culberson: mr. chairman, i assert a point of order against the amendment, depending on what the gentleman intends to do. does the gentleman intend to withdraw the amendment? mr. richmond: i would like to know what the point of order is. i'm shifting money from one thing that's in the budget to something else in the budget. mr. culberson: the amendment is subject to a point of order on the basis that it proposes to increase an appropriation not authorized by law, mr. chairman, and therefore is in violation of clause 2-a of rule 21. although the original account funding for the office of juvenile justice contains a number of programs that are unauthorized it was permitted to remain in the bill pursuant to provisions of the rule that proided -- provided for consideration of this bill. when an unauthorized appropriation is permitted to remain an amendment merely changing the amount is in order but the rules of the house apply a quote merely perfecting standards to the item permitted to remain and do not

culberson. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. mr. culberson: the only thing standing between president barack obama's attempt to override the woifl the people as expressed by congress, which is we will not do business with cuba that's the federal law president obama's attempting to change that. the only thing stopping president obama from doing business with the -- with cuba is this language. and language says you cannot do business with the communist military in cuba or the communist intelligence services. so it's very straightforward. if you want to do business with the private sector in cuba, go ahead. all this says is you can't do business with the communist military or communist services so we urge members to vote no against the amendment. the chair: the gentleman from california. mr. farr: it's interesting that the capitalistic society -- capitalist society out there supports my amendment. engaged cue bark the emergency committee on american trade they wrote this letter, we urge house

culberson: mr. chairman, i yield myself such time as i may consume. today i'm very pleased to present to the house the fiscal year 2016 commerce justice, science, and related agencies appropriations bill with my colleague, mr. chaka fattah of pennsylvania. we have worked very closely -- the chair: the committee will be in order. mr. culberson: thank you, mr. chairman. i'd like to begin by thanking my ranking member, chaka fattah of pennsylvania, it's been a pleasure to work with him. we have worked together closely on this legislation. i appreciate his approach to the bill. his input has improved the bill considerably and i look forward to working with him and all the members of the subcommittee as we move forward and go into conference with the senate on this important legislation. i also want to thank chairman hal rogers of kentucky and ranking member, nita lowey of new york for her helping in putting this legislation together. this is my first year chairing the commerce justice, science, subcommi

culberson: yes. mr. nadler: does the gentleman not know what has been testified to repeatedly, that it would be a lot cheaper for the taxpayers, to hold them in the united states than guantanamo? mr. culberson: that may be your opinion, sir, but we will not and will not ever afford constitutional rights or house foreign fighters captured on a foreign battlefield who have been killing men and women of the armed forces of the united states on a foreign battlefield, we're never going to house them in a prison of the united states, we're not going to give them constitutional rights. those rights are reserved to the people of the united states and to people who commit crimes within the boundaries of the united states

culberson: yes. mr. nadler: does the gentleman not know what has been testified to repeatedly, that it would be a lot cheaper for the taxpayers, to hold them in the united states than guantanamo? mr. culberson: that may be your opinion, sir, but we will not and will not ever afford constitutional rights or house foreign fighters captured on a foreign battlefield who have been killing men and women of the armed forces of the united states on a foreign battlefield, we're never going to house them in a prison of the united states, we're not going to give them constitutional rights. those rights are reserved to the people of the united states and to people who commit crimes within the boundaries of the united states the 19th terrorist who didn't quite make it that day was captured in the

culberson: mr. speaker, before i begin, i'll be very brief, i want to make sure to thank the majority staff who worked so hard on this bill. i want to thank our chief clerk john, leslie, jeff, taylor, collin and ashley for their tireless work drafting this bill, along with bob on the minority staff matt, cory and megan in my personal office and a personal thank you to my good friend, congressman from philadelphia, who has done such a great job, we've worked together arm in arm in this bill on this legislation to produce, after over 80 amendments, and starting about 2:00 yesterday afternoon we have worked through over 80 amendments and all the the gentlewoman from california would have had to do was show up here during the course of that debate, any member could have offered an amendment. that's one of the great things about this process. i want to thank our majority leader and speaker, mr. boehner, for opening up the legislative process, unlike in the past, any member of this congress could stand up

culberson: i seek time in opposition . i oppose this amendment and in a grand jury proceeding our department of justice and federal grand injurey proceeding would not have the protecting the sources and this is absolutely confidential and i think it is astononning issuing and they have self-sertfide . this is -- i agree with the free press but it is written far too broadly. and i think he has neglected that problem and i would welcome and recognizing the chairman of the judiciary committee, robert goodlatte. mr. goodlatte: i want to thank the chairman in opposition to this amendment. shield laws for reporters are not a bad concept at all, about this is the hardly way to do about it. where it is so vague that anyone in the united states claiming to be a journalist or reporter and lots of people maintain blogs could go a journalist or reporter would be covered by this. no one continues toe allow anyone to evade the requirmentse that they respond the to a subpoena for investigation by law enforcement of violation of the law.