mr. chairman. in opposition, again, this amendment simply makes a fiction out of what's actually happening in the budget. again, there's an increase in funding for medicare over the next course of the budget. over 80% increase in funding for medicare. washington, d.c., like i said earlier, is the only place where a decrease in the rate of increase is a cut and i would urge opposition to this. my amendment would repeal the -- senator sanders: senator harris. senator harris: this amendment is co-sponsored by senators sanders, murray, stabenow and myself. it will restore the $473 billion in cuts to medicare paid for by reducing the republican tax breaks for the wealthy and i urge my colleagues to vote yes on this amendment. senator enzi: thank you. all time -- is there anyone else who wishes to speak? all time has expired. for the reasons stated earlier i oppose the amendment. the question is on the amendment. i assume you want a roll call. the clerk will call the roll. the clerk: mr. grassley. senato

mr. chairman. >> everyone can leave. >> mr. chairman cannot have your unanimous consent to ask my request the recorded as a no vote on the motion to table number one? >> certainly. >> thank you. >> can we thank staff? >> that's what i was going to do. staff on both the sides of the isle had been tremendous and working together and putting together a process so that people knew what was going to be voted on and so that it could be expedited and i think that is one of the quickest markups we have had and particularly want to thank ranking member for his cooperation in the cooperation of all the senators. >> thank you. i vote the process was excellent and thank you to your staff. >> we will keep working on the process to get a better. >> thank you. [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [i

mr. chairman. our budget requires 11 authorizing committees to find a minimum of $203 billion in savings and reforms over the 10-year budget window. with an expektation that the reforms will result in significantly higher sings. this package of mandatory reforms is the largest since the 1990's through reconciliation, and it is the first step to change the culture of washington and our spending. our budget also promotes tax reform and regulatory reform to get the federal government out of the way and allow our free market economy to thrive. the larger the government, the less freedom for individuals and businesses have to thrive, grow, hire, and innovate. the obama economy left millions with with over 14d million people leaving the labor work force in just the last eight years. through reconciliation, our budget specifically paves the pro-growth tax reform will reduce taxes for the middle class americans and ee up american businesses to grow and to hire. it will also simplify the tax code, allowing a

mr. chairman. mr. king: under the rules, will to him.ime to contend contend i remember when you were governor, you were a fine governor. let me explain gently why i think my way is better. what i'm proposing in this amendment was proposed by president clinton with respect to tanf, and it has worked. it has worked in every single state. and it's worked because president clinton -- he didn't approach it being hard hearted or the purpose wasn't to throw anybody out in the cold. the purpose was to help people understand the dignity of being self-sufficient. now some people respond well to reason. when they see the light. others need to feel the heat. my son is in the latter category. what i'm proposing is a rule that just says, if you want to access these programs and you're healthy and don't have children and you are relatively young, then you have to work 20 hours a week, we'll help you get a job. look at the labor participation rate. there are jobs available. if you don't want to work, that's cool, you

mr. chairman. >> mr. chairman. >> the gentleman from iowa is recognized. >> i would withdraw my point of order but ask to be recognized to describing the last word. >> without objection the point of order is withdrawn and the gentleman continues to be recognized. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i want to just examine this as i understood the base bill, too, that it guarantees that if there is a standard wage that exists there, say $15 and change an hour but under this bill you would still have to pay $15 and change an hour and the gentleman from new york disagrees with me, but i wanted to pose that question to him and i wanted to ask you also if the gentleman would yield to a question, where do you determine the wages, how does that determine the prevailing wage within meat packing plants, for example? >> please, and i would yield to the gentleman from new york. >> if you look at the bill on page 18 that provides the provisions that you thought guarantee the market wage, but just look at the language from line

mr. chairman. the cdc and prevention has called for drug overdose and abuse in the united states and epidemic has found drug overdose to be the leading cause of death in the the united states. between 1999 and 2010 the death rate from prescription painkillers quadrupled and only continues to rise. in 2015 more than 52,000 people died in america and two-thirds of those were linked to opioids. the total is only rising. . the "new york times" analysis of preliminary data found that likely died from overdoses in 2016. today it's estimated more than 2 million have an abuse disorder and too few are in treatment. the rate has increased dramatically in recent years. this rise is directly linked to the opioid epidemic. in 2010 guests were connected to heroin. in 2013, the number jumped to a total of 8,000 overdose deaths and only continues to rise. there's no community that has not within touched by this crisis and some have been ravaged by. so much is needed to come at it when families are being torn apart.

mr. chairman. before i share my thoughts on this bill, i'd like to express my deep condolences to the nearly 60 families that lost luvled ones and the over 500 people who were injured by a man armed to the teeth earlier this week in las vegas. i urge my colleagues to join me and other gun owners to pass commonsense reforms to prevent further mass casualty attacks. while the fbi has found no link to isis, this is clearly a domestic terrorist attack. turning to the matter at hand, a simple promise input's campaign was that he would build a big, beautiful wall across the entire southern border and mexico would pay for it. that was a time in a not too distant past when this committee cared about farkcts, data and results. we supported them having a border strategy, presenting matrix and deploying personnel and equipment to adjust to threats. last month the department of homeland security provided evidence that our responsible approach to border security is paying off. in a 20-page report dhs concluded a

mr. chairman. mr. chairman, this amendment establishing a -- establishes a deficit neutral reserve fund to allow for a constitutional amendment to overturn citizens united and reform our broken campaign finance system by moving toward the public funding of elections. mr. chairman, in my view, the republican budget we're discussing today is patently absurd. it gives massive, massive tax breaks to the wealthiest people in this country. it makes horrific cuts to medicare and medicaid. it forces about 30% of middle class families to pay more in taxes. and it also allows for massive cuts to education, nutrition, and environmental protection. now, why would anybody want to like proposal a budget this? i think it has a lot to do with an article that appeared on june 26 in the guard -- in "the guardian" newspaper. let me quote the article. quote, at a weekend donor are-treat attended by at least 18 elected official the koch brothers washed that time is running out to push their agenda most notably, health care

mr. chairman. the sentrs for disease control and prevention has called for prescription drug over dose and an epidemic has found drug over dose to be the leading cause of injury death between 1999 and 2010 the death rate from prescription pain killers only continued to rise. in 2015 more than 52,000 people died of drug over doses in america. about 2/3 were linked to opioids. the new york times found that 59,000 to 65,000. today more than 2 million have use disorders and the rate of heroin over doses has increased dramatically and the rise is directly linked to the opioid epidemic. in 2010 approximately 3,000 drug poisoning dects were connected to heroin. and only continues to rise. there's no community that hasn't been touched by this crisis and some have been ravaged by it. so much is needed to combat it when communities across the country are being torn apart. and the state targeted response of the grant program. it provided money to states to address the opioid epidemic. extending this money is a

mr. chairman. thank you very much. as i think everybody doe knows,i believe in the people on our side believe that the budget being brought forth is one of the most unfair and destructive budgets ever proposed in the modern history of the country. it provides incredible tax breaks to the wealthiest people in this country while it makes trillions of dollars in cuts to the needs of working people in terms of healthcare, medicaid, medicare, education of our mental protection. and in terms of programs that many people desperately need. space on the robin hood principle in reverse. it takes from working people to give to millionaires and billionaires. during the coast of the debate we have excellent amendments that would address the serious problems of the republican budget. i will call up the first amendment and that sanders limit number one. is simple and straightforward, would establish a 60 boat vote budget point of order to prevent the top 1% of americans, people doing phenomenally well from receiv

mr. chairman, i yield back the balance of my time. . the chair: the gentleman from kentucky has closed for the minority and yielded back. the gentlelady from tennessee is recognized to close for the majority. mrs. black: thank you, mr. chairman. i likewise would like to just say that the ranking member, mr. yarmuth, has just been wonderful to work with and we may have differences of opinion but we can do it in a very southern hospitality way. i just so much appreciate his demeanor, his leadership on the committee, the way he honors the members of the committee, both democrats and republicans, and it has just been a joy to work with him. i'm going to miss working with him and being able to have lively debate which is good this body and good for america. -- is good for this body and good for america. i want to also thank all the member who was participated in the debate today, both democrats an republicans. this is what our democracy is about. being able to voice our opinions and at the end of the day, being able to come to a conclusion af

mr. chairman. mr. smith, thank you for being here this morning, and certainly, we all are a tad confused about the knowledge that you had and your execs had, seem to -- at least the stock sales seem to suggest more information than we are getting here. so i just want to walk through the numbers as well as the timeline to better understand and appreciate what happened. you said they did not know about the breach, but there was suspicious activity that was reported. did you know about the suspicious activity on july 29th? >> no, sir, i did not. >> you were not notified about the suspicious activity? >> i was, but not on the 29th. >> the 31st, you were notified? >> yes, correct. >> okay. so the very next day after you were notified, your senior executives, including your cfo, sold $1.8 million, nearly $2 million of stock for a profit of, comparatively speaking to your september 7th valued stock, for about $655,000. so at a price that the execs sold their stock for, netted them comparatively speaking to th

mr. chairman. mr. mccaul: mr. payne is recognized. mr. payne: thank you. mr. chairman, for every border patrol agent we have put in the ield over the last decade, apprehension rates have decreased. i agree with my colleagues on the other side of the aisle that perhaps having more boots on the ground is having a deterrent effect. however, i also ask my colleagues to consider that the flow of individuals attempting to cross the border illegally has been falling at a steady rate for the last 60 years. in fact, the cato institute found that when the data on the number of agents deploy to the southwest border was combined with the apprehension rates, the average border patrol agent apprehended less than two people per month in twoucks. -- 2016. of course, certain sectors have different rates of apprehensions than others, but i just do not see the rationale based on the overall picture for adding another 5,000 border patrol agents to the field. this observation is supported by the department's own inspector general. this summer the inspector general found that c.b.p.

mr. chairman, for 3711. >> yes. the clark will report the amendment. >> amendment to the amendment in the nature of the substitute offered by mr. smith of texas offered by mr. conyers in section two -- >> objection the amend the considered as read. >> i thank the gentleman and members of the committee, this amendment corrects a serious imbalance in the bill by adding an enforcement mechanism to the bill's worker protections. this added enforcement mechanism is very necessary. hr-3711 contains several requirements intended to protect american workers, but these provisions are really nothing more than mere suggestions without any associated mechanisms for enforcement. as we know, the bill imposes a series of new mandates on employers, including requirements that they, one, verify approximately 54 million new hires each year. two, re-verify current employees in certain circumstances. three, notify dhs if the employer chooses not to terminate an employee after receiving a final nonconfirmation. and four and last, refrain

mr. chairman. let me begin by echoing your words about the senator and what an excellent senator he was. and also let me thank you for doing what no other proves budget committee chairman has done. you and your staff have released your budget resolution five days prior to our markup. we think that's an all-time world's record. and i appreciate that very much. mr. chairman, at a time when the american people are dealing with the horrible mass murder in las vegas, we're dealing with the incredible destruction that has taken place in texas, florida, puerto rico, and the virgin islands because of the recent hurricanes, people are asking wrong? what else do we have to worry about? and i am very sorry to have to inform the american people that they do have something else to worry about. and that is that this republican budget, the budget we're dealing with today s in my view the most unfair and destructive budget in the modern history of our country. and if it were to be passed, and we all on this side of

mr. chairman. i yield myself such time as i may consume. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. mr. goodlatte: our system of government is a tripartite one with certain responsibilities delegated to it. the congress is charged with writing the law the executive with enforcing the laws and the courts with interpreting them. this forwards against the abuse of power by any one branch. the separation of pow sers at the core of the fundamental premisele of our constitutional design that a limited government, divided in three branches, exercises enumerated powers is necessary to protect individual liberty and the rule of law. unfortunately, over the last several decades, congress has aloud its powers to gradually be chipped away at by the other branches. by allowing its powers to be diminished, congress, especially this house, effectively permitting the people to be deprived of their most responsive voice in the federal government. through the legislation before us today, and other legislation that the h

mr. chairman, mr. chairman flake, ranking member franken, and the honorable members of the subcommittee. thank you for the opportunity to testify before you today. as the chairman mentioned my name is rick smith and for the past 12 years i've had the honor to be the chairman and ceo of equifax. i've submitted written testimony earlier, which goes into much greater detail than i will today. i look forward to answering any questions that you may have. as you might guess over the past month or so i've talked to many consumers and read their letters, and i understand how frustrated and fearful many americans are about the breach that happened at equifax. this is my third hearing in two days, and in each of these hearings i have said that there's no doubt that this criminal attack happened on my watch, and the responsibility as ceo of the company stops with me, and i take full responsibility for letting that breach occur. i want to say to every person in this room and every american that i am truly sorry for

mr. chairman. equifax, we know so well, waited six weeks to disclose its cyber breach, the identifier is 143 million americans were in the hands of criminals as we know. companies may often say if a matter does not have a material impact on its financial results they don't need to disclose it to investors and the public. is materiality the right when a company has a breach and americans personal information is stolen? >> senator, i believe materiality is the core of our disclosure system. i believe it's the touch tone. going to your question about whether companies are making the right materiality assessment, i think that's a very good question. >> so when it's left in the hands of the company with the sec from your -- that response, doesn't seem as engaged in this question and this issue as we might like. they may continue this kind of behavior. >> companies should be disclosing more. i'm not going to talk about a specific company or circumstances. that's inappropriate in my position. as i look ac

mr. chairman. i now am pleased to yield to the chairman of the republican study committee, the honorable mark walker of north carolina, for three minutes. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for three minutes. mr. walker: thank you, mr. speaker. $22.2 trillion. our national debt is more than $22.2 trillion. let's put it this way. each american's share of the national debt is $62,000. from the retiree in north carolina who has already done so much to serve the country, to the newborn child in new york with so much potential, $62,000. in fact, it's more than the median american family brings home in an entire year. our debt continues to mount even as federal reserves reach record highs. this leads to an undeniable conclusion even from captain obvious. the federal government has a spending problem. the growing federal government has significant negative consequences for the country and its people. the large federal debt reduces investment, productivity and wages while federal interventions in the ec

mr. chairman, and mr. chairman, welcome to the committee. >> thank you. >> i want to focus on some of the challenges that over regulation is putting on smaller businesses and smaller investors. you may be aware of a small business we had in arkansas, called walmart, it provides a lot to arkansans, their groceries and their kids clothes and everything under the sun. i have in my hand, from 1970, walmart ipo document. that's walmart's ipo from 1970. i have in my hand a snap ipo document from just last year, 247 pages, 10 times the size of walmart's ipo. i think this explains one of the reasons why we have so many fewer ipos than we once did, especially for smaller firms, i don't think you can attribute it simply to the dotcom boom from 20 years ago, after all other countries have seen a 50% increase in listed companies during the same time period. and the types of those ipos have declined as well. that means ultimately that small investors, the kind of people that investigated in wal-mart, based on this, a do

mr. chairman. i appreciate it. mr. smith, one of my constituents accessed equifax's website, equifaxsecurity2017.com to determine if they were effected. they inform me that whether you submit your own identifying information or whether you submit a random name and social security number, you get the same message that you may be affected. what course of action should consumers who haven't received correspondence yet as to whether they're effected or not, what is the course of action, and if they were affected, what are the next steps? >> congressman, it's my understanding that those have gone online to register and that were not notified immediately, that that backlog is completely now drained, if you will. so if you are trying to sign up for the service, i understand your question correctly, you have now been notified. >> okay. i understand that equifax currently is waiving fees to freeze and unfreeze your credit. how long is that exemption going to stay in place because it's so very important? >> it is important, cong

mr. chairman. since the new issue including the subtitle quote premature retirement of fuel secure generation reliability and resiliency -- [inaudible] however, mr. secretary, the study that was conducted by own agency indicated that diversity made the grid more reliable and a senior official testified in june stating that the state of reliability in north america remains strong and trendlines show continuing improvement year-over-year, in the quote. mr. secretary, how did you arrive at the conclusion that -- [inaudible] somehow more reliable and resilient and other sources of generation and, therefore, should receive additional compensation? >> mr. rush, thank you. one of the things that i think is really important is that your life experiences kind of inform you about future events. and this is a great example of it, and i respect the ferc members of use, you know, i think their picture is one that is a snapshot of time. there are blue skies, the sunshiny, the winds blowing, the pipelines are cari

mr. chairman. >> general sessions, i would like to swear you at this point. do you affirm that the testimony you're about to give before the committee will be the truth, the whole truth, and not but the truth, so help you god? yeah. before you speak, i would lake to -- we have a long session ahead of us here, probably with you, i don't -- because there's going to be a lot of questions. since we did not get a copy of your opening remarks, i was wondering if it would be possible for you to submit your longer remarks and maybe summarize so we can get to questions sooner. but i'll defer to you, but that's my request, but whatever time you need, take it. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i appreciate the opportunity to be with all of you. ranking member feinstein and distinguished members of the committee, former colleagues and friends, i appreciate this opportunity. it's an honor of a lifetime, you have to know, for me to serve as attorney general, of the united states of america. you can understand and know

mr. chairman. mr. sullivan, let me ask you, during the debate over the iran agreement the obama administration repeatedly charged opponents of the flawed and i think egregiously flawed deal that somehow we were pushing for war. nothing could have been ever further from the truth in that false allegation. let me ask you this. is iran's behavior increased aggressiveness, build out on ballistic missiles, what you expected from the deal? mr. sullivan: thank you for the opportunity. to clarify this point i never believed in negotiating this deal from the beginning that producing a nuclear agreement with iran, arms control agreement with iran we would fix iran. mr. smith: let me ask you this. secretary of state john kerry said on cnn or reported by cnn january 21 of 2016 that money from the deal that the iranians were getting would go to terrorists. to whom has that gone? who are the terrorists and how much? mr. sullivan: as i understand it the trump administration d.i.a. chief has said the bulk of that mone

mr. chairman. >> thank the senator. mr. chairman. >> in the event i can't get back or have a witness, is that possible if it's on the second panel? i have a panelist today from south dakota. incredibly capable general manager and telecommunications cooperative which is in wall, south dakota. . . . . . there. he'll be 98 in december. he spends a lot of time wahoffing cable and the internet and probably one of my most informed and least paid constituents. inevitably, he calls me to complain about whatever he's seeing that we're doing. golden west has been around for a long time and denny has a 27 year history in that industry all in south dakota. and what makes his current job as ceo of golden west telecommunications so challenging is his company's location in one of the most rural areas of the country. with ranch and farming operations positioned miles apart and often one to two hours from a larger city like rapid city. yet he's managed to meet the challenges by developing reliable broad brand providing access for jobs, educa

mr. chairman. mr. secretary, welcome to the energy and commerce committee. we're delighted to have you here to share your thoughts and view with us and answer your questions. we appreciate your leadership. i understand the d.o.e. held a ceremony yesterday to celebrate its 40th birthday as cabinet agency. i think you'd have to agree lots has changed in this country and in the world since congress created the department of energy, especially in the national security and energy security space where d.o.e. provides critical functions for country. while the domestic and international energy posture is substantially different from the 1970s i do not believe the importance of d.o.e.'s role serving the nation and public interest has diminished. this past august secretary perry joined me at an energy roundtable with local officials and energy leaders at mcnary damn in oregon wh which plo pro-deuces power for bonneville power administration. secretary perry i did not leave the county without one of our famous

mr. chairman. mr. chairman, i want to respond to things i've been hearing from my colleagues and elsewhere, including these shrill and wildly inaccurate charges about the tax reform that i hope we will accomplish. we've heard that tax reform is robin hood in reverse. we've heard that it is tax reform for billionaires and millionaires and the 1%. we heard that 80% of the benefits are going to go to the top 1%. the source of these allegations seems to be the tax policy center. that is described as a nonpartisan organization, but as we know it is a creature of the urban institute and the brookings institution, two left of center organizations entitled to their point of view. let's not kid ourselves about there is a point of view. what is really unfortunate, we are going to have our differences. in the end when we produce a tax reform, my democratic colleagues may not like it. it has not been written yet. it is beyond absurd to identify a precise percentage of benefit in a tax reform that is going to go to

mr. chairman. >> thank you, mr. chairman. so i want to follow up if i can on this question about athe tack aices on voting systems. seems like the russians are pretty happy with those efforts, and i don't see any reason to believe they won't try again. in fact, mr. krebs, your predecessor at homeland security recently urged congress to quote, have a strong sense of urgency about russian tampering in the up coming elecks. and i know homeland security designated our cyber security as a critical infrastructure earlier this year. so i would like to follow up on a question that the senator was just asking. and what i think i heard you say, are are you confident our nation is prepared to fully prevent another round of cyber intrusions into our election systems in 2018 or 2020, mr. krebs? >> so what i would say is we have structures in place, this is not an overnight event. we are not going to flip a switch and be 100% secure. >> so we're not there now? >> we are working towards our goal of securing -- >> it's a simple question. so

mr. chairman. so mr. secretary, i appreciate your willingness to testify before the committee today and i hope to work with you going forward. this type of hearing is critical to making our government work better and i hope we will see you here again and hope we'll see some of the other cabinet secretaries and agency representatives as well. thank you. i yield back. >> gentleman yields back. at this point we will welcome the secretary's testimony. it is made part of the record in its entirety and we will let you summarize it. following that, we will do questions from the dais. so welcome again. thank you. chairman,ou, mr. ranking member rush, it's my privilege to be in front of you and the other members of the committee. i'm proud to be able to represent this administration in front of you, proud represent the department of energy. been a couple of months since i appeared before congress and want to take this opportunity to highlight the progress that we made towards achieving our goals at d.o.e. i'

mr. chairman. and mr. secretary, thanks for being with us today. >> yes, sir. >> like you, i believe in promoting energy security, and that means energy policy of the united states. and i would like to take a moment to thank you for your recent actions to start those conversations about energy mix and energy markets. and i would like to now focus on a couple of items of legislation i've been working on. mr. secretary, in addition to the mandatory efficiency standards, there's also a voluntary program called energy star, that identifies those appliances that go above and beyond the federal efficiency standards by allowing them to carry the energy star label. this label allows consumers who want ultra efficient appliances to easily identify which models save most energy. however, in 2009, the obama administration shifted the lead role for this voluntary program from the doe to the epa. many have complained that the epa is the wrong agency to handle what is fundamental liang energy program. and mr. secretary,

mr. chairman. and mr. secretary, general dunford, thank you for being here and thank you for your service to our country. in president trump's august 21st speech, the president stated that he had lifted restrictions placed on our war fighters and the expanded targeting authorities. i know you understand this is, obviously, critical that congress be kept appraised of the outcomes as a result of these changes so we can continue to conduct the appropriate level of oversight. can you clearly define for me what are the restrictions have been lifted and what results have you seen since the changes were made thus far? >> sir, the nato o plan had certain objectives in mind. it's organized to bring the afghan army into a stronger position. and in some cases we were not giving the army the high ground. in other words, have fought in the mountains, it's a very uncomfortable feeling when the enemy is above you. we did not give the young afghan boys the sense that they had the high ground when they were fighting agains

mr. chairman. >> next is senator wyden and senator johnson. >> it sounds like it is changing into a meeting of the senate finance committee. that will make you feel like a part of a prolonged root canal surgery. let me lay out a couple of points, with regards to taxes. what we are talking about is a trillion dollar elephant in the room. this entire budget is about setting up another crack at reconciliation for a partisan deficit-exploding tax cut. the majority leader has said, and i share crapo's view on how important it is to be bipartisan on this. senator stabenow out and i sit together on the committee. we are intensely committed to a bipartisan approach. the majority leader ruled that out and he said that we are not going to do a bipartisan approach. he said we are going to do a partisan approach and he is set on using reconciliation to jam through a republican plan. we can forward with our principles for tax reform. republicans said they are for them, like they are for the middle class. if you

mr. chairman. sen. flake: thank you, mr. franken. we will try to chairman grassley. sen. grassley: thank you. for the audience, i don't normally attend all the subcommittee meetings. i have great confidence in our chairman and ranking members. this is such an important one that i want to say a few words, and then i want to go back to the budget committee meeting. chairman flake, i know this is an unfamiliar subject to you and in fact, in the last congress, you held a hearing in this on the data broker industry security standards for protecting personal information. andpreciate your hard work a bipartisan approach that you and senator franken have taken in examining this issue over a long period of time. today's hearing continues this committee's long-standing history of being involved in our committee and data breach and data security. we have held hearings to examine past data breaches and spent years working on legislation to establish a uniform national data security and breach notification standard, while our progress in congress has been criminal hackers finding ways

mr. chairman. >> senator purdue. >> thank you, mr. chair. mr. sa loloan, thank you for be here how many states does wells fargo operate today? >> all of them >> are you regulated in every one of those states? >> yes >> how many federal regulators do you have today? occ, federal reserve, cfbb, is that correct >> security regulators, too. >> were you supervised 2007, 2016, were you supervised by the federal reserve? >> yes >> in their oversight, and i'm sure they were quite involved, did they reveal any material issues during that period of time >> they have, but that's confidential information that i can't disclose, but we have an act of dialogue -- >> relative to this breach -- >> in terms of the retail accounts no, they did not >> were you supervised by the occ during this period of time >> yes >> did that oversight reveal material issues related to this situation? >> yes, it did, and the prior comptroller of the currency, mr. curry, has testified to that >> did the cfpb come up with anything, any material issues, during this period of time >>

mr. chairman. >> thank you, mr. chairman. first, i'd like to note and think some of my colleagues here that we've launched a bipartisan congressional infrastructure caucus, that includes mr. graves and mr. duncan and john pat maloney. we'll be working to get our colleagues in all different committees not just this committee. as we've been discussing here today the revenue aspects are incredibly important. that the false ways and means and energy and commerce as well as we look at how technology is rapidly changing the needs and demands. i wanted to let you know that an urge in your my colleagues who are not yet members, sign up today. okay, mr. defazio is starting the bidding, thank you. we are being outcompeted by china and other countries that are robustly investing in their infrastructure, and we don't have 20 or 40 years to wait to get on with it. mr. mccarty, you encapsulated the remarks of many of the manufactures in my district who are looking at us and saying how can you possibly compete with i can't get my goods to m

mr. chairman, mr. smith, we are addressing a very egregious concern in our country, concerning our financial inf infrastructure, our government spends hundreds of millions of dollars every year regarding cyber security measures well as energy companies and other institutions. to date, we're aware that not just the 143 million consumers' personal information was exploited, but additionally, the there's now another 2.5 million people that's been affected by this initial account. can you assure us that the 2.5 million are the last americans whose data has been compromise inside. >> congressman, can you repeat the last part of your question? >> can you assure that the additional 2.5 million people who have been reported that their data has been compromised, is that the last? >> yes, it's my understanding, from the forensic experts, that one movement from the time you announced to the final conclusion is not unusual. and number two is, while i have not had a chance to read the press release myself, it's my

mr. chairman. i much appreciate you holding this hearing today on this very important issue with this outstanding panel of witnesses. the united states has a generous refugee program as provided millions people playing persecution. we resettled [inaudible] refugees and the last fiscal year we rattled 53716 refugees. while we should continue the great tradition it has become clear that our refugee laws and policies have been abused and they need to perform. the refugee act of 1980 created our current refugee resettlement process in which the president sets the annual limit for the number of refugees the united states can resettled during the next fiscal year. he sets forth who can be admissible as refugee and how and when those refugees can adjust to lawful permanent status. he is put in place a process for the federal government to work through nongovernmental agencies to be settled refugees. thirty-seven years later members of congress and the american public are voicing a growing number of concer

mr. chairman. i yield myself as much time as i may consume. the chair: the gentlewoman is recognized. mrs. black: i thank the gentleman. i do want to just begin this next section by making a brief comment on my good friend from kentucky, who has been using some information off of forbes. as he responds to our speakers. i just want to say, i went out to look at forbes, to see what was on forbes while we were on this brief intermission. and found this article that was just in forbes, just the day before yesterday. that does say g.o.p. tax framework is a pay raise for middle class families. i encourage people to take a look at this because it actually does some scenarios for what we know at this point in time. however i do want to say that what has been put out is a framework and it doesn't really have enough details to give too much on these scenarios, because there are some very important pieces that are missing. so guessing on these key points really doesn't allow us to do a truly proper analysis.

mr. chairman. >> i can tell you were not paying attention to my opening statement and i want to know-- i understand you are getting ready to go to burma? >> we hope to put that together and i would like to invite all the members of the committee to join us. >> distinguish ranking member? >> to senator merkley, first of all happy birthday and you really note where to go decelerating birthday. we appreciate your willingness to take that trip. mr. chairman, thank you so much for holding this hearing. now it's a burma. another country that's committing ethnic cleansing. another country under the watch of the international community that is allowed to perpetrate an atrocity. make no mistake about it atrocities are taking place in burma. we have humanitarian crisis. we have perpetrators who expect immunity and there's no reason to doubt that in fact that may in fact occur. this is ethnic cleansing i know that the administration is evaluating that as we hold this hearing. ethnic cleansing is defined by th

mr. chairman. the chair: mr. speaker, the committee of the whole on the state of the union has had under consideration h.r. 732 and pursuant to the house resolution 577, i report that the bill as amended back to the house with a further amendment adopted in the committee of the whole. the speaker pro tempore: the committee has reported has had under consideration the bill h.r. 732 and pursuant to house resolution 577, reports the bill as amended by that resolution back to the house with a further amendment. under the rule, the previous question is ordered. the question is on the adoption of the amendment. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the ayes have it. he amendment is adopted. the question is on engrossment and third reading of the bill. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the ayes have it. third reading. the clerk: pursuant to settlement agreements which the united states is a party and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: the question is on the passage of the bill. those in favor say

mr. chairman. mr. smith, in your testimony you stated that you are deeply sorry that this event occurred and that you and equifax leadership team have worked tirelessly over the last two months to make things right. however, according to an article in "fortune" magazine published on september 26th, you are retiring with a paycheck worth as much as $90 million. so my question to you, sir, do you believe it is right for you to walk away with a payday worth $90 million when the lives of more than 145 million hard-working americans have been potentially compromised? >> congresswoman i deeply apologize for the breach of those american consumers. i have heard this article. i can't reconcile that number. let me be very clear. >> how much are you getting in your retirement? >> when i retired, i did announce my retirement, and at a time -- so i also told the board back in early, mid september that i would not take a bonus going forward. i also told the board that i would be adviser, unpaid, helping the board, h

mr. chairman. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i'm glad that we're having a discussion about the integrity of our elections and as being fundamental to our democracy. mr. krebs, is a look at this chart, even if it's dated, your responsibility at dhs is to protect critical infrastructure and you did say you have -- you have an election security text force. do you consider dhs to be the lead agency on make sure our election systems are not hacked? >> ma'am, we do have unique statutory authorities to coordinate protection activities across the critical infrastructure, and as a digs nateed critical structure, subcertificate yes. do not physically protect those networks. i enable state and locals and private sector to have better practices. >> but you would be the lead federal agency that would have the responsibility to work with the state and local entities to protect our election systems? >> from a critical infrastructure protection perspective, yes, ma'am, alongside the fbi and intelligence community. >> we're just looking for wres