mr. mchenry: claiming my time, mr. chairman, what i would submit is that the postal service, as my colleagues across the aisle say, is a constitutional function. really important that the postal service do its mission of delivering the mail. what we don't think we should do is give a government bureau, thraw nonlegislative means, the right to expand and to -- into nonessential services for a part of the government that is bleeding money. and an institution that cannot balance its own books should not be getting into the offering of credit or the movement of money and funds. -- so i ask my colleagues -- the chair: the gentleman will suspend. he house will be in order. the gentleman may proceed. mr. mchenry: while i'm in favor of postal reform and support my letter carriers, i don't favor postal banking. i think it's important for this congress to put a note down that we're in opposition to that. that's why i urge my colleagues to vote for this amendment and i yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields. the question is

mr. mchenry? it would not be appropriate for me to internet. youtor whitehouse: w cannot tell me -- >> we are abiding by the judge's orders. any comment would be inappropriate. is therehitehouse: anything that would have prevented real organizations from going through the process that the judge has been forced to undertake to prepare for this? you did it afterwards and the judge told you. couldn't you have done it beforehand if there had been an implementation period? >> senator, we were able to effect that you reunification of minor with their parents. because the judge ordered us to not follow the trafficking victims protection reauthorization act, we could not have done that about him ordering us to do that. we were prevented by statute. senator whitehouse: was that foreseeable? >> what? senator whitehouse: the consequences of following that act? tothe uac program exist reunify them with sponsors in this country. reunification with those in ice detention is not constitent with statute. what was thet, debut heard of attorney general sessions'

mr. mchenry: i yield the gentlelady an additional 30 seconds. ms. waters: i had one inquiry from one of the newspapers who said, tell me what happened in the background? what was really going on, how did this all come together? and i want you to know it's none of his business, it really happened and pleased about it and worked very hard. and with that, i thank you, mr. hensarling and the members who made this happen and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman yield. the gentleman from texas. mr. hensarling: may i inquire how much time i have remaining? the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas has one minute. mr. hensarling: i yield myself the balance of the time. indeed, mr. speaker, some would say that the ranking member and i can't agree even on the time of day. i was told when this debate started that thunderstorms came over washington d.c. and it was that monumental of an achievement. but in seriousness, i want to offer my thanks and my gratitude to the ranking member. she and her staff worked very constructively with us

mr. mchenry, vice chair of the committee. >> chair powell, thank you for being here. thank you for being here. i want to talk -- shift to cryptocurrency. which is a bit of your monetary policy but a bit of your regulatory hat. i want to get your thinking along the lines of cryptocurrency. the bank of international settlements just released a report. saying cryptocurrencies -- you've stated publicly that cryptocurrencies are currently want big enough yet to matter. or something along those lines. i would submit the report by bank of international settlements misses the mark of potential of block chain, the potential of crypto, more broadly. but there was a great deal of interest in your views and central bank views, more broadly, on cryptocurrency. can you just outline to me your thinking on cryptocurrency? >> sure. i would say -- i think the question i asked you're referring to do cryptocurrencies currently face a substantial currency threat. my answer is, they're not big enough to do that yet. that's what i was saying. not that they're a longer term thing. they are v