[Congressional Record Volume 163, Number 203 (Wednesday, December 13, 2017)]
[House]
[Pages H9854-H9859]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




    PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 2396, PRIVACY NOTIFICATION 
 TECHNICAL CLARIFICATION ACT, AND PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 
     4015, CORPORATE GOVERNANCE REFORM AND TRANSPARENCY ACT OF 2017

  Mr. BUCK. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call 
up House Resolution 658 and ask for its immediate consideration.
  The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:

                              H. Res. 658

       Resolved, That at any time after adoption of this 
     resolution the Speaker may, pursuant to clause 2(b) of rule 
     XVIII, declare the House resolved into the Committee of the 
     Whole House on the state of the Union for consideration of 
     the bill (H.R. 1638) to require the Secretary of the Treasury 
     to submit a report to the appropriate congressional 
     committees on the estimated total assets under direct or 
     indirect control by certain senior Iranian leaders and other 
     figures, and for other purposes. The first reading of the 
     bill shall be dispensed with. All points of order against 
     consideration of the bill are waived. General debate shall be 
     confined to the bill and shall not exceed one hour equally 
     divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority 
     member of the Committee on Financial Services. After general 
     debate the bill shall be considered for amendment under the 
     five-minute rule. In lieu of the amendment in the nature of a 
     substitute recommended by the Committee on Financial Services 
     now printed in the bill, it shall be in order to consider as 
     an original bill for the purpose of amendment under the five-
     minute rule an amendment in the nature of a substitute 
     consisting of the text of Rules Committee Print 115-47. That 
     amendment in the nature of a substitute shall be considered 
     as read. All points of order against that amendment in the 
     nature of a substitute are waived. No amendment to that 
     amendment in the nature of a substitute shall be in order 
     except those printed in part A of the report of the Committee 
     on Rules accompanying this resolution. Each such amendment 
     may be offered only in the order printed in the report, may 
     be offered only by a Member designated in the report, shall 
     be considered as read, shall be debatable for the time 
     specified in the report equally divided and controlled by the 
     proponent and an opponent, shall not be subject to amendment, 
     and shall not be subject to a demand for division of the 
     question in the House or in the Committee of the Whole. All 
     points of order against such amendments are waived. At the 
     conclusion of consideration of the bill for amendment the 
     Committee shall rise and report the bill to the House with 
     such amendments as may have been adopted. Any Member may 
     demand a separate vote in the House on any amendment adopted 
     in the Committee of the Whole to the bill or to the amendment 
     in the nature of a substitute made in order as original text. 
     The previous question shall be considered as ordered on the 
     bill and amendments thereto to final passage without 
     intervening motion except one motion to recommit with or 
     without instructions.
       Sec. 2.  Upon adoption of this resolution it shall be in 
     order to consider in the House the bill (H.R. 4324) to 
     require the Secretary of the Treasury to make certifications 
     with respect to United States and foreign financial 
     institutions' aircraft-related transactions involving Iran, 
     and for other purposes. All points of order against 
     consideration of the bill are waived. In lieu of the 
     amendment recommended by the Committee on Financial Services 
     now printed in the bill, an amendment in the nature of a 
     substitute consisting of the text of Rules Committee Print 
     115-48 shall be considered as adopted. The bill, as amended, 
     shall be considered as read. All points of order against 
     provisions in the bill, as amended, are waived. The previous 
     question shall be considered as ordered on the bill, as 
     amended, and on any further amendment thereto, to final 
     passage without intervening motion except: (1) one hour of 
     debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and 
     ranking minority member of the Committee on Financial 
     Services; (2) the further amendment printed in part B of the 
     report of the Committee on Rules accompanying this 
     resolution, if offered by the Member designated in the 
     report, which shall be in order without intervention of any 
     point of order, shall be considered as read, shall be 
     separately debatable for the time specified in the report 
     equally divided and controlled by the proponent and an 
     opponent, and shall not be subject to a demand for a division 
     of the question; and (3) one motion to recommit with or 
     without instructions.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Colorado is recognized 
for 1 hour.
  Mr. BUCK. Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the 
customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Hastings), 
pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During 
consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purpose 
of debate only.


                             General Leave

  Mr. BUCK. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 
5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Colorado?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. BUCK. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the rule and the 
underlying legislation.
  This rule provides for consideration of two bills dealing with Iran 
and its continued support of international terrorism. In addition, the 
rule makes in order all submitted amendments.
  These bills were the subject of hearings in the Financial Services 
Committee and were marked up and reported favorably to the House. Both

[[Page H9855]]

bills received bipartisan support in the committee, and I would expect 
that we will see significant bipartisan support on the House floor.
  Mr. Speaker, it is no secret that Iran's leaders have a threat to our 
way of life. We don't have to look any further than Iranian support for 
lethal attacks on U.S. troops in Iraq and Afghanistan, particularly 
through IEDs, to witness Iran's hostility toward us. Going back several 
decades, Iran has routinely terrorized the Middle East and has sought 
to export terror worldwide.
  Iran's numerous threats to annihilate our friend and ally, Israel, 
are a steady drumbeat that should continuously remind us of Iran's 
threat.
  In 2001, the Ayatollah Khamenei is quoted as saying: ``It is the 
mission of the Islamic Republic of Iran to erase Israel from the map of 
the region.''
  In 2002, a leader of Hezbollah, which is a known extension of the 
Iranian regime, said: ``If Jews all gather in Israel, it will save us 
the trouble of going after them worldwide.''
  But lest we think these are the views of the past, the Ayatollah was 
quoted in 2014 saying that ``this . . . regime of Israel . . . has no 
cure but to be annihilated.''
  And we could go on. The evidence of Iran's intent on the destruction 
of Israel is nearly endless. Just yesterday, the commander of Iran's 
revolutionary guards offered to support Palestinians if they choose to 
stage an armed uprising to take by force Israel's newly recognized 
capital: Jerusalem.
  Any country whose leaders actively support terrorism against Israel 
and whose leaders take an official position that the nation of Israel 
should be eliminated from the Earth are, and always must be, a sworn 
enemy of the United States.
  But it is not just Israel. Other Middle Eastern allies in the United 
States have been the target of Iran's hostility as well. Namely, Saudi 
Arabia has been increasingly threatened by the Iranian regime.
  In 2011, our FBI and DEA agents successfully disrupted a plot by Iran 
to assassinate the Saudi Arabian Ambassador to the U.S. here in 
Washington, D.C. The uncovered plot included bombing a restaurant in 
D.C. at which the Saudi Arabian Ambassador was planning to eat. The 
bombing would almost certainly have killed innocent Americans as well.
  The list could go on.
  Iran has fomented unrest in Iraq, has sought to subject Sunni Muslims 
to Shiite militias, has supplied the Syrian regime in its years-long 
civil war, has supported Hezbollah and Hamas, has flagrantly 
disregarded international law by building a nuclear program, and has 
taunted the United States.

                              {time}  1230

  Who can forget the image of U.S. Navy sailors, hands behind their 
heads, forced to kneel under gunpoint on an Iranian military vessel? Or 
the thinly veiled attacks on U.S. troops in Iraq using proxy militant 
groups? Or the numerous incidents in the Persian Gulf involving 
harassment of the U.S. Navy?
  Yet, against this backdrop, the United States entered into an 
agreement with Iran. The agreement, commonly referred to as the ``Iran 
deal,'' was opposed by a bipartisan majority in the House. It relaxed 
sanctions on Iran, opened channels for business investment, and allowed 
Iran a pathway forward on a nuclear bomb.
  Further, while having the impact of a treaty between two nations, the 
Obama administration chose to call the agreement by another name and, 
in so doing, bypassed the United States Senate. This political 
commitment by President Obama to Iran is the reason for these two bills 
today.
  The first bill, H.R. 1638, the Iranian Leadership Asset Transparency 
Act, targets the finances of Iran's ruling class. Its goal is 
threefold: One, aid U.S. authorities in their efforts to eliminate 
money laundering by the Iranian regime; two, expose the sectors of the 
Iranian economy that are controlled by Iran's rulers; and three, show 
the Iranian people how their corrupt government accumulates wealth for 
itself at the expense of the people.
  The Iran deal removes sanctions on many of the known corrupt 
government entities. This bill will provide the transparency necessary 
to reveal the level of corruption within Iran and to inform Congress 
and others about how to combat the flow of money to terrorists. It 
further exposes the ruling class by publishing this information in the 
most common languages spoken within Iran.
  The second bill that will be considered under this rule is H.R. 4324, 
the Strengthening Oversight of Iran's Access to Finance Act. This bill 
will instruct the Treasury Department to report on transactions of 
financial institutions related to the export of aircraft to Iran.
  Under the Iran deal, President Obama removed restrictions on the sale 
of American aircraft to Iran. In 2016, the Treasury Department 
authorized the export of more than 200 aircraft to Iran Air, Iran's 
state-owned air carrier. Yet we know that Iran Air has been the 
transporter of choice for Iran's revolutionary guards as they have 
ferried weapons systems around the Middle East.
  The absurdity of this deal to increase the revolutionary guards' 
capacity to move weapons is self-evident. The bill before us today will 
require certification by financiers of the aircraft exportation deals 
that none of the aircraft exported will be used for terrorism or Iran's 
weapons of mass destruction program.
  Due to Iran Air's continued role in transporting materials used for 
terrorism, this is one step that we should take to help hold lending 
institutions accountable for their support of aircraft exports to Iran.
  Mr. Speaker, many of us in Congress know how bad the Iran deal was 
for our security and our allies' security. That is why there was 
bipartisan opposition to the deal last Congress. While in the end we 
were unsuccessful in prevailing upon the administration to abandon its 
bad idea, we should continue to stand in the gap against Iran's ongoing 
efforts to undermine peace in the Middle East and destroy our friends 
and, ultimately, the United States.
  Today, we have two bills that will help our ongoing efforts to thwart 
Iran's terrorist ambitions. I urge my colleagues to support this rule 
and these bills.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. HASTINGS. Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend, the gentleman from 
Colorado (Mr. Buck), for yielding me the customary 30 minutes of 
debate. I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, when the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action came before 
Congress, I made my objections very clear. I believed then, as I do 
now, that the Iran deal too quickly removed the sanctions that brought 
Iran to the negotiating table in the first place, allowing Iran to 
remain a nuclear threshold state.
  However, like it or not, the JCPOA is now law, and it will be wrong 
to undermine it for purely political reasons. Unfortunately, that is, 
in my opinion, what my Republican colleagues are doing here today. This 
is not the way to handle our country's foreign policy.
  Mr. Speaker, the most important question that you need to ask 
yourself at this time does not have to do with the substance of the 
legislation this rule provides for, but, rather, why on Earth this body 
is wasting what precious legislative time remains to bring these bills 
to the floor today.
  The checklist of important items that need to be addressed is long 
and time is short. Thanks to the inability of my Republican colleagues 
to govern, even within their own conference, we face the specter of yet 
another government shutdown next week. The Band-Aid that Republicans 
came up with last week to provide funding for the Children's Health 
Insurance Program, which insures some 9 million children, expires at 
the end of the year. Utah, Colorado, Arizona, California, Ohio, 
Minnesota, the District of Columbia, and Oregon are just some of the 
States that have had to inform families that CHIP funding is nearing 
its end.
  Why is this? Historically, the Children's Health Insurance Program 
funding has been a largely bipartisan effort. And why shouldn't it be? 
We are simply talking about helping to cover roughly 9 million low-
income children and pregnant women.
  It has been over 2 months since CHIP's authorization lapsed, and it 
is far past time for a sensible solution to this problem. Does today's 
legislation solve this issue? No, it does not.
  We also have 800,000-plus DREAMers waiting for word from this 
Republican-

[[Page H9856]]

controlled Congress. Will my friends across the aisle allow these fine 
young people to remain in the only country they have ever known as 
home? Will you let those DREAMers who have served this country bravely 
stay in this country so that they may start their own families here in 
the United States, start their own businesses, and go to college?

  The idea that my friends would drag their feet on such an issue, let 
alone actually allow DREAMers to be deported, is anathema to what this 
country stands for, and it will darken the beacon this country has been 
for millions of people since our founding: a place where those of 
differing backgrounds but dedicated to freedom and the rule of law come 
and make a life for themselves.
  Mr. Speaker, Republicans control the House; they control the Senate; 
they control the White House; and what has that control translated into 
for the American people? Absolutely nothing at this point. In fact, it 
is looking increasingly more like the first year of a unified 
Republican government in over a decade will end with nothing getting 
done.
  In an attempt to distract from their failures, Republicans have taken 
to blaming, and I quote them, ``obstructionist Democrats.'' They point 
to this side of the aisle as the cause of their governing woes. That is 
a neat trick, but the American people are not going to fall for it, and 
I think you saw that last night in Alabama where new stars fell on 
Alabama.
  It wasn't the Democrats who tried to take healthcare away from 32 
million people. It was Republicans. Thank goodness they failed. It is 
not the Democrats who are trying to give the wealthy and rich 
corporations a tax break on the backs of hardworking Americans. It is 
the Republicans. I hope this equally misguided effort likewise fails.
  I have some advice for my Republican friends. If, like this side of 
the aisle, you spent more time working on policies that help the 
American people instead of the wealthy and rich corporations that are 
doing just fine, you would likely see more legislative success.
  Democrats remain ready to work in a bipartisan way to accomplish all 
that remains left to do this year. We are ready to fund the government 
and provide for smart investments for the future of our country. We are 
ready to pull the hundreds of thousands of DREAMers out of unnecessary 
limbo and provide them with the status they deserve. We are ready to 
provide the funding and authorization needed to give millions of low-
income children the health insurance they need.
  The list goes on and on. But, Mr. Speaker, if Republicans continue to 
not even allow Democrats in the room to address these issues and if 
they continue to burn legislative time on the bills we have before us 
today, then it won't be just the Republican majority that pays the 
price. It will be the American people.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. BUCK. Mr. Speaker, we have two witnesses on their way. We started 
a little bit early. I reserve the balance of time.
  Mr. HASTINGS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I am expecting another speaker. If we defeat the 
previous question, I am going to offer an amendment to the rule to 
bring up the bipartisan bicameral bill H.R. 3440, the Dream Act.
  Just last week, a group of 34 of my Republican colleagues sent a 
letter to Speaker Ryan urging a vote before the year's end on 
legislation that would protect the DACA recipients. This means, if we 
defeat the previous question and bring up the Dream Act, the bill would 
garner enough bipartisan support to pass the House today.
  Mr. Speaker, I ask how much longer will this body be complicit in the 
Trump administration's assault on DREAMers? It is time we listen to the 
vast majority of Americans and this body and act to protect these 
courageous young people.
  Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to insert the text of my 
amendment in the Record, along with extraneous material, immediately 
prior to the vote on the previous question.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Florida?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. HASTINGS. Mr. Speaker, when my speaker arrives, I will allow Mrs. 
Torres to discuss this matter further. Mr. Speaker, at this time, I 
reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. BUCK. Mr. Speaker, at this point, I reserve the balance of my 
time.
  Mr. HASTINGS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, continuing, we are faced, as I said earlier, with 
another government shutdown. The National Flood Insurance Program, 
which is particularly critical to those of us in coastal States, is set 
to expire. The Republican Band-Aid to keep the Children's Health 
Insurance Program funded will run out, leaving millions of children 
without the healthcare they need.
  The authorization of an important intelligence tool to keep this 
country safe is set to expire, and millions of Americans in California, 
Texas, Florida, Puerto Rico, and the Virgin Islands desperately wait to 
find out if they will receive the resources they need to recover from 
the devastating hurricanes and the wildfires that we have seen this 
year and that are continuing in California.
  I have said repeatedly that FEMA is not only dealing with hurricanes 
and floods, they are dealing with tornadoes and with all sorts of 
matters, and the wildfires manifestly have kept them occupied over the 
course of time.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the distinguished gentlewoman from 
California (Mrs. Torres), my good friend, as I previously noted, to 
discuss the proposal that I spoke of with reference to the DREAMers.
  Mrs. TORRES. Mr. Speaker, it has been 2 weeks since I last stood here 
to ask the House to bring the Dream Act to a vote. Thirty-four of my 
colleagues, my Republican colleagues, have sent a letter to Republican 
Speaker Ryan asking for action to protect DREAMers before the holidays 
because they understand the urgency.
  What are we waiting for? Republicans continue to state that we have 
until March to resolve this issue, but that is simply not true. 122 
DREAMers lose protection every single day.

                              {time}  1245

  That means that 122 intelligent, hardworking Americans, by every 
right except birth, are losing their ability to continue their 
education, to work and contribute to our economy.
  Are we willing to stop the deportations of hundreds of thousands of 
young DREAMers or not?
  This is not a partisan question. This is the question of who we are 
as Americans. Let's put an end to the fear and uncertainty that 
DREAMers have been living with these past few months.
  We have been clear. This Congress must not finish this year without 
providing a permanent fix for DREAMers, their families, and the 
communities that depend on them. It is unconscionable. This is not who 
we are.
  Mr. Speaker, many of my Republican colleagues support action on the 
Dream Act before the holidays. Many have said so publicly. The majority 
of Americans want us to act now.
  Mr. Speaker, 1,708 DACA recipients have lost their status since I 
last stood here 2 weeks ago. This isn't hard. The fix is right in front 
of us. It has been here all along.
  We all know that the votes are here today, if this body only had the 
courage to act. And I know that the Dream Act would pass today if we 
only allowed it.
  I ask my colleagues to vote against the previous question so that we 
can immediately begin to bring the Dream Act and act on the floor 
today.
  Mr. BUCK. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentlewoman from 
Florida (Ms. Ros-Lehtinen), the former chair of the Foreign Affairs 
Committee.
  Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Mr. Speaker, I thank my good friend from Colorado 
(Mr. Buck) for the time.
  I want to thank Chairman Hensarling because these bills that we are 
combining today came out of his committee. I want to thank him for his 
leadership in bringing these important bills before us today.
  I rise in support of H.R. 1638, the Iranian Leadership Asset 
Transparency Act. I want to thank my good friend from Maine, Bruce 
Poliquin, for his

[[Page H9857]]

work in authoring this bill. It is a critical step, a necessary step in 
holding the Iranian regime accountable for its money laundering, for 
its terror financing, and other wide-ranging criminal activities.
  The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, known by its initials, its 
acronym, IRGC, has long been at the heart of the Iranian criminal 
enterprise, controlling the better part of Iran's economy in key 
sectors like oil, gas, telecommunications, and transportation.
  The IRGC's business empire and monopoly of these economic sectors 
provides the regime with billions of dollars that it uses to do what? 
To feed the people, to clothe the people, to educate the children?
  No. To repress the Iranian people and to export the terror that it 
has done so much damage in throughout the world, and its hateful 
ideology abroad.
  Two years ago, I held a hearing of our Subcommittee on the Middle 
East and North Africa, where we explored the role of the IRGC and, 
again, that is the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps. We looked at the 
role of the IRGC in Iran's economy and we raised these very concerns, 
Mr. Speaker.
  So I want to thank Chairman Hensarling for his leadership on this 
issue and his consistent efforts to hold Iran accountable, because that 
is what we are trying to do, hold these terrorists accountable.
  This is one of the many issues where the Financial Services and the 
Foreign Affairs Committees have done a great job of working together to 
implement targeted sanctions against the Iranian regime for its illicit 
activity.
  For years, our Treasury Department has been working to identify and 
to sanction IRGC leaders. They have shell companies. We have been 
looking at what these shell companies are. Let's identify and let's 
sanction them. Their proxies. Let's designate and warn foreign 
companies about the risk of doing business with the IRGC's connected 
entities. As fast as the IRGC can create new ones, we shut them down, 
new ones pop up.
  Unfortunately, the misguided JCPOA has made the Treasury's job even 
harder, with the IRGC collecting billions from their financial windfall 
created by new outside investments in the very sectors previously 
targeted by our sanctions.
  So it is important now more than ever that the Treasury publicizes 
the assets controlled by the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps and the 
rest of Iran's corrupt leadership for two reasons, Mr. Speaker.
  First, so that the long-suffering people of Iran, with whom we have 
no problem--we want to help the people of Iran so that these people 
have a window into the regime's pervasive theft and corruption that 
deprives them of the most basic of commodities.
  Second, so that businesses stop funneling cash into these criminal 
enterprises that are financing terror throughout the world.
  This bill will help shine a necessary light on these nefarious 
actions of Iran both inside and outside of the country, and I urge its 
swift passage.
  Mr. HASTINGS. Mr. Speaker, I would advise my good friend that I have 
no further speakers and I will be prepared to close when he is 
prepared.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. BUCK. Mr. Speaker, I have two more speakers. I yield 5 minutes to 
the gentleman from Maine (Mr. Poliquin), a member of the Subcommittee 
on Terrorism and Illicit Finance.
  Mr. POLIQUIN. Mr. Speaker, I speak today and rise in support of the 
rule for H.R. 1638, the Iranian Leadership Asset Transparency Act.
  Mr. Speaker, I want to thank Chairman Hensarling also for moving this 
very important bipartisan piece of legislation through the House 
Financial Services Committee.
  Additionally, I want to thank my colleagues on the other side of the 
aisle who supported my bill last year. Unfortunately, it got stuck in 
the Senate, so we are doing it over again this year in the House.
  Mr. Speaker, the primary responsibility of every Member of Congress 
is to help keep our families safe. Embedded with that promise is to 
support and defend our Constitution.

  Mr. Speaker, moms and dads in Maine and across America are 
increasingly alarmed by the frequency of terrorist attacks here at 
home, with another attempted attack 2 days ago in New York City.
  Mr. Speaker, today, there are 1,000 ongoing investigations of 
terrorist activity by the FBI in all 50 States.
  Mr. Speaker, that is why H.R. 1638 is so important. It is a 
commonsense bill that will help keep our families safe and free. In 
doing so, we should never make this a political issue.
  Mr. Speaker, the Iranian Government is one of the chief sponsors of 
terrorism and instability throughout the world. Their senior political 
and military leaders and the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps train, 
arm, and fund terrorist organizations around the world. They have 
become experts at using the internet and social media to radicalize, to 
recruit, and to direct terrorist attacks around the globe, including 
here in the United States of America.
  Mr. Speaker, the Iranian Government has American blood on its hands.
  Now, there are approximately 70 to 80 top political and military 
leaders in Iran that control about one-third of its entire economy. 
They use their power to corrupt the telecommunications, the 
construction, and other important industries in that country.
  A recent investigation by Reuters found that the Supreme Leader in 
Iran alone has accumulated tremendous personal wealth through a 
foundation claiming to help the poor. So while the corruption has 
grown, the average Iranian citizen earns the equivalent of $15,000 per 
year.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
  Mr. BUCK. Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 1 minute to the 
gentleman from Maine.
  Mr. POLIQUIN. Mr. Speaker, the citizens of Iran and the people of the 
world should know how much wealth has been accumulated by these chief 
sponsors of terrorism and what the money is being used for.
  Companies across the globe looking to possibly do business with Iran 
should also understand what they are dealing with before they invest.
  That is why my Iranian Leadership Asset Transparency Act is a 
straightforward, main, commonsense bill. It simply requires the U.S. 
Treasury Department to collect, to maintain, and to post online the 
list of these 70 or 80 senior political and military leaders in Iran, 
their personal assets, and how that money was acquired and what it is 
being used for.
  My bill requires the Treasury Department to post this information on 
their website in English as well as the three major languages that are 
used and spoken, rather, in Iran: Farsi, Arabic, and Azeri. The 
information should be available, easily downloaded, and shared by 
everyone who wants to see this.
  Mr. Speaker, I might also add that this information comes from 
publicly available sources. It is not classified information.
  Now, I have heard folks say: Well, this is not a good idea to expose 
the Iranian Government's corruption in their funding of terrorism, 
because, if you do, we might not be able to work with these people.
  Are you kidding me?
  These are the radicals who regularly chant ``Death to America.'' It 
doesn't make sense to hope that they will abandon their support for 
terrorism by not shedding light on their corruption. Mr. Speaker, hope 
is not a national security strategy.
  My bill helps make sure Congress gets its priorities straight when it 
comes to this issue. Protecting American families here at home and 
helping to safeguard our troops overseas, where they are fighting for 
our freedom, is the right thing to do.
  Mr. Speaker, so let's use one click of a computer from any corner of 
the globe to help expose the illicit activities of the chief sponsor of 
terrorism in this world. Secrecy and corruption breed more terrorism by 
governments like those in Iran.
  Let us stand up, Mr. Speaker, for every peace-loving nation around 
this world, and let's stand up to protect our families here at home.
  Mr. Speaker, I greatly appreciate the time and the consideration. 
Please vote ``yes'' for H.R. 1638, the Iranian Leadership Asset 
Transparency Act.
  Mr. BUCK. Mr. Speaker, I would just ask, how much time is remaining?
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Colorado has 13\1/2\ 
minutes remaining. The gentleman from Florida has 17\1/2\ minutes 
remaining.

[[Page H9858]]

  

  Mr. HASTINGS. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. BUCK. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Texas 
(Mr. Williams), the vice chairman of the Subcommittee on Monetary 
Policy and Trade.
  Mr. WILLIAMS. Mr. Speaker, I am happy to come to the floor this 
afternoon to support House Resolution 658, the combined rule providing 
for consideration of H.R. 1638 and H.R. 4324.
  H.R. 1638, the Iranian Leadership Asset Transparency Act, sponsored 
by the gentleman from Maine (Mr. Poliquin), is commonsense legislation. 
The bill would publicize assets associated with Iran's Government and 
military leadership. It would require a report to Congress on the 
assets that these leaders control, how they were acquired, and how each 
and every one of these Iranian leaders uses them.
  The American people, the American businesses, and the international 
community deserve to know who controls money and assets in Iran.
  I am also proud to be the sponsor of H.R. 4324, the Strengthening 
Oversight of Iran's Access to Finance Act. My legislation would improve 
congressional oversight of any financing that the Treasury authorizes 
for aircraft sales to Iran.
  Every 6 months, the Treasury would need to certify to us that finance 
authorizations would not benefit an Iranian person who is transporting 
items for the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, nor 
providing transportation for sanctioned entities.

                              {time}  1300

  Treasury would also have to certify to us that these authorizations 
don't pose a significant money laundering or terrorism finance risk to 
the U.S. financial system.
  If the Treasury Department cannot make this certification, the 
Department must tell us why, and it must explain to Congress the course 
of action it intends to take.
  I urge all of my colleagues to support this rule, and I urge them to 
support H.R. 1638 and H.R. 4324.
  Mr. HASTINGS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
  Mr. Speaker, as we approach the end of 2017, and with just a few 
legislative days left, the Republican majority is focusing on the wrong 
things. Plain and simple, the bills before us today are more evidence 
of that.
  Over the next couple of weeks, we face a terrifyingly long to-do 
list, the outcome of which will affect every single American.
  Let me be very clear. My friend from Maine and my friend from Texas, 
my friend from Maine, especially, passionately put forward significant 
matters having to do with Iran. My recollection is that I, for one, as 
did many members of the Democratic Party, voted for the transparency 
that he calls for and are likely to do so again.
  While this is an important matter, it is not nearly as critical at 
this time that we be occupying this kind of legislative time. The 
simple fact of the matter is we could have put this on the suspension 
calendar and not been exercising ourselves in the Rules Committee, 
occupying legislative time that could be addressing the Flood Insurance 
Program, the Children's Health Insurance Program, and intelligence 
tools that keep this country safe that are about to expire.
  We could have been addressing the hurricane relief for Puerto Rico, 
the Virgin Islands, and southwest Louisiana.
  We could have been addressing the fires in California, Oregon, 
Montana, and other areas of the country.
  We could have been addressing the flood in Texas that devastated 
portions of that area, as well as, during that same period of time, we 
had tornadoes and other issues indicating how critical it is that we 
support these matters.
  We could have been dealing with a real infrastructure measure. 
Everybody in this country knows that our roads and bridges are in 
despicable shape at this point, and it is not as if we do not have the 
ability to do something about it. We don't have the political will.
  So we are wasting legislative time here today with these daunting 
tasks before us, and this is what the Republican majority chooses to 
focus on: trying to pass a tax bill, for example, that gives most of 
the benefits to the wealthy and rich corporations while adding over 
more than $1 trillion to the deficit.
  I have said before: Look out. When we finish whatever this tax bill 
is--and now it is being called what it is, a tax cut and not tax reform 
that is needed in this country. When we finish with that, the next 
words out of many of my colleagues' mouths next year are going to be, 
``We need to address the entitlements,'' meaning Medicare, Social 
Security, and Medicaid. I can assure you that that is what we will hear 
from my former deficit hawk friends who are now in charge of this 
country.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge my Republican friends, for the sake of the 
American people, to abandon this reckless tact and return to regular 
order. That is something that we are not doing and have not done. We 
have had more closed rules in this session of Congress than in the 
history of the United States Congress.
  They need to work with Democrats in a bipartisan way. I think Alabama 
told us that last night, and I hope that that message is pervasive and 
allows for us in this body, as well as in the other body, to understand 
the importance of everybody, all of these brilliant people that 
Americans sent here to work, to work together to solve many of the 
issues of this country and address its needs in a meaningful way, not 
the needs of the wealthy few. Given everything there is to do, anything 
less is abdication of our duty as legislators.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. BUCK. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
  Mr. Speaker, as my family and I sit around the dinner table, my wife, 
Perry, and my two children, we talk politics, not surprisingly, and 
there are times where we distinguish good from bad, and we know that 
Iran is an enemy of the good in this world. It terrorizes the Middle 
East. It seeks to eliminate Israel. It pursues the destruction of the 
United States. And yet, for some reason, the prior administration 
struck a deal with the Iranian regime, the same regime that has 
American blood on its hands. The two bills before us today begin the 
difficult work of once again ensuring Iran is stopped in its pursuit of 
weapons of mass destruction and in its support of terrorism.
  I thank Chairman Hensarling for bringing these bills forward and for 
my colleagues from the Financial Services Committee who have joined me 
on the floor today to make the case for this effort. I thank Chairman 
Sessions for his leadership on the Rules Committee and for providing 
the debate on this issue today.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting the rule, 
supporting the underlying bills, and putting pressure on Iran to 
abandon terror and embrace peace.
  The material previously referred to by Mr. Hastings is as follows:

          An Amendment to H. Res. 658 Offered by Mr. Hastings

       At the end of the resolution, add the following new 
     sections:
       Sec. 3. Immediately upon adoption of this resolution the 
     Speaker shall, pursuant to clause 2(b) of rule XVIII, declare 
     the House resolved into the Committee of the Whole House on 
     the state of the Union for consideration of the bill (H.R. 
     3440) to authorize the cancellation of removal and adjustment 
     of status of certain individuals who are long-term United 
     States residents and who entered the United States as 
     children and for other purposes. The first reading of the 
     bill shall be dispensed with. All points of order against 
     consideration of the bill are waived. General debate shall be 
     confined to the bill and shall not exceed one hour equally 
     divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority 
     member of the Committee on the Judiciary. After general 
     debate the bill shall be considered for amendment under the 
     five-minute rule. All points of order against provisions in 
     the bill are waived. At the conclusion of consideration of 
     the bill for amendment the Committee shall rise and report 
     the bill to the House with such amendments as may have been 
     adopted. The previous question shall be considered as ordered 
     on the bill and amendments thereto to final passage without 
     intervening motion except one motion to recommit with or 
     without instructions. If the Committee of the Whole rises and 
     reports that it has come to no resolution on the bill, then 
     on the next legislative day the House shall, immediately 
     after the third daily order of business under clause 1 of 
     rule XIV, resolve into the Committee of the Whole for further 
     consideration of the bill.
       Sec. 4. Clause 1(c) of rule XIX shall not apply to the 
     consideration of H.R. 3440.

[[Page H9859]]

     
                                  ____
        The Vote on the Previous Question: What It Really Means

       This vote, the vote on whether to order the previous 
     question on a special rule, is not merely a procedural vote. 
     A vote against ordering the previous question is a vote 
     against the Republican majority agenda and a vote to allow 
     the Democratic minority to offer an alternative plan. It is a 
     vote about what the House should be debating.
       Mr. Clarence Cannon's Precedents of the House of 
     Representatives (VI, 308-311), describes the vote on the 
     previous question on the rule as ``a motion to direct or 
     control the consideration of the subject before the House 
     being made by the Member in charge.'' To defeat the previous 
     question is to give the opposition a chance to decide the 
     subject before the House. Cannon cites the Speaker's ruling 
     of January 13, 1920, to the effect that ``the refusal of the 
     House to sustain the demand for the previous question passes 
     the control of the resolution to the opposition'' in order to 
     offer an amendment. On March 15, 1909, a member of the 
     majority party offered a rule resolution. The House defeated 
     the previous question and a member of the opposition rose to 
     a parliamentary inquiry, asking who was entitled to 
     recognition. Speaker Joseph G. Cannon (R-Illinois) said: 
     ``The previous question having been refused, the gentleman 
     from New York, Mr. Fitzgerald, who had asked the gentleman to 
     yield to him for an amendment, is entitled to the first 
     recognition.''
       The Republican majority may say ``the vote on the previous 
     question is simply a vote on whether to proceed to an 
     immediate vote on adopting the resolution . . . [and] has no 
     substantive legislative or policy implications whatsoever.'' 
     But that is not what they have always said. Listen to the 
     Republican Leadership Manual on the Legislative Process in 
     the United States House of Representatives, (6th edition, 
     page 135). Here's how the Republicans describe the previous 
     question vote in their own manual: ``Although it is generally 
     not possible to amend the rule because the majority Member 
     controlling the time will not yield for the purpose of 
     offering an amendment, the same result may be achieved by 
     voting down the previous question on the rule. . . . When the 
     motion for the previous question is defeated, control of the 
     time passes to the Member who led the opposition to ordering 
     the previous question. That Member, because he then controls 
     the time, may offer an amendment to the rule, or yield for 
     the purpose of amendment.''
       In Deschler's Procedure in the U.S. House of 
     Representatives, the subchapter titled ``Amending Special 
     Rules'' states: ``a refusal to order the previous question on 
     such a rule [a special rule reported from the Committee on 
     Rules] opens the resolution to amendment and further 
     debate.'' (Chapter 21, section 21.2) Section 21.3 continues: 
     ``Upon rejection of the motion for the previous question on a 
     resolution reported from the Committee on Rules, control 
     shifts to the Member leading the opposition to the previous 
     question, who may offer a proper amendment or motion and who 
     controls the time for debate thereon.''
       Clearly, the vote on the previous question on a rule does 
     have substantive policy implications. It is one of the only 
     available tools for those who oppose the Republican 
     majority's agenda and allows those with alternative views the 
     opportunity to offer an alternative plan.

  Mr. BUCK. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I 
move the previous question on the resolution.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on ordering the previous 
question.
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the ayes appeared to have it.
  Mr. HASTINGS. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, further 
proceedings on this question will be postponed.

                          ____________________