    [Senate Hearing 117-]
    [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

          FINANCIAL SERVICES AND GENERAL GOVERNMENT APPROPRIATIONS
                          FOR FISCAL YEAR 2023

                                  ----------

                                           U.S. Senate,
               Subcommittee of the Committee on Appropriations,
                                                        Washington, DC.

                           NONDEPARTMENTAL WITNESSES

        [Clerk's note.--The subcommittee was unable to hold
    hearings on nondepartmental witnesses. The statements and
    letters of those submitting written testimony are as follows:]
      Prepared Statement of the American Friends Service Committee (AFSC)
        Chairman Van Hollen, Ranking Member Hyde-Smith, and Members of the
    Committee, thank you for the opportunity to submit testimony. My name
    is Daniel Jasper and I am the Asia Public Education and Advocacy
    Coordinator for the American Friends Service Committee (AFSC). We are a
    peace and social justice organization that has worked for over a
    hundred years to address the root causes of violence and conflict
    throughout the world. We appreciate the opportunity to address the use
    of sanctions before the subcommittee today, as this foreign policy tool
    now serves as a primary response to geopolitical conflict.
    Specifically, my testimony addresses (1) report language addressing the
    need for the Government Accountability Office (GAO) to conduct impact
    assessments on comprehensive sanctions regimes, and (2) the need for
    the Treasury Department's Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) to
    conduct regular and comprehensive reporting on licensing procedures.
        The urgency and importance of conducting impact assessments on
    comprehensive sanctions regimes cannot be understated. In 2021, The
    Treasury Department's sanctions review found that sanctions
    designations have risen from 912 to 9,421 in the last two decades,
    representing an increase of 933%.\1\ However, despite this accelerating
    rate of usage, government agencies have indicated that the impact of
    sanctions is often unclear.
        According to a 2019 GAO report, implementing and relevant agencies
    only conduct ad hoc assessments and do not monitor ``the overall
    effectiveness of existing sanctions programs in achieving broad policy
    goals.'' The report found that officials only ``informally'' evaluate
    the overall efficacy of these measures. However, given the immense
    impact of sanctions on ordinary civilians and the global economy,
    informal evaluations are grossly insufficient. Notably, officials
    indicated that one major reason for the lack of comprehensive
    assessments is that ``there is no policy or requirement'' for this type
    of analysis.\2\ It's clear, then, that until Congress enacts such a
    policy, the executive branch is unlikely to undertake such critical
    assessments on its own accord.
        Throughout AFSC's more than one hundred-year history, the
    organization has accompanied countless communities under sanctions
    regimes and borne witness to the varied impacts of these measures. Our
    organization, for instance, was among the first to support South
    Africans in their call to sanction the apartheid regime. While the case
    of South Africa has been considered a success, we have found that
    critical to that success was that it was led by the impacted
    communities themselves.
        Conversely, we have seen that the impacts of these measures are far
    more damaging when implemented unilaterally and without the support of
    the local population. In recent decades, the U.S.' propensity to
    unilaterally impose comprehensive sanctions without the support of
    local civil society efforts has created large pockets of vulnerable
    communities throughout the world.
        These communities--in many cases entire nations like the Democratic
    People's Republic of Korea (or ``North Korea''), Iran, Venezuela, and
    Cuba--are left in a State of arrested and reversing development. Given
    the mounting global challenges such as the COVID-19 pandemic and global
    food supply chain disruptions, these communities represent an open
    wound on the collective body of humanity. It is in these conditions
    that viruses mutate, conflict arises, human rights are violated,
    humanitarian crises develop, and violent ideologies take root. It is,
    therefore, imperative that the subcommittee act to fill this immense
    gap in monitoring and evaluation as policymakers must understand the
    true impacts of these widespread tools.
        Here, I would like to stress that while administration officials
    have stated that there are humanitarian exemptions for comprehensive
    sanctions regimes, in practice these exemptions are insufficient for
    aid operations and peacebuilding initiatives.
        For instance, AFSC has operated the longest-standing NGO program in
    North Korea since 1980. Prior to the pandemic, our program worked to
    improve conservation agricultural techniques in four cooperative farms
    outside of the capital city of Pyongyang. These activities had over
    84,000 direct and indirect beneficiaries as we worked to improve food
    access for local communities.
        We have witnessed many impacts of sanctions in our work on the
    ground in places like North Korea such as a chronic shortage of basic
    supplies, increases in manual labor, decreases in the availability of
    transportation and fuel, and a general attitude of resentment toward
    the U.S. government. A recent and dramatic example of the impact of
    sanctions was the increasingly restricted space for the delivery of
    humanitarian assistance since 2017.
        As a consequence of the U.S.' ``maximum pressure'' campaign and a
    U.S.-led UN sanctions resolution, we witnessed deeply disturbing
    situations where lifesaving assistance to North Korea was delayed or
    denied by bureaucratic procedures. In at least 42 instances, aid
    operations were severely disrupted even in cases where agencies
    obtained the correct paperwork. This resulted in patients undergoing
    surgery without anesthesia, children going without nutritional
    assistance, and increased mortality risks for a population already on
    the margins. While some of these issues have been resolved, the damage
    to key humanitarian channels had been done; relationships and
    operations were largely unable to recover in the years leading up to
    the pandemic.\3\
        As the COVID-19 outbreak erupted in China in early 2020, North
    Korea largely closed its borders to incoming travel and cargo and has
    continued these border closures throughout the first half of 2022.
    Despite a ``maximum pressure'' campaign and over 2 years of a self-
    imposed embargo, North Korea's missile and weapons development
    programs--a primary target of sanctions measures--continue unabated.
    Instead, AFSC has witnessed that it is the ordinary people, who have no
    say in their government's actions, that often bear the true cost of
    sanctions.
        In 2019, Korea Peace Now, a global movement of women mobilizing to
    end the Korean War, commissioned one of the few assessments of the
    impact of sanctions on citizens. The study found that ``[s]anctions
    destabilize North Korean society in ways that have a disproportionate
    impact on women, resonating with patterns observed in other sanctioned
    countries. The resulting economic pressure tends to exacerbate rates of
    domestic violence, sexual violence, and the trafficking and
    prostitution of women.'' \4\ These types of impacts on the human rights
    and humanitarian situations of local communities are seldom captured by
    the ``informal'' impact assessments offered by administration
    officials.
        At the beginning of the Biden administration, 55 nongovernmental
    organizations--representing over 65 million supporters--sent a letter
    to the President outlining urgently needed sanctions reforms. Among the
    key recommendations included in the letter was the need to institute
    ``ongoing reporting protocols that monitor the impact and human cost of
    sanctions.'' \5\
        The administration has not taken action on these reforms to date,
    and with millions of lives in the balance, Congress must champion the
    voice of civil society and institute common sense monitoring policies.
    We strongly urge the subcommittee to adopt report language requesting
    impact assessments on all comprehensive sanctions regimes from the GAO.
        In many heavily sanctioned contexts such as North Korea, it is now
    routine for aid operations to go through extensive OFAC licensing
    procedures to send aid shipments. Throughout my tenure at AFSC, I have
    seen this process take anywhere from 9 months to 2 years.
        The application process is strenuous--often filled with vague
    guidance on high-stakes procedures. Communication and status updates
    are typically infrequent from OFAC and the process requires the aid of
    expensive legal counsel. Further, OFAC staff turnover and/or the sheer
    volume of applications mean that we are continuously educating
    policymakers and bureaucrats about our work. This means that in moments
    of humanitarian crisis (and sometimes in moments of geopolitical
    opportunity), aid workers are spending precious moments navigating red
    tape and re-hashing the most basic elements of longstanding programs
    instead of responding to critical situations.
        Consistent with the Treasury Department's commitment to
    ``modernizing'' sanction regimes and supporting legitimate humanitarian
    actors,\6\ OFAC must begin regular and transparent reporting on
    licensing procedures. Moreover, making this data publicly available
    would improve the speed and consistency of these processes, reduce
    humanitarian response time, and improve our collective understanding of
    the impacts of sanctions on civilians.
        Amid increasing global security challenges, sanctions have emerged
    as a primary tool of the U.S. in dealing with its adversaries. These
    tools are sometimes enacted with an alarmingly cavalier attitude toward
    their potentially devastating human impact, and with a severe lack of
    oversight. Given the widespread nature of these instruments, their
    impact on the global economy, and the hundreds of millions of lives
    they impact, we urge you to support these proposals in order for the
    U.S. government and public to fully understand the consequences of
    these policies.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \1\ 2021 Sanctions Review. U.S. Department of Treasury, Oct. 2021,
    https://home.treasury.gov/system/files/136/Treasury-2021-sanctions-
    review.pdf.
        \2\ Economic Sanctions: Agencies Assess Impacts on Targets, and
    Studies Suggest Several Factors Contribute to Sanctions' Effectiveness.
    U.S. Government Accountability Office, Oct. 2019, https://www.gao.gov/
    assets/gao-20-145.pdf.
        \3\ Jasper, Daniel. ``Why the World Should Care about the COVID
    Outbreak in North Korea--38 North: Informed Analysis of North Korea.''
    38 North, 27 May 2022, https://www.38north.org/2022/05/why-the-world-
    should-care-about-the-covid-outbreak-in-north-korea/.
        \4\ ``The Human Cost and Gendered Impact of Sanctions on North
    Korea.'' Korea Peace Now. Oct. 2019, https://koreapeacenow.org/wp-
    content/uploads/2019/10/human-costs-and-gendered-impact-of-sanctions-
    on-north-korea.pdf.
        \5\ ``Civil Society Groups Call on Biden to Provide Immediate
    Sanctions Relief and Legal Reform.'' American Friends Service
    Committee, 26 Mar. 2021, https://www.afsc.org/newsroom/civil-society-
    groups-call-biden-to-provide-immediate-sanctions-relief-and-legal-
    reform.
        \6\ 2021 Sanctions Review. U.S. Department of Treasury, Oct. 2021,
    https://home.treasury.gov/system/files/136/Treasury-2021-sanctions-
    review.pdf.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                     ______

         Prepared Statement of Coalition for a Prosperous America (CPA)
        Dear Chairman Van Hollen and Ranking Member Hyde-Smith:

        For the reasons outlined below, the Coalition for a Prosperous
    America (CPA) strongly urges the subcommittee on Financial Services and
    General Government to approve an increased appropriation for the
    Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) to $210.3 million for the
    Fiscal Year 2023. CPA is concerned the Corporate Transparency Act (CTA)
    will not be implemented promptly without these resources. The CTA
    prioritized our National security by denying the most egregious means
    of obscuring the actual owners of different types of property.
        The Coalition for a Prosperous America is a nonprofit, nonpartisan
    organization that represents the interests of domestic producers across
    the country engaged in agricultural production, agribusiness, and many
    manufacturing supply chains. We are concerned about foreign
    intellectual property theft, offshoring of industry, and the decline of
    the quality of jobs in the US due to the loss of supply chains.\1\
            fincen needs to implement the corporate transparency act
        The FinCEN, tasked with codifying and implementing the CTA, has
    already missed deadlines due to resource shortages.\2\ Therefore, CPA
    strongly supports the subcommittee on Financial Services and General
    Government approving increased appropriations for the Financial Crimes
    Enforcement Network (FinCEN) to $210.3 million for the Fiscal Year
    2023.
        Congress passed the Corporate Transparency Act in 2020 as part of
    the Anti-Money Laundering Act. This bipartisan landmark legislation
    sought to improve anti-money laundering laws and deny the benefits of
    anonymous shell companies.
        Hidden `beneficial' owners include foreign kleptocrats and
    criminals who pose a grave security threat to the United States. Our
    recent attempts to hold Russian kleptocrats accountable for the
    invasion of Ukraine exposed our vulnerability and our need to
    strengthen our economic' borders.' American producers need information
    regarding the competition they face from autocratic non-market foreign
    owners.
             kleptocracy threatens america's financial independence
        The FinCEN advisory on Kleptocracy and Foreign Public Corruption
    (FIN-2002-A001), released on April 14, 2022, specified that
    ``Kleptocratic regimes and corrupt public officials may engage in
    bribery, embezzlement, extortion, or the misappropriation of public
    assets, among other forms of corrupt behavior, to advance their
    strategic, financial, and personal goals.'' \3\
        These behaviors are not limited to the country of the foreign
    kleptocrats. Once a US financial enterprise becomes involved with these
    tainted funds, the enterprise has a vested interest in promoting a
    continued relationship for the sake of management of this ``property.''
    The vested self-interest divides the financial enterprises' allegiance
    from the United States' competitive economy, moral values, and even the
    Nation's national security interests.
        Consider the problems concerning London's enmeshing with Russian
    kleptocrats. A former Russian correspondent, Oliver Bullough, gives
    ``kleptocracy tours'' in the capital of the United Kingdom, showing how
    illicit funds affected the city.\4\ Despite criminal activities,
    including the 2018 poisoning of Sergei Skripal and his daughter on
    United Kingdon soil by Russia's leader Putin, British elected officials
    took few actions against the Russian kleptocrats until the invasion of
    Ukraine. In effect, London's political class was a willing hostage
    because it had become dependent on kleptocrat money.
        With a GDP of over 500 Billion (just under $650
    billion) in 2020,\5\ London's economic size did not guarantee
    protection against this form of foreign political manipulation. In
    2020, only 10 of our 50 American States had a greater GDP than
    London.\6\ It is no small leap to assume entire American States are
    vulnerable when we do not know the identities of the beneficial owners
    of investments in the United States.
        Meanwhile, our intended sanctions revealed how ill-prepared the US
    financial system is to respond to actions like Russian aggression. When
    the White House announced its comprehensive legislative package to hold
    the Russian government and oligarchs accountable for President Putin's
    war against Ukraine, Russian forces had invaded Ukraine for over 2
    months.
        The White House proposal had to take time to streamline specific
    ways to enable the seizure and implementation of the sanctions because
    they had been playing a game of whack-a-mole with Russian kleptocrat
    funds. In the future, these mechanisms should be easy to implement and
    clearly outlined against any hostile power. FinCEN's work is essential
    to simplifying the knowledge of foreign-based beneficial ownership in
    the United States.
        Despite the successful bipartisan efforts to pass the Corporate
    Transparency Act, its implementation must be accelerated, not
    restricted. FinCEN is too underfunded to be effective in its current
    funding state, and that weakness in our economic infrastructure must
    end.
        Russian kleptocrats are not the final concern as a price for our
    lack of financial transparency. Any autocratic government seeking to
    manipulate the United States would have good reason to use their
    wealthy kleptocrats to invest in it. Chinese ``greenfield'' investments
    have already been a significant concern to members of the Senate.\7\
    These Chinese-held subsidiary investments can use corporate anonymity
    to disguise non-market intent.
        The Coalition for a Prosperous America contends that the US
    underestimates our National producers' competition with non-market
    firms that sacrifice market-based results in exchange for future
    monopoly dominance or illicit political capital due to a lack of
    information.
        The Coalition for a Prosperous America does not directly oppose
    foreign financial investment. But it is crucial to know which foreign
    citizens of autocratic regimes own what property, how much is held, for
    what purpose, and how much wealth ends up in foreign jurisdictions.
        Therefore, the Coalition for a Prosperous America urges the
    subcommittee on Financial Services and General Government to approve an
    increased appropriation for the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network
    (FinCEN) to $210.3 million for the Fiscal Year 2023. The Corporate
    Transparency Act (CTA) prioritized our National security, but the
    necessary regulation and enforcement need these resources to implement
    the will of Congress as soon as possible.

        Sincerely,
        David Morse, Tax Policy Director
        Coalition for a Prosperous America
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \1\ About page Coalition for a Prosperous America. https://
    prosperousamerica.org/about/.
        \2\ Das, Himamauli, US Treasury FinCEN Acting Director, Statement
    before U.S. House of Representatives Financial Services Committee.
    April 28, 2022. https://financialservices.house.gov/uploadedfiles/hhrg-
    117-ba00-wstate-dash-20220428.pdf.
        \3\ Advisory on Kleptocracy and Foreign Public Corruption. US
    Treasury, FinCEN April 14th, 2022. https://www.fincen.gov/resources/
    advisories/fincen-advisory-fin-2022-a001.
        \4\ Keefe, Patrick Radden. How Putin's Oligarchs Bought London. New
    Yorker Magazine. March 28th, 2022. https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/
    2022/03/28/how-putins-oligarchs-bought-
    london.
        \5\ Gross domestic product of the United Kingdom in 2020, by region
    (in million GBP). Statista. https://www.statista.com/statistics/
    1004135/uk-gdp-by-region/.
        \6\ Gross Domestic Product by State, 4th Quarter 2020 and Annual
    2020 (Preliminary). US Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis. https://
    www.bea.gov/sites/default/files/2021-03/qgdpstate0321.pdf.
        \7\ Senator John Kennedy. Kennedy introduces bill to increase
    scrutiny over Chinese investments on U.S. soil. Press Release. October
    21, 2021. https://www.kennedy.senate.gov/public/2021/10/kennedy-
    introduces-bill-to-increase-scrutiny-over-chinese-investments-on-u-s-
    soil.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                     ______

                 Prepared Statement of Coalition for Integrity
    Dear Chairman Van Hollen and Ranking Member Hyde-Smith:

        We at Coalition for Integrity support and encourage the
    subcommittee on Financial Services and General Government to approve
    increased appropriations for Financial Crimes Enforcement Network
    (FinCEN) in line with the President's budget request for the 2023
    fiscal year.\1\
        Coalition for Integrity is a non-profit, non-partisan 501(c)(3)
    organization. We work in coalition with a wide range of individuals and
    organizations to combat corruption and promote integrity in the public
    and private sectors both in the United States and internationally. An
    important area of focus for us is ending impunity for corrupt public
    officials and oligarchs around the world. We have previously submitted
    comments to FinCEN on a proposed rule that would address the
    vulnerability of the U.S. real estate market to money laundering and
    other illicit activity.\2\ We have also submitted comments on notice of
    proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to implement the beneficial ownership
    reporting requirements in the Corporate Transparency Act (CTA).\3\
        FinCEN remains one of the leaders entrusted with combatting illicit
    finance and addressing deficiencies in the anti-money laundering regime
    in the first U.S. Strategy on Countering Corruption.\4\ FinCEN's work
    is critical to keep the proceeds of corruption and other crimes from
    being laundered through the U.S. financial system. Deputy Secretary of
    the Treasury Wally Adeyemo expressed during his testimony before the
    subcommittee on Financial Services and General Government, the U.S.
    Treasury has ``taken unprecedented measures . . . [but] these new
    actions and initiatives require substantial resources'' to conduct the
    necessary analysis and produce a global response.\5\ These remarks echo
    FinCEN Acting Director Himamauli Das' testimony before the House
    Financial Services Committee where he explained that ``while the AML
    Act made significant improvements to the AML/CFT framework, these
    improvements come at a cost. FinCEN employs a team of about 300
    dedicated employees, including intelligence analysts, investigators,
    AML/CFT policy strategists, enforcement and compliance officers,
    outreach specialists, data analysts, regulators, and economists . . .
    [yet] FinCEN has significant staffing requests that remain unfunded.''
    \6\
        The Strategy on Countering Corruption recognizes the real estate
    and private investment sectors are vulnerable to abuse by illicit
    actors seeking to launder the criminal proceeds.\7\ FinCEN is
    responsible for rulemaking in these sectors as well as implementing the
    beneficial ownership transparency rule of the CTA.\8\ FinCEN's role
    continues to grow as it follows the money.\9\
        The Coalition for Integrity urges the subcommittee on Financial
    Services and General Government to approve the full $210.3 million in
    order for FinCEN to fulfill its duties to combat money laundering and
    its related crimes such as terrorism and promote national security.\10\
    Coalition for Integrity also endorses FACT Coalition's letter in
    support of increased FY 2023 appropriations for FinCEN.
        Thank you for your time and consideration. Please contact me with
    any questions at sshah@coalitionforintegrity.org.

        Sincerely, Shruti Shah
        President & CEO Coalition for Integrity
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \1\ The White House, Budget of the U.S. Government: Fiscal Year
    2023, Feb. 2022, https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp- content/uploads/2022/
    03/budget_fy2023.pdf.
        \2\ The letter was written in response to FinCEN's request for
    comment. See Letter from Shruti Shah, President & CEO, Coalition for
    Integrity, to Himamauli Das, Acting Dir., FinCEN, U.S. Department of
    the Treasury (Feb. 21, 2022), https://www.coalitionforintegrity.org/wp-
    content/uploads/2022/02/C4I-FinCEN-Comments-Feb-21-Real-Estate-
    Final.pdf; see also FinCEN, 86 Fed. Reg. 69, 589 (Dec. 8, 2021),
    https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2021-12-08/pdf/2021-26549.pdf.
        \3\ See Letter from Shruti Shah, President & CEO, Coalition for
    Integrity, to Himamauli Das, Acting Dir., FinCEN, U.S. Department of
    the Treasury (Feb. 7, 2022), https://www.coalitionforintegrity.org/wp-
    content/uploads/2022/02/FinCEN-Comments-Feb-7-Final.pdf.
        \4\ The White House, U.S. Strategy on Countering Corruption, Dec.
    2021, https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2021/12/United-
    States-Strategy-on-Countering-
    Corruption.pdf.
        \5\ U.S. Department of the Treasury, Testimony of Deputy Secretary
    of the Treasury Wally Adeyemo before the subcommittee on Financial
    Services and General Government, Committee on Appropriations, U.S.
    Senate, June 14, 2022, https://home.treasury.gov/news/press-releases/
    jy0815.
        \6\ Statement by Himamauli Das Acting Director Financial Crimes
    Enforcement Network U.S. Department of the Treasury before Committee on
    Financial Services, U.S. House of Representatives, 12 (April 28, 2022),
    https://financialservices.house.gov/uploadedfiles/hhrg-117-ba00-wstate-
    dash-20220428.pdf.
        \7\ Supra note 4 at 22.
        \8\ FinCEN, 86 Fed. Reg. 69, 589 (Dec. 8, 2021), https://
    www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2021-12-08/pdf/2021-26549.pdf.
        \9\ FinCEN, What We Do, https://www.fincen.gov/what-we-do.
        \10\ FinCEN, Mission, https://www.fincen.gov/about/mission.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                     ______

          Prepared Statement of Congressional Fire Services Institute
    Dear Chairman Van Hollen and Ranking Member Hyde-Smith:

        On behalf of the Nation's fire and emergency services, we write to
    urge your support for vital funding to enhance life safety across the
    country by preventing illness and death related to carbon monoxide
    exposure. As you consider the Fiscal Year (FY) 2023 Financial Services
    and General Government (FSGG) Appropriations bill, we urge you to
    provide $10 million to the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC)
    for grants required by section 204 of the Nicholas and Zachary Burt
    Memorial Carbon Monoxide Poisoning Prevention Act of 2022 (Public Law
    117-103).
        Carbon monoxide (CO) poisoning is a proven threat to Americans
    across the country, claiming at least 430 lives annually. Additionally,
    approximately 50,000 people are sent to emergency rooms every year due
    to unintentional poisonings, according to the Centers for Disease
    Control and Prevention (CDC).\1\ Since CO is an odorless, tasteless,
    and colorless gas, many people are initially unaware they are even
    being poisoned.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \1\ https://www.cdc.gov/nceh/features/copoisoning/index.html.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Carbon monoxide poisoning can result in death, but it can also
    cause lifelong neurological and cardiac issues, in addition to other
    harmful, long-term health conditions. While anyone can be harmed by
    exposure to CO, it is especially dangerous for babies, children,
    elderly individuals, and individuals with preexisting chronic health
    conditions, such as cardiovascular disease, anemia, and respiratory
    issues.
        The Nicholas and Zachary Burt Memorial Carbon Monoxide Poisoning
    Prevention Act established a grant program at CPSC to help States and
    local governments implement CO alarm installation programs and ensure
    that families across America are protected from CO poisoning. It is
    critical that this program is adequately funded to help mitigate the
    harmful-and even fatal-effects of CO poisoning.
        Our organizations look forward to working with you on funding this
    important public safety grant program.

        Sincerely,

        Congressional Fire Services Institute
        International Association of Fire Chiefs
        International Association of Fire Fighters
        International Code Council
        National Association of State Fire Marshals
        National Fallen Firefighters Foundation
        National Fire Protection Association
        National Volunteer Fire Council

        [This statement was submitted by Michaela Campbell, Director of
    Government Affairs for the Congressional Fire Services Institute]
                                     ______

                     Prepared Statement of Demand Progress
    Dear Chairman Van Hollen, Ranking Member Hyde-Smith, and Members of the
    subcommittee:

        Thank you for the opportunity to submit written testimony regarding
    the FY 2023 Financial Services and General Government Appropriations
    Bill. My organization, Demand Progress, conducts research and engages
    in advocacy focused on strengthening Congress's ability to legislate
    and conduct oversight. In furtherance of this mission, I urge the
    Committee to direct the public disclosure of in-person and virtual
    visitors to the White House and the Vice President's residence, which
    would further Congress's oversight role and greater governmental
    accountability.
                     disclosure of white house visitor logs
        Disclosure of White House visitor logs--records of in-person
    visitors to the White House--is an important element of government
    accountability and serves as a proxy for disclosure of meetings by
    lobbyists and special interests with government officials. These
    records of in-person meetings are generated by the activity of the
    United States Secret Service, which monitors visitors and clears them
    to the White

    House complex using records from two automated systems.\1\ These
    records track visitors from the initiation of a request that they be
    cleared for access until the point that they exit the White House
    complex.
        On September 15, 2009, the Obama administration began voluntarily
    disclosing the majority of the information in the White House visitor
    logs to settle then-ongoing litigation brought by civil society
    organizations over the issue of public access to these records under
    the Freedom of Information Act.\2\ In doing so, the White House
    recognized the ``right'' of ``Americans'' to ``know whose voices are
    being heard in the policymaking process.'' As implemented, the posted
    records included names of visitors, the dates and times they entered
    and exited the White House compound, and the names of the White House
    staff requesting that they be cleared for access. (Ultimately, the
    Federal courts held the records are not legally Secret Service
    property, but rather White House records, and are thus covered by the
    Presidential Records Act and not the Freedom of Information Act.)
        Under its disclosure policy, the Obama administration released
    nearly 6,000,000 records, which opened a new window into the
    functioning of the White House and helped inform the public, directly
    and through countless news stories, about who was going into the White
    House to meet with administration officials. This also offered
    opportunities for civil society groups to analyze the data in an effort
    to hold the administration accountable.
        Experience under the Obama administration's voluntary disclosure
    policy demonstrates how important these records are for public
    accountability. The Washington Post reported that the visitor records
    released by the Obama administration included ``scores of lobbyists.''
    \3\ For example, one news report examining records from an
    ``unremarkable'' day in January 2012 revealed the ``regular presence''
    of lobbyists at the White House, with ``lobbyists with personal
    connections to the White House enjoy[ing] the easiest access.'' \4\ At
    the same time, the Obama disclosure policy protected the interests of
    the president, his family, and the Nation by excluding purely personal
    guests of the president's family, records implicating national security
    interests, and records of particularly time-sensitive meetings that
    were temporarily withheld.
        Eight years later, President Trump closed that window when he came
    into the White House, leaving the public in the dark about who was
    going into ``the people's house'' and fueling multiple lawsuits.
    Regardless of who is president, information about White House visitors
    should continue to be publicly available. These records help inform
    Congress and the public about those individuals and entities that seek
    to influence presidential decision-making and Executive branch
    policies, and the basic day-to-day workings of our government--the
    information the FOIA was designed to access and the voluntary
    disclosure policy was meant to address.
        The Biden administration has chosen to reverse the Trump
    administration's decision to discontinue the voluntary disclosure
    policy. This is a welcome development, but one granted at the
    sufferance of the current administration and liable to reversal at any
    time. Congress must step in to guarantee access for itself and the
    American people.
        To that point, the House of Representatives included language in
    the Protecting Our Democracy Act, Section 2203 of H.R. 5314 (117th
    Congress), which establishes ``not later than 90 days after the date of
    enactment of this act, the President shall establish and update, every
    90 days thereafter, a publicly available database that contains covered
    records for the preceding 90-day period, on a publicly available
    website in an easily searchable and downloadable format.'' While the
    House passed H.R. 5315 on December 9, 2021, it has yet to see any
    action in the Senate. The measure paralleled legislation introduced by
    Rep. Mike Quigley in section 602 of the Transparency in Government Act
    over multiple Congresses.\5\
        Appropriators routinely require the administration to provide to
    Congress records appropriate for legislative oversight of Executive
    branch activities, including requiring the public disclosure of these
    records. White House visitor logs are quintessential oversight records.
    The House has already given its blessing for requiring White House
    visitor log disclosure and the Appropriations Committee is best
    positioned to vindicate Congress's will. I urge you to ensure
    uninterrupted congressional and public visibility into visitors to the
    White House and the Vice President's residence regardless of who
    occupies the White House. The policy adopted by the White House with
    respect to which records to disclose and which ones may be withheld is
    reasonable, by and large, and should be put into law. To that end, I
    recommend the following bill language that codifies the current White
    House policy and vindicates Congress's oversight needs and the public's
    right to know:

            White House Visitor Logs.--Not later than 30 days after the
            date of enactment of this act and updated every 30 days
            thereafter, the White House Office of Administration shall
            report to the Congress, the Senate Homeland Security and
            Governmental Affairs Committee, the House Committee on
            Oversight, and make contemporaneously available online, a
            searchable, sortable, downloadable database of visitors to the
            White House and the Vice President's residence compiled in the
            White House Worker and Visitor Entry System that includes the
            name of each visitor, the name of the individual who requested
            clearance for each visitor, and the date and time of entry for
            each visitor. Notwithstanding this requirement, the White House
            Office of Administration, after consultation with the United
            States Secret Service and the President or his designee, may
            exclude from the database any information that would (1)
            implicate personal privacy or law enforcement concerns or
            threaten national security, or (2) relate to a purely personal
            guest. In addition, with respect to a particular sensitive
            meeting, the White House Office of Administration shall
            disclose each month the number of records withheld on this
            basis and post the applicable records no later than 365 days
            later.
                 disclosure of white house virtual visitor logs
        As described above, the Biden Administration reinstated the Obama
    administration's policy to disclose the vast majority of records of
    visitors to the White House. However, many White House meetings are
    taking place virtually and are not covered under that policy. The move
    from in-person to virtual meetings in response to COVID-19 could not
    have been anticipated when the disclosure policy was first implemented
    in 2009.
        The Financial Services and General Government FY 2022
    Appropriations Bill Report (H. Rept. 117-79, p. 37) requested ``[t]he
    Executive Office of the President to explore the feasibility of
    disclosing 'virtual' visitors to the Executive Office of the President
    in a manner that provides similar information as provided for other
    visitors and that is retroactive to January 20, 2021'' and ``directs
    EOP to provide a briefing on this topic no later than 120 days after
    enactment of this act.''
        I applaud this action from the Committee and believe access to
    ``virtual'' visitor disclosures should become a permanent practice. I
    encourage the Committee to move forward to direct the Executive Office
    of the President to provide a report on the cost and implementation of
    making ``virtual'' visitor log disclosures permanent. To that end, I
    recommend the following bill language:

            White House Virtual Visitor Logs.--The White House Executive
            Office of the President, within 60 days of enactment of this
            legislation, shall provide a report to Congress on how it
            recommends implementing a requirement to make contemporaneously
            available online on at least a biweekly basis a searchable,
            sortable, downloadable database of ``virtual visitors'' to the
            White House and the Vice President's residence. A virtual
            visitor is a person who meets with Executive branch office
            staff whose normal place of work is at the White House or the
            Vice President's residence. This list should include the name
            of each visitor, the name of each person they met with, and the
            date and time of each meeting. This is intended to be an
            analogue for disclosure of White House Visitor Logs.

        As part of its report to Congress, the Executive office of the
    President may evaluate whether to include a provision that would
    exclude from the biweekly public disclosure any information that would
    (1) implicate personal privacy or law enforcement concerns or threaten
    national security, or (2) relate to a purely personal guest. In those
    instances, the Executive Office of the President shall still disclose
    the total number of records on a biweekly basis, but withhold the
    applicable record for no more than 365 days.
        The report shall also address the costs of implementing such a
    system.
        Thank you again for the opportunity to submit written testimony.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \1\ 18 U.S.C. Sec. Sec. 3056, 3056A.
        \2\ Peter Baker, The White House Will Disclose Visitor Logs, New
    York Times, Sept. 4, 2009, available at https://
    thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/09/04/the-white-house-will-disclose-
    visitor-logs/.
        \3\ John Wagner, Trump will keep list of White House visitors
    secret, Washington Post, Apr. 14, 2017, available at https://
    www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2017/04/14/trump-to-
    discontinue-obama-policy-of-voluntarily-releasing-white-house-visitor-
    logs/.
        \4\ T.W. Farnam, White House Visitor Logs Show Lobbying Going
    Strong, Washington Post, May 20, 2012, available at https://
    www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2012/05/20/gIQA2ok4dU_
    story.html.
        \5\ See, e.g., H.R. 2055 (117th Congress).

        [This statement was submitted by Hajar Hammado, Policy Advisor]
                                     ______

              Prepared Statement of Harbor Bankshares Corporation
        Chairman Van Hollen, Ranking Member Hyde-Smith, and members of the
    subcommittee, good afternoon. Thank you for inviting me to discuss the
    important work of Community Development Financial Institutions (CDFIs).
        My name is Joseph Haskins. I am a founding Director, Chairman and
    CEO of Harbor Bankshares Corporation, headquartered in Baltimore,
    Maryland.
                                  bank history
        The Harbor Bank of Maryland (Harbor Bank) opened its door for
    business in September of 1982. The Bank had its origin dating back to
    the early 1970s when Baltimore's African American leadership was
    seeking ways to enhance economic opportunities for minority communities
    in Baltimore City.
        One of the major issues identified as limiting economic
    opportunities was the lack of access to capital and more importantly
    access to banking. To address these issues Harbor Bank was found.
        Harbor Bank focused on providing banking services in the following
    areas:
      --Minority Business/Commercial Lending
      --Faith Based (Church Financing)
      --Residential Mortgages

        Increased demands for financial services coupled with increasing
    bank regulations required and expanded operations.
        In 1992, Harbor Bank formed a holding company, Harbor Bankshares
    Corporation (The Corporation), allowing for additional financial
    services.
        Establishing the holding company led to the formation of three (3)
    subsidiaries and a non-profit Community Development Corporation (CDC).
        Today, The Corporation oversees a $350 million Bank and
    subsidiaries that directly and indirectly control another $300 million.
    While the Bank remains the primary subsidiary, the other operations
    provide the Baltimore community with access to more diverse capital and
    financial services.
        Some of the expanded services include:
      --Lower priced loans
      --Equity investment support
      --Financial literacy programs
      --Real estate development programs
      --Specialized tax benefits

        Over the past thirty-nine (39) years, the significance of the
    Corporation and Bank to the development/revitalization of communities
    is evidenced by:
      --The development of the Inner Harbor East where Harbor Bank was the
            first money to help build a hotel, office building, and
            residential housing.
      --The Canton Community where Harbor Bank was the first money to
            support a residential housing project and the converting of old
            warehouses to office and retailed space.
      --East Baltimore Development Inc. (EBDI), a non-profit, was aided by
            Harbor Bank's seed money to help an 88-acre community known for
            poverty and crime to be revitalized and become livable. Johns
            Hopkins Science Park is a part of this community's
            revitalization. This community is now a national model.
      --University of Maryland at Baltimore (UMAB) Science Park where
            Harbor Bank was the first money to support land and project
            development West of Martin Luther King Boulevard.

        As a corporation in the financial services space, our role evolved
    to that of being a catalyst and advocate for revitalizing and restoring
    abandoned, forgotten, and disregarded communities in Baltimore.

    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                                 the cdfi role
        The Corporation and Bank seeking to enhance financial services and
    bring more resources to the Baltimore Community applied over 20 years
    ago to become certified Community Development Financial Institutions
    (CDFI). Today, the Corporation and two of its subsidiaries are CDFIs.
    Also, The Corporation's non-profit CDC is a certified CDFI.
        Under the Department of Treasury's CDFI Program, the Corporation
    and its subsidiaries have participated in several of funds programs and
    have successfully won/earned:
      --13 Bank Enterprise Awards (BEA) totaling $3,893,753 which helped to
            increase lending in lower income communities. The BEA Award is
            important to CDFI Banks because of its leverage capacity.
            Records show that 90 percent of BEA monies go to the lowest
            income census tracts.
      --Financial Assistance (FA) award totaling $649,000. ($500,000 was
            for loans and $149,000 persistent poverty).
      --Nine rounds of New Market Tax Credit (NMTC) awards totaling $384
            million helping to leverage over $3 billion of development and
            create 4,000 jobs. Projects include science buildings,
            community schools, and healthcare facilities.

        Many projects involve multiple level of participation from The
    Corporation. A project could include New Market Tax Credit (NMTC),
    Harbor Bank loan and advisory services.
                                maryland profile
      --The programs of the CDFI Fund are very important to the state of
            Maryland. Maryland is home to 15 CDFIs, two of which are banks
            or bank holding companies, while two additional CDFI banks
            based in the District of Columbia provide significant services
            within the state.
        --In 2020, Maryland-based CDFIs and CDFI banks serving Maryland
                (Maryland and D.C. based) received $6.7 million in CDFI
                Financial Assistance (FA) and Technical Assistance (TA)
                awards. CDFI banks serving Maryland received $202,898 in
                BEA funds.
        --In the past 3 years Maryland-based CDFIs and CDFI banks serving
                Maryland have received $31.4 million in FA and TA awards,
                while CDFI banks serving Maryland have received $1.15
                million in BEA funds.
        --Since the CDFI Fund's inception in 1996, Maryland-based CDFIs and
                CDFI banks serving Maryland have received $119.5 million in
                total awards. In that same period, CDFI banks serving
                Maryland have received $14.5 million in BEA funds.

      --Maryland is among the poorest States in the Nation. Like other
            States with persistent poverty, Maryland has a lot to lose if
            the CDFI Fund and BEA Program do not have adequate funding.
        --Approximately 9.1 percent of all Marylanders live in poverty--
                with the poverty rate in 8 counties (Somerset, Baltimore,
                Dorchester, Allegany, Wicomico, Garrett, Kent and
                Washington) equal to or exceeding the 12.3 percent United
                States total
        --Baltimore City, Maryland's USDA designated persistent poverty
                county, has a poverty rate 160 percent higher than the
                United States total. Somerset County has a poverty rate 190
                percent higher than the United States total.
                               covid-19 pandemic
        The crisis of COVID-19 highlighted the importance of CDFI banks and
    other community based financial institutions. CDFI banks reached and
    helped the businesses that required loans to survive, the ones
    disproportionately operating in low to moderate income communities and
    desperate for banking services and in particular financial assistance.
    The government offered stimulus programs--especially the Paycheck
    Protection Program (PPP) proved to be a lifeline to many of these
    businesses, especially in the distressed communities.
        Harbor Bank stepped to the front of the line providing assistance
    through the PPP program. Harbor Bank met and assisted over 1,000
    potential PPP applicants and processed 674 applications totaling $67.5
    million. Adjusting out the 10 largest borrowers, the average size of
    Harbor's PPP loan was $52,000.
        The government met the economic call from the community and Harbor
    Bank was a part of the delivering channel.
        In summary, the Treasury's CDFI Program is vital to the growth and
    restoration of the communities that have been depressed or deprived for
    years. It is difficult to provide the capital that these communities
    need without a CDFI Program. My fear today is that the absence of the
    PPP Program will render businesses incapable of continuing on the
    survival path.
        I urge the members of the subcommittee to recognize the significant
    economic benefits of funding the CDFI Fund programs. Not only do these
    programs provide access to capital in historically disadvantaged
    regions of the country, but they do so by leveraging private
    investment. The CDFI Fund programs are a market-based strategy for
    addressing chronic economic challenges.
        I thank Chairman Van Hollen, Ranking Member Hyde-Smith, and the
    members of the Committee for the opportunity to tell you the story of
    Bank of Anguilla, the work we do, and the communities that we serve.

        [This statement was submitted by Joseph Haskins, Jr., Chairman and
    Chief Executive Officer]
                                     ______

    Prepared Statement of Leadership Engagement of the National Congress of
                                American Indians
        On behalf of the National Congress of American Indians (NCAI),
    thank you for this opportunity to provide testimony on FY 2023 funding
    for the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), Department of the
    Treasury (Treasury), the Small Business Administration (SBA), and the
    Federal Communications Commission (FCC). A brief history of Native
    American policy in the United States contextualizes the need for
    increased and improved financial services in Indian Country and greater
    representation in OMB. Specifically, the U.S. legacies of genocide,
    isolation, forced assimilation, complete termination of Tribal
    government recognition, revocation of Tribal government jurisdictional
    authority, and forced conversion of Tribal lands, contribute to the
    systemic negative socio-economic conditions in Tribal communities,
    including a lack of access to deposit and credit services in Indian
    Country. Policies failing to consider that Tribal Nations and their
    citizens do not have the same capital equity as other American
    governments and citizens cause Federal programs and initiatives to be
    less successful than intended. Federal spending policy for programs
    that benefit Native Americans must be considered holistically across
    appropriations subcommittee jurisdictions and recognize the unique
    historical and political position that was forced upon Tribal Nations
    by the United States.
        For example, other governments in this country can raise revenue
    through tax-exempt debt. The issuance of tax-exempt bonds are a
    valuable tool to raise capital because they have a longer payback
    period and lower interest, in general. Tribal Nations do not have
    parity in access to issuance of tax-exempt bonds because of the
    ``essential government function'' test, which requires a Tribal Nation
    to prove that it is going to use the money for an essential government
    function. However, the Department of the Treasury (Treasury) has not
    defined what it means, nor has the Internal Revenue Service (IRS). Tax-
    exempt debt used to be a market in Indian Country, but without an
    essential government function definition, banks backed out of those
    sort of activities. So, when Tribal governments raise capital for
    economic purposes, the same purposes we are uniquely reliant on to
    generate revenue, we are not able to use tax-exempt debt. Tribal
    governments are not able to use it for housing and other activities
    that, again, have other collateralized asset barriers when they take
    place on Trust lands. Indian Country needs patient capital. Changing
    this discriminatory practice around the issuance of tax-exempt debt
    would free up a lot of capital that other governments take for granted.
        Another example can be found in alignment of a banking and credit
    deserts map with a map of Tribal communities, which reveals a crisis
    for Tribal citizens and governments attempting to access cost-effective
    capital and banking services.\1\ Unbanked and underbanked areas in the
    United States are known as ``banking deserts.'' \2\ According to a 2013
    national survey of unbanked and underbanked households by the FDIC,
    16.9 percent of American Indian/Alaskan Native households did not have
    an account at an insured institution (unbanked) and 25.5 percent with
    an account also had to obtain financial services and products from non-
    banks, alternative financial services providers, in the prior 12 months
    (underbanked).\3\ The general U.S. population is unbanked at about 7.7
    percent and underbanked at about 20 percent.\4\ Access to credit,
    especially for small businesses, declines as the distance between the
    bank and borrower increases.\5\
        The President's FY 2023 Budget Request to Congress calls for a
    historic shift in the paradigm of Nation-to-Nation relations that seeks
    to restore the promises made between our ancestors and the United
    States in several key programs. It includes requesting mandatory
    funding for: Indian Health Service, Department of the Interior Contract
    Support Costs and Section 105(l) Tribal Leases, and water settlements
    operations and maintenance; along with a myriad of investments in
    Indian healthcare, education, public safety, natural resource
    management, and infrastructure. The Biden-Harris request represents the
    most revolutionary presidential budget and policy proposals for Tribal
    programs ever, which have long been advocated for by Tribal leaders,
    are long overdue, and are prepaid for by our ancestors. The President's
    FY 2023 Budget for Federal agencies within this subcommittee's
    jurisdiction is largely a continuation of the status quo that results
    in Native Americans ranking near the bottom of all Americans in terms
    of health, education, and employment \6\ and the persistence of banking
    deserts that inhibit economic development, but this subcommittee can
    make a substantial difference by providing critical funding for
    programs beyond the norm.
        Cross-referencing OMB Native American Crosscut data with
    Appropriations Committee reports reveals that FY 2022 spending for
    Native American programs represents approximately 0.43% of total
    regular appropriations budget authority within this subcommittee's
    jurisdiction. With Federal investment metrics such as these, it is no
    surprise that Indian Country is in a State of catastrophe by national
    standards. Despite this chronic underinvestment, Indian Country is an
    important economic driver in the U.S. Economy.\7\ Collectively, Tribal
    Nations comprise the 13 largest employers in the United States, with
    Tribal businesses employing more than 700,000 employees, providing
    economic opportunity for both Native and non-Native workers.\8\
    Evidence indicates that where Tribal Nations are successful with
    economic development that poverty rates, arrest rates, and health issue
    rates are lower, while educational outcomes and real per capita income
    are higher. Further, revenue generated on Tribal lands results in a
    spillover effect that supports local workforces and generates tax
    revenue.\9\ Ultimately, prosperity for Indian Country increases market
    penetration across sectors and productivity in the American labor
    market, as well as improves outcomes associated with other Federal
    spending that maximize value ratios of Federal input to desired
    output--in simple terms, good governance. As such, an investment in
    Indian Country is an investment in America for all Americans.
                        office of management and budget
        The United States has a unique legal relationship with Tribal
    governments--a Nation-to-Nation relationship that extends to all
    Federal agencies. On April 26, 2021, OMB released its Tribal
    Consultation Plan of Actions to: improve executive branch compliance
    with Executive Order 13175; consider establishment of a Tribal affairs
    advisor; conduct regular consultations with Tribal Nations and Tribal
    officials; develop an OMB Consultation Policy; consider providing
    additional information on Tribal funding; review its policies and
    procedures; and identify legislation of potential interest to Tribal
    Nations. Yet, OMB reports zero Federal funding for programs that
    benefit Native Americans in its FY 2015 through FY 2023 Native American
    Funding Crosscuts. Dedicated offices to promote and fulfill the Federal
    Government's trust and treaty obligations are a proven policy mechanism
    to reduce programmatic inefficiencies and improve outcomes, making
    government work better with and for Tribal Nations. Congress must
    provide OMB the resources to establish this ongoing expertise and must
    break down the historic institutions of discriminatory gatekeeping that
    harm Tribal Nations. It is a matter of fulfilling its trust
    responsibility. Congress can promote this government-wide efficiency by
    providing $2.5 million to OMB for an Office of Tribal Affairs to be
    bureaucratically located within and report directly to the OMB
    Director. The crosscutting nature of Tribal spending and policy
    throughout the Federal Government necessitates that this expertise be
    within the Office of the OMB Director.
                           department of the treasury
        Treasury maintains a long standing and significant role in matters
    that substantively impact the sovereignty and welfare of Tribal
    Nations. Treasury invests in economic development and financial
    services for Indian Country, primarily through funding and technical
    assistance for Community Development Financial Institutions (CDFIs).
    However, Treasury has other programs that make decisions affecting
    Tribal Nations and their citizens, such as the Internal Revenue
    Service, the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC), and the
    Office of Recovery Programs. The Native American Community Development
    Financial Institutions Fund Assistance Program (the NACA Program) has
    been successful and effective in infusing desperately needed financial
    capital into low-income Tribal communities through technical and
    financial assistance grants; however, the CDFI bond guarantee program,
    and the New Market Tax Credits program have not had the same success.
    Native CDFIs provide a wide range of loans to microenterprises, small
    businesses, consumers, and homeowners; financial education and
    entrepreneurial development training; small business planning and
    homebuyer education; and counseling on credit, foreclosure prevention,
    debt relief, and other ways to improve financial capacity. Due to
    limited funding, far fewer Native CDFI applications are approved than
    submitted. Barriers to capital access, aggravated by the COVID
    pandemic, necessitate greater funding for existing Native CDFIs and
    awards to more grant applicants to generate more loans, financial
    literacy, and entrepreneurial development counseling in Indian
    communities.
        Although regular appropriations funding levels for Treasury
    programs increased in FY 2021 for the first time in more than a decade,
    the increase has not kept pace with CDFI and Native CDFI growth during
    that same period, resulting in lost economic opportunities throughout
    Indian Country. Even with the increase in FY 2021 (which was flat-
    funded for FY 2022), cross-referencing OMB Native American Crosscut
    data with Appropriations Committee reports reveals that FY 2022
    spending for Native American programs represents approximately 0.15% of
    total regular appropriations budget authority provided for Treasury
    within this subcommittee's jurisdiction. The subcommittee should
    provide at least $30 million to the CDFI Fund Program Account for
    Native CDFIs and $2.5 million for an Office of Tribal Affairs within
    the Office of the Secretary of the Treasury. Establishment of a
    permanent Office of Tribal Affairs within the Office of the Secretary
    of the Treasury will promote institutional expertise and guidance
    across Treasury policy and activity. Congress and Treasury should
    welcome this opportunity to reduce costs and increase efficiencies
    associated with necessary operations of the agency, while
    simultaneously maximizing the American taxpayer's investment in this
    country and growing local, regional, and national economic
    productivity.
                         small business administration
        SBA focuses on capital access, contracting, and entrepreneurial
    development. The SBA's Entrepreneurial Development budget includes a
    small line item for Native American Outreach that funds the Office of
    Native American Affairs (ONAA) which coordinates all SBA program
    activities to help Tribal Nations and Native-owned businesses navigate
    SBA contracting, business assistance and lending programs. In the COVID
    pandemic's wake, the ONAA needs more outreach funding to engage in
    multi-agency workshops and Native supplier initiative events, encourage
    greater use of SBA loan guarantees, assist Native recipients of
    Paycheck Protection Program loans and disaster loans, and strengthen
    Native contractors' participation in the SBA's 8(a), HUB Zone, and
    other small business contracting programs. In order to provide
    meaningful services, outreach, and education that is national in scope
    to Tribal Nations and Native-owned businesses, this subcommittee should
    provide at least $5 million for the SBA's ONAA.
                       federal communications commission
        Tribal lands experience lower rates of both fixed and mobile
    broadband deployment as compared to non-Tribal areas of the United
    States, particularly in rural areas.\10\ The FCC Office of Native
    Affairs and Policy (FCC-ONAP) States that, ``[u]nderstanding the
    complexity of the digital divide in Indian Country requires an
    appreciation of the unique challenges facing Tribal Nations, which
    include deployment, adoption, affordability, and access to spectrum, as
    well as lack of investment dollars and access to credit and start-up or
    gap financing.'' Through this Tribal engagement, the FCC has revamped
    regulations to assist in bridging the digital divide on Tribal lands.
    However, the FCC-ONAP office was created without dedicated funding, and
    it was not until passage of the FY 2014 Omnibus that the Office
    received $300,000 to support its Tribal consultation and training
    directives, an amount that is not commensurate with the scope of the
    mission tasked. This subcommittee should expressly provide $2.5 million
    to FCC-ONAP to promote an office with the resources to address barriers
    that exacerbate the digital divide in Indian Country.
                                   conclusion
        Our people have paid for every penny obligated to Indian Country
    hundreds of times over by providing this nation with our land. In order
    to uphold this Nation's promises to its people, it must first uphold
    its promise to this land's First People. We expect to continue to be
    treated as sovereign nations and with governmental parity. When we work
    together we can achieve so much. We must now continue down that path of
    Nation-to-Nation growth, and only then will all of our people be able
    to fully flourish.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \1\ Native American Finance Officers Association (NAFOA), Comments
    Re: Community Reinvestment Act Modernization, Docket ID: OCC-2018-0008,
    2.
        \2\ Donald P. Morgan, Maxin L. Pinkovskiy, and Bryan Yang, Banking
    Deserts, Branch Closings, and Soft Information, March 7, 2016, https://
    libertystreeteconomics.newyorkfed.org/2016/03/banking-deserts-branch-
    closings-and-soft-information.html.
        \3\ Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, 2013 Federal Deposit
    Insurance Corporation National Survey of Unbanked and Underbanked
    Households, 16, https://www.fdic.gov/householdsurvey/2013report.pdf.
        \4\ Id.
        \5\ Id.
        \6\ U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, Broken Promises: Continuing
    Federal Funding Shortfall for Native Americans, 1, available at:
    https://www.usccr.gov/files/pubs/2018/12-20-Broken-
    Promises.pdf, accessed on: May 25, 2022.
        \7\ Patrice H. Kunesh, Getting real about Indian Country--
    surprising progress in the heartland, https://indiancountrytoday.com/
    opinion/getting-real-about-indian-country-surprising-progress-in-the-
    heartland, Accessed: April 6, 2022.
        \8\ Id.
        \9\ Id.
        \10\ See FCC, Fixed Broadband Deployment Data from FCC Form 477,
    available at https://www.fcc.gov/general/broadband-deployment-data-fcc-
    form-477; FCC, Mobile Deployment Form 477 Data, available at https://
    www.fcc.gov/mobile-deployment-form-477-data.

        [This statement was submitted by Larry Wright, Jr., Director]
                                     ______

                     Prepared Statement of Lincoln Network
    Chairman Van Hollen, Ranking Member Hyde-Smith, and Members of the
    subcommittee:

        We are writing on behalf of Lincoln Network to encourage this
    subcommittee to provide additional funding to the Federal Trade
    Commission (FTC) and to direct funds for the hiring of additional staff
    technologists.
        In March, Congress passed the Consolidated Appropriations Act that
    appropriated $376.5 million to the FTC for FY 2022.\1\ The FTC
    requested that this subcommittee appropriate $490 million for FY 2023,
    an increase of $139 million.\2\
        The report language from the House Appropriations Committee for FY
    2023 recommended fully funding the FTC's requested budget at $490
    million.\3\ This report also encourages the Commission to address
    several concerns related to the technology industry, including
    deceptive data collection practices, fraud related to cryptocurrencies,
    online misinformation, and online privacy for children. Addressing
    these concerns requires deep technical expertise that is currently
    lacking at the FTC.
        In its own appropriations bill, the subcommittee should fully fund
    the FTC's FY 2023 budget request and specify that a significant portion
    of this funding should go toward bolstering technical expertise at the
    Commission.
                                   background
        The FTC, in conjunction with the Department of Justice Antitrust
    Division, is primarily responsible for enforcing laws related to unfair
    and deceptive business practices and other anticompetitive activity.
    Over the past few decades, the Commission has increasingly exercised
    its authority over the technology industry. The Commission regularly
    scrutinizes the business practices of tech firms and reviews mergers
    and acquisitions in the technology sector. As the size and complexity
    of the tech industry have grown, it is essential that the FTC has
    sufficient technical expertise to properly evaluate consumer impacts in
    this sector.
        Recently, the FTC has taken dozens of enforcement actions against
    tech firms, particularly regarding user privacy and data security
    practices.\4\ The Commission has settled cases against Google,
    Facebook, Twitter, and several other tech companies recently for
    privacy violations and for violating previous orders. Perhaps most
    significantly, the FTC is currently engaged in litigation against
    Facebook (now Meta), alleging that the company has abused its
    ``monopoly power'' to implement ``an anticompetitive scheme that
    prevented differentiated and innovative firms from gaining scale, thus
    enabling Facebook to maintain its dominance.'' \5\ All of these actions
    require the Commission to have a firm grasp of the technical issues at
    play in addition to legal and economic factors.
        The FTC's technical expertise, while great, tends to lag behind
    other global enforcement agencies. For example, the FTC's Division of
    Privacy and Identity Protection has 40-45 employees. The United
    Kingdom's and Ireland's enforcement agencies have over 700 and 150
    employees, respectively.\6\ While this comparison is imperfect,
    comparing one Division to entire foreign agencies, this analysis
    highlights that the FTC's technical staff deserves to be fully funded.
        Increasing technical expertise at the FTC will not necessarily
    result in more cases being brought against tech firms. The primary
    value-add for investing in technical expertise at the Commission is to
    help its lawyers and economists more accurately evaluate potential
    consumer harms, establish enforcement priorities, and develop
    technological solutions to operational challenges.
                  the need for technical expertise at the ftc
        The FTC has long recognized the need for expanded technical
    capacity, both for enforcement and general operations. In its FY 2023
    budget request, the Commission asked Congress to increase its
    appropriation by $65.4 million to hire 300 additional full-time
    equivalent employees. Among other areas, this increase would go to
    support increasing technology enforcement capacity and developing
    technological solutions to casework and litigation challenges.\7\ With
    regard to enforcement, the Commission further explained:

            In FY 2020, the Commission established the Bureau of
            Competition's Technology Enforcement Division (TED) to
            reinvigorate and refocus BC's
            commitment to identifying and challenging anticompetitive
            mergers and conduct in complex and increasingly pervasive
            technology markets. While pursuing this work, FTC staff are
            severely outmatched by the resources that dominant technology
            firms can deploy, such that the number of attorneys and experts
            working for defendants can outmatch FTC by ten to one.\8\

        Federal agencies are often outgunned when engaging in enforcement
    actions against tech firms. Giving the FTC the resources it needs to
    hire more technical experts for the TED and other tech-focused
    departments would undoubtedly help it more effectively and efficiently
    police anticompetitive activity in tech markets.
                  the need for qualified economists at the ftc
        The Bureau of Economics is crucial to the Commission's antitrust
    and consumer protection missions. It ``helps  . . .  evaluate the
    economic impact of  . . .  actions by providing economic analysis for
    competition and consumer protection investigations and rulemakings.''
    \9\ The Bureau employs numerous Ph.D. economists, research analysts,
    accountants, and other staff necessary to support the analysis it
    provides to the Commission.\10\ Throughout the decades, the Bureau's
    responsibilities have increased to include analysis supporting
    antitrust investigations, merger review, and support for other types of
    investigations and cases.
        In addition to increased technical staffing levels, the FTC's
    budget justification requests that Congress provide funding for 20
    full-time employees to ``provide increased support and economic
    analysis  . . .  and to increase the amount of economic analysis that
    guides the Commission's consumer protection and competition policies
    and enforcement.'' \11\ Within the justification document, the
    Commission expresses a desire for the prospective full-time employees
    to be economists focused on antitrust, including ``merger and nonmerger
    enforcement investigations and litigation, and research to help the FTC
    focus antitrust enforcement to maximize the agency's ability to
    maintain competitive markets.'' \12\
        The Commission's primary role is protecting consumers, not solely
    competition. Even the competition model should ask the question of
    whether the presence or absence of competition harms consumers. The
    Commission and Bureau should be focused on ensuring that government
    practices do not harm consumers by restricting entry, limiting
    competition, chilling innovation, or restricting choices.\13\
        Given the Bureau's nature supporting the Commission's work, the
    core request seems appropriate. However, this subcommittee should focus
    on the Bureau and Commission's broader work. While additional staff
    should help the Commission's antitrust efforts, this subcommittee
    should make it clear that any new staff should be used to support the
    Bureau's broader mission of protecting consumers.
                                recommendations
        This subcommittee should fully fund the FTC's FY 2023 Budget
    Request.
        As we have argued previously, complex technical challenges and
    increased workloads at the FTC necessitate additional resources.\14\
    Just as their House counterparts did, this subcommittee should fully
    fund the FTC's FY 2023 budget request of $490 million. While funding
    alone is insufficient, granting the Commission the resources to expand
    its technical capacity would result in more effective supervision of
    tech markets and more efficient operations at the FTC.
        This subcommittee should include language in the FY 2023
    appropriations bill that directs funds toward hiring additional
    technical staff.
        The need for additional technical capacity at the FTC is clear and
    immediate, and it is incumbent upon appropriators to ensure that the
    Commission has the resources it needs to address this challenge.
    Specifically, this subcommittee should direct the necessary funds of
    the $65.4 million requested for additional, full-time employees toward
    hiring individuals with technical or economics expertise. These new
    roles could help close capacity gaps within the Technology Enforcement
    Division, Division of Privacy and Identity Protection, Office of
    Technology Research and Investigation, Bureau of Economics, regional
    offices, and other relevant parts of the FTC. In all cases, this
    subcommittee should also ensure that the Commission remains committed
    to its original and statutory purposes of protecting consumers, with a
    focus both on government practices and private sector practices that
    harm consumers.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \1\ Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2022, Public Law 117-103
    (2022).
        \2\ Federal Trade Commission, Federal Trade Commission Fiscal Year
    2023 Congressional Budget Justification (March 2022), p. 8, https://
    content.mlex.com/Attachments/2022-04-04
    _X75ZUQW17T5GT2LS/FTC%20-%20FY23%20CBJ.pdf.
        \3\ Financial Services and General Government Appropriations Bill,
    2023, p. 69-72, (2022), https://docs.house.gov/meetings/AP/AP00/
    20220624/114951/HMKP-117-AP00-20220624-SD002.pdf.
        \4\ Federal Trade Commission, FTC Report to Congress on Privacy and
    Security, (Sept. 13, 2021), p. 2 (focusing on efforts on health apps;
    accuracy of data for housing, employment, and credit;
    videoconferencing; and education technology, https://www.ftc.gov/
    system/files/documents/reports/ftc-report-congress-privacy-security/
    report_to_congress_on_privacy_and_data_
    security_2021.pdf).
        \5\ Federal Trade Commission v. Facebook, Inc., 1:20-cv-03590-JEB
    (2021).
        \6\ Ibid., p. 7.
        \7\ Federal Trade Commission, Federal Trade Commission Fiscal Year
    2023 Congressional Budget Justification (March 2022), p. 10, https://
    content.mlex.com/Attachments/2022-04-04_X75ZUQW17T5GT2LS/FTC%-
    %FY23%CBJ.pdf.
        \8\ Ibid.
        \9\ Federal Trade Commission, ``Bureau of Economics,'' https://
    www.ftc.gov/about-ftc/bureaus-
    offices/bureau-economics.
        \10\ Michael Salinger and Paul Pautler, ``The Bureau of Economics
    at the US Federal Trade Commission,'' Federal Trade Commission, April
    2006, https://www.ftc.gov/sites/default/files/
    attachments/careers-bureau-economics/06beover.pdf.
        \11\ See 2023 Budget Justification, p. 9-10.
        \12\ Ibid., p. 13.
        \13\ Paul A. Pautler, ``A History of the FTC's Bureau of
    Economics,'' September 8, 2015, p. 82, https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/
    papers.cfm?abstract_id=2657330.
        \14\ ``Providing Resources for the Federal Trade Commission to
    Promote Healthy Digital Markets and U.S. Leadership in Technology
    Governance'' (2021), https://lincolnpolicy.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/
    02/FTC-approps-letter-final.pdf.

        [This statement was submitted by Jonathon Hauenschild, M.A., J.D.,
    Policy Counsel and Luke Hogg, Policy Manager]
                                     ______

         Prepared Statement of the National Association of Drug Court
                                 Professionals
        Chairman Van Hollen, Ranking Member Hyde-Smith, and distinguished
    members of the subcommittee, I am Meg Kaiser, prevention associate with
    the Harford County Office of Drug Control Policy in Maryland. I am
    honored to have the opportunity to submit my testimony on behalf of
    40,000 treatment court professionals working in adult drug courts,
    family treatment courts, juvenile drug treatment courts, Tribal healing
    to wellness courts, impaired-driving courts, and veterans treatment
    courts. I am requesting Congress provide level funding of $3 million to
    the authorized Drug Court Training and Technical Assistance Program
    (Public Law 115-271) at the Office of National Drug Control Policy for
    fiscal year 2023.
        Across the country and in my home state of Maryland, treatment
    courts are on the front lines of saving lives, reuniting families,
    cutting crime, and saving money. They unite public health and public
    safety to transform the justice system's response to substance use and
    mental health disorders by offering an evidence-based alternative to
    incarceration that combines individualized, evidence-based treatment
    with accountability. Continued education and training for the
    multidisciplinary court team (which includes the judge, treatment
    providers, defense, prosecution, law enforcement, community
    supervision, and others) is vital to ensuring fidelity to the
    successful treatment court model. In fact, research shows treatment
    courts whose teams participate in training see a 55% reduction in
    recidivism among program graduates.
        I know firsthand the importance of training and technical
    assistance (TTA) for treatment courts. Prior to becoming a prevention
    associate, I served as drug court case manager. In my current role, I
    work closely with the Harford County Drug Court and see how training
    and technical assistance (TTA) at the local and national level pays off
    in ensuring fidelity to the treatment court model. Our participants
    come from different backgrounds and face unique barriers to recovery
    when they enter the program. From incentives and sanctions to
    medication for addiction treatment and so many other relevant topics,
    training is fundamental to enabling the court team to effectively serve
    the unique needs of program participants.
        I not only attest to the importance of TTA in my professional
    capacity but also in my personal capacity. In 2018, I graduated from
    the Harford County Drug Court. I had casually and sporadically used
    substances in college but spiraled into heavy substance use in 2012
    after I was sexually assaulted. I became dependent on opiates as I
    self-medicated my trauma, and my life unraveled. I was dismissed from
    the University of Maryland right before my senior year, and I began
    stealing to support my addiction. For a long time, I managed to conceal
    the trauma of my sexual assault and my substance use disorder from my
    family, but eventually I could not hide my struggle. While in
    treatment, I resumed use after receiving news that a dear friend had
    overdosed. I don't like to think about where my downward trajectory
    could have landed me. Had my parents not turned me in, and the drug
    court program not accepted me, I'm confident I wouldn't be here today.
        I'm grateful every day for the redirection my life took once I got
    into drug court. The treatment, supervision, coaching, and recovery
    support from the multidisciplinary treatment court team helped turn my
    life around. The court team was highly functional and well trained.
    They worked together seamlessly to respond to every bump in the road
    and ensure I had the tools I needed to find and sustain recovery. The
    treatment providers developed an individualized treatment plan for me
    that included medication for opioid use disorder to help stabilize me
    in early recovery. More than 3 years after graduating, I'm in long-term
    recovery without medication, and I'm once again a proud daughter,
    sister, friend, taxpayer, and employee. I have dedicated my career to
    helping people turn their lives around and stay in recovery.
        Now more than ever, TTA are needed to educate treatment courts on
    critical issues such as medication for addiction treatment, overdose
    prevention, and equity and inclusion. Understanding and implementing
    best practices improves service delivery and outcomes and helps
    treatment courts address the most pressing issues facing our justice
    system.
        I am one of 1.5 million people who have found long-term recovery
    through treatment courts. Supporting TTA for treatment courts is
    critical to ensuring these programs continue providing quality,
    evidence-based care to participants struggling with mental health and
    substance use disorders. I encourage this committee to provide level
    funding of $3 million for the Drug Court Training and Technical
    Assistance Program at the Office of National Drug Control Policy.

        [This statement was submitted by Margaret ``Meg'' Kaiser,
    Prevention Associate, Harford County Office of Drug Control Policy,
    Maryland]
                                     ______

            Prepared Statement of the National Coalition for History
        The National Coalition for History (NCH) supports the Biden
    administration's recommended funding level of $426.5 million for the
    National Archives and Records Administration's (NARA) Operating
    Expenses (OE) budget in fiscal year (FY) 2023, which is an increase of
    $38.2 million from the FY 22 level of $388.3 million.
        NCH also supports the Administration's base funding level of $9.5
    million in FY 23 for the National Historical Publications and Records
    Commission (NHPRC) grants program. That represents an increase of $2.5
    million over the FY 22 base level of $7 million. The NHPRC received a
    total of $12.3 million in funding in FY 22. However, $5.3 million of
    that was the result of congressionally directed funding which we expect
    will fluctuate from year to year.
        The National Coalition for History (NCH) is a consortium of 43
    organizations that advocates and educates on Federal legislative and
    regulatory issues affecting historians, archivists, political
    scientists, documentary editors, teachers, students, genealogists, and
    other stakeholders. As researchers, teachers, and conservators of
    American history and culture, we care deeply about the programs and
    activities of NARA and the NHPRC.
        NARA has reached an inflection point. Recently, David S. Ferriero
    retired after 12 years as Archivist of the United States (AOTUS). We
    want to recognize and thank him for his leadership, dedication, and
    integrity during what have been challenging times for NARA.
        The new Archivist will face tremendous challenges in both the short
    and long term. For far too long, NARA has been neglected and
    underfunded. NARA has made progress but continues to struggle with the
    transition from paper to electronic records. As the quantity of
    material increases exponentially, NARA will have difficulty keeping up
    with Federal records generated each year, let alone tackling the
    massive backlog of older, historically important paper records that
    should be digitized. Perhaps most importantly, the quality and quantity
    of services provided to our citizens will further deteriorate if not
    addressed in this budget cycle. There are indications that NARA may be
    unable to manage these important responsibilities, a trend that has
    only been exacerbated by the pandemic, the ensuing shutdown and delayed
    restoration of on-site services. This limitation owes less to
    management issues than to inadequate funding.
        NARA's operating expenses (OE) budget has remained stagnant for
    more than a decade at a time when the transition to use of electronic
    records by Federal agencies is well underway. Investment in human
    capital, including professional archivists, is vital for providing an
    elevated level of service to the public. For too long Congress and the
    administrations of both parties have, unfortunately, viewed NARA as a
    mere housekeeping agency, rather than as a vital agency that ensures
    transparency, efficiency, and historical documentation for the Nation.
        NARA's FY 22 operating expenses budget is $388 million, which is
    only $3 million more than the FY 18 level of $385 million. NARA
    requires a level of appropriations commensurate with its vastly
    expanded responsibilities. This chart provides a summary of the NARA OE
    and NHPRC budgets over the past decade.

    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        In inflation-adjusted dollars, NARA's OE budget has declined for
    more than a decade.--No Federal agency can absorb such significant
    reduction in funding without concomitant decreases in public services.
    Even before the pandemic, NARA had to reduce hours at its research
    rooms.
        We fully understand, and agree, that NARA must prioritize the
    safety of its staff, researchers, and visitors and we realize they are
    doing the best they can under unusual and trying circumstances.
    Currently, customers must make appointments in advance to visit NARA's
    research rooms and the wait time varies from location to location. In a
    vast number of cases, researchers working on a project cannot complete
    their work in a single visit, thus increasing the time required to
    conduct research.
        Researchers may be coming from some distance to use the records at,
    for example, a presidential library, and being unable to conduct
    research on consecutive days is not merely an inconvenience. It may
    make it impossible to do the research at all. To its credit, NARA has
    tried to enhance the customer experience by allowing the researcher to
    request the records to be pulled in advance. However, the current
    system simply cannot be allowed to continue indefinitely.
        We appreciate the additional funds you provided to address the
    backlog of over 500,000 requests for veteran's records at the National
    Personnel Records Center (NPRC). However, these are not the only
    category of NARA's holdings that are experiencing delays. There are
    tremendous backlogs in responding to Freedom of Information Act (FOIA)
    requests. In addition, NARA is also facing backlogs in the
    declassification of records hampering the ability of historians and
    others to perform research. Delays in the processing of records and
    responses to records requests at presidential libraries have also
    increased.
        In recent years Congress and the executive branch have placed
    additional responsibilities on the agency without providing the funding
    necessary to assume these functions. These include transitioning from
    the preservation and storage of paper records to the preservation and
    storage of electronic records. NARA also faces the continued addition
    of presidential libraries. Each new presidential library created and
    placed under NARA's care adds additional costs for staff, maintenance,
    and records management.
        The Federal Government's transition to electronic records,
    including email, has exponentially increased the number of records that
    NARA must process and catalog. In 2019, NARA and the Office of
    Management and Budget (OMB) announced that the agency will no longer
    accept paper records from Federal agencies as of December 31, 2022. We
    are concerned that with diminished resources and the impact the
    pandemic had on its ability to perform even its most basic functions,
    NARA will not be prepared to continue this transition without serious
    disruptions. We doubt that this deadline can be met without additional
    resources, both human and technological.
        Despite the additional appropriations you provided for this purpose
    in the FY 22 budget, NARA lacks the funding needed to meet the
    imperative for digitization and accessibility. This need was made even
    more obvious during the pandemic which showed the public's expectation
    that the Federal Government's records can be easily found on the
    internet. In addition, the need to manage large volumes of textual
    records is not diminishing. Proactively funding NARA's records
    management programs ensures that agencies operate more efficiently and
    that permanent records are preserved. We urge you to provide NARA the
    additional funding necessary to ensure a seamless transition to all
    digital recordkeeping in the coming years.
        While not an issue that can be addressed in the appropriations
    process, we urge you to press the authorizers on the House Committee on
    Oversight and Reform to pass legislation strengthening and clarifying
    the Presidential Records Act (PRA). Events of the past few years have
    shown how woefully inadequate the statute has proven in ensuring that
    the complete historical record of an administration is preserved.
    Increased accountability and oversight are necessary.
        national historical publications and records commission (nhprc)
        The National Historical Publications and Records Commission (NHPRC)
    is the grant-making arm of NARA. It enables the National Archives to
    activate resources that connect the American people with archival and
    historical materials of deep significance to the present. Archive-
    specific work includes the preservation and access of electronic
    records and disaster preparedness for vulnerable collections.
    Historical grants provide for the creation of documentary collections
    (websites, podcasts, books, databases, transcripts, and audio
    resources) of nationally significant groups and individuals. Some
    examples include the documentary histories of people like George
    Washington, Willa Cather, Thomas Edison, Frederick Douglass, Walt
    Whitman, Albert Einstein, Martin Luther King, Jr., and Eleanor
    Roosevelt. NHPRC grants also fund the curation of content pertaining to
    noteworthy institutions like the early Supreme Court, the First Federal
    Congress, and the Freedmen's Bureau. In addition, the NHPRC has funded
    an ongoing project to make the papers of the Founding Fathers available
    for free online.
        NCH supports the Administration's minimum base funding level of
    $9.5 million in FY 23 for the NHPRC. That represents an increase of
    $2.5 million over FY 22 base level of $7 million. The NHPRC received a
    total of $12.3 million in funding in FY 22. However, $5.3 million of
    that was congressionally directed pass-thru funding, an amount which we
    expect will fluctuate from year to year. $9.5 million would enable
    continued support of ongoing programs and modest investment in new
    ones.
        Thank you for the opportunity to present our views on the FY 23
    budgets of NARA and the NHPRC.

        [This statement was submitted by Lee White, Executive Director]
                                     ______

               Prepared Statement of National Security Counselors
        Chairman Van Hollen, Ranking Member Hyde-Smith, and members of the
    Financial Services and General Government Appropriations subcommittee,
    thank you for the opportunity to provide this testimony.
        This testimony will discuss an area where I believe that
    Congressional action is needed to address a subtle issue which
    nonetheless has significant deleterious effects for transparency and
    accountability, namely, agencies' expansive use of secret filings in
    Freedom of Information Act (``FOIA'') cases and the resulting inability
    of journalists, academics, and members of the public to access these
    court filings years or even decades later.\1\
        FOIA cases are somewhat unique in civil litigation, due to the fact
    that the agency being sued must demonstrate through admissible evidence
    that information must be withheld from disclosure without disclosing
    the information in question. Agencies generally do so by submitting
    sworn declarations from FOIA officers which ``must prove that each
    document that falls within the class requested either has been
    produced, is unidentifiable, or is wholly exempt from the act's
    inspection requirements.'' \2\ These declarations ``must be 'relatively
    detailed' and nonconclusory,'' \3\ but ``would not have to contain
    factual descriptions that if made public would compromise the secret
    nature of the information.'' \4\ In some cases, an agency will assert
    that it cannot meet its burden on the public record, and in such cases
    it generally attempts to file a declaration in camera and ex parte so
    that only the judge-and not the plaintiff or their attorney--sees it.
    This mechanism is an imperfect compromise at best, but it is
    increasingly overused and abused by agencies with the passive
    acquiescence of judges, who cite the presumption of good faith that
    they must afford to agency declarations and virtually never refuse to
    accept such filings.
        It is not unheard of for a judge to grant summary judgment to an
    agency solely on the basis of an in camera declaration, in which the
    agency kept from public view not only the facts which would support its
    case but even the legal arguments. In such cases, the actual legal
    brief for the agency's motion includes little more than boilerplate
    language about the burden of proof and the proper conduct of FOIA
    litigation, and then refers the judge to the in camera declaration for
    all the relevant analysis. For instance, one of the FOIA cases
    involving the memos written by former Federal Bureau of Investigation
    (``FBI'') Director James Comey about his meetings with former President
    Trump was decided solely on the basis of in camera testimony, where
    even the arguments were kept secret from the plaintiffs (although the
    judge in that case did agree to review the memos themselves in camera,
    which is very much the exception to the general practice).\5\ In
    another such case, the judge found not only that the declaration filed
    in camera by the FBI was proper, but that the plaintiff did not even
    deserve a chance to file an opposition brief because ``the evidence
    presented in camera was so conclusive as to the questions presented
    that further briefing and argument was clearly unnecessary.'' \6\
    Bizarrely, that same judge had the following to say about this
    purportedly incontrovertible proof:
        Nonetheless, the court must state that Hardy's unredacted
    declaration is the quintessence of bureaucratic obfuscation. While
    attempting to decipher its meaning, I recalled one of Orwell's
    observations when confronted with such writing:

            As soon as certain topics are raised, the concrete melts into
            the abstract and no one seems able to think of turns of speech
            that are not hackneyed: prose consists less and less of words
            chosen for the sake of their meaning, and more and more of
            phrases tacked together like the sections of a prefabricated
            henhouse.

        George Orwell, ``Politics and the English Language,'' in A
    Collection of Essays 162, 165 (Anchor Books 1954). Which begs the
    question, why did the government resort to hackwork here? Orwell again:

            The inflated style is itself a kind of euphemism. A mass of
            Latin words falls upon the facts like soft snow, blurring the
            outlines and covering up all the details. The great enemy of
            clear language is insincerity. When there is a gap between
            one's real and one's declared aims, [the writer] turns, as it
            were, instinctively to long words and exhausted idioms, like a
            cuttlefish squirting out ink.\7\

        My research has determined that the number of such filings has
    shown a slow increase over time, from approximately 15 instances in
    1994 to the high-water mark of approximately 56 in 2017.\8\ I was only
    able to identify three instances of a judge denying an agency's request
    to file an in camera declaration since 1993. My personal litigation
    experience has suggested an increase in the expansiveness of agencies'
    claims that information must remain secret. In the past, I have
    occasionally received redacted versions of such declarations through
    FOIA or similar means, despite the fact that the agency insisted they
    could not possibly be filed on the public record without serious
    consequences.\9\ Some of the newly released information has been
    mundane, and some has been of significant historical importance. For
    example, in the landmark FOIA case Weberman v. NSA, the National
    Security Agency (``NSA'') argued that it could neither confirm nor deny
    the existence of records about a telegram that Jack Ruby was alleged to
    have sent to Havana the year before the assassination of President
    Kennedy.\10\ The district court and the 2nd Circuit granted summary
    judgment to NSA on the basis of an in camera classified declaration,
    and it was not publicly revealed whether NSA had intercepted such a
    telegram. However, in 2011, I obtained a redacted version of the
    classified declaration from NSA, which revealed for the first time that
    NSA had not intercepted the alleged telegram because it had lacked the
    technical capacity at the time.\11\ This was historically important
    information which would never have seen the light of day but for my
    efforts, but the public's access to such information should not depend
    on people like me pursuing it.
        It is for these reasons that I bring this issue to the
    subcommittee's attention. It is arguably beyond the jurisdiction of
    this subcommittee, or even of the Appropriations Committee as a whole,
    to make a significant change to the way in which in camera declarations
    are handled in FOIA cases, but such an effort should not be undertaken
    without hard data. It will be important for legislators to understand
    how prevalent this practice truly is and under what circumstances these
    filings are made by agencies and accepted by courts. To this end, I ask
    that the subcommittee appropriate sufficient funds from within the
    Administrative Office for U.S. Courts account (Salaries and Expenses)
    directing to that office to conduct a comprehensive survey of all in
    camera agency declarations filed in FOIA cases within the past 10 years
    (or another reasonable time period), specifically for the purpose of:
    (1) identifying with certainty the number of such filings; (2)
    identifying any geographic or temporal trends; (3) specifying whether
    the agency sought leave for the filings or simply filed them without
    asking; (4) indicating the depth of the court's discussion of the
    appropriateness of the in camera filings; (5) indicating the nature of
    the claims being supported by the in camera filings; and (6) providing
    any other relevant data.
        I also ask the subcommittee to appropriate sufficient funds to the
    Administrative Office to perform a feasibility study for a process in
    which all agency declarations filed in camera in FOIA cases would
    automatically be filed on the public record after 5 years (or another
    reasonable time period). This study would allow Congress to
    intelligently decide whether it would be appropriate to legislate such
    a proposal, so that these important court records would ultimately
    become accessible to journalists, academics, and the general public
    without relying on individual persons to pursue their release as I did.
    If any type of sealed court filings should be presumptively open after
    a period of time, it would most assuredly be filings made in litigation
    over government transparency.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \1\ NSC's Deputy Executive Director Bradley Moss provided oral
    testimony elaborating on this topic as part of the 30 April 2021 Demand
    Progress Webinar on fiscal Year 2022 Appropriations Public Witness
    Testimony, at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qsUc5nLcZDk (testimony
    begins at 43:56).
        \2\ Nat'l Cable Television Ass'n. v. FCC, 479 F.2d 183, 186 (D.C.
    Cir. 1973).
        \3\ Goland v. CIA, 607 F.2d 339, 350 (D.C.Cir. 1978).
        \4\ Vaughn v. Rosen, 484 F.2d 820, 826-27 (D.C. Cir. 1973).
        \5\ CNN, Inc. v. FBI, 293 F. Supp. 3d 59, 66-67 (D.D.C. 2018).
        \6\ Truthout v. DOJ, 20 F. Supp. 3d 760, 770 (E.D. Cal. 2014).
        \7\ Id. at 768-69.
        \8\ This research was performed by searching court dockets from
    1993-2018 for the term ``in camera'' and then parsing out the
    appropriate entries. These dockets were provided by the Transactional
    Records Access Clearinghouse's FOIA Project. The degree to which these
    dockets accurately reflect court filings during this time period cannot
    be ascertained at this time, and so these figures may not represent the
    totality of the practice. Detailed information about this analysis and
    my bases for making any other claim in this testimony is available upon
    request.
        \9\ However, as of the last few years, agencies have resisted
    releasing such in camera declarations through FOIA or Mandatory
    Declassification Review (``MDR''), taking the position that because
    they were sealed by a court the agency is powerless to release them.
    The result of this shift in many cases is that courts will not unseal
    them because they remain classified, while agencies will not declassify
    them because they remain sealed, making it literally impossible for
    them to be made publicly available except when the agency voluntarily
    decides to release them.
        \10\ 668 F.2d 676, 677 (2d Cir. 1982).
        \11\ I obtained this record by filing an MDR request with the NSA
    pursuant to Executive Order 13,526. MDR is a different mechanism than
    FOIA which is limited to classified documents.

        [This statement was submitted by Kel McClanahan, Executive
    Director]
                                     ______

                  Prepared Statement of Never Again Coalition
    Dear Chair Van Hollen and Ranking Member Hyde-Smith:

        We are writing to urge you to support increased funding for the
    Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) in FY2023 FSGG
    Appropriations. Today, the House Appropriations FSGG subcommittee has
    approved $210.33 million in FinCEN funding in their FY2023 bill \1\.
        The Never Again Coalition is an organization dedicated to the
    prevention and cessation of genocide and mass atrocities everywhere by
    focusing on five core areas: Sudan, South Sudan, Democratic Republic of
    Congo, Burma and Bangladesh. We seek to empower those affected by mass
    violence through community-led initiatives, awareness building,
    partnerships, and advocacy. The United States government is our most
    powerful ally in these goals and that is why we are urging increased
    funding for FinCEN, to allow them to enact and enforce effective laws
    that will disrupt the cycle of corruption that enable genocide and mass
    atrocities to occur.
        Effective laws, and their enforcement, are part of the
    infrastructure that is necessary for a healthy society. Without them
    the financial system loses integrity, threatening common goals of the
    United States and its allies: basic human rights, democracy,
    sustainable development, and peace. Congress recognized this and passed
    the Corporate Transparency Act in December 2020, in a bipartisan vote.
    Thus directed, Congress must now provide the tools to FinCEN to make
    this act reality. The absence of integrity in our financial system has
    been made stark by the war in Ukraine. When they were most in need, the
    tools were not sufficient. We can do better, and we must.
        It isn't just Russian oligarchs and corrupt government officials
    that we must safeguard our financial system from. It is the duty of the
    U.S., as the leading economy in the world, to prevent bad actors,
    wherever they are, from using and manipulating U.S. laws and financial
    infrastructure for illegal activities. The $210.3 million dollars
    FinCEN is requesting, and the House FSGG subcommittee approved, to
    implement and enforce the CTA, is nearly imperceptible in the scheme of
    costs associated with corruption. In Africa alone, ``Every year, an
    estimated $88.6 billion, equivalent to 3.7% of Africa's GDP, leaves the
    continent as illicit capital flight, according to UNCTAD's Economic
    Development in Africa Report 2020, almost double the amount it receives
    through international development assistance.'' \2\
        This begs the question--is it more effective to systemically fight
    corruption with laws and enforcement, or deal with the resulting famine
    and mass displacement that stems from corruption and kleptocracy?
        The U.S. is wasting resources through development aid if corruption
    isn't stopped and missing opportunities for affected communities around
    the globe to live fulfilling and productive lives when they are not
    reaping any of the benefits from development aid and investment. For
    the U.S. to fulfill its vision of basic human rights for all, there
    must be a commitment to invest in the tools needed to stop illicit
    financial flows. According to a recent report from Transparency
    International, ``Up to the Task'' \3\, the U.S. financial system
    generates thousands of suspicious activity reports (SAR) each year, but
    we staff our enforcement team to only investigate a small fraction of
    these: 10,000 SARs for each staff person, per year. In Germany and
    France the equivalent ratio is 600:1. Without robust and sustained
    resources, ours is a system bound to fail.
        The U.S. can lead on anti-corruption, and the world needs this
    leadership. FinCEN is the correct agency to work with the financial
    system, law enforcement, domestic and international governments to
    effectively implement and enforce these critical laws. We urge you to
    support increased funding for FinCEN, in line with FinCEN's request and
    the House FSGG approved $210.33 million, in your FY2023 budget.

        Thank you,
        Kelly McDermott
        Financial Accountability Analyst
        Never Again Coalition
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \1\ https://docs.house.gov/meetings/AP/AP23/20220616/114911/BILLS-
    117-SC-AP-FY2023-FServices.pdf.
        \2\ All-Party Parliamentary Groups (APPG) on Anti-Corruption &
    Responsible Tax and the APPG on Fair Business Banking, ``Economic Crime
    Manifesto'', https://www.appgbanking.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/05/
    Economic-Crime-Manifesto-1.pdf.
        \3\ Vincent Freigang and Maira Martini, ``Up to the Task?'',
    Transparency International, https://images.transparencycdn.org/images/
    2022-Report-Up-to-the-task.pdf , May 13, 2022.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                     ______

                        Prepared Statement of The Sentry
        On behalf of The Sentry, we urge the subcommittee on Financial
    Services and General Government to approve increased appropriations for
    the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) to $210.3 million, in
    alignment with the President's fiscal year 2023 budget request.
                             fincen's critical role
        The Sentry is an investigative and policy organization that seeks
    to disable multinational predatory networks that benefit from violent
    conflict, repression, and kleptocracy. Launched in 2016, The Sentry
    produces hard-hitting investigative reports and dossiers on individuals
    and entities connected to grand corruption and violence. We advocate
    for the use of tools of financial and legal pressure, including anti-
    money laundering and illicit finance measures, targeted network
    sanctions, criminal prosecutions, compliance actions by banks and other
    private companies, and asset recovery. As a result of our work, money
    laundering routes have been exposed and shut down, assets have been
    frozen, travel has been banned, and corrupt networks have been cut off
    from the international financial system.
        One of the principal agencies The Sentry collaborates with to
    achieve these objectives is FinCEN. Since The Sentry's launch, we have
    worked closely with FinCEN leadership and staff to take action against
    the money laundering that underlies violent kleptocracies, particularly
    in East and Central Africa. In 2017 and 2018, FinCEN issued important
    Advisories on illicit finance in South Sudan and on the connection
    between serious human rights abuse and corruption, which helped to
    elevate the risk profile of these concerns for the banking community.
    More recently, FinCEN released an Advisory focused on the risks from
    kleptocracies, highlighting Russia in particular.
        FinCEN plays a crucial role in protecting the U.S. economy from the
    threat of money laundering and illicit finance, from both domestic and
    foreign sources. From the current threats posed by the Russian
    government and network of oligarchs (some of whose wealth comes via
    exploitation of natural resources in sub-Saharan Africa) and their
    gatekeepers to regimes such as Iran and Venezuela to more general
    concerns such as money laundering through real estate and
    cryptocurrency, FinCEN's mandate and scope is uniquely local and
    international at the same time, given that the U.S. financial system is
    itself at once both local and international.
        In the years ahead, FinCEN's role will only grow more important to
    the ability of U.S. regulatory and law enforcement to catch up with and
    even get ahead of the array of risks the financial system faces. FinCEN
    plays a central role in implementing the U.S. Strategy on Countering
    Corruption, as well as several critical new proposed rules and
    initiatives, and in tracking new and emerging threats, including the
    impact of the ongoing crisis in Russia and Ukraine.
                           strong cta implementation
        At the top of the list of FinCEN's priorities is implementation of
    the bi-partisan Anti-Money Laundering Act and the Corporate
    Transparency Act (CTA)--landmark pieces of legislation. If robustly
    implemented, the provisions of both laws will be cornerstones in
    FinCEN's ability to address current and emerging risks.
        The CTA in particular needs swift and strong attention. In
    February, The Sentry was pleased to lead a coalition of 23 human rights
    organizations from around the globe in urging implementation of the
    initial proposed rule focused on the CTA's required establishment of a
    corporate registry of beneficial owners. This registry will help bring
    transparency and accountability to human rights abusers who have been
    benefiting financially from their malign activities, and it will begin
    to address the problem of anonymous corporate ownership that has been
    widely reported, including in the blockbuster ``Pandora Papers'' series
    that firmly pointed the finger at U.S. financial secrecy.
        FinCEN is unfortunately behind in its rulemaking and implementation
    efforts. FinCEN must be given the resources it needs so that it is able
    to satisfy congressionally mandated timelines. Given that
    implementation of the CTA is also a priority related to the Summit for
    Democracy and that the United States will serve as host to the next
    International Anti-Corruption Conference, FinCEN's delivery of final
    products for these events in December would prove U.S. commitment and
    provide encouragement to other countries.
                   addressing money laundering in real estate
        A recent study by Global Financial Integrity found that at least
    $2.3 billion has been laundered through the U.S. real estate market in
    the past 5 years. In November 2021 as part of a massive reporting
    project connected to a leak of banking documents, The Sentry reported
    on money laundering scandals involving Congolese officials moving
    illicitly obtained funds into the U.S. real estate market, including in
    Rockville, MD--Congress' backyard--and receiving tens of millions of
    dollars in bribery payments related to massive mining and
    infrastructure deals from Chinese companies and middlemen. These are
    just two of the myriad money laundering schemes routing through the
    U.S. financial system from networks like those of former Congolese
    President Joseph Kabila. Such schemes threaten not only the potential
    for peace and good governance in foreign countries, but also the
    integrity and soundness of the U.S. economy.
        Though the Treasury Department and national security officials
    identified the US real estate market as a money laundering
    vulnerability more than 20 years ago, real estate professionals have
    had a ``temporary exemption'' from having to fulfill anti-money
    laundering obligations similar to those required of other financial
    institutions, thereby offering a gateway to the U.S. financial system.
    In December, FinCEN initiated a rulemaking to update U.S. anti-money
    laundering safeguards for the U.S. real estate sector.
        FinCEN must have the necessary resources to deliver a timely
    proposed rule instituting safeguards for the U.S. real estate sector,
    as another demonstration of U.S. commitment to combat corruption and
    illicit finance.
                                   conclusion
        To implement the CTA, tackle money laundering in real estate, track
    Russian oligarchs' assets and target their enablers, as well as
    continue to deliver on the agency's baseline priorities, FinCEN
    requires high-level and trained professionals to keep up with both the
    financial institutions the agency partners with and the criminal
    networks they seek to disrupt and penalize. As the ``FinCEN Files''
    showed in 2020, in many potential money laundering investigations,
    banks are fulfilling their end of the bargain by submitting the
    Suspicious Activity Reports required of them; the issue is that FinCEN
    lacks the staff and resources to follow up on these leads.
        FinCEN serves a crucial function to uphold U.S. national security
    and, by extension, to protect human rights. This has been made ever
    clearer by Russia's invasion of Ukraine. The Sentry encourages the
    Senate Appropriations Committee to approve the full $210.3 million for
    FinCEN.
                                     ______

                Prepared Statement of Transparency International
        Dear Chairman Leahy and Vice Chairman Shelby:

        On behalf of Transparency International U.S., we write to urge you
    to support increased funding in the amount of $210.3 million for the
    Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (``FinCEN'') in the FY2023
    appropriations process. This is the amount that FinCEN has requested
    \1\ in order to effectively fulfill its mission.
        Transparency International U.S. is a U.S.-based nonprofit
    organization that is part of the largest global network of
    organizations dedicated to combating corruption. One of our top
    priorities is stemming the flow of corrupt and other criminal funds
    into and through the U.S. financial system.
        Corruption causes serious and widespread harm. The wealth drain
    from victimized countries robs people of access to healthcare \2\ and
    basic public services. It drives away private investment and economic
    development opportunities \3\ that are necessary for sustainable
    economies. It props up authoritarian regimes \4\ that engage in human
    rights abuses and undermine democratic values, institutions, and
    practices. And, as demonstrated in the current crisis in Ukraine,
    corruption has played a central role \5\ in emboldening Russian
    leadership to threaten global security.
        Our collective understanding of transnational corruption has been
    enhanced in recent years through a series of blockbuster reports \6\ by
    teams of investigative journalists and others who've exposed the global
    architecture of illicit financial flows. We now know that effective
    enforcement of our anticorruption laws--the ability to ``follow the
    money''--is nearly impossible without a well-resourced financial
    intelligence unit.
        In the U.S. that entity is FinCEN. In a new report, Up to the Task,
    released on May 24, 2022, Transparency International U.S., in
    collaboration with our global network, wrote that:

            Financial intelligence units (FIUs) are one of the most
            important government agencies tasked with combatting financial
            crime. Their core function is to receive and analy[z]e
            suspicious [activity] reports (SARs) and produce financial
            intelligence for further investigation by law enforcement and
            other authorities, where relevant. They also support and
            coordinate the exchange of information with foreign FIU
            counterparts. In some countries, FIUs have additional
            responsibilities as they function as the primary regulators
            and/or anti-money laundering supervisory bodies.

        A key finding of the report is that compared to several financial
    intelligence counterparts that have joined the U.S. to form the Russian
    Elites, Proxies, and Oligarchs (``REPO'') Task Force, FinCEN resources
    are woefully insufficient to address the current crisis in Ukraine and
    to meet the longer-term mission of protecting the U.S. financial system
    from abuse by corrupt officials and other criminals. As a proxy for the
    relative size of the covered financial sectors among REPO participating
    countries, consider the following: Germany and France's financial
    intelligence agencies each receive fewer than 600 suspicious activity
    reports per staff person, per year. In contrast, FinCEN, even with an
    additional allocation this past year, receives more than 10,000 such
    reports per staff person, per year.
        FinCEN's ability to work with federal, state, territorial, Tribal,
    and local law enforcement agencies and to respond to Congress and
    financial institutions with anti-money laundering obligations is
    clearly hampered by a lack of resources.\7\ The bureau we ask to
    safeguard our $20- plus trillion economy has a staff that is smaller
    than the staff of the financial intelligence unit of Australia.
    Additionally, the bureau has outdated equipment and software, and
    limited funds for licenses to access other data to do proper and
    necessary analysis--frustrating partners in law enforcement and the
    private sector.
        The invasion of Ukraine and the subsequent search for sanctioned
    funds is a stark reminder of why a robust financial intelligence bureau
    is so important. The bipartisan call for an effective response to the
    crisis has led to an important bipartisan agreement \8\ to increase
    funding for asset tracing and other improvements to our defenses
    against financial crime. We urge your continued support for increasing
    the FinCEN budget to a level at which the bureau can effectively and
    efficiently manage the data analysis, legally mandated rulemakings, and
    timely support to public and private sector partners.
        Thank you for your consideration of our views. If you have
    questions, please contact Scott Greytak, Director of Advocacy for
    Transparency International U.S., at sgreytak@transparency.org.

        Sincerely,
        Gary Kalman, Executive Director
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \1\ The Office of Management and Budget, ``Budget of the U.S.
    Government Fiscal Year 2023,'' the White House, March 2022, available
    at https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/
    budget_fy2023.pdf.
        \2\ Karen Hussmann, ``Health Sector Corruption,'' U4 Anti-
    Corruption Resource Center, June 2020, available at https://www.u4.no/
    publications/health-sector-corruption.pdf.
        \3\ Shamim Adam, Laurence Arnold and Yudith Ho, ``How Malaysia's
    1MDB Scandal Shook the Financial World,'' The Washington Post, July 28,
    2020 available at https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/energy/how-
    malaysias-1mdb-scandal-shook-the-financial-world/2020/07/28/dade64d6-
    d094-11ea-826b-cc394d824e35_story.html.
        \4\ Natasha Hall, Karam Shaar, and Munqeth Othman Agha, ``How the
    Assad Regime Systematically Diverts Tens of Millions in Aid,'' Center
    for Strategic & International Studies, October 20, 2021, available at
    https://www.csis.org/analysis/how-assad-regime-systematically-diverts-
    tens-millions-aid.
        \5\ Amanda Taub, ``To Keep Putin and His Oligarchs Afloat, It Takes
    a System,'' The New York Times, May 11, 2022, available at https://
    www.nytimes.com/2022/05/11/world/europe/putin-russia-corruption.html.
        \6\ Michael Hudson, et al., ``Offshore havens and hidden riches of
    world leaders and billionaires exposed in unprecedented leak,'' the
    International Consortium of Investigative Journalists, October 3, 2021,
    available at https://www.icij.org/investigations/pandora-papers/global-
    investigation-tax-havens-offshore/.
        \7\ Himamauli Das, ``Statement by Himamauli Das Acting Director
    Financial Crimes Enforcement Network United States Department of the
    Treasury before the Committee on Financial Services U.S. House of
    Representatives,'' Financial Crimes Enforcement Network, April 28,
    2022, available at https://financialservices.house.gov/uploadedfiles/
    hhrg-117-ba00-wstate-dash-20220428.pdf.
        \8\ Senator Sheldon Whitehouse and Senator Charles Grassley,
    ``Whitehouse, Grassley Lead Senators in Call to Fully Fund FinCEN's
    Anti-Money Laundering Operations,'' the office of Senator Sheldon
    Whitehouse, May 17, 2022, available at https://
    www.whitehouse.senate.gov/news/release/whitehouse-grassley-lead-
    senators-in-call-to-fully-fund-fincens-anti-money-laundering-
    operations.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                     ______

     Prepared Statement of Zero Emission Transportation Association (ZETA)
        The Zero Emission Transportation Association is a public interest
    non-profit of over 50 member companies advocating for 100 percent
    electric vehicle sales by 2030. Our membership spans the entire
    electric vehicle (EV) supply chain and includes critical materials,
    charging companies, utilities, vehicle manufacturers, and battery
    recyclers.
        We request the Senate Appropriations subcommittee on Financial
    Services and General Government fully fund the General Services
    Administration (GSA)'s Electric Vehicle Fund, as proposed in the Fiscal
    Year (FY) 2022 White House budget. Additionally, we request that the
    Committee include language in its FY 2022 appropriations report that
    directs GSA to implement policies that will help achieve the
    President's stated goal to rapidly electrify the Federal fleet.
        We offer the following report language suggestions:
      --The Committee directs the General Services Administration to
            rescind delegated authorities for agency vehicle ownership and
            unify fleet management and acquisition under a single updated,
            government-wide fleet management and acquisition system.
      --The Committee directs the General Services Administration to use a
            Total Cost of Ownership (TCO) procurement model that accounts
            for vehicle operating costs, including fuel/charging,
            maintenance, and public health savings.
      --The Committee directs the General Services Administration to work
            with the U.S. Department of Energy to develop a TCO model which
            uses statewide variables, regional variables, and inventory
            variables to estimate the cost of electrifying the Federal
            fleet and accounts for the social cost of carbon.

        [This statement was submitted by Joe Britton, Executive Director]