gone way too far and we get to the point where we start regulating smaller and smaller numbers in making it very difficult when we start talking about 70 parts per billion in issues versus 60 parts per billion, we have gone a long ways. we do know that no matter where the line is drawn, there are individuals out there who are willingly and knowingly trying to find ways around the law. as such, e.p.a. needs to have the ability to look into criminal activity whether it is illegal dumping of waste, negligent dumping of oil and the illegal transportation or importation of products from other countries by those who would chose to ignore u.s. law.

so we can debate the law and what is appropriate but we can't give criminals a free pass toig north law or the laws that reason -- pass to ignore the laws or the laws that are on the books. i'm sorry, i must oppose the amendment and strongly urge my colleagues to do the same. the chair: does the gentleman reserve? mr. calvert: i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman from california reserves his time. the gentleman from alabama is recognized. >> thank you mr. chairman. with all due respect to my colleague from california, no one is in favor of allowing criminals to commit crimes at any level of federal government. palm palm or any part of the country -- mr. palmer: or any part of the country. i think it should be troubling to every member of this body that we have gone over the line in regard to becoming what could be viewed as a police state. in regard to the raid on the wastewater treatment facility, that is a city facility. that is the federal government sending armed agents and full

-- in full-body armor with weapons to a municipal facility . and i would beg the question, what was the threat assessment? this is going on in other parts of the country as well. and i think we have a responsibility to draw a line where law enforcement's involved. if there is a threat assessment that would indicate the need to have armed officers assist the e.p.a. in an investigation or raid, there's ample law enforcement available to do that. so in that regard, i think this is an area where the e.p.a. has overreached and respect to their responsibilities as regulators of the environment -- in respect to their sponlts as regulatering -- responsibility as regulators of the environment. i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman from california is recognized. mr. calvert: i thank the gentleman. this is an important debait.

i recognize that we've had federal agencies that have had overreach and have done things that go beyond their training and possibly should be done by other agencies. i won't disagree with that. but doing this in an appropriation bill is not the right place to do this. we should be -- the authorizers should have this debate and we shouldn't be making these determinations with an appropriation bill which just broadly states that we're going to get rid of a whole swath of law enforcement, whether they're good or bad. it doesn't determine that. because we can't do that in this type of legislative process. with that i'd be happy to yield to the gentlelady from minnesota. the chair: the gentlewoman from minnesota is recognized. ms. mccollum: thank you. mr. chair if i may inquire how much time is remaining, so i don't consume all of the gentleman's time. the chair: the gentleman from

california has 45 seconds remaining. ms. mccollum: thank you, mr. chair. so i'll just be short and sweet. i support the gentleman from california's strong objection to this amendment and would encourage people not to vote for it. let me conclude with this. an e.p.a. law enforcement official deserves a right to come home to their families safe at night. so they should have the tools that they need in order to do that. with that i yield back. the chair: the gentlewoman yields back the balance of her time. the gentleman from california is recognized. mr. calvert: again, i oppose this amendment and i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman from california yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from alabama. mr. palmer: how much time do i have? the chair: 2 3/4 minutes remaining -- 1/4 minutes remaining. mr. palmer: i appreciate the gentlelady from minnesota's response and i too agree that every federal official deserves to be able to go home safe and sound to their family. that, though, does not address the specific issue here in regard to what's going on with

the e.p.a. if there is a need for armed intervention with a business or, in this case, with a municipality, there should be a clear threat assessment. there isn't any. there was no reason for anyone to think that they needed to go in in full body armor with weapons drawn. i think that that is part of what is going on here, that a lot of american citizens are concerned about. is the overreach of the government. and particularly in regard to 70 federal agencies having armed agents in their employment. i agree with the gentleman from california, this needs to be a broader discussion. but with that, in that regard i think we should have that. but in respect to my amendment, i think we need to divert this funding away from this armed agency that the e.p.a. is

deploying, i think, without due course or without proper course. for that regard, i urge my colleagues to vote yes on this and i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. all time has expired. the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from alabama. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the noes have it. the amendment is not agreed to. the gentleman from alabama. mr. palmer: mr. chairman, i request a recorded vote. the chair: pursuant to clause 6 of rule 18, further proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from alabama will be postponed. for what purpose does the gentleman from california seek recognition?

mr. calvert: mr. chairman. the chair: for what purpose does the gentleman from california seek recognition? mr. calvert: i move that the committee do now rise. the chair: the question is on the motion that the committee rise. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the ayes have it. the motion is adopted. accordingly, the committee rises. the speaker pro tempore: mr. chairman. the chair: mr. speaker, the committee of the whole house on the state of the union having had under consideration h.r. 2822 directs me to report that it has come to no resolution thereon. the speaker pro tempore: the chair of the committee of the whole house on the state of the union reports that the

committee has had under consideration h.r. 2822 and has come to no resolution thereon. for what purpose does the gentleman from texas seek reck fligs? mr. burgess: -- seek recognition? mr. burgess: mr. speaker i send to the desk a plived -- privileged report. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title. the clerk: report to accompany house resolution 350, resolution providing for consideration of the bill h.r. 6, to accelerate the discovery development and delivery of 21st century cures and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: referred to the house calendar and ordered printed. pursuant to house resolution 333 and rule 18, the chair declares the house in the committee of the whole house on the state of the union for the further consideration of h.r. 2822. will the gentleman from illinois, mr. hultgren, kindly resume the chair.

the chair: the house is in the committee of the whole house on the state of the union for further consideration of h.r. 2822, which the clerk will report by title. the clerk: a bill making appropriations for the department of the interior, environment and related agencies for fiscal year ending september 30, 2016, and for other purposes. the chair: when the committee of the whole rose earlier today a request for a recorded vote on an amendment offered by mr. palmer had been postpone and the bill had been read through -- had been postponed and the bill had been read. for what purpose does the gentleman from california seek recognition? mr. calvert: mr. chairman i rise to strike the last word. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. calvert: mr. chairman, i want to thank chairman rogers for his leadership and support. under his guidance, the appropriation committee is again setting the standard for getting things done in the house. this is the seventh of the

appropriation bills that have come to the floor, that we hopefully will be able to pass tomorrow. and i also want to thank my good friend and ranking member, ms. mccollum, for her partnership and work on this bill. finally i want to thank each our subcommittee members for their efforts and their collegiality and that continues to be the hallmark of our subcommittee's deliberations. even though we may have differences of opinion within this bill, i greatly appreciate the members' constructive contributions and i mean that sincerely. the committee has made some very difficult choices in preparing this bill. as reported by the appropriations committee, the fiscal year 2016 interior appropriation bill is funded at $30.17 billion which is $246 million below the fiscal year 2015 enacted level and $3

billion below the budget request. we've made a sincere effort to prioritize the needs within our 302-b allocation and i'd like to point out some of the highlights of the bill. again, this year the committee has provided robust wild land fire funding, fire suppression accounts department of interior and forest service are fully funded at the 10-year average level. the hazardous fuel program was increased by $75 million to $526 million in fiscal year 2015-enacted and that increase has been maintained in this bill. the bill also continues critical investments in indian country, a nonpartisan priority of this committee. building upon the bipartisan work, former subcommittee chairman mike simpson, jim moran, norm dick, certainly my friend ms. mccollum, the bill continues to make investments in education, public safety and

health programs in indian country. overall, funding for the indian health service has increased by $154 million or 3% while funding for the bureau of indian affairs and education is increased by $165 million or 6% from fiscal year 2015 levels. the largest percentage increase in this bill. the bill provides full funding for fiscal year 2016, for payments in lieu of taxes or the p.i.l. program. p.i.l. payments are made to 49 of the 50 states, as well as the district of columbia, guam, the u.s. virgin islands and the commonwealth of puerto rico. the bill provides $2.7 billion for the national park service including more than $60 million in new funding relating to the centennial of the park service. we've also addressed a number of priorities within the fish and wildlife service accounts. the bill funds popular

cost-saving -- sharing programs -- cost-sharing programs. it also provides for additional funds for combat -- to combat international wildlife trafficking, protects fish hatcheries from cuts and closures continues funding to fight invasive species and reduces the backlog of species that are recovered but not yet delisted. the bill provides $248 million for the atlanta water conservation fund. programs that enjoy broad, bipartisan support. some members would prefer more funding, others would prefer less funding for lwcf. we attempted to forge a middle ground that begins to return an emphasis to lwcf to its original intent of recreation. overall funding for e.p.a. is reduced by $718 million or 9% from fiscal year 2015-enacted levels. members of the great lakes

region will be pleased to know that the great lakes restoration initiative is maintained atitiescal year 2015-enacted level of $300 million rural water textcal assistance grants and many -- technical assistance grants and many categorical grants including ray done grants -- ra don grants. again this year there's a great deal of concern over a number of regulatory actions being pursued by e.p.a. which we've discussed over the last day and the absence of legislation without clear congressional direction. for this reason, the bill includes a number of provisions to stop unnecessary and damaging regulatory overreach by the agency. i'd like to address the endangered species act. we've had a number of amendments over the last day about this subject. certainly this committee has no interest in interfering with science or letting any species

go extinct but we are concerned about federal regulatory actions lacking in basic fairness and commonsense. . and force departments to cut corners to meet arbitrary deadlines. no where is this more evident than with the sage grouse. states are concerned about land use plans and zates and private land owners. these partnerships are necessary to save both sage brush ecosystems and local economies. so long as sage grouse are not under imminent threat of ex tinchings, conservation must be given a chance to work.

that's why it maintains a one-year delay. and with that. -- mr. chairman, i would like to strike the last word. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. calvert: as long as sage grouse are not under imminent threat, conservation must have a chance to work. and the sage grouse along with full funding to implement conservation efforts. the next step in a long legislative process. i hope over the coming months we will come together to find common ground and in that spirit i look to work with the members of the house on both sides of the aisle. as this bill moves forward hopefully the senate will act on a bill soon and we will be able

to get back to regular order which is the hope for both sides. in closing, i thank the staff. minority side, i thank rick, rita, joe, as well as rebecca. they played a roll role in the process and their efforts are appreciated. on the minority side, kristen, jackie, betsy, jason, daron and dave. i would like to thank ine and rebecca, alexander and tricia for their great work. mr. chairman this is a good bill and i enjoyed the bill over the last couple of days. and i thank you, mr. chairman.

one thing i want to talk about under my five minutes the wild and hazardous fuel management program is that it was mentioned earlier in the debate we are attempting to work out an agreement with both sides that we can hopefully move mr. simpson's language forward and have a hazardous wildfire bill that h.r. 167, we are looking for co-sponsors of the bill and looking for more support of that bill as we move this process forward. we did fund the bill with the 10-year average. but this still isn't going to be sufficient if we have a significant wildfire year that

we expect. catastrophic wildfire can literally burn through any amounts of money we have set aside and it causes disruptions within the department of interior and department of forestry as to how they manage those accounts which is not good management on our part. i hope we can move with mr. simpson's bill as quickly as possible. we also discussed the endangered species act and continue to talk about the states and the difficulties they are having working with fish and wildlife and other agencies in trying to work out their state plans. it's a deal with attempting to try to deal with these significant issues.

as we look at our sage grouse strategy, we have 11 states involved in this program. we are doing everything we can to have cooperative program with private land owners and state lands and federal lands to make sure that we continue to have a sage grouse. we want to make sure that the sage grouse persists and we found funded b.l.m. and make sure that we have the resources available to do that. i would be happy toll yield to mr. davis. mr. davis: i want to congratulate the chairman of the subcommittee who has done a great job of getting this bill through the house. i would like to thank the ranking member. i sat in that chair last night

where you were presiding over many different amendments. much discussion on a wide variety of issues, but it's what we came here to do in this institution, work in a process that i call our constitutional appropriation fs process. if we are to regain the power of the purse we ought to work through the appropriations process that so many hardworking colleagues have put in. this is an opportunity for us to begin the process once begin of prioritizing of how washington spends money which the way washington spent money when washington wasn't nearly as broke. we have the opportunity to come here to the floor and we get an up-or-down vote. and when our amendments don't

pass, we shouldn't regain the power that congress has been given in our constitution. mr. chairman, congratulations. i look forward to supporting your bill. i had a great time presiding over the debate. and i kwleeled back. mr. calvert: we will be having other bills in front of us. we are looking to having the financial services bill on the floor next week and other appropriation bills for the ball answer of the month. we want to have all 12 bills brought to the floor debated. and as we move back to regular order which the chairman has done a great job of moving this committee back to its historic importance. we appreciate your continued support this that process. as i mentioned on the forest

service funding allocations, we are continuing to work to make sure that monies are available to fund the forest service research and development, to make sure that the analysis and inventory program continues to be funded. we recognize the renewable resource domestic timber supports local communities and u.s. industry especially in the west, also helps reduce fuel load in our national forests which is combrately needed because these fires are burning hotter and fire seasons are growing longer and more communities are at risk. our forests need to be managed. forest service estimates up to two million acres of land need to be actively managed.

in the rocky mountains, 4 million acres have been affected by the bark beetle. we have seen results of that in my area, where thousands of acres have been devastated by this beetle that attacks weaken trees and certainly exposes a problem to wildfire conditions. and once those wildfires start, the fires become catastrophic and as we have seen just recently in a fire in a the san bernandino national forest. we are fortunate that it was well below the normal with 87% of the 10-year average. and we are praying that is going to occur in the 2015 wildfire season. most people believe that's not going to occur that because of

the drought, especially in the west that we could have catastrophic conditions and could have wildfires that could certainly grow out of control. 2% of the wildfires, mr. chairman, cost more money than the other 98%. that's why we need to continue to invest resources wisely a into making sure that we get rid of hazardous materials and manage our forests properly and not toville voofic fires. these figures combined with the fact that california, my home state, suffered through this exceptional drought, including minnesota have the poning for above wildfire activity in the next couple of months, which are

extremely worrisome. i would like to talk about the land and water conservation fund. i know we would have liked to appropriate for the fund. but we are acting under these funds and we were constricted. but we want the to focus back, which is recreation and state and local acquisitions. in this bill, limit the federal acquisitions and local and state congressional support are strongest. extends -- strike the last word. the chair: without objection. mr. calvert: we extend the authority, prohibit interior from creating new wilderness

areas, providing $452 million in payment of lieu of taxes which is important to every state in the union and increases products so the forest service can increase timber har vet. we loss a lot in the west. after the issue with the spotted owl. we are trying to -- after that 20-year experiment realize it was a failure. we have forests that have overgrown, especially in the west and we poorly managed some of those forests and we need to thin those forests out. and two ways to do it, either god does it or allow for good timber operations done in a scientific manner that clears

out that forest which brings back animals that stismse have abandoned the region because of overgrowth and makes it for a healthier forest in the long run. these are good goals. and we want to work with the department of forestries to make sure that they continue to make progress in this and we'll continue to do that. grazing, obviously -- i'm happy to yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. mr. calvert: i have an amendment at the desk. the chair: for what purpose does the gentleman from california seek recognition? california mr. calvert: i have an amendment at the desk. the clerk: amendment offered by mr. calvert of california, at

the end of the bill, insert the following, section, notwithstanding any other provision of this act none of the funds made available by this act may be used to display the flag of the united states or the p.o.w./m.i.a. flag with flags in the national park service national cemetery as provided in national park service directors' order 61 or memorandum january 24 2015 with the subject line containing immediate actionry quired. the chair: the gentleman from california and a member opposed each will control five minutes. the chair recognize is the gentleman from california. mr. calvert: this amendment will codify national park service policy with regard to the declaration of cemeteries. i urge adoption of my amendment.

the chair: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. does the gentleman from seek recognition? ms. mccollum: i oppose. . . i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman from california. mr. calvert: i continue to reserve. the chair: does the gentlelady from minnesota wish to yield and close? ms. mccollum: i would rise in strong opposition to this amendment and i'm actually quite surprised that we find ourselves here tonight attempting to overturn the national park service recent policy changes to stop allowing the confederate flag to be displayed or sold in national parks. mr. chairman, just yesterday this house passed an amendment -- passed amendment after amendment supporting the removal of the symbol of racism

from our national parks, which are visited every day by americans and foreign visitors of every race. we have read about the divisive tactics happening in the south carolina state house as they debate the removal of the confederate flag. after the murder of nine black parishioners. i never thought that the u.s. house of representatives would join those who would want to see this flag flown by passing an amendment to ensure the continuing flying of the confederate flag. i strongly urge every member to stand with the citizens of all races and to remove this symbol of hatred from our national park service. and with that i reserve the

balance of my time. the chair: the gentlelady reserves the balance of her time. the gentleman from california is recognized. mr. calvert: i continue to reserve. the chair: the gentleman reserves. the gentlelady from minnesota is recognized. ms. mccollum: mr. chair i have the right to close. so i reserve my time until i close. the chair: the gentlelady reserves. the gentleman from california is recognized. the gentleman from california wish to reserve? mr. calvert: i urge adoption of the amendment and i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentlelady from minnesota is recognized. ms. mccollum: i want to restate on june 25 what the national park service director when he requested that confederate flag sales be removed from the national park book stores and gift shops, he also followed a decision by several large national retailers, wal-mart amazon and sears, to stop selling items with confederate flags on them. and i agreed with these decisions and i commend those

for their prompt action. while in certain and very limited circumstances it might be appropriate in a national park to display the image of the confederate flag in a historical content, and i say that as a social studies teacher, the display or sale of confederate flags is inappropriate and divisive and i strongly oppose this amendment, which is an attempt to negate amendments which were approved yesterday without any opposition to limit the displaying of the confederate flag. and so we should make sure that we uphold what this house stood for yesterday. which is to say no to racism, which is to say no to hate speech. with that i yield back. the chair: the gentlelady yields back the balance of her time. the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from california. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. ms. mccollum: mr. chair. i request a recorded vote.

the chair: pursuant to clause 6 of rule 18 further proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from california will be postponed. the clerk will read. the clerk will suspend. for what purpose does the gentlelady from minnesota wish to be recognized? ms. mccollum: mr. chair, i move to strike the last word. the chair: the gentlelady is recognized for five minutes. ms. mccollum: as we prepare to finish consideration of h.r. 2822, i want to take this opportunity to congratulate my subcommittee chairman, ken calvert, from getting this bill to this point. it has not been an easy process. as we just realized a few moments ago. we've had to consider nearly twice as many amendments as any other appropriations bill taken up in the house this year.

and while i have not agreed with a considerable number of the amendments that have been made to the bill, i do appreciate the chairman. and that we have been able to disagree when necessary without being disagreeble. my working relationship with chairman calvert has been first-rate. i appreciate the hard work and effort he's put into the bill and let me also express my sincere thanks to the committee staff on both sides of the aisle, as well as the personal staff in both of our respective offices for their work on the bill. they put in long hours to smooth away for consideration of this bill and i appreciate their efforts. just a minute, please. once again i want to say that we've had a good working relationship, mr. chairman, but i cannot hide my surprise and my outrage that we find ourselves here tonight attempting to overturn the

national park service's recent policy change to stop allowing the confederate flag to be displayed or sold at our national parks. with that i would yield to the chairman. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. mr. calvert: i want to say that i enjode and continue to enjoy -- enjoyed and continue to enjoy working with the gentlelady as we move this process forward and i appreciate your courtesy and kindness. we'll continue to work this process as we move ahead. thank you. ms. mccollum: thank you. i yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentlelady yields back the balance of her time. the clerk will read. the clerk: page 133, line 1, this act may be cited as the department of interior, environmental and -- environment and related agencies appropriations act, 2016. the chair: for what purpose does the gentleman from california seek reck fligs? mr. calvert: i move that -- recognition? mr. calvert: i move that the committee do now rise. the chair: the question is on the motion that the committee rise. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the ayes have it.

the motion is adopted. accordingly, the committee rises. the speaker pro tempore: mr. chairman. the chair: mr. speaker, the committee of the whole house on the state of the union, having had under consideration h.r. 2822 directs me to report that it has come to no resolution thereon. the speaker pro tempore: the chair of the committee of the whole house on the state of the union reports that the committee has had under consideration h.r. 2822 and has come to no resolution thereon.

the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from florida seek recognition? >> i ask unanimous consent that in the engrossment of h.r. 5, the clerk be authorized to correct section numbers, section headings, cross references punctuation and indentation and to make any other technical and conforming change necessary to reflect the actions of the house. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. the chair lays before the house the following personal request.

without objection, the request -- without objection, the request is granted. under the speaker's announced policy of january 6, 2015, the gentlewoman from florida, ms. ros-lehtinen, is recognized for 60 minutes as the designee of the majority leader. ms. ros-lehtinen: thank you, mr. speaker. i would like to thank all of my colleagues who are here tonight at this late hour to talk about the negotiations that are taking place in vienna on the nuclear deal with iran. and we have a number of distinguished speakers tonight who will address this looming

topic that is of great urgency. let me begin with mr. johnson of ohio. and i yield him however much time he may consume. but i ask unanimous consent, mr. speaker, that all members may have five legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous materials on the topic of our special order. so i'd be glad to yield to mr. johnson for however much time he would like to consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. johnson: i thank my colleague for yielding and thank you, mr. speaker. you know trusting that iran, the world's largest state sponsor of terrorism, has suddenly had a change of heart in its decades'-long quest to obtain a nuclear weapon is just simply naive at best. legislation that was signed into law in may would allow congress to review and vote on any deal that the administration makes with iran. those i represent believe

congress should have the final say on any deal and i couldn't agree more. america's national security, as well as global security, will be jeopardized if the administration gets this wrong. we must ensure it doesn't. the stakes are simply too high. additionally, if iran is actually serious about re-engaging with the global community, they cannot continue to hold american citizens as political prisoners. or harass and provoke u.s. navy ships in international waters. iran should stop provoking direct military confrontation, immediately release all detained u.s. citizens and provide any information it possesses regarding any u.s. citizens that have disappeared within its borders. the fact that the iranian regime won't even do these basic actions indicates to me that counting on them to honor commitments they make around a negotiating table can't be

taken seriously. with that i yield back the balance of my time. ms. ros-lehtinen: thank you very much, mr. johnson. i think you highlighted in just a minute and a half the basic problems that we have with dealing with a rogue regime like iran, that cannot be trusted, that has not been dealing with this in a straight manner. thank you very much for your leadership on this issue. mr. speaker, at this time i'd like to yield such time as he may consume to mr. davis of illinois. to address this threat as well. mr. davis: mr. speaker, i rise today to voice my concerns over the potential deal regarding iran's nuclear program and i stand here thanking my colleague from the great state of florida for putting this special order together on such a very important issue. and it's such a timely issue. i want to read a quote. they will freeze and then dismantle their nuclear program . our other allies will be better protected. the entire world will be safer

as we slow the spread of nuclear weapons. the united states and international inspectors will carefully monitor them to make sure it keeps its commitments. sound familiar, mr. speaker? that's what president clinton told the american people about the north korea nuclear deal in 1994. and today north korea has anywhere from 10 to 20 nuclear weapons in their arsenal and that number is expected to grow to 50 in the next five years. now we're hearing the same type of posturing from this administration about the iran negotiations. the united states seems destined to repeat history unwilling to hold their ground and granting an iran an extension after extension and concession after concession. as a strong supporter of increasing sanctions against iran, which brought iran to the negotiating table in the first place, it's commonsense that additional sanctions could even put more pressure on them when they are already hurting from

the low price of their most prized commodity, oil. look, nobody believes iran when they say their nuclear infrastructure's in place for peaceful purposes. if that were the case, they'd have no need to enrich uranium past 3.5%. iran has a record filled with lies deceit, sponsored terrorism, human rights violations and the list goes on and on. just as north korea couldn't be trusted two decades ago, neither should iran today. mr. speaker, a nuclear iran is not only a grave danger to american interests, but to israel our strongest ally in the middle east. and our many allies throughout the world. of course the world would be a much safer place if iran were to neutralize their nuclear production facilities, if they would allow inspections at any time if they would disclose all military implications of its nuclear program or if iran were to demonstrate a better record on human rights.

but unfortunately these are just what if's that have failed to happen today and i'm afraid will never happen under this proposed deal. mr. speaker, this is a bad deal and i yield back the balance of my time. . ms. ros-lehtinen: more we know about this deal this is a week, dangerous bad deal. thanks for sharing your insight. and i yield to mr. lance of new jersey who has long been speaking about the dangers of a nuclear iran. mr. lance: thank you, mr. speaker. and i thank the distinguished gentlelady from florida regarding the foreign policy of this country and her continued expertise that is a benefit to the entire nation.

those of us in congress will be able to scrutinize an agreement between the iran and united states and iran's nuclear weapons program. congress will debate and consider the administration's proposal and i will be looking to ensure that any agreement achieves the goal that iran will never get nuclear weapons. a nuclear iran would change its international dynamic, put the united states and our allies, including israel, in extreme peril. the balance of power in the world would slip away from those who would give blood while awarding those. the principle of peace through deterrence would be compromise

and the nonnuclear treaty would be a history and require their own nuclear weapon. nuclear arms race would be an element of unpredictability in the world's most volatile region. i do not oppose any agreement. i oppose a bad agreement. sanctions brought iran to the table and sanctions will keep iran there and any deal that surrenderers that leverageage in the way of taking iran's word is not an greem. the state sponsors of the fror will prove to be not honest. trust but verify.

that was true then and it is certainly few regarding iran. a successful nuclear agreement must include concessions thus to dismantle its regime and must be included in any agreement. the world will be watching, the entire world, not only the 15 mill i don't know people of this country but the member in the middle east which is extremely dangerous. this matter of great consequence will have far reaching gratification and certainly i hope that the president and the secretary of state and the administration will heed the concerns that exists here in congress, bipartisan concerns and the president signed the

legislation that reached his desk and that was an expression of the will of the american people through elected representatives here and in the other house of congress. overwhelming in its nature ar and certainly i hope the president and the secretary of staret and the administration will recognize the american people are deeply concerned about what appears to be the parameters of an agreement. there is still time to reach a better agreement. and let me repeat, no agreement is superior to a bad agreement as prime minister netanyahu has stated in this chamber this spring. i hope that iran will come meaningfully to the table.

i hope that iran will cease its terrorist fifths across the globe and i hope iran will recognize if it were to achieve nuclear weapons it will be the beginning of a recognition of un senator inhofe: tended con see quenses. and a country that believes in democracy. israel terrible consequences for saudi arabia and egypt and places beyond that and we want to live in peace with the iranian people. the iran wan people are a great people, a well-educated people and i hope the people of iran recognize it is not in their best interest. i commend with every breath i

take the soup esh breath i take with the gentlelady. and i join with her and with others this evening to caution that we must ensure a strong agreement and if that is not possible, then no agreement at all. i yield back. ms. ros-lehtinen: may it be so, from your words to god's ears may we get this strong deal that can truly be verified. i yield to my florida colleague a man with whom i have had the honor of talking about issue, the danger of iran for the stability of the world and for the united states. so thank you, for your leadership.

>> i thank for your leadership and really on all issues having to deal with foreign relations. she has set the example and a very high bar for all of us who skemb on this chamber. mr. curbelo: just how serious the security threat is. as my colleagues have expressed here, iran can never attain nuclear capability. any deal reached must ensure that the iranian regular yeem dismantles its nuclear infrastructure. it is critical that the administration be unyielding. additional considerations are not an option.

a weak deal to obtain nuclear weapons is not good for the united states or its allies especially israel. it isn't good for the entire world. the p hifere 5 plus 1 took place, the leeder supported ham as' attacks from gadsa and technology was being used to attack israel and called for all palestinians in the west bank to join gaza in an armed attack. we cannot continue to view iran's program as existing in a vacuum. it would be irresponsible to ignore the pursuit of ballistic

missiles and its failure to comply. moving forward, several things must be present in an unacceptable deal including a robust regime and resolution of issues of past and present concerns. only then could a deal couldn't then be considered to be as acceptable. it could be difficult to implement and not in the best interest of the united states. we must protect the infrastructures than rely on tactics that the iran yab regime does not comply. when it comes to an agreement with iran, we need to ask ourselveses, does it prevent from keeping the united states

safe. anything other than that is totally is unacceptable. and the central question here is what kind of a world do we want to live in. what kind of a world do we want to live in. a world in which the most radical terrorist regime acquires nuclear weapons, whether two years, five years 10 years or 15 years is totally acceptable. this is a government that has pledged to ine light. the country that stands with us no matter what. some in this administration have unjustly chris sized prime minister netanyahu for what? for his country to survoif and

his 3e78 to live in peace and security. this is the same government when the eye tolla sint their, he pledged that together with cuba's dictators, they would bring the united states to its knees. i know my colleagues recall that. what kind of a world do we want to live in. it is not too late to walk away from this table and tell them that they will never acquire nuclear weapons as long as the united states is the greatest superpower in the world and a greatest beacon in the world. i thank my colleagues for this special opportunity to highlight an issue that is of vital importance to the entire nation.

ms. ros-lehtinen: you have been a leader in this fight and you should bring up th clown, and he has been replaced. but the international community likes to call him the moderate lieder and the death to america deeth toial chants continue, just as they continued during could main a. whether it's a moderate supreme leader they call the shots. nothing in iran has changed and calling for the destruction of our allies. and with that mr. speaker, i yield as much time as he may consume to the the gentleman from georgia, mr. collins.

mr. collins: you have stepped up and been a voice. and because for a moment, i want to stop here and put things in perspective and it has been said over and over. a bad deal is worst than no deal. and a deal to the u.s. should be one in which iran is no longer a nuclear threat. at within point did we forget this? iranian nuclear, 20 years. mr. president you got to listen to what you are saying. netanyahu explained to president obama to the joint comprehensive union.

threatens the state of the state of israel. it fails to protect the and that is why i voted no i voted on the iran nuclear review act. i'm not in zreelt that congress providing oversight but a horrible deal is something that congress and will not support any doom that will support iran the opportunity to develop a nuclear weapon. we know that it calls for the details announced in detail the potential for a detail. iran will be able to maintain over 6,000 centrifuges. 5,000 of those will continue to enrich uranium. 5,000. what part of not having a

nuclear iran. and this is a wonderful snapback provision. they shouldn't have been in the process. why are we going to talk about that and the sanctions should stay. we are talking about snap back provisions. . . if they don't meet the provisions, things will snap back. why do we believe they're going to keep any commitment? this is just an amazing thought to me. it took several years of u.s. pressing for our european allies before they started seriously enforcing u.n. sanctions, security council sanctions currently in place. while a u.s. president can unilaterally reinstate the u.n. has to receive support from all