[Congressional Record Volume 164, Number 131 (Friday, August 3, 2018)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages E1122-E1123]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




CONFERENCE REPORT ON H.R. 5515, NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR 
                            FISCAL YEAR 2019

                                 ______
                                 

                               speech of

                          HON. JEB HENSARLING

                                of texas

                    in the house of representatives

                        Thursday, July 26, 2018

  Mr. HENSARLING. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of the 
conference report and want to congratulate my friend and fellow Texan, 
Chairman Mac Thornberry for his leadership and hard work to get us to 
this point and his willingness to work with the Financial Services 
Committee on a number of provisions where we have shared jurisdiction.
  I wish to address one title in particular: the Foreign Investment 
Risk Review Modernization Act, or FIRRMA, which reforms the Committee 
on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS). FIRRMA represents 
the first significant update to CFIUS since passage of the Foreign 
Investment and National Security Act of 2007. In the intervening 11 
years, a number of gaps in CFIUS's jurisdiction have emerged that 
FIRRMA now seeks to close, particularly in the realm of sensitive non-
controlling investments and real estate transactions near national 
security-related sites.
  This is not to say that everything outside CFIUS's jurisdiction 
qualifies as a gap. Far from it. Although the House and Senate both 
produced their own versions of FIRRMA, the House approach was generally 
more cautious in the authorities it delegated to CFIUS. If CFIUS needed 
to review transactions that genuinely posed a national security risk, 
the House worked in good faith to determine which additional powers 
were called for, but also circumscribed those powers appropriately to 
prevent overreach and unintended consequences.
  The final version of FIRRMA adopts many important provisions from the 
House's bill (H.R. 5841), which passed this chamber in June by a vote 
of 400 to 2.
  For instance, the text that we have negotiated focuses on U.S. 
businesses that own, operate, or supply--and by ``supply,'' we mean 
provide--critical infrastructure, targeting specific information or 
influence that could be transferred. This approach is designed to 
prevent CFIUS from sweeping up entire economic sectors regardless of a 
business's connection to national security.

[[Page E1123]]

  Even within the scope of ``critical infrastructure,'' FIRRMA makes 
explicit that CFIUS is only to focus on the subset of systems and 
assets that are likely to be important to national security. There are 
technically a number of assets that fall within critical infrastructure 
sectors broadly, including everything from restaurants to amusement 
parks, but the bar for inclusion under FIRRMA is much higher. FIRRMA 
makes this clear.
  CFIUS must also limit its new jurisdiction to certain categories of 
investors, which is meant to include foreign persons connected with 
problematic countries. Those categories of foreign persons are not 
intended to target our allies.
  As under current law, CFIUS will continue to have jurisdiction over 
foreign investments in U.S. businesses when a transaction could result 
in control of the business. Under FIRRMA--and we have confirmed this 
point with the Treasury Department--CFIUS will continue to be limited 
to transactions involving a U.S. business only to the extent of its 
activities in interstate commerce.
  Finally, a key innovation originating in the House is the protection 
of sensitive personal data of U.S. citizens that may be exploited in a 
manner threatening national security. While some had sought to expand 
this language to include personally identifiable information more 
broadly, the conference committee rejected that approach in order to 
focus only on sensitive data with a clear link to national security.
  Again, the need for CFIUS modernization was clear, and the conference 
committee has worked to address it through FIRRMA. At the same time, we 
have ensured that expansions to CFIUS's jurisdiction are themselves 
appropriately limited in order to preserve our country's open 
investment climate. It is this openness to investment that drives 
forward our productivity, innovation, and growth, making openness 
itself indispensable to national security.
  I want to thank Members on both sides of the aisle who helped ensure 
that the will of the House was reflected in the conference report. I 
especially want to acknowledge the author of the House's CFIUS bill, 
Mr. Pittenger of North Carolina who has been a tireless advocate for 
reform, and my fellow conferees from the Financial Services Committee: 
the gentleman from Kentucky, Mr. Barr, who chairs our Monetary Policy 
and Trade Subcommittee, as well as the Ranking Member of the Full 
Committee, the gentle lady from California, Mrs. Waters. This 
legislation is narrowly focused on national security while keeping 
America's doors open to investment. For that reason, it deserves our 
support.

                          ____________________