mr. collins: reclaiming my time on this one. probable cause if taken properly is not 13 on a doodle pad, mr. chairman. that is not an argument that actually frankly makes sense here. because this amendment actually says probable cause. so to say that i'm writing here 13, i may be writing circles here because i think we're wasting time but that doesn't mean i have a problem. it means i'm bored. now that's what probable cause would do. they'd have to look and say should by on that list or should i not? i think that's the concern here. you're splitting a hair that doesn't exist. > would the gentleman yield? mr. buck: this goes beyond west side story and the jets and sharks. this is a situation where the police officers are trained and there are very identifiable signs and it isn't just one sign. it isn't just someone writing the number 13 in school. this is a series of -- this is a threshold that has to be met and whether you agree with it or not, a court is going to decide with a probable cause standard in order to make the decisio

mr. collins: move -- mr. collins: collins move to strike the last word. mr. chairman, you just made my point. you're using your snapchat filter here. you went basically to say -- mr. nadler: instagram. mr. collins: snapchat. i missed it. darn it. we're so in fantasy land here, nobody knows what's going on. this is the problem. you just went back to what we said. instagram, snapchat, twitter, it doesn't matter, we're not in an impeachment inquiry. it doesn't matter what we're doing here. this is -- i don't care if you -- here's my problem. the chairman can do this at any time. the chairman can do this at any time. he just don't do it. because he wants the appearance of something that it's not. he just gave the answer to the gentleman from colorado saying that we did this in an impeachment inquiry. you're not in an impeachment inquiry. so you can continue to call it whatever you want. i think just be honest. let's just talk about what is here and not here. with that, i yield back. mr. nadler: yep. is there any further discussion on the amendment? the gentleman

collins: will the gentleman yield? mr. buck: i yield to the ranking member. mr. collins: i appreciate it. you brought out an interesting point. the chairman was here and was very vocal in the clinton era impeachment issues on how this is supposed to go about and how you're supposed to do this. it's really interesting to see that what was needed back then is not needed now because there's a serious problem. they don't have the votes to go to the floor. now we have to make it up as we go. you brought up a very good point. i disagree that this deals with anything with impeachment but if they're going to apply, we need to point out the inconsistencies here. i appreciate the gentleman's amendment and yield back. mr. nadler: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. i recognize myself. mr. buck: mr. chairman, i yield back also. mr. nadler: thank you. [laughter] i recognize myself in opposition to the amendment. the amendment essentially says that -- the chairman can designate the full committee, a full committee hearing for purpose of presentation and impeachme

mr. collins: we can sit right here and do that mr. nadler: i can't do that. >> the penalty prenchings is in the amendment in the nature of a substitute. it's not -- mr. nadler: i agree with that. >> i'm not sure there's any research on the state level that will change it. mr. nadler: i don't know. i'm not prepared to accept it at this point. >> i'll withdraw it because we've been here for umteen hours anyway. mr. nadler: i appreciate the gentleman's action. we will be working on. this are there any other amendments? the gentleman from california. . >> i move to amend by striking the last word. mr. nadler: i couldn't hear. >> move to strike the last word. mr. nadler: the gentleman moves to strike the last word. the gentleman is recognized. >> i think it's ironic that the previous bill on binding arbitration it was argued that trial by jury is so important it should be provided even when both parties waived that right in a contract. then we immediately turn around and consider this bill which argues that we should deny first and second

mr. collins, for opening statement. mr. collins: thank you, mr. chairman. this.eciate welcome to everybody here who was expecting one thing and getting another. driving to a as great event. it is the opening of football university of georgia. we're going between the hedges. the day was starting. it was our first home game. my wife and i were driving down the road, and she's looking at her phone. bored. she's looking and she's in her instagram account. she ooks over at me and shows me this picture of a family member, close family member. she looks over and says, megan told me about filters that you make your appearance look better. and i said, yeah. what are you talking about? look at this picture. this looks nothing like our family member. do? did she i said, well, lisa, i don't know. i said, undoubtedly she used one filters. what's happened today is great. the judiciary committee has filter. giant instagram to make you appear that that's g's happening not. it's really interesting. he difference between formal impeachment proceedings and what we're doing to

mr. collins for his opening statement. >> thank you, mr. chairman and welcome back to september. arbitration gives consumers a faster and cheaper path to justice than the judicial system. the last time performed oversights of the system during the 111th congress. that is what the evidence showed earlier this term when they renewed this on antitrust commercial law and administrative law. in fact, the evidence in favor of preserving access to arbitration has only increased over time. companies are continuing to improve arbitration agreements and following protocols to help assure due process is given against them. the market has resolved considered during the 110th and 111th congress. even the consumer financial protection bureau's the 2015 arbitration study highlighted problems consumers would face if they had no access to arbitration but instead had to rely on flaws judicial class actions. the study emphasized the rise of predispute mandatory binding arbitration. it stems directly from the repeated abuses of class actions that have plagued the judicial system in recent decades. t

mr. collins. senator collins: -- mr. collins: well, it's been one of the days again in judiciary committee. it's been one great week, though. congratulations. we know what's happening. his is one of the things that we're seeing -- for those of us that travel the country and hose in the last month, once you get outside washington, d.c., it was not amazingly gloom doom. everyone where else there seems to be optimism. there's jobs. there are these things happening people are excited about that. let me touch base really what happened this morning which was continuance what's happened for the last eight months since they had the the majority.e we have continued -- now if anybody could follow the pretzel logic of the committee this morning, the chairman, we're investigating, we've been investigating, is it an inquiry, an inquiry. let me make it clear for you. you e go back and say, if say if any of this is new rules today, it's wrong. plain and simple, it's not new rules. are rules that have been part of the committee structure

mr. collins -- [indiscernible] >> motion to adjourn. mr. collins votes aye. mr. sensenbrenner. mr. chavis. mr. gomert. mr. jordan votes yes. mr. buck. mr. radcliffe. ms. robie. mr. gates. mr. johnson of louisiana votes yes. mr. biggs votes aye. mr. mcclintock votes aye. ms. lesko. mr. armstrong votes yes. mr. steubie. mr. gates, you are not recorded. mr. gates votes aye. clerk: mr. chairman, there are eight ayes and 20 nos. >> point of parliamentary inquiry. chairman nadler: who has a point of parliamentary inquiry. the gentleman will state his point. >> thank you, mr. chairman. it relates to the rule we change last week where we mentioned staff conducting questioning it has been expanded to include consultants today. we contemplated the distinction between independent contractors such as a consultant. chairman nadler: sorry, did we contemplate what? >> independent contractors, vis-a-vis, employees and staff being a part of the distinction. when the rule was changed last week. >> point of order, mr. chairman. >> mr. chairman, the advice i received from the top staffers and the hous

mr. collins? mr. collins votes yes. mr. chabot votes aye. mr. jordan? mr. jordan votes yes. mr. buck? mr. buck votes aye. mr. ratcliffe? miss roby? miss row by votes aye. mr. mcclintock? mr. mcclintock votes aye. mr. reschenthaler? mr. reschenthaler votes you and i. mr. steube? >> gentleman from tennessee? is anyone else not voted that wishes to vote? the clerk will report. >> mr. chairman, there are 15 ayes and 23 noes. >> the amendment is not agreed to. for what purpose is the gentleman from florida seek recognition. the clerk will report the amendment. gentle lady reserves the point of order. >> offered by mr. gates of florida, page 4 line 104 strikes staff and insert members. >> the gentleman will -- is recognized for the purpose of explaining his amendment. >> thank you, mr. chairman. >> the gentle lady withdraws her point of order. >> i don't know what the majorities obsession is with having staff members ask questions to witnesses in these important proceedings. i've made the point previously and sincerely that i do believe that some of the most talented members of the democrat

mr. collins, for his opening statement. mr. collins: thank you for holding this markup today. and i'm concerned about addressing this important issue from addressing the incidents of mass shootings plaguing our urban communities. work with you on sensible solutions. what i'm not willing to do is support legislation that will not do anything to make us safer and infringes on the rights and liberties guaranteed of our constitutions. all three of these bills just do that. we will be considering h.r. 1236. it may seem like a commonsense measure, it is far worthy. five months ago in an interview, one of the statements that was given by the chairman and you said it to one of your papers, the time i was probably 12 years old was civil rights and due process and that has never changed. i'm not sure what has changed, but the bill before us has due rocess problems. and the proceedings standards are not the only flaws in this bill. for a permanent order, the court must find that the preponderance of the evidence that the individual must have access to a firearm. we don't convict people f

mr. collins: it's getting there. agree. patrick, your thoughts on this. mr. yoes: i agree with her comments. tell you my experiences in law enforcement and when officers leave from agency to agency does an ex-tensive background that determines their liability and with hing else associated it. there are standards in given states that determine, that follow that officer in that their cation within state. everyone for the most part, even though every state has its own standards, police standards, based on the same criteria so -- agree what you said. let's peel the onion back a little bit. supposed to y it's happen. we also know, if you are down officers, you got a five-pernfors, it's hard -- five-person force, it's harder. don't have to pay for schooling. i can get them in now. he told me there was a problem chief.e police i agree with the certification in georgia we've seen this. how do we -- i know what the story is.- the the question is, though, how oes that seep down to the departments that frankly don't have the resources to do that and are under pressure t

mr. collins, to discuss this further. mr. collins: thank you. what we are seeing is a continuation of just complete, utter disrespect for this house. what we have seen over the past little bit, especially with the speaker yesterday, jumping to conclusions. it's amazing what we are seeing coming out of this is taking here say, stuff you have not read, and say there will be an impeachment inquiry. i have news flash for the speaker, she's not doing an impeachment inquiry, she's not doing the stuff it takes. it's another decision by this speaker and the house democrats to disregard over 200 years of precedent in this house. where we actually have rules. things that matter. they are so bent on getting at this president, especially while he was in new york doing exactly what he's supposed to be doing. t's amazing to me. i'm going to say this, they are more like plinko. this is the way they treat impeachment. they drop the thing in and says which way it bounces, first it was mueller, this, trying to hit imaginary target of getting rid of a president th

mr. power, aye, and miss escobar votes aye. collins votes no. shafit votes no. votes no.mert mr. jordan? mr. jordan votes no. mr. buck? mr. buck votes no. mr es no.oby vot .r. gates votes no mr. johnson votes no. mr. vick votes no. votes no.lintock >> vaguely defined hate crime as against individual against whom they disagree by taking over their constitutional rights. the legislation would apply retroactively to misdemeanor convictions and that may have occurred years or decades in the past. moreover, the legislation is an assist very. current law already provides a dangerous follows being -- applying those laws to a certain level because of a definition again is from a problematic. it is an interesting slope was this will. best with this bill. please year the warnings of the minority. the careful what you are doing here. as you go forward, keeping this vague and in a certain way of going back and retroactively applying, hate is hate free speech and other things, we may decently with, you may want to suppress -- we may disagree with or want to suppress, but it is a first amendme

mr. collins votes aye. mr. shabbat boat slip aye mr. radcliffe votes yes. >> as everyone voted that wishes to vote? mdm. clerk? the clerk will report. there are 13 aye's and a 19 at nose. >> mr. chairman. the gentleman is not recognized. the point of order is assisting. i'm very troubled that the white house counsel is preventing you from answering these basic questions . >> mr. chairman i have a motion. >> you will wait for your motion. than point of order. point of order has to be recognized . >> not in the middle . >> yes it does. if the chairman is not following house rules i motion to adjourn? >> point of order. if the republicans are successful the motion to adjourn means that there would be no hearing and the american people would not hear from mr. lewandowski about his efforts to obstruct justice. the motion is not debatable. >> i have a motion of parliamentary. >> mr. sizzling he gets recognized? in the opinion of the chair of the nose have a. roll call is requested. the clerk will call the role. i i i like i there are 12 aye a

mr. collins, for his opening statement. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i appreciate this. welcome to everybody here who is expecting one thing and getting another. last week i was driving to a great event. it is the opening of football season at the university of georgia. we're going between the hedges. the day was starting, our first home game. my wife and i are driving down the road, and she's looking at her phone, bored, she's looking and she's in her instagram account. she looks over at me and she shows me this picture of a person, it's a family member, a close family member. she looks over and she says -- and a friend who was staying with us, she said, megan told me about filters that you can use to make your appearance look better. and i said, yeah, what are you talking about? she said, look at this picture. this looks nothing like our family member. what did she do? i said, well, i don't know. i said, undoubtedly, she used one of the filters. what's happened today is great. the judiciary committee has become a giant instagram filter. to make you appear that somethin

mr. collins. i will now introduce today's witness. rey lewandowski is a political consultant and commentator he previously certainlied agency the first campaign manager for donald trump's 2016 presidential campaign mr. lewandowski received a bachelors degree of political science from university of massachusetts. and a masters degree in political science from american university he also attended the naval war college. former white house deputy chief of staff rick dearborn and robert porter have refused to appear here despite duly issued subpoenas from this committee. as i discussed in my opening statement i strongly disagree with the white house's assertion of absolute immunity to mr. dearborn and mr. porter. we welcome mr. lewandowski, we thank him for participating in today's hearing. if you please rise, i'll begin by swearing you in >> do you swear or affirm under penalty of perjury that the testimony that you're about to give is true and correct to the best of your knowledge, information and belief, so help you got. >> let the recor

mr. collins, is recognized for one minute. mr. collins: thank you, madam speaker. i appreciate it. today is a great today. it is the birthday of the united states air force. for those of us who served. i rise today not only to recognize that birthday but have the great and distinlt honor of actually having chief of chaplains to be here and i had the privilege of calling him myself. i am in the air force as well. he is my cham lynn and top of my chain. he is there for reason. he exemplifies what a chaplain means and how they serve in our air force. throughout our country's history men and women have answered the call of duty. le today we acknowledge the men and women who have taken to the skies to defend our country as members of the unches air force. as a chaplain, in that united states air force reserve, i had the privilege to minister and worked with airmen since 2002. theicouragand integrity both at home and abroad are unmatched. he's a native of wisconsin. he n listed in 1976 serving for four years, he'sence dorsed by the presbyterian church u.s.a. and commissioned in the air f

mr. collins? >> aye. >> mr. collins votes eye. >> mr. sensenbrennor? mr. sensenbrenner votes aye. mr. jordan? mr. jordan votes yes. mr. buck? >> aye. >> mr. buck votes aye plchlt radcliff? mr. radcliff votes yes. miss roby? miss roby votes aye. mr. gates votes eye. mr. biggs? mr. biggs votes aye mr. mcclintock votes aye. miss lesko votes aye. mr. rushinthaler? mr. armstrong votes yes. mr. stube votes yes. mr. cohen, you are not recorded. mr. cohen votes no. mr. lew, you are not recorded. mr. lew votes no. >> any members who voted who wish to vote? the clerk will report. >> mr. chairman, there are 15 ayes and 20 nos. >> the amendment is not agreed to. are there any other amendments? >> mr. chairman? >> for what purpose -- >> i have an amendment at the desk. >> the clerk will report the amendmen amendment. >> amendment offer by mr. sensenbrenner, page six after -- >> sent the amendment be considered as read. >> the gentleman is recognized to explain his amendment. >> let's be plain about what this bill does. at its core it does one thing and only one thing. it steers millions of amendme

mr. collins. i will now introduce today's witness. corey lewandowski is a political consultant and commentator. he previously served as the first campaign manager for donald trump's funny 16 presidential campaign. mr. lewandowski received a bachelor's degree in political science from the university of massachusetts, and a masters degree in political science from american university. he also attended the naval war college. the former white house deputy chief of staff, rick dearborn, and former staff secretary robert porter, have refused to appear today despite duly-issued subpoenas from this committee. as i discussed in my opening statement, i strongly disagree with the white house's assertion of absolute immunity. as to mr. dearborn and mr. porter. we are considering all of our available options to enforce the subpoenas. we welcome mr. lewandowski and thank him for participating in today's hearing. if you would please rise, i will begin by swearing you in. do you swear or affirm under penalty of perjury that the testimony you are about

mr. collins. mr. collins: thank you. thank you for this hearing, which is under the old school rules and the new rules are the old rules, and yet, here we go again. we will not say they are, because we like the packaging. i have never seen so many enjoying the packaging, because they cannot sell the product. they just keep packaging it differently. we had mr. mueller here. there are impeachable offenses, as the chairman said, clearly in , but here iseport the problem. 17 members of the judiciary committee has said the president should be impeached, so why are we still investigating it? the problem is, you do not have the votes. you do not have the numbers. even if you got it out of this committee, you do not have it on the floor. that is your problem. we are going to drag this committee through oversight hearings, talking about things that have been talked about ad nauseam, and we will say what it really is and really is not, and all of the things we are going to try to implied that this president should not be president

mr. collins. >> it's been one of those days, one long great week. congratulations. we know what's happening. this is one of the things that we're seeing. those of us who travel the country, once you got outside of washington, d.c. it was not amazingly gloom and doom. everywhere else there seems to be optimism, jobs, and people are excited about that. me touch base really on what happened this morning which was of what's nuance happened for the last eight months, since they had the to have the majority. we've continued, now today, if could follow the pretzel logic of the committee this orning, especially the chairman, well, we're investigating, we've been inquiry?ting, is it an let me make it very clear. let me go back and say if you is new rules, that's just wrong. plain and simple, it's not new rules. been are rules that have part of the committee structure forever. they are simply choosing to use packaging themre together to make it seem like it's something more. this is important, because when country le across the only get their news by either a headline or quic

mr. collins, this is not a reality tv show. this is a serious judiciary committee hearing. >> it's a serious question. >> we are trying to investigate misconduct by the president. may i continue, mr. chairman? >> the gentle lady may continue. >> thank you. on august 26th, the committee served a subpoena on rick dearborn to appear here today. you gave him the message dictated by the president, we went over that message today it a ask the attorney general not to investigate, and it was during the campaign. in that meeting dearborn coordinated meetings for president trump and the trump campaign, meetings that were organized by russian organizations. dearborn himself communicated with russian officials, but once again, the president is trying to prevent us from learning the truth about his conduct. let's be honest here. mr. dearborn is not here today because the president is afraid of what he would tell us and the american people. the president directed him not to appear based on a fake claim of absolute immunity. even though we can

mr. collins of georgia. from the committee on natural resources for consideration of 6001, s 314, 2812, 2814, 6020, subtitle z of title 67, section 8524, part one of subtitle bmbing of title 85, sections 8554 and 571 of the senate bill and sections 330-g, 094, 1099-d, 1099-f, 1099-u, 2851, subtitle f, of title 28, sections 2876 and 2880 of the house amendment and modifications committed to conference. mr. grijalva. ms. pl holland. mr. bishop of utah. from the committee on oversight and refrm for consideration of sections 218, 5 30, 559, 1081, 1082, title 11, sections 580 , 6012, subtitle b of title 65, 9311, 9313,4, 9307, 10-434, 03, 10432, 0601, 1060 through 05, 10612, 10741 and 10742 of the senate ill and sections 212, 239, 5550-o, 629, 633rks084, 829, 884, 1, 8 2, 877, 883, 8991, 5, 899-e, 899-h, 1064, 1085, 1099-b, title 11, section 1704, 1711, 1713 through 16, and 3127 of the house amendment and modifications committed to conference. lynch, president connolly and green. 6006, s 219, 1612, 6001, 8524, 00

mr. collins and by mr. lewandowski. i think you have to look at mr. lewandowski as an adverse witness. he had no interest in complying with this actual subpoena outside of showing up. he intended to obstruct justice once again, frankly, by not being willing to give answers to questions by the democrats. i think if i were mr. nadler right now, i would be slapping mr. lewandowski with an inherent contempt order and calling him in front of the house of representatives and fining him. because he is a key witness. because in the mueller report there were ten incidents where mr. mueller said, but for the department of justice decision, the guidance that they would not file an action against the seated president, that there would not be an indictment made, this is one of the key elements that shows the president was attempting to obstruct justice by giving corey lewandowksi a script that he was supposed to turn over to then jeff sessions, the attorney general, to stop the mueller investigation. >> so congresswoman, that kind of feeds into the next question i have, which is i've seen a lot of

mr. collins: it was not. it was a statement. mr. nadler: the gentleman from tennessee is recognized. >> thank you, mr. chair. dave cowens it's been made clear here you're not -- mr. cohen: it's been made clear here you're not an employ of the white house. and you were a policeman at one time. so you know something about the law. and about following the law. didn't you think it was a little strange that the president would sit down with you one-on-one and ask you to do something that you knew was against the law? did that strike you as strange? mr. lewandowski: i disagree with the premise of your question. mr. cohen: you weren't a policeman? mr. lewandowski: i didn't think the president asked me to do anything illegal. mr. cohen: you don't think it would have been illegal to ask mr. sessions to drop the investigation and just go on to future presidents and omit everything with this president? we're going to start with the next one about colluding are russia? you didn't think that was illegal to obstruct justice? mr. lewandowski: the

mr. power, aye, and miss escobar votes aye. collins votes no. shafit votes no. votes no.mert mr. jordan? mr. jordan votes no. mr. buck? mr. buck votes no. mr es no.oby vot .r. gates votes no mr. johnson votes no. mr. vick votes no. votes no.lintock >> that objection, staff is authorized to pursue changes. 2708, the disarm hate act. we moved the committee report the bill favorably to the house. hr 2708, to prevent a person who has been convicted of a misdemeanor hate crime, because of hate or by -- >> objection. i will begin by recognizing myself in opening statement. with the sharp increase in hate crimes in this country, it is important that the city today adopt the disarm hate act. this bill introduced by our colleagues would prohibit the purchase or possession of firearms by individuals who have been convicted of misdemeanor level hate crimes or who have received bias for misdemeanor convictions. the fbi reports that has been a significant increase in hate crimes over the past three years. with 7100 hate crimes reported in 2017 alone. there is likely substantial undercount. re

mr. collins, this is not a reality tv show. >> i have been asked several times whether the committee will hold you in contempt it is certainly under consideration. >> he took the time during that recess to launch his is that the campaign web site with a tweet and i think that fact says an awful lot about the witness's motivation to appear here today and i've heard enough. >> as the congresswoman mentioned in the middle of the hearing, lewandowski did indeed post a message promoting a web site for his possible senate run. once lawmakers were done, house democrats used a career lawyer and a courtroom veteran, a professional at this kind of thing, serving as council to question lewandowski and this attorney, barry burke did get lewandowski to admit he's been less than honest at least with the media >> that was you saying on msnbc you don't ever remember the president ever asking you to get involved with jeff sessions or the department of justice in any way, shape or form that wasn't true, was it, sir? >> i heard that. >> and that was not true. >> i have no obligation to be honest as the medi

mr. collins. >> thank you. one of the things i want to point out, normally we've had a classified briefing after this. we don't have that today. i don't know why we didn't but we're choosing not to do that today. we've done this in the past and it would be good to have. what session identifying information under the caller detail records program. if we terminate that and allow the program to expire, a terrorist decides to communicate over an encrypted app, is identifying information lost with respect to encrypted communication? >> sir, i apologize, but in open hearing, i can't get into capabilities. >> thus the reason it would have been nice to have had a classified hearing after this as well, which we could have gotten into this. >> and sir, i'm absolutely willing to make my -- arrange for a time that's convenient for you and the rest of the committee to tell us about -- >> that's fine. we've had all year and we're here now. i guess we just have to deal with it so that's fine. mr. wigman, does the criminal req

mr. collins. >> take as much time as you need there, mr. chairman. you did yesterday. one of the things i want to point out, ms. morgan, is normally we have had the -- classified briefing after this. we don't have that today. so i understand your questions here. i don't know why we didn't, but we were choosing not to do that today. we've done this in the past and it would have been good to have. i think you've probably been able to answer questions in classified briefings much -- i do appreciate the chairman actually acknowledging me for my five minutes today. i appreciate that. what the session -- ms. morgan, what session identifying information collected under the call detail record programs, if we terminate that and allow the program to expire, a terrorist decides to communicate over an encrypted app, is the ability to collect session-identifying information lost with respect to encrypted communications? >> sir, i apologize, but in o n opening hearing i can't get into capabilities -- >> that's the reason it would have been nice to have had a classified hearing after

mr. collins. i will now introduce today's witness. corwin lewandowski is a political consultant and commentator. he previously served as the first campaign manager for donald trump's 2016 presidential campaign. mr. lewandowski received a bachelor's degree in political science from the university of massachusetts and a master's degree in political science from american university. he also attended the naval war college. white house deputy chief staff rick dearborn and white house staff robert porter declined to appear here art direction of the house. we are considering all available options to enforce these subpoenas. we welcome mr. lewandowski and we thank him for pampg rticipat in today's hearing. if you please rise, i will begin by swearing you in. do you swear or affirm under penalty of perjury that the testimony you're about to give is true and correct to the best of your knowledge, information and belief, so help you god? let the record show the witness has answered in the affirmative. thank you and please be seated. please note t

mr. collins, each will control 30 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from rhode island. mr. cicilline: thank you, madam chair. i yield myself such time as i may consume. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. mr. cicilline: i rise in strong support of h.r. 1423, the forced arbitration and justice repeal act or the fair act. very deep within the fine print of everyday contracts, forced arbitration deprives american consumers and workers of their day in court when they attempt to hold corporations accountable for breaking the law. this private system lacks the procedural safeguards of our justice system. it's not subject to oversight, no judge or jury, and not bound by laws passed by congress or the states. but it's become a requirement of everyday life. consumers and workers must surrender their rights to corporations through forced arbitration clauses which are unilaterally imposed by companies before disputes even arise. and when forced arbitration is combined with nondisclosure agreements, it effectively silences the victims rampant corporate misconduct. this shameful, hu

mr. collins for his opening statement. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i appreciate that.efore i get started i would like to add to the record a letter from the detectives endowment association of new york and also the national association of police organizations a letter for the record. >> without objection. >> thank you. i appreciate the chairman's, you know, opening and i think you covered great deal of stuff. for me and i have a lot of notes here, one of the things to start out this, is it is very important that excessive force used ought to be punished. it should not be thought about, but punished and put before a proper due process procedure and acted on quickly. it should not be if it's in a minority community in particular or any other community it needs to be looked at, processed and done so in a fair way to all involved so there is justice, there is so people do trust. the one thing i want to focus on and the chairman did a good job i think because it is very fair that there's a lot of things that have happened in communities that raise a lot of concerns. even on

mr. collins for his opening statement. like thank you mr.chairman, i would like to add to the record a letter from the detectives and dominant association new york and the national association of police organization. >> without objection. i appreciate the chairman's opening and i think you covered a great deal of stuff. i have a lot of notes in listing, i think one of the things to start off with is it's very important that excessive force were used ought to be punished. it should not be thought about, it should be punished and put before proper due process procedure needs to be processed and done in a fair way to all involved so that there is justice and Ãbbut the one thing that i want to focus on in the chairman did a good job because it's very fair there's a lot of things that have happened in communities that raise a lot of concerns. on this committee they say how do we fix this there's officers almost committee and i serve with and it Ãis one of those that has done that but him in uniform and been out there. i com ed it as a different p

collins: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from maine. ms. collins: mr. president, earlier today we paused and commemorated those who lost their lives on september 11, 2001. 18 years have passed, but the memory of that day remains as vivid as if it were yesterday. we each have our own recollections of where we were and what we were doing as the horrifying terrorist attacks on our country began to unfold. i remember having the television on and watching a report that a plan, originally reported as a small plane, had struck one of the twin towers. i then shortly thereafter saw the second aircraft strike the world trade center. it was then that i knew that our country was under attack. i told my staff to stay away from the capitol building because i feared that it, too, could be a target. today we all still share the powerful emotions of shock and anger and grief. i was worried not only about my staff, those in the buildings, but also staff members that i had who were on their way back from portland, maine, which turns out to be where some of the terrorists

mr. collins, ranking member has a statement for the record. >> we welcome our witnesses and thank them for participating in today's hearing. your written statements will be entered into the record for entirety. there's a timing light on your table. light switches from green to yellow. it means you've got one minute left. if it turns red, trouble. five minutes expired. remind every witness that your statements made to the subcommittee are subject to penalties and perjury which could result in a fine or prison of five years or both. that will not likely happen. our first witness is ms. gupta. previously she served as principal deputy assistant attorney general and as acting assistant attorney general in the head of the civil rights division at the u.s. department of justice during the obama administration. ms. gupta received her law degree from the new york school of law. and received her under graduate degree magna laude. >> chairman nadler, ranking member johnson, members of the subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity. thank you, chairman cohen, for your leadership and callings of hear