over the past five years. large outbreaks of disease tied to tainted food are up over the past five years. the cdc tallies 120, they can be letahl. legal -- the house is gaveling in for their legislative session. thanks for watching. oceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.] the speaker pro tempore: the house will be in order. the chair lays before the house a communication from the speaker. the clerk: the speaker's rooms, washington, d.c., november 4, 2015. i hereby appoint the honorable glen thompson to act as speaker pro tempore on this day. signed, paul d. ryan, speaker of the house of representatives. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the order of the house of january , 2015, the chair will now recognize members from lists submitted by the majority and minority leaders for morning hour debate. the chair will alternate recognition between the parties with each party limited to one hour and each member other than the majority and minority leaders and minority whip limited to five minutes.

but in no event shall debate continue beyond 11:50 a.m. the chair now recognizes the gentleman from illinois, mr. gutierrez, for five minutes. mr. gutierrez: i would like to congratulate the house of representatives, the republican conference, and my friend, paul ryan, for his election to be speaker of the housement those on the other side of the aisle are lucky to have him. it is sad that he has to promise members of his conference in writing to not address a national issue on behalf of the american people. he has to swear that he would not allow a vote on immigration reform as long as president obama is in office. the new speaker has to promise to put party unity ahead of national public policy to be elected speaker. one of my colleagues from alabama who is so vehement in his opposition to immigration came to the floor last week to read the pledge into the across-the-board. the congress that did --

congressional record. the congress that did nothing will continue to do nothing. it's really stunning. you must promise to do nothing in order to be speaker. -- speak of the house of representatives. maybe those on the other side of the aisle will come up with a new oath of office for leadership position. raise your right hand and repeat after me, they'll say, will i swear i will not let anything happen on my watch. i will faith fi uphold and defend the principles of do-nothing congress and pledge allegiance to the do nothingness for which it stands. i will ignore our cries for help no matter how loud for the american people. will i not let public policy get in the way of party politics. and that party unity is more important than the united states of america, so help me tea party. why would one faction within the republican party demand a promise from the new speaker that he not bring up immigration legislation to the floor? because the opponents of immigration and immigration reform, they must get from the

speaker that the majority not rule in the house of representatives because the opponents of immigration know they are actually the minority. this is a telling moment for the republican party and it is not confined to immigration. the majority of the country supports planned parenthood continuing to provide basic health he services and contraception to women. but playing to a smaller segment of their base, republicans threatened to close down the government in order to block its funding. they want the minority to rule and they want the tail to wag the dog. in the environment of scientific evidence that human beings caused climate change, what is the republican response? do nothing, it's a liberal hoax, they say. we can buy another beach house, farther inland, when the beach house is, well, farther inland. members on the other side of the aisle celebrate the antics of a county clerk who refuses to follow the law and do her job. which includes issuing marriage licenses to two men or two women who want to spend their lives together.

maybe house republicans think they are standing on principle, but the majority of the country has been fighting against exclusion, second class treatment, and bigotry for decades. the rest of us have embraced equality with support voting rights, the same pay for the same work, and police in communities that protect and serve not just stop and frisk. here in congress, as we saw last week with the discharge petition to preserve the export-import bank, some things the majority can break the gridlock of this minority and take action. as we saw last week on the bipartisan budget and debt ceiling vote, sometimes republican leaders take action for the good of the country. despite the calls from the do-nothing caucus, to do nothing. all these matters do nothingness comes with a cost. it's the cost of deported immigrants and businesses that cannot hire people legally. of women who are denied lifesaving health screenings, honoring families as first class citizens no matter who has them. a cleaner planet, and safer

neighborhood. but there is a political cost as well. a colleague from south carolina summed it up in the documentary "immigration battle" on pbs frontline, which i also appeared in. addressing a group of republican voters in his district, congressman mulvaney says, and i want to quote, the congressman said, at some point we are going to have to figure out if you take the entire african-american community and write them off, take the entire hispanic community and write them off, take the entire libertarian community and write them off, the gay community and write them off, what's left? about 38% of the country. the congressman concludes by saying, you cannot win with 38% of the country. you want to know something? he's right. we know from the environment, from the fight for marriage equality, the fight for civil rights, the fight to modernize our immigration system that taking no action is precisely the problem. i think the new speaker understands this and someday i hope my colleagues on the other side of the aisle agree with him and let the majority rule

in the people's house. the speaker pro tempore: the chair recognizes from pennsylvania, mr. thompson, for five minutes. mr. thompson: thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, today i rise to recognize the efforts in pennsylvania and the pennsylvania fifth congressional district to reintroduce the american chestnut tree. before the 1900's the american chestnut was the dominant tree in the eastern united states. my home state of pennsylvania, it comprised roughly 25% of all hardwoods. blight struck these trees beginning in 1904, and by 1950 the american chestnut was nearly wiped out of our forests. mr. speaker, efforts over the past several years have focused on reintroducing this hardwood, the american chestnut, by making it more resilient to blight. i'm proud to say reintroduction

efforts are taking place at several sites in centre county, deloin county, and elk county. this past week the pennsylvania state university's chapter of the american chestnut foundation held its annual meeting. outlining the worker of researchers along with distributions of volunteers to the reintroduction of the american chestnut. as chairman of the house agriculture subcommittee on conservation and forestry, i commend those advocates for their dedication, their research, their efforts to the reintroduction of this species and i look forward to lending my support to bringing the american chestnut back. thank you, mr. speaker. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the chair recognizes the gentleman from illinois, mr. quigley, for five minutes. mr. quigley: thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, john muir, a naturalist, author, and environmental philosopher once said, when we try to pick out anything by itself, we find it hitched to everything else in the universe. this couldn't be truer when it

comes to the effects climate change is having on the bio diversity of our planet. we can't solve the climate change crisis without realizing how interconnected its impacts truly are. the intergovernmental panel on climate change has predicted, assuming that current trends and burning fossil fuel continue, by the year 2100, the surface of the earth will warm on an average of six degrees celsius. that kind of fonings for rapid and lasting climate warming poses a significant challenge for biodiversity conservation. it may seem obvious, but the places that plants and animals exist are limited by factors such as sunlight, precipitation, and temperature. a polar bear can't exist in brazil, just as a lion can't exist in antarctica. you won't find palm trees in greenland, just like you won't find pine trees in arbegin tina . -- argentina. as climate changes, the abundance of animals will also

change. climate change alone is threatened to -- is expected to threaten animals by the year 2025. it will surpass habitat loss as the biggest threat to life on land. because of climate change, birds lay eggs earlier in the year. plants bloom earlier. and mammals come out of hibernation sooner. these changes may sound insignificant but they drastically impact the lifecycle of the population and any species that rely on it. we are littlerlyly -- literally alterly the timeline. they need to plan animal species, i urge them to consider the impacts. 12 plant species provide approximately 75% of our total food supply. what is not generally appreciated is that these relatively few species depend on hundreds and thousands of other species for their productivity. our food supply is not only

based on the food we eat but insects and birds that pollenate crop flowers and feed on crop pests. more than 80% of the 26 crops grown in the european union, depend on insect pollenators. a lack of biodiversity can lead to a decreased ability to produce medicine as key plants are lost to extinction. without specific plants such as grasses and trees that evolve to resist the spread of wildfires or mitigate the impacts of flooding, we are losing a key shield in protecting against natural disasters. these are nature's defenders and we are losing them. in my own backyard, these climate changes are expected to impact regional bio diversity in a variety of direct and incorrect ways. the chicago wilderness, which expands across illinois, indiana, wisconsin, and michigan will likely experience changes in the timing of natural events such as blooming, migration, and the onset of hiberation.

-- hibernation. it could also cause the loss of habitat and beakological communities due to different responses to climate change. these impacts are not limited to our land, plants, and animals. changes in biodiversity will have significant impacts on our waterways as well. in the great lakes, native plant an animal species will differ widely in their responses. wetlands animal communities are continually adapting to changing water levels. however, the extreme changes we see as a result of climate change, such as droughts and flooding, create more unstable environments for species. protecting our biodiversity does more than save plants and animals. it protects agriculture, medicine, and the overall safety of our communities. from the beginning of time, nature has fed us, cheered us, and protected us. now it is our turn. if we let one piece fail, we are putting the entire system at risk. we need to protect plant and

animal species from an ever-changing climate if we want to secure a healthy and prosperous future for our children. i urge my colleagues to stop ignoring the science and support federal legislation that acts on climate change and addresses these grave bilogical threats. thank you. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the chair recognizes the gentleman from virginia, mr. forbes, for five minutes. mr. forbes: thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, today as i stand on this great floor, a place that we call the people's house, i look across and there is a full plaque of moses, the great lawgiver. while he may not be staring me in the eye, he stairs every speaker who stands where you stand today directly in the eye. and right above you there is our national motto, that's even above the flag of the united states, that says, in god we

trust. and i come here this morning because in the state of washington in a school district he they take a different interpretation of that motto. you see, they believe there that you can trust in god as long as you don't trust too much. that you can be grateful to that god, as long as you are not too grateful. because last week they put on administrative leave a young football coach, coach joe kennedy, not because he molested a child, not because he he wasn't a winning football coach, not even because he didn't have good service, because everyone agreed he had had exemplary service for the last eight years, but the reason was simply because he dared to offer a personal private prayer at the conclusion of a football game thanking god for protecting his players and the players on the other football team. now, the school district is

very noble because they say coach kennedy can exercise his faith even while on duty as long as no one else can see it. mr. speaker, as the school district will cite case they do like so many anti-faith groups do, they cite the cases, just those cases don't apply to the facts in this particular situation at all. see this coach is not asking to pray with students at a mandatory pregame meeting. he's asking for his freedom to quietly and personally offer prayer of thanks for his team and the safety of his players after the game is over and the players are heading to greet their families and friends in the stands. as a member of congress, my faith is not some kind of coat that i take off when i walk into the capitol building to perform my legislative duties. and as a coach, coach kennedy's faith is not something he sheds when he walks on to the field. the constitution doesn't require you to be sequestered in a private room out of sight and earshot to offer a prayer. it protects the rights of an

individual to visibly express his or her faith just like it protects the rights of a muslim teacher to wear her head scar or jewish teacher to wear his yarmulke. mr. speaker, that's why i rise today because i hope all across this country americans will stand with coach kennedy as we do today and in so doing send a message to the school district in the state of washington that when they trample on even one young football coach's religious liberty and religious freedom, they trample on the religious freedom and the religious liberty of all of us. with that, mr. speaker, i yield back. . the speaker pro tempore: the chair recognizes the gentlewoman from connecticut, ms. esty, for five minutes. ms. esty: thank you, mr. speaker. i rise today to celebrate and reflect on the life of a great

man, john cushingesty jr., an education leader, a reformer, a man of threct, whitt and joy intellect, wit and joy and he was the oldest of four boys. he was a ham radio operator, learned languages, a gifted student, a lover of education and words. and he lived a life devoted to excellence in education. he was committed to education opportunity although he attended some of the most elite private schools in the country, but as a leader of those schools, he pushed them into the modern era. in the air force during the korean war era, he taught flight nurses, hundreds at a time, not exactly tough duty, but as a young dean at apple hearst college, i learned his commitment to equal opportunity for all students from none

other than my physician in the 1990's, a man named marshall holly, an african-american scholarship student in the 1950's, one of three students in his college. he got in trouble for having told off a professor, a rofessor who he believed to be racist. he risked losing his scholarship when he received a failing grade. he went to see my dean. he said, you were unwise to tell him off before you got your final grade. i will fix your grade but you have to be wiser in the future. as head master of the task school in my district, watertown, connecticut, in the 1960's a tumultuous time, john esty led as an education leader but he also led in the cause of what at the time was quaintly called co-education.

much over the objection of many alumni, some of the present students and faculty, he pushed for co-education, successfully so, and did he it because he knew that education opportunity and excellence could only happen when opportunities were provided for young women as well as young men. as a trustee of apple hearst college, his alma mater, he successfully fought for that institution to become co-education. over the objection of among others his own father. as a reformer, as the head of the national association of independent schools, he helped create a program called a better chance. that took his commitment to equal opportunity for young men and women of disadvantaged backgrounds to lead to a national effort and scholarship programs around this country. one of those examples of a better chance scholars is governor duvall patrick of

massachusetts who credits his time as a better chance scholar having transformed his life from the south side of chicago to become one of this country's leaders. similar scholarships also were adopted in other schools around the country, including one school in hawaii whose scholarship student, barack obama, graduated in 1979. my father-in-law devoted his life to excellence in education, but he lived the life as well. not only did he care about excellent education in private schools but he fought for it in public schools. he served on the elected board of education in his town of concord, massachusetts, and all four of his sons went to public schools. e was a man of merriment and joy. he loved learning. we first met in 1978 and bonded over an argument over the correct pronunciation of a word.

in classic john esty style, he went to the dictionary that was in the dining room. we looked up the word. i happened to be right. i don't remember the word. he doesn't either. but i pronounced it correctly and he knew that we had bonded for life. he loved children, especially his grandchildren. he told them amazing stories, often getting them so worked up they wouldn't go to bed. and jimmy bond, the young james bond stories. john, you will be loved and missed by kathryn esty, your wife of 60 years, all four of your sons, my husband, dan, my brother-in-law, paul, and his wife, my brother-in-law, ben, and his wife, raquel. my brother-in-law, jed and his wife andrea. the many grandchildren, sarah, thomas, jonathan, mark, julie, victor, jonah, maya, aileya and asher. he shared your love of life, of

music, of stories, of education and of making a difference with all of us. you lived a full 87 years, a committed servant of this great country, a believer in educational opportunity and a gift for joy. you will be greatly missed. thank you and god speed, john esty. the speaker pro tempore: the chair recognizes the gentleman from texas, mr. poe, for five minutes. mr. poe: mr. speaker, recently a hollywood filmmaker joined protesters and marched in an anti-police rally in new york city. he referred to peace officers as murderers. his hateful rhetoric called for violence against law enforcement saying, i have a call -- i have to call a murderer a murderer, and i have to call a murder a murder, adding that he is on the side of the ones who confront and are confronted by police.

his comments encourage mischief and crimes against peace officers. for the haters to justify lawlessness in response to perceived lawless acts by the police is idiotic. bad cops like bad citizens should face a judge in a court of law. communities cannot be burned, looted by cop haters because some police officer allegedly committed a crime. nor can crimes against police be encouraged, tolerated or justified because some other officers accused of doing something improper. otherwise there's mob rule. the filmmaker whose occupation is dedicated to the fake, the false and to fiction make -- made comments one week after new york city lost one of its finest. officer randolph holder was gunned down, really assassinated, by a ruthless outlaw and he was recently buried. the filmmaker's self-righteous indignation toward law enforcement only fuels the fire

on the war on police. it promotes anarchy, chaos and lawlessness. the -- 31 police officers were killed in the line of duty this year. 31 officers who gave their life and their blood to protect and serve the rest of us. cop haters ought to be ashamed. the new york police union has called for a boycott of the hollywood filmmaker's film which interesting enough are riddled with extreme violence, racist remarks and more hate toward police. it's ironic, mr. speaker, that society expects police officers to protect them but they will be the first to criticize officers for doing their job. officers defend the thin blue line between law and the lawless. their job is dangerous, and every day peace officers run toward chaos that everyone else is running away from. mr. speaker, in my past life i was a criminal court judge and a prosecutor in houston, texas. for 30 years i met peace

officers from all over the country. some of those officers i met were later killed. i know peace officers from new york city, and after we get through the communication barrier, as churchill said, we're separated by common language, i generally find them to be remarkable people who do dirty work for society. those peace officers in new york are constantly on the job rooting out the evil in new york city while protecting and serving new yorkers. they go into the dark areas to arrest those who would do harm to others. they have a thankless job that most people in america would never do. mr. speaker, this isn't hollywood. this is real life where situations can turn violent in an instant. there's no fake blood, makeup or actors. these lives are real. anti-police comments like these from hollywood should be looked at for really what they are, it's a commercial by the hollywood film crowd to make money off of films that preach

hate and violence by pandering to police haters. mr. speaker, peace officers wear the badge or shield or star over their heart. it's symbolic by where it's placed, as a protector from the evils that are committed in our society by protecting the rest of us. they stand between us and those that would do us harm. when i was a kid back in texas, my dad and i went to a parade in a small town called temple. as the parade was going by my dad noticed i was looking at a person who was standing on the corner. he wasn't in the parade. he was watching what was taking place. it was a local temple police officer. back in the days they didn't have uniforms. they wore a white shirt, a cowboy hat and sometimes jeans. my dad commented at that time, he said if you're ever in trouble, if you ever need help, go to the man or woman that

wears the badge because they're a cut above the rest of us. that statement was true then and it's still true today. mr. speaker, peace officers are a cut above the rest of us and that's just the way it is. i'll yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the chair recognizes the gentlewoman from california, ms. sanchez, for five minutes. ms. sanchez: thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, i rise today to honor all the men and women who have courageously served this country and to continue to sacrifice in order to preserve the values and the freedoms of our great nation. in 1919, president wilson spoke the following words as he commemorated armistice day, better known to us all as veterans day for the very first time. to us in america, the reflection of armistice day will be filled with solemn

pride and the heroism of those who died in this country's service and with gratitude for the victory. now, of course, that was 1919 and it was a day when americans reflected on the lives which were lost during world war i. world war i, the war to end all wars. however, then came world war ii, america's engagement in korea, and congress voted to redesignate november 11 as veterans day in honor of all our veterans from all our wars and today, of course, there are over 1.4 million men and women in active duty, many of whom have completed multiple deployments in areas of the wars where there is mass chaos, which is foreign to many of our young service members. unfortunately, these service members bring this chaos home, both physically and mentally. here are some staggering numbers from a recent report by the university of southern california.

over 2/3 of today's veterans report difficulties adjusting to civilian life. nearly 8-10 service members leave the military without a job lined up. and in the area i represent in orange county, nearly a quarter of the veterans with jobs are earning at or below the poverty level. and these numbers quite frankly are very unacceptable. 2014, an estimate of almost 50,000 veterans were living in shelters or in streets or other places not dig nant of the human population. this is 11% of the adult homeless population. and according to the numbers of studies, both male and female veterans are more likely to be homeless than their nonveteran counterparts. so how does that make sense? these men and women are brave, they're skilled, they're critical thinkers, they're dedicated, they're loyal, they love their country.

so what's gone wrong? we must not only commit to figuring out how we're failing these young men and women but once we do, we have to be held responsible for providing the necessary resources to help them succeed outside of the military. i understand this is a significant commitment at a time of tight budgets and the changing nature of war and that there's no one size fits all for this solution. for california, for example, there are 1.8 million veterans. we make up 8% of the total u.s. veteran population, and according to the state of california, california anticipates receiving an additional 30,000 discharged members of the armed services each year for the next several years. and we have to be ready. we have to be ready for those 30,000 veterans coming along and also with the 1.8 million who already exist in california. as these members have served

our country so must we serve them. and according to the veterans administration, there are 22 sue sides a day -- suicides a day of our veterans. we must again look at the causes of that staggering number. we identified posttraumatic stress disorder, traumatic brain injury, many triggers for suicide, etc., but we got to do better. 20% of new recruits will also be women. 15% of the 14 million active duty forces are currently women, and over 280,000 women have served in iraq and afghanistan. we have to do different things for women veterans because it's not the same as the needs of the men veterans. . to ensure all veterans receive medical assistance in a timely manner. lastly, we must protect what we fought hard for them. the education when they return

back. we must ensure that military educational benefits do not go to waste. next wednesday, once again, we celebrate veterans day, and i urge my colleagues to work with me to ensure that we can be proud in the services and the help that we give our veterans just as they have been proud to serve all of us. god bless. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the chair recognizes the gentleman from kansas, mr. pompeo, for five minutes. mr. pompeo: thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, just a little over 100 days ago the obama administration completed an agreement with iran on its nuclear program. i strongly opposed the joint plan of action all through its consideration in congress and the congress never approved the deal. nothing since those 100 days have now passed has led me to have any different view of the

impact of that deal on the united states of america. and yet the president appears prepared to continue to implement the deal on its terms at least as he understands it. and while media attention may have shifted away to other things, it is incumbent upon this body, the united states congress, to remain vigilant and ensure that america's vital national security interests are not damaged beyond repair in the execution of the iran deal. indeed, in those 100 days it's become clear that this deal is so badly conceived that america's position so muddled and the text so poorly drafted that the parties cannot even agree what they executed 100 days ago. for example, secretary kerry, the principal negotiator of the deal on behalf of the united states and the p-5 plus one, said on july 23, in front of the house foreign affairs committee, quote, we will not violate the jcpoa if we use our authorities to impose sanctions on iran for terrorism.

human rights, missiles, or any other nonnuclear reason. but on october 21, iran's supreme leader in a letter to president row hani ostensibly approving the jcpoa said, quote, throughout the eight year period any imposition of sanctions at any level and under any pretext, including repetitive and fabricated pretext of terrorism and human rights, on the part of any of the countries involved in negotiation will constitute a violation of the jcpoa. end of quote. members of congress and the american people were promised repeatedly that this deal was only about iran's nuclear program. that america's ability to implement sanctions based on iran's continued terrorism or ballistic missile ambitions or other nonnuclear ambitions would not be impeded. now it appears the only man in iran whose interpretation matters, the identifya toll la khomeini, believes 100% the

reverse of that. this isn't about where you put a semicolon or come ma, this goes to -- comma, this goes to the very part of the deal between the p-5 plus one and the iranian republic. iran's refusal to a-- abide by the written terms, seems an irresolvable conflict on the key issue and congress must lead. congress must stand ready and willing to combat a regime who continues to view america as the great satan and been emboldened by this deal. rather than moderate, the regime has continued to flout u.n. resolutions, kidnap more americans, and stepped up its efforts to dominate the region. here's several examples. on july 24, 10 days after the jcpoa announced, iran's chief exporter of terrorism traveled to moscow in direct violation of u.n. security council resolution. in september, it was reported that anticipation of sanctions relief, the iran regime has significantly increased funding

for terrorist groups, lebanese hezbollah, and hamas. two organization that is have american blood on their hands. there is no doubt these groups have turned their eyes to the west and israel as they seek to grow their deadly and destabilizing force in the middle east with no moderation after they signed this deal. on the 10th of october, iran successfully test fired the next generation ballistic missile, capable of hitting israel in clear violation of u.n. security council resolution. and last week the regime kidnapped another american citizen without justification. who joins a pastor, a mean reason in unjust captivity in iran. there is every reason to believe there will be more. iran has firmly set itself against american interest in syria as well. a ground force. over 2,000 iranian forces tibs to fight against american interests in syria. supporting the dictator, assad,

who our president has said must go. came to the floor today because it is the 36th anniversary of the iranian hostage crisis back in 1979. anyone who had hoped that the iran deal with the united states would portend a new era of openness between iran and the united states has been disappointed, jolted beyond all imagination in the past 100 days. the iranian regime clearly intends to test our will here in congress. our willingness to defend america's interest by pushing the limits of the jcpoa and beyond. iran also intends to intensify its conflicts with the west. it has new legitimacy, $150 billion. we, congress, has a duty not to let the passage of time, the loss of media interest, and the difficulty of the task prevent us from protecting america's interest against iran's aggression, even as we must battle against our own president. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the

gentleman's time has expired. the chair recognizes gentleman from pennsylvania, mr. cost tell heo, for five minutes. -- costello, for five minutes. mr. costello: thank you, madam speaker. as we look forward to celebrating veterans day on november 11, let me just thank every man and woman serving in our military, every veteran, for your service to our country. you represent and reflect the very best in our country's values and ideals. this month we also celebrate national family caregiver month. caregivers play a vital role, providing care and a sense of comfort and peace at trying times for americans all over our country. while we recognize all caregivers, i rise today to specifically speak about individuals who dedicate their livelihood, love, and support to improving our veterans' quality of life. caregivers of veterans assist with personal care needs and support their daily activities, including mental and physical therapies, managing of

finances, transportation, and other essential services. other essential duties, i should say. in 2010, congress passed the caregivers and veterans help services act, marking the needed investment in supporting the family caregivers of our veterans by creating the v.a. caregiver support program. this law while beneficial limits eligibility of the program to post-9/11 veterans. i believe we should not limit the care of a veteran based on their period of service but instead make the program accessible to veterans of all service areas. particularly our elderly veterans and their caregivers who presently do not have the benefit. in an effort to open the program to all veterans, i joined congresswoman elizabeth esty to introduce the care for all veterans act, h.r. 2894. earlier this year i attended a town hall at the southeastern

veterans center where a vietnam war veteran asked me why his caregiver could not have access to the support provided by the v.a. caregiver support program. i want to thank that veteran for raising this issue. and on behalf of the estimated 214,000 pre--9/11 veterans in pennsylvania, including 11,000 in my district alone, and veterans across this country, i introduced the care for all veterans act with congresswoman esty. this legislation is a meaningful step to ensure our veterans receive the quality of care they need in the comfort of their own home from their loved one. h.r. 2894 responsibly grows the program to create an equitable system for our nation's veterans and provide additional assistance to primary family caregivers of eligible pre--9/11 veterans. a coalition of veterans group supports the care for all veterans act, including the american legion, military officers association of america, disabled american

veterans, amvets, paralyzed veterans of america, veterans of foreign wars, and vet first. i encourage my colleagues to co-sponsor this legislation and when the time comes support this legislation on the house floor. our focus must obviously be on making sure our veterans receive the care and services they need, and that means ensuring their loved ones and caregivers have the proper training, support services, travel expenses, health care and respite care to provide the best in-home care for veterans. all caregivers, no matter the age of the veteran they serve, should have access to the v.a. caregiver support program. during a month when we recognize veterans day, we must also take a moment to recognize those who play an instrumental role in the life of a veteran. their caregivers. by passing this bill we could make a big difference for the veteran and their caregiver. i'm grateful for my constituents for bringing this need to my attention and call upon my colleagues to join me in this effort in supporting h.r. 2894.

madam speaker, i yield back the remainder of anaheim. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the chair recognizes the gentleman from indiana, mr. young, for five minutes. i rise : mr. speaker, today on behalf of countless hoosiers who are concerned for our troops. like many americans, we are increasingly dismayed by the obama administration's incoherent strategy to defeat isis and protect american interests around the world. as someone who served this country in the united states marine corps and now as an elected representative, i take seriously our responsibility here in congress to demand more strategies that put american military personnel in a position to successfully complete their missions. this responsibility to our troops to set them up for victory has contributed to a new level of frustration felt by many of us over president

obama's disjointed foreign policy decisions in the middle east. just last friday without any input from congress, and absent any form of public debate, a white house spokesperson announced to the world that president obama was authorizing the deployment of u.s. special operators directly into the fray in syria. rather than hear straight from our commander in chief t. took president obama -- it took president obama three full days to appear publicly and discuss his decision to escalate u.s. involvement and put more american boots on the ground. now, on the one hand i applaud the administration for any attempts to degrade the capabilities of isis and stabilize a war-torn syria. however, it remains unclear what these brave special operators had had been asked to accomplish. and what strategy will enable a

few dozen u.s. special operators to decisively drive isis from their stronghold. to be clear, i know many of these valor special operators personally. i'm familiar with the they rohrabacher mabble ability to accomplish seemingly impossible mission, even with the odds stacked against them. but these warriors are not magicians. they are not a magic elixir capable of turning the tide of a four-year, multifaceted civil war. they must be empowered to win. president obama tells us the u.s. mission is to degrade and defeat isis. but for that to succeed, he must articulate a broader strategy for the remaining 15 onths of his tenure as commander in chief. as it current stands, limited air strikes and a handful of special forces operators will not sufficiently empower the united states and our partners to initiate change in the region.

unfortunately, i fear that this marks yet another instance of the president dictating u.s. defense policy by popular opinion. this is unfair to our men and women in uniform, their families, it's unfair to all americans. my fervent hope is that during the close of this administration a coherent, longer term strategy is developed that empowers the greatest military in the world, to protect american interests and to bring stability to a region desperately in need of peace. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the chair recognizes the gentleman from iowa, mr. young, for five minutes. mr. young: thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. young: i rise today as we approach veterans day to honor the brave men and women who have served our country in uniform.

earlier this year i met with a group of young iowans in greenfield, iowa, belonging to the junior optimist club. they found a truly unique way to pay tribute to our iowa veterans. a family owned and published the free press in greenfield iowa for over 125 years. the free press was published in their newspapers letters iowa service members sent home to the family members over the years and the junior optimists i met with went through the collection of letters from world war ii, from soldiers, they picked out the ones they found most interesting or compelling, and read them aloud at a flag day celebration that i was fortunate to attend. . i want to share one with me and enshrine them in the congressional record so that we and future generations may always remember the very real and human struggles our men and women face as they leave their loved ones and family behind to bravely secure and serve our

country with dignity, honor and distinction. i'd like to read one of these letters written by lieutenant kenneth eatinger of aida county, iowa. july 29, 1943. dear little brother, i hope and trust you will be able to read this all by yourself, but if you can't, mother will read it to you and you will be able to yourself read it after you learn to read it better. sonny, i miss you. i know you miss me too. i hope i could be with you a while longer and do all the things i planned to do with you. but i suppose we must be brave and put those things off for now. if i could just get home once more to see you and all the folks again and have them meet my little wife and baby i wouldn't ask for anything more. when you are a little older you will know why your brother had to leave for home so long. you know we have a big country

and we have big ideals as to how people should live and enjoy the riches of it and how each is born with equal rights to life, freedom and the pursuit of happiness. unfortunately, there are some quns in the world where they do not -- countries in the world where they do not have these ideals, where a boy cannot grow up to be what he wants to be, with no limits on his opportunity, to be a great man such as a great statesman or a businessman, a farmer, a soldier, because there are many people in other countries who nt to change our nation, its ideals, its form of government and way of life. we must leave our homes and families to fight. when it's all over, your brother's going to bring his little family home to see you and mom and dad and inez and all the rest. in the meantime, take good care of mom and dad and grow up to be a good boy and a good young man. study hard when you're in school. be a good leader in everything

good in life. be a good american. strive to win. but if you must lose, lose like a gentleman and be a good sport. don't be a quitter either in sports or in business or your profession when you grow up. get all the education you can. stay close to mom and follow her advice. obey her in everything no matter how you may at times disagree. she knows what is best and will never let you down or lead you away from the right and honorable things of life. little brother, if i don't come back, you will have to be mom and dad's protectors when they get older because you will be the only one they have. you will grow up to take my place as well as your own in their life and heart. last of all, don't forget your brother. pray for him to come back from this war and if it is god's will that he does not, be the kind of boy and man your brother wants you to be. kiss mother, dad and inez for me every night.

goodbye for now, little brother. with all to love -- with all brother.to you, your this rings true today, they embody the ideals of this great nation and the ethos of our armed forces they have fought, sacrificed and died for our country so that we can remain free. my friends and colleagues, next week, when we recognize these men and women on veterans day, look them in the eye and say thank you for the bravery and sacrifices. they deserve our unwavering gratitude and respect. may god bless them and may god bless these united states of america. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the chair recognizes the gentleman from maryland, mr. hoyer, for five minutes. mr. hoyer: i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: without objection.

mr. hoyer: first, mr. speaker, i would say i was moved by the remarks of gentleman who just spoke and i know we all join him in his sentiments. mr. speaker, i rise today to pay tribute to an individual who has made a remarkable impact on higher education in this country and in my state. he's done that for more than half a century. william english britker retired at the end of june as chancellor of the university system of maryland. he served as chancellor for the past 12 years, and during that ime he oversaw the period of growth, transformation and achievement which included the integration of online technology with course instruction and a 24% increase in enrollment. his lifetime of service to higher education, mr. speaker, began in his youth which was spent on and around college

campuses in louisville and lexington, kentucky, and during ham, north carolina. his -- durham, north carolina. his father was an accomplished educator and college administrator as well, having written and lectured in history at the university of kentucky and later served as dean and its president. he followed in his footsteps luckily for all of us, attending the university of kentucky and later pursuing his masters and doctorate in mathematics from rut gers university in new jersey. -- rutgers university in new jersey. he came to the university of maryland, college park, in 1964, a year after i graduated. he came as an assistant professor of math. after 24 years teaching in the department and having been elevated to the department hair and then provoast, he was selected as the president of the university in 1988. he led the university system of maryland's flagship campus for a decade before leaving to

become president of the ohio state university. i think i speak for all marylanders when i say we were very happy when he came back to maryland. i was a member of the board of regents at the time and i remember participating in a meeting when we were searching for a new chancellor and i asked my colleagues if we could get brit to come back, what would you think. all of them were extraordinarily enthusiastic. i called his home in ohio and his wife, patty, answered and i asked if she and brit would happy to return. they said they would like to be close to their grandchildren which was in maryland. brit was back as chancellor of the university system. he managed a network that serves over 165,000

undergraduate and graduate students at 12 universities, two regional higher education centers and one research center. it is the 12th largest university system in america. and under dr. kerwin's leadership, it has been a model of research, applied innovation. he's been called upon by both democratic and republican senators -- excuse me -- presidents over the years to advise on issues relating to higher education, access and performance and certainly he's been asked by united states senators and members of this house for his advice and counsel as well. he's been committed throughout his years as an administrator, mr. speaker, to the principle that education ought to be accessible to all and that ought to be seen as a tool to help people enrich their lives through learning while advancing their careers. among his major priorities have been making the university

campuses more diverse and making attending college more affordable. under his leadership, the university system built partnerships with the private sector in the state and federal government in order to further the cause of advanced research and innovation that has practical application for economic growth and national defense. last year, mr. speaker, i was proud to be onhand to inaugurate a new test site in southern maryland for unmanned aircraft systems, which will help in the development of new aerospace technologies and bring business development and skilled jobs to that regions. dr. kerwin has always understood we need to do more to ensure that everyone who wants to pursue a higher education can do so and that our colleges and universities are helping to produce skilled innovators and workers. he knew that the university system was a partner in economic growth in our state

and that university and academic institutions were partners in growing the u.s. economy. mr. speaker, i've had the pleasure of working closely with dr. kerwin for many years and i've seen him firsthand his passion for higher education, his respect for faculty and staff and his love of students. and last week i had the opportunity to participate in a ceremony to rededicate the university of maryland mathematics building in honor of dr. brit kerwin. that building in which he taught mathematics is now named in his honor for him. all of us, mr. speaker, have witnessed his determination to make the university system of maryland a source of pride for our state and for our country. and he's done so. he's been a man who's deeply devoted to his wife, patty, a wonderful woman and their wonderful family and their

community. patty kerwin is herself an extraordinary partner in the success that she and brit have both achieved. mr. speaker, chancellor brit kerwin is a man of extraordinary intellect, vision, understanding, passion, character and principle. he's brought all of these traits to bear in all of the important roles he performed throughout every endeavor in his life. on behalf of all of us who live in our state but indeed on behalf of all the citizens of the united states whom he has advantaged in one way or another, i thank dr. kerwin for his leadership on behalf of higher education for our state and for our country. dr. kerwin has stepped down as chancellor, but, mr. speaker, i know he will continue to lend all of his great talents to

making higher education ever more effective and his country ever more successful. well done, doctor. the speaker pro tempore: the chair recognizes the gentleman from pennsylvania, mr. fitzpatrick, for five minutes. mr. itzpatrick: thank you, speaker. t.s.c. is a genetic disease which causes tumors to form in organs throughout the body, impacting the health and abilities of those born with it. nearly 50,000 americans are affected by this condition, and many more cases remain undiagnosed because of lack of awareness or observable symptoms. for these individuals and their families, the fight against t.s.c. is constant. but in the face of this adversity, those with t.s.c. show us strength and determination, not only to survive but to thrive.

individuals like evan moss from virginia. evan was just 2 years old when he was diagnosed with t.s.c., and by age 4 was suffering up to 400 seize yours a month because -- seizures a month because of his condition. but like so many with t.s.c., evan's story is not defined by this impact. now 11 years old, evan is an accomplished author and a passionate advocate for those living with t.s.c. as a member of the congressional rare disease caucus and honorary chair of the t.s.c. alliance, i'm focused on shedding light on conditions like t.s.c. and highlighting exceptional individuals like evan. the fight against t.s.c. extends far beyond this chamber, but each of us can play an important role in understanding and ultimately defeating this. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the chair recognizes the gentleman from minnesota, mr. knollan,

or five minutes. mr. knollan: thank you, mr. peaker, members of the house mr. nolan: thank you, mr. speaker, members of the house. want to thank mr. defazio and chairman shuster for bringing a transportation bill. numerous hearings have been held over the last couple of years and they are interesting in that universally, whether we were hearing from the head of the national chamber of commerce or hearing from the head of the afl-cio and/or the trade unions that build our infrastructure, the message was always the same. first of all, it was a recognition of the obvious, bridges are falling down, trains are coming off the track, it's tragic and costly in terms of dollars and loss of life.

but secondly, was pointed out by everybody, this failure is handicapping our economy, our ability to expand business, to create jobs and to grow our economy. thirdly, everyone testified that we need a long-term surface transportation legislation so that states and communities and our federal transportation officials can do the kind of planning that's necessary to build the kind of transportation system that's needed for a strong economy. . lastly, i want to point out that this legislation before us here today is the product of what has come to be known as regular order. namely, the process where important legislation for the country is brought before the appropriate committees and the committees and all the members of that committee have an

opportunity to offer any ideas, any amendments that they want, that they think will improve. in this case, our surface transportation system. the fact of the matter is, we have hundreds of amendments and that committee on which i am proud to serve examined and considered every single one of those amendments. it's important to remind ourselves here that democracy is a long arduous difficult process. but when you allow the members of a committee who have spent enormous amounts of time getting smart and knowledgeable about the responsibilities of that committee, to come together to offer their ideas, to have them thoroughly examined, to have them thoroughly debated, that's how you find common ground. that's how you come together. that's how you build and develop respect for one another. and that is what has happened in the development of this surface transportation bill

that we have before us here today. i congratulate the committee. i congratulate the congress for recognizing how important and how valuable regular order can be for the process of restoring people's confidence in the ability of the congress of the united states to fix things and get things done and end the gridlock. thank you, mr. speaker. thank you, my fellow colleagues. the speaker pro tempore: the chair recognizes the gentleman from illinois, mr. dold, for five minutes. mr. dold: thank you, mr. speaker. i rise today to talk about an issue we don't talk about nearly enough. our country's imperfect criminal justice system. it's affecting not only the people in my district, but also in communities all across our nation. every year the federal government spends more than half a trillion dollars on anti-poverty programs. the numbers show that these initiatives have not solved the problem. today there are nearly 50 million americans living in

poverty. over the last decade, the number of americans living in our nation's most impoverished communities were at least 40% of the families live below the poverty line has nearly doubled to historic high of 14 million. meanwhile, the united states prison and jail population has reached an all-time high. and the number of people on probation and parole has literally doubled. this is not a coincidence, but the numbers don't even begin to tell the real story. solving this problem requires meaningful action and change. two things i would argue that washington does not do so well. but rather than sitting idly by and waiting for washington to get its act together, i have already begun taking action back home in illinois' 10th congressional district. i have worked with community level programs that have helped give people the tools that they need to be able to lift themselves out of poverty, brought in national leaders to

tutor our social service organizations across our district, and learned about the unique ways these organizations are fighting poverty and working for criminal justice reform on the local level. recently i had the privilege to introduce bob woodson to a few of the inspiring local leaders who are working on these issues. the more time i spent talking with various community leaders, the more painfully obvious the need to implement reforms to this system becomes. one of the inspiring local groups working to fix some of the problems in our district is fist, stands for former inmates striving together in waukegan. this works with the community to help individuals get -- individuals that are re-entering society, what they need to re-enter the work force. it's no secret, mr. speaker, that most ex-convicts sadly end up back in prison after serving jail time. this organization, as well as others, are trying to change that trend by sharing positive

stories and offering a judgment-free zone for individuals to get back up on their feet. far too often, mr. speaker, the success stories that these organizations have do not get told, and in fact are kept a secret. as bob woodson said, people are motivated to change and improve when they are shown victories that are possible. not injuries to be avoided. one inspiring young man we had the privilege to meet was darell mcbride from waukegan. he took the time to tell us about the journey that he took to get to where he is today and that story bears repeating. darell spent eight years in prison which left him with limited resources and educational opportunities. he knew that he needed a job and direction after he was released or the statistics would suggest that he would find himself back in prison. he turned to youth build lake county and since graduating from the program, he has earned a construction certificate and most importantly has landed a job.

mr. speaker, it's this kind of help that we should be encouraging all to begin to promote within our communities. thousands like darell would benefit greatly from criminal justice reform. while i know that this situation cannot simply be fixed in washington, i certainly hope that we can help. one way in which i'm trying to help is by co-sponsoring and working for the passage of the fair chance act introduced by my friend from maryland, representative elijah cummings. this legislation would ban the box for federal agencies, prohibiting them from asking prospective government employees about their criminal justice histories on job applications. potential employees should not use criminal histories to screen out applicants before they have a chance to look at their qualifications. this policy would enable almost 20 million people to have a second chance and the opportunity to sell themselves to potential employers and make a positive contributions to our country. we need to deal with what leads

people to end up in prison to begin with. we cannot do this by implementing innovative strategies such as the use of -- we can do this by implementing positive strategies and innovations like the use of body cameras for police officers to fight crime and to improve transparency and accountability. put simply, we need to end the era of mass incarceration. this means reforming the mandatory minimum sentencing, among other policies. mr. speaker, i hope that going forward we can work with groups to promote the success stories, to help to empower individuals trying to turn their lives around and to o work with local communities to reduce the rate of incarceration. unfortunately, there is still a long way to go until this problem is solved. but i would like to think organizations like this and youth build for the great work that they are doing in illinois' 10th congressional district. thank you. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the chair recognizes the gentleman from mississippi, mr. palazzo,

for five minutes. mr. speaker, i rise to express my concern over recent events taking place if my home state and around our nation that tear at the fabric of our country's first amendment right to freedom of religion. time and again we have seen instances in which an individual's right to practice his or her faith has been subordinated to the sensibilities of individuals who do not share their faith in god. in mississippi we saw it in august when a high school band from brandon, mississippi, was forbidden from playing the hymn, "how great thou art" at a football game. we saw it in september in lamar county as a teacher was ridiculed and disciplined for posting a voluntary prayer list in her classroom. just last week, i along with 45 other members joined congressman forbes and senator

lankford in support of coach kennedy of bremerton high school in washington state. coach kennedy's eight-year tradition of walking to the 50-yard line after the conclusion of football games to say a quiet prayer was banned last month due to the school district's concern that his actions could be construed as an endorsement of religion. recently we have even seen a marine corps base in hawaii come under fire for having a road sign read, god bless the military, their families, and the citizens who work with them. wow, even our united states marines are attacked for exercising their faith. opponents of religious freedom have been energized by recent decisions made by the united states supreme court as well as lower courts. both of which have placed the cultural views of a small group ahead of the thoughts, feelings, and rights of the ast majority of americans.

judicial activism at all levels of the federal judiciary has resulted in the systematic rewriting of centuries old societal norms. and this must end. time and again our courts have waded into waters which the constitution specifically vests in the legislative branch. what is at stake here is nothingless than the future of our country's religious liberties, on which our very nation was founded. those who would have god completely removed from public discourse be it marriage, health care, or the right of school children to pray or play religious music during football game half times are pleased with the first part of the amendment, congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion. however, they ignore the second part or prohibiting the free exercise thereof. this amendment was enacted by our framers to protect religion from government not the reverse. families are struggling to keep

it together. single parent households are at an all time high. poverty, incarceration, teenage pregnancy, and drug usage are all around us. when and where prayer is needed the most, it is no longer allowed for forbidden. how can we try to remove from the public spirit the one thing that holds us together? and that's our religion. we can no longer simply leave our religion at the church doors. it is our responsibility to live out our values and beliefs in our everyday lives. edmund burke said it best, the only thing it takes for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing. i support the free expression of religion and all quarters of our society and i stand with coach kennedy, the band from brandon, and the teacher from lamar county and every other american who has been stripped of their religious freedoms. i am committed to protecting our right to express our faith

without fear of governmental intrusion or retaliation. i encourage my colleagues to do the same. with that, mr. speaker, god bless america. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the chair recognizes the gentlewoman from florida, ms. ros-lehtinen, for five minutes. mr. speaker, n: monday, november 9, marks the 77th anniversary of crystal enact. the event that would foreshadow the crimes against humanity that the nazis would commit against six million jews and other religious and ethnic minorities. inspired by the incitement from the nazi minister of propaganda, joseph goebbels, regime members and party loyalists issued orders to

local officials to target and attack the jewish community. often disguised in plain clothes to perpetuate the false narrative that these were spontaneous attacks and is an expression of the public sentiment toward the jews, the lgrims of crystal nocket d.-kristllnacht. destroys the businesses, and forcing jews to perform public act of humiliation. nearly 300 synagogues were destroyed while jewish artifacts and archives were confiscated. approximately 7,500 jewish-owned businesses and shops were vandalized and looted. and to add to the disgrace and punishment of having their livelihoods taken from them and

destroyed, the jews were blamed for the events of crystal nocket -- kristallnacht and were fined for damages, the equivalent of $400 million. over 30,000 jews were arrested and transferred to some of the nazi's most gruesome and notorious concentration campsites. during the event of kristallnacht. nearly 14u7bd jews were killed on the night of november 9, 1938, and into the morning the next day. yet this was only the beginning . facing little public backlash, the nazi regime took the events of kristallnacht as a signal of support for their cruel treatment of the jewish community and quickly imposed restrictions against the jews that would lead up to the holocaust.

mr. speaker, kristallnacht is a solemn reminder of what can happen when people allow anti-semitism, incitement, and hatred to carry on unabated. kristallnacht was the manifestation of fear and scapegoating and was not only allowed to take place but was the direct result of a people's indifference to the hatred of a religious minority. . and indifference is all that is needed for evil to take root, for evil to expand. that is precisely why we must commemorate these tragic events that mar our collective past and that mark one of humanity's darkest periods and why we must rededicate ourselves to the vow of never again. this is particularly important

in today's environment as israel finds itself plagued by a new round of terror and violence that has been spurred upon by incitement and anti-israel indoctrineation from the palestinian authority and its so-called leaders. in the past month and a half, there have been nearly 60 random knife attacks against israeli citizens, five shootings and six car rammings. yet, where is the condemnation from the international community? instead of speaking out against these attacks, the united nations human rights council invites abu mazen, and he used this platform to spew out his harmful rhetoric. responsible nations must condemn, not ignore, abu mazen's words and his actions. last month, secretary kerry

said that leaders need to lead, and this week this body stood up and said, enough is enough. the house passed a resolution i offered alongside my south florida colleague, congressman ted deutch, that condemned the anti-israel and anti-semitic attacks from within the palestinian authority. the house also passed a resolution that encouraged our government to do more mountain fight against anti-semitism and to work more closely with the governments of europe to step up their efforts to battle the alarming rise of anti-semitism across the continent. and we need to do more at home, especially on our college campuses. too often, mr. speaker, anti-semitism is being disguised as an anti-israel political attack, manifested particularly to the boycotting,

the b.d.s. movement. we have a more obligation to stand up against these acts. thank you thank you, mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to clause 12-a of rule 1, the chair declares the house in recess until noon today. >> the measure continues the federal gas and diesel tax to pay for it without congressional action the tax expires in 2016. this bill continues the tax through much of 2023. it also takes nearly $46 billion

from the treasury to cover a shortfall over the first three years of the bill. the house added a provision in the bill to re-authorize the export-import bank for another four years with a number of changes to back operations. congress had let the ex-imchart expired in june. members will consider a total of 81 amendments to the bill today on top of the 29 amendments debated yesterday. all of that gets under way again at noon eastern. live coverage here on c-span. take you live now to the rayburn house office building where the house financial services committee is holding a hearing on the fed's plans for bank supervision and regulation. testifying is fed chairwoman janet yellen. they have been under way for about an hour and 15 minutes. >> policy review at the fed. i encourage you to take that under consideration. chair yellen: let me simply say that i think maintaining the confidentiality of sensitive information is, to me, a very

high priority. >> that's not my point. i think you can see there is an issue here on how the policy works internally. i think you can work on changing it. only a couple minutes left. the "wall street journal" recently reported that the white house and treasury were made aware of the 2012 leak. is that true? before congress was made aware in december of 2014? chair yellen: not to the best of my knowledge. >> you were aware they were doing background check on mr. carpenter for potential nomination from the fed refreshry, correct? you are aware of that process? you are not aware of that? chair yellen: i know he's been nominated to be assistant secretary. >> as part of a background review are you telling me they did not reach out to the fed and ask about his access to this information that was involved in the leak and did you not provide that to the white house? chair yellen: i don't have direct knowledge of that.

>> do you have any indirect knowledge of that? hair yellen: i -- that's a particular matter pertaining to an employee. >> madam chair, here's my concern. that we find out in congress who have the oversight over the fed, and we find out in december of 2014. however, before the nomination the white house has this information about the leak. the white house and treasury don't have any oversight over the fed are made privy to not just the internal investigation at the fed, but also they received the i.g. investigation. so -- chair yellen: i am not aware that that's correct. i think it would be maybe standard practice for an agency that's considering a nomination to do a background check and hat might involve asking the

previous employer as part of the -- mr. duffy: i would agree with that. it's common practice for the oversight committee to send subpoenas that are lawful to the agencies in which they oversee and that that agency has to comply with those subpoenas in a timely manner. chair yellen: i have done my best to do that. i believe we have now fully complied. >> the chair now recognizes the gentleman from missouri, mr. clay, ranking member of the financial institution subcommittee. mr. clay: thank you, mr. chairman. thank you, chairwoman yellen, for your return visit. fed's309 would remove the ability to make safety and soundness decisions and place them with the f sock -- fsoc. what impact would this dilution of your authority have on your ability to work with international regulators?

chair yellen: well, it is important to the fed to be able to put in place the supervision program that we regard as appropriate for a particular institution. and we would not like to see fsoc involved in determining exactly what that appropriate program would be once a firm is under our supervision. there's no real relationship, i'm not sure when you say international negotiations, i'm involved there. mr. clay: let me elaborate for you. of r h.r. 1309, designation banks for enhanced prudential standards can only be undertaken if the fsoc follows standards developed by the international basil committee.

made up of banking regulators from over two dozen countries. do you know of any major nation that defers their domestic bank safety and soundness regulations to a board of international regulators? chair yellen: no, i do not. that's a very useful committee. we participate actively. we want to make sure that other untries put in place tough safety and soundness regulations that will be good for our firms and for financial stability. but nothing is law in the united states or is adopted as a regulation unless we deem it to be appropriate for our firms. and i believe all countries behave in the same manner. this is international bodies, coordinating bodies where consultation takes place, but that doesn't substitute for

domestic rule -- rule writing efforts here in the united states. mr. clay: that would be a highly unusual -- chair yellen: extremely unusual. mr. clay: let's shift, chair yellen, to insurance capital standards. now that the insurance capital standards clarification act was given -- which gives the federal reserve flexibility he in implementing capital standard for insurance companies, subject to enhanced supervision, has been signed into law, can you please provide an update on the federal reserve's implementation? chair yellen: we appreciated the flexibility that that law provides to us to design an regime for apital insurance centric companies that we supervise.

we are taking our time to really understand the business models f these firms so that we can tailor the regulations in a way that's genuinely appropriate to their business models. we are working on that and in the process we are closely consulting with the national association of insurance commissioners. with the federal insurance office. with representatives of the industry and the firms, again to be clear we really understand their business models. want to get this right and we want to take the time we need to understand what will be appropriate. mr. clay: it sounds to me as though you are on a path to get it correct. chair yellen: we are on the path to implementing that. mr. clay: this week the federal reserve bank of new york is for the second year in a row hosting a conference to promote the importance of a strong culture of compliance within the banking

industry. in white of the seemingly endless series of bank violations on everything from anctions and market fraud to manipulation, the focus on improving bank culture certainly seems appropriate. can you discuss what the board's role has been in the effort to improve bank culture? chair yellen: we have been extremely disturbed by the pattern we have seen of violations in a whole variety of areas, foreign exchange. we have imposed exceptionally large fines. and in a number of cases barred individuals from continuing to work at the supervised institutions or in the industry. and we do fully expect as part

of our supervision that the boards of directors of these firms will put in place rules and hint of the culture so we do not see a continued pattern of flagrant violations. mr. hensarling: the time of the gentleman has expired of the the chair now recognizes the gentleman from new mexico, mr. pearce. mr. pearce: thank you, mr. chairman. thanks, madam chair, for being here. kind of a continuation of the questions that mr. capuano had, do you-all ever sit around as a team and assess the things that were within your control leading up to 2008 that you-all were doing sort of a bad job of regulating and say, hey, we had internal failures here, we were signature in the room, we were allowing this, we saw long-term capital collapse, we saw the instability, i think greenspan actually forced the banks to come in and buy the bad assets

because he could and because of trying to save a system. have you-all sat around and kind of had that discussion internally as a team that we need to do better? that set of discussions we've had over many years. and lessons learned, exercises of bad habits that happened, and what do we need to do differently so that it doesn't happen again. i have tried to describe in some detail in the testimony how we have changed the process of supervision as well as more broadly our monitoring of financial stability risks in the system outside of just the portion that we regulate in order to avoid the problems. mr. pearce: follow that with the -- you're saying the things in the system that provide a risk. so my under-- i understand that

-- i'm getting mixed signals whether or not you release the standards on which you evaluate firms. i'm not quite sure. my question is do you really look at the systems themselves? your comments say that we aim to regulate and supervise financial firms in a manner that promotes the stability of the financial system as a whole. it's that financial system as a whole that i think provides maybe the greatest risk to the largest firms or all of us. so are you really discussing that? are you discussing the fact that the brick nations are performing the n.d.b. or whatever they are forming, that other nations are trying to figure out how to avoid the u.s. currency because of our actions internally? are you having that discussion? chair yellen: we are bringing together a diverse group of people to consider what the significant threats are that could affect not only individual

firms but a set of firms that are large and interconnected. could involve foreign threats. it could, for example, when there were stresses pertaining to euro area, focus would have been how could those -- mr. pearce: could you share with me parts of the discussion that deal with china selling down its debt? with them selling their treasuries they decreased the percentage from 74% to 54%. that to me indicates a very strong reaction against our policies and against our dollar. and it is maybe the biggest threat, forget the internal stresses of corporations. think about that, the fact that the ground we are standing on literally is going to get unsolid and very quickly. can you share with me the concerns that have been expressed internally about china selling its treasuries? chair yellen: china has been selling treasuries because its

currency has been under downward pressure. and in the market there is a demand -- mr. pearce: i understand that. i only have a little bit of team. don't mean to interrupt. let's step aside from that if that says there is no concern there, look at the fact that we are putting $1.1 trillion of debt and you have $300 billion being purchased. that leaves a gap of $800 billion. forget the chinese, forget everybody else. you, the feds, are going to have to fill the gap with printed money for the $800 billion. 800 out of 1.1 trillion, you-all should be saying, this is really outside the scope of what the stress tests are showing us on the banks. tell me about that conversation. chair yellen: congressman, we have no intention, given the economic outlook of expanding. we are maintaining our holdings of securities that we acquired

during the period -- mr. pearce: let me wrap up. chair yellen: no intention of adding to those holdings. mr. pearce: this morning in barron's, they compare the situation to zimbabwe. this morning in barron's they say that the federal reserve is making itself a lender of last resort. these are huge warning signs to us. we are sitting here talking bout relatively small stress tests inside the bank. i appreciate the work you are doing. i really think we have to look deeper. yield back. mr. hensarling: the time of the gentleman has expired. the chair now recognizes the gentleman from georgia, mr. scott. mr. scott: thank you, mr. chairman. ms. yellen, let me ask you first about basil capital. how is it that the basil capital requirement do not recognize the exposure offsetting nature of segregated customer margins that

are posted from a derivatives client? and then that goes to a bank, and that the bank guarantees the client's transaction with a clearing-house. this is particularly when just five years ago we here in congress in the dodd frank act actually encouraged more derivatives clearing as a means of reducing clients' counter party risk. my question is, what sort of message are we sending these clients who post margin to offset this guarantee by not recognizing it as such? chair yellen: congressman, i'm not sure that i can respond properly to your question. i may need to get back to you on that. i mean we certainly have required higher margin requirements both initial and variation on noncleared

derivatives. is your question about capital requirements on the assets that are being held? mr. scott: yeah. i think it's sending a conflicting message to the public. particularly when we on one hand are encouraging more derivatives action for risk management, but yet the basil capital requirements do not recognize the exposure offsetting nature of the segregated customer's margins. my point is that we need to send a clearer message to the public as to how basil capital is interreacting with this margin requirement of posting. chair yellen: the important message we want to send is we have taken key steps to make the

derivatives markets and transactions safer and less a source of risk. i promise to get back to you on details about how that interacts with basil. mr. scott: this is very important, chairman, because as you well know derivatives and swaps now as far as using for $822 anagement is not trillion piece of the world's economy. and we need to take a little bit better care of making sure we send out nonconflicting information. i want to go back to another question about the designated company. as a member of fsoc you are responsible for determining when a designated company no longer presents a risk to our financial system. so it would be important if you could tell us, in a nutshell, exactly when does a designated company no longer present a risk

to the financial system and therefore should be dedesignated? in your opinion, is it not important for fsoc to communicate clearly and publicly with designated companies as to what are those specific risks that they present so that we can have transparency in the process so the designated companies and the public will know exactly what a designated company is and what those issues are? chair yellen: so fsoc explains very clearly to the company and to the public what the basis was for designation. so it is no mystery at all to the companies what aspects of their business model caused them to be designated. the firms have that information. every year fsoc reconsiders

whether or not designation is appropriate and looks at the changes that have occurred in the business of those designated firms since it last reviewed them. if there are significant changes , then a firm can be dedesignated. now -- mr. scott: i want to get this last bit of question because i want to know what we here -- if we here in congress made a move to improve the transparentcy and due process -- transparencycy -- transparency and due process companies receive, what would you recommend we do? chair yellen: i don't really think it's necessary to do anything because these companies have every opportunity to provide information to fsoc. to list that their business model has changed. to ask the council to consider

dedesignation. i think you probably know, for example, the g.e. capital has significantly changed its business model. it's decided that it's in their interest to do that. they have not come to fsoc yet, to the best of my knowledge, to ask to be dedesignated, but a company like g.e. capital of course could present information to fsoc and when asked there would be an active discussion of whether that's appropriate. mr. hensarling: time of the gentleman has expired. the chair now recognizes the gentleman from virginia, mr. hurt. mr. hurt: thank you, mr. chairman. i want to thank the chair for appearing before us today. i want to thank the chairman for holding this important hearing. madam chair, we had discussed dynamic. t of the in my rural congressional district in rural fifth district of virginia, where access to capital is critical for job growth across all those main

streets, across all that farmland that i represent, it's important to our small businesses, it's important to our farmers, and important to families. i think that those of us who live in rural areas depend disproportionately on community banks. and i appreciate your testimony up front talking about the efforts that you have made to try to tailor the rule making, tailor the regulations to try to accommodate the difference in size and complexity of these institutions. but i think -- i hope you would agree despite these efforts, community banks have been disproportionately affected. u.v.a. law school professor who testified before our committee previously, he testified that dodd-frank is in significant part is designed to enhance regulatory bank regulators

inevitably. that will mean increasing the size, market share, and political clout of the largest banks. i think if you look at the trend over the last three decades, you see it's been brutal for community banks. just in the five years since dodd-frank has been enacted, we have seen a drop in the number ,700 to ity banks from 6,300. a whopping 20% loss. the main consolidation has doubled. this regulatory regime and the supervision has clearly impacted our smallest institutions. i hear from institutions across our district who say all i have time to do is do paperwork. i don't have any time to serve my customers. to go out and look for new business. one instance i recently talked to a bank president who said, i realize hi a problem when we were up for an examination and we had more examiners, bank examiners in our boardroom than we had bank employees. those are the kind of stories

that we hear as we travel across the district. i guess my first question really deals with why you are here. we know that the dodd-frank act included one provision that would create a vice chair for supervision. i guess my question is -- let me just tell what you paul volcker said, you know what he said after it was included he said, this new post might turn out to be one of the most important things in there. focuses the responsibility on one person. we know this is a senate confirmed position. i guess my first question is is -- you would agree that effective and balanced supervision is an important part of the role of the federal reserve? chair yellen: absolutely. it is one of our most important responsibilities. i spend a great deal of time on it. take it very seriously. mr. hurt: my next question would be, then, if there was a senate

confirmed person in that place, in that spot, how would that affect your ability to focus on what your other responsibilities are in the larger picture? wouldn't it be good as former fed chair volcker said, wouldn't it be good to have that position filled? chair yellen: congress created that position and i would welcome having it filled. i have to say that we now have a division of labor among the governors on the board. we operate through a committee system. mr. hurt: the position remains after five years unfilled. chair yellen: yes. the governor -- mr. hurt: he's not been confirmed for that position by the senate. chair yellen: that's correct. but i would say that he's done an outstanding job of leading our work in this area. and all of us do need, including

me, need to be involved. mr. hurt: you believe the fact that this important role and congress' important role in the appointment of that, does that reflect, do you think, the president's view of whether having a balanced and effective supervision, having somebody as volcker said, who is dedicated to this, striking this balance, does that reflect the president's priorities? chair yellen: you would really have to ask the white house why -- mr. hurt: considering dodd-frank is the law of the land at this time. is it appropriate for you as chair of the fed to press the president to fill this position? is it appropriate for you to do that? chair yellen: i think that we -- as i said, i think that we are carrying out our supervisory work in a very thorough and thoughtful fashion but would welcome nomination to the position. mr. hensarling: time of the gentleman has expired.

the chair now recognizes the gentleman from texas, mr. green, ranking member of our oversight investigations subcommittee. mr. green: thank you, mr. chairman. thank you, madam chair, for your appearance today. madam chair, dr. king, m.l.k., reminded us that life is an inescapable network of mutuality tied to sangle garment of destiny. whatever impacts one impacts all indirectly. we found this to be imminently true with leighman and bear stearns. the failure of these megainstitutions had a die direct impact on us but indirectly they impacted the global economy, which is integrated to an extent that many of us can't even imagine. i mention this to you, madam chair, because it's not just a failure of a bank in the united states that we have to concern ourselves with, but the failure of one of these megabanks in a foreign country.

because of the indirect impact that it can have on the united states and other banking institutions around the world. i see some value in this living will for these megainstitutions and the lesser institutions as well simply because when we had the failure in 2008 we had a crisis such that banks were reluctant to lend to each other. and when banks won't lend to each other, you don't have a lot of options left. i mention all of this to you because i'm getting to the $50 billion threshold. you have indicated a willingness to see that threshold lifted, but i believe you also indicated that you would still prefer to have the opportunity, if necessary, to revisit those that are below the $50 billion threshold so as to ascertain

whether or not they may become -- you mentioned lifting it. i'm not going to ask you to tell me at what point you would go to in terms of lifting. but are you saying to us that you still prefer a trigger of some dollar amount, currently we have the $50 billion trigger, if you lift it, do you still want a trigger in there of a dollar amount or are you ameebable -- amenable of going to a means by which only the activities will determine the designation? certainly n: well, i remain amenable to having a dollar threshold. and to the extent that i have discussed the possibility of raising the thresh healed, i would really only -- threshold, i would really only support a very modest increase in the threshold. once we get to a slightly higher

threshold, we are dealing with institutions, even when we are looking at the large regional banking organizations, that are very important suppliers of credit to the country regionalely, given the organizations have probably $1 trillion if more of lending throughout the country. and while conceivably the failure of one of these organizations would not bring about the downfall of the financial system, it could impact a significant portion of the country and the borrowers who depend on these institutions for access to credit. so i think a threshold is appropriate, especially in which banks over that threshold are

designated for more intense supervision, especially if we have the ability to tailor our supervision. and the only reason that i have said i would be supportive of some modest increase in the threshold is because dodd-frank does impose some requirements on the smaller institutions in the area of stress testing and resolution plans where we have limited insufficient flexibility to remove those requirements and we really think the costs exceed the benefits. mr. green: thank you. moving quickly to the interest rate. you have a global economy that is weak and by some standards continuing to weaken. how much emphasis do you have to place on the global economy when setting the interest rates

within our economy given what i said about the inescapable network of mutuality? chair yellen: we are mutual and interconnected. we take global performance into account. and at the moment what we see is a domestic economy that is pretty strong and growing at a solid pace offset by some weakening spilling over to us from the global economy. on balance, as we said, we still see the risk to economic growth and the labor market is balanced, but the global economy has been a drag. mr. hensarling: the gentleman's time has expired. the chair now recognizes the gentleman from ohio, mr. stivers. mr. stivers: thank you, mr. chairman. chairman yellen, thank you for being here today. the gentleman to my left, mr. hurt from virginia, already talked about the reason for this hearing is statutorily mandated around your supervisory roles.

normally it would be vice chair of supervision here who is supposed to be presidentially appointed, senate confirmed. that position still only filled by an acting person, governor trilliono sacramentoing in that capacity. when was he appointed by you to that acting position? chair yellen: i guess i won't call it an acting position. we have a committee system in which up to three governors oversee particular functions that we carry out. supervision is one of those functions. there are other areas reserved, oversight of reserve banks, and so forth. this is a long-standing practice and the chair of the committee on banking supervision whose governor turillo, that individual is -- mr. stivers: how long has he been doing that? chair yellen: he's been doing that i think -- he did that

under chairman bernanke since he joined the fed. i think that was 2009, if i'm not mistaken. mr. stivers: five years. so not having him here, even though he's acting in that role, reduces the accountability. it reduces the interaction that the person in that supervisory role should have. my question for you is, will you commit to allowing him to accompany you to these hearings in the future? these semiannual hearings? chair yellen: governor turillo has testified on many occasions to our oversight committees and usually stands ready to do so. i certainly have no concerns about having him come up and answer questions. mr. stivers: i hope you'll bring him with you nix time because he's the one making a lot of decisions. i know you're his boss and engaged. but we really need him here because these are important.

the next area i'd like to quickly talk about is the impact of regulation. as you know we don't live in a static world. we live in a dynamic world. every time we take an action, there are responses to that action. regulation has increased the compliance cost for many financial institutions, created barriers to entry, and actually the result has been consolidation of assets in the too big to fail banks. it's almost been the opposite of what we as policymakers would have liked to have seen. and on the volcker rule, the result has been a reduction in the number of market makers which is a market utility function that provides important liquidity during a crisis. i guess i would just ask you, are you trying to look at these unintended consequences because in both these cases we are actually making -- creating

problems through unintended consequences? chair yellen: we certainly are looking at consequences. and in particular in the case of market liquidity that you mentioned, that is something we are looking into very carefully. mr. stivers: i hope you guys will do a report on it. i think there are a lot of driving forces to it. there is basic business simplification, volcker rule, the coming u.l. standard. there are a lot of things driving it. i would like you to do an important analysis of it because liquidity is so important to anybody, whether they are a small 401-k person or a large corporate entity because we all enter and exit through the capital markets. if there is no liquidity, the marketplace doesn't work. chair yellen: completely agree. and that is why we are looking at it. we issued a report on the october 15 episode -- mr. stivers: one more thing i want

to get it. i hope you'll look at the volcker rule as potentially another way to look at volcker is separately capitalize those activities. it takes away the whole argument and doesn't make it as complicated. yesterday your i.g. issued a report that showed with regard to stress tests there were six problems that were found in the fed's own stress test. if it had been a member bank, they would have required immediate attention. i have only seen media reports on this. i look forward to reading the report on it. but in light of these highly critical things in the report, you plan to undertake any changes that would create more transparency and accountability in the stress testing process with regard to the fed? chair yellen: as i understand it the i.g.'s findings had to do with our model. mainly with our model validation procedures and those are matters that we certainly will look into

in an attempt to strengthen. mr. stivers: i think we should probably request a more complete review by the i.g. on all that. thank you. mr. hensarling: the gentleman's time has expired. the chair now recognizes the gentleman from missouri, mr. leaver, 7878 ranking member -- ranking member. . mr. cleeverpb -- r. cleaver: thank you. it's been a little over year ago that the congress gave you the authority to tailor standards for insurance companies. those who would qualify for enhanced supervision. there is, as you know, a great deal of angst 8. there's maybe even panic on the part of the interest companies over the fact that they don't know what's going on. and fear what may come.

to the degree that you can speak about this publicly, i would present you with that opportunity because it would lso help us, help me, as i'm asked questions over and over and over again from that industry. chair yellen: we know that this is a very important matter. we understand that insurance companies are different than banks in important ways. in particular the natur of their liabilities is in many cases quite different from that of banking organizations. we appreciate the flexibility that we were given to tailor appropriate rules and we are working very hard to get it right. to understand the nature of the business, to consult with the firms. with the insurance, state insurance commissioners, with our colleagues. and the federal insurance office.

we are consulting widely and thinking very carefully about what the appropriate regime is. when we have made this set of initial decisions, we'll go out with a notice of proposed rule making likely, and ask for comments. so we will go through an open and transparent process in deciding on what the appropriate supervision is. and allow for comments that we will carefully respond to. mr. cleaver: i don't want to ask you to give me a date certain, but is the process moving along? chair yellen: yes. people are working very hard and i'm sorry i can't give you a date certain. but this is something that our staff is working on very hard. it's a high priority. sfed eaver: similarly the

-- fed is a member of the international association ever insurance advisors. we got to do something about that acrow nism. the federal government. especially this committee, mr. chairman. we need to do something. your mission is to promote effective global consistent supervision of the insurance industry. , i think, at a point now where -- maybe it's because the 2008 collapse, everybody's nervous about everything. and everybody's afraid that there's a new regulation that's going to come in -- >> just to let you know the hearing with the fed chair continues until about 1:00 eastern or so. can you follow it live online at c-span.org. we'll take you live shortly to the floor of the u.s. house. they are gaveling back in for a second day of work on highway

and mass transit funding with some 81 amendments under consideration. could be a long day in the u.s. house with plenty of votes. live coverage here on c-span. the speaker: the house will be in order. the prayer will be offered by our chaplain, father conroy. chaplain conroy: let us pray. god, our creator, we give you thanks for giveing -- for giving us another day. you brought light from darkins and order from kay -- darkness and order from chaos. lead our lawmakers using their daily experiences of joy and sorrow, pleasure and pain, victory and defeat to strive together for your glory. may the fruits of their labor read down to the benefit of our nation. as