the financial services committee, always feels welcome at the rules committee. and perhaps not quite as interesting as hr-1. we believe hr-3312 is an important piece of legislation for our economy. it's the systemic risk designation act of 2017. it's an important bill, and i want to accentuate that this is a bipartisan bill. the bill was approved in october in our committee with a strong bipartisan vote. i would point out that a majority of the democrats on our committee voted in favor of the bill hr-3312 was introduced by mr. lukemeyer. the bill reforms what many now agree was a flawed and arbitrary framework, used by regulators in the dodd/frank act to designate systemically important financial institutions, known by their acronyms. it's important to remember that designation anoint the institutions as too big to fail. the current designation subjects any bank with 50 billion or more in assets to the same costly and cumbersome standards as trillion dollar globally systemically important institutions. mr. lukemeyer's bipartisan bill again supported by a majorit

committee and -- on the house judiciary committee and adopted numerous ideas based on their efforts. we also drew on ideas from the senate intelligence committee. i'd like to thank both of those committees for the hard work and careful consideration they put into this issue. without congressional actions, section 702 authorities will expire at the end of the year. the loss of these authorities would be a dangerous blow to the counterterrorism efforts of the intelligence community, decisive congressional action is needed to help american citizens and troops safe from terror attacks at home and abroad. section 702 allows targeting of foreigners located in foreign nations. it's an effective program that's helped thwart potentially devastating terror plots such as the 2009 new york city subway bombing plot. it's also led to the elimination of critical terror suspects such as hajji amman in isis who was killed by u.s. forces in 2016. testimony to this committee from throughout the intelligence community as well as tech la -- declarations from the bipartisan civil liberties oversight board

host: what is the process for the ethics committee to start the investigation? i will show the viewers who sits on this committee. five republicans, five democrats. what prompts them to investigate a fellow member? host: -- guest: there's the office of congressional ethics, nominally independent arbiter of congressional behavior created after the last major wave of congressional scandals around 2006 and the oce investigates these matters and refers it to the ethics committee. if you go on the ethics committee's website, you will be able to see oce referrals past cases, but that's not the only way they can take something up. they can also take something out the majority of the committee recommends that. in that case, they hold on this on conyers. host: what can the ethics committee do? guest: in terms of -- host: in terms of consequences. guest: that's really tough to say. the ethics committee doesn't have the ability to force member to leave the house. ability tohave the require changes to the house rules or set a precedent that would create changes to the house

today, we investigate what congress' ethics committees really do.re they hard core or a place in where ethics investigations a go to die? meredith mcgehee: people who live in glass houses don't like to throw stones. that's the truth on the house and the senate side. sharyl: meredith mcgehee is executive director of issue one, a nonprofit working to drain the washington swamp. that includes reforming how congress investigates misconduct within its own ranks. is it accurate to say that all in of the ethics bodies that oversee congress in some way are created by or beholden to congress? meredith: absolutely. in the people that sit on the ethics committees, one day they're judging whether or not their colleague has violated congressional ethics rules. the next day, they're probably going on the flo t convince them to vote for one of their amendments. so there's a built-in conflict of interest. you sharyl: mcgehee first testified as an expert on the subject twenty years ago. meredith: well, we have a proposal that we've been talking about for a number of

, currently declining to attend the committee to reiterate the view of this committee to the work of the defense committee to appear and whether you will allow them to attend the defense committee. >> responding to the letter you sent me, take, important to recognize national security advisor and to me providing evidence to the joint committee on the national security strategy, coordinating work, and finally to me. and accountable decisions. and and really accountable to parliament, the evidence given to the committee. giving evidence the joint committee on national security strategy where it is appropriate to give evidence, he has always done that. >> a few minutes of the joint committee and defense committee specifically undertaking a review of the national security capability review. it is difficult for them to carry out their work without the appearance before them. and we feel very strongly, what we ask you to consider. >> of the defense committee is looking at national security capabilities in relation to aspects of defense and the defense secretary and his permanent secretary,

committees. the second point i'd like to ake is, we learned through donna brazil's former book that there were, in the last election, during the general election, there were funds being allocated outside of her knowledge. she was not signing the check, she wasn't aware of the checks being signed. and we also learned through the d.n.c. it chair debare that -- debate that executive committee members were not aware of these funds being allocated during the presidential primary and general election. now, what does that mean legally? that means the people have the fiduciary responsibility to this party, were unaware of where the money was going. so god forbid something, hopefully knock on wood, nothing has happened inappropriately, they're held, they're responsible. and they had no idea. so i would also urge, and somehow put this into the language a little bit more clear, that any major budgetary decisions be put before the executive committee as is said, i believe, in the bylaws. but make it very cle

to have this committee do what this committee is already charged to do.cause in here it just reiterates they should do what they're already required to do. and so it doesn't -- to me it doesn't necessarily -- it doesn't make sense to me if we have a committee that's supposed to do a certain thing, then we should let that committee do its work or we should take it up with the chairman or whatever. but to create a committee to make a committee do what it's supposed to do doesn't sound -- and most of us apparently, we don't know much about this committee including the people who were working on this subgroup, which i was not one. so i'm not sure, you know, if we're sufficiently well-informed to do it. >> hold on. i'm sorry, but we have seven people in line to talk and i want to give everybody the opportunity. >> his amendment is being represented as something it is not. i don't think. i want to hear from him, is that the correct characterization of his amendment? >> hold on. if jim can clarify to that point. >> jeff, i know people on the budget committee. i

patty murray and lamar alexander on the health committee are also on that committee as well. they have a proposal that i think makes a lot of sense. kansas would be probably 52,000, 58,000 people that may lose their insurance. that will not happen in terms of kansas, because the insurance companies have already said what they're going to do in terms of premiums. but i think we can make a step forward with that. then we got to get a farm bill. and i know that the house is working hard on that, along with colin peterson, his democratic counterpoint. nator stabenow and i, we get along. last farm bill, i think we marked it up in one morning and several hours. phil, i think you were there. on the floor, we got it done in two days. that's when harry reid shut everything down. we gotit handled 63 amendments. we can do this. we are going to try to work together in early spring. we hope to have a blueprint together that both democrats and republicans can agree with. done onto get something behalf of the farmer and rancher look,eir lenders who say we have to have dependability, we have

the house intelligence committee held an in depth discussion of the house judiciary committee and adopted numerous ideas we also drew on ideas from the senate intelligence committee, i'd like to thank both those committees for the hard work and careful consideration they put into this issue. this is necessary to help keep american citizens and troops safe from terror attacks at home and abroad. it allows for targeting of foreigners located in foreign nations. it's helped thwart potentially devastating terror throts -- plots such as the 2009 new york city subway bombing plot and led to the elimination of critical terror suspects such as the second in command of isis who was locate through the section 072 activities and killed by u.s. forces in 2016. beyond any doubt the program's effectiveness in locating and tracking foreign errorists. though section 702 is subject to numerous layers of oversight, the program's operations should be subject to regular adjustment as necessary to ensure american's privacy and civil liberties are being fully protected. while analyzing the program's current op

of the committee, for co-sponsoring the bill, as well as chairman thornberry on the committee on armed services and i extend thanks to chairman kay granger of the defense appropriations committee and representative ken calvert. all of these members who serve as nonvoting members of the intelligence community all for co-sponsoring this bill. finally i'd like to thank the ranking member of the committee for his work incorporated in this bill particularly the idea of a warrant rirpte for the f.b.i. to review section 702 query returns. at this point i want to yield to -- the remainedmoifer time to mr. rooney who chairs the n.s.a. and cyber subcommittee. mr. rooney: as the chairman mentioned this bill re-authorizes fisa 702 a critical intelligence gathering program targeting foreigners overseas. this was carefully crafted based on our extensive outreach to members of the house, the senate and the administration over the last two years. we provided information sessions both on the hill and at the n.s.a. we've also reached out to member -- at the member-to-member level to discuss authorities

this committee identified several areas. after careful consideration without hindering the programs effectiveness the committee devised to section 702 and other surveillance authorities that are included in this bill. these include briefly requiring procedures separate from the minu minute mization procedures adding optional warrant requirement and restrictions on the use of communications in criminal prosecutions against americans. mandating new procedures related to unmasking of americans temporarily codifying an end to the nsa section abouts collection until the government collects new procedures. improving transparency as well as requiring additional reporting to congress hoon how e community is using other authorities. i would like to thank all of the members of this committee who have cosponsored this bill. i would like to thank a former member for cosponsoring the bill. finally i would like to thank the ranking member that was incorporated in this bill particularly a permissive warrant requirement to review section 70

ideas built by another committee. i thanked him for the hard work and consideration they put into this issue. without congressional action, section 702 will expire at the end of this year. it would be a dangerous blow to the counterterrorism efforts of the intelligence committee. decisive action is needed to help troops and citizens be safe from terror attacks at home and is an section 702 effective program that has helped towards potentially devastating -- helped thwart potentially devastating plots. it has also led to the elimination of critical terror suspects, the second in command of isis who was killed by u.s. forces in 2016. frommony to this committee throughout the intelligence committee, as well as bipartisan on the civil liberties board, executive branch civil liberties watchdog, indicate no doubt of the effectiveness. subject section 702 is to -- operations should be adjustments to ensure privacy and civil liberties are being fully protected. while analyzing the current operations, this committee has identi

i am deeply honored to tear this conference committee, the first tax reform conference committee and 31 years. and to be here with all of you as we move forward with this historic effort. before i deliver my opening remarks, i want to take a moment to welcome everyone to discuss the format of today's meeting. i would also like to thank all of the members of congress trying us today from both sides of the capital, and both sides of the aisle. i also thank all of the members of the house and senate and our professional staff who have worked so hard on tax reform for the past several years, and in particular, the members of the ways and means committee and senator hatch in the finance committee. we will begin with today's meeting with the opportunity of each person to make a statement of up to three minutes. in order to respect everyone's time, i will be in forcing this time limit. once opening things are complete, we will turn to the chief of staff of the joint committee on taxation to provide a brief overview of the house and senate versions of the tax cuts and jobs act. after his pre

on the agriculture committee we are the least partisan committee. but as it affects dodge city, several commodity organizations have come out in favor of the bill. several farm organizations have come out in favor. there's one in particular hat's opposed. it went pretty much along party lines. we've done a pretty good job of putting this bill together. i think it's a good bill. is it the best bill possible? no. it's the best possible bill. and we haven't done a very good job of selling it. n other words, i know that our colleagues across the aisle, if you say tax reform, they immediately say taxes are benefits to the rich. you know, tax cuts for the rich. that's just not the case. so i think the more people understand what is in the bill, and we do a better job of selling it, i think that will change. by the way, i don't know of any poll that was taken in dodge city. >> can you talk specifically about how the tax bill would affect your farmers, and for me and also for the audience, are these farms set up as people that are not corporations, but woul

executive board were proportionate and at the same time the committee tried to protect the rights of individual athletes thus came the decision and of course it has several points and i just want to go through the main ones that i have right here that statement was of course published on the website of the international olympic committee number one is the decision to suspend the russian olympic committee with immediate effect something that is most important for the actual athletes is that they will be invited under strict conditions that is going to be announced a little later to the olympic winter games in pyung chang twenty eight ing these. invited athletes will participate under the name. a limb pick our feet from russia and they will compete with a uniform bearing this name under the olympic flag the olympic athlete i'm sorry will be played in any ceremony what's more what's very important in this case also is that the former russian sports minister will not be able to be present at any olympic competitions any more as official from russia so these are the key decisions key poin

i would like to submit a letter to the committee by members of the committee for the women and accusers to be heard. >> that will be made a part of the record. >> hr 3654 which is a compliment to the bill that was my line of questioning regarding the integrity of the work special counsel. the scheduling if i could stop and ask for scheduling questions are we having another judiciary in the next week? >> not that i know of. i don't think at this point we have any plans. >> this is our jurisdiction and as i go home, despite our likes or dislikes there are so many people living in devastating fear and i know that our engagement with the speaker and the leadership provide some comfort to people who are right now so fearful that they will be on status tunsatisfied had adulo me whose children's friends are about the nature of many of these people because they are so frightened. i don't know whether we could fix it in the committee. we are leaving young people coming home from school and they are fearful it will be rated and immediately deployed. phd candidates and other academic individuals a

>> the committee will reconvene. when we recessed we were in the questioning period with the director of the fbi and the chair recognizes the gentlewoman from georgia for five minutes. >> thank you so much for being here. it is wonderful to seal. i would like to say that given your distinguished and exemplary record of service, i am frankly on the extraordinarily up the mystic side that under your leadership we will see a heightened degree of integrity going forward in the agency. i look forward to that. i wanted to ask a couple of questions around terrorism and isis. you mentioned in your opening the agency had some 1000 active terrorist investigations. to is that volume continuing strain the agency in terms of your resources? dir. wray: it is a good question. thousandsn to those of isis related investigations, we have a similar number two we would classify as homegrown violent extremists. and we would call those isis inspired. lone wolf's who see -- loan wolves. we have a fair number of al qaeda related investigati

and this is the rules committee. live coverage here as long as it lasts on c-span3. [ banging gavel ] rules committee will come to order. and good afternoon. and welcome to another fun day at the rules committee. today we have an exciting panel with two very experienced members who take time to visit the rules committee often. we welcome the young chairman of the financial services committee, the gentleman from dallas, texas, mr. hensarling, as well as the gentlewoman, my dear friend, ms. waters, from los angeles. and we're delighted that you're here. the rules committee today will be considering hr-3971. the community institution mortgage relief act of 2017. and hr-477, the small business mergers acquisition sales and brokerage simplification act. of 2017. and house joint resolution 123, which will be the second part of the hearing today, the continued appropriations act of 2018. m & a brokers provide necessary services for small, private companies that are looking to merge. and/or to be acquired. but m & a brokers

in 2017, poor members of the committee for women of the committee and myself, asking this committee, the women accusers of donald trump to be heard. >> that would be made part of the record. >> i have a line of questions i hope to put in a letter to the deputy attorney general, ask unanimous consent to put that in the record. >> without objection. >> hr 3654, a complement to the senate bill, follows my line of questioning about protection of the integrity of special counsel mueller. >> without objection. >> if i could ask a scheduling question, are we having another judiciary in the next week? >> not that i know of, i do not think we have any plans next week. >> i have been listening, i asked the judiciary committee to be a participant in the dac a fix. if i go home, despite our likes or dislikes there are so many young people living in such fear. our engagement with the speaker, provide some comfort to young people who are so fearful they will be -- adults have come to me whose children's friends are about the suicidal nature of many of these young people because they are so frighte

of international olympic committee and to the international olympic committee is zero tolerance to doping but on the other side the basic orientation is protection of clean sport sport just so little my point of view of you should punish old those who made those people says this and you should allow that but dissipations of all the clean sport distant law expect the executive committee of the international community believes the deal of is the problem and just is the violence the protruded but are they. report was a report. in the certain stage but set. one thing legations and the other seems proves the gulf as a skiff to be put over. to basic produce the purpose of olympic movement out of one universality the additive on the best quality in the world and con see a possibility that big games would be uni was the top level of the quality result the biggest country in the world. due to my knowledge due to a lot to be helpful to put dissipate and i would appreciate it i think that the doping of this is in any county including you can do without the collaboration of the county itself and i th

the congressman is a member of -- projections committee appropriations committee and house rules committee. for those that don't exactly rules committee is explain your role and because it a lot of focus this week on the high profile bills. guest: the rules committee is the oldest standing committees. place where every single piece of legislation goes through authorizing or has to ations committee come through the rules committee before it can go to the floor. we can determine whether or not amendments can be made in rder or what the amendments could be. we can amend the bill if we choose to in the rules committee. is kind of the gate keepers of the legislative prosecutes. you need to do that? why not allow members to make they have enough support on the floor of the house before the final vote happens? a good question. f there is a lot of need to be able to have a filter, something used to be the speaker's committee so it is an pportunity for the majority leadership to be able to have some impact on the legislation to its coming to the floor. robert is calling from georgia, line for democ

we do conference committees. that's normal. so i don't think the factthat -- so i don't think the fact that they don't like our numbers let's them off the hook from doing something. i really appreciate your inclusionship. the first program was in alabama. i was on the state school board when we adopted it. i'm a big believer in chip. it's helped a lot of children in my state. our state is going to send out notices thatthe chip program is going to be ended. it will start very soon. so because i love the chip program and i think it's important i'd really appreciate that be included. i do want to talk about thecr -- to talk about the cr from a standpoint of defense. i do not consider it to be defense spending to be like any other spending we have in government. it is the -- that which not there isn't a country. i have listened as all of us in the armed services have listened to the secretary of defense, the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, all the heads of the services and many other of our generals and admirals tell us the

when she led this committee. but just understand our current chairman made more amendments in order on a single appropriations bill than you were able to do in an entire two years of -- final year as chairman of this committee. it's a hard job that the two of you have. and there is lots to be frustrated about. i just want to recognize successes when we have them. perhaps we have them too seldomly. but we should celebrate them when we do. >> well, i don't want to speak for my colleagues here. but i feel pretty shut out. it's been a long time since we've had amendments. >> okay. we're ready to shut it out again, i guess. >> yield back. >> thank you very much. by the way, this is this part of making legislation. i'm proud that our students are here to see this. we have an amendment on the flo floor, the polis amendment. we've now debated that. i offer the information. we're on a vote that time is running out. and so we're going to move forward. those saying aye. >> aye. >> those saying no. >> mr. cole? >>> no. >> no

crowley's earlier employment include the committee on house admin is ration, also the committee on house oversight and the officers weicker newt gingrich. we welcome you, mr. crowley. the kuwaitis received each each of your written testimony is in you will each now have five minutes to present a summary of that submission. most of you have testified before the >> , so you have the clock in front of you that will help you keep up your time. when you have gone it will be queen for format that will turn yellow for the last-minute and red means you're time is expired. the chair now recognize their witnesses for purposes of the opening statement beginning with eeoc. thank you all for being here today. >> thank you summit chairman harper, ranking member brady, good morning and thank you for the opportunity to testify today about a subject for weeks now has consumed headlines, sexual harassment, but certainly something we have seen to be far too common in this only now been fully brought into light. since early october when news of what was then simply known as the weinstein scandal broke, the

we think that's an important criteria for the committee to consider, and also, at thesub committee meeting, we had discussed the fact that this is based on some previous verbiage. we'd still love to review that policy potentially as part of the committee, but thank you so much for this amended resolution. we appreciate it, and again, the parent feedback that was considered is -- is appreciated by more than just the cac, so thank you. >> nina blanc. >> good evening, commissioners, public, superintendent. i wanted to say how appreciative i am that this is coming before the board, that the board responded in a very thoughtful manner when it first came to the sub committee. there was -- knowing that there was very strong feelings, almost across the district from educators, with different nuances from different divisions and very strong opinions and feelings voiced by the parents, and rather than kick the can down the road, as often happens, i feel the board took on the challenge of finding a way of addressing the need that was being -- was incorporated into the initial resolution. and the usf

the rules of the conference committee the committee report is filed. the public and members will have full opportunity to examine that report and under the regular andess, a vote in the house senate. >> when are you anticipating that being filed? chair: the timetable will be driven by the completion of the conference committee report. asking it be before questions of staff so we know what we are asking about? it is difficult. i appreciate we are here. chair: i anticipate the committee will file its report at the end of this week. >> but today we are asking questions? could you give us a hint to we are asking -- what we are asking questions about question mark chair: the senate passed a bill and the house did and so we will be questioning mr. barthold on the two bills. >> thank you for convening this important meeting. this is an important day as we take another step closer toward enacting the historic tax reform that will help boost america's economy, that will make the system simpler and fair and it will put more money in people's pockets. this will h

crowley's earlier employment includes counsel to this committee, committee on house administration and the committee on house oversight and the office of speaker newt gingrich and we welcome you, mr. crowley. of the committee has received each other and testimonies and you will each now have five minutes to present a summary of the submission. most of you have testified before or see that, so you have a clock in front of youwe to hep you keep up with your time when you have gone it will be green for four minutes and yellow for the last minute and yet read major time has expired. the chair recognizes our witnesses for purposes of the opening statement . thank you-- think all four of you for being here today. >> thank you so much. good morning and thank you for the opportunity to testify today about a subject that for weeks now has consumed headlines on the sexual harassment and surly something we at eeoc have known to be far too common which is only now fully brought into the light. since early october when news of what was then known as the weinstein kit scandal broke the issue of sexu

by the committee or full dnc may not be theen in full sequence of rules and bylaws committee. i have spoken to both individuals about participating in those meetings, even though they have not been officially appointed. that does not solve the gender balance problem. we can do that when we get to the official acts. chair dillon: i will move to final remarks for commission members. than wea bit longer were hoping today, with good reason. we should feel good about that. i would like everyone to give two minutes. let's not go on until the end of time. we will have to call you if you are going to lung. but we would like to hear your remkars for the record. we will start with jan. >> several months ago i introduced myself as being from ames, iowa. i think it is safe to say i have been advocating on behalf of caucuses too much. i think they are worthy of the effort. they are certainly quirky, much like myself, but they are critical to this party and building its base. hope you will continue to the presence of caucuses in the party structure. the most important feature of caucuses is

i look forward to the continued the committee will have on the committee will have on this issue as we work to institute policies that protect staffers against sexual harassment and ensure female staffers are provided leadership opportunities. i urge all of my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to support this resolution. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from mississippi reserves. the gentleman from pennsylvania is recognized. mr. brady: mr. speaker, i yield two minutes to the gentleman raskin.yland, mr. mr. raskin: i thank the member for yielding and his leadership. and salute ms. speier and mr. hearp for their work. i rise in strong support of h.r. 630, which requires all members, staffers, and interns to undergo annual anti-harassment and anti-discrimination training to of us our all individual all of our hill offices and also in our district offices setting forth what the rights and protections are of our employees so they know this is how we got rid of minimum wage violations, violations of overtime protections in america. and this

the judiciary committee is the committee of jurisdiction. everybody has a security clearance. about that later. i don't want to get in the way. that's not the way you provide oversight. they'll talk about everything from the dossier, the personnel problems that are out there. i think you are going to see in particular jim jordan and trey gowdy, john radcliffe, one of the strongest members of that committee and bob goodlatte that will have the most pointed questions and there is no reason why rosenstein should pull back those answers. it is not just to come up and read a press release, it is to actually answer the questions from the american people. >> sandra: if you were sitting in that room what would you be asking him? >> i would be all over this bruce ohr situation. that has such an amazing conflict of interest. and i want to know what is it that happened with that dossier? how was it funded? was that bogus information used to get a fisa court order so they could go spy and the trump administration. if you just keep pounding away at that issue, you need to know the integrit

but this committee has a job to do. president trump has engaged in a persistent and dangerous effort to discredit both the free press and the department of justice. these are the agencies and institutions under our jurisdiction. every minute that our majority wastes uncovering for president trump is a minute lost on finding a solution for the d.r.e.a.m.ers or kucurbing a vicious spike in hate crimes or stopping the president from further damaging the constitutional order. i hope my colleagues will use today's hearings as an opportunity to find their way back to the true work of the house judiciary committee. i thank the chairman and i yield back the balance of my time. >> we welcome our distinguished witness. if you would please rise, i'll begin by swearing you in. do you solemnly swear that the testimony you are about to give shall be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you god? thank you, let the record show that the witness answered in the affirmative. mr. rod rosenstein was sworn in as the

we heard in the rules committee, well, we need more committee deliberation. again, the president took their protections away on september 7. 21. now on december what have you been doing? you said the judiciary committee needs more hearings. they set up a bill, this concealed carry reciprocity bill that allows people from states that almost have no standards to issue permits for people to carry concealed weapons to go to any state in this country and basically endangering my constituents. they brought that to the rules committee and there was not a single hearing, none. and we had this tax scam bill that we just voted on where 83% of the tax breaks go to the top 1% wealthiest in this country. you know the bill that the president just celebrated with my republican friends. that came before this house and not a single hearing on it. now we need to have hearings protecting the dreamers. this is outrageous. these deemers are contributing. we should celebrate and we should value them. they have served in our military. they are out front leading disaster relief effo

a letter by four members of the committee f committee, four women of the committee. myself, miss bass and miss lofren for asking them to hold hearings for the accusers of mr. trump to be heard. >> objection. that will be made part of the record. >> and i have a line of questions that i hope to put in the letter to the deputy attorney general that would not complete. i ask unanimous consent to put that in the record. >> objection. >> then hr 3654, a compliment to the senate bill follows my line of questioning to the integrity of the work special counsel mueller. and mr. chairman, scheduling, if i could stop and ask for a scheduling question. are we having another judiciary do you think in the next week? i would just ask the committee to be an active participant many the daca fix. this is our jurisdiction and as i go home, there are so many people living in fear and i know that our engagement with the speak speaker -- to young people who are right now so fearful that will be unstatused that i've had adults come to me whose children are not daca, but whose children's fr

committee. >> after, and during the conference committee, after the ways and means committee actually passed out of bill and after the senate finance committee passed on the bill. you seek what happened in the case of senator rubio, he city ford additional money. went to 13 hundred the child tax credit and i understand the idea of trying to figure out how to get to a majority but let's not make it sound as though this process was sanitized. >> were the llcs a part of the regular conference or did they -- >> not that it recall. >> came afterwards. do remember all of that business before about the nebraska corn husker buyback? those were gimmicks and obviously were pointed to. my friend seemed to forget that along the way. mr. brady, you were going to say? >> the mlp provision was added in senate before it went to the floor, was voted on. that was not in conference committee. worked out between the house and senate. fully debated on the senate floor. >> now that you bring it up it does allow for 16 members of congress, both in the senate and the house, to make a ton of money, and ain't

this committee nor any committee can prosecute crimes dealing with sexual assault. guest: he's a good man. he's a friend of mine. they are not alleging assault. they are alleging harassment. that falls well within the jurisdiction. we are not accusing the president of crimes. they are accusing him of a civil offense. within our jurisdiction to do investigation. it is within our jurisdiction. a member of the democratic women's working group. she has distinction of serving as the first chair of the equal employment commission. we of calls lined up for you. our first call is from buffalo. republican line. caller: good morning. i want to say's largest with you but i have some concerns. i want to say that i am a sexual is on survivor and a survivor of sexual harassment in the work lace. me wasson who assaulted fired for their actions. haveconcerns me is you senators like christian gillibrand who in the past has benefited from associated with men who have committed sexual assault. up in the soul away to live about being raped at columbia university when the man she accuse

testimony before that committee.d only happened once before in this investigation with carter page. why do we get transcripts from eric prince and carter page but not from anybody else who's testified? last night adam schiff, top democrat on the intelligence, told us this is by design. a unilateral zin by the republicans who for whatever reason want page and prince's testimony made public and nobody else's. the only other transcript we have been promised all this time is that of glenn simpson, the co-found ir of fusion gps, the firm that hired christopher steele to put together the famous trump/russia dossier. in august he spent ten hours testifying to the senate judiciary committee and then gps said it stood behind the dossier and happy to see simpson's testimony released to the public and we could get ten hours worth of testimony about whether the dossier is true or not and why glenn simpson says there is. there's a ton of interest on all sides of what he told the committee about the dossier, questioned him about u

as a member of the oversight committee, i call on all of my colleagues who sit on this committee to support and immediately launch this investigation. regardless of the victim or alleged predator, every voice deserves to be heard. and justice demands transparency, accountability, and due process. thank you. >> thank you. any questions? yeah. >> my first question is, have you gotten any response from the republican chairman about whether he is -- >> not yet. >> and then my second question is, what do you say to republicans who argue this isn't something that congress should be investigating because it happened allegedly before mr. trump took office? >> the question is -- i'm sorry, just so everyone hears the question. is question is what do we say to republicans who say this has already been litigated and this is something that happened before the president was elected. the oversight committee has broad jurisdiction. i will remind everybody of the whitewater investigation many years ago when president clinton was investigated for matters that were outside his presidency. yeah? >> yes. it may

for the committee and the defense committee without that before then but there is precedent to appear and we feel very strongly on the capability in relation to the defense secretary in that particular issue of the rights to the chairman. [inaudible] we need to establish very clearly. if the ministers decide or they are able to agree those who are responsible for the areas of activity to the select committees and the civil service appearances from the relevant select committee for the national security adviser strategy. aspects of defense for the permanent secretary in response to the committee as any other departmental secretary of states would get evidence to the committee. >> [inaudible] is a matter of precedence that has appeared in front of other committees as a matter of principle do they choose their witnesses should be and the government should assist it is not the government to decide which witnesses appear in the committees. the so-called rules are the property of the government and have never been approved by the house and who to put in front of the select committees but it

committee learned mr. pruitt was being summoned to meet with his boss, the president, for 90 minutes around lunch. rather than agreeing to start the whole process over and -- or the hearing earlier, we have -- and to have a defined end time or push the entire their late afternoon start time or find another date, we have come to an agreement which we understand is not ideal but gives members maximum flexibility to question the administrator. we will proceed i've opening statements, the administrator's testimony and members questions until 11:00 a.m. we'll recess at that time and reconvene at 2:00 p.m. in 2322 which is upstairs. we expect the administrator will stave with us until committee members who are present or want to ask questions have been begin their turn to ask questions. i will also note that there's going to be a voting period in this last block and we'll try with then of my colleagues to keep the hearing going through that vote series. if done it before years ago. it's juggling but we'll try to

to such an extent that the committee was actually renamed from the committee on house administration to the committee on house oversight to emphasize the fact that it was not going to be determined at the committee level but by the individual member. so i think that there is some conflict between the congressional accountability act language and the inherent authority that members have over the mra. >> your testimony highlights the speech and debate clause within the constitution. can you explain to the committee how this clause has been interpreted by the supreme court in its applications within the context of the congressional accountability act. >> yes, sir. the lower courts -- i don't think the supreme court has ruled, but the lower courts, d.c. circuit in particular, has ruled that the clause does not preclude suits under the congressional accountability act but there still remains the immunity that is essentially an affirmative defense that members can assert. so we've created sort of a gray area. stepping back to the original discussions around the act, there was case law sayi

crowley's earlier employment includes counsel to this committee, the committee on house administration and the committee on house oversight and the office of speaker nuewt gingrich. and you will each now have five minutes to present a summary of that submission. of course most of you have testified before or seen that so you have a clock in front of you that will help you keep up with your time. when you have gone, it will be green for four minutes and turn yellow for the last minute and red means that your time has expired. so the chair now recognizes our witnesses for the purposes of the opening statement. thank all four of you for being here today. >> thank you so much. chairman harper, ranking member brady, members of the committee, good morning and thank gryou fo the opportunity to testify before you today about sexual harassment but something we have known to be far too common and only now being fully brought into the light. since early october since news of what was known as it weinstein scandal broke, the issue of sexual harassment has dominated the nation's collective conversa

committee. >> after, and during the conference committee, after the ways and means committee actually passed out of bill and after the senate finance committee passed on the bill. you seek what happened in the case of senator rubio, he city ford additional money. went to 13 hundred the child tax credit and i understand the idea of trying to figure out how to get to a majority but let's not make it sound as though this process was sanitized. >> were the llcs a part of the regular conference or did they -- >> not that it recall. >> came afterwards. do remember all of that business before about the nebraska corn husker buyback? those were gimmicks and obviously were pointed to. my friend seemed to forget that along the way. mr. brady, you were going to say? >> the mlp provision was added in senate before it went to the floor, was voted on. that was not in conference committee. worked out between the house and senate. fully debated on the senate floor. >> now that you bring it up it does allow for 16 members of congress, both in the senate and the house, to make a ton of money, and ain't