libya, two in saudi arabia and one each in the sinai, nigeria yemen, one in pakistan and afghanistan. saudi arabia's known for its strong government control, but the isis affiliate in saudi arabia recently pulled off two successful suicide attack bombs in two weeks. its affiliate in yemen has taken advantage of the fall of the government to take over more land. isis affiliate in libya is running free in a lawless area throughout the same country that killed our ambassador and three other countries. all of isis' 10 networks are growing stronger, not weaker by the day. the president said last year that the united states would defeat and dismantle isis. well here we are a year later, we still do not have that strategy. that's at least according to the president himself last week

when he was meeting with the world leaders at the g-7 summit. he said we do not yet have a complete strategy against isis. this amendment requires the director of national intelligence to report to congress within six months a complete strategy to defeat isis and other groups like it. the same amendment did pass unanimously last year with the committee support. so i ask members to support it once again this year and make it become the law of the land. today, terrorists control more land than it has since world war ii. we need a strategy. we need a plan and we need it soon, and i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman reserves. for what purpose does the gentleman from california rise? mr. schiff: mr. chairman, i rise in opposition to the amendment. the chair: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. schiff: i thank the chairman. it's critical that united states continue to refine and implement a comprehensive and aggressive strategy to counter isil, al qaeda and their

affiliates. but that responsibility does not lie with the director of national intelligence. the d.n.i.'s job is to ensure that our national leadership who do generate our counterterrorism strategy have the timeliness -- the timeliest, most germane and detailed information to be sure our strategy will be successful. mr. poe's amendment misclassifies that responsibility and misconstrues the important role of the director of national intelligence. our intelligence community must be free to collect and assess intelligence outside of the scope of political decisions to be sure their analysis remains impartial and objective. so reluctantly i must oppose this amendment and ask my colleagues to do the same. thank you and i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from texas. mr. poe: the amendment does state that director of national intelligence will work with other appropriate agencies. mr. chairman it's hard to fathom that this nation does not have a plan to deal with

isis. this amendment says congress will move forward and expect and put into law that we will have a plan we will have a strategy. if the director of national intelligence is not an individual who is supposed to help form that plan, then i don't know who would be. so i would ask that this amendment be adopted and i will yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman yields. the gentleman from california. mr. schiff: mr. chairman with respect to my colleague, we have a strategy with respect to defeating al qaeda and isil with respect to the war in syria and iraq. it is a comprehensive strategy and frankly it is a difficult strategy to implement. it's a strategy that involves cutting off terrorism financing. it's a strategy that involves cutting off the flow of foreign fighters into syria and iraq. it's a strategy that involves driving -- drying up the resources the propaganda, the

attacking of the recruitment mechanism of isis. it's a strategy that involves enlisting the support of our partners in the region and within the islamic world to combat the per version of their faith that is used to recruit people to this jihad. it is a strategy that is also military in character that employs our air assets that seeks to train and assist iraqi forces. so we have a strategy. it is comprehensive and it is tough, and while i recognize that there is frustration that many of my colleagues have that our strategy has thus far not borne more success, and i share that frustration i have yet to hear any of my colleagues offer an alternative. it is one thing to bash the administration because it doesn't like the strategy, it is another to ignore the fact that we have a strategy or to propose improvements to it.

but the subject matter of this amendment is whether the top intelligence official in the country should be charged with the responsibility of developing the policy to defeat isis. and i think it's rather his responsibility to make sure that the policymakers in congress and the administration have the very best intelligence to inform those decisions. we see frankly this misunderstanding of the role of the intelligence community many times even in our committee when committee members will ask witnesses from the intelligence committee to state policy positions on how they think certain policies should be implemented when that is really not their responsibility. and here, much as i concur with the need to perfect our strategy improve our strategy and the execution of that strategy, i don't believe that this is something that we should lay at the feet of the director of national intelligence. and with that i urge a no vote on the amendment and yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman yields back. the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from texas.

those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. the amendment is -- for what purpose does -- the amendment is agreed. for what purpose does the gentleman from texas rise? mr. poe: i don't have anything to say, believe it or not, mr. chairman. i yield back. the chair: cool. the amendment is agreed.

the chair: for what purpose does the gentleman from california rise? >> i move the committee now rise. the chair: the question is on the motion that the committee rise. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. somebody. aye. the ayes have it. the motion is adopted. accordingly, the committee rises. the speaker pro tempore: mr. chairman. the chair: mr. speaker, the committee of the whole house on the state of the union having had under consideration h.r. 2596, directs me to report that it has come to no resolution thereon.

the speaker pro tempore: the chair of the committee of the whole house on the state of the union reports that the committee has had under consideration h.r. 2596 and has come to no resolution thereon. pursuant to clause 1-a of rule 1, the house declares the house in recess subject to the call of the chair.

>> now we were expecting this week, in fact today they were going to vote again on this workers' aid program, but instead they decided to extend to july 30 to give the president more time to get his votes in order for republicans to try to grow their vote in order to get this thing across the finish line. >> how did the possibility of a revet to the floor in the first place? >> everyone is holding their fire. the way it's going to get to the floor, today there will be a

vote on a rule on a separate, unrelated intelligence bill, intelligence bill that would allow republicans to extend as i mentioned until july 30 to give them an opportunity to take this up once again. and you know, the idea is that by giving themselves a little bit more time, they can perhaps twist a few more arms. the president can hopefully re-engage with some members of thinks party. now it's going to be a very tall task to try to flip roughly 85 votes in order to get this thing to the finish line, but the idea is that maybe republicans can get 40 and president obama can get an additional 40. and maybe you get close to that number. >> on capitol hill we have seen a number of meetings and press conferences going on. speaker boehner talking to his

house republicans and talked to you. boehner says he had several conversations with president obama to move trade, t.p.a. ahead. what else did the speaker say about getting trade done this year and about votes against it from his house republicans? >> well, as we saw last week a number of house republicans nearly three dozen voted against the rule that basically structured the trade package and nearly scuttled the entire package and what we heard from the speaker and told his g.o.p. conference in a closed-door meeting this morning is he was not happy, he was not thrilled that republicans were voting against the team in trying to vote down the rule. and it's generally a procedural vote. generally passes by wide margins. but the rule nearly killed the

entire bill last week and the speaker made his disappointment very known. >> you also wrote about three ways the g.o.p. could possiblely save this bill and what are they and why is it important that this pass this year, the trade? >> it's important that it passes soon, specifically fast track authority, which would give the president broader authority to get a major trade deal -- involving 12 pacific rim nations done. the reason why we're under the gun at this point is because the president doesn't have much time left in his term in his second term. very soon, he will be a lame duck president. in fact, they are already calling him a lame duck president. this is number one about the president's priority getting a big legislative win before he

wraps up his time in office and big priority for republicans like speaker boehner and paul ryan. they feel like they are under the gun and need to act quickly before 2016 and the presidential race really kicks into gear. >> we are going to keep following your tweets. and your reporting. thanks, scott. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2015] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] >> the house has voted to postponeanother attempt to pass the trade adjustment assistance measure through july 30. he updates his stories saying the republican leaders are considering a vote later this week granting the president fast track trade authority. and that's reflected by the associated press saying after talks with president obama, top republican leaders in congress put together a quick rescue plan today for highly controversial

white house-backed trade legislation. we'll pass more details as we get them. the house will gavel back in at 5:00 eastern for votes expected on the intelligence authorization bill for 2016. we will have live coverage. part of this morning's washington journal. looking, alabama. the president o send an additional up to 500 military advisers into iraq to help fight against isis there. what is your reaction? guest: i am somewhat uncomfortable with that move. put it in context and when the president says there is no strategy no game plan, then you have to wonder why we are risking so many lives and spending so much that we are

having to borrow to get it i feel much better about the president doing what he is doing if he said, this is why i am doing it. this is how we will approach the situation and this is how we will prevail. but he does not have that game plan yet. i hope in time that will evolve and be shared with the united states congress and the american people. host: the president said the iraqis hate to take responsibility for the situation there. the u.s. will help them along. guest: i agree the iraqis need to play a greater role. i'm inclined to seek a real team that is substantive, not where the united states is once again doing the bulk of the work risking substantial number of

lives with very little substance, predominately symbolic from other nations. if the rest of the world is not willing to join in this endeavor, i do not think the united dates -- united states -- we should let things play out until the rest of the world to join with us as a team where they are invested as much as we are. host: do you view isis as a threat to the united states, does that not require boots on the ground? guest: if i were the president of the united states, yes, i would determine the islamic state is a threat to the united states and i would be much more aggressive. but i do not want a repeat of vietnam were you going to a fight halfhearted you burden your troops with rules of engagement that prevent you from winning.

if you do not go in there to do the things you need to do to win, then you should not be there. i see that it is more symbolic than substance, it is not doing what is necessary to win. if you are not, then the president should not be doing what he is doing. host: the military is even wary of putting more advisers into iraq. here's a headline on sunday. the military telling the president there are not a lot of good options and they are not sure it is worth more american bloodshed to put more resources on the ground there. guest: the military is smart like congress. depending on who you talk to, that will depend on the answer you get. they will resolve in the united states prevailing if we engage islamic state in the way that needs to be engaged to defeat it. but there are not good options if you're not willing to do what is necessary to win.

if you are not, then do not engage. do not waste lives. host: what about arnie -- arming the cities and the kurds directly? syrian kurds in a win against the united states. they have been successful, the kurdish military, and fighting against isis. why not give them the direction -- directly the weapons? guest: the kurds are the shining star in the middle east with respect to the united states -- to the islamic state. they have done what is necessary to defend their own territory with the help of america and perhaps other countries with armaments. i feel more comfortable assisting the kurds. what we are seeing too often in this region of the world is american treasury's spent, we arm people and then they flee and the bad guys get this

military equipment, which means they are upgraded in their capabilities in inflicting the damage and loss of lives. we have to be judicious and ensure the people we give weapons to will actually use them to defend themselves or defend their territory as the case may be, and not fully and add to the armament and empower the islamic state. host: how do you respond to those who said the president sent out an authorization for military force in syria and iraq ? the congress has not taken it up. the republican leadership could take up their own but have not done so. guest: the president's authorization for military force is weak and has a time limit of three years. it talks about enduring ground troops, whatever that may mean. again, if we are going to get in there, the president is to have whatever authorization he needs to have to win. i will vote for that authorization for use of military force spirit i will not

vote for one that replicates the problems and loss of lives associated with vietnam where we do not get in there to win where we hamstring ourselves. a good argument can be made that's a ums provides the president with a greater authority in iraq than he now wants. i do not see us weakening our position but i will give the president the authority to win. i do not want to give the president the authority that limits him to a halfhearted measure. host: other democratic lawmakers in the senate and house proposing amendments to the debate congress is having right now on defense spending and authorization for the pentagon. the resolution would force president obama to remove u.s. personnel fighting isis within 30 days. if the president determines it not safe to remove the troops within a time frame, the deadline would be extended to the 31st, and other was trying to force congress passes hand to

debate military for spared if this will get a vote, how would you vote on that? guest: i welcome the opportunity to debate this type of resolution, which is basically withdrawal. i think it gets into a situation where you have got three options at one is you fight to win. two is you repeat the at nam and fight halfheartedly or three, you withdraw. you need to do one of these two. we do not need to do the middle ground the president is now seeking. if the president is unwilling to accept one of the military strategies advised by the pentagon that would enable us to win, if the president will fight halfheartedly, then we do need to withdraw our troops and have a healthy debate in the senate and house of representatives. host: let's get to calls. john, republican, good morning. you're on the air. caller: yes ma'am. mi to be asking a question?

i told the individual who has responded and picked up the line that i thought it was more confusing than giving credit extensive branches of these sorts of faculties. just that, as far as this fellow is concerned, he seems correct as far as doing it right here if you're going to do it, it seems too dangerous and i am not sure how that, if they are actually attacking or interested in persecuting, i am not sure. host: all right. i will move on to new hampshire democrat, you are on the air with the congressman. caller: how are you doing this morning? the representative just mentioned vietnam. i am currently reading "the real history of vietnam war: a new

look at the past." i would suggest anybody read this and we never should have gotten involved in vietnam. he is talking about a strategy to win, attacking the president, as everyone does, but the issue is our foreign policy. there has not been really a justified war since world war ii . because we push our nose in people's business and think that we are going to win. if we learn from history, the russians were beating afghanistan come if we learn from history, the french were beaten in vietnam, who do we think we are? guest: you make a good point.

what happens after the islamic state, who will be in control. will we empower the regime in syria, by using weapons of mass destruction against its own citizens. are we going to empower the iranians? you have got a conflict and on the one hand, you have got the islamic state trying to claim that leadership, and you have got the iranians also trying to claim that leadership or mantle of power and they are fighting each other. if we help one side or the other defeat the other, then what is left? that is one of the complexities in the middle east and i hope the president with his advisers would be able to not just get past the defeating of the islamic state part of it, but go to what happens next. that is quite frankly one of the problems we have had with the wars in afghanistan and iraq that have begun over a decade ago, what is next?

i am hopeful the secretary of the state and the president can come up with a strategy, a plan they can share with congress or, in the alternative, just say look, we do not know what will happen next and it is not worth the cost of american lives, and because of uncertainties, we will not engage. host: are you talking about a political solution for the iraqis? guest: there has to be some kind of government that ensues after the islamic state is defeated we easily have military capability to defeat the islamic state if we are willing to use all of the capabilities in the united states military. maybe easily is the wrong word. it would be a tough fight but we would prevail and we would know with certainty we would ultimately prevail. we will not be the government of iraq or syria. there in mind the islamic state now is also in africa afghanistan, and many other parts of the world. we will not be the resulting government. we have to have the people

themselves in these regions, in my opinion, that are not only willing to fight for their freedom as american ancestors had to do in the revolutionary war, but are also willing to come up with a governmental system that functions as we were fortunate enough to have with our founding fathers. host: "the washington times", serving as vice president in baghdad, al-maliki third playing a critical background role in undermining the push for a more inclusive government, warning the shiite hardliner, al-maliki, is still pulling the strings in a bid to hold power in the year ahead. guest: i want to mention something that is probably not brought up very often for time ok with iraq splitting into different territories or countries. bear in mind that the borders of iraq were artificially imposed by european powers roughly a century ago. not necessarily consistent with

geography or the various tribes or fashion -- factions in the region. i am ok if the kurds, for example, have their own country. i am ok if you split iraq up so the now warring factions have their own territories and we have peace. if that is what is necessary to have peace, i am ok with that. we need to think outside the box and look at different alternatives, bearing in mind that a lot of the borders in the middle east that exist today are not natural borders. they are not borders the people themselves chose. they were borders imposed on them by european powers long ago. host: we will go to virginia beach, paul, an independent. caller: how are you doing this morning? my question is pretty simple. i hear the representative using the term "win" a lot. i want to know specifically what he means by winning it i was

born in 1966. in my opinion, we have not "won a war" since i have been on this planet. we are fighting a different battle. terrorism. a mindset. after isis it will be somebody else. after that group, somebody else. i do not think you can beat a mindset with bombs, guns, and tanks. basically, my question is to the representative, what specifically does he mean by winning? guest: i would disagree with you. i will use that as an example. if you have people with a different mindset and they are all dead, you do not have to worry about them anymore. i know that is blunt. that is often the case and worse. you have people with a different mindset and people fighting on behalf of that mindset and one side or the other loses. the people who lost, they are no longer there. there is a point he is making and i agree with the point. i think the world needs to be looking at the koran more

seriously, reading it, understanding it, to have a better idea of where radical muslims, and i put pregnancies -- i put parenthesis around the word "radical." you have got three great religions formed in the jerusalem area in the middle east. who certainly see jerusalem as the nexus point, and when you have got religion involved, as a part of the mindset, that is where you have got people more than happy to give up their own lives on behalf of the guide as they view their guide. it makes things much more challenging. we can have a military victory, but you are ultimately right that we have to change the mindset that has poured such horrendous violence against somebody people in the middle

east, where christians are killed and murdered in her thick ways for no other reason than that they are christian. i should not say just the christians. with the islamic state, if you are not muslim, in their particular sect of islam, you are at risk of being tortured and killed. there has to be something to change that mindset. i welcome ideas on how best to change the mindset. host: to have a military victory like you're talking about doesn't that require troops on the ground? guest: absolutely. somebody has to pull the trigger. if we are going to go into win you have a choice. you can either rely on an unproven uncertain ground presence that has proven an inability to do what needs to be done to prevail, or you can have american ground troops there that is the kind of decision our commander in chief, he ran for the job, barack obama, he wanted the job and he has got it. as commander in chief, he has to

make the decision whether these risks, the spinning of american treasury, the risk to american lives, is worth the cause we are embarking on. if it is not, he is our president, it is his decision to make, then we should not do it. but if we're going to do it, we need to do it to win. it cannot be a halfhearted measure. unfortunately, in my opinion, at least, today, you're looking at a halfhearted measure where you are not doing what you need to do to win on the one hand or not engaged on the other. host: florida, alfredo is a democrat. caller: i also had a question in regards to specificity. with 40,000 troops would that be enough to win? or 100,000 troops be enough to win? also sir what is your role as

far as being a congressman, in declaring war? why haven't you guys given the president the capability? why are you still sitting on the sideline? guest: we are not sitting on the sideline and we are budgeting the kind of revenues necessary to sustain our military. $612 billion in spending is what the house of representatives has passed this year. we will see what happens in the senate and we will see of the president carries through in his veto of it. with respect to a declaration of war, i am one of those who believes that is the kind of language and emotion we should be debating. the economic how can you say that was not a war? it was never declared to be a war. we can use example after example. i do not like the idea of splitting hairs. again, i think we as the people, it is not just the united states congress and the president of

the united states. it is the american people who have to make the decision on whether what is at stake with respect to the islamic state is worthy of going in with whatever number of troops is necessary to prevail. i will not say it is 40,000. it might be more or less. i will not say it is 100,000. that is a decision for the pentagon with their expertise and the president of the united states come our command -- commander-in-chief. if they make the decision to go in, we need to go in with whatever forces are necessary to prevail. i will reiterate a point i have said many times in this interview. if you're not willing to do what it takes to win, do not get in. we do not need another drawnout conflict with no hope for success where ultimately we have lost american lives, with an american treasury, and we have not had the victory our men and women in uniform deserve. host: rockland, maine, thomas, a republican. you are next. caller: i have one question for

the representative appeared all these years now, they have been coming up with the cruise middle -- cruise missile. from hundreds of miles away of a camel's nose. you now see on tv isis is taking over this heavy equipment and everything we left there. isn't there any way there could be a chip put in these military vehicles and everything to disable them once they went into other people's hands? host: ok. guest: i am not sure that is technologically feasible. if you are talking about a cruise missile something that has got a weapons guidance system that is heavily computer oriented, perhaps it would work in that situation. but if you're talking about a motor vehicle, a humvee, a bradley or something of that nature it would seem it would not be difficult at all to pull out that chip in it, it would be discovered very quickly.

it is a motorized vehicle care ultimately, you could run it without a chip. host: we will go to pennsylvania next. an independent. caller: thank you for taking my call. all right, congressman or do you want to think outside the box? you want to win wars or avoid how's this. let's start at. with justice. let's take care of people here and what they need. things like jobs, let's redistribute some wells. let's take money out of the hands of millionaires, billionaires, who end up with all the control, power, say so. let's put that back into the hands of middle-class working people here. let's lead and that will be the example. let's create some justice in america. let's see if we have any worldwide followers.

people who want to be like us. not people who we go to their country and occupy it and get them to do it the way we want them to do it. and then when they fall out of favor with us -- let's create some peace and justice in america. we all know what that is. republican democrat, ask any american family. it means having your human needs met in a civilized way. let's take a poll of all the middle-class people. they will say the same thing. i want opportunities for myself. i want opportunities for my children. i want peace and safety. host: we got to her point. guest: the number one cause of the suppression of wages is our poor southern border. we have had a huge surge of

illegal alien labor that have taken millions of jobs from america, and suppressed the jobs -- wages from americans. americans can be paid less for the work that is done. i have done everything i can to improve border security to try to remove illegal aliens from jobs that americans would do if the illegal aliens weren't here. if we can address the illegal alien issue, you would see 10 million jobs open up. if you want to take it a step further and look at our immigration policy, it is the most generous in the world. no nation comes even close to giving as many citizenships as america does. we give almost as many as the rest of the world does together. the biggest challenge for american-born workers today is

the huge surge of illegal aliens coupled with a most generous lawful immigration policy, where you have people who are foreign-born taking jobs from americans. host: and in new york. a democrat. caller: hi. i would like to say i am against our military involvement in the middle east. i don't think we should put our troops in, that is up to the other countries in the area. you hadn't mentioned containment as one of the options. i was wondering obviously, you consider that not a real option. i think the military budget should be cut, and the money should be sent back here. thank you. host: ok. guest: i would love for the world to be at peace.

where we could reduce our military budget. but the world seems to be going in the opposite direction over the past couple of years. china is becoming much more aggressive in the china sea. you have the rising of boko haram in the islamic state. you have a toppling of the government of libya, which resulted in a civil war where muslim extremists are trying to take over that country. you have russia with the attack on crimea and ukraine. there is a lot of uncertainty in the world today. like it or not, the united states is who people are looking to for world leadership. while i would love to be in a position to reduce our military spending, i would only be willing to do that if the world was much more peaceful, both today and with the outlook going forward. as far as i see it, the dangers

are increasing around the globe not decreasing. i believe it would be the wrong thing to do to produce our military when these aggressive nations, russia, china, the middle east, might become more aggressive and draw america into a world war where we don't have the capability to defend the united states. host: front page of the "new york times" on sunday, the u.s. is poised to put heavy weaponry in east europe. what do you make of this? guest: i think it is good if the goal is to deter russia, and to let russia know we mean business. to let russia know that their military aggression in crimea and ukraine -- the disappointment i have is with europe. why is europe cutting their defense budget. why is the u.s. being put in the position to defend europe when

they have the economic capability of defending themselves. at some point, europe is going to have to be more aggressive. at some point, the u.s., given our own financial situation, our deficits and debt, we will have to proceed from the world stage because the financial circumstances of deficit and debt are going to forces too. and europe, japan, south korea, any number of nations around the world, a will have to step up. otherwise aggressors will take advantage. host: putin has not responded to this possible deployment. -- put out a message yesterday saying it would -- the pentagon maintains that it is merely deploying the equipment, not the troops themselves.

speaking of putin and sending him a message, telling him we mean business, here is an opinion piece in the wall street journal from last week. it says, boycotting the world cup or showing that it was gained by corrupt means would be one hard lesson for the russians of being led by a disreputable men. -- undeniable losses on its invaders is another. would you agree with that? guest: i would have to think that one through. this is the first time i've heard of the boycotting the world cup. i would like to think that there are some things where we can interact with our geopolitical foes or rivals in the hopes that those things would result in a better relationship amongst nations. so that is something that can be considered, i will have to give that more thought.

we definitely should be in a position to assist the ukrainians, more than we have. to me, europe needs to become more involved with the ukraine does that is their neighbor. they are in close proximity. if russia is successful in taking crimea, it looks like they will be, if russians are successful in moving further to the west through the ukraine some of these smaller european countries may be next. we need to learn from the example of the 1930's that presage world war ii. it is best to get these things in the bud, rather than confront them when they are out of control. in world war ii, over 50 million people lost their lives in that conflict. there are a lot of pieces to look at and put together in this puzzle. have to be careful. ronald reagan said it best, he's

through strength. you need to show strength in the front of aggressors. they are rational actors. they don't want to commit suicide. they will respect the strength that we show. that is entirely different than people like the islamic state who don't mind giving up their own lives on behalf of their god . a different strategy will have to be employed with them. host: we'll go to your home state of alabama, william is next. caller: i would like to say that we can end the war in 24 hours, it won't cost america one dime. we have atomic bombs in the united states left. let's drop 10 bonds -- bombs, we will save 54 russia and five for china in case they interfere.

japan was never our friend. host: congressman? guest: that is an approach i hope we never have to use. host: joe, cedar rapids, a republican. caller: hi, i appreciate c-span. patent must be spinning in his grave with the way we are handling this. where are the a-10s? 90% of these missions are being flown by planes that are totally inappropriate for tactical support. also, how many vehicles are left in europe from the real fortune program that we could be giving to the jordanians and the kurds? host: sorry about that. guest: with respect to the

a-10s, you have to ask the commander in chief. i'm not second-guessing the type of weaponry the commander in chief is using. i think there is a desire to fight from afar. we have aircraft and missiles and guided bombs that enable us to fight from afar with a minimal risk of loss of american lives. that seems to be the president' g. an a-10 is great for ground support, but it is greater risk of loss of life for the pilots who crew the a-10. the president has made the decision to fight from afar, using the types of weapons that are best suited for that purpose. thereby, he minimizes the risk of americans losing their lives in this conflict. the american people will have to make a decision. is this worth fighting? if it is is it worth fighting to win?

if it is worth fighting to win we need to engage in a strategy that results in a victory. a victory would be a defeat of the islamic state, airing in mind, we have to know what comes next. are we helping a brutal iranian regime? there are a lot of complexities. i am not secretary of state, i don't have access to the same kind of information that they have. but i hope that they will make the right decision with the information they have. host: new york, frank, you are next. caller: yes. -- you want us, the average citizen, to go refight this? you are crazy. what you need to do is put yourself on the front line i'm am talking about you, sir. on the front line where those soldiers died for the lie that

you told, and now you want their children to believe that same lie. why don't you do it? guest: apparently this gentleman has no idea what he is talking about. i don't know what lie he is referring to. host: i think he is referring to bush getting into a rock. guest: weapons of mass destruction? there were weapons of mass destruction. before we went into iraq, and afterwards. you can have a discussion as to whether it was worthwhile to get into iraq, given that saddam hussein had used chemical weapons of mass affection against his own people. apparently the gentleman has not watched the whole show. i have not said that we need to go in there with all forces and win. i have said that congress needs to make a decision. one is to go in all out and win.

or two, if you are not all in, don't go in at all. i've said don't fight in the middle. where you are not continuing to -- not intending to do what is necessary to win. that results in defeat. this is a repeat of a run. -- repeat of vietnam. the annan is an excellent example of a mistake in sending our troops to fight that did not allow them to win the fight that they were risking their lives for. americans lost their lives in the anonymous as a result. we have to view other places in the exact same way. if we are going to impose rules of engagement for our members of the armed forces that does not allow them to be the enemy, do not engage them at all. there should be no debate about

a middle-of-the-road policy that does not allow us to ultimately prevail. host: columbia, maryland with tom. you are on the air. caller: good morning. i agree with what was just said. the one solution that nobody ever listen to was joe biden's solution about -- government, where the shiite and the sunni had their own states. host: earlier, the congressman said he would be for that. guest: if that is what is necessary to have peace, let them divide into three different countries and move forward from there. if that is what is necessary for peace, i am all for it. bear in mind that the iraqi boundaries on the map today is

because of european powers from a century ago. those are artificially imposed boundaries. host: we go to florida, and independent. caller: good morning. this is my favorite show. one thing i have to say is that i agree with the congressman that we must negotiate with power and strength. my problem with that is that our power and strength has led up to our events. when he answered the question on immigration, when he blamed the immigrants for jobs, most of his support will come from the businesses that gain from the illegal aliens and their low wages. i like him quickly to tell us that he is against this action.

secondly, i commend him. i happen to be a muslim. he said for all of america to read the koran and he is right. rather than creating conflict with islamic countries for military gains, i would like him to address that. guest: i disagree with the chamber of commerce boss desire to flood the labor market and to suppress wages so that they can make more profits by paying american workers less. the ticket only by their desire to import more and more for norse -- foreigners illegally. that is not the way to go. if the american economy is robust, and we have the room to bring in people from around the globe to fill jobs that are not being filled by americans or lawful immigrants, that is fine. when we have a robust economy.

but right now we have an anemic economy. under those circumstances, when you have a continuation of huge surges of illegal labor, huge surges of unlawful labor searching for jobs, not always low-paying jobs. the american people are being suppressed in their own desires to seize the american dream. we are looking at a suppression of wages and a loss of jobs. i will share some information with you that the american people need to think about when they think about immigration policy. i'm not sure if your listeners are aware, but over the last 14 years, the american economy generated a net gain of 5.6 million jobs. you know how many went to american-born citizens?

minus -- 5.7 million jobs when two people who were not american citizens. that is having a friend's affect on families who are struggling to survive. it is having an effect on our use who can't find a job. those jobs are being taken by a legal immigrants and lawful immigrants who are flooding the market place, and are willing to work for less. if we had a robust economy we could accommodate all three. but when you have an anemic economy, you have to have an immigration policy that reflects -- host: we will hear from natasha in troy, michigan. caller: i am absolutely amazed

that they are trying to put the trade on the american people. crimea belong to russia many hundreds of years. has anyone heard of the crimean war? russia, a country that lost 28 million people in world war ii helping to defeat the nazis has now become -- i think america should get out. russia and ukrainians are like brothers and sisters. they can solve their own problems. the greatest misconception that they are trying to perpetrate on us is that crimea belong to the ukrainians. -- was the one that gave the crimean area to ukraine. they took it from russia. it didn't make a difference at that time, because it was all

part of the soviet union. stop blaming russia for wanting to reclaim land that belongs to them. host: all right, natasha. guest: when the soviet union split up, there were another -- there were a number of treaties that ensued. the ukrainians gave up their weapons in part because of the boundaries that russia said it would respect. the boundaries that russia agreed to included ukraine having possessed an -- having possession of crimea. bear in mind, superimposed over all this was the soviet union. russia was a subpart of that and now, russia ought to respect the agreement that they participated in. host: >> u.s. house returns in at 5:00

p.m. and will vote on one amendment and passage of the 2016 intelligence authorization bill. the thousands voted to postponeanother attempt to pass the trade assistance measure which failed last friday in the house. there is a meeting going on. the senator joining hatch and cornyn and the majority in the senate dollars s in boehner's office and also in that meeting according to "roll call," kevin mccarthy, and paul ryan and others and apparently on the trade measures as the associated press reported earlier, officials saying that the speaker and senate majority leader are likely to split the stalled bill into two parts and send them to the president separately with republicans provided the needed votes for one part and democrats for the house. house live coming up at 5:00.

donlt trump entered the presidential race. he spoke at trump tower on 5th avenue. >> i would do various things very quickly. i would repeal and replace the big lie obamacare. i would build a great wall. and nobody builds better walls than me and i will build them inexpensively. i will build a great, great wall on our southern border and have mexico pay for that wall, mark my word. nobody would be tougher on isis than donald trump. i will find the general patton or i will find general mcarthur,

i will find the right guy, the right guy who's going to take that military and make it really work. nobody, nobody will be pushing us around. i will stop iran from getting nuclear weapons and we won't be using a man like secretary kerry, that has absolutely no concept of negotiation who's making a horrible and laughable deal, who's being tapped along as they make weapons right now and then go into a bicycle race at 72 years old and falls and breaks his leg and i promise i will never be in a bicycle race, that, i can tell you. i will immediately terminate president obama's illegal executive order on immigration immediately. [applause]

>> fully support and back up the second amendment. today, i heard it. through stupidity in a very, very hard core prison interestingly named clinton two vicious people escaped and nobody knows where they are. and a woman who was on television this morning and she said, you know, mr. trump and telling other people and i actually called her, and she said, you know, mr. trump, i was always against guns. i didn't want guns. and now, since this happened, that's up in the prison area, my husband and i are in agreement, he wanted the guns. we are ready to start shooting. i said very interesting. so protect the second amendment.

end common core. common core -- it is a disaster. bush is totally in favor of common core. i don't see how he could get the nomination. weak on immigration and in favor of common core. how the hell can you vote in favor of this guy? education has to be local. nobody can do it like me, believe me. it will be done on time, on budget, way below costs. i look at these roads being built all over the country and i say i can build those things tore one-third. unbelievable, how bad. we are building on pennsylvania avenue rg, the old post office and converting into one of the

best hotel in washington, d.c.,. we got it -- the obama administration, we got it. it was the most highly sought after or one of the most highly sought after project in the history of general services. we got it. people were shocked, trump got it. i got it for two reasons. we had a really good plan and add in a third we had a great financial statement, and the general services who are talented people, they wanted to do a great job and wanted to make sure it got filled. we have to rebuild our infrastructure, our bridges roadways and airports. you come into la guardia airport, it's like a third world country. look at the patches and the 30-year-old -- you look at the asphalt and look at these airports we are like a third

world country and i come in from china and qatar and different places and they have the most incredible places in the world, you come back to this country and have l.a.x., disaster. you have all of these disasters. airports, we have to rebuild our infrastructure. save medicare, medicaid and social security without cuts. have to do it. get rid of the fraud, waste and abuse, but save it. people have been paying in for years and many of these candidates want to cut it. you save it by making the united states, by making us rich again, by taking back all of the money that's being lost. renegotiate our foreign trade deals. reduce our $18 trillion in debt, because believe me, we are in a

bubble. we have artificially low interest rates. we have a stock market that frankly has been good to me but i hate to see what is happening. we have a stock market that is so bloated. be careful of a bubble because what you have seen in the past might be small potatoes. so be very, very careful. and strengthen our military and take care of our vets, so, so important. sadly, the american dream is dead. but if i get elected president, i will bring it back bigger and better and stronger than ever before and we will make america

great again. thank you. thank you very much. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2015] [captioning performed by national captioning institute]