you're on with colin goddard from everytown for gun safety. caller: in switzerland they require somebody to have a rifle and know how to use it. they don't ha >> we'll leave this conversation at this point and go live to the u.s. house. brief speeches and then recess until 3:00 p.m. legislative work will include a bill dealing with regulation of internet domain names. will fered byue cha ne, dr. reverd y blk, inf tnited stat senate, washingt, d. thchapain:us p vereign you kgd ot be ske ank u f iitto anceitoe a findnd to knooroorso open

lo forve u whew for t blosorfeitou esn because of o airek. d us tha we haveot cae wesk inspire our lawmakers to harness prayer, power continuously. may they follow your admonition to pray without ceasing. throughout this day, may they repeatedly ask you for wisdom and guidance. may their fervent prayers make a positive impact on the legislative process. we pray in your great name,

amen. the speaker pro tempore: the chair has examined the journal of the last day's proceedings and announces to the house his approval thereof. pursuant to clause 1 of rule 1 the journal stands approved. the pledge of alenalsance will be led by -- allegiance will be led by the gentleman from minnesota, mr. emmer. mr. emmer: i pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america and to the republic for which it stands, one nation, under god, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. the speaker pro tempore: the chair will now entertain requests for one-minute speeches. for what purpose does the gentleman from minnesota seek recognition? without objection. the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. kline: mr. speaker, i rise today in recognition of joe

ramsteady, a high school senior from forest lake minnesota. this impressive 18-year-old from my district was recently named the 2015 star in agriscience by the minnesota future farmers of america for his work teaching a local agricultureal literacy program. mr. emmer: agriculture is a vital part of minnesota's economy and we are dependent on these young men and women to ensure that agriculture remains a bright and thriving industry in our state. in the fall, joe will be heading to the university of minnesota with plans to work toward an agricultural education degree. eventually he hopes to work in an urban setting to educate students on a variety of agricultural opportunities that exist. i applaud joe and all future farmers of america for their interest and passion in agriculture and minnesota. thank you and congratulations on your recent honor, joe. with that, mr. speaker, i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the

gentleman yields back the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentleman from virginia seek recognition? without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> thank you mr. speaker. mr. speaker, i rise today on a bill that representatives mccal saly car deanas, joe heck and i have introduced. the humane cosmetics act. the humane cosmetics act would phase out the use of animal-based testing for cosmetic products. it will eventually prohibit the sale of cosmetics testing on animals in foreign countries, making sure that only safe products enter the american market. mr. beyer: it's time for us to end the painful and completely unnecessary process of testing american cosmetics on animals. safer, more cost-effective and completely humane alternatives already exist. and the united states is no s no danger of losing its competitive role as a leader in the global cosmetics industry. now we need to ensure our place as a moral leader. over the last 20 years cosmetic companies have reduced

their use of animals for cosmetics testing in favor of more reliable, cost effective and technologically advanced methods that can more accurately predict whether cosmetics are safe for humans. this would match u.s. law to the european union, israel and india and ensure that american cosmetics industry can remain competitive in a changing global market. i urge my colleagues to co-sponsor this bill. thank you, mr. speaker i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentlewoman from tennessee request attention? without objection, the gentlewoman from tennessee is recognized for one minute. >> mr. speaker, in 2010 president obama described his signature health care law as, and i quote, a new set of rules that treats everyone fairly and honestly. mrs. black: closed quote. but under president obama's independent payment advisory

board are also known as ipab, a panel of 15 unelected bureaucrats would be cast with cutting medicare costs in a way that could deny care to our seniors who need it the most. i've been a nurse for over 40 years, but you don't have to be in health care as a professional to understand that there's nothing fair about that. even democrat governor howard dean called ipabs, and i quote, a health care rationing board closed quote, that should be scrapped. mr. speaker, no seniors need a washington bureaucrat standing between them and their doctor. vote yes on h.r. 1190 and let's repeal ipab today. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman yields back the balance of her time. for what purpose does the gentleman from california seek recognition? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one

minute. >> thank you mr. speaker. the goal of the ongoing p-5 plus one negotiations is to guarantee that iran never develops a nuclear weapon. mr. lowenthal: as congress assesses the final deal, i'm going to draw upon a recent publication which is entitled negotiations with iran, five requirements for a good deal which details the following five components. one, mechanisms supporting strong verification, including any time, anywhere inspections of all iranian nuclear military facilities. two, iranian compliance with all u.n. resolutions and full disclosure of its previous work toward nuclear weapons. three, a schedule which lifts sanctions only as iran meets the agreements -- agreement's obligations. four, must include measures to prevent iran from becoming a nuclear threshold state.

and lastly, requirements that iran dismantle its nuclear weapon infrastructure and relinquish its fissionble weapons material stockpile. thank you, mr. speaker, i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. is anyone seeking recognition? 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 19 2015, at 2:22 p.m. that the senate passed senate 808. with best wished i am, signed sincerely, karen l. haas. the speaker pro tempore: the chair lays before the house another communication. the clerk: the honorable the speaker, house of representatives, sir. pursuant to the permission granted in clause 2-h of rule

of the rules of the u.s. house of representatives, the clerk received the following message from the secretary of the senate on june 23 2015, at 11:02 a.m. that the senate passed, with an amendment, h.r. 91, with best wished i am, signed, sincerely, karen l. haas. the speaker pro tempore: and the chair lays before the house a large communication. the chair: the -- the clerk: the honorable the speaker, house of representatives, sir. pursuant to the permission granted in clause 2 h -- 2 hh -- 2-h of rule 2 of the rules of the u.s. house of representatives, a message was received at 5:26 pnl. that the senate passed with an amendment h.r. 1735 with best wished i am, signed, sincerely karen l. haas. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from hawaii seek recognition?

without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> aloha mr. speaker. i rise today to talk about a very good friend ofway and a very good friend of mine. council general -- counsel general. he has been a tireless advocate for japan and has been the glue that has held together a solid bond between hawaii and japan. mr. takano: i've known -- mr. takai: i've known him and his wife since she a-- since they arrived in october of 2012. i've enjoyed many occasions with the counsel general and it -- at the numerous dances throughout oahu. i recall inviting him to the dance two years ago. we had a great time. more importantly, counsel general and i enjoyed spending many friday and saturday nights last year going to dances. he and his wife are really

great bone dancers. i also want to commend the counsel general on his efforts to bridge the pacific ocean and bring together the leaders of japan's diet with the members of the hawaii state legislature. this japan-hawaii friendship association with will continue for many years and will continue to foster the great relationship between hawaii and japan. i also wanted to thank michiko. she's developed strong bonds with many japanese organizations and has always been a great advocate for japan. i wish them well, mr. speaker, for their service in hawaii and i wish them the very best in their future endeavors. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. pursuant to rule 1, clause 12-a the chair declares the house in recess until approximately 3:p.m. today -- p.m. 3:00 today.

>> district maps, a foldout map of capitol hill, and the congressional committees, president's cabinet, federal agencies, and state governors. order your copy today. it's 1395 plus shipping and handling through the c-span online store at c-span.org.

c-span's road to the white house coverage continues tomorrow. we'll bring you the announcement of our republican louisiana governor bobby jindal on his plans for the 2016 presidential race. currently serving his second term as governorment tomorrow at 5:00 p.m. eastern. real have his remarks live on our companion network c-span3. >> like many of us, first families take vacation time. and like presidents and first ladies, a good read can be the perfect companion for your summer journeys. what better book than one that piers inside the personal life of every first lady in american history. first ladies presidential historians on the lives of 45 iconic american women. inspiring stories of fascinating women who survived the scrutiny of the white house. a great summertime read. available from public affairs as a hard cover or an e-book

through your favorite bookstore or online book seller. >> yesterday sara kate elliss, lived remarks on her organization's advocacy work regarding the rights of lesbian, gay bisexual, and transgender individuals. and look at the supreme court's upcoming decision on same-sex marriage. >> i'm keith hill. i used to be a writer with bloomberg, form press club president and member of the club's newsmaker committee. i'll be today's moderator for the youth maker with president and c.e.o. sara kate ellis. after the speaker's presentation we'll take questions from the audience for the remaining time. the press club gives preference to questions from members of the media and many of those around you are working journalists. please respect they are here to

do a job. once the members of the press have asked their questions we'll invite nonpress club members to ask their questions. please keep your questions brief and to the point. no speeches, please. so we can get in as many questions as time allows. everyone asking questions should please identify themselves and state the agency or organization they represent. before i begin, i'd like to mention an upcoming event at the club that may be of interest to some people. on july 8, coach trots of the washington capitals will speak at a national press club luncheon. again, please turn off or set to vibrate all cell phones and electronic devices. the u.s. supreme court will soon decide obergefell vs. hodges. a case that will require ohio to recognize the same-sex marriage lawfully entered into in another state. what will happen to the gay rights movement after the

decision is handed down? today's guest will discuss the ramifications of a decision for or against the plaintiff. sara kate ellis has been president and c.e.o. of glad, the nation's lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender media advocacy organization since january, 2014. before taking the position, she was an award winning media executive and communications strategist who led programming to spotlight the diversity of the lgbt community. ms. ellis, the podium's yours. ms. ellis: thank you very much. hi thanks for having me today. so there are three ways that the ruling can come down. one is affirmative, which is a yes. and if that happens then it will be a great celebration but we'll be back to work on monday or the following day because

there's still much work to be done. i'll talk about that in a little while. number two, the way that the ruling can come down, is that the states that do not have marriage equality will have to recognize marriage equality from other states. so that's a half win you could look at it that way. then the third way is that we get a no all together. which means that we'll really be having to do a lot of work in the future. any way that those three -- any way in which they come in, there's still a lot of work that we have left to do. at glad we just commissioned a poll of over 2,000 americans that asked them how they really feel about the lgbt community. so really it's an understanding of what the culture is out there for the lgbt community. we ask them on a five-point scale from very comfortable to very uncomfortable. then we asked about everyday situations such as bringing

your kids over to a same sex household for a play date. attending a same-sex wedding. finding out a child on your kid's sports team is transgender. what we found was that about one out of every three americans are still very uncomfortable with the lgbt community. when you look closer at those numbers, and you look at the south, it turns ute that those levels of discomfort go even higher, 10 percentage to 20 percentage points. when you look at the transgender community, those levels increase by up to 40%. so 90% of americans at times are very uncomfortable with the transgender community. from there what we have been doing is a bus tour in the south. and why we are doing that is because we want to accelerate acceptance of the lgbt community. no matter the way that scotus rules, we still have to create

a culture in which they can live. we traveled from six states, 10 cities, in seven days. and we met with community leaders. we premiered two mini documentaries. and we met with church and faith leaders. and had very vibrant conversations on how to help accelerate acceptance in the south. additionally, we have been working very closely with transgender visibility. those are only two points that are making out of this entire study. also when you look globally, we have some real challenges globally. as acceptance is moving forward in america it's being -- secretary of transportation is being exported globally. we are working very closely with our advocates on the ground across the world, to accelerate acceptance. i think that's about it. keith did a wonderful job of introducing me.

i've been at glad for a year and a half. i come from the for-profit side of the world in media. and at glad we do media advocacy. it's about raising the stories of everyday americans but also people who are well-known who are supportive of the lgbt community. because we know and understand to build acceptance in this country that you need to know somebody who is lgbt because it opens your heart and mind. and it changes public opinion. so we work very hard to change public opinion in this country. with that, i can take questions. mr. hill: i will take moderator's prerogative and ask a couple questions before i open it up. first, i'd like to focus on a couple of controversies that glad experienced over the last several years. in 2011 glad supported at&t in

its eventually canceled merger with t mobile when it was reported that glad had received $50,000 from at&t. second, in 2014, -- 2013, glad gave former president bill clinton, he was noted as an advocate for change by glad. my question is, have either of those controversies affected how you broadcast your message in any way? ms. ellis: fortunately, none of them happened under my watch. but that being said i think that when you're dealing with corporate america -- i think -- do you want me to start over? i started by saying fortunately none happened under my watch.

however, i am the leader there now. and i feel that at that speech that bill clinton gave he talked about coming on to his journey of of acceptance for the lgbt community. and i think that that was a powerful platform for him to have to talk about that. i think moving forward, though, we -- glad is an advocator, and we have been known in the past as a watchdog. so there's always been a lot of controversy around glad because we -- not always but we do call people on some things when they are not going well. i have to say that the media and us have a really good relationship now. glad was formed at a protest in front of the "new york post" almost 30 years ago this october. when the post was reporting on aids and calling it the gay man's disease. so we have always had an

advocacy arm to us. mr. hill: you mentioned bill clinton and his journey of self-discovery or whatever you want to call it. what about situations where you have recognized individuals who may have talked against gay marriage at one point but are now coming around they have done a 180? how do you address that so-called dichotomy or that kind of flip-flopping i guess some people would call it. ms. ellis: i think it is a journey. acceptance is a journey. and we talked about it a lot recently in the south with a lot of faith leaders who are trying to bring their congregations along with them to this place of acceptance. and i think that we have to give room for people to discover to understand to educate, to meet people who are

lgbt and to go on this road of discovery and acceptance. it takes time. we have seen that as the lgbt community. and we talk about that very openly that it is a journey to acceptance. mr. hill: shifting gears. reported a week or so ago that both american airlines and wells fargo took some hits for their lgbt rainbow. i think american airlines has the rainbow flag on the tail of their planes. how do you approach or how do you help the corporate community in advocating for lgbt acceptance? before the ruling comes out or up until the ruling comes out, how has glad gone about trying

to change the corporate mindset and trying to get them to accept the lgbt community? ms. ellis: the thing that we know is that being diverse and inclusive is very good for business. so once the business case scenarios were made, most of corporate america, majority of corporate america got onboard in supporting the lgbt community because they understood not only did it affect their bottom line, it helped them retain great talent and recruit great talent. i think that with corporate america they got the memo when the business case came out that it would actually help their business. and so they have been very pro-lgbt for majority of companies. and they realize that i think taking some of the hits, the bigger social impact is really important and the business impact is really important. mr. hill: at this point i open

the floor up for questions. yes. >> bill douglas, you mentioned depending on what happens ruling wise you have work to do. if you get a ruling that totally not strike down but makes it more difficult for the lgbt community how do you go about doing that work? ms. ellis: the first i mentioned which is that one out of three people are still uncomfortable or high level of discomfort with the lgbt community. that's really focused on raising the stories, telling -- meeting lgbt people through the media. we find a lot of people who don't accept or are not pro-lgbt don't know anybody who is lgbt. the other thing is that from a media standpoint what we would do is probably raise the stories of these loving couples who are being hurt by not

having a positive ruling. we would talk about the tax it would put on families and what the human side -- human cost of it would be. that's our job at glad is to raise awareness of what exactly the human toll would be for not having a positive ruling. >> do you have a game plan? do you have something that you will immediately roll out depending what the court does? ms. ellis: yes. we have all three scenarios covered in terms of of how we will proceed. we are not a policy organization. so our plan is a media plan and how we would raise those stories up and make sure there was enough awareness about if it is a negative ruling how that's hurting american families today. >> you talked about how there are lingering acceptance from

lgbt people regardless of the ruling. what is the mechanism by which we get people to be more accepting? how do you envision getting people there? ms. ellis: i think a lot of it is by meeting lgbt people. we do that through tv shows. we do it through movies. movies are one of america's biggest global exports. cultural exports. we are doing a lot of work with the movie studios to have them be more influencive because they don't get a good rating on being inclusive in high production studio movies. another is by telling the stories of everyday people that we know. and who have done extraordinary things or lived ordinary lives in the face of adversity. and this way people get to know people who are lgbt. with katelyn jenner coming out recently, before she came out we knew that 8% of americans

knew people who are transgender. now we are in the market seeing how does that move that needle with such a high profile person coming out at transgender. i think getting people like that who can do positive portrayals in the press is really important to moving acceptance forward. >> inevitably when you have court cases come down it seems or can be the case top down decision as opposed to a ground up. what do you do about that? how do you avoid the perception that people think that a court or some of the smaller body is, let's say, pushing an idea on a larger populous that may or may not have agreed with that. ms. ellis: that's a great question. 39 states now having marriage equality i think is over a

majority obviously. so that doesn't seem very top down. it seems bottom up when you look at the landscape and how we have been fighting for marriage equality in this country over a decade. so it's been gradual and slow. building to this moment now. i think it's been very much a bottom up strategy in order to get -- if you look at the statistics over 60% of americans are pro-marriage equality for the lgbt community. that's a supermajority at this point. it's really -- it's definitely a bottom up. >> nationwide, but state-to-state would you say it's bottom up in those states that are not onboard with marriage equality? ms. ellis: when you go state to state. each state could be its own country, right, in america. we often sometimes say that. but i think that the people of

america have spoken and ready for this with over 60% saying they are for marriage equality. i think that the states are ready. i do think that we have our work cut out for us at glad in accelerating acceptance across the country, especially in those states where southern and middle of the country where it might be a little slower to move in that direction. but overall we are in a good place. pr or a you have to recognize other state marriages but you don't have to perform your own in ohio in the states that have resisted doing that. wasn't that basically legalized? because all people would have to do is go out of state and then come back and they would still be able to have the benefits of marriage. ms. ellis: yes. but you also have to think about in theory, correct. there are people who can't leave their state whether they

are sick, whether they don't have the means to. so it's not -- it could get into a socioeconomic issue at that point as well. it's not fair to those people that live in those states. i think in theory, yes. but in practice, i think that it's very important that we have marriage equality in those states. and we will be pushing for that if we do get the second ruling that we talked about. >> talked about media earlier. i know that glad has scored the media on its portrayal of gay characters in film and television. in 2015 the betrayal of gay characters -- portrayal of gay characters by the media industry a plus, minus, or wash? ms. ellis: it all depends on what media you are talking about. on the network front the networks do a very good job actually, of in incorporating lgb people into storylines and

give a diverse viewpoint of the lgb community. when we get to transgender community, there's one show right now, the bold and beautiful, which is a soap opera, that's exported more than it is viewed in the united states. that has the only recurring transrole. we have to pick up the transrepresentation. when we look at the studios, i had mentioned studios don't do a very good job. they are very low numbers of portrayals, and they are usually still the joke. the lgbt community is still made fun of, victimized, killed. when you look at the news media, the news media does a -- actually a pretty good job at portrayals. they give diverse representation. they do good interviews. i think there are some media institutes or news segments you

can do better. but i think overall news does fairly good. mr. hill: what two other three things could the film industry do to improve their record -- what two or three things could glad do to get the film industry to turn around other than having a newsmaker like this today, but what other things can glad do do to get the film industry to change its mind set as far as lgbt community is concerned? ms. ellis: i'd love for them to take a page from corporate america who understands that diversity and inclusion is better for business. and i think that the film industry would see it's better for their business as well. however, one of the things that we are doing right now is not only do we measure them every year, so we have a place, a base lane, to have the conversation. but the other thing that we are doing is compiling the past two years the representation of lgbt.

people in films to show how negative it really is. we are figuring if we play it back for them, then they'll be able to see what we are talking about versus handing them a report every year. so we have -- and we are meeting with studio executives and talking about places that they could incorporate more lgbt characters into their movies. you have a two-year pipeline on a studio film. and a lot of money. so it takes longer to see the effects of that. i also think that they are starting to look at the streaming content providers the netflix of the world, amazons of the world, to see the success they are having with diverse and inclusive storylines. mr. hill: do you think the reason that the film industry has been slow in coming around in its acceptance of the lgbt community is possible blowback

from the general public? do you think that they see this , particularly if they are showing movies in the south, i know years ago there were movies in which african-americans, movies and tv shows, in which african-americans appeared did not appear in the south. could they be looking at that and saying if we put a gay bisexual or transgender person in a movie that's going to decrease our box office because the south is probably -- if it's shown in the south, it's going to be shown in very few theaters there. do you think that's part of the mindset? ms. ellis: i think their mindset is these are very expensive to make. films are millions and millions multimillion dollar films, once you get one in the can, you can't fix it all that

much. you can edit it and they are form layic in the way they have done things year over year over year. they try to work that formula. to step outside of that formula is very scary for them because there are millions of dollars on the line. i think it's for them to step outside of that formula and see success will get us where we need to go. i think that they most likely just get caught up in their own cycle of formula and big money. these are expensive to shoot and expensive to edit and all of that. i think it's really important for them to start to look at different ways to be inclusive because i think that it will add to their bottom line not detract. recently ireland became the first country in the world to accept gay marriage. is there anything that glad could learn from the irish experience as well as the

experience of other countries that have a better acceptance of gay marriage, the lgbt community than we do? ms. ellis: what's interesting about ireland is that it was by popular vote. i don't believe that a minority's rights should be voted on by a majority. that being said, it went very well. we worked on that, actually, at glad. when we do global work we train advocates on the ground, we work with the media pin and help get the questions right, the answers right. and get as much media around big events as possible. so i think that, yeah, we should take a beige from their book. i don't think voting on it is the page to take, but that, a very catholic country, has beaten america to the punch here is why i'm cautiously optimistic we'll get a positive ruling from the supreme court.

we just saw it in mexico. last week. so we are seeing a lot of really positive affirming lgbt movement globally as we are seeing as much resistance though. i don't want to down play that at all because it's still criminal in many countries to be lgbt. >> ireland as a country generally speaking, on so many social issues like abortion is right, still same-sex marriage they loved to the left or more. how do you do that in america? you talk about faith community. how do you take these traditionally right or left positions and get to where you want to get? without necessarily trying to say we are trying to move you entire left on all your issues, or entirely right. ms. ellis: i don't think it's a left right issue. it's an issue of love, right? it's an issue of family. that's one thing where i think ireland took what we do really

well. which is when we first started on the marriage equality road, we talked about rights and protections. and then when we realized that those weren't really resonating emotions resonate with people, so we started talking about love and family. and appealing to what we all have in our nature is to protect our family. to love our family. and ireland actually took that and upped it even a notch. some of their campaigns were shear brilliance where they had a grandson calling his grandmother and coming out to her and her responding in the positive. so i think it's really about love what we are talking about. not left-right. i think it gets mired in the left-right when it's really about family. it's about making this country even better because when you have love, when you have strong families, a country thrives.

>> let's say you see a case where a southern baptist preacher says he doesn't want to perform a same-sex marriage, in your idea, could he or should he be sued? or say, listen, this is not the way? is that somehow -- is there a gray area? ms. ellis: freedom of religion is critical to this country. i think where it gets shady and gray is when it gets out of the church or out of the place of worship and gets into businesses. denying services for businesses. because that gets into a very gray area. what one day is a wedding cake you are denying to serve somebody could be the next day life or death e.m.t. services. i think that it's really important right now there's over 80 anti-lgbt religious freedom bills pending. what we want to be careful

about is that those are about denying people services every day. and that business -- when you're talking about churches, i think within the confines of your church, you have your religion. mr. hill: let's focus on the transgender community for a minute. first of all, hi a discussion with someone yesterday because she didn't know the difference between transvestite and transgender. so could you clarify that for us? i gave her what i thought my definition of both of those were. and hopefully i was correct. could you go ahead. ms. ellis: i'm so glad people are asking. that's what's been really profound about katelyn coming out. it started a national dialogue. it's so important to have these conversations. someone who is transgender is someone that by definition has

been -- feels that they are -- they feel different inside than their body shows. so they want to align their body with how they feel in their heart and their mind. and that's what transgender is. so it's been a very impactful couple of years in the media for the transgender community. and we have seen a lot of visibility grow out of that. i also warn that what we have also seen this year is eight murders of transgender women. while we are seeing more visibility, we are also seeing an uptick as reported. so many people are misgendered or are not out. eight is what we know of this year, which is more than one a month. we are really focused in on accelerating acceptance for the transcommunity. mr. hill: transvestite?

ms. ellis: there is a lot of nomenclature around that. transvestite is -- tends to be somebody who dresses in women's clothes but doesn't necessarily identify as a woman full-time. mr. hill: i was pretty much right. ms. ellis: you can always go to our website. mr. hill: we mentioned katelyn jenner here several times. before catelyn general there are was renee richards who was a professional tennis player. before her there was christine talking about the earl little 1950 east. -- early 1950's. two questions. first, how specifically, if you can talk about it, would this case help the transgender community if the first option

holds true the first option that you mentioned earlier w.er they say yes you have to accept same-sex marriage, period. hue would that -- how would that help the transgender community do you see a direct assistance, indirect, both neither? ms. ellis: any time that we have seen marriage equality come to a state, we have seen the acceptance rates in that state of the lgbt community go higher. what we know is that if this positive affirming ruling comes in acceptance will be accelerated just by virtue of the ruling coming in. for the lgbt community. mr. hill: my second question, i would like to if he cuss on -- focus on an article that was published in my company's human

resources report, written by again neeve douglas. there are two things that struck me in this article. first, she quoted that there are an estimated 700,000 transgender adults in the u.s. work force. 700,000. second thing that struck me was, she quoted a consultant and advocate who said, quote, when you transition, you didn't transition in a vacuum -- you don't transnation a vacuum. everyone in your life transitions with you whether you like it or not. my question is does there need to be -- does a critical mass need to be reached before the

transgender community gets the same level of acceptance as the -- as gay, lesbian, and bisexual? in other words i'm thinking that this old commercial about if you tell two friends, they tell two friends. so if there is a number above which a turning point could occur, and then transgender community begins to be accepted by the general public, do you think that the numbers need to increase before that will happen? ms. ellis: i always get nervous around numbers. just because especially when it's self-reported and it's in the trans community. when we were on the southern bus tour this last week, hi a young woman come up to me who

was transwho said i didn't even know what i was until two years ago. she couldn't -- she didn't see it. she hadn't heard of it. she knew that what she felt inside wasn't lining up with her body, but she wasn't aware of what transgender even meant. so i think even building visibility about what transgender is increases hopefully, the people who are living in pain right now, who are potentially suicide candidates, understand who they are, accept who they are, and see that they can live in this world happily. i worry about the numbers quite frankly. i do think that as we see people transition, as we hear their stories, as we learn about their lives and their family, we become more open and more accepting to them. and it creates just a happier, better world for these people. so i think that we are on that road. i do believe we are on that

road. i think that laverne cox is a great example of that. laverne cox we have worked with for a number of years. over five years. was on the cover of "time" magazine last year as the transgender tipping point. and then with catelyn coming out, that interview with diane sawyer went over -- was viewed by more than 20 million households in the united states. so for the first time in millions and millions of households on that night, they met somebody who was transgender. and that's a miraculous thing for acceptance. mr. hill: have you seen any exchange in the numbers since katelyn jenner did her -- did the -- was on the cover of vanity fair? ms. ellis: we don't have automatic reporting like that, i wish we did. but we are not for profit. we don't have automatic reporting for that. my guess, my professional guess

is that we are going to see more people who say that they know someone who is transgender now, and we are going to see more people identifying as transgender now because they'll know who they are. they have been struggling very quietly in the recesses of the country. and now they'll actually have something to put feelings against who they are. mr. hill: you talked about the bus tour you have done throughout the south. could you talk more about the bus tour and people you have met. any negative impressions or experience you had during the bus tour? ms. ellis: it was phenomenal. we did six cities -- six states, six states, 10 cities in seven days. we started in nashville and did the first ever country music concert for the lgbt.

affirming lgbt affirming concert with ty herndon who is an out country artist. we sold out. we had over 13 artists. we actually had to stop taking artists on because it was going to be an all day affair. we had over 30 press outlets. in nashville during c.m.a. fest. that was the first of its kind and it was accepted really well. no protests or anything. we were thrilled with that. we went on to alabama where we met with community activists. then we went on to meet with military families. lgbt military families to find out how life is now after the repeal of don't-ask, don't-tell. and how we could help through media bring those stories to light and shine a light on any issues they were still having. then we premiered too many documentaries, one on south carolina in charleston, and then we were in columbia. and then in georgia on a mini

documentary on georgia. these documentaries are doing exactly what we are -- our job is at glad which is taking the trials and triumphs of of everyday people who live extraordinary lives and pushing them out through the press so people know more people who are lgbt. i think we met with a lot of faith leaders. that was interesting to me because they really are at a point of acceptance and they are trying to figure out how to bring their congregation along. some of the most successful people or faith leaders have done about a year or two journey with their congregation. having these conversations about who are we, what do we stand for, and how do we be inclusive and diverse as a community? i found that really fascinating. the other thing is that i found fascinating was in these smaller towns a lot of the activists or people who are on the frontlines who are just living their everyday lives out

and proud as lgbt aren't organized. so i think a lot of organizing happened in those smaller towns across the south, which i think already you could see the light bulb go off for a lot of these community activists where they realize they weren't talking to each other and there was more power in numbers. it was a fascinating trip. mr. hill: we talked about ireland earlier. let's go to the other side of the globe. do you have any statistics on the lgbt community and how they are treated or the views of the lgbt community in asia? ms. ellis: i think one of the challenges that we have globally, i touched on this earlier, was that our opponents in the state have taken their message, their anti-lgbt message and they have been exporting it. so we are seeing the

criminalization happen across the globe of the lgbt community. not only that, in a little less than 10 countries, you could be punished by death for being lgbt. there is a real crisis abroad. specifically, i don't have the specifics on each country, but i could absolutely get those for you. but i think overall what we want to be really mindful of is that we have a challenge that's been -- that is global now that we really need to recognize. we started recognizing it at glad. we have been working on the global -- with activists on the ground globally for years. we started to get really involved last year around the olympics and making sure that the stories of russian lgbt people were being told while all the cameras were on sochi. and we have been active in ireland. we are working with nigeria right now. and we have quite a few other projects on the horizon. we actually can't keep up with

all the advocates on the ground globally who are asking for our assistance and help to help media train them to understand how to work with the media, how to build the relationship with the media. so it's a very active space right now with a lot of needs. mr. hill: are you going to do anything specific related to the 2016 olympics in brazil next year? ms. ellis: well, we are always looking. i think that we are always analyzing who needs our help, how we can help, and when the national spotlight is on a country we'll always be there and active and talking about the issues that we are having globally for sure. oomple a in regard to the affordable care act, do you believe that -- [inaudible]

ms. ellis: i think that it's been proven that it is something that should be medically covered. i think there's documentation -- there is documentation on that. when somebody is not matching up or aligning and it's causing stress, it's not good for anybody. and i think that having that kind of coverage is critical. mr. hill: do you have any specific partnerships with companies here in the united states or are you doing a blanket presentation regarding the lgbt community? ms. ellis: can you clarify that? mr. hill: are you -- with a specific company here in the united states, are you working with them to try to get them to

generate more acceptance with the lgbt employees that they have within the company? or are you doing -- is your presentation general that will affect or touch most of the companies here in the united states? ms. ellis: one thing that we found out when we did our accelerating acceptance harris poll is that what we definitely need to pay attention to in the future more so than we have in the past are our allies. a lot of corporate america can be our allies. within their companies have a number of allies. it's about engaging allies and bringing them along to support us and to help us along. i think that our -- glad as a hole is about accept rating --

whole is about accelerating accepts an. any way we can do that whether it's a corporate framework or private framework, we are always trying to do that. and like we said earlier corporations understand. it's good for their bottom line. it's good for talent, retaining and gaining new talent. and so it's in their best interests. and they understand that now. i find that they are very clued in to the lgbt community and how powerful acceptance can be. mr. hill: are there any specific policies that you would like to see corporate america adopt regarding the lgbt community? such as somebody mentioned health care. pensions, wages. there are a whole range of issues where corporate america could benefit their lgbt

community. are there any specific policies that you'd like to see corporate america put in place to help the lgbt community here in the united states? ms. ellis: i think it's really important, especially when it comes to the transgender community, to think about health care. it's also important to think about what transitioning is and any service that is they could help provide to make that easier to help them do it while they are still at work. and i also think one thing that we didn't touch upon while we are on policy is policy beyond marriage equality in this country. you can still get fired in 29 states for being lgb and 33 states for being transgender. you could be evicted from your homes and you could be denied services. we have a lot of work to do in this country still on a policy front. marriage equality is just that.

it's marriage equality. and it's a benchmark. it's not a finish line. and we know at glad that you cannot legislate acceptance and that's why we are so focused on accelerating acceptsance. those policies alone, whether they are in a big corporate environment or they are at the country state left the federal or state level they still -- the best policy and protection for lgbt community is acceptance because that's when you have consensus of acceptance you have a safer environment and a safer country, whether it be a work environment or your housing environment or your community. . mr. hill: is there anything you think congress can do or would you rather focus on individual -- individual programs to help the lgbt community?

you mentioned not having a vote on the issue. do you think there's anything legislatively that can be done specifically on federal level to help the lgbt community? . . we have to progress as a society, as a community to allow our transgender brothers and sisters to feel safe and accepted and not be put into situations where they're scared and they're unsafe.

those bathroom bills are creating those environments. those are a big one that we're having conversations about. [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2015] >> we'll go live now to the u.s. house. members record votes on postponed questions will be taken later. for what purpose does the gentleman from illinois seek recognition? >> mr. speaker, i move that the house suspend the rules and pass the bill h.r. 805 as amended. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the bill. caller: h.r. 805 a bill to prohibit the national telecommunications and information administration from relinkishing information over the internet domain system until the comptroller of the united states smits to congress a -- submits to congress a report on the role of the ntia with respect to such system. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule the gentleman from -- the gentleman from illinois, mr. shimkus, will be recognized for 20 minutes. mr. shimkus: i ask unanimous

consent that all members may have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. mr. shimkus: mr. speaker, i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. shimkus: today we are here to debate h.r. 805. the dot-com act is a great example of what can get done when we work together and builds on the energy and commerce committee growing record of legislative success. . from the time the administration announced their intent to transing the functions, i've had serious concern about it's potential risk associated with the move. this is far too important to rush and we must carefully consider all the potential consequences and outcomes before any transition occurs. my bill would require a period of 30 legislative days for us to review any proposal that n.t.i. receives from the community and this allows us to hear from our constituents and consult with outside experts

before we decide if the proposal is satisfactory. if in this review period, allowed only through passage of the dotcom act, we find that it or its proposal does not adequately protect the free and open internet, congress can then take action to either completely stop the transfer or require more safeguards to be put in place. everyone agrees that the contract should remain with ntia, while this process moves forward. dotcom is a vehicle to make sure this does in fact happen. extending the contract takes the pressure off of making a rush transition and perhaps making mistakes. we get one bite at the apple on this and we need to make sure it's done correctly. mr. speaker, before i relinquish my time i want to

say that i'm very proud of the work that's been done on this bill and the energy and commerce committee particularly by chairman upton and walden and ranking members pallone and eshoo. we wouldn't be here today without their hard work and also the work of staff, particularly greta of my office committee staff david, kelsey and margaret david and tiffany. mr. speaker, clearly this is an issue that has brought both sides together for the best interests of americans. i ask my colleagues to support the passage of h.r. 805. thank you and i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from new jersey. >> thank you, mr. speaker. i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. pallone: mr. speaker, i rise today in support of h.r. 805 the domain openness through continued oversight matters or dotcom act. i'm pleased to support this bill and i want to commend my colleagues for the bipartisan

process in the energy and commerce committee that brought us here. the internet is a great american success story that has benefited billions of users around the globe. over the last two decades the united states government has taken steps to get out of the way and empower a bottom-up approach to internet governance. thanks to the success of this multistakeholder model, the internet has opened up new markets and economic opportunities and become an unprecedented platform for democratic free expression. mr. speaker, under both republican and democratic administrations, the u.s. government has supported the idea that the internet should be governed through a decentralized process. free from governmental control. since the late 1990's, the u.s. government has moved toward private sector management of the domain name system. to put it another way, we think that the future of the internet should be determined by businesses civil society and technical experts. congress has also embraced this vision. as recently as 2013, the house

voted unanimously in support of a bill making it official u.s. policy to, quote, preserve and advance the successful multistakeholder model that governs the internet. mr. speaker, implementing or complimenting the transition of the internet assigned numbers authority advances that policy goal. the transition reaffirms our two decade commitment to the global multistakeholder community. but we have a responsible to make sure that the transition is done right. the dotcom act continues the long standing congressional support for the global open internet while appropriately conducting oversight of the national telecommunications and information administration. we require ntia to live up to the commitments the agency has made for the transition and ensure that transparency and accountability mechanisms are in place before the u.s. government can relinquish its stewardship role. in short, i believe our bill provides the necessary safeguards for the transition to occur without unnecessary

delay. our vote on the dotcom act today is timely for several reasons. key meetings are taking place as we speak in buenos aires, argentina, to finalize planning for the transition. and quick action on the dotcom act is needed to provide a better alternative to the language in the house commerce, justice and science appropriations bill that blocks ntia's ability to implement the transition. unlike the appropriations rider, the dotcom act provides a real opportunity for congressional oversight. so i urge all my colleagues to support it. finally, mr. speaker, i want to thank chairman upton and walden and representative shimkus and their respective staff, david and greta, for working with congresswoman eshoo and other democrats on this bill. the dotcom act shows that we can accomplish -- what we can accomplish when our work is bipartisan from the start and it also -- i'd also like to thank david goldman and margaret mccarthy for their hard work on this ledge slafplgtse i look forward to

working with you all and our colleagues in the senate to see this bill become law and i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from illinois. mr. shimkus: mr. speaker, i have no other requests for time so i'd yield to the gentleman from new jersey. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new jersey. mr. pallone: mr. speaker, i have no other speakers and i would urge passage of the dotcom act and yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from illinois. mr. shimkus: i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the question is, will the house suspend the rules and pass h.r. 805 as amended. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair 2/3 of those voting having responded in the affirmative, the rules are suspended, the bill is passed and without objection, the motion to reconsider is laid on the table. the gentleman from illinois. mr. shimkus: a recorded vote. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman ask for the yeas and nays? the speaker pro tempore: the ask for the yeas and nays. the speaker pro tempore: the yeas and nays are requested. all those in favor of taking this vote by the yeas and nays will rise and remain standing until counted. a sufficient number having arisen, a recorded vote is ordered. pursuant to clause 8 of rule

20, further proceedings on this question will be postponed. for what purpose does the gentleman from illinois seek recognition? mr. shimkus: mr. speaker, i move that the house suspend the rules and pass the bill h.r. 2576ed a amended. the speaker pro tempore: -- 2576 as amended. the clerk: a bill to modernize the toxic substances control act and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from illinois, mr. shimcurks and the gentleman from new jersey, mr. pallone, each will -- shimkus and the gentleman from new jersey, mr. pallone, each will control 20 minutes. mr. shimkus: i ask unanimous consent that all members have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and insert extraneous materials in the record on the bill. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. shimkus: mr. speaker, i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. shimkus: mr. speaker the modernization act has been a long time in coming. we actually started working on this bill in the last congress. we held a total of eight hearings and received testimony from a broad range of stakeholders, including the administration. but most importantly, we worked with each other, member to member, across the aisle. the bill before you, mr. speaker, reflects lessons

learned over the course of the last three years in which we've worked on tsca reform. first, the bill is clear and understandable. despite the highly technical nature of chemical regulation, members can pick up this bill read it and from beginning to end understand what it does and how it works. second -- second the bill does not try to be all things for all people. major sections are not amended at all. we leave the process for new chemical review in tsca section 5 unchanged because it's working pretty well right now and changes could make it worse. the heart of the bill is our approach to regulating chemicals already in the market. thousands of these chemicals have been in commerce for many years and they pose no known risk and really don't need to be regulated at all. we leave those alone. but we do allow some existing chemicals to be scientifically evaluated for risk and, if necessary, to have that risk managed through a rule by the e.p.a. chemicals may be chosen for risk evaluation in one two of

ways. either e.p.a. may select a chemical for risk evaluation based on what e.p.a. knows may pose an unreasonable risk or the manufacturer may designate a chemical for e.p.a. to evaluate for risk. now, why would a manufacturer environment e.p.a. scrutiny of its product? there are several reasons. first, some interests may be raising concerns about a product and the manufacturer wants to put those concerns to riss -- rest. or one of two states may be think being regulating the chemical. the state by state approach can spell disaster for someone trying to capture economics of scale in a national market. what better way to put these concerns at risk than to have the e.p.a. with the scientific standards we require perform an objective risk evaluation? then the e.p.a. decision on that chemical will apply in all states and consumers and the public can have the confidence that the chemical is stated for its intended use.

another legislation that required careful discussion and negotiation is preemption. of course we want to make sure national markets are just that. and not a patchwork of restrictions varying state to state. at the same time we did not want to deny anyone a legitimate cause for action under state tort or contract law. so that is what we said. as long as the state law does not conflict with the federal ruling, the state action may continue. the bill has strict but attainment deadlines for action. if e.p.a. initiates a risk evaluation, it must finish in three years. if a manufacturer initiates one and includes the information e.p.a. needs to make a decision e.p.a. should finish that in two years. once the risk evaluation is complete, if e.p.a. decides a rule is needed to manage the risk e.p.a. must propose the rule within one year. the risk evaluation itself only asks does the chemical present an unreasonable risk of injury to health and the environment? that's a science question based

on a combination of hazard and actual exposure. risk, the agency's decision on how to manage it is based on many other factors such as cost effectiveness, weather restriction -- restricting an article will reduce exposure, whether replacements are available and many other concerns. this prevent -- allows e.p.a. to regulate articles in those areas where regulation of chemical substances and mixtures alone would not be effect to have reduce the identifyified risk by require -- but requires e.p.a. to be careful in addressing replacement parts that serve a commercially intended function or the original product or are needed for -- to maintain the functionality of the original product. we think this system sets a new standard for quality regulation. of course we want to be protected from harm. but we do not want needless expensive regulation. consumers want safe choices, not no choice at all. mr. speaker, we are on the brink of setting up commonsense

approach to protecting people from unsafe chemical exposure that will become the standard of the world. we want our constituents to be safely and -- safe and we want markets to work. this bill delivers both. with that, mr. speaker, i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from new jersey. mr. pallone: thank you mr. speaker. i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. pallone: thank you. nearly four decades ago congress enacted the toxic substance control act to identify and regulate risks from dangerous chemicals. unfortunately, the statute has never worked. improvements to the law are long overdue and i'm happy to be here today with my energy and commerce and commerce colleagues on both sides of the aisle to support this landmark reform legislation. mr. speaker, what brought us together is the failure of the current statute to keep the american public safe and to provide confidence in the safety of american products. toxic chemicals can be found in the products we use every day and are steadily building up in our bodies and the environment.

consumers are worried about chemicals like b.p.a. and tryclosine but they don't know how to avoid them. something needs to change. the energy and commerce committee has held many hearings over the last few years to understand why toxic isn't working. some critical flaws worked into statute like the grandfathering of over thousands of chemicals in the 1960's. the impossible analytical burden of the statute's lease burdensome clause. even though we recognize these flaws, forward progress has been elusive. so when the chairman came to me and mr. tonko to address the essential components of reform i was hopeful. the result is a bipartisan bill that will remove major obstacles to e.p.a. action and give the agency new authority and new resources.

it will offer more protection and more implementation than current law. it is a strong compromise and i urge all of my colleagues to support it. mr. speaker, h.r. 2576 will empower e.p.a. to regulate the universe of chemicals that were grandfathered in 1976 by removing the requirement that e.p.a. impose the least burdensome regulatory option and by establishing a risk-based standard for risk management instead of a cost benefit standard. for the first time the decision of whether a chemical needs to be regulated will be based purely on the risk it poses. h.r. 2576 will improve e.p.a.'s access to information about potentially dangerous chemicals by allowing e.p.a. to require testing through orders and consent agreements, not just rule makings and by authorizing e.p.a. to seek data when needed for risk evaluation without first demonstrating risk. h.r. 2576 will provide expedited action for the worst chemicals, those are

consistent toxic. we can expect quick action to get these chemicals out of our environment and out of our bodies. mr. speaker, h.r. 2576 will explicitly and protect vulnerable populations like children workers elderly and hot spot communities. the bill will provide more resources for the e.p.a. to carry out this important pornt program by eliminate caps on user fees and make sure they're deposited in a trust fund for toxic implementation. under the bill all confidential business information claims by industry would have to be substantiated, preventing abuse and ensuring greater transparency. and h.r. 2576 would ensure that states maintain their important role as partners in chemical regulation. under the bill preemption of state laws would be more limited than current law and other proposals. no state law would be preempted until federal requirements are in effect. and many state laws would be protected from preemption, including existing state laws, new state laws adopted to address air and water quality

or implement other federal laws, state torque claims, not evaluated not e.p.a. in response to concerns raised by stakeholders and members, a few additional important clarifications have been made following committee markup and i thank the chairman for working with us to make those changes. there is now clear authority for e.p.a. to make a schedule if manufacture risk -- request risk evaluation exceed e.p.a. capacity ensuring such requests won't overwhelm the practice. and the grandfathering provision for existing state laws have also been clarified based on feedback from state attorney generals. mr. speaker, strong -- the strong committee report language further clarifies the limited role of cost and risk management, the preservation of state monitoring and reporting requirements and the expansion of e.p.a.'s testing authority. i know that tomorrow we'll get back to disagreeing on the importance of environmental protection and the essential role e.p.a. plays in keeping america safe but for today we can all agree on the need for

strong and protected federal regulatory programs for chemicals. and i want to thank chairman shimkus and chairman upton for their leadership, their willingness to work with democrats and stakeholders to craft this legislation. i'd also like to thank jackie cohen of my staff for her hard work on this legislation as well as dave mccarthy of the majority staff for his efforts. this is a true testament to what we can achieve when we work together, and i look forward to supporting this bill and i hope all my colleagues will join me in supporting this landmark legislation. i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from illinois. mr. shimkus: mr. speaker, i would like to give two minutes to my colleague dr. bucshon from indiana. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from indiana is recognized for two minutes. mr. bucshon: mr. speaker i rise today in support of h.r. 2576, the toxic substance control act of 1976. this legislation will benefit

the eighth district of indiana and our nation by improving the regulation of chemicals in commerce. indiana's eighth district has a strong and diverse manufacturing sector, including plastics fertilizer production, automobiles and medical devices which play pivotal roles in the local and state economy. h.r. 2576 will improve the e.p.a.'s outdated regulatory process for these industries and manufacturers, fostering conditions for stronger interstate commerce and ensure robust protections for public health and the environment. i urge my colleagues to support this important legislation, and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from new jersey. mr. pallone: mr. speaker, i now yield five minutes to the ranking member of the subcommittee mr. tonko. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. tonko: thank you, mr. speaker. and i thank the gentleman from new jersey and our ranking member on energy and commerce

representative pallone for yielding. mr. speaker, 40 years ago congress passed the toxic substance control act, which created a federal program to manage the risks associated with our nation's industrial chemicals. that law tsca, has never met that need. as a result, the public has lost confidence in this federal program. the many failings of the current law have been pointed out in reports reports issued by the government accountability office and others. well-intentioned attempts over the years to address some of the problems administratively or through voluntary agreements amongst the environmental protection agency, the chemical industry and the environmental and public health communities have failed. the public has too little information about the safety of chemicals that are -- that they are exposed to every day in virtually every product that they use. even in the face of overwhelming evidence of harm

to people's health, e.p.a. is unable to regulate exposure to toxic chemicals. congress had to step in and explicitly legislate to gain public health and environmental protections from p.c.b.'s, for instance, and asbestos. because of the regulatory vacuum at the federal level, some states have legislated to secure protections for their citizens. in some cases, large retailers have initiated their own chemical policies to respond to what our consumers' concerns. 40 years of ineffective federal policy is enough. h.r. 2576, the tsca modernization act amends tsca and corrects the fundamental flaws that exist in our law. when my colleague, chair shimkus, began the effort to reform tsca in the last congress i knew the committee could produce a bill.

i believed we could. i was not convinced however that we could pass a law, but h.r. 2576 is a decisive step, i believe, in that direction. i thank the chair, chair shimkus, chair upton and ranking member pallone for their continued cooperation and dedicated effort on behalf of this legislation. this truly has been a productive partnership and the result is a good bill, a bill that i am pleased to support. h.r. 2576 is the result of much discussion, much work and compromise by all parties involved. while no one group gets all they might have hoped for in this legislation, every stakeholder group gets something that they need, and frankly we all need a functional, fair and reliable federal program of chemical regulation. industry gains a fair, predictable federal program for chemical regulation, a program that will inspire public

confidence in the safety of their products. in the context of our global economy, that is an important asset for doing business both here and in other countries. the public health and environmental communities gain a federal program in which e.p.a. evalue waits chemicals and based on those evaluations will act to regulate chemicals the agency determines present a risk to health or a risk to the environment. under current law, in order to regulate a chemical, e.p.a. must demonstrate that benefits of regulating outweigh the costs. under h.r. 2576, e.p.a.'s evaluation and decision on whether to act will be based solely on risk factors, risk factors alone. considerations of costs will be addressed when the agency selects among different regulatory options to reduce chemical exposures. that is a major gain, a major

gain for public health and a major gain for the environment. h.r. 2576 is a good bill. it offers significant improvements over our current law. i know many members have concerns about states' rights and state preemption provisions in tsca. i share those concerns. there is state preemption in current law, and there is state preemption in h.r. 2576, but state preemption only occurs when e.p.a. takes final action on a chemical, either finding it safe or regulating its risks. h.r. 2576 maintains a strong role for the states, and with those changes in tsca, the states will have a more active and credible partner in this effort at the federal level. again, i want to thank chair shimkus, chair upton and ranking member pallone for their excellent work on this bill, and i appreciate the constructive partnership that

we formed in working together on this legislation. we worked through many difficult issues and found that common ground. i look forward to continuing to work together as this bill moves on to the designate. i might ask the gentleman from new jersey if i could have 30 seconds. mr. pallone: i yield another 30 seconds to the gentleman. mr. tonko: i thank the gentleman. i urge my colleagues to end the ineffective chemical policy that we had for four decades and to support h.r. 2576. i, too would like to thank some individuals who are very pertinent to this discussion and final product. i thank david mccarthy from the subcommittee staff on the majority side and jerry corey from the subcommittee staff. jackie cohen from our subcommittee staff on the democratic side. and chris sarley of chair shimkus personal office staff and jane ferucci, the legislative director of our congressional office. with that i thank you mr. speaker, and i yield back the balance of my time.

the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from illinois. mr. shimkus: i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from new jersey. mr. pallone: mr. speaker, could i just ask how much time remains? the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman has 9 1/2 minutes remaining. mr. pallone: i yield now three minutes to the gentleman from texas, mr. green. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas is recognized for three minutes. mr. green: thank you, mr. speaker. i rise in support of h.r. 2576, the tsca modernization act and i'm a proud co-sponsor that will update the toxic substance control act that will -- our nation's primary statute regulating the use and safety of commercial chemicals for the first time since it was enacted in 1976. this legislation was -- will directly address many of the current flaws. eliminating the least burdensome requirement explicitly clarifying that law's safety standards excludes any consideration of cost. this bill would require e.p.a. to consider the risks to vulnerable subpopulations like children pregnant women,

workers and set restrictions if necessary to protect them. the tsca modernization act will go a long way to make sure that families of chemical facility workers and fence line community members like our congressional district in houston in harris county, texas, are protected from the potentially harmful chemicals and bring clarity to the important sector of our nation's economy. i'd like to thank both chairman shimkus, ranking member tonko of the subcommittee, chairman upton and ranking member pallone and their staffs for the hard work and willingness to work together and make tsca reform a reality. i also like to personally thank my legislative director, sergio espinoza, who's worked on this for three terms, i think, mr. chairman, and i want to ask my colleagues from both sides of the aisle to join us and vote in support of this important legislation. and mr. speaker, i yield back. i return the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the

gentleman from illinois. mr. shimkus: reserve the balance of my time mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new jersey. mr. pallone: thank you, mr. speaker. i now yield two minutes to the gentlewoman from california, mrs. capps. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from california is recognized for two minutes. mrs. capps: mr. speaker, we all know that our chemical regulatory system is badly broken, and it's been broken for a very long time. when it comes to chemicals weak statutory authority and limited resources, we have prevented e.p.a. from fulfilling its mission to protect public health and the environment. . current law is so weak that e.p.a. could not use it to ban the use of asbestos, despite overwhelming evidence that asbestos poses risk to human health. even when the e.p.a. can regulate a technical, they must do so using a flawed cost-benefit analysis that prioritizes profits over health and safety. and these are just a few of the many serious flaws that the

current system -- with the current system. what the tsca modernization act does not address all of these problems, it takes several important steps forward that will help improve the health and safety of consumers and their families. it finally ensures that health not cost, is the standard by which the safety of chemicals is evaluated. it maintains critical state chemical safety laws such as california's landmark proposition 65. and for the first time it includes explicit protections for vulnerable populations, such as pregnant mothers, children and seniors. i want to commend chairman upton and shimkus ranking members pallone and tonko, and the calf staffs for all their hard -- and the committee staffs for all their hard work and commitment. it's far from perfect, but its that improved it every step of the process -- it has improved it every step of the process. should the senate pass its package, harold: this cooperation continues in congress and we can produce an even stronger bill. mr. speaker, for far too long

our chemical laws have prioritized profits over human health and safety. this bill would put an end to this inequity and many other serious failings of the current system. the tsca modernization act is a good compromise and a major step forward. that's why i will be voting for it today. i urge my colleagues to do the same and yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from illinois. mr. shimkus: reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new jersey. mr. pallone: mr. speaker, i yield now two minutes to the gentlewoman from colorado, ms. degette. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from colorado is recognized for two minutes. ms. degette: thank you very much mr. speaker. i rise in support of h.r. 2576, the tsca modernization act. since the 111th congress, a lot of us have been wrestling very seriously with how to reform the e.p.a.'s current regime for reviewing and regulating chemicals. everyone agreed that this statute has been broken for most of the decades that it has been in effect.

devicing a new program though, that would both enable the e.p.a. to take meaningful action on the chemicals that truly need regulation and protect the health of our citizens, was an uphill battle in deeply partisan times. but we've come up here with a true procomprise. we focused on the aspects of current law that really need to be addressed and we developed language that will move the ball forward. as all the other speakers have said though, our work is not done after a vote later today. the senate working its own will has come up with a reform bill that takes a distinctly different approach. we have a lot to reconcile. it's important though, that legislation makes it to the president's disease that will equip the e.p.a. to protect -- president's desk that will equip the e.p.a. to protect from us toxic chemicals over the long-term. we'll be judged how well the new law works over the coming decades. i want to add my thanks mr.

speaker, to congressman frank -- frank pallone, congressman shimkus, congressman tonko, jean green, all of our staff -- gene green, all of our staff, and in particular, my legislative director, eleanor, who has been working on this bill ever since i got here or ever since we really started seriously negotiating. one last thing. i think it's important. congresswoman capps mentioned that this bill will not preempt state law and it will not preempt proposition 65. this was an important provision and i want to thank congressman shimkus and his staff for working on it with us because it's important that we have these kinds of protections that we need. with that i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from illinois. mr. shimkus: mr. speaker i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new jersey. mr. pallone: thank you mr. speaker. i have no more speakers and i believe my colleague gets to

close so i just want to, if i could just say thank you again to mr. shimkus in particular for reaching out to myself and mr. tonko on this legislation and making it bipartisan. i almost feel anti-climactic today because i know how much hard work has gone into getting this bill to the floor and i know we're going to work hard after it passes the house to get it passed in the senate and to have a law that goes to the president. so with that i would urge all my colleagues to support the bill and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from illinois. mr. shimkus: thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, this is a good bill and i'm going to have -- to add my thanks to my colleagues too. we want a good vote today because we want to make sure we have a strong house position as we go into negotiations with the senate. and i think we're going to have that. i also appreciate the leadership for thing -- for bringing this up on the suspension calendar which i think shows a lot of support right at the outset. i want to take a moment to thank, as everyone else has

done, our colleagues. this has been a multiyear multicongress approach and as a former high school teacher in government history this -- so far the system is working on this bill. and we hope for good things as we move forward with conchings and get something to the president's dess -- conference and get something to the president's desk. i harkin back to paul tonko's comment and frank pallone's comment that, we could pass a bill but if we wanted to pass a law we needed to open up the process a little bit and that was very helpful to me and i appreciate that. we also want to thank chairman upton, obviously for his leadership and his friendship. diana degette, who just spoke, and jean green both were with me -- gene green both were we me slaving away the last couple of years. we learned a lot about each other and the law. it's a very difficult law to understand. we also started getting help from bob latta from ohio and

bill johnson also and we want to thank them for their help. h.r. 2576 has also gained letters of support from a variety of stakeholders and sometimes this shocks people. that we have this group of diverse interests. but american chemistry council, the american cleaning institute, consumer association, the national association of chemical distributors national wildlife federation, just to name a few. i also want to thank two people who never promoted any particular policy, but are responsible for exceptional quality and legislation before us. tim brown and legislative council -- counsel who make sure the words in the bill do what we intend them to do. that's a part of this process that really goes unrecognized to people in legislative council. but they spent long hours and we ask them to do heavy lifting at short notice and we want to make sure we thank them here today in a highly they cancal field such as chemical risk

management that is not an easy task. we thank them for their skill, dedication and hard work. i'd like to recognize the dedicated staff on both sides of the aisle who helped us craft this legislation. david mccarthy has already been mentioned along with jerry cory on the energy and commerce staff. understanding our chemical regulations have helped members navigate through the complex nature of tsca reform from a very first informational hearing last congress. i know that over there we got jackie cohen who last congress was a real pain in the rear end to me. but this year we've been able to work together, which has been helpful. gene also was a calming influence and we appreciate her steady guidance. they both have provided quality input to my colleagues on the other side of the aisle throughout this process. we appreciate their dedication oftentimes through nights and weekends to help us get to where we are today. i urge all my colleagues on both sides iflet to vote yes on this, to spend a strong signal

that the time is now to update this outdated law and keep the momentum and the bipartisan spirit moving forward until the president signs it into law. with that, mr. speaker, i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the question is, will the house suspend the rules and pass the bill h.r. 2576 as amended. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair 2/3 of those voting having responded in the affirmative, -- the gentleman from new jersey. mr. pallone: i'd ask for the yeas and nays. the speaker pro tempore: the yeas and nays are requested. all those in favor of taking this vote by the yeas and nays will rise and remain standing until counted. a sufficient number having arisen the yeas and nays are ordered. pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20, further proceedings on this question will be postponed.

for what purpose does the gentleman from michigan seek recognition? >> mr. speaker, i rise today in support of h.r. -- i'm sorry mr. speaker. i move to suspend the rules and pass h.r. 893 as amended to require the secretary of the treasury to mint coins in

commemoration of the centennial of boys town and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: h.r. 893, a bill to require the secretary of the treasury to mint coins in commemoration of the centennial of boys town and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from michigan, mr. huizenga and the gentlewoman from new york, mrs. maloney, each will control 20 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from michigan. mr. huizenga: mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on this bill. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. huizenga: mr. speaker, i also ask unanimous consent that the exchange of letters between the committees of jurisdiction be included in the record. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. huizenga: mr. speaker i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. huizenga: mr. speaker, i rise today in support of h.r. 893, the boys town centennial commemorative coin act introduced by the gentleman from nebraska, mr. fortenberry

and seek its immediate passage. mr. speaker, on december 12, 2017, boys town will celebrate 100 years of saving children and healing families. boys town was founded in 1917 by a young irish priest, father edward flanagan, who believed that every child could be a productive citizen if given love a home, education and a trade. he accepted boys of every race, color and creed, an amazing thing back in 1917. boys town first opened on december 12 of 1917 in a rundown victorian mansion in downtown omaha, nebraska. in 1921 the home later moved to overlook farm on the outskirts of home are a ha where it remains located -- of omaha where it remains located today. by the 1930's hundreds of boys lived at boys town which grew to include dormitories and administrative buildings and the boys even elected their own government which included a mayor, council and commissioners. news of father flanagan's work spread worldwide and even hollywood took notice when a very famous 1938 move request "boys town" with spencey tracy

who won an award for his portrayal of father flanagan. he even traveled the world visiting orphans and advising government leaders on how to care for displaced children after the war. although father flanagan died in 1948, his work at boys town, which flanagan called god's work, i think most of us would agree with that, continued. today although boys town is still headquartered in nebraska, it continues to expand its care across america. it's one of the largest nonprofit child care agencies in the country providing treatment for behavioral, emotional and physical problems for children and their families. helping as many as two million people annually. additionally, boys town national research hospital is a global leader in the research of usher syndrome. mr. speaker, i can't think of a better way to commemorate father flanagan and the boys town than by creating this commemorative coin. the spirit of boys town truly embodies the best of america. this bill would help recognize and continue to nurture that

spirit. i commend the gentleman from nebraska for his hard work on this issue and i ask immediate passage of the bill and reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentlewoman from new york. mrs. maloney: i yield myself as much time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman is recognized. mrs. maloney: i rise in support of h.r. 893, the boys town centennial commemorative coin act. i was pleased to be an original sponsor in the last congress and a co-sponsor in this one. this bill appropriately recognizes the outstanding work done by boys town, a nonprofit organization headquartered in the village of boys town, nebraska. that selflessly promotes the interests of children and their families across this nation. boys town, which takes its name from father flanagan's boys home, impacts the lives of more than two million families across america each year, through its counseling

services outreach and education. i'm also pleased to report that each year boys town directly touches the lives of thousands of new yorkers through its community support services and homes for troubled youth. father flanagan, the founder of boys town, focused on the inherent good in children and built a world class organization that emphasized the rehabilitation of troubled youth, rather than punishment. president franklin roosevelt once said that america needs 49 more father flanagans. it is this compassionate approach and commitment to love, training and guidance regardless of race or religion, that has made boys town such a success story and a life line for countless children and their families. . the bill before us today would require the u.s. treasury department to mint and issue $5

gold, half dollar-clad commemorative coins. surcharges from the sale of the coins will allow boys town to raise needed funds that will be dedicated to making a positive impact on the lives of children and families from underserved communities across america. it's also important to note that passage of this bill comes at absolutely no cost to the taxpayer. i would urge my colleagues to join me in passing this commonsense bipartisan bill without further delay, and i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman reserves the balance of her time. the gentleman from michigan. mr. huizenga: mr. speaker, i would like to yield such time as he may consume at this time to the gentleman and sponsor of the bill from nebraska mr. fortenberry. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from nebraska is recognized. mr. fortenberry: thank you, mr. speaker. first, let me thank mr. huizenga and mrs. maloney for your thoughtful reflections and

history of boys town. i appreciate the sentiments offered. i'm very happy and proud to stand here in support of the centennial commemorative coin. as mentioned, boys town was founded in 1917 by father edward flanagan and has grown from a small local home for children who found themselves in difficult circumstances in omaha to one of the largest nonprofit, nonsectarian child and family service organizations in america. boys town offers a remarkable model of academic and spiritual engagement. students learn more than math and grammar, as important as that is. their teachers and caregivers give them solid formation. graduates are equipped to succeed not only professionally but are also given the life skills to stay on the right path. boys town is so impactful that about 90% of the children who come here integrate successfully back into their communities and historically many over time have joined the

military. and what is this extraordinary model of intervention that boys town and girls town employs? it starts with a family. each child is placed into a family with a caring, nurturing mother and a protecting, giving father where there are rules and expectations, discipline and love. the success of nebraska's boys town has recently been duplicated across many, many communities in our country. there are network of 11 national sites and hotlines touches more than two million children each year. december 22, 2015 will celebrate 100 years of saving children and helping to heal families. in honor of this 100-year anniversary, this legislation again would authorize the u.s. mint to produce a series of commemorative coin with a design emblem @ic of boys town 100-year history.

these coins will be available to the general public for sale and will more than offset the cost of minting by the treasury. so as was mentioned earlier, there will be no cost to the taxpayer. mr. speaker, boys town is a quiet institution necessaryled in the heartland -- necessaryled in the heartland, my -- nestled in the heartland, my home. it helps heal wounds during this socially fractured time. a quick story, mr. speaker, last year i had the privilege of participating as a commencement speaker at boys town, and after i fin shed my address, the young people were called forward to receive their dipalomas in a ceremony marked with -- diplomas in a ceremony marked with light heartedness. even though families and friends visiting were told to please hold their applause, the excitement couldn't be contained. as each graduate across the stage shouts of joy and encouragement and clapping continued throughout the whole event. prior to the graduation,

students gathered for a retreat, giving them the opportunity for reflection and recommitment and during their last time together, the seniors discussed what they had to say and here are quotes from a few of them. i ran in the wrong crowd, hated my family, kept running away from home and inflicted self-harm. at boys town i'm a member of the junior rotc and learned to like myself and my family. i'm looking forward to returning home and being a good example to my younger brother. i lived on the streets from age 10 to 13 and stole to eat. i ended up in prison and my cousin got shot in the face. i never played sports, let alone attended school but at boys town i just finished playing baseball this year and signed on with a college to study business. another child said this, my mom and dad were both in prison and

i had trouble since kindergarten. in junior high i was locked up myself for two years and when i got out my mom died. my dad was still in prison. since i have lived at boys town i chose to get myself on the right track and graduate and made a promise to myself that i would never do anything that would land me in prison. boys town saved my life. mr. speaker, fortunately, most children do not experience such trauma in their lives. but some do. these are the kids who bear the scars of frage social and familial bonds, destructive choices and legal difficulty. through no fault of their own, the great problems of our time fall most heavily on our young people. economic hardship and broken families destroy the sense of safety and possibility that is a necessary antidote to social

alienation. never child needs a nurturing environment, a compassionate challenge and genuine promise. education should cultivate that cree atastetivet as well as dignity allowing all boys and girls to realize their full potential. so today we have an opportunity to celebrate the lives of remarkable young men and women and the extraordinary institution who is serving them so well by authorizing to boys town commemorative coin, we are investing in the future of our children in a simple but i think really impactful way. i want to thank the nearly 300 bipartisan members of this congress who have signed on as co-sponsors of this bill. i think that's an important statement. i'd also like to thank chairman hensarling and ranking member waters as well for their leadership on the committee and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from new york. mrs. maloney: i yield as much time as he may consume to the gentleman from nebraska,

congressman ashford, whose father and grandfather served on the board of boys town. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from nebraska is recognized. mr. ashford: and i thank the gentlelady. i'd like to commend, mr. speaker, my colleague congressman fortenberry, for his work on this issue and his words which are right on. and the chairman as well, thank you for your words which describe accurately the history of boys town. and the ranking member for her comments that also so accurately reflect what boys town means to our community and to the entire country. i grew up around boys town. i grew up playing sports at boys town. in the high school i went to boys town was in our conference and we spent many difficult nights playing basketball against the boys town basketball team which quite frankly was better than we

were. on most every occasion. in my years in the legislature that lasted until last year i had the opportunity to work with a colleague of mine, senator bob chryst from omaha who spearheaded significant juvenile justice reform in our state. the child welfare system in nebraska was in deep trouble and senator khchryst, along with father baist who is an incredibly competent leader at boys town, we passed significant juvenile justice legislation that helped families throughout the state of nebraska that deals with brain development, that deals with wrap-around services, family services, as was so aptly described by my colleague, congressman

fortenberry. mr. speaker, we are changing lives in nebraska and as been mentioned, boys town is changing lives throughout the country. their ue -- their unique approach to juvenile justice systems, the wrap-around family services that deals with not only the parents but the siblings to help bring these young people into a productive life is what boys town has been about for the 100 years that it's been in existence. and i remember -- it's no longer there -- but i remember as a child in the 1950's actually seeing the first boys town facility in downtown omaha. and when i was growing up, boys town was way out of town. it had a farm around it. the farm is still there. but now it's in the middle of omaha as omaha grows. but though it is in a different

place in the world today than it was when father flanagan in 1970 -- 1917 by bringing business leaders in omaha together and others to create boys town, it serves that grand purpose that father flanagan envisioned in 1917. so it's with great pride that i -- and thank you, ranking member giving me this opportunity to speak and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized. mrs. maloney: mr. speaker i have no further speakers. i thank mr. fortenberry for his beautiful statement as well as mr. ashford from the great state of nebraska, and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady yields back. the gentleman from michigan. mr. huizenga: and mr. speaker i, too, want to express my thanks to both congressman fortenberry and congressman

ashford for their dedication and desire to highlight boys town and what an amazing thing that has happened out there and really the impact that we have. mr. speaker, i, too, have no further requests for time and yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the question is will the house suspend the rules and pass the bill h.r. 893, as amended. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, 2/3 having responded in the affirmative, the rules are suspended, the bill is passed, and without objection the motion to reconsider is laid on the table. for what purpose does the gentleman from michigan rise? mr. huizenga: mr. speaker, i move to suspend the rules and pass the bill h.r. 1698, as amended, to amend design and content requirements for certain gold and silver coins

and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: h.r. 1698, a bill to amend design and content requirements for certain gold and silver coins and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from michigan, and the gentlewoman from new york each will control 20 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from michigan. mr. huizenga: mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the bill. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. huizenga: mr. speaker i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. huizenga: mr. speaker, i rise today in support of h.r. 1698, the bullion and collectible coin production efficiency and cost savings act , a bipartisan bill which i introduced in march, along with the gentlelady from new york, representative maloney. this simple piece of legislation would make minor changes to four existing coin

programs, each change saves money for the united states mint and it makes it easier to produce the coins or make the coins more attractive to investors and collectors. the changes include, first, making it less expensive to package gold investment coins. second it allows the mint to buy standard coinage silver for collectible coins instead of the most expensive custom alloy. third it removes the already completed study for production of investor made coin of plate yum and the widely popular american eagle silver investment coin to bear an inscription noting that next year is the 30th anniversary of the first issuance of those coins. these small impacts will save taxpayer dollars over the next few years. mr. speaker, i ask for immediate passage of h.r. 1698 and i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentlewoman is recognized. mrs. maloney: thank you, mr. speaker. and i yield myself such time as i may consume.

mr. speaker, i rise today in support of this cost saving legislation which i was proud to co-sponsor with my friend from michigan. people who see the big things that congress does and they often forget that we have to pay attention to the little things too, and these little things are important. this is a very good example of that. it is a small bill which makes the government work better, saves some taxpayers money and makes our coin programs better for collectors and for investors. . for years the laws that specify the production of coins made by mapet have required them to be 90% silver. today the standard silver user in coins is 91% silver. so the mint has had to pay extra for custom coin blanks. this legislation fixes that problem. it also allows the mint to make a special collectible version of the american eagle silver

bullion coin, noting the popularity of the program over the past 30 years. the bill also allows the sale of american buffalo gold coins in bulk rather than in individual packages, making handling easier for the mint and for investors. and clears the final hurdle for the mint to finally produce investor coins made of playedum, an idea from a 2010 bill by my former colleague and very good friend, mr. watt mr. speaker, this bill saves money -- watt. mr. speaker, this bill saves money and makes coin programs more. i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman reserves the balance of her time. the gentleman is recognized. husehies -- mr. huizenga: i have no further requests and i'm curious if the gentlelady has further speaker.

mrs. maloney: i have to further speakers at this time so i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman yields back the balance of her time. mr. huizenga: mr. speaker, i too have no further requests for time and yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the question is, will the house suspend the rules and pass the bill, h.r. 1698, as amended. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, 2/3 of those voting having responded in the affirmative the rules are suspended, the bill is passed and without objection, the motion to reconsider is laid on the table. for what purpose does the gentleman from georgia seek recognition? >> mr. speaker i move that the house suspend the rules and pass h.r. 2620 as amended. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the bill.

the clerk: h.r. 2620, a bill to amend the united states cotton futures act to exclude certain cotton futures contracts from coverage under such act. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule the gentleman from georgia, mr. austin scott, and the gentleman from georgia mr. david scott, each will control 20 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from georgia. mr. scott: thank you mr. speaker. i yield myself as much time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. scott: i ask unanimous consent that all members may have fiket lev -- five legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the bill under consideration. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. scott: mr. speaker, i rise in strong support of h.r. 2620 and yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. scott: this bill would allow for the creation of a world cotton contract listed on the united states exchange. current law, which requires sampling and classing by the usda of every bail of cotton solicited on a u.s. exchange

reflects an antiquated picture of the global cotton market. some market participants need to hedge price fluctuations in foreign markets and the current law limits their ability to do so. we need to update our law to reflect the modern nature of this marketplace, h.r. 2620 accomplishes this by providing an option for cotton produced and delivered in foreign markets to be classed by rating facilities closer to the point of delivery rather than by the united states department of agriculture. it makes no changes to the treatment of domestically produced and delivered cotton. this legislation will allow any willing exchange to meet industry demand to design a world cotton contract. for example, ice futures u.s. which has already worked with market participants, has publicly announced their intention and preference to list world cotton contract side by side with the domestically focused cotton number two contract they already list. h.r. 2620 allows for an important new contract for cotton hedging to be developed which would be beneficial to commercial hedgers.

however, it's important specifically to me and to others to note it would not disrupt the industry's benchmark hedging contract, the number two contract, which is relied upon by u.s. cotton producers in my district and around the country. before i close, i'd like to thank chairman conaway both for his continued leadership on the agriculture committee and his efforts on this legislation. additionally i want to thank ranking member david scott for working with me on this issue over the last few months and i'd like to acknowledge congressman westmoreland's work on this as well. he was instrumental in advancing this issue. i urge my colleagues to join me in support of h.r. 2620 and i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from georgia is recognized. mr. scott: thank you very much mr. speaker. i too have enjoyed working with my colleague from georgia, chairman of our ranking committee on commodities exchanges and energy. congressman austin scott.

mr. speaker, our bill, h.r. 2620, will modernize the way in which cotton futures contracts are listed. and regulated under the 1916 cotton futures act. more specifically, as many of you know the main tool used in the marketplace for hedging contracten is the number two -- cotton is the number two contract. currently the number two contract only permits cotton grown within the united states and that cotton is delivered to only five united states cities. galveston, texas, houston, texas, dallas-fort worth texas, greenville, south carolina and memphis, tennessee. now, under the 1916 cotton futures act, every bail of

cotton tendered under a contract listed on a u.s. exchange must be sampled and classed or graded by the united states department of agriculture. however, seeing that cotton has grown -- is grown all over the world, my bill targets cotton that is grown and delivered outside of united states borders. now, mr. speaker here is the problem. the concern that our bill is solving. as i mentioned earlier, because of the fact that there are only five domestic cities that are cotton delivery points listed under the 1916 cotton futures act, there has been much concern that the cotton number two contract cannot accurately

reflect price movement in foreign markets. therefore cannot provide an effective risk management tool. that's simply the problem. now, to solve this problem what our bill will do is simply allow u.s.-based future exchanges flexibility in how they handle foreign-grown cotton and foreign delivery points. that will never touch the united states at all. mr. speaker, we live now and we operate in a rapidly changing global economy. it is very important that we not put our cotton producers or our commodities exchanges into a disadvantaged position competively when it comes to being able to get the price fluctuations that occur in foreign markets, thereby

providing our businesses with the most effective tool by which they can manage their risk. so, because the united states department of agriculture does not have the man power to deploy personnel all over the world at one time, our bill will allow cotton grown outside the united states to be classed by either a united states department of agriculture testing lab inside the united states or an international lab deemed to have comparable, comprehensive rules and regulations equivalent to the united states. that's it, clean and simple. our bill solves this problem. it gives our cotton producers, it gives our exchanges that ability to be able to know how

prices are sliding and each foreign country that's producing cotton. while at the same time our producers and our exchanges without that cannot apply good risk management. that's why this is so essential. let me declare again, as my colleague from georgia made clear, i too want to make clear that our bill does not change the fact that 100% of all domestically produced and delivered cotton will be classed by the united states department of agriculture. there's absolutely no change here. furthermore, the bill does not, and i repeat does not change or alter the cotton number two contract. what our bill does is simply allow our u.s.-based futures exchanges that much-needed

flexibility, that's needed in order to list cotton that will never touch the united states through a world cotton contract. as i said, we live in a global marketplace. it is important that our rules and regulations reflect the modernization that has happened in our global markets since this act was written 100 years ago. it's important mr. speaker that we keep the united states economy the strongest economy in the world and our bill, h.r. 2620, will do just that. thank you, mr. speaker, i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from georgia is recognized. mr. scott: thank you, mr. speaker. as my colleague, mr. scott, and i have said, this is simply a necessary minor change. we would -- i would continue to

reserve the balance of my time as i have no further speakers. or if the gentleman -- the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from georgia is recognized. mr. scott: we have no other speakers mr. speaker. so i will yield back my time and urge passage. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from georgia is recognized. mr. scott: mr. speaker i would just ask all members to support passage of h.r. 2620 and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the question is, will the house suspend the rules and pass the bill, h.r. 2620, as amended. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, 2/3 of those voting having responded in the affirmative the rules are suspended the bill is passed and, without objection, the motion to reconsider is laid on the table.

for what purpose does the gentleman from north carolina seek recognition? >> mr. speaker, i move that the house suspend the rules and pass h.r. 1640 as amended.

the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: h.r. 1640, a bill to direct the secretary of homeland security to submit to congress a report on the department of homeland security headquarters consolidation project and the national -- in the national capital region and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from north carolina, mr. walker, and the gentlewoman from new jersey mrs. watson coleman, each will control 20 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from north carolina. scott walker thank you mr. speaker -- mr. walker: thank you, mr. speaker. i ask unanimous consent that all members have fike legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include any extraneous material on the bill under consideration. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. mr. walker: i yield back the balance of my time -- i yield myself such time as i may consume. i rise in strong support of h.r. 1640. mr. speaker, since 2006, the department of homeland security and the general services administration have been working toward completing a

consolidated headquarters on the historic st. elizabeth campus in washington, d.c. however, as with many other federal projects the consolidation has run up against cost overruns and construction delays. at times estimated to be more than $1 billion over budget and 12 years behind schedule. . earlier this year i went to the site to see the challenges that lie ahead. i remain concern that taxpayers' dollars will be put at risk without better management. this bill h.r. 1640, the d.h.s. headquarters consolidation act of 2015, would require the secretary of homeland security in coordination with the administrator of general services, to investigate and submit a report on the estimated cost and property needs of the project. while we were encouraged by the updated d.h.s. st. elizabeths

plan published earlier this year we still believe that increased oversight of the consolidation project will help ensure accountability and the efficient use of our constituents' taxpayers' dollars. mr. speaker, accountability is a fundamental aspect of citizened ruled government and something our constituents expect that representatives should uphold. h.r. 1640 does just this, and i look forward to the bipartisan support this legislation will receive. i ask unanimous consent to enter into the record an exchange of letters between the chairman of the committee on transportation and infrastructure and the chairman of the committee on homeland security. with that i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman reserves. the gentlewoman is recognized. mrs. watson coleman: mr. speaker, i rise in strong support of h.r. 1640, the department of homeland security headquarters consolidation accountability act of 2015 and

i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman is recognized. mrs. watson coleman: thank you, mr. speaker. in 2006, three years into the department of homeland security's existence president bush proposed consolidating the headquarters' functions of the department and the components from the more than 50 locations to the st. elizabeths campus in seat washington, d.c. construction began -- southeast washington, d.c. construction began in 2009 but appropriations for the project had been $1.2 billion less than president bush and president obama requested. naturally, congress' failure to consistently and inadequately fund the project has led to increased costs and has also forced d.h.s. to revisit its master plan and reduce the scope of the project. at this juncture, it is important that the department have a realistic and achievable plan. the legislation under consideration seeks to do just

that. if enacted, this legislation would require the secretary of homeland security to submit to congress an updated plan for st. elizabeths to inform future funding decisions. importantly, h.r. 1640 requires the submission of a proposed occupationy plan for st. eliz -- occupancy plan for st. elizabeths for offices to be housed there. as a key consequence of the department to scale down the plans is a reality that the portfolio will need to remain large. in fact, up to 69% of d.h.s.'s commercial leases in the national capital region expiring between fiscal years 2016 to 2020, we should all be aware that d.h.s. will be forced to embark on the expensive process of recompeting and possibly relocating its operations and

personnel. before i reserve the balance of my time, i'd like to acknowledge that i am pleased that the bill includes an amendment to give the department adequate time to engage the general services administration, the construction manager for the project in preparing the updated plans, assessments and estimates. g.s.a.'s participation in the development of these key materials is essential to ensuring that what is transmitted to congress is realistic and achievable. as a supporter of the st. elizabeths project and d.h.s.'s unity of effort initiative, i urge passage of h.r. 1640, could he location of d.h.s. -- co-location of d.h.s.'s headquarters is potential not only in achieving cost savings but fostering an environment where collaboration and integration drives more effective and efficient operations. with that, mr. speaker, i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman reserves.

the gentleman is recognized. mr. walker: mr. speaker, i have no more speakers. if the gentlewoman from new jersey has no further speakers, i am prepared to close once the gentlewoman does. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentlewoman is recognized. mrs. watson coleman: mr. speaker, i have no further speakers and i am also prepared to close if the gentleman has no additional speakers. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. walker: mr. speaker, i yield myself -- i reserve the balance. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentlewoman -- the gentlewoman from new jersey is recognized to close. mrs. watson coleman: mr. speaker, i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman is recognized. mrs. watson coleman: thank you mr. speaker. i appreciate the bipartisan approach taken on this legislation. the st. elizabeths project is about more than real estate. it is about ensuring the department of homeland security has a home where diverse components can come together. that is the thinking behind the secretary's unity of effort

initiative. enactment of this legislation will help to ensure that d.h.s. has a realistic plan for st. elizabeths. with that, mr. speaker, i would like to thank chairman mccaul and the gentleman from north carolina, mr. walker, for their work on this legislation. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman yields back. the gentleman from north carolina is recognized. mr. walker: mr. speaker, i once again urge my colleagues to support this strong bipartisan piece of legislation, and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the question is will the house suspend the rules and pass the bill h.r. 1640, as amended. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, 2/3 having responded in the affirmative, the rules are suspended, the bill is passed, and without objection the motion to reconsider is laid on the table.

for what purpose does the gentleman from georgia seek recognition? mr. loudermilk: mr. speaker, i ask that the house suspend the rules and pass h.r. 1633, as amended. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: h.r. 1633, a bill to provide for certain improvements relating to the tracking and reporting of employees of the department of homeland security placed on administrative leave, or any other type of paid nonduty status without charge to leave, for personnel matters and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule the gentleman from georgia, mr. loudermilk, the gentlewoman from new jersey, ms. watson -- mrs. watson coleman, will each control 20 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from georgia. mr. loudermilk: mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent that all members may have five

legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include any extraneous material on the bill under consideration. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. loudermilk: mr. speaker, i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. loudermilk: mr. speaker, i believe our children and grandchildren deserve a better government than the one that we're passing onto them. families are struggling due to a lagging economy, senseless regulations on businesses are pushing jobs overseas. and with the recent rash of scandals within our federal government, the american people are continually losing their faith in representatives of our government. i know we can do better, and the american people expect to see change. i came to congress to make a difference to cut spending, to eliminate waste and to hold big government bureaucrats accountable and make this nation a place that is more free, safe and full of opportunity. this is what the american people expect from us, and now's the time for us to take bowled and decisive -- bold and decisive action and that's why i'm standing here today. the department of homeland security has roughly 240,000 employees who work around the

clock to protect the lives and liberties of americans, and i am grateful for their dedicated service. however, due to a lack of proper management and accountability, there are numbers of d.h.s. employees who are staying at home and drawing a paycheck while being investigated for acts of misconduct. in may of 2014, the former deputy inspector general at the department of homeland security was accused of altering reports and delaying investigations. one of those investigations was the secret service prostitution scandal that occurred in 2012. the senate subcommittee on financial and contracting oversight delved into this case which also led to further investigations. however, even though the former deputy inspector general was being investigated for gross misconduct he was placed on administrative leave receiving full pay and benefits for almost an entire year. we all know that there are occasional incidents like this any organization. however, if this was an isolated case i would not be standing here today presenting this bill. but there are numerous cases

like it. the government accountability office reported that from 2011 to 2013 the department of homeland security provided its employees with over 1 1/2 million days of paid administrative days equating to over $380 million in taxpayer dollars. most of this paid leave was granted to employees who were on administrative leave for reasons of misconduct. unfortunately, the department has no agencywide standards or reporting policies regarding paid administrative leave for employees being investigated for misconduct. this lack of management and accountability allows employees with disciplinary issues like the former deputy inspector general to fall through the cracks. this bill, h.r. 1633, the d.h.s. paid administrative accountability act of 2015, requires the chief human capital officer to implement an agencywide policy regarding those who are on paid administrative leave for more than six months being investigated for misconduct. in addition, it requires the department to report to

congress the number of employees on administrative leave during investigation as well as the associated cost. having a commonsense policy is mandated by this bill, will potentially save the department millions of dollars and provide for critical oversight and accountability. the bill will also require the chief human capital officer to submit quarterly reports to the house and senate homeland security committees. these reports will allow more oversight by congress and ensure d.h.s.'s no longer squandering hardworking taxpayer dollars. d.h.s. must do a better job of tracking employees under investigation for misconduct and in a timely manner take appropriate action to hold them accountable. employees who tarnish the department's reputation do not deserve paid vacations at taxpayer expense. americans are tired of government carelessly giving away their future through mismanagement and thoughtless spending habits. i encourage my colleagues to support passage of h.r. 1633, a commonsense bill there will help prevent fraud, alleviate

waste and bet remember safeguard taxpayer dollars. i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman reserves. -- the gentleman reserves. the gentlewoman from new jersey is recognized. mrs. watson coleman: thank you, mr. speaker. i rise in strong support of h.r. 1633, the d.h.s. paid administrative leave accountability act of 2015. and i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman is recognized. mrs. watson coleman: thank you, mr. speaker. this measure, which was unanimously approved in committee, seeks to enhance how certain paid administrative leave is tracked and managed by the department of homeland security. h.r. 1633 was introduced in response to a 2014 government accountability office report that looked at paid administrative leave expenditures across government between fiscal years 2011 and 2014. in that report, g.a.o. found that overall agencies spent $3.1 billion on paid administrative leave. of that amount the department

of homeland security spent $380 million on this category of leave. agencies approve administrative leave for a variety of reasons -- from severe weather events to jury duty to voting to disciplinary matters subject to investigation. h.r. 1633 focuses on helping to improve d.h.s.'s management of just one segment of paid administrative leave expenditures, leave that is paid for six or more consecutive months to an employee that is under investigation by the department for a conduct or criminal matter. this legislation directs the department's chief human capital officer to maintain records from the -- throughout the department on the number of employees who are paid leave for six or more consecutive months during a d.h.s. personal investigation, the total costs including salaries and benefits associated with this leave and the average length of time that

an employee in these circumstances is on paid administrative leave. h.r. 1633 also directs the department's chief human capital officer to develop and implement departmentwide policy on how components can comply with this record keeping requirement and guidance and on how components can expedite the resolution of personnel matters for an employee in these circumstances. in committee language i authored was accepted to ensure that when a component expeditiously works to resolve personal matters as directed by this bill, that component must do so in a way that is objective and fair. the addition of this language is important because we do not want to create the impression that congress fails values expediency. we must not lose sight of the fact that we are talking about people's careers here. before i close i would add that

this legislation does nothing to disturb the discretion that the department has to make leave decisions and this bill should not impact the availability of paid administrative leave to the d.h.s. work force. and with that, mr. speaker, i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman reserves. the gentleman is recognized. . >> thank you mr. speaker. i yield to the gentleman from georgia, mr. scott. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. scott: thank you mr. speaker. rise today in support of this, the d.h.s. paid administrative leave accountability act of 2015. introduced by my colleague from georgia, barry loudermilk. over the spahn of two years department of homeland security employees have ranked up 105 million days of paid administrative leave which apts to hundreds of tax -- amounts to hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars. stopping wasteful government spending has been a top priority for me during my time

in congress. which is why i'm proud to co-sponsor this piece of legislation. this bill increases government transparency by establishing an accountability system within the department of homeland security. this system is essential in safeguarding against waste fraud and abuse. i'm glad that it is a bipartisan measure. like forward to its passage and i rge my colleagues to support h.r. -- urge my colleagues to support h.r. 1643. with that i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentlewoman is recognized. >> thank you mr. speaker. i have no more further speakers and am prepared to close if the gentleman has no further speakers. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman reserves. the gentleman is recognized. mr. loudermilk: i have one or speaker and i'd like to yield two minutes to my colleague, friend j georgia and fellow member of the homeland security committee, mr. carter. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for two minutes. mr. carter: thank you, mr. speaker. i rise today in support of h.r.

1633 from 2011 to 2013 over 200 d.h.s. employees were placed on paid administrative leave. while administrative leave may be necessary on a case by case basis, more frequently we hear federal employees who are under investigation for conduct-related angsts -- actions. these vexes -- investigations can relate for several months which can result in substantial costs to taxpayers. for example, in 2013 the d.h.s. employee was placed on paid administrative leave for running a website that predicted and advocated a race war. such actions should not involve paid leave. it clearly should involve termination of employment. another example involves former acting and deputy d.h.s. inspector general charles edwards. mr. edwards was placed on paid leave in may of 2014. as of october, 2014, he was still on paid administrative leave. this bill protects precious taxpayer dollars by requiring d.h.s. to track and report on

employees placed on administrative leave for personal matters. by keeping track of who is on paid administrative leave, we can better ensure we are not using the taxpayers' dime to pay for d.h.s. employee misconduct. i urge my colleagues to support this bill and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentlewoman from new jersey is recognized. mr. cole: cole mr. speaker, i have -- mrs. watson coleman: waths mr. speaker, i have no -- mrs. watson coleman: mr. speaker, i have no more speakers and i'm prepared to close. mr. loudermilk: i reserve. i'm prepared to close. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentlewoman is recognized. mrs. watson coleman: i yield myself as much time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman is recognized. mrs. watson coleman: thank you mr. speaker. as i mentioned before this legislation would do nothing to disturb the availability of paid administrative leave for d.h.s. workers who need it to vote on to serve on a jury. it is narrowly focused on

getting a handle on how much the department is spending on paided a live leave for individuals under investigation -- paid administrative leave for individuals under investigation. these circumstances are often tough for all involved. the sooner there's an appropriate resolution, better it is for everyone involved. if enacted h.r. 1633 would help to ensure that such matters are resolved in a timely and appropriate manner. with that, mr. speaker, do i urge passage and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman yields back the balance of her time. the gentleman from georgia is recognized. mr. loudermilk: mr. speaker, i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. loudermilk: mr. speaker, once again i urge my colleagues to support this strong commonsense and bipartisan piece of legislation and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the question is, will the house suspend the rules and pass the bill h.r. 1633 as amended. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no.

in the opinion of the chair, 2/3 of those voting having responded in the affirmative, the rules are suspended the bill is passed and, without objection, the motion to reconsider is laid on the table. for what purpose does the gentleman from georgia seek recognition?

most often referred to as drones pose an emerging security threat. this is further evidence by a recent high profile events at the white house, french nuclear power plants and numerous sports venues. drones had been used to smuggle drugs across our borders and negligent use of this technology presents a public safety risk. during this congress bills have been introduced that focus on topics such as the commercial uses of drones and the privacy concerns associated with their use. however, nobody has tackled the security implications of expanding the use of drones. h.r. 1646, the homeland

security security drone assessment and analysis act requires the secretary of homeland security to research how commercially available small and mude yum sized drones can be used in an attack and develop policies guidance and protocols for the department of homeland security to prevent an attack. by the end of year 2015, the federal aviation administration is expected to establish knew rules to remove the waiver requirement and allow the operation of drones for nonrecreational purposes in u.s. airspace. undoubtedly, these regulations would be better informed by d.h.s. assessment of the potential security risks associated with the expanded use of small and medium-sized drones. h.r. 1646 is a good first step towards protecting the country and the american people from this emerging threat. mr. speaker, i ask i ask unanimous consent to enter into the record an exchange of letters and i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman reserves.

the gentlewoman from new jersey is recognized. mrs. watson coleman: thank you, mr. speaker. i rise in strong support of h.r. 1646, the homeland security drone assessment and analysis act, and i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman is recognized. mrs. watson coleman: thank you mr. speaker. mr. speaker, i rise in support of the house's adoption of h.r. 1646 the homeland security drone assessment and analysis act. i introduced this legislation in response to testimony we received in committee this past march on gaps in our understanding of the security implications of unmanned aerial systems, u.a.s., in domestic air space. for example, off the shelf systems widely available today in the wrong hands can jam transmitted signals fake surveillance imagery and carry dangerous weapons. given these systems capabilities it is important that there be a comprehensive study of the security risks and plans to address them.

to that end h.r. 1646 directs the department of homeland security to research how a commercially available small and medium sized drone could be used to perpetrate an attack and develop policies, guidance and protocols to prevent such an attack or mitigate the risks of such an attack. my legislation directs d.h.s. to work with the u.s. department of transportation and energy and the nuclear regulatory commission to carry out this research and allow for d.h.s. to share advice and information based on that research with these key federal partners. mr. speaker, drone technology holds great promise of significant social and economic benefits not yet fully realized. however, given the rapid growth in the domestic drone market, it is important that we identify and have strategies to mitigate the associated security risks. if enacted h.r. 1646 will enhance our nation's security

while at the same time clarifying the framework for americans' legitimate interest in producing and using drones lawfully and safely. mr. speaker, i urge the house's adoption of h.r. 1646 and reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman reserves the balance of her time. the gentleman from georgia is recognized. mr. loudermilk: thank you, meeks -- thank you mr. speaker. i have no more speakers. if the gentlewoman from new jersey has no further speakers, i'm proposed to close once the gentlewoman dozen. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. jt is -- the gentlewoman is recognized. mrs. watson coleman: thank you very much, mr. speaker. i yield myself as much time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman is recognized. mrs. watson coleman: thank you, mr. speaker. i urge my colleagues to support legislation, h.r. 1646, to further the department of homeland security's effort to work with other agencies on the security risks of small and medium sized drones in domestic air space. with that, mr. speaker, i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman yields back the balance of her time. the gentleman from georgia is recognized.

mr. loudermilk: thank you, mr. speaker. once again i urge my colleagues to support the strong bipartisan piece of legislation and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the question is, will the house suspend the rules and pass the bill, h.r. 1646, as amended. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, 2/3 of those voting having responded in the affirmative, the rules are suspended, the bill is passed and without objection, the motion to reconsider is laid on the table. without objection, the title is amended. for what purpose does the gentleman from georgia seek recognition? >> mr. speaker, i move that the house suspend the rules and pass h.r. 1615 as amended. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the bill.

the clerk: h.r. 1615, a bill to direct the chief foia officer of the department of homeland security to make certain improvements in the implementation of section 552 of title 5 united states code, commonly known as the freedom of information act, and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule the gentleman from georgia, mr. carter, and the gentlewoman from new jersey, mrs. watson coleman, each will control 20 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from new jersey. mr. carter: mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent that all members have five legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and include any extraneous material on the bill under consideration. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized. mr. carter: mr. speaker, i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. carter: thank you, mr. speaker. i rise, mr. speaker in strong support of h.r. 1615. in november of 2014, it was reported that d.h.s. had received and processed the most

fully request out of any federal department. it holds the largest backlog of any foia requests of any federal agency. in fact, since 2010, d.h.s. foia requests have increased by over 65% and d.h.s. currently holds almost half of all federal foia requests of any government agency about. 50,000 of 95,000 requests. in addition, three weeks ago i was informed that the increase in d.h.s. foia requests was partly due to requests for immigration records for people requesting information for their future deferred action cases. my bill, h.r. 1615, the d.h.s. foia efficiency act of 2015, streamlines the process to address the tremendous work load and backlog and bring transparency to the cost of foia requests for the department. in recent past d.h.s. has received poor evaluations regarding this efficiency and handling foia requests.

for these reasons, my bill directs the chief foia officer of d.h.s. to work with other officers within the department to update their capabilities in handling the large amount of foia requests and identify the total annual costs associated with processing these requests. by updating their capabilities and reporting to congress on how the department is addressing their poor performance, my bill would direct the department to address its backlog and inefficiencies in an appropriate and quick manner. i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentlewoman from new jersey voiced. mrs. watson coleman: thank you mr. speaker. i rise in strong support of h.r. 1615, the d.h.s. foia efficiency act, and yield myself as much time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman is recognized. mrs. watson coleman: thank you mr. speaker. this legislation, which was unanimously approved by the committee on may 20, seeks to improve the department's processing of freedom of information act requests.

in november, 2014, the comptroller general reported that d.h.s. faces the largest backlog of unprocessed foia requests of any federal agency. while resource challenges and inefficiencies in d.h.s.'s internal processes help explain in part the backlog, we must not be complacent and accept these challenges as excuses for the backlog. a cornerstone of our democracy is that the government is accountable to its citizens. the foia process is a key mechanism to ensure accountability. i am pleased that the approach taken under this bill is consistent with the department's unity of effort initiative. specifically h.r. 1615 requires that the department's chief foia officer collaborate with foia officials and component agencies to track the total annual costs associated with processing foia requests, identify and eye do not cost-saving mothers and strategize on addressing the

backlog. i would also note that in committee measures authored by democratic members to promote or auto mation and address staffing resources were adopted with bipartisan support. mr. speaker, i mr. speaker, i urge passage of h.r. 1615, a bipartisan bill that seeks to improve the responsiveness of the department of homeland security to the american public, and i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman reserves. the gentleman from georgia is recognized. mr. carter: mr. speaker, i have no more speakers. if the gentlewoman from new jersey has no further speakers, i'm prepared to close once the gentlewoman does. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentlewoman from new jersey is recognized. mrs. watson coleman: thank you mr. speaker. i have no further speakers and i'm prepared to close. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman is recognized. mrs. watson coleman: thank you mr. speaker. i i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman is recognized. mrs. watson coleman: thank you mr. speaker. timely compliance with foia requests is good for an open

government. the backlog has existed for too long and needs to be addressed. i thank representative carter and chairman mccaul for their bipartisan efforts on a d.h.s. foia efficiency act, which marks an important first step in addressing this foia backlog and promoting greater automation in the processing of requests. with that, mr. speaker, i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman yields back the balance of her time. the gentleman from georgia is recognized. mr. carter: mr. speaker i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. carter: mr. speaker i once again urge my colleagues to support this strong bipartisan piece of legislation, and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the question is will the house suspend the rules and pass h.r. 1615, as amended. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the ayes appear to have it. mrs. watson coleman: mr. speaker. mr. speaker, on that i request

the yeas and nays. the speaker pro tempore: the yeas and nays are requested. all those in favor of taking the vote by the yeas and nays will rise and remain standing until counted. a sufficient number having arisen, the yeas and nays are ordered. pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20, further proceedings on this question will be postponed. for what purpose does the gentleman from texas seek recognition? mr. hurd: mr. speaker, i move that the house suspend the rules and pass h.r. 1626, as amended. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: h.r. 1626, a bill to reduce duplication of

information technology at the department of homeland security, and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule the gentleman from texas mr. hurd, and the gentlewoman from new jersey mrs. watson coleman, will each control 20 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from texas. mr. hurd: mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include any extraneous material on the bill under consideration. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. hurd: mr. speaker i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. hurd: thank you, mr. speaker. i rise in strong support of h.r. 1626. call me crazy but it just doesn't make sense to me to have federal agencies using multiple i.t. systems that do the same thing. as chairman of the oversight and government reform i.t. subcommittee and a member of the homeland security committee, i see these cost overruns and hear stories of duplicative systems on a daily basis.

it is a ridiculous and outrageous waste of taxpayer dollars. this year the g.a.o.'s annual high-risk report designated information technology as a new area of high risk within the federal government. federal agencies spend nearly $80 billion a year on i.t. projects and nearly 80% of them are on outdated and legacy systems. and the department of homeland security there are more than 600 i.t. systems in fema alone. the d.h.s. i.t. duplication reduction act is designed to change that. my bill requires the d.h.s. chief information officer to identify all i.t. systems within the department, figure out which ones are redundant and come up with a strategy to reduce their number. when i was building a cybersecurity firm in the private sector, things like this didn't happen because there's no way with a small business trying to grow would waste their money like this. and washington should have the same mentality. especially since it's money

being wasted -- since money being wasted isn't washington to begin with. it's past time to change the it's not my money so let's spend it culture here in washington that leads to this kind of waste. taxpayers should be able to trust that every dollar is being used carefully and thoughtfully from a thoughtful and effective government. i believe this will get our government back on track. i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentlewoman from new jersey is recognized. mrs. watson coleman: thank you mr. speaker. i rise in strong support of h.r. 1626, the d.h.s. i.t. duplication reduction act of 2015, and i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman is recognized. mrs. watson coleman: thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, h.r. 1626 seeks to address duplication or fragmentation within the department of homeland security's information

technology systems. specifically h.r. 1626 requires the department's chief information officer to report on the number of i.t. systems throughout the department and identify and address those areas where duplication or fragmentation may exist. this undertaking at the headquarters' level should help inform the department's i.t. budget plan which in light of sequestration and the downward trend of the department's budget becomes all the more important when considering the critical missions entrusted to d.h.s. this legislation is in the spirit of the department's unity of effort initiative and has the potential of fostering more coordinated i.t. planning and management among the department's components. in committee a number of technical refinements offered by democrats were accepted to ensure reducing redundancy frees up resources for operations. with that, mr. speaker i do support -- urge support of this measure and i reserve the

balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman reserves. the gentleman is recognized. mr. hurd: mr. speaker, i have no more speakers. if the gentlewoman from new jersey has no more speakers i'm prepared to close once the gentlewoman does. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentlewoman from new jersey is recognized. mrs. watson coleman: thank you mr. speaker. i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman is recognized. mrs. watson coleman: thank you mr. speaker. in closing i once again want to point out the bipartisan efforts in regard to this measure. this measure has the potential of fostering more coordinated i.t. planning and management among the department's components. i urge the passage and support of this measure. with that, mr. speaker, i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman yields back. the gentleman from texas is recognized. mr. hurd: mr. speaker i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. hurd: i'd like to thank chairman mccaul, ranking member thompson, congresswoman watson coleman and my colleagues on the homeland security for their support on this bill. and i once again urge all my colleagues to support this

strong bipartisan piece of legislation, and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the question is will the house suspend the rules and pass the bill h.r. 1626, as amended. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, 2/3 having responded in the affirmative, the rules are suspended, the bill is passed, and without objection the motion to reconsider is laid on the table. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from texas seek recognition? mr. ratcliff: mr. speaker, i move that the house suspend the rules and par h.r. 1637. -- pass h.r. 1637.

the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: union calendar number 107 h.r. 1636, a bill to require annual reports on the activities and accomplishments of federally funded research and development centers within the department of homeland security, and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule the gentleman from texas, mr. ratcliff, and the gentleman from mississippi, mr. thompson, each will control 20 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from texas. mr. ratcliff: mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include any extraneous material on the bill under consideration. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. ratcliffe: mr. speaker i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. ratcliffe: thank you mr. speaker. i rise today in strong support of h.r. 1637, the federally funded research and development center sunshine act of 2015. mr. speaker, i'm honored to represent 700,000 north and east texans.

they sent me here to washington to pull the curtin back and shine a -- curtain back and shine a light on this federal bureaucracy. mr. speaker, we all know that federal agencies can be inefficient, ineffective and resistant to oversight. they don't like to be held accountable. not by the american people or by individuals like me who are elected to represent those folks here in congress. but as a committed conservative who is fighting to preserve the american homeland i believe that increased transparency is a national security issue, and because of that every taxpayer dollar that we spend must be scrutinized. we have to evaluate the government's programs and activities to see if they're worthwhile and to craft reforms that eliminate waste and bolster our national defense. a sluggish national security apparatus simply won't suffice. the american people deserve more, but congress can't even begin to conduct effective

oversight and to cut waste fraud and abuse if we don't know what's going on behind closed doors. that's why i introduced h.r. 1637. this bill will increase transparency at the department of homeland security by directing the secretary to give congress a detailed account each year of the ongoing and completed projects that federally funded research and development centers, or ffrdc's, within the department of homeland security have been assigned. ffrdc's conduct specialized research and development for the federal government. the two ffrdc's within the department of homeland security provide independent analysis of homeland security issues. currently the homeland security committee is expected to oversee these ffrdc's. yet, the committee doesn't even receive an account of the status of ongoing or completed

projects. it's hard to be a vigilant steward of hard-earned taxpayer dollars when you have a blindfold on. my legislation will enable the committee to have visibility into the scope of ffrdc's, projects that d.h.s. has tasked them to meet their mission needs. this detailed accounting will allow committee members to have insight into current research and development projects and be able to further scrutinize them thereby increasing oversight and transparency of the entire science and technology director and -- director at d.h.s. it's important that congress is aware of the department of homeland security's research and development efforts and funding priorities to ensure that it's meeting the mission needs of its components. and this bill today will shed light on those activities. mr. speaker, i urge my colleagues to support this commonsense bill.

i think that we all agree that we can support increased transparency and a stronger, more secure homeland. i ask unanimous consent, mr. speaker, to enter into the record an exchange of letters between the chairman of the committee on science space and technology and the chairman of the committee on homeland security and with that i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, and the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from mississippi is recognized. mr. thompson: mr. speaker i rise in strong support of h.r. 1637 the federally funded research and development act of 2015, and i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. thompson: thank you mr. speaker. mr. speaker, this legislation would require the department of homeland security to prepare annual status reports on the research activities of federally funded research and development centers, or

ffrdc's, on behalf of the department. d.h.s. looks to these institutions that are largely operated by universities and not-for-profit organizations to help meet special long-term research and development needs. in addition to the two ffrdc's that d.h.s. sponsors, there are 17 national labs managed by the department of energy that provide research and technical assistance in support of the nation's homeland security. . among the areas of research expertise offered by these labs are critical infrastructure protection, kem ka, biological defense countermeasures, biodetection and emergency preparedness. i believe that timely and regular information about how d.h.s. is utilizing these institutions is important to assessing progress on a wide

range of homeland security challenges. that is why i support h.r. 1631 and urge passage. with that, mr. speaker, i reseven the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from texas is recognized. mr. ratcliffe: i have no further speakers, if the gentleman has no further speakers, i'm prepared to close. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from mississippi is recognized. mr. thompson: i have no speakers and i'm prepared to close. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. thompson: i yield myself such time as i may consume. i want to commend members of the homeland security committee on the bipartisan nature in which this has been crafted. it is important to know how d.h.s. is using federally funded development centers to address homeland security challenges. with that, i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from texas is recognized.

mr. ratcliffe: i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. ratcliffe: i urge my colleagues to support this strong commonsense, bipartisan piece of legislation and yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the question is, will the house suspend the rules and pass the bill h.r. 1637? those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, 2/3 being in the affirmative, the rules are suspended. the bill is passed. without objection, the motion to reconsider is laid on the table. for what purpose does the gentleman from texas seek recognition? mr. ratcliffe: i move that the house suspend the rules and pass h.r. 2390 as amended. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: h.r. 2390, a bill to require review of university-based centers for homeland security and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule the gentleman from texas, mr. ratcliffe, and the gentleman from mississippi, mr. thompson,

each will control 20 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from texas. mr. ratcliffe: i ask unanimous consent that all members have five legislate i days to revise and extend their remarks and include any extraneous material on the bill under considering. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. ratcliffe: i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. ratcliffe: thank you, mr. speaker. i rise in support of h.r. 2390 the homeland security university based centers review act of 2015, authored by the ranking member, the gentleman from mississippi. mr. speaker, this bill will require the government accountability office to initiate a study to assess the university-based centers for homeland security and provide recommendations to congress on improvements. the department of homeland security centers of excellence play a vital role in providing long-term research and support of technology development in areas of emerging threats. additionally these centers play

key roles in supporting the department of homeland security and its mission in protecting our homeland. i look forward to seing the results of this study and how we can better improve the effectiveness of these university centers. i ask unanimous consent to enter into the record an exchange of letter between the chairman of the committee on science space and technology and the chairman of the committee on homeland security, and i reseb the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from mississippi is recognized. mr. thompson: i rise in strong support of h.r. 2390, the homeland security university based centers review act and yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. thompson: thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, i introduced h.r. 2390, the homeland security university based centers review act, with my colleague, mr. richmond, to provide congress with the full picture of the department's management of the centers of excellence program.

this program dates back to the department's earliest days. it was authorized in the homeland security act of 2002, to be a coordinated university-based system to enhance the nation's homeland security. since that time, however, we have not had a comprehensive review of the department's management of this vital research and development program. h.r. 2390 marks the most significant effort to assess the centers of excellence program to date. the measure directs the government accountability office to issue a comprehensive report that among other things evaluates how the department aligns decisions about establishing maintaining, or eliminating a center with its research needs how d.h.s. identifies prioritizes and funds projects, and how d.h.s. measures progress on its research goal. the bill also directs d.h.s. --

g.a.o. to examine how d.h.s. promotes collaboration among centers as well as institutions outside of its network, including historiccally hi black colleges and universities and other minority-serving institutions. i have the privilege of representing jackson state university which is part of the department's coastal resilience center of excellence program. i'm proud that in -- in its capacity, jackson state has contributed research and modeling that inform realtime operational decisions such as fema in the wake of hurricane sandy and other disasters. i know that throughout this country, there are other institutions that could benefit from the unique knowledge and expertise -- and bring unique knowledge and expertise to d.h.s.

the homeland security committee has been involved in vigorous oversight of the centers of excellence, particular particularly encouraging the department oadopt policies that help divorcity university and student participation in the homeland security enterprise. in my opinion, the d.h.s. science and technology directorate robust outreach effort to universities and institutions of recent years is that direct result of our oversight. but we need to understand whether f&t's outreach along with its efforts to better manage centers of excellence are really working. h.r. 2390 is an important first step in effectively assessing the value of the centers of excellence and evaluating whether or not the research and development potential of our nation's universities are being effectively leverages. with that, mr. speaker, i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the

gentleman reserves. the gentleman from texas is recognized. mr. ratcliffe: i have no more speakers if the gentleman from mississippi has no speakers, i'm prepared to close once the gentleman does. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from mississippi is recognized. mr. thompson: thank you, mr. speaker. i have no further speakers. i yield myself as much time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. thompson: thank you, mr. speaker. again, mr. speaker, i'm grateful for the cooperation of the subcommittee chairman, mr. ratcliffe, and the full committee chairman, mr. mccaul for their help to improve the department's centers of excellence and urge passage of this legislation. with that, mr. speaker, i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from texas is recognized. mr. ratcliffe: i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. ratcliffe: i thank chairman mccaul and ranking member thompson for their leadership on this bill and once again urge my colleagues to support this bill.

it's a strong, bipartisan piece of legislation, and with that, i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the question is, will the house suspend the rules and pass the bill h.r. 2390 as amended? those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, 2/3 in the a-- 2/3 being in the affirmative, the rules are suspended, the bill is passed and the motion to reconsider is laid on the table. for what purpose does the gentlewoman from arizona seek recognition? >> i move the house splules and pass h.r. 2200 as amended. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: h.r. 200 a bill to amend the homeland security act to establish chemical,

biological radiological and nuclear intelligence and functions of the department of homeland security and to require dissemination of information analyzed by the department with entities relating to homeland security and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule, the gentlewoman from arizona, ms. mcsally, and the gentleman from mississippi, mr. thompson, will each control 20 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from -- the gentlewoman from arizona. ms. mcsally: i ask unanimous consent that all member vs. five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the bill under consideration. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. ms. mcsally: i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman is recognized. ms. mcsally: as chairman of the subcommittee on emergency preparedness, response and communications, i rise in support of h.r. 2200, the cbrn intelligence and information sharing act of 2015.

we know that terrorists have long strived to employ chemical, biological, ride yo logical and nuclear, or cbrn, materials in their attacks. isis and other terror organizations have attempted to use chemical weapons and experts suggest interest in using these weapons has increased. reports say isis may be using chemical weapons in syria and iraq. since the procedures and equipment required to develop biological weapons are the same as those used for legitimate research purposes, it is imperative that intelligence is appropriately analyzed and shared with those who would be on the frontline of response in the event of an attack. furthermore, events such as the boston marathon bombing illustrate the need for better information sharing between federal and local initials. h.r. 2200 will enhance intelligence analysis and

information sharing to fill this need and will work to ensure that state and local ferbles get the actionable intelligence information necessary to stop or mitigate a cbrn attack this legislation considers information garnered from the subcommittee on emergency prepared response and communications hear thonings threat of chemical and biological terrorism. during two hearings earlier this year, we heard from numerous stake holders that information sharing with appropriate state and local officials and emergency response providers about this threat is critical. specifically, this budget neutral bill requires the office of intelligence and analysis at d.h.s. to support homeland security focus intelligence analysis of cbrn threats including emerging infectious diseases, working in coordination with the department's national biosurveillance immigration center and the intelligence community. as information and intelligence is only useful if it is shared with those who can take action,

such as state, local, tribal and private entities, h.r. 2200 directs the office of intelligence and analysis to not only share information with these partners but also engage with them and get their feedback on mechanisms for two-way sharing of information. finally, h.r. 2200 directs the secretary of d.h.s. to report abulely for five years on the department's intelligence and information sharing activities to counter the threat from weapons of mass destruction and d.h.s.'s activities in accordance with relevant intelligence strategies. the house passed nearly identical bills during the 112th and 113th congresses with bipartisan support. i urge members to join me in supporting this bill and i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman reserves. the gentleman from mississippi is recognized. mr. thompson: thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, i rise in strong support of h.r. 2200, the cbrn intelligence and information sharing act and yield myself such time as i may consume.

the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. thompson: thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, in the years following the september 11 attacks, congress worked to address many of the preparedness gaps identified by the 9/11 commission. including the threat posed by weapons of mass destruction. pursuant to the 9/11 commission's recommendation, congress established weapons of mass destruction w.m.d., commission. in 2008, the w.m.d. commission issued a series of rebling mendations to counter the proliferation of w.m.d.'s and build a more robust national capability to respond to such attacks. subsequently the w.m.d. commission and its legacy organization, the w.m.d. center issued a series of report cards evaluating the federal government's progress implementing the w.m.d. commission's recommendations. unfortunately, each report card

found that the federal government was not acting quick enough. in the years since the w.m.d. center issued its final bioresponse report card in 2011, w.m.d. threats have continued to evolve. what we know now is that the threats posed by w.m.d.'s are more dynamic and that our enemies are grow manager agile. h.r. 2200 focuses on an important aspect of our nation's ability to prevent, prepare for and respond to a w.m.d. attack. information sharing. at the full committee and subcommittee level, the committee on homeland security has devoted significant time and resources to assessing federal activities to address the threat of w.m.d.'s. . i've heard one message consistently from the witnesses that have come before us we need to improve coordination and information sharing with state and local governments and

emergency responders. situational awareness is essential to ensuring a robust response to a w.m.d. incident and to saving lives. i appreciate emergency preparedness subcommittee chairman mcsally's efforts to improve cbrn threat-related intelligence and information sharing. i urge my colleagues to support this legislation. with that, mr. speaker, i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from mississippi reserves. the gentlewoman from arizona is recognized. ms. mcsally: mr. speaker, i have no more speakers. if the gentleman from mississippi has no more speakers i'm prepared to close once the gentleman does. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman reserves. the gentleman from mississippi is recognized. mr. thompson: thank you, mr. speaker. i am prepared to close at this time and i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. thompson: thank you. mr. speaker, if we learned anything from the 9/11 attacks it is that information sharing saves lives.

from putting desperate pieces of information together to stop an attack to ensuring that first responders are equipped to respond safely and effectively, information sharing plays an essential role in complete situational awareness. h.r. 2200 will improve the way we use information related to devolving threats posed by chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear agents. i ask my colleagues to tore h.r. 2 -- to support h.r. 220. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentlewoman from arizona is recognized. ms. mcsally: mr. speaker i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speakeo tempore: the gentlewoman isog ms. mcsally: i ask my of cbrn related threat information and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman yields back. the question is will the house suspend the rules and pass the

bill h.r. 2200, as amended. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. mr. thompson: mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from mississippi. mr. thompson: mr. speaker, on that i request the yeas and nays. the speaker pro tempore: the yeas and nays are requested. all those in favor say aye -- all those in favor of taking this vote by the yeas and nays will rise and remain standing until counted. a sufficient number having arisen, the yeas and nays are ordered. pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20 further proceedings on this the question will be postponed. for what purpose does the gentlewoman from arizona seek recognition? ms. mcsally: mr. speaker, i move that the house suspend the rules and concur in the senate amendment to h.r. 615. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: h.r. 615, an act to

amend the homeland security act of 2002 to require the under secretary for management of the department of homeland security to take administrative action to achieve and maintain interoperable communications capabilities among the components of the department of homeland security and for other purposes, senate amendment. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule, the gentlewoman from arizona, ms. mcsally, and the gentleman from mississippi, mr. thompson, each will control 20 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentlewoman from arizona. ms. mcsally: mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include any extraneous material on the bill under consideration . the speaker pro tempore: without objection. ms. mcsally: mr. speaker, i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman is recognized. ms. mcsally: thank you mr. speaker. as the chairman of the committee of homeland security's subcommittee on emergency preparedness response and communication i rise today in support of h.r. 6 15, the department of homeland security interoperable communications act of which i am proud to be a co-sponsor.

this bill was introduced by the gentleman from new jersey, the subcommittee's ranking member, mr. payne. the bill amends the homeland security act of 2002 to include among the responsibilities of the department of homeland security's undersecretary for management achieving and maintaining interoperable communications among the department's components. h.r. 615 addresses the findings and recommendations of a november 2012, d.h.s. office of inspector general report which stated that the department does not have the appropriate oversight or governance structure to ensure communications interoperability among its components. it is vital that department's components are able to effectively communicate day-to-day, and most importantly during emergencies. in response to the finding of the inspector general report, i joined chairman mccaul and the oversight management efficiencies chairman perry in requesting a review of this issue by the government accountability office. their report, which was released in march, found that nearly three years after the

inspector general report, communication problems persists within the department and its components. in particular, customs and border protection and immigration and customs enforcement personnel reported to g.a.o. that lack of interoperability in some cases along the border resulted in misapprehensions and jeopardized agents' safety. my district is on the south border. i know the problems that border patrol agents, i.c.e. officers face in meeting their vital missions. it is unacceptable they lack the tools and training necessary to communicate with each other. this bill seeks to make this more of a priority at the headquarters level. in order to ensure the department is taking the necessary steps to achieve and maintain interoperable communication capabilities, h.r. 615 requires the department's undersecretary for management to submit an interoperable communications strategy to the committee of homeland security no later than 180 days after enact jlt and periodically report to congress

-- enactment and periodically report to congress. this bill passed in february by a vote of 379-0. i appreciate the swift action of the senate homeland security and governmental affairs committee under the leadership of my friend chairman johnson. their thoughtful additions have served to further improve this bill. i urge all members to support me in supporting this bill, and i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman reserves. the gentleman from mississippi is recognized. mr. thompson: thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, i rise in strong support of senate amendment to h.r. 615 the department of homeland security interoperable communications act. i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. thompson: thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, in november, 2012 the inspector general of the department of homeland security issued an assessment of interoperable communications capabilities among d.h.s. components. the inspector general found

that of 479 field radios that attempted to communicate on a specific common channel, only one user could do so. that is a 99% failure rate. in short d.h.s., the federal entity charged with providing guidance to state and local governments to improve interoperable emergency communications was not practicing what it's preached. the inspector general found that d.h.s.'s interoperable challenges were not technological in nature. rather, they were attributed to the fact that there was no one leading the efforts in the field. further, there was no policy in place to ensure the 123,000 radio users at d.h.s. understood how to use the communications equipment issued to them. throughout my tenure on the

committee, i have repeatedly sought opportunities to drive home the message that interoperable communications is critical to the homeland security mission at the federal, state and local level. addressing this fundamental operational challenge is consistent with the d.h.s. unity of effort initiative so it would seem that timing is right for real progress. however, late last month we learned from the inspector general that nearly three years after the issuance of the first report that d.h.s.'s components inability to communicate on a common channel exists and they have not completed the corrective actions necessary to resolve the problems. the inspector general's most recent findings confirms it is going to take law to get this

done. that is why i was happy to support ranking member don payne jr. when he introduced this legislation. h.r. 615 would put d.h.s. components on the path to achieving interoperable communications by directing the department's undersecretary for management to develop a strategy to achieve interoperability. the taxpayers have spent $430 million on interoperable communications capabilities at the department so far. in this fiscal climate we cannot waste more money investing in communications capabilities when d.h.s. lacks the policies that is sure to be effective. with the help of the full committee chairman mccaul and subcommittee chairwoman mcsally, the department of homeland security interoperable communications act passed the house unanimously earlier this

year. subsequently, our senate counterparts approved h.r. 615 by unanimous consent with some enhancements. i urge my colleagues to concur with the senate amendment to h.r. 615 and send this bill to the president's desk. with that, mr. speaker, i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentlewoman from arizona is recognized. ms. mcsally: mr. speaker, i have no more speakers. if the gentleman from mississippi has no more speakers, i'm prepared to close once the gentleman does. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman reserves. the gentleman from mississippi is recognized. mr. thompson: mr. speaker, i'm prepared to close and i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. thompson: thank you. mr. speaker, the inspector general report identifying the urgent interoperable communications problem at d.h.s. came out three years ago. a comprehensive solution is long overdue. unfortunately, the department still has not implemented appropriate corrective actions.

i commend subcommittee ranking member payne for introducing this important legislation and for his efforts to get it enacted into law. i urge my colleagues to concur with the senate amendment of h.r. 615 and yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentlewoman from arizona is recognized. ms. mcsally: mr. speaker i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman is recognized. ms. mcsally: mr. speaker, i once again urge my colleagues to support h.r. 615, which seeks to enhance interoperable communications at the department of homeland security and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman yields back. the question is will the house suspend the rules and concur in the senate amendment to h.r. 615. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, 2/3 having responded in the affirmative, the rules are suspended. the senate amendment is agreed to. and without objection the motion to reconsider is laid on the table.

pursuant to clause 12-a of rule 1, the chair declares the house in recess until approximately 6:30 p.m. today. and a look at congressional committees, the president's

cabinet, federal agencies and state governors. order your copy today $13.95 plus shipping and handling through the c-span online store at c-span.org. >> much of today's white house briefing focused on the president's use of the n-word in a podcast last weekend. he was also asked about the possibility of gun control legislation in the aftermath of a church shooting in south carolina and nuclear negotiations with iran. >> good afternoon, everybody. nice to see you all. let me begin by commending the republicans and democrats of the united states senate who today took another important step toward ensuring the united states can negotiate and enforce strong, high standard trade

agreements that are good for our economy and good for our workers. trade promotion authority will help america write the rules of the road and ensure -- and ensure that our new global economy will be constructed to allow more hard working americans to compete and win. josh: but our work on trade is not finished. in addition to requiring final passage for t.p.a. in the senate, the president also wants to provide vital support like job training and community college education to an estimated 00,000 workers per year. that's why he continues to urge congress to send trade adjustment assistance to his desk this week so he can sign it and to exactly that. we also need to reaffirm and bolster trade relations between the united states and subzahar rain africa, so -- subsaharan africa, so congress must pass that as well. we must also seek to improve trade and improve enforcement,

as well as cracking down on unfair currency practices that put and businesses to a disadvantage. to that end the president asks congress to complete legislation that's before the house and senate. there are slightly different versions of that that passed the house and senate, a conference process needs to be undertaken, we hope that they will do that promptly. let me conclude by saying that today's vote and further action on trade in congress this week will send an prnt message to the world about america's engagement and continued global leadership. with that, let's go to your questions. >> is there a different term than preeredyurl snafu? as you said several times, the president, the only strategy the president supports is one that gets trade promotion authority, fast track negotiating authority to his desk as well as the workers assistance package. josh: that's correct.

>> what do you say to democrats who might see that as an indication that now that t.p.a. cleared the hurdles, as an invitation to vote against worker assistance in the house? josh: that strikes me that that would be akin to cutting off your nose to spite your face. ethis -- the previous expla nation we heard from some democrats who voted against trade assistance, something democrats have steadfastly supported for decades is that they did that in an effort to slow down advancement of trade protection authority, but pending final passage in the senate that will no longer be a factor to consider when democrats and republicans in both the house and senate have to make a decision about whether or not to support trade adjustment assistance. and the fact is, we can go through the statistics about how significant that assistance actually is, currently trade

adjustment assistance is scheduled to expire at the end of this fiscal year, at the end of september. so we anticipate that speaker boehner and leader mcconnel will follow through on public commitments they have made to bring t.a.a. up to for -- up for a vote promptly and it will be the last chance for democrats to be able to not just extend that critically important program, but to actually substantially expand it based on the amount of money that could be involved here, we're talking about nearly doubling the size of the program. as i mentioned at the top this would benefit up to 100,000 american workers each year for the next six year it would allow more than 1,000 workers who submitted applications over the last 18 months and had their applications denied. it will allow the department of labor to reconsider those applications. so this is a critically important priority of the president's, and we're going to be counting on the leaders of

both the house and senate giving the bipartisan majorities that we know exist in the house and senate the opportunity to vote for this bill. >> the fly? that strategy is the president would not act on t.p.a. unless t.a.a. was also on his desk? shouldn't that be seen by some democrats as a strategy to deny final signature on t.p.a.? josh: what we have said on this is there is no reason to do that the commitment made is there will be a clear path for t.a.a. legislation to arrive at the president's desk, in the same way the path for t.p.a. emerged as well. that's what the president is counting on what he's looking forward to signing into law. >> the president would sign t.p.a. even if democrats hold back t.a.a. from arriving at his desk if democrats were

responsible for not getting it to his desk? josh: there would be no good reason for democrats to do that, given that democrats strongly supported t.a.a. in the past, considering the significant impact t.a.a. would have on 100,000 middle class workers and considering that there no longer is a legislative process for them to slow down. the legislative process for t.p.a. will have been completed. >> is there any concern that the up and down nature of fast track in any way hurts the administration's hand in negotiating the final points of the transpacific partnership? josh: i have not heard anybody raise that concern. our negotiate jor -- negotiators have not raised that concern with them. what i've been told is that what our -- what his interlo cutors from the representative to the t.p.p. countries are looking for is a firm commitment from the

united states that if an agreement is reached around the negotiating table, it's not one they have to worry about being renegotiated by 535 members of the united states congress. and so what they're looking for is a clear path where congress can, of course, weigh in on a trade agreement. if one can be reached. but one that is consistent with the kinds of priorities that the president has made clear must be included in the t.p.p. agreement before he'll even sign it in the first place. so what our partners are looking for is congress to give the president the authority he needs to complete this agreement. and then they will know that if it -- if a deal can be reached around the negotiating table, it will be clear, the process by which the agreement can be ratified and enter into force. >> on a separate subject,

various organizations including ours, are reporting that the hostage review is going to come out tomorrow and concluding that families of hostages will not be penalized if they pursue any ransom. and -- but at the same time it's not making any change in the law. i'm wondering why not simply change the law rather than not enforce the law that'sen the -- that's on the books? josh: as i indicated to carroll yesterday, the time frame for the release of the hostage policy review is coming up very soon. it will be released tomorrow. and over the course of the day today, many of the families of american citizen who was been held hostage around the world are meeting with members of the administration who conducted this review. and we're using this opportunity to let them know about many of the decisions that were made, many of the recommendations that

were offered i'll give them the opportunity to see for themselveses the contents of the report. but i -- so for today, i'm not going to get into the contents of the report. but i will assure you that tomorrow we will release the report. it will also include a presidential policy directive, as well as an executive order that the president will sign. and we'll release all of that tomorrow and have an opportunity to have a robust discussion about what the policy review entails, what decisions were made what recommendations were put forward and we can weigh all of that tomorrow. >> in going through this review process, was there any conclusion reached that any of the hostage situations would have resulted differently had these changes taken place? josh: that's a difficult thing to determine. enge the goal of this review when we set out to conduct it,

was to make sure that we were better and more closely integrating the wide variety of u.s. government assets that are used to try to safely recover u.s. citizens who are being held hostage. we also wanted to improve the process of communicating with families who have loved ones who are going through this terrible situation. and there is a hope and expectation that by implementing many of these recommendations that we can better integrate the resources of the federal government that are devoted to this effort, they are extensive. and that we can improve our ability to communicate with the families of those placed in this terrible situation. >> just going back to trade, make sure i understand, when the t.p.a. gets to the president's desk is the plan for him to sign

it straight away? or is he going to wait until he makes sure that t.a.a. passes so he has them both? josh: the president made clear that both of them are a priority. and we continue to count on leader mcconnel and speaker boehner to make good on their public commitment to give the bipartisan majorities that we know exist in both the house and senate the opportunity to vote on trade adjustment assistance legislation. i don't have a time frame to lay out for you right now in terms of when the president will sign one bill or the other but the president expects to be in position to sign both of them. >> if you're confident that the latter is going to pass as the leader has sort of -- leaders have assured that the vote will be successful, then there's no reason to wait to sign t.p.p., right? josh: you mean t.p.a.

>> yes. josh: we still need to wait for final passage in the senate. we still need to wait for the senate to deliver that piece of legislation to the house, to the white house. and we'll have an opportunity to go through this. >> i want to ask about syria and the kurds have had some military success in taking back the state in northern syria. i'm wondering what will the u.s. -- what role the u.s. air strikes played, how much coordination there's been, what the white house makes of this success, what the goal is? josh: this is a situation we talked a little bit in -- talked about a little bit in here a week or two ago. we have seen important progress against isil in northeast syria. much of that progress is actually related to an early mission that the administration, that the president made to weigh in heavily in support of anti-isil forces in the area.

there was a decision the president made to airdrop some military equipment inside of the area, to resupply those forces that were surrounded and under siegely isil forces in the area. there also was an effort by the united states and our coalition partners to encourage turkey to provide safe passage to some anti-isil fighters to enter the country and reinforce those fighters in qobani. since that time we've seen those forces move eastward and push back isil. there have been expensive military air strikes carried out by the yeats and coalition partners in the region as well and this is, i think an indication of how critically important it is for the united states to have a capable, willing, and effective partner fighting isil on the ground. and that's why significant resources have been dedicated to

trying to build up that kind of force, both in syria and in iraq. obviously they're different situations. we have a central government to work with in iraq. some iraqi security forces there. we're starting from a much different place when it comes to syria, trying to solicit member os they have moderate syrian opposition and enlist them in the fight, put them through training. that frankly is a more difficult task. but i think this is a clear illustration of why that very difficult work is important. >> kurdish forces specifically, can you describe their general strategy in terms of the advance. josh: i guess for more details i'd refer you to the department of defense in terms of what objective they see as next. we obviously have seen steady progress across northeast syria and we've -- the coalition

partners will continue to be engaged in that effort to drive back isil. michelle. >> just want to make sure we're clear on trade. if t.a.a. gets -- if t.p.a. gets to 4izz desk first but t.a.a. is still -- gets to his desk first but t.a.a. is going to take some time he'll wait and do them together? josh: i don't have the sequencing but there's no reason this should be an issue. >> it's looking like it could be. josh: there have been significant concerns raised by people in this briefing room, threatening that there could be significant problems encountered. we have encountered problem bus so far we have a pretty good track record of working through them. right now we believe there's a clear path for t.p.a. and t.a.a. to come to the president's desk. there obviously are many more steps to go before that goal is completed but we are pleased with the progress we have made even as of today. >> on the hostage review, i know

it's coming out tomorrow but details and reactions to it are already out now. do you expect it to -- the original goal was communication with families but do you expect it now with these extra elements to have an effect on bringing hostages home? josh: you'll have an opportunity to evaluate that once the full report is released tomorrow. >> is that what you expect to come from it? you know what's in it. josh: what we have indicated is that our goals entering into this process was to both better integrate the variety of federal government resources that are dedicated to securing the safe regard of -- safe rush return of american hostages held against their will overseas and improve communication with the families of those going through this terrible ordeal. that was the goal going in. all of you will have an opportunity to read the report tomorrow and you can evaluate

what kind of progress we're able to make against that goal. >> if part of it is to not threaten families with prosecution and sort of including the facilitation as already happened in other cases with ransom, if the goal of that part of it is to get people home potentially, that seems to be an -- seems to be at odds with the policy of the government ideologically. how does that play out to make sense, that both of those things could exist within the same system? josh: once we have some more details of the policy to make public, we can talk more about that. >> the reactions are coming out the wine steyn family is saying they wish -- the wean stein family is -- the weinstein family is saying they wish the coordinator could be nearer, the

widow is saying it would give them more interagency coordinating authority but ensure that those debating counterterrorism and other thrts were sitting in the same room. do you feel that that's going to be a problem? jsh: my understanding of the way it's structured is that the family engagement representative would both have direct access to the interagency fusion cell that's responsible for responding to these kinds of incidents but also will have a role on tissue in the broader policymaking process housed here at the white house. >> you don't feel that would be at odds with what these families are looking for? josh: i haven't seen the exact statement they made, we'll all have an opportunity to review. >> one more on the motivation for hostages. is there a feeling that these

administrations -- this administration and previous administrations were adding to the burden of families? josh: i think it was felt they could be more effective in delivering clear information, in some cases instructions, to the families of those who are going through this ordeal. the sense was that this is a process that could be improved and so we have undertaken a pretty rigorous effort over the last months to determine how to improve it. >> does the government still believe if you pay ransom to a terrorist you'll encourage more kidnappings? josh: the president does believe it's important for the government to adhere to a no negotiations policy. the reason the president believes that's the right approach is that to offer concessions to terrorists only does allow them to more effectively fund their operations but also makes

american citizens around the globe and even -- an even more significant target than they already are. >> a couple for you. john kerry talked about a frank and candid conversation i'm hoping you can tell us who is behind the o.p.m. hack. josh: as a student of diplomacy you know as well as anyone that the conversations that take place behind closed doors in the context of a summit as significant as the security strategic and economic dialogue are different than the public conversations that take place. that's why we invite senior chinese officials to the united states, so we have a direct,

face-to-face discussion. i say all of that and by only reiterating -- and end by only reiterating that we have not made any public declaration about who precisely is responsible for the intrusions detected at the office of personnel management. >> a couple more for you. the secretary of defense said the administration is working on a proposal to shut gitmo that would include moving some of the detainees that the administration has concluded cannot be freed, moving them to u.s. soil. can you offer any details all about what that plan would look like and what the level of optimism is, given the bipartisan opposition to doing that on the hill? >> i don't have any more about our plans to describe to you. the president has made clear that closing the prison at guantanamo bay is a top priority, something he did on his second day in office, i believe. since then we have encountered

a number of significant obstacles from members of congress who have sought to make that already difficult task even more challenging. and the president has directed his team to be persistent in pursuit of the goal of closing the prison, primarily because that prison does serve as a recruiting tool for our adversaries but also it's not an effective use of taxpayer dollars. so the president continues to believe that's an important national security goal. there's a variety of ideas for how exactly to do that. as the decisions are made about closing the prison, what will be paramount of course is making sure that we're protecting the national security interest of the united states. in fact, it's because the president does believe that closing the prison is so clearly in our national security interest that he's it a priority. >> careful read orse they have white house blog noticed a post about right sizing or downsizing the n.f.c.

could you give us a sense of the scale of the right sizing or downsizing? the reasons were laid out in the post but i got no sense at all, like how many people and in what areas are being asked to consider other opportunities. josh: i don't have a good sense of the hard numbers that are involved. i'm afraid my colleagues at the n.f.c. -- i think think colleagues at the n.s.c. may provide you with more details. it was thought there may be opportunity to improve their performance by reforming the structures. some of those reforms are not the kinds of things that will be immediately obviously to those who don't work there but processes could be made more efficient by instituting some of these chamings. john. >> just to get a straight answer to a very simple question, the president signed trade promotion

authority regardless of whether or not t.a.a. gets through? yes or no is all i need. josh: i know. but it's a hypothetical. >> will he sign the bill. if it passes the house will he sign the bill regardless? josh: the president made clear the t.p.a. and t.a.a. are top priorities and he's spent a lot of time advocating to the united states congress that they should pass both. we're pleased a way emerged that will allow both to pass. >> will he sign the first if the second doesn't pass? josh: it shouldn't come to that. >> but if it does. this is a bill a stand-alone bill would he sign it? or is it contingent? josh: it's the president's intent to sign both of these pieces of legislation into law. >> ok, i tried. josh: a valiant attempt. >> and on the o.p.m. hack, when we first learned of it, we were told there were about four

million current and former federal employees that were affected. we've now learned that o.p.m. knew that the number was actually significantly larger, perhaps in the tens of millions, why were we told four million? what do you think the true extent of the hack was? josh: what we have tried to do as each stage is to allow what is known about the investigation of the intrusion drive what information is being made public. and we have at many turns sort of cautioned against being able to release specific pieces of information because the, there were certain details emerging from the investigation. what at one point the office of personnel management was able to confirm is that there was significant concern, a prige probability, that up to four million or so sensitive that

sensitive records related to four million or so individuals were potentially exfiltrated by those responsible for the intrusion. that's what we put forward as part of our obligation to communicate with those individual. you'll recall the administration put forward legislation to congress that would set a pretty high standard for notifying those whose data may be at risk from cyber intrusion. we sought to try to meet that standard ourselves and we did. but the investigation is ongoing and as more information is learned and as we reach additional conclusions and our investigators determine that it's in the interest of the innovation make that information public, we will attempt to do so. >> can you acknowledge that the number that were affected here, the numb of people affected here is actually significantly larger than four million? josh: what i have previously acknowledged is that after

reviewing the information about the breach that led to possibly four million people having their sensitive data exfiltrated that as the investigation continues, information about an additional intrusion emerged. i act nged -- acknowledged at that point that it's possible, maybe even likely, that additional data may be at risk but only when investigators have reached a better conclusion about how much data we're talking about what sort of data we're talking about who may be affected that's when we'll be able to put that information out in public. >> a policy of rab some, is it still a crime to pay ransom to a foreign terrorist group for the sake of freeing abamerican? josh: for a legal analysis, the department of justice. the department of the

administration -- the policy of the united states is that the united states does not make concession to terrorists. >> families don't make concessions to terrorists? josh: that's a legal question you can direct to the department of justice. >> on the confederate flag issue, both wal-mart and series said they'd stop selling confederate flag merchandise. does the president think other businesses should follow suit? josh: obviously this is a decision for individual businesses to make. but the announcements by wal-mart and series are certainly consistent with the president's feeling about the confederate flag. we welcome those decisions but they are decisions that should be made by individual businesses. >> you mentioned a moment ago that as you reached conclusions about the numbers of those affected by the intrusion you'll announce them. apparently those conclusions

have been released to at least some senators on the hill because that seems to be the source of the report of as many as 14 million intrusions. why can't you confirm that? josh: two things. the decision would be driven also by, the decision to make particular pieces of information public will also be driven by whether our investigators believe that's in the best interests of the ongoing investigation. sometimes by putting out a particular piece of information or a set of information we can give our adversary greater insight into our investigative tools and better insight into the capabilities we have to respond to these particular situations. >> they've already got it, based on this leak. josh. when you say they and it, what are you referring to? >> the information. josh: we announced a month ago that this had occurred and put

at risk the information of four million americans. >> does the president still retain full confidence in the department? >> yes. >> a couple on china and then one further. are federal investigators able at this point to exonerate china of culpability in the o.p.m. breach? josh: i haven't heard any firm conclusions from the f.b.i. about who suspects are, who subjects aren't, i refer you to the f.b.i. for a conclusion. >> you would agree that given what we know about chinese cultural sensitivities, if they were innocent and it is within the power of the united states goth to exonerate them amid widespread speculation, that would con deuce to better u.s.-china relations as they're in washington right now. josh: that's something that would be decided by

investigators. >> we heard opening statements from the treasury secretary today and others, there seems to be a repetitive quality to these things. we hear year in and year out about how we want frank exchanges and want to find areas for collaboration but certainly we maintain our respective positions but no one is going to lecture anyone and nothing ever comes of it except more o.p.m. breaches. i wonder, what is this accomplishing? josh: james, mr. earnest: you understand that sometimes the kinds of public statements that are made by officials on both sides don't reveal everything about the private exchanges that are occurring. that is, after all, why these meetings occur in the first place. i will say that there have been concerns that we have consistently raised year after year about china's activity in cyberspace. you'll recall it was just a year or two ago that the department of justice made an announcement indicting some

chinese officials based on their conduct in cyberspace. in cyberspace. at the same time there are some areas where the united states and china are able to work together to advance our collective mutual interests. that was on display when the president traveled to china last fall and made a significant announcement, where both countries made a commitment to reduce carbon pollution. this was a substantial commitment that did drive we believe, did drive some additional countries around the world to make some other similar commitments. i would also point out that china has continued to be a useful participant ant in the p-5 plus one negotiations with iran. we value the role that they have played there. there is no doubt there are some areas where the united states and china are in what could be described as heated competition but there are also areas where we are able to cooperate and that is what we're seeking to build upon.

questioner: vice president biden said today to his chinese audience, this is not a lecture. is it a concern of this administration that we may be seen by the chinese as lecturing them? mr. earnest: i'm not in a position to evaluate what our concerns may be about the way they receive our messaging. our goal here is to make very clear that we welcome a rising china. questioner: it is a concern of yours they hear our messages. i was struck by the vice president of the united states seeking to assure the chinese that we're not lecturing them. mr. earnest: you'll have to ask the vice president's office about why he chose to include that particular sentence. questioner: secretary kerry spent more time, whether you measure by number of words or time running -- total running time in his remarks today about climate change than he did about cyber or human

rights. is it safe to say this administration regards its work with china on climate as a higher priority than our work with china on human rights or cyber? mr. earnest: i think it's fair to say that we conclude that both are priorities. i think as i mentioned earlier our goal is to try to build upon those areas where we have been able to effectively cooperate. and certainly fighting climate change is one area where we have been able to work effectively with the chinese to accomplish goals that are in the interest of citizen of both of our countries but it does not diminish the concerns we have previously expressed about china's conduct in cyberspace or even china's failure on many occasions to respect the basic universal human rights of their people. those are values that we hold very dear in this country and in every interaction senior u.s. officials have with their chinese counterparts, wery its rate the significance of those values to us. -- we reiterate the

significance of those values to us. questioner: the president's use of the n word. it strikes me as saying moment in the history of presidential rhetoric. i don't think we've ever seen a sitting president before use that word in a public setting. and you explained yesterday why he felt it was necessary to use that word. i wonledser if you could tell us whether any deliberation prior to the interview went into the use of that word, whether it was debated internally amongst the president and his aides as to whether it would be a well-considered thing for him to use that word. questioner: i'm not aware of any deliberation that went on. this is an informal discussion. a long open-ended discussion that the president engaged in. that's where he made this argument that is familiar to those who have been open to hearing exactly what the president believes is important for people to recognize. both in terms of the important progress that's been made in this country over the last several decades in terms of

the issue of race, but also acknowledging that important work remains to be done. questioner: four million or 18 million regarding the office of personnel management, acknowledgment of the number of people whose das that been compromised. were you among those individuals who was notified that your data may have been compromised? mr. earnest: i was. questioner: you were. can you give us a sense of how many people in this office were on that same -- the executive office right now working for the president of the united states? mr. earnest: i don't know how many people at the white house were affected. questioner: a hostage policy, acknowledging that we'll find out more detail tomorrow, whether it still enforces the law or whether the law which we understand, will not change do you believe it undermines the process for families of american hostages to pay a ransom? whether or not they'll be prosecuted? mr. earnest: i think what i would say about this, and i think we'll have an opportunity to talk about this a little bit more when you can see

first-hand the policy, i think what everyone who has been involved with these issues even on the periphery like i have, it's very difficult to put yourself in a situation of somebody who is going through something so terrible. to think of your loved one being in this awful situation, being held against their will overseas by people with very bad intentions. and i think it is difficult to -- i certainly wouldn't want to put myself in a position in which i judge their reaction or their motivation to do one particular thing or another because i can't imagine what it's like to be in that situation. to imagine a mother or a father or a husband and wife or a son or daughter in that situation, i think it's hard to even hype thetically -- hypothetically make a judgment about their motivations. questioner: the no concessions policy exists because the administration believes and

past administrations have believed that that will somehow empower those people, those captors who are taking hostage american or whatever other sorts, so does it undermine the process that you're trying to achieve if others, not the government but others' families are paying money, why would they stop kidnapping people if you don't give the money, the family will? mr. earnest: well, what's clear is that the reason that we have our policy in place is that the resources of the united states government are not going to be used to make concessions to terrorists and again we do not want to open the door to even more americans being vulnerable to hostage taking. questioner: are familying opening dooter? mr. earnest: and we certainly -- are familying opening the door? mr. earnest: and we certainly don't want to give financial resources to terrorist organizations who we know turn around and use those resources to carry out additional atrocities, including additional hostage takings. questioner: -- open that door? mr. earnest: the bergdahl situation was different. he wears the uniform of the

united states military and as the commander in chief, the president does believe that he has made a firm commitment to everyone who puts on the uniform, that we will not leave them behind. questioner: will we hear from the president tomorrow on this review? mr. earnest: yes. the president tomorrow, as i mentioned, many of the families of american hostages are in washington, d.c., today. they're receiving a briefing from officials who participated in this review. tomorrow those families will come to the white house and they'll have an opportunity to sit down and visit with the president and the president will have an opportunity to speak publicly about the completion of this review process tomorrow. questioner: he will take questions? mr. earnest: i don't anticipate he will, no. questioner: only about a small percentage of the families even participated in the review process. which is demons thattific of the lack of trust that exists right now. what do you say about the fact

that -- the number of families that participated in that? mr. earnest: i'm not sure that's accurate. we'll have an opportunity to talk about their involvement in this tomorrow. questioner: can you provide additional details on the president's trip to charleston on friday? in particular, is he writing a eulogy himself? is he going to use that as a moment truly to reflect on the lives of the victims or is he going to use it as a moment to lay out a path forward for the country in the wake of the tragedy? mr. earnest: the president has begun the process of working closely with cody kenan, his lead speech writing -- writer, on those remarks for friday. that process has just begun. so i wouldn't want to speculate at this early stage about what their remarks will look like at the end. as we get closer i'll try to provide some additional insight. questioner: the ban of openly transgender people serving in the military has come to a

head. a representative is trying to introduce legislation to force the pentagon to lift the ban. another representative is circulating letter calling for the administration to make a change on the policy. tomorrow at least two transgender service members will be in attendance at a reception here at the white house. you said before the president agrees everyone who is qualified to serve should be able to serve. will he act on that principle tomorrow by announcing he'll lift the ban prohibiting trans genders from serving in the military? mr. earnest: i wouldn't anticipate an announcement like that tomorrow. questioner: -- [inaudible] -- everyone who is qualified to serve should be able to serve -- [inaudible] -- for the pentagon to continue discharging people who are transgender? mr. earnest: this is a question that was posed earlier in the administration, related specifically to the don't ask,

don't tell policy. and we've long acknowledged that considering these kinds of policy changes, also involved considering the process for implementing them. and the job of advocates on the outside is to apply pressure and to try to speed that process, but it's the responsibility of those, particularly those who are leading our military, to ensure that any policy that is decided and implemented is clearly within the best interests of the united states military and our men and women who volunteer to serve this country. but i will reiterate the president's view. and it's one that is shared by his secretary of defense. and americans who are qualified to serve should be able to do so and deserve to be treated with dignity and respect. questioner: does the president believe the leaders of the military will end this prohibition? mr. earnest: i don't have any news for you on this. questioner: -- i'm wondering, you said families are being

briefed today. did you brief lawmakers on capitol hill? there's a bipartisan group of them cardin, cornyn, hunter, who are vocally critical of your approach. and they want a completely different approach in terms of -- [inaudible] -- they believe in too many turf wars and allowing the f.b.i. to head this up -- [inaudible] -- can you respond to that? mr. earnest: we'll be able to talk a little bit more about the specific policy tomorrow once it's been released. but i would anticipate that many members of capitol hill have will have an opportunity to speak with senior members of the administration prior to the release of the report tomorrow. questioner: they were briefed at 1:00 p.m. today. i think by the n.d.i. and the -- [inaudible] mr. earnest: i don't have any specific conversations to tell you about. many members of congress will hear from the administration prior to the release of the report. questioner: did you get the input in terms of how to get the fusion center organized?

mr. earnest: i do know there are a number of conversations that took place with members of congress as the task force was doing their work and as they were assembling this report. but i don't have any specific details of those conversations either. questioner: you mentioned p-5 plus one. it's now june 23 and there's a week until this self-imposed new deadline new self-imposed new deadline for coming to some kind of final agreement. can you update us on that? especially with iran's leaders making all kinds of statements? mr. earnest: as i mentioned yesterday, i believe olivia asked about this. the united states and our partners are continuing to operate against the june 30 deadline and we're going to continue to press for an agreement that is consistent with the political agreement that was reached earlier this spring. now, there is also a self-imposed deadline in the context of those political

negotiations as well. the deadline was march 31 and you'll recall that an agreement was not announced until april 2. we're mindful of what these deadlines often look like. but our view is that we've been negotiating with iran, with our partners for come on two years now. now is the time for to us reach an agreement. we're pressing to reach an agreement by the june 30 deadline. questioner: you realize it could very well slide a few days or a couple of days? mr. earnest: that certainly is what we saw in the context of the spring discussions and agreement. but ultimately it didn't have an impact on our ability to reach an agreement that's consistent with the priorities of the president. so if it requires to us take a couple of extra days just like we did in the spring in order to reach an agreement that's consistent with that political agreement, then we'll do that. but again, there's no reason our negotiators by working with iran as we have over the last two years shouldn't be able to

meet this june 30 deadline. questioner: quick follow-up. you were just discussing with us the prospects that the talks may extend beyond the june 30 deadline for some limited period of time and certainly recent history bears that out as a valid prospect. can you at least assure the american people that if a final deal is reached, it will in fact be final? that is to say the final deal will not contain within it, with respect to any particular component parameters that are to be fleshed out further and further negotiation after the inking of the so-called final deal? mr. earnest: let me just say that i would anticipate that the culmination of two years of work here is to be able to establish a framework for moving forward and that means

iran taking the steps that are necessary and in a verifiable way, shutting down every pathway they have to a nuclear weapon. and they would do that in exchange for sanctions relief. that is the essence of the agreement. will there be differences of opinion as there are certain aspects of this that are implemented that will require certain negotiations? yes. that's going to keep our diplomats employed here. but this is an effort to reach a final agreement. questioner: -- additional negotiations after the final deal has been announced? mr. earnest: you've been closely -- a close observer of this process enough to understand that, yes, this will be a final agreement and there is no reason we shouldn't be able to begin to accomplish the goal that both sides set out to achieve. which is the united states and our p-5 plus one partners shutting down every pathway that iran has to a nuclear weapon and iran getting, in exchange for taking those

steps, the sanctions relief that they seek. we should be able to reach that final agreement by june 30. questioner: ash carter said on cbs news today that he is not confident that guantanamo bay will be closed before the president leaves office. i'm wondering, does the president share this lack of confidence that he he won't be able to reach this goal before he leaves office? mr. earnest: i think what is clear from secretary carter's remarks is that because of the consistent and repeated effort on the part of congress to impose obstacles on the process of closing the prison at guantanamo bay, that's made an already difficult process even more challenging. and -- but this is a priority that the president has set and his national security team is working hard to achieve it. questioner: i also want to ask you about the king versus furwell case. just want to get a on whether

or not -- we know all think that the case doesn't have merit and should have been taken out. in the case that the court does strike down these subsidies, can you explain what the white house has done to prepare for that? has the president made calls, is he reaching out to members of congress who are saying that they have an alternative? is there anything going on at the white house to prepare for that scenario? mr. earnest: i don't have a lot to tell you about. the fact is, we continue to have a lot of confidence in the power of the legal arguments made by the solicitor general before the court. and you've heard the president discuss this at some length and what some people thought was pretty colorful. but we continue to have confidence in the strength of those arguments and the fact is in the unlikely event that there is an adverse ruling, the president's also been pretty clear that if congress is

serious about involving -- about solving this problem, they could solve the problem in one day with a one-page bill. it's pretty clear from those who have been quoted talking about this publicly, at least on the republican side of the aisle, that they're interest is not in trying to protect the critically important gains that have been enjoyed by millions of americans across the country, but rather to dismantle them and that is the publicly stated goal of any number of members of congress. chairman ryan was quoted today saying that was his goal and he hoped to use the prospect of an adverse court ruling to accomplish that goal. that certainly is not what the american people expect their elected leaders. but we're not losing a whole lot of sleep over it because we continue to have a lot of confidence in the power of the arguments that we've made.

questioner: it was reported this week that world war ii veterans who were subject to the secret muss card gas experiment, when -- mustard gas experiments, the v.a. promised they would notify all the veterans who had been affected and make it easier for them to get disability payment. it was found that thousands of them had never been notified and many were still being denied the benefits to which they're indictmented. what's it going to take for the v.a. to make good on its decades' old promise to these veterans? mr. earnest: what's clear is that our v.a. is committed to making sure that our men and women in uniform who served this country get the benefits that they deserve. and that is the reason for that agency's existence. and it is something that the president has indicated to his team here at the white house and at the v.a. is a top priority and that's why you

have seen all this significant progress that web of been able to make in terms of expanding access to care and making sure that we are working through the backlog 6 that has materialized -- that has materialized. we've made important progress in those regards. as it relates to this specific case, i'd refer you to the v.a. so they can talk about how they're processing these claims and following through on that commitment. but the president certainly believes that they're doing so is consistent with the instructions they've received to make sure that the v.a.'s doing their job and looking out for our veterans. questioner: is the white house doing anything to keep tabs on that progress the v.a. is making both on this specific subject and on the broader veterans who maybe had their promises met in a very slow manner? mr. earnest: again, there's a substantial progress that's

been made at the v.a. and they can tell you more about the metrics of that and somebody here can if you're not able to get those details. we're pleased with the important progress that we've made. we recognize there's a lot more that needs to get done. and -- but that progress is a result of the president and his team making this a top priority . but for this specific case, i'd refer you to the v.a. for details on how they are working through that process. questioner: personal question at the beginning. mr. earnest: are we allowed to ask those? we'll see, we'll see. questioner: has the president contacted governor hogan following his very moving announcement yesterday? or does he plan to issue any statement about the governor? mr. earnest: i know senior officials here in the white house have been in touch with the governor's office to try to line up a phone call between

the two. but i don't know that a conversation's taken place yet. questioner: just going back to the earlier question about an adverse ruling from the supreme court. senator tillis of north carolina said last week that in the event that happened and congress passed a contingency plan, he felt confident the president would veto it or anything that would concede that there were flaws in the affordable care act. other lawmakers have said that, including senator cassidy who offered the patient freedom act, which he says has the same goals as the affordable care act. what doesed administration say to senators when they make statements like that? mr. earnest: i think what we'd say to them, is hopefully their musings on this topic will be rendered irrelevant in the next week or so. [laughter] questioner: how concerned is the white house about the security situation in afghanistan? we saw that brazen attack on parliament yesterday. and now there are reports that

the taliban is close to overtaking the northern part of the country. how concerned is the white house about this? mr. earnest: i can tell you that as it relates to the specific attack we saw against the parliament building yesterday, that it is an indication of the sophistication and capability of taliban fighters, but we were pleased to see a rapid and professional response by the afghan security forces that did limit the very dangerous attack that was carried out. and that is an indication of some of the progress that has been made as it relates to building up the capacity of security forces inside of afghanistan, to provide for the security of their citizens. but obviously it's a very difficult security situation in that country. there continue to be u.s. military personnel in afghanistan that are focused on the effort to continue to build

up the capacity of those afghan security forces by offering them some training and some assistance. there also is a counterterrorism role for u.s. forces in afghanistan and that is strictly to ensure the safety and security of those american military personnel inside of afghanistan but also to look out for the broader national security interests of the american people. so there's still important work that's been doing by the u.s. military there. even in a difficult situation. but i would not anticipate that yesterday's attacks by the taliban would have any impact on the longer term u.s. policy toward afghanistan. questioner: two questions. one, health care costs meant to help detention and hypertension are on the rise around the globe. to keep all this in mind under the leadership -- [inaudible] -- last year, the united nations declared june 21 as the

international day of yoga. an on sunday around the globe it was celebrated including at the my question is, how does the president feel about this or has he spoken with anyone? [inaudible] mr. earnest: -- mr. earnest: i'm not aware the president had any conversations with world leaders on this topic. but obviously the president and the first lady have made public health and the health of the american people a top priority of their administration. whether that's trying to advance the affordable care act or the first lady through her let's move initiative, tro try to encourage -- to try to encourage children in this country to be more active and follow a healthy diet, these are policy priorities that the administration's identified and one that we've tried to encourage the american people and people around the world to

follow. questioner: two lobbyists have discussed child labor and child trafficking around the globe is on the rise, including of course in india and often china. can you tell me, there was a man in washington last week, speaking about the lincoln memorial on this issue, around the globe, about bringing children from out of the shadow and out of child labor. what did the president think about this? mr. earnest: i can say as a general matter that the president believes strongly that we need to be serious about combating child trafficking and the administration is de-- has devoted significant time and consideration and even resources to international efforts to try to fight human

trafficking. we can get you some more details about the nature of those efforts but i know this is something that the president has talked about frequently, not just with his national security staff, but his conversations with other world leaders and even in the context of international meetings like at the united nations. thanks, everybody. [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2015] >> and in just a couple of minutes the house of representatives comes back to vote on several bills tonight. the first one, to repeal the independent payment advisory board. that was set up under the affordable care act. to reduce medicare spending. also a vote tonight on the commerce department's plans to hand over regulation of

internet domain names to an international agency. later in the brief, the house will consider the 2016 spending bill for the interior department and the environmental protection agency. allegation the house could consider trade legislation this week, depending on what happens in the u.s. senate. so the house back in just a moment to vote on bills dealing with medicare and internet domain names. >> the new congressional directory is a handy guide to the 114th congress. with color photos of every senator and house member, plus bioand contact information and twitter handles. also district maps, a foldout map of capitol hill and a look at congressional committees, the president's cabinet, federal agencies and state governors. order your copy today. it's $13.95 plus shipping and handling through the c-span online store. at cspan.org. >> as we wait for the house to come back momentarily, we'll

remind you on the next "washington journal" tomorrow morning at 7:00, we'll get an update on the senate procedural vote that would give the president fast track authority for trade deals and the upcoming supreme court decision on health care subsidies. our guests will be david hawkings of c.q. roll call. also congressman glenn thompson and congresswoman lois frankel co-chair of the congressional art competition. we're going to talk to them about the contest and other issues in front of congress this week. and later, as part of our spotlight on magazine series, david graham of the atlantic talks about his article on the council of conservative citizens which he calls a white supremacist organization. "washington journal" live every morning at 1k7 right here on c-span and you can join -- 7:00 right here on see spanned and you can join the conversation by phone, facebook or twitter. three votes coming up this evening in the house. the first one, abolishing the