[House Hearing, 118 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
MARKUP OF VARIOUS MEASURES
=======================================================================
HEARING
BEFORE THE
COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS
U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED EIGHTEENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
December 13, 2023
__________
Serial No. 118-119
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Foreign Affairs
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Available: www.foreignaffairs.house.gov/docs.house.gov,
or www.govinfo.gov
__________
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
56-748 PDF WASHINGTON : 2025
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS
MICHAEL T. McCAUL, Texas, Chairman
CHRISTOPHER H. SMITH, New Jersey GREGORY MEEKS, New York, Ranking
JOE WILSON, South Carolina Member
SCOTT PERRY, Pennsylvania BRAD SHERMAN, California
DARRELL ISSA, California GERALD E. CONNOLLY, Virginia
ANN WAGNER, Missouri WILLIAM KEATING, Massachusetts
BRIAN MAST, Florida GABE AMO, Rhode Island
KEN BUCK, Colorado AMI BERA, California
TIM BURCHETT, Tennessee JOAQUIN CASTRO, Texas
MARK E. GREEN, Tennessee DINA TITUS, Nevada
ANDY BARR, Kentucky TED LIEU, California
RONNY JACKSON, Texas SUSAN WILD, Pennsylvania
YOUNG KIM, California DEAN PHILLIPS, Minnesota
MARIA ELVIRA SALAZAR, Florida COLIN ALLRED, Texas
BILL HUIZENGA, Michigan ANDY KIM, New Jersey
AUMUA AMATA COLEMAN RADEWAGEN, SARA JACOBS, California
American Samoa KATHY MANNING, North Carolina
FRENCH HILL, Arkansas SHEILA CHERFILUS-McCORMICK,
WARREN DAVIDSON, Ohio Florida
JIM BAIRD, Indiana GREG STANTON, Arizona
MICHAEL WALTZ, Florida MADELEINE DEAN, Pennsylvania
THOMAS KEAN, Jr., New Jersey JARED MOSKOWITZ, Florida
MICHAEL LAWLER, New York JONATHAN JACKSON, Illinois
CORY MILLS, Florida SYDNEY KAMLAGER-DOVE, California
RICH McCORMICK, Georgia JIM COSTA, California
NATHANIEL MORAN, Texas JASON CROW, Colorado
JOHN JAMES, Michigan BRAD SCHNEIDER, Illinois
KEITH SELF, Texas
Brendan Shields, Majority Staff Director
Sophia Lafargue, Minority Staff Director
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
LEGISLATION
H.R. 6602........................................................ 2
McCormick Amendment in the Nature of a Substitute #120 to H.R.
6602........................................................... 6
H.R. 6606........................................................ 10
H.R. 5613........................................................ 13
Waltz Amendment in the Nature of a Substitute to H.R. 5613....... 22
H.R. 6614........................................................ 29
Jackson Amendment in the Nature of a Substitute #200 to H.R. 6614 34
H.R. 1135........................................................ 41
Meeks Amendment in the Nature of a Substitute #55 to H.R. 1135... 70
H.R. 5917........................................................ 102
H.R. 3016........................................................ 111
Castro Amendment #87 to H.R. 3016................................ 116
Castro Amendment #88 to H.R. 3016................................ 119
Castro Amendment #89 to H.R. 3016................................ 123
H.R. 3569........................................................ 126
H.R. 6586........................................................ 132
Burchett Amendment in the Nature of a Substitute #65 to H.R. 6586 139
H.R. 6306........................................................ 148
Mills Amendment in the Nature of a Substitute #73 to H.R. 6306... 154
H.R. 6416........................................................ 160
Meeks Amendment in the Nature of a Substitute #54 to H.R. 6416... 169
H.R. 6610........................................................ 181
Issa Amendment in the Nature of a Substitute #139 to H.R. 6610... 204
Crow Amendment #106 to H.R. 6610................................. 224
APPENDIX
Markup Notice.................................................... 232
Markup Minutes................................................... 234
Markup Attendance................................................ 235
Markup Summary................................................... 236
Votes
Vote to Report H.R. 6602......................................... 238
Vote to Report H.R. 6606......................................... 239
Vote to Report H.R. 5613......................................... 240
Vote to Report H.R. 6614......................................... 241
Vote to Report H.R. 1135......................................... 242
Vote to Report H.R. 5917......................................... 243
Vote Castro #88 to H.R. 3016..................................... 244
Vote Castro #87 to H.R. 3016..................................... 245
Vote to Report H.R. 3016......................................... 246
Vote to Report H.R. 3569......................................... 247
Vote to Report H.R. 6586......................................... 248
Vote to Report H.R. 6306......................................... 249
Vote to Report H.R. 6610......................................... 250
Vote to Report H.R. 6416......................................... 251
MARKUP OF VARIOUS MEASURES
----------
Wednesday, December 13, 2023
House of Representatives,
Committee on Foreign Affairs,
Washington, DC.
The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:11 a.m., in
room 210, House Visitor Center, Hon. Michael McCaul (chairman
of the committee) presiding.
Chairman McCaul. A quorum being present, the Committee on
Foreign Affairs will come to order. The committee is meeting
today for consideration of H.R. 6602 to amend the Export
Control Reform Act of 2018 related to the review of interagency
dispute resolution process; H.R. 6606 to amend the Export
Control Reform Act of 2018 relating to the statement of policy;
H.R. 5613, the Sanctions List Harmonization Act; H.R. 6614, the
Maintaining Americans' Superiority by Improving Export Control
Transparency Act; H.R. 1135, the Countering Economic Coercion
Act of 2023; H.R. 5917, the Strengthening Tools to Counter the
Use of Human Shields Act; H.R. 3016, the IGO Anti-Boycott Act;
H.R. 3569, the Star-Camargo Bridge Expansion Act; H.R. 6586, to
Require a Strategy to Oppose Financial or Material Support by
Foreign Countries to the Taliban and for Other Purposes; H.R.
6306, the Embassy Construction Integrity Act of 2023; H.R.
6610, the Passport System Reform and Backlog Prevention Act;
and finally, H.R. 6416, the Russian War Crimes in Ukraine Tax
Act.
The chair announces that any requests for recorded votes
may be rolled and he may recess the committee at any point,
without objection, so ordered. Pursuant to House rules, I
request that members have the opportunity to submit views for
any committee report that may be produced on any of today's
measures without objection, so ordered.
Pursuant to notice, I now call up H.R. 6602, to Amend the
Export Control Reform Act of 2018 related to the review of
interagency dispute resolution process. The bill was circulated
in advance and the Clerk shall designate the bill.
[The Bill H.R. 6602 follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
The Clerk. H.R. 5602, to Amend the Export Control Reform
Act of 2018----
Chairman McCaul. Without objection, the first reading is
dispensed with. The bill is considered read and open to
amendment at any point. I now recognize myself for an opening
statement.
Today, we will consider several measures related to export
controls. I cannot express how important it is to protect
sensitive technology from falling into the wrong hands. It is
critical that we work together on this committee on a
bipartisan basis to do this.
The CCP poses a direct threat to our national security.
Each year, China steals upwards of $600 billion worth of
American technology and the FBI opens a new case on CCP
economic espionage every 12 hours. Whatever technology they
don't steal, they buy. Look no further than the CCP's
successful hypersonic missile test which circled the globe and
landed with precision. This was built on the backbone of
American technology. The CCP is blurring commercial and
military distinctions to undermine a core tenet of the U.S.
export control regime that assumes clear distinction between
military and civilian use.
Last week, I released my 90-day review of the BIS, that is
the Bureau of Industry and Security. Put simply, the system
must be reformed. It lacks transparency. It is failing to
protect America's national security. The measures we will be
considering today will address both of these issues. It is well
past time that we modernize the Export Control Reform Act of
2018 to stay ahead of our adversaries. So the bills we take up
today will use a whole of government approach to put America's
national security first. And it will ensure Congress has the
ability to conduct proper oversight of BIS and its licensing
divisions.
Is there any further discussion on the bill? Mr. Meeks is
recognized.
Mr. Meeks. Mr. Chairman, I am going to reserve my remarks
for when the amendment in the nature of a substitute is
offered.
Chairman McCaul. The gentleman reserves. Any further
discussion on the bill? There being no further discussion----
Mr. McCormick. Mr. Chair.
Chairman McCaul. Who seeks to be recognized? Mr. McCormick.
Mr. McCormick. Thank you, Mr. Chair. The Operating
Committee for Export Policy was established in 1995 to resolve
disputes between agencies regarding expense licenses. This
committee is placed under the Bureau of Industry and Security
at the Department of Commerce. The committee is comprised of
voting members from the Department of Commerce, Defense,
Energy, and State. Under the current law and regulations, the
chair of the committee, who is supposed to be impartial,
despite being a Bureau of Industry and Security employee, may
issue a ruling, instead of letting the majority vote, to decide
the case.
My bill would simply amend Section 1763 of the Export
Control Reform Act to say that disputes involving jet
propulsion technology, commercial satellites, emerging or
foundational technology, and countries subject to comprehensive
United States arms embargo shall be decided by a majority vote
instead of may be decided.
I am pleased to report that this bill is now bipartisan and
my Democratic colleagues suggest language allowing the chair to
break tie votes. This will ensure the chair cannot rule in
favor of commerce if they are outvoted three to one, and
ensures that a two-two vote does not paralyze the process.
As the People's Republic of China does everything possible
to achieve a qualitative technological superiority over their
adversaries, we must ensure that our export controls perform at
the highest possible levels and account for imperatives of our
national security oriented Federal departments and agencies.
This is a simple bill that ensures that each department has
a say in these export licensing disputes and I humbly ask for
all of my colleagues' support on this legislation.
Chairman McCaul. The gentleman yields. A point of personal
privilege. This is the 90-day review report. I recommend to all
committee members to read. I know it sounds wonky, but it is
extremely important to protect our national security.
On a point of personal privilege, in 1997, I prosecuted the
Johnny Chung Case that led us to the director of Chinese
intelligence and China Aerospace, putting money into his Hong
Kong bank account to influence the Presidential election at
that time. And why? Because they wanted dual use space
technology, satellite, aerospace wanted to get into the WTO.
They achieved all those objectives and that was 1997. Imagine
where China is today. We just can't simply afford to sell them
the very technology from the United States that ends up in the
Chinese military's war machine.
Is there any further discussion on the bill?
Mr. McCormick. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment in the
nature of a substitute at the desk and I ask for consideration
at this time.
[The Amendment offered by Mr. McCormick follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Chairman McCaul. Yes, and we were getting to that point.
Now that you have raised that, we will entertain your amendment
in the nature of a substitute. It is at the desk.
The Clerk shall distribute the amendment in the nature of a
substitute.
The Clerk shall report the amendment and distribute the
amendment.
The Clerk. Amendment in the nature of a substitute to H.R.
6602, offered by Mr. McCormick of Georgia. Strike all after the
enacting clause and insert the following: Section 1, review the
inter-agency dispute resolution process. Section 1----
Chairman McCaul. Without objection, further reading of the
amendment is dispensed with. The gentleman is recognized for 5
minutes on his amendment.
Mr. McCormick. Thank you for yielding, Mr. Chairman. I am
pleased to offer the amendment in the nature of a substitute
for H.R. 6602, Making a Targeted Bipartisan Change to the
Interagency Export Dispute Resolution Act. The Bureau of
Industry and Security Operations Committee for Export Policy
has four voting members present representing the Department of
Commerce, Defense, Energy, and State with a nonvoting chair
from the Bureau of Industry and Security. While my bill seeks
to even the playing field and decrease Commerce's outsized rule
in the dispute resolution process by requiring majority votes
on export disputes, the possibility of tie votes without an off
ramp could paralyze the process. The amendment empowers the
chair to break ties which makes sure the process can function,
ensures Congress still won't get their way if the vote is
three-one with Commerce in the minority.
I want to thank my colleagues for helping this draft in the
amendment and I ask that members of the committee vote yes on
the McCormick amendment.
Mr. Meeks. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, I had
concerns about the underlying measure. This committee and the
House voted down other attempts to intervene in the export
control interagency dispute resolution process last Congress,
as amendment to the EAGLE Act, as well as to America COMPETES
bill. I worried that mandating a majority vote on individual
licenses for export to all embargoed countries could
significantly increase the number of cases that get escalated
to the Advisory Committee which will make the license review
process slower and more cumbersome. Insisting on a majority
vote seems unnecessary to me because any single agency can
already block the approval or denial of an individual license
by the committee. On average, BIS receives close to 40,000
license applications per year. Based on the majority's own
report in Fiscal Year 2017, only in 17 cases did an individual
agency feel that the chair's decision warranted escalation. If
the Operating Committee was making decisions without merit, it
would see a lot more cases getting escalated, but that is just
not the case.
Having said this, I do appreciate, Mr. Chairman, you and
Representative McCormick's efforts to revise the underlying
bill and I support the ANS that would be offered by or has been
offered by Representative McCormick. And I know, Mr. Chairman,
that this is a genuine priority for you, that you have talked
about for a while and for Representative McCormick, so our
staffs were able to come up with a compromise that addresses
some of our concerns.
I continue to believe Congress' intervention in interagency
deliberation should be limited. The ANS will allow the chair of
the Operating Committee to decide cases where the agencies are
divided two to two, which should mitigate the number of
escalations that we see. And I am glad that we are able to come
up with a compromise and therefore, I support this ANS and I
thank the gentleman and I thank the staff for working together
so that we could reach this compromise and I yield back the
balance of my time.
Chairman McCaul. The gentleman yields and let me thank you
as well for working together with us and our respective staffs.
That is the way we like to get things done. The gentleman
yields back. Any further discussion on the amendment?
There being no further discussion, do any members wish to
offer an amendment to the McCormick amendment in the nature of
a substitute?
There being no further amendments, the question now occurs
on the amendment in the nature of a substitute offered by
Representative McCormick.
All those in favor, signify by saying aye?
All those opposed, signify by saying no?
In the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it and the
amendment is agreed to.
There being no further amendments, I move that the
committee report H.R. 6602, to Amend the Export Control Reform
Act of 2018 related to the review of the Interagency Dispute
Resolution process, as amended, to the House with a favorable
recommendation.
All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
All those opposed, signify by saying no.
In the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it and the
motion is agreed to.
Mr. McCormick. Mr. Chair, can I call for a recorded vote,
please?
Chairman McCaul. A roll call vote has been requested.
Pursuant to the chair's previous announcement, this vote will
be postponed.
Pursuant to notice, I now call H.R. 6606, to Amend the
Export Control Act of 2018. Related to the statement of policy,
the bill was circulated in advance. The Clerk shall designate
the bill.
[The Bill H.R. 6606 follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
The Clerk. H.R. 6606, to Amend the Export Control Reform
Act of 2018 relating to the statement of policy.
Chairman McCaul. Without objection, the first reading is
dispensed with. The bill is considered read and open to
amendment at any point. Is there any discussion on the bill?
Mrs. Radewagen. Mr. Chairman?
Chairman McCaul. Mrs. Radewagen is recognized.
Mrs. Radewagen. Good morning. The U.S. faces unprecedented
espionage by unfriendly states. We have seen time and time
again that these actors steal everything they can from the
American people. My bill further clarifies U.S. policy for
export controls to act against those that steal American trade
and industrial secrets. I want to thank Chairman McCaul and
Ranking Member Meeks for holding today's markup and considering
my bill.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
Chairman McCaul. The gentlelady yields back. Is there any
further discussion?
Mr. Meeks is recognized.
Mr. Meeks. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I support this
legislation by Delegate Radewagen. We know the PRC is committed
to bolstering its technological and military might. We have
seen numerous attempts by the PRC to steal technology from U.S.
businesses, as well as policies that force technology transfer
to PRC entities which cause great harm to U.S. industries. IT
theft not only harms our economy and reduces the number of good
paying American jobs, but it can also undermine our economic
and national security. It is important that our export controls
are designed to maximize our national security and account for
China's intent to steal our trade secrets to bolster its civil/
military fusion strategy. This bill ensures that our export
controls are being implemented in a way that protects U.S.
trade secrets on items subject to the export control
regulations and therefore, Mr. Chairman, I support this measure
and yield back the balance of my time.
Chairman McCaul. Any further discussion? There being no
further discussion of the bill, the committee will move to
consideration of amendments. Does any member wish to offer an
amendment?
There being no further amendments, I move that the
committee report H.R. 6606 to amend the Export Control Reform
Act relating to the statement of policy to the House with a
favorable recommendation.
All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
All those opposed, signify by saying no.
In the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it and the
motion is agreed to.
Mrs. Radewagen. Mr. Chairman, may I call for a recorded
vote?
Chairman McCaul. A roll call vote has been requested.
Pursuant to the chair's previous announcement, this vote will
be postponed.
Pursuant to notice, I now call H.R. 5613, the Sanctions
List Harmonization Act. The bill was circulated in advance. The
Clark shall designate the bill.
[The Bill H.R. 5613 follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
The Clerk. H.R. 5613, to require review of whether
individuals or entities subject to the imposition of certain
sanctions through inclusion or certain sanctions list should
also be subject to the imposition of other sanctions and
included in other sanctions----
Chairman McCaul. Without objection, the first reading is
dispensed with. The bill is considered read and open to
amendment at any point.
Is there any discussion on the bill?
Mr. Waltz is recognized.
Mr. Waltz. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you for
holding this--I thank you and the Ranking Member for holding
this markup today and allowing me to speak on this bill.
The Sanctions List Harmonization Act is a simple, yet very
much needed piece of legislation to require coordination
between Federal agencies managing prohibited party lists. The
U.S. Government has various sanctions lists with different
jurisdiction authorities maintained by numerous agencies. Right
now, our Federal agencies do not adequately communicate when a
foreign entity is added to their respective sanctions list. And
this is a major national security concern. For example, an
entitle may be denied an export license by the Department of
Commerce, but still be allowed to conduct banking transactions
regulated by the Department of Treasury. At the very least, our
agencies should proactively notify and coordinate with one
another to maximize the penalties on these bad actors when
appropriate.
Let me be clear, this bill does not mandate inclusion on
any list. Instead, it requires agencies to notify one another
of any new addition to their list. From there, the agencies
would have to determine whether or not that entity should be
added to their own sanctions list. Subsequently, each Federal
agency will be required to submit a report to Congress,
certifying compliance with these requirements, explaining their
deliberative process on determining whether or not to add the
entity to their own list, and specifying which entities they
chose to include on their list.
Again, this is not intended to be overly burdensome, but we
are, as a legislative body, having to force these agencies to
coordinate. And I do believe given the nature, transparency is
warranted. If an entity is concerning enough to be included on
one of our Federal sanctions lists, in my view there is no
logical reason for our remaining agencies to not, at the very
least examine the national security implications of that entity
within their agency.
I would like to thank the Ranking Member and his team for
working with us to get this language to a bipartisan agreement.
Again, I thank you for the opportunity to mark up this
critical, and I think long overdue, legislation. I urge my
colleagues to support this bill. I yield back.
Chairman McCaul. The gentleman yields back. Is there any
further discussion? There being no further discussion the bill
in the committee will move to consideration of amendments.
Does any member wish to offer an amendment? Mr. Waltz is
recognized.
Mr. Waltz. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I have an amendment in
the nature of a substitute at the desk. And I ask for its
consideration at this time.
[The Amendment offered by Mr. Waltz follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Chairman McCaul. The Clerk shall distribute the Waltz
amendment in the nature of a substitute.
The Clerk shall report the amendment.
The Clerk. Amendment in the nature of a substitute to H.R.
5613 offered by Mr. Waltz of Florida. Strike all after the
enacting clause and insert the following: Section 1 short
title. This act may be cited as Sanctions List Harmonization
Act. Section 2, requirements to include individuals and
entities subject to the United States sanctions on certain
other sanctions----
Chairman McCaul. Without objection, further reading of the
amendment is dispensed with.
The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes on his amendment.
Mr. Waltz. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I will keep this brief. My
initial remarks reflected the changes agreed to through this
ANS and this ANS is a product of negotiations with the Ranking
Member and his team to get this bill to a bipartisan agreement.
I urge my colleagues to support this ANS and I yield back.
Chairman McCaul. The gentleman yields back. Any other
member seek recognize? Mr. Meeks is recognized.
Mr. Meeks. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to thank the
majority and Representative Waltz for working with us to reach
a compromise that I am willing to support. I had concerns about
the original measure. On principle, the various lists that this
bill is trying to harmonize have different purposes and should
remain distinct from one another. This bill could create a
disincentive for any administration to add new entities to
these lists. Harmonizing these various lists also would make
our sanctions and export control policies less effective. Our
sanctions are designed not just to be punitive, but to have a
policy impact on the entities targeted. For our sanctions to be
successful, targeted entities must believe that stopping their
behavior would result in the removal of the sanction.
We seek to use our sanctions and other tools in ways to
maximize our ability to pressure the target entities. The
original bill would give companies little incentive to change
their behavior and it would remove America's ability to retain
any additional leverage down the line because we have emptied
our quiver already. So this supposedly tough approach would end
up backfiring and undermining United States' interests.
I want to thank you, Mr. Chairman, and again,
Representative Waltz for working with me to address some of my
concerns. Representative Waltz' ANS makes changes that would
reduce the bureaucratic burden on individual agencies, allowing
them to focus on the most high priority, national security
threats and foreign policy challenges. It will simply ensure
that once an agency adds an entity to the sanctions list, that
all other agencies are conducting timely review to determine
whether that entity warrants inclusion on their list as well. I
think this makes a lot of sense and we could all agree with
this concept. While I believe the agencies are informally doing
this work already, codifying the need to conduct timely review
as the ANS does is a reasonable step to take. We need smart and
effective policies, not a one-size-fits-all ranking approach
when it comes to economic statecraft, and especially our
competition with China.
In the most problematic cases, this may be a need for
financial sanctions. And others, we may strategically work to
keep the PRC dependent on our exports and invest the revenue
our companies gain to maintain our innovation and technological
edge. In other cases, we may need to limit the export of the
most advanced exports to a particular entity, but that entity
may have done nothing that warrants a financial sanction. In
many cases, the legal authority to immediately place a company
on the SBN list without an Executive Order, simply doesn't
exist. The ANS allays my concerns about the original measure,
so I will support it and I look forward to continuing to work
with this legislation, with you, Mr. Chairman, and Mr. Waltz,
and I yield back the balance of my time.
Chairman McCaul. The gentleman yields back. Do any other
members seek recognition? There being no further discussion, do
any members wish to offer an amendment to the Waltz amendment
in the nature of a substitute? There being no further
amendments, the question now occurs in the amendment in the
nature of a substitute offered by Mr. Waltz.
All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
All those opposed, signify by saying no.
In the opinion of the chair the ayes have it and the
amendment is agreed to.
There being no further amendments, I move that the
committee report H.R. 5613, the Sanctions List Harmonization
Act as amended to the House with a favorable recommendation.
All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
All those opposed, signify by saying no.
In the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it and motion is
agreed to.
Mr. Waltz. Mr. Chairman, request for a recorded vote.
Chairman McCaul. A roll call vote has been requested.
Pursuant to the chair's previous announcement, this vote will
be postponed.
Pursuant to notice, I now call up H.R. 6614, the
Maintaining American Superiority by Approving Export Control
Transparency Act. The bill was circulated in advance. The Clerk
shall designate the bill.
[The Bill H.R. 6614 follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
The Clerk. H.R. 6614, to Amend the Export Control Reform
Act of 2018 relating to Licensing Transparency.
Chairman McCaul. Without objection, the first reading is
dispensed with. The bill is considered read and open to
amendment at any point. Is there any discussion on this bill?
Mr. Jackson, do you have any----
Mr. Jackson of Texas. No, sir.
Chairman McCaul. There being no further discussion, the
committee will move to consideration of amendments. Does any
member wish to offer an amendment?
Mr. Jackson is recognized.
Mr. Jackson of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at
the desk in the nature of a substitute and I ask for
consideration at this time.
[The Amendment offered by Mr. Jackson of Texas follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Chairman McCaul. The Clerk shall distribute the Jackson
amendment in the nature of a substitute. The Clerk shall report
the amendment.
The Clerk. Amendment in the nature of a substitute to H.R.
6614 offered by Mr. Jackson of Texas. Strike all after the
enacting clause and insert the following: Section 1, short
title. This act may be cited as Maintaining American
Superiority by Improving Export Control Transparency Act.
Section 2----
Chairman McCaul. Without objection, further reading of the
amendment is dispensed with. The gentleman from Texas is
recognized for 5 minutes on his amendment.
Mr. Jackson of Texas. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank
you Ranking Member Meeks for holding this markup today and for
allowing swift consideration of my bill, the Maintaining
American Superiority by Improving Export Control Transparency
Act. This country's determination, innovation, and commitment
to achieving what was once thought impossible have led to some
of the most incredible technological advances in the history of
the world, and consequently, we make many of the world's very
best goods right here in America. But it is hard to keep a good
thing to yourself and many across the world want to benefit
from our American goods for themselves. Generally, we are happy
to export the fruits of our hard work because trade is an
important part of our successful and vibrant economy, but the
reality is that not every country who wants access to our goods
and materials is friendly toward the United States. Some actors
in the world, China, Russia, North Korea, and Iran to name a
few, would gladly seek to use our own goods and technologies
against us whether in military engagements or on economic
battle. And the type of goods I am speaking about are not just
those that have obvious military applications such as night
vision goggles, tanks and stealth technology. These bad actors
are constantly thinking of new ways to use anything and
everything against us, making everyday commercial items
produced right here in the U.S. ripe for employment against our
own country. One example would be telecommunications equipment.
Anything from routers to cell phones to Bluetooth technology
are generally all thought of as commercial goods, but they have
a huge, national security and military implications as well.
These so-called dual-use technologies are the type of goods
that current export controls attempt to prevent from falling
into the hands of malign actors.
My bill, the Maintaining American Superiority by Improving
Export Control Transparency Act simply seeks to ensure that
there is openness and accountability in the export control
process by maintaining a report on export control license
applications. Quite simply, my bill creates a mechanism through
tracking and reporting on export control license applications
that can be used to form a paper trail to know where goods and
the ultimately the destructive purpose may have come from, who
produced them, and to where they were sold.
Further, it would provide some clarify to Congress on how
these decisions are made. Every 90 days, the House Committee on
Foreign Affairs and the Senate Committee on Banking would
receive the report on export control license applications and
would gain insight into where our American made dual use goods
are going abroud. I want nothing more than for the American
economy to be strong, open, and free and trade is a part of
that vision.
Ultimately, our own free market cannot also be the source
of our own downfall if we allow our adversaries to use our
goods and our technologies against us. My bill makes sure that
there is accountability and trackability when we send dual use
goods abroad. And with that, Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
Chairman McCaul. The gentleman yields.
Does any other member seek recognition? Mr. Meeks is
recognized.
Mr. Meeks. Mr. Chairman, I support this amendment in the
nature of a substitute offered by Representative Jackson.
Transparency is critical for enabling effective
congressional oversight, and this measure will allow Congress
greater insight into the license application decisions and
enforcement actions taken by the Bureau of Industry and
Security.
Again, Mr. Chairman, I want to thank you and Representative
Jackson for working with my team to negotiate this bill in a
bipartisan fashion, to ensure that the committee is getting the
information it needs while maximizing BIS's ability to
effectively carry out its core day-to-day export control
activities regarding our national security. The changes
reflected in the ANS will give BIS adequate time to compile all
the required information and share it with Congress.
We have also strengthened the confidentiality protections
to ensure that business proprietary information about U.S.
companies isn't shared with their domestic and foreign
competitors.
I am supportive of this bill, and I also encourage my
colleagues--or the committee to provide BIS with the resources
and technology needed to implement this bill effectively. Given
BIS's national security objectives and its growing mandate, we
must adequately resource the agency and position it for
success. Therefore, I look forward, Mr. Chairman, to working
with the majority to mark up a bipartisan bill that authorizes
funds for BIS to modernize its IT and software tools early in
the new year.
And with that, I yield back the balance of my time.
Chairman McCaul. The gentleman yields back.
Any other members seek recognition?
Mr. Mast is recognized.
Mr. Mast. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I rise in support as
well.
Yesterday, the Committee on Oversight and Accountability
within Foreign Affairs had a hearing with the Bureau of
Industry and Security. And one of the things that was addressed
very specifically was Chinese entities being taken off the
Entity List, Chinese government agencies being taken off the
Entity List, for handshake deals with the administration to
stem the flow of fentanyl coming out of China, and ultimately,
making it through our southern border.
That's a worthy cause to prevent Americans from dying from
fentanyl, from what is making it into the United States of
America. But what was unanswered, what remained unanswered
through multiple people asking questions in this hearing was,
No. 1, why was this Chinese entity put on the--why was this
Chinese arm put on the Entity List? What did we hope to keep
them from getting in terms of dual-use technologies? And why
were they allowed to be taken off of it, that it's now OK that
they get whatever dual-use technologies that they wouldn't tell
us about over this handshake agreement to stop fentanyl from
coming across or to help stop fentanyl from coming across the
southern border--instead of doing something so commonsensical
as securing our southern border, preventing goods and people
from coming across illegally? Instead, the BIS chose to work
with China to say, well, if you take them off this list, then
we'll work to deal with this.
So, the point that I'm making is it is important to have
this transparency within BIS about what is and is not being
applied for in terms of licenses; what is being denied; why
entities are being put on the list or taken off the list.
And again, Mr. Chairman, I rise in support. I think it's a
very necessary piece of policy that my colleague here is
putting forward, and I thank him for putting it forward.
Chairman McCaul. The gentleman yields back.
Does any other member seek recognition?
Mr. Davidson is recognized.
Mr. Davidson. Thank you, Chairman.
I thank Mr. Jackson for moving this piece of legislation.
You know, several years ago, we passed the Foreign
Investment Risk Reduction Modernization Act. And the balance
that we struck was tough. Because, on the one hand, we,
obviously, want to protect our national security; protect,
frankly, our companies and our citizens and their sensitive
data from those who would exploit it. And China is a perfect
example of exploiting that kind of information.
On the other hand, we don't want companies so gun-shy about
making research and development investments in the United
States that they feel like, well, do I own the intellectual
property or does America own the intellectual property? So, if
we're going to attract the most innovative companies into the
United States and make the investments here, they need to know
that, if they make the investments, they can commercialize they
make in America.
I do fear we've had proposals that go to the far extreme,
that it's like, well, gee, if I locate this in America, I may
not actually be able to sell this outside of America. And, you
know, those are features more characteristic of a police State.
I don't think Mr. Jackson's bill goes here, but I do
highlight that some of the proposals we've entertained in the
committee kind of brush up on that. And that's kind of the
tension between work product that's been here in our committee
versus work product that's been in Financial Services, Mr.
Barr's bill versus the chairman's bill, for example, on how to
deal with intellectual property.
One of the things that I hope we confront through some
committee of jurisdiction--and export control is part of it--is
a bill that we've got that would prevent companies from
exporting personally identifiable information from Americans.
This is the kind of thing that is used to exploit our senior
citizens with scams. They get their information sold. Hackers
get it. People exploit it. They get phone calls, emails, text
messages, every way they can to go after folks. The information
gets located offshore. And we need to protect that.
We've passed through the Judiciary Committee the Fourth
Amendment Is Not For Sale Act. And that prevents government
agencies from buying data that they would otherwise have to get
a warrant or a subpoena. We should certainly do everything we
can to limit the ability of foreigners to buy or access that
same sort of data.
It may not be the right amendment to offer to Mr. Jackson's
bill. So, I'm not offering that today. But, as we continue the
dialog, I think those are the kinds of things that, hopefully,
our committee will consider and make sure we keep the right
balance in mind.
I yield back.
Chairman McCaul. The gentleman yields back.
Is there any further discussion?
There being no further discussion, do any members wish to
offer an amendment to the Jackson amendment in the nature of a
substitute?
There being no further amendments, the question now occurs
on the amendment in the nature of a substitute offered by
Congressman Jackson.
All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
All those opposed, signify by saying no.
In the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it and the
amendment is agreed to.
There being no further amendments, I move that the
committee report H.R. 6614, the Maintaining American
Superiority by Improving the Export Control Transparency Act,
as amended, to the House with a favorable recommendation.
All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
All those opposed, signify by saying no.
In the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it and the
motion is agreed to.
Mr. Jackson of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I request a recorded
vote.
Chairman McCaul. A roll call vote has been requested.
Pursuant to the chair's previous announcement, this bill be
postponed.
Pursuant to notice, I now call up H.R. 1135, the Countering
Economic Coercion Act of 2023.
The bill was circulated in advance.
The clerk shall designate the bill.
The Clerk. ``H.R. 1135, to grant certain authorities to the
President to combat economic coercion by foreign adversaries,
and for other purposes.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States''----
Chairman McCaul. Without objection, the first reading is
dispensed with.
The bill is considered read and open to amendment at any
point.
[The Bill H.R. 1135 follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Chairman McCaul. With objection, the Meeks amendment in the
nature of a substitute, No 55, circulated to members in
advance, shall be considered as read and will be treated as
original text for purposes of amendment.
[The amendment No. 55 in the nature of a substitute offered
by Mr. Meeks follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Chairman McCaul. Is there any discussion on the bill?
Mr. Meeks is recognized.
Mr. Meeks. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I strongly support this bill, and thank you for working
with me to mark up this critical legislation.
My thanks, also, to Representative Tom Cole, the chairman
of the Rules Committee, for co-leading this bipartisan bill
with me, as well as to Senators Young and Coons, who introduced
the bill in the Senate.
American allies and partners are increasingly subject to
blatant economic coercion to get them to take actions directly
contrary to their interests, and at times ours also.
Beijing lashed out at Seoul after South Korea and the
United States announced a plan in 2016 to install THAD in South
Korea.
In 2017, Beijing weaponized trade against Australia when
Canterbury considered legislation to combat PRC's interference
in its own domestic politics.
In 2018, Beijing cracked down on Canadian agriculture and
meat exports to punish Ottawa for arresting the CFO of Huawei
for violating United States sanctions laws.
2021, Beijing attempted to crash Lithuania's economy
through an import blockade after Vilnius announced it would
open a Taiwanese representative office.
These are just the most prominent cases, but we know that
Beijing's use of coercion is pervasive and constant. Beijing
weaponizes its economic heft to punish nations for sovereign
decisions that are contrary to its interests. It preys on
economic dependencies and vulnerabilities of small economies to
advance its own agenda, and it does so in direct contravention
of the multilateral trading system and a rules-based
international order.
But the good news is the world is waking up. This year, the
G7 announced the launch of a Coordinated Platform on Economic
Coercion to increase our collective assessment, preparedness,
deterrence, and response to economic coercion. This kind of
international coordination is critical. However, the United
States needs to lead for such global cooperation to succeed.
This is why my bill, the Countering Economic Coercion Act
of 2023, establishes an anti-coercion toolkit to assist
partners facing coercion, as well as punish Beijing for its
actions.
After Beijing cracked down on Lithuania, the Biden
administration initiated an interagency process to add Vilnius,
including through a $600 million export credit agreement with
Lithuania.
But we cannot be reactive every time. We need a proactive
approach to deter coercion and make it less effective. And
that's why my bill authorizes the President and the Secretary
of State to support U.S. partners by decreasing duties or
modifying tariff rate quotas on imports, requesting
appropriations for foreign aid, and expediting export license
decisions and regulatory processes.
The bill also authorizes the President to exercise
authorities to penalize the PRC for engaging in economic
coercion, including through increased duties, modified tariffs,
export controls, and sanctions. This set of authorities would
allow the United States to demonstrate robust support for our
partners and allies. It represents a comprehensive counter-
coercion strategy that can serve as a model for G7 nations and
the rest of the world.
In my view, this bill will have a significant impact on our
ability to counter Chinese economic coercion against other
nations and will send a strong message, both to Beijing and to
our friend abroad, that the United States is ready and serious
to take on this challenge.
So, Mr. Chairman, I strongly support this bill and urge my
colleagues to do the same.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Chairman McCaul. The gentleman yields.
Does any other member seek recognition?
Mr. Davidson is recognized.
Mr. Davidson. Thank you, Chairman.
I have concerns about this bill because, frankly, it grants
the President, essentially, unchecked ability to give the full
faith and credit of the United States to any loan guarantee.
So, while I fully acknowledge that China's Belt and Road
Initiative is coercive to many countries, and it is a great
focus and priority for our country to counter that, providing a
tool that provides the President an unlimited ability to
guarantee dollars not appropriated by this body to back credit
of other nations--and here's what happens when that takes
place:
You take a nation in Africa, for example, that's fighting
off Belt and Road Initiative activities, their borrowing costs
are going to be pretty high. And when the bond-holders take
that, they get paid at a very nice rate. You know, they're
taking risk. So, is it a risk-appropriate rate? I don't know.
But, at the end of the day, when the United States provides the
guarantee, the risk is U.S. credit risk, but, meanwhile, the
payout for the bond-holders is at the high rate.
This is what went on with Puerto Rico, as an example. The
market wanted to buy Puerto Rican bonds. They were paying great
returns compared to U.S. Treasuries. And then, when Puerto Rico
couldn't repay the loans, the United States came in and bailed
out Puerto Rico. No, they didn't bail out Puerto Rico; they
bailed out the bond-holders that were, essentially, buying U.S.
Treasuries and getting Puerto Rican returns.
And that's what this bill does. It really is a gift to Wall
Street to be able to get African-level risk returns while
taking American credit risk. And so, I think it's the wrong
approach. I will have a hard time supporting the bill. But I do
like the intent of the bill, but I don't think we're judging
the potential consequences of the action.
I would be happy to work with Mr. Meeks and others to try
to amend it to address those kind of concerns, but the net
effect is that you're going to have no real risk of default
because America is going to back the loans. And the big funds
are going to pour cash into this, and I guess that's great.
It's a way to counter the Belt and Road Initiative. But you're
really subsidizing the capital out there; you're not
subsidizing the country that's trying to counter China's
influence.
That's why I think I'm opposed to this bill, but I would
love to work with the gentleman to amend it to address the
concerns.
I yield back.
Mr. Meeks. And if the gentleman would just yield for 1
second, I just want to inform the gentleman that we have put in
a really strong congressional review process, including a JRD,
to ensure that Congress does have a say in what's going on as
far as the dollars are concerned, et cetera.
Chairman McCaul. The gentleman yields.
Any other members seek recognition?
Mr. Bera?
Mr. Bera. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I really want to thank the ranking member for his
leadership on this bill, as well as the chairman of the Rules
Committee, Tom Cole, as well as the chairwoman of the Indo-
Pacific Subcommittee, Mrs. Kim.
This is an incredibly important bill. It provides the
President and the administration the tools to counter what we
increasingly are seeing as overt economic coercion.
Examples, as the ranking member mentioned, in South Korea,
when we deployed THAD batteries for the protection of South
Korea, there was immediate retaliation against South Korea
limiting the number of tourists, targeting supermarket chains,
et cetera. To this day, South Korea's economy continues to feel
that. This was not about China. It was about protecting South
Korea.
Australia, legitimately, asking questions about COVID
origins--China targeted Australian imports of beef, barley,
corn, and wine, timber, lobsters, coal. Again, we have seen
that.
South Korea and Australia are big countries that can manage
this. When Lithuania started to recognize Taiwan, Lithuania is
a smaller economy; yet, we saw immediate economic coercion,
cutting off food imports, threatening to break contracts
between Lithuanian firms and Chinese companies. This type of
behavior is not what leading nations do.
I think this is an incredibly important tool that will give
the President, Presidents of both parties, the ability to help
minimize the impact of overt Chinese economic coercion. It can
build coalitions. It can create tools to help minimize that
impact. Because, again, in the 21st century, we've got to fight
for freedom, democracy, the rule of law, and standards and
norms.
It isn't just about the economy. You know, in 2010, when
Chinese dissident Liu Xiaobo was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize,
do you know what Beijing did? They targeted Norway by targeting
their agricultural and fishing industry. Again, that's not what
modern countries do.
I am strongly supportive of this bill. It builds on work
that I did in the last Congress in terms of better
understanding this. And that bill, legislation, was passed into
law last Congress.
This is an increasingly place where we're going to see more
battle take place. And again, like-minded, like-valued
countries that understand democracy, understand freedom,
understand open markets have to work together to create a
better and more prosperous 21st century for all of us.
I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of this bill. It's
incredibly important. It is bipartisan; it is bicameral.
Thank you, and with that, I yield back, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman McCaul. The gentleman yields.
Is there any further discussion?
Mr. Self is recognized.
Mr. Self. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
And I agree with the intent of the bill. However, one of
the major issues that we have today is trying to claw back
Article I authority from the executive branch. I think there
must be a better way to do this. I am not satisfied with
congressional review. Right now, we have select committees that
are working to identify and claw back Article I authority. So,
the review process, I am not satisfied with, and I think we
need to go back, readdress this bill, and find a way that we do
not cede more Article I authorities to the executive branch.
I would yield back.
Chairman McCaul. The gentleman yields.
Does any other member seek recognition?
Mr. Perry is recognized.
Mr. Perry. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
The ranking member and I have been at--we've been on this
committee for a long time together, and he's a friend.
And while, like many others on this side of the aisle,
having read through the legislation and the descriptions of it,
I support the intent; however, I have similar concerns as those
of my friends, Mr. Davidson and Mr. Self, and maybe others on
this committee.
I'm happy to work with the ranking member, the former
chairman, the guy that I share some locker space with down in
the gym, to try to improve this.
But I'm concerned that the congressional review and
oversight, while I think well-intended--you know, the other
thing I've noticed since my time here in Congress is there's
little appetite to really actually rein in anything around
here. And so, I would like to see the Congress be more
proactive on the front end of this, as opposed to reactive
after the fact. Because I just haven't seen any appetite or
courage, for that matter, in the Congress, in general, to deal
with these kind of issues.
So, unfortunately, on this occasion, I will oppose, but I
will endeavor to work with the ranking member to make this
piece of legislation, and the intent of it, workable for the
entire Congress and the American people.
With that, Mr. Chairman, I yield.
Chairman McCaul. The gentleman yields.
Perhaps the two of you could utilize that locker room time
together to work this thing out.
[Laughter.]
No locker room talk, Okay?
[Laughter.]
Does any other member seek recognition?
There being no further discussion of the bill, the
committee will move to consideration of amendments.
Does any member wish to offer an amendment?
There being no further amendments, I move that the
committee report H.R. 1135, the Countering Economic Coercion
Act of 2023, as amended, to the House with a favorable
recommendation.
All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
All those opposed, signify by saying no.
In the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it and the
motion is agreed to.
Mr. Davidson. Request a recorded vote.
Chairman McCaul. We're getting right there. A roll call
vote has been requested.
Pursuant to the chair's previous announcement, this vote
will be postponed.
Without objection--we're not there yet.
Next. You know I like to move fast.
Pursuant to notice, I now call up H.R. 5917,
``Strengthening Tools to Counter the Use of Human Shields
Act.''
The bill was circulated in advance.
The clerk shall designate the bill.
The Clerk. ``H.R. 5917, to Amend the Sanctioning the Use of
Civilians as Defenseless Shields Act to modify and extend the
Act, and for other purposes.''
Chairman McCaul. Without objection, the first reading is
dispensed with.
The bill is considered read and open to amendment at any
point.
[The Bill H.R. 5917 follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Chairman McCaul. Is there any discussion on the bill?
There being no further discussion of the bill, the
committee will move to consideration of--oh, Mr. Lawler is
recognized.
Mr. Lawler. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I am proud to support the passage of H.R. 5917, ``the
Strengthening Tools to Counter the Use of Human Shields Act,''
introduced by my colleague, Mike Gallagher from Wisconsin.
This bill makes several improvements to existing sanctions
policy to target barbaric terrorist organizations who use human
shields. Specifically, this legislation extends the sunset for
this sanctioning authority and gives Congress more tools to
request the President impose sanctions on certain individuals.
It also imposes mandatory sanctions on PIJ leaders who use
human shields. This requirement already applies to Hamas and
Hezbollah.
The utilization of human shields is disgusting. It's a war
crime, and we should be using every tool imaginable to protect
innocent civilians and stop this type of behavior.
In the past 2 months, we have, unfortunately, seen up close
the damaging use of human shields in Gaza. Hamas and the PIJ
continue to use the Palestinian people, including women and
children, as human shields. These terrorists store weapons in
and under civilian infrastructure, like hospitals and schools,
as well as launch rockets from heavily populated areas.
Hamas also tells Palestinians to ignore Israel's evacuation
warnings--further endangering their own civilians and causing
the loss of life to be as dramatic and tragic as we've seen it.
H.R. 5917 sends a clear message to Hamas, to the PIJ, and
to other terrorist groups that the United States does not
tolerate this behavior, and we will not ignore the reckless and
deliberate attempts by Hamas to put civilians in harm's way in
an effort to influence the world's view of the current conflict
in Gaza.
This legislation makes clear to the administration that
combating the use of human shields is a priority for Congress,
and it sends a message to the world about what Hamas and the
PIJ care about. They don't care about their own people. They
care about wiping Israel and the Jewish State off the face of
the earth.
I urge all of my colleagues to support H.R. 5917, and I
yield back.
Chairman McCaul. The gentleman yields.
Does any other member seek recognition?
Mr. Meeks is recognized.
Mr. Meeks. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I support this legislation and believe that the updates to
Sanctioning the Use of Civilians as Defenseless Shields Act is
timely and appropriate. We have seen clearly and unequivocally
over the last few months that it is Hamas' practice and policy
to use human shields.
They have built their military headquarters, stored
weapons, and hidden ammunition inside schools and under
hospitals. Hamas has built miles and miles of tunnels under
Gaza that it keeps exclusively for its fighters, while innocent
Palestinian civilians remain aboveground and in danger.
When the Israelis told families in Gaza in flee to the
south, Hamas demanded people stay in Gaza City to remain and
fight. This behavior is in clear violation of international
law, and contrary to basic tenets of the laws of war. It
results in the death of innocent Palestinians, which is
unconscionable.
By extending the sunset in the original legislation, adding
additional terrorist entities, and bolstering congressional
oversight in reporting requirements, this legislation will
renew and strengthen existing law.
And I support this bill. And yield back the balance of my
time.
Chairman McCaul. The gentleman yields back.
Are there any other members who seek recognition?
There being no further discussion of the bill, the
committee will move to consideration of amendments.
Does any member wish to offer an amendment?
There being no amendments, I move that the committee report
H.R. 5917, The Strengthening Tools to Counter the Use of Human
Shields Act to the House with a favorable recommendation.
All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
All those opposed, signify by saying no.
In the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it and the
motion is agreed to.
Mr. Meeks. Mr. Chairman, I request a recorded vote.
Chairman McCaul. A roll call vote has been requested.
Pursuant to the chair's previous announcement, this vote
will be postponed.
Pursuant to notice, I now call up H.R. 3016, the IGO Anti-
Boycott Act.
[The Bill H.R. 3016 follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Chairman McCaul. The bill was circulated in advance.
The clerk shall designate the bill.
The Clerk. H.R. 3016, To amend the Anti-Boycott Act of 2018
to apply the provisions of that Act to the international
governmental organizations.
Chairman McCaul. Without objection, the first reading is
dispensed with. The bill is considered read and open to
amendment at any point.
Is there any discussion on the bill?
Mr. Lawler is recognized.
Mr. Lawler. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And thank you to my
colleague from New Jersey, Congressman Josh Gottheimer for
working with me on this important bipartisan legislation.
Long before the horrific terrorist attacks of October 7th,
anti-Israel rhetoric and action was still very present on the
world stage. One of the insidious ways we have seen this take
root is in the boycott, divestment, and sanction movement,
otherwise known as the BDS movement.
BDS is a Palestinian-led group that advocates for the
boycott of Israeli products and companies, divestment from
other companies that do business in Israel, and the imposition
of sanctions on Israel. BDS groups maintain blacklists of
companies that conduct business in Israel, with the intent to
pressure these companies to stop, and to pressure the Israeli
Government to meet certain demands.
In recent years, Jewish groups, pro-Israel groups, and
allies in Congress in leadership positions have fought back
against the BDS movement and its anti-Semitic and biased
mistreatment of Israel. That is why in 2018, Congress passed
the Anti-Boycott Act to protect American companies from being
coerced into providing information used for countries BDS
blacklists, or any other foreign boycott imposed on countries
friendly to the United States.
My bill, the IGO Anti-Boycott Act, really simply expands
this law to add four words, ``or international governmental
organizations.'' With this bill, American companies wouldn't
just be protected from engaging in other countries' blacklists,
but also blacklists maintained by IGOs like the United Nations.
Anti-Israel bias is clear and present at the United
Nations, and it is critical for the U.S. anti-boycott laws to
cover the U.N. and other IGOs with the same bias.
At a time when the Jewish State is fighting for the release
of hostages from terrorist groups, at a time when Israel's
adversaries are raising their voices even louder, at a time
when anti-Semitism is running rampant around the world,
Congress must stand up for Israel and for U.S. organizations
that share our support for the Jewish state's right to exist.
So, I urge all of my colleagues to join me in support of
H.R. 3016, the IGO Anti-Boycott Act. And I yield back.
Chairman McCaul. The gentleman yields.
Is there any further discussion?
Mr. Meeks is recognized.
Mr. Meeks. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I will support this measure primarily because it underpins
existing anti-boycott laws and U.S. policies to combat
international boycotts against countries friendly to the United
States.
That being said, I do believe that the bill is a solution
in search of a problem. The underlying anti-boycott legislation
bill amends, amends ``address boycotts by foreign countries
against another country.'' We, of course, cannot stop other
countries from adopting policies we do not agree with. So, the
anti-boycott bill was addressing a real issue.
At the United Nations, the United States has a voice and a
veto. U.S. persons are only bound by American law. Implementing
legislation is required for international law to become our
law. So, this bill is not addressing an issue in the same way
that the underlying anti-boycott statute was.
I think this legislation could be more finely crafted to
balance these and other equities. But, ultimately, I believe
this bill fail--falls on the right side of the ledger. And I
will support it because it underpins the existing anti-boycott
laws and U.S. policies to combat international boycotts against
countries friendly to the United States.
And I yield back the balance of my time.
Chairman McCaul. The gentleman yields.
Any further discussion?
Mr. Castro is recognized.
Mr. Castro. Thank you, Chairman.
As I mentioned I think 5 years ago, or the last time we
dealt with this piece of legislation, it's incredibly broad and
gives incredible discretion to a president and his or her
administration on the application of this law that could
trample, possibly trample over different constitutional rights
of Americans.
So, the right to participate in a boycott is an expression
of free speech and free association that's been enshrined in
American law and in political culture since the Nation's
founding. Giving the Federal Government the power to compel
compliance or non-compliance with a boycott does give me great
concern, especially as this bill does not precisely define the
boycotts it seeks to target. It does not define them.
This bill and the underlying law it amends would penalize
Americans for participating in a boycott against a, a quote,
``a country which is friendly to the United States and which is
not itself the object of any form of boycott pursuant to United
States law or regulation.''
I fear that under this legislation and the underlying Anti-
Boycott Act the President would be able to, or a president
would be able to prevent Americans from participating in
boycotts against, for example, China, Russia, Cuba, or any
number of countries.
Let me lay out one example that I hope we can all agree on
that is problematic of how this law might be weaponized.
An international organization calls for boycott of goods
made through forced labor in Xinjiang, China. An American
citizen, concerned about the treatment of Uyghurs who are being
subject to genocide by the Government of China, vocally
expresses support for this boycott and participates in it.
We may face a real situation where an administration
willing to turn a blind eye to these abuses decides to call
China a country, quote, that is ``a friend to the United
States'' and penalizes one of our own fellow citizens with a
one million dollar fine and 20 years in prison.
I cannot support that. If an American chooses to
participate in such a boycott, whether you agree with that
boycott, don't agree with it, it should be their decision and
theirs alone, not the Government's.
I urge my colleagues to oppose this piece of legislation.
Mr. Wilson.
[Presiding.] The gentleman yields back.
Is there any further discussion?
There being no further discussion on the bill, the
committee will move to consider, consideration of amendments.
Does any member wish to offer an amendment?
Congressman Castro.
Mr. Castro. Thank you.
I call up amendment, Castro Amendment Number 87.
[The Amendment offered by Mr. Castro follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Mr. Wilson. The clerk shall distribute the amendment.
The clerk shall report the amendment.
The Clerk. Amendment to H.R. 3016 offered by Mr. Castro of
Texas. Page 2, after line 13 add the following: In section 1773
by adding at the end the following: Additional Exception. In
general the Secretary of State shall, with respect to each
country determined to be friendly to the United States for
purposes of this Act, certify to Congress no less--not less
than every 2 years----
Mr. Wilson. Without further objections, further reading of
the amendment is dispensed with.
The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes on the amendment.
Mr. Castro. Thank you, Chairman.
As I stated in my remarks on the bill, and as I stated back
in 2018 when similar legislation was taken up by this
committee, I'm concerned that this gives an administration--
and, by the way, we don't know who the next president is going
to be at this point. I hope that it is Joe Biden, working
toward that, but we don't know for sure. I am concerned that
this gives the Administration too much power to silence the
actions of American citizens.
The Anti-Boycott Act that this bill amends has language
that is too broad. It applies the anti-boycott provisions to
``nations that are friendly to the United States and which,''
which not, ``is not itself the object of any form of boycott
pursuant to United States law or regulation.''
Democrats and Republicans have very different views on
which countries may be considered friendly to the United
States. And I think this is a determination too broad to be
left up to a particular president.
My amendment is simple. It would require the Secretary of
State to certify to the Congress every 2 years that any
countries protected by these anti-boycott provisions are
complying with all obligations under United States and
international human rights law. We cannot have a situation
where the President has the ability to unilaterally decide that
Russia or China are friendly to the United States, and then
enforce these laws against American citizens who choose to
boycott those countries.
I urge my colleagues to vote yes on this amendment and
prevent any potential abuses by any Presidential
administration.
I yield back, Chairman.
Mr. Wilson. The gentleman yields back.
Do any other members seek recognition?
Congressman Lawler of New York.
Mr. Lawler. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
It is unfortunate my colleague did not reach out to discuss
these matters before offering his amendments at this late
moment. But he is seeking to amend the underlying bill, not my
bill that we have brought forward today, to add IGOs to the
Anti-Boycott Act.
So, if he would like to, you know, bring forward his own
bill to change that, Godspeed. But that is not what we are
actually here doing today.
So, for those reasons I oppose this amendment.
Mr. Wilson. The gentleman yields back.
Do any other members seek recognition?
There being no further discussion, the question now occurs
on the amendment offered by Representative Castro, Number 87.
All of those in favor, signify by saying aye.
All opposed, signify no.
In the opinion of the chair, the noes have it.
Mr. Castro. Chairman, I ask for a recorded vote.
Chairman McCaul. The amendment is not agreed to.
A roll call has been requested. Pursuant to the chair's
previous announcement, this vote will be postponed.
Are there any further amendments?
Any further proceedings on this bill shall be held over
till our final vote.
Mr. Castro. Thank you.
I call up Castro Amendment Number 88.
[The Amendment offered by Mr. Castro follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Chairman McCaul. The clerk shall distribute the amendment.
The clerk shall report the bill.
The Clerk. Amendment to H.R. 3016 offered by Mr. Castro of
Texas. At page 2, after line 13, add the following:
In Section 1773(A) by adding at the end the following:
Additional Exception. This section----
Mr. Wilson. Without further objection, further reading of
the amendment is dispensed with.
The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes on the amendment.
Mr. Castro. Thank you, Chairman.
I share my view that the statute gives a Presidential
administration too much power to determine what kinds of
boycotts are allowed and which ones aren't, and that both this
amendment and the underlying bill are incredibly vague.
So, for example, right now vast swaths of Ukraine are under
the brutal military occupation of the Russian Federation. In
these territories, Russian businesses and oligarchs have
swooped in, set up shop, and taken advantage of the occupation
of the Ukrainian people that we all hope will end soon.
The Anti-Boycott Act that this bill amends applies to
countries friendly to the United States, which is not itself
the object of any form of boycott pursuant to United States law
or regulation.
We have all seen what former President Trump has said about
despots and dictators, the admiration he has shown for Vladimir
Putin and Xi Jinping and for Kim Jung Un. I am wary of a
situation where an American president, blind to the abuses
committed by a country like Russia, forces American citizens to
do business with Russian companies in occupied Ukraine. There
must be some limits to these powers.
I urge my colleagues to support this amendment.
I yield back.
Mr. Wilson. The gentleman yields back.
Are there any further members seeking recognition?
Congressman Lawler of New York.
Mr. Lawler. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
If a boycott is consistent with U.S. foreign policy, there
is no problem. It is the way that this law has been applied for
45 years.
At the end of the day, there is no question that we have
seen, my colleague just brought up President Xi, you know,
Vladimir Putin, Kim Jung Un, we have seen the unholy alliance
that has been formed by Russia, China, Iran, and North Korea.
They are not our friends. They are not our allies. We know
that.
I mean, frankly, this President just met with President Xi,
and the Administration's tack in dealing with China, frankly,
has been weak at best. But we all recognize they are not our
friend.
So, the reality of this law is that if a boycott is
consistent with our foreign policy, it applies.
So, the amendment is, frankly, unnecessary. And for that
reason I oppose it.
Mr. Wilson. The gentleman yields back.
And we now recognize Congresswoman Kathy Manning of
Greensboro, North Carolina.
Ms. Manning. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I know we are talking about the amendment, but I would like
to get my comments on the underlying bill on the record.
I support H.R. 3016, the IGO Anti-Boycott Act introduced by
our colleagues Representatives Mike Lawler and Josh Gottheimer.
The House Foreign Affairs Committee has jurisdiction over
the Department of Commerce's Bureau of Industry and Security,
including a little known but very important division known as
the Office of Anti-Boycott Compliance. And this office ensures
that American citizens and businesses are not forced to comply
with unsanctioned foreign boycotts, including against our ally
Israel.
From the Arab League boycott to the global BDS campaign
against Israel, Congress has repeatedly stood united in a
bipartisan way against this hateful campaign to isolate, single
out, and economically punish the State of Israel. No American
citizen or company should be coerced into participating in a
boycott against Israel.
I am glad the Biden administration has enforced the strong
anti-boycott provisions in existing law, including announcing
recent enforcement actions on September 7th and November 3d.
In the aftermath of the Hamas attacks we are likely to see
even more attempts by foreign actors to try to compel Americans
to participate in the BDS campaign against Israel. H.R. 3016
would simply make sure that international governmental
organizations are not also a source of these demands. No
American should be forced to participant in an unsanctioned
foreign boycott or efforts such as the U.N. Human Rights
Council's 2020 anti-Israel blacklist of companies which do
business in the West Bank.
That is why I support this bill to update the 2018 Anti-
Boycott Act. And I urge all my colleagues to join me in voting
for it.
I would also like to comment on H.R. 5917.
I am proud to support H.R. 5917, the Strengthening Tools to
Counter the Use of Human Shields Act, a bipartisan bill
introduced by our colleagues Representatives Mike Gallagher and
Brad Sherman, which penalizes Hamas by imposing sanctions on
them for their indefensible use of civilians as human shields.
Since the brutal October 7th Hamas terrorist attack when
Hamas fighters killed 1,200 innocent civilians in some of the
most shocking brutality we have witnessed, and they committed
brutal, grotesque atrocities on women, girls, and men before
they killed them, Israel, since that time Israel has been
fighting to defend itself and its citizens. But Hamas has
compounded the tragic number of civilian casualties by
intertwining its fighters alongside the civilian population in
Gaza, deliberately putting them in harm's way by using them as
human shields.
This cynical ploy not only makes Israel, Israel's fight
extremely difficult, as Israel is a democracy which takes
measures to limit the number of civilian casualties. But it
further underscores that Hamas does not care at all about the
lives of the Palestinian people in Gaza.
Secretary Blinken said a few days ago, this could be over
tomorrow if Hamas got out of the way of civilians instead of
hiding behind them, if it put down its weapons, if it
surrendered, and if it released all the hostages.
And what there ought to be as well is a call on behalf of
the entire world for Hamas to do just those things. That would
stop this war tomorrow.
But in the absence of that, Israel has to take steps not
only to defend itself against the ongoing attacks from Hamas,
but against Hamas' stated intent to repeat October 7th again
and again if given the opportunity.
Mr. Chairman, I could not agree more. That is why it is so
critical that this committee work to hold Hamas accountable for
its use of innocent civilians as human shields. This bipartisan
bill will extend and reauthorize legislation that requires the
President to impose sanctions on foreign entities affiliated
with Hamas and Hezbollah who are responsible for using
civilians as human shields.
The international community must come together to call out
Hamas' use of hospitals and schools, to condemn the reports of
rape and sexual violence against Israeli women and girls, and
to demand that Hamas immediately and unconditionally release
all hostages held in Gaza.
Congress should make sure we have the sanctions in place
just to do that.
I urge my colleagues to support these bills.
Thank you. And I yield back.
Mr. Wilson. The gentlelady yields back.
And we wish her well in a bipartisan manner for her future
career, as she has determined not to seek reelection. But we
just wish her well and appreciate her service.
Do any other members seek recognition?
There being no further discussion, the question will not
occur on amendment offered by Representative Castro, Number 88.
All of those in favor, signify by saying aye.
All opposed, signify by saying no.
In the opinion of the chair, the noes have it and the----
Mr. Castro. I ask for a recorded vote, Chairman.
Mr. Wilson. A roll call has been requested.
Pursuant to the chair's previous announcement, this vote
will be postponed.
Are there any further amendments?
Mr. Castro. Yes, I have got one.
Mr. Wilson. And we proceed with Congressman Castro.
Mr. Castro. Thank you, Chairman.
I call up Castro Amendment Number 89.
[The Amendment offered by Mr. Castro follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Mr. Wilson. The clerk shall distribute the amendment.
The clerk shall report the amendment.
The Clerk. Amendment to H.R. 3016 offered by Mr. Castro of
Texas. Page 2, after line 13 add the following:
In Section 1773(A) by adding at the end the following:
Annual Report. The President shall submit to Congress and make
available to the public on an annual basis a report that
contains a list of foreign countries and international
organizations that foster or impose boycotts with respect to
which this section applies, and a description of those
boycotts.
Mr. Wilson. Thank you very much.
The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes on the amendment.
Mr. Castro. Thank you, Chairman.
Under this law Americans may be penalized up to one million
or 20 years in prison for participating in a boycott against a
country friendly to the United States, even though that
definition is very vague and we don't know who is on the list.
But there is little transparency in which countries and which
boycotts this law applies to.
In fact, we still, we searched for a list. We couldn't find
one.
My amendment requires the Administration to annually
publish a list of boycotts that foreign countries and
international organizations that foster or impose boycotts, and
a description of those boycotts.
Again, this is an amendment, you know, whatever your
position is on this bill, if you support it, if you think it is
a good idea, this is a transparency amendment. This is to make
sure we, at a minimum, known which countries are on the list
and so Americans have some clarity about what they can or
cannot do.
With that, Chairman, I yield back.
Chairman McCaul.
[Presiding.] Mr. Lawler is recognized.
Mr. Lawler. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I have no problem with the transparency. I think,
obviously, the intent of the bill is to expose these boycotts
and the BDS movement that other countries are engaged in, and
IGOs. And that is the whole point of adding IGOs to it.
So, I have no problem with requiring the President to
submit to Congress an annual report. I think transparency is
important here. And, frankly, actually I think it will help in
terms of exposing the BDS movement.
So, I will support this amendment.
Chairman McCaul. OK. Do any other members seek recognition?
Mr. Castro?
Mr. Castro. No.
Chairman McCaul. There being no further discussion, the
question now occurs on the amendment offered by Representative
Castro, Number 89.
All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
All those opposed, signify by saying no.
In the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. And the
amendment is agreed to.
Are there any further amendments?
There being no further amendments, further proceedings on
this bill shall be postponed.
So, now call up the H.R. 3569, the Starr-Camargo Bridge
Expansion Act.
[The Bill H.R. 3569 follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Chairman McCaul. The bill was circulated in advance.
The clerk shall designate the bill.
The Clerk. H.R. 3569, To provide for the expansion of the
Starr-Camargo Bridge near Rio Grande City, Texas, and for other
purposes.
Chairman McCaul. Without objection, the first reading is
dispensed with. The bill is considered read, open to amendment
at any point.
I now recognize myself.
The expansion of critical infrastructure is essential to
keep goods and services flowing. The Starr-Camargo
International Bridge is a privately owned toll bridge on the
United States-Mexico border. It connects Texas and the Mexican
State of Tamaulipas, crossing the Rio Grande, and connecting
the cities of the Rio Grande City and Camargo.
The bridge is a key commercial gateway that brings in close
to $800 million a year in imports through Texas and into this
country. Its expansion will increase international commerce and
trade, lowering the cost of goods for American families. The
proposed improvements will reduce commercial congestion and
alleviate supply chain issues.
This bill will also allow the owners and operators of the
bridge to use private funds, such as tolls, to expand and
improve the bridge. No taxpayer funds will be utilized in the
improvement process.
As an international port of entry, any changes such as this
expansion requires congressional approval. The language has
been reviewed and cleared by the State Department, the
Transportation Department, and CBP. The Senate passed it
unanimously in July.
As a Texan and a chairman of this committee, I am proud to
join Congressman Henry Cuellar as the Republican House lead on
this bipartisan bill.
I would also like to thank Kim as well as Senators Cornyn,
Kelly, and Cruz for their efforts in getting this bill through
the Senate. And I urge my colleagues to support it.
Is there any further discussion on the bill?
Mr. Meeks is recognized.
Mr. Meeks. I support this bill. In 2023, Mexico became the
top U.S. trading partner with bilateral commercial activity
totally $263 billion by April, and accounting for more than 15
percent of the total United States trade.
United States-Mexico total trade in goods and services
surpassed $864 billion in 2022, the highest amount on record.
And United States exports to Mexico provides hundreds of
thousands of American jobs.
That is why I support H.R. 3569, which will allow for the
expansion of the Starr-Camargo Bridge. The existing bridge has
been a key investment in the economic well-being of so many in
South Texas and an important entry point for import-export into
the United States. The expansion of the bridge connecting the
United States and Mexico will improve supply chain issues and
blockages caused by outdated infrastructure and traffic.
This bridge has been essential to local growers and
producers on both sides of the border as they move vegetables,
fruit, and other needed products to markets.
I understand that the project is also designed to include
toll booths, the fees from which will help to pay for the cost
of upkeep and maintenance.
I support it. This is a good bill.
And I yield back the balance of my time.
Chairman McCaul. The gentleman yields back.
Any further discussion?
Mr. Castro is recognized.
Mr. Castro. Thank you, Chairman McCaul, for marking up the
Starr-Camargo Bridge Expansion Act, and Representative Cuellar
for introducing this important legislation in the House of
Representatives.
One of the many vital issues this committee has
jurisdiction over is the governance of the U.S.-Mexico border
where the routine day-to-day activities of communities have
deep foreign policy impacts. One of the areas of our
jurisdiction is over the process for authorizing construction
at the U.S.-Mexico border, including for bridges that are
critical for the economic well-being of millions of people who
live in South Texas.
The communities that live in the United States along the
Rio Grande River are deeply integrated with communities in
Mexico. Every year the land port of entry in Rio Grande City
processes imports into the United States of over $700 million,
with tens of thousands of truck, vehicle, and pedestrian
crossings. Starr County is one of the most impoverished
communities in the country. And the land port of entry
facilitated by the Starr-Camargo Bridge is a crucial economic
lifeline.
The Starr-Camargo Bridge predates the 1972 International
Bridges Act and, so, requires a specific authorization by law
to facilitate future expansion. It would allow the bridge to
expand, add additional lanes, and potentially build a rail line
that will create jobs and opportunity on both sides of the
border
I want to thank my colleague Henry Cuellar, who represents
Starr County, for introducing this legislation, and the
chairman and ranking member for bringing it forward and, of
course, also, the senators who worked so hard on the Senate
side to make this possible.
And I urge my colleagues to support the measure.
Chairman McCaul. The gentleman yields.
Any further discussion?
There being no further discussion of the bill, the
committee will move to consideration of amendments.
Does any member wish to offer an amendment?
There being no amendments, I will move that the committee
report H.R. 3569, the Starr-Camargo Bridge Expansion Act to the
House with a favorable recommendation.
All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
All those opposed, signify by saying no.
Mr. Meeks. Mr. Chairman.
Chairman McCaul. In the opinion of the chair, the ayes have
it, and the motion is agreed to.
Mr. Meeks. I ask for a roll call vote.
Chairman McCaul. A roll call vote has been requested.
Pursuant to the chair's previous announcement, this vote
will be postponed.
Pursuant to notice, I now call up H.R. 6586, to require a
strategy to oppose financial or material support by foreign
countries to the Taliban, and for other purposes.
[The Bill H.R. 6586 follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Chairman McCaul. The bill was circulated in advance.
The clerk shall designate the bill.
The Clerk. H.R. 3586, To require a strategy to oppose
financial or material support by foreign countries to the
Taliban.
Chairman McCaul. Without objection, the first reading is
dispensed with. The bill is considered read and open to
amendment at any point.
Is there any discussion on the bill?
Mr. Burchett. Mr. Chairman.
Chairman McCaul. Mr. Burchett is recognized.
Mr. Burchett. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, I appreciate that.
I am a little confused with the procedural situation here.
I have got my prepared notes, but I believe I go under the
explanation----
Chairman McCaul. Mr. Burchett, you are entitled to make an
opening statement if you would like to. If not, we can move
straight to an amendment, if you have got one.
Mr. Burchett. Why don't we just go straight to the
amendment.
Chairman McCaul. If there is no further discussion, are
there any amendments?
Mr. Burchett is recognized.
Mr. Burchett. Yes, sir.
Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment in the nature of a
substitute at the desk, and ask for its consideration at this
time.
[The Amendment of Mr. Burchett follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Chairman McCaul. The clerk shall report the amendment in
the nature of a substitute and distribute it.
Mr. Burchett. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the opportunity,
and the ranking member for his tutelage in my wardrobe apparel.
Stepped out a little bit on this blue tie. Want everybody to
notice.
Chairman McCaul. From Tennessee especially.
Mr. Burchett. After he comes up the treadmill for 1 hour
every morning, smoking me in there, he just--I spend 15 minutes
and I am out of it. And there he is an hour. And then he, then
he advised me on my tie wear.
Chairman McCaul. I am just so pleased that this is part of
the congressional record for all eternity for people to read
this.
Mr. Burchett. Yes, sir. He did supplant the role of former
Representative Joe Kennedy in this.
Chairman McCaul. The clerk shall report the amendment.
The Clerk. Amendment in the nature of a substitute to H.R.
6586 offered by Mr. Burchett of Tennessee.
Strike all after the enacting clause and insert the
following.
Chairman McCaul. Without objection, further reading of the
amendment is dispensed with.
The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes to speak on his
amendment, not his sartorial splendor.
Mr. Burchett. I was just trying to fill some time, that
awkward pause we have when they are passing out the amendment,
Mr. Chairman.
Today I have an amendment. Basically it just, first, it
states the policy of the United States is to oppose financial
or material support to the Taliban; calls for report on any
foreign countries that provided support to the Taliban; and
calls on the Secretary of State to develop a strategy to
discourage foreign countries from providing support.
Second, it calls for a report on cash assistance programs
in Afghanistan, and the safeguards in place to prevent the
Taliban from accessing cash assistance.
Third, and last, it requires a report on the Afghan Fund,
the Afghanistan Central Bank, the Board of Trustees of that
bank, and what controls are in place to ensure those funds are
not diverted or misused.
Mr. Chairman, I think it is important that we, while we no
longer have a military present in Afghanistan, but that we
should understand how the Taliban is funded. We need to be
stewards of our constituents' tax dollars. If that money is
making its way to the Taliban, Congress should know about it.
This amendment was made in collaboration with my Democrat
friends. And you might ask what parts did they offer some
recommendations on? It was reporting on the timelines and the
committee jurisdiction issues.
And, personally, Mr. Chairman, I believe that possibly made
this a better bill.
I want to thank you again for bringing this bill to markup.
And I welcome any further discussion.
Chairman McCaul. The gentleman yields.
Any further discussion on the bill?
Mr. Meeks is recognized. On the amendment, I should say.
Mr. Meeks. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
And I support this amendment. H.R. 6586 combines a strategy
and reports in three different areas of Afghanistan policy:
material and financial support for the Taliban that is counter
to U.S. policy or law; direct cash assistance programs by the
United States Government; and oversight of the Afghan fund.
And I want to thank my friend from Tennessee Mr. Burchett
for working with me, along with you, Mr. Chairman, and my staff
to improve this legislation. And the ANS reflects the substance
of our discussions.
I would also like to mention that there are areas where we
have granted exception to those sanctions, in particular for
humanitarian aid. It would not be credible or effective for us
to call out behavior we in fact allow and, in some cases,
encourage.
I also remind my colleagues that the Afghan Fund was set up
precisely to keep the Taliban from abusing the assets of the
Afghan Central Bank, that the fund has not made any
disbursement and that the fund is expected to make decisions
with the unanimous assent of its board where the United States
Treasury has a seat.
So, I hope these reports will provide us with more
assurance about our foreign assistance and the Afghan Fund.
And I yield back the balance of my time.
Chairman McCaul. The gentleman yields back.
Any other members seek recognition?
There being no further discussion, are there any amendments
to the amendment in the nature of a substitute?
There being no further amendments, the question now occurs
on the amendment in the nature of a substitute offered by Mr.
Burchett.
All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
All those opposed, signify by saying no.
In the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. And the
amendment is agreed to.
There being no further amendments, I would move that the
committee report H.R. 6586, to require a strategy to oppose
financial or material support by foreign countries to the
Taliban, and for other purposes, as amended, to the House with
a favorable recommendation.
All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
All those opposed, signify by saying no.
In the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. And the
motion is agreed to.
Mr. Burchett is recognized.
Mr. Burchett. Yes, sir. Mr. Chairman, I would like a
recorded vote.
Chairman McCaul. A roll call vote has been requested.
Pursuant to the chair's previous announcement, this vote
will be postponed.
Congratulations, Mr. Burchett.
Pursuant to notice, I now call up H.R. 6306, the Embassy
Construction Integrity Act of 2023.
[The Bill H.R. 6306 follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Chairman McCaul. The bill was circulated in advance.
And the clerk shall designate the bill.
The Clerk. H.R. 6306, To amend the State Department Basic
Authorities Act of 1956 to prohibit the acquisition or lease of
a consular or diplomatic----
Chairman McCaul. Without objection, the first reading is
dispensed with. The bill is considered read and open to
amendment at any point.
Without objection, the Mills amendment in the nature of a
substitute, Number 73, circulated to members in advance, shall
be considered as read and will be treated as original text for
purposes of amendment.
[The Amendment of Mr. Mills follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Chairman McCaul. Is there any discussion on the bill?
Mr. Mills is recognized.
Mr. Mills. Chairman McCaul and Ranking Member Meeks, I
would like to thank you both for working with me to include my
legislation, The Embassy Construction Integrity Act, in today's
markup.
Earlier this year the committee was made aware of an
instance in which the State Department established a diplomatic
post in a building constructed by a Chinese company. As the
State Department engages with partners in the Indo-Pacific, I
think everyone on this committee recognizes the importance of
ensuring that the U.S. has a strong presence in these
countries.
However, there is an extremely limited set of circumstances
in which a Chinese-owned company should be permitted to
construct a U.S. diplomatic outpost. This is the issue that
this bill addresses.
H.R. 6306 requires the Secretary of State to establish
increased due diligence practices to ensure our contracting
processes align with the national security interests of the
United States. The State Department's monitoring of the
beneficial owners of the companies that build our diplomatic
posts is a very fundamental baseline that we need to establish.
Because of the severe concerns with the integrity of
sensitive facilities such as diplomatic posts, this bill also
requires the Department to notify Congress when inconsistent
measures are discovered.
The amendment to this bill, the ANS, integrates revisions
based on discussions with committee staff and the State
Department to ensure that this bill does not inadvertently
undermine our Nation's ability to continue operating diplomatic
missions in the PRC.
I urge all my colleagues to support this straightforward
legislation.
And with that, I yield back.
Chairman McCaul. The gentleman yields back.
Is there any further discussion on the amendment?
Mr. Meeks is recognized.
Mr. Meeks. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Under President Biden's leadership, the Department of State
has expanded the United States diplomatic footprint across the
Indo-Pacific region from the Solomon Islands to Tonga, to
Kiribati, to Vanuatu, with diplomatic facilities open or in the
works.
This expansion is critical to effectively compete with
China, as it enables the United States to provide a powerful
counterpoint to the PRC's economic coercion and disinformation,
and to deepen our relationships to safeguard a free and open
Pacific.
The Department also works every day to open, renew, or
modernize its diplomatic facilities around the world to ensure
our diplomats can engage safely and effectively, from re-
raising the flag in Kyiv to support our partners there after
Russia's brutal renewed invasion in 2022, to breaking new
ground of facilities in Bangkok, Brasilia, and beyond.
In all these efforts the Department works to develop site-
specific measures to mitigate security and counterintelligence
risks. Such risks are not new. We have dealt with them for
decades, from the cold war to the Global War on Terror. So, the
Department has deep expertise in this area, not just last year.
Congress has legislated bipartisan reforms to the Secure
Embassy Construction and Counterterrorism Act to ensure it has
sufficient flexibility to balance the need for bold,
expeditious diplomacy and operational risks.
On such matters as these, I have always--I always want to
be sure that we are not placing unhelpful statutory
requirements that undercut the Department's ability to maintain
and open new facilities. And I am glad that our colleagues
across the aisle have offered an ANS that includes a more
flexible regulatory formulation.
And for that reason, I can support this ANS.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Chairman McCaul. The gentleman yields back.
Is there any further discussion on the bill?
There being no further discussion of the bill, the
committee will move to consideration of amendments.
Does any member wish to offer an amendment?
There being no further amendments, I move that the
committee report H.R. 6306, the Embassy Construction Integrity
Act, as amended, to the House with favorable recommendation.
All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
All those opposed, signify by saying no.
In the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. And the
motion is agreed to.
Mr. Mills is recognized.
Mr. Mills. Yes, Mr. Chairman. I would like to request a
recorded vote.
Chairman McCaul. A roll call vote has been requested.
Pursuant to the chair's previous announcement, this vote
will be postponed.
Pursuant to notice, I now call up H.R. 6416, The Russian
War Crimes in Ukraine Tax Act.
[The Bill H.R. 6416 follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Chairman McCaul. The bill was circulated in advance.
The clerk shall designate the bill.
The Clerk. H.R. 6416, To amend the Internal Revenue Code of
1986 to impose certain tax penalties in connection with the
invasion of Ukraine.
Chairman McCaul. Without objection, the first reading is
dispensed with. The bill is considered read and open to
amendment at any point.
Without objection, the Meeks amendment in the nature of a
substitute, Number 54, circulated to members in advance, shall
be considered as read and will be treated as original text for
purposes of amendments.
[The Amendment of Mr. Meeks follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Chairman McCaul. Is there any discussion of the bill?
Mr. Meeks is recognized.
Mr. Meeks. I lend my voice of support for H.R. 6414, a bill
we worked on with colleagues from Ways and Means Committee to
help Ukraine.
I thank you, Mr. Chairman, for working with us and your
fellow Texan on moving this idea forward and for placing this
very important legislation on the markup calendar.
This committee regularly looks at economic statecraft as it
relates to Russia's war. And as the horrific war evolves, so
must our strategy. And this bill is an important part of that
evolution.
This bill directs the Administration to tax any profits or
revenue procured from frozen Russian assets in the United
States. The funds would then be used by the State Department to
help keep Ukraine's economy alive, recover, and eventually
rebuild.
Importantly, this bill underscores the fact that we should
work with our partners to develop a common path forward on the
future of the frozen Russian assets. Most of the assets are not
in the United States. And the United States acting alone could
hamper the overall joint effort that is currently being
undertaken at the multilateral lever.
I think this legislation would have a strong chance of
garnering support not just in our country but in other applied
allied capitals around the world.
This bill also comes at a time when the world is watching
the U.S. Congress drag its feet on support for Ukraine. I know
that this committee and our chairman are serious about
continuing vital assistance. I simply implore that we do all
that we can to be able to vote on the Administration's
supplemental request as soon as possible.
With that, I yield back.
Chairman McCaul. The gentleman yields.
Is there any further discussion on the bill?
Mr. Self is recognized.
Mr. Self. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I have not yet determined the meaning of several phrases in
this bill.
When it says, ``notwithstanding Section 203 of the
International Emergency Economic Powers or any other provision
of law,'' and then it goes on to say, ``notwithstanding any
other provision of law, this section shall apply without regard
to any treaty obligation of the United States,'' and the fact
that this is the IRS we are talking about, which we know
targets certain Americans, I have grave concerns about this
bill, the precedent of it.
So, I recommend that we take a hard look at exactly what we
are authorizing against treaties and any other provision of
law. I am unconvinced at this time.
And I yield back.
Chairman McCaul. The gentleman yields.
Is there any further discussion?
Mr. Keating is recognized.
Mr. Keating. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I support this bill and am proud to be a co-sponsor of it.
I can't look at this bill by itself and realize we are going
home tomorrow. We are scheduled to go home tomorrow. And I
think it is an absolute disgrace that we have not acted on the
full funding, the supplemental funds that the Administration is
seeking for Ukraine.
As a person who had a family member who was killed in
action in World War II defending freedom in Europe, we are now
stewards of those efforts where so many people were injured,
separated from their families, faced economic disadvantage, and
lost their lives to preserve freedom in Europe. And we are
compromising that right now as we go home without acting on the
President's supplemental budget to fund Ukraine the way it has
to be funded.
So, I am proud to advance this effort. It is totally
inadequate given the needs that we should be really facing our
responsibility and acting so strongly to uphold a commitment to
preserve democracy, to stop illegal Russian aggression, stop
and fight the war crimes that Putin has perpetrated, and to
speak up as a country. And not be a country like Hungary, for
instance, that does nothing but do Putin's, you know, bidding
for him.
I am truly upset that we go home. I wish we would stay here
until this was resolved. But evidently that is not going to be
the case.
So, I support this as a step forward. It is a step forward
at a time when we are not meeting our responsibility to
preserve democracy in Europe, and not working to make sure we
are doing the right thing for the U.S. at home.
There is talk about funding and not having adequate funding
by many in Congress. But not acting on the supplemental, this
will cost the United States taxpayers more money. It will risk
breaking up an historic coalition that is a multiplier effect
in dealing with thwarting Putin's illegal war.
It will also be a signal, as with other pieces of
legislation here concerning China and our efforts to deter
their aggression in Taiwan. That is being compromised. As well
as other matters that we talked about here today dealing with
our support of Israel.
Those three matters should be taken up. They need not be
taken up as a package, but they should be taken up before we
leave here today.
And with that, I yield back.
Chairman McCaul. The gentleman yields.
Is there any further discussion on the bill?
I would just like to say that I think this bill complements
the REPO Act that this committee marked up out of committee
that essentially says that Russia must pay for its war crimes.
And we do that by getting into the sovereign Russian assets,
sovereign assets fund, the sanctioned assets that can be used
to help pay for this, as opposed to the American taxpayer.
And let me just say to the gentleman from Massachusetts
that we are working to get this language in the supplemental
when that and if that comes to the floor. I hope it is sooner
rather than later. But I think it is important that we have
this language, both from this but also the REPO Act, and
whatever comes out of the Senate.
So, with that, is there any further discussion?
Mr. Stanton is recognized.
Mr. Stanton. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
I appreciate this committee's dedication to aiding our ally
Ukraine as they stand against Russia's brutal and unprovoked
aggression. Putin's invasion was met with swift and severe
consequences, sanctions, suspension of normal trade relations,
and isolation of his economy and leaders.
I fully supported those actions. And I am proud to support
H.R. 6416 to make sure that Putin's cronies continue to pay for
the damage they have inflicted. After all, the United States
and Ukraine are united by our shared values of freedom and
democracy. And America has a duty to stand by its friends when
those values are threatened.
But we must do more. With each day that Congress fails to
send Ukraine additional aid, Putin is emboldened, threatening
peace and democracy in Europe, and sending a message of
American retreat to our enemies across the globe.
And now Congress is set to leave town for the holidays just
as aid for Ukraine runs dry. It would be a gift to Putin, an
entire month of unchecked Russian aggression, putting all the
military gains Ukraine has made at risk. Congress cannot delay
any longer. The stakes are too high.
And with that, I yield back.
Chairman McCaul. The gentleman yields.
Any further discussion?
There being no further discussion of the bill, the
committee will move to consideration of amendments.
Does any member wish to offer an amendment?
There being no further amendments, I move that the
committee report H.R. 6416, the Russian War Crimes and Ukraine
Tax Act, as amended, to the House with a favorable
recommendation.
All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
All those opposed, signify by saying no.
In the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. And the
motion is agreed to.
Mr. Meeks. Mr. Chairman, I----
Chairman McCaul. And the ranking member is recognized.
Mr. Meeks. With that, I ask for a roll call vote.
Chairman McCaul. A roll call vote has been requested.
Pursuant to the chair's previous announcement, this vote
will be postponed.
Now to our final bill. Record time.
Pursuant to notice, I now call up H.R. 6610, the Passport
System Reform and Backlog Prevention Act.
[The Bill H.R. 6610 follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Chairman McCaul. The bill was circulated in advance.
And the clerk shall designate the bill.
The Clerk. H.R. 6610, To provide for the modernization of
the passport issuance process, and for other purposes.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the----
Chairman McCaul. Without objection, the first reading is
dispensed with. The bill is considered read and open to
amendment at any point.
Is there any discussion on the bill?
Mr. Self. Mr. Chairman.
Chairman McCaul. Mr. Self is recognized.
Mr. Self. Mr. Chairman, I simply have a request of the
author. Do we have a scoring of this bill yet?
Chairman McCaul. A what?
Mr. Self. A CBO score.
Chairman McCaul. Oh. Yes, we, actually by the process is
that we get the CBO score as it is moved to the floor. But an
excellent question.
The author of the bill, Mr. Issa, is not here.
Is there any further discussion?
Let me say I am supportive.
Mr. Meeks?
Mr. Meeks. I reserve for the ANS.
Chairman McCaul. OK. There being no further discussion, the
committee will move to consideration of amendments.
Does any member wish to offer an amendment?
Mr. Crow. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment to the ANS at
the desk.
Chairman McCaul. Yes, I need to bring up the amendment in
the nature of a substitute first.
Here I will speak on his behalf. There is an amendment in
the nature of a substitute at the desk. I ask for its
consideration at this time.
[The Amendment of Mr. Issa follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Chairman McCaul. The clerk shall distribute the Issa
amendment in the nature of a substitute.
The clerk shall report the amendment.
The Clerk. Amendment in the nature of a substitute to 6610
offered by Mr. Issa of California.
Strike all after the enacting clause and insert the
following:
Section 1, short title and table of contents.
Short Title. This Act may be----
Chairman McCaul. Without objection, further reading of the
amendment is dispensed with.
The gentleman Mr. Meeks is recognized.
Mr. Meeks. I support the ANS. This year has been rough for
many of our constituents trying to obtain or renew U.S.
passports. And after the COVID-19 pandemic, the department
experienced an unprecedented level of demand for passports,
which has led to significant processing wait times.
I am pleased to say today, though, that we have learned
from the department that we have now achieved pre-pandemic
processing times again, and are set to publicly announce these
new, shorter service times in the coming days. This illustrates
that the steps State is taking to modernize and streamline its
passport processes are working. And this committee needs to
partner closely with them going forward to complete, complete
the department's modernization agenda.
So, I appreciate the ANS that Mr. Issa has introduced today
of a bill to further the modernization of passport processing
and the constructive negotiations his team has undertaken with
the State Department and my staff to redefine--to refine these
proposals.
I want us to be careful going forward that we don't saddle
the department with unfunded mandates or overly boutique or
cost-inefficient private sector solutions. But I look forward
to working with him and others on this committee to ensure that
the best practices and smartest technologies are brought to
bear on the department's critical work to issue passports to
American citizens.
I support the ANS. And I yield back the balance of my time.
Chairman McCaul. The gentleman yields back.
Do any other members seek recognition?
There being no further discussion, do any members wish to
offer an amendment to the Issa amendment in the nature of a
substitute?
Mr. Crow. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment.
[The Amendment of Mr. Crow follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Chairman McCaul. Mr. Crow is recognized.
Mr. Crow has an amendment at the desk.
The clerk shall report the amendment and distribute it.
The Clerk. Amendment to the amendment in the nature of a
substitute to H.R. 6610, authored by Mr. Crow of Colorado.
Page 14, after line 17----
Chairman McCaul. Without objection, further reading of the
amendment is dispensed with.
The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes on his amendment.
Mr. Crow. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. congressional offices
like our own and many of us here have heard from our
constituents about the difficulty of obtaining or renewing
their passports throughout the year. We understand that the
department has addressed the backlog and returned to pre-
pandemic processing times, which is a relief to our
constituents and shows State is taking steps to modernize the
process and address these delays.
As an oversight body, though, it is important that Congress
work with the State Department to continue these improvements
and support their work to ensure our constituents are able to
receive these essential documents in a timely manner. We should
work together with them to find best practices to support this
process.
One way to identify these best practices is to work with
the private sector and take advantage of smart new ideas and
technologies. My amendment urges the department to consider at
least three pilot projects, and to include in their report to
Congress recommendations on scaling successful solutions based
on these pilot projects.
Smart, scalable solutions will help the department address
demand and meet the modernization needs of our time, and
support our constituents who rely on timely passport services.
I urge the committee to support my amendment. And I yield
back the balance of my time.
Chairman McCaul. The gentleman yields back.
Any further discussion?
There being--Mr. Meeks is recognized.
Mr. Meeks. Yes. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I strongly support Mr. Crow's amendment to H.R. 6610. As he
indicated, the No. 1 issue that I had for the past few years
was passports. And the backlog was indeed tremendous, which
indicates that we need the best ideas possible to successfully
advance the department's passport modernization agenda.
And so, I welcome the dialog and innovation this amendment
will foster.
And I want to thank Ranking Member Crow for offering this
amendment. I think it is very important.
And I yield back the balance of my time.
Chairman McCaul. The gentleman yields.
Any further discussion?
There being no further discussion, the question now occurs
on the amendment offered by Representative Crow, Number 106, to
the amendment in the nature of a substitute.
All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
All those opposed, signify by saying no.
In the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. And the
amendment is agreed to.
Are there any further amendments?
There being no further amendments, the question now occurs
on the amendment in the nature of a substitute offered by
Representative Issa.
All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
All those opposed, signify by saying no.
In the opinion of chair, the ayes have it. And the
amendment is agreed to.
There being no further amendments, I move that the
committee report H.R. 6610, the Passport System Reform and
Backlog Prevention Act, as amended, to the House with a
favorable recommendation.
All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
And all those opposed, signify by saying no.
In the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. The motion
is agreed to.
Mr. Meeks. Request a roll call vote.
Chairman McCaul. A roll call vote has been requested.
Pursuant to the chair's previous announcement, this vote will
be postponed.
That is the completion of our business for today. We, the
committee, will recess. I understand votes are going to be
called at 5.
I would recommend that we reconvene at 4:30. If the votes
change in time, we will reconvene 30 minutes prior to any votes
being called later this afternoon.
And, with that, the committee stands in recess.
[Recess.]
Chairman McCaul. The committee will come to order. Let me
just say at first that 2 weeks ago this committee unanimously
passed a bipartisan bill to restrict outbound investment in
foreign adversaries like China.
Today, Reuters reported that a Chinese semiconductor firm,
backed by U.S. venture capital money, is supporting military
companies in China. The article reports this type of investment
is ``not an apparent breach of any U.S. rules.'' The work this
committee is doing on outbound investment, and today on export
controls, will put an end to that. And we should all be proud
of that.
So with that, we are going to go to our electronic voting.
The committee postponed further proceedings on reporting H.R.
6602 to amend the Export Control Reform Act of 2018 related to
the review of interagency dispute resolution processed
favorably to the House in which the ayes prevailed by voice
vote.
The question now occurs on reporting the measure to the
House with a favorable recommendation. Members will use the
electronic voting system. The clerk will open the vote.
Have all members voted? Ms. Manning? Can somebody help her?
Ms. Manning, how would you like to be recorded? OK. You are a
yes. Have all members voted? Does any member wish to record or
change their vote? The clerk will close the vote and report the
tally.
The Clerk. On this vote, the ayes are 43, the noes are 0.
Chairman McCaul. The ayes have it. The motion is agreed to
without objection. The motion to reconsider is laid on the
table. Staff is authorized to make any technical conforming
changes.
The committee postponed further proceedings on reporting
H.R. 6606 to amend the Export Control Reform Act to 2018
related to the statement of policy favorably to the House in
which the ayes prevailed by voice vote.
The question now occurs on reporting the measure to the
House with a favorable recommendation. The members will vote
using the electronic voting system. The clerk will open the
vote.
Have all members voted? Does any member wish to record or
change their vote? The clerk will close the vote and report the
tally.
The Clerk. On this vote, the ayes are 43, the noes are 0.
Chairman McCaul. The ayes have it. The motion is agreed to.
Without objection, the motion to reconsider is laid on the
table.
The committee postponed further proceedings on reporting
H.R. 5613, the Sanctions List Harmonization Act, as amended,
favorably to the House on which the ayes prevailed by voice
vote.
The question now occurs on reporting the motion to the
House with a favorable recommendation. The members will vote
using the electronic voting system. The clerk will open the
vote.
Have all members voted? Does any member wish to record or
change their vote? The clerk will close the vote and report the
tally.
The Clerk. On this vote, the ayes are 43, the noes are 0.
Chairman McCaul. The ayes have it. The motion is agreed to.
Without objection, the motion to reconsider is laid on the
table.
The committee postponed further proceedings on reporting
H.R. 6614, the Maintaining American Superiority by Improving
Export Control Transparency Act, as amended, favorably to the
House in which the ayes prevailed by voice vote.
The question now occurs on reporting the measure to the
House with a favorable recommendation. Members will vote using
the electronic voting system. The clerk will open the vote.
Have all members voted? Have all members voted? Does any
member wish to record or change their vote? The clerk will
close the vote and report the tally.
The Clerk. On this vote, the ayes are 43, the noes are 0.
Chairman McCaul. The ayes have it. The motion is agreed to.
Without objection, the motion to reconsider is laid on the
table.
The committee postponed further proceedings on reporting
H.R. 1135, the Countering and Economic Coercion Act of 2023, as
amended, favorably to the House in which the ayes prevailed by
voice vote.
The question now occurs on reporting the measure to the
House with a favorable recommendation. Members will vote using
the electronic voting system. The clerk will open the vote.
Have all members voted? Does any member wish to record or
change their vote? The clerk will report the tally.
The Clerk. On this vote, the ayes are 35, the noes are 8.
Chairman McCaul. The ayes have it. The motion is agreed to.
Without objection, the motion to reconsider is laid on the
table.
The committee postponed further proceedings on reporting
H.R. 5917, the Strengthening Tools to Counter the Use of Human
Shields Act, favorably to the House in which the ayes prevailed
by voice vote.
The question now occurs on reporting the measure to the
House with a favorable recommendation. Members will vote using
the electronic voting system. The clerk will open the vote.
Have all members voted? Does any member wish to record or
change their vote? The clerk will close the vote and report the
tally.
The Clerk. On this vote, the ayes are 43, the noes are 0.
Chairman McCaul. The ayes have it. The motion is agreed to.
Without objection, the motion to reconsider is laid on the
table.
The committee postponed further proceedings on the roll
call vote on Amendment Number 87 offered by Representative
Castro to H.R. 3016 on which the noes have prevailed by voice
vote.
The question now occurs on agreeing to the amendment.
Members will vote using the electronic voting system. The clerk
will open the vote.
Have all members voted? Does any member wish to record or
change their vote? The clerk will close the vote and report the
tally.
The Clerk. On this vote, the ayes are 5, the noes are 38.
Chairman McCaul. The noes have it, and the amendment is not
agreed to.
The committee postponed further proceedings on the roll
call vote on vote on Amendment Number 88 offered by
Representative Castro to H.R. 3016 on which the noes have
prevailed by voice.
The question now occurs on agreeing to the amendment.
Members will vote using the electronic voting system. The clerk
will open the vote.
Have all members voted? Does any member wish to record or
change their vote? The clerk will close the vote and report the
tally.
The Clerk. On this vote, the ayes are 3, the noes are 39.
Chairman McCaul. The noes have it. There being no further
amendments, I move that the committee report H.R. 3016 to the
IGO Anti-Boycott Act, as amended, to the House with a favorable
recommendation.
All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
All opposed, signify by saying no.
In the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it.
Mr. Lawler. Mr. Chairman, I request a recorded vote.
Chairman McCaul. A recorded vote is requested. A roll call
vote has been requested pursuant to the chair's--there we go.
The members will vote using the electronic voting system. The
clerk will open the vote.
Have all members voted? Does any member wish to record or
change their vote? The clerk will close the vote and report the
tally.
The Clerk. On this vote, the ayes are 42, the noes are 3.
Chairman McCaul. The ayes have it. The motion is agreed to.
Without objection, the motion to reconsider is laid on the
table.
The committee postponed further proceedings on reporting
H.R. 3569, the Starr Camargo Bridge Expansion Act, favorably
reported to the House on which the ayes prevailed by voice
vote.
The question now occurs on reporting the measure to the
House with a favorable recommendation. Members will vote using
the electronic voting system. The clerk will open the vote.
Have all members voted? Does any member wish to record or
change their vote? The clerk will close the vote and report the
tally.
The Clerk. On this vote, the ayes are 46, the noes are 0.
Chairman McCaul. The ayes have it. The motion is agreed to.
Without objection, the motion to reconsider is laid on the
table.
The committee postponed further proceedings on reporting
H.R. 6586 to require a strategy to oppose financial or material
support by foreign countries to the Taliban and for other
purposes, as amended, favorably to the House on which the ayes
prevailed by voice vote.
The question now occurs on reporting the measure to the
House with a favorable recommendation. Members will vote using
the electronic voting system. The clerk will open the vote.
Have all members voted? Does any member wish to record or
change their vote? The clerk will close the vote and report the
tally.
The Clerk. On this vote, the ayes are 46, the noes are 0.
Chairman McCaul. The ayes have it. The motion is agreed to.
Without objection, the motion to reconsider is laid on the
table.
The committee postponed further proceedings on reporting
H.R. 6306, the Embassy Construction Integrity Act of 2023, as
amended, favorably to the House in which the ayes prevailed by
voice vote.
The question now occurs on reporting the measure to the
House with a favorable recommendation. Members will use the
electronic voting system. The clerk will open the vote.
Have all members voted? Does any member wish to record or
change their vote? The clerk will close the vote and report the
tally.
The Clerk. On this vote, the ayes are 46, the noes are 0.
Chairman McCaul. The ayes have it. The motion is agreed to.
Without objection, the motion to reconsider is laid on the
table.
The committee postponed further proceedings on reporting
H.R. 6610, the Passport System Reform and Backlog Prevention
Act, as amended, favorably to the House in which the ayes
prevailed by voice vote.
The question now occurs on reporting the measure to the
House with a favorable recommendation. Members will vote using
the electronic voting system. The clerk will open the vote.
Have all members voted? Does any member wish to record or
change their vote? The clerk will close the vote and report the
tally.
The Clerk. On this vote, the ayes are 46, the noes are 0.
Chairman McCaul. The ayes have it. The motion is agreed to.
Without objection, the motion to reconsider is laid on the
table.
And finally, the committee postponed further proceedings on
reporting H.R. 6416, the Russian War Crimes and Ukraine Tax
Act, as amended, favorably to the House in which the ayes
prevailed by voice vote.
The question now occurs on reporting the measure to the
House with a favorable recommendation. Members will vote using
the electronic voting system. The clerk will open the vote.
Have all members voted? Does any member wish to record or
change their vote? The clerk will close the vote and report the
tally.
The Clerk. On this vote, the ayes are 41, the noes are 5.
Chairman McCaul. The ayes have it. The motion is agreed to.
Without objection, the motion to reconsider is laid on the
table.
This concludes consideration of the measures noticed by the
committee. Hopefully, this will be the last full committee
event in the CVC as our real committee room will be done by
January. The committee stands adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 4:56 p.m., the committee was adjourned.]
APPENDIX
----------
Material Submitted for the Hearing Record
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
[all]