[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 [email protected].

    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 [email protected].

    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]