[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 160 (2014), Part 12] [Issue] [Pages 16343-16449] [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov][[Page 16343]] VOLUME 160--PART 12 HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES--Tuesday, December 2, 2014 The House met at 10 a.m. and was called to order by the Speaker pro tempore (Mr. Stewart). ____________________ DESIGNATION OF SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE The SPEAKER pro tempore laid before the House the following communication from the Speaker: Washington, DC, December 2, 2014. I hereby appoint the Honorable Chris Stewart to act as Speaker pro tempore on this day. John A. Boehner, Speaker of the House of Representatives. ____________________ MORNING-HOUR DEBATE The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the order of the House of January 7, 2014, the Chair will now recognize Members from lists submitted by the majority and minority leaders for morning-hour debate. The Chair will alternate recognition between the parties, with each party limited to 1 hour and each Member other than the majority and minority leaders and the minority whip limited to 5 minutes, but in no event shall debate continue beyond 11:50 a.m. ____________________ SPECIAL IMMIGRANT VISA PROGRAM The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. Blumenauer) for 5 minutes. Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, one of our responsibilities in this Congress is to protect the men and women from Iraq and Afghanistan who put their lives on the line to assist the United States. Thousands of Afghans and Iraqis who helped us as guides, as interpreters, must not be left to the tender mercies of al Qaeda, the Taliban, and others with long memories who seek to punish those who helped us. Yesterday's Wall Street Journal had a front-page story about an Iraqi family that is caught in the bureaucratic pipeline for the families seeking safety after years of service and now facing intense threats against them. There was a recent HBO feature by comedian John Oliver on his program, ``Last Week Tonight,'' that, in graphic, satirical, somewhat profane terms, captured the essence of the bureaucratic nightmare faced by thousands in Iraq and Afghanistan. They and their family members are at risk of being assaulted, kidnapped, tortured, raped, or killed simply because they were there helping Americans. We are seeing some progress. I deeply appreciate the tireless efforts of Chairman Buck McKeon, Ranking Member Adam Smith, and their staff, the work on the National Defense Authorization Act, which will help us uphold commitments to our Afghan allies. However, all of us in Congress have a responsibility, and there is an opportunity for all of us to step up and help this desperate situation. Over the last 7 years, it has been a battle to have America honor its obligations by effectively implementing this Special Immigrant Visa program authorized by Congress to help those who helped us to escape. We are seeing the results of many on this floor who encourage the State Department to more aggressively implement this Special Immigration Visa program. The Afghan program went from an embarrassing 32 visas for all of 2012 to an average of 400 each month this year. This is due to enhanced oversight and pressure and cooperation from Congress. The program is now functioning at a level that almost allows us to keep our promises to our allies. One thing we all can do is to join me and my colleague, Adam Kinzinger, who has been a tireless champion for justice for these Afghan and Iraqi nationals, in directing a letter to our friends on the Appropriations Committee asking that they, like last year, authorize urgently needed Afghan SIVs in the end-of-the-year appropriations package that we will soon have here on the floor. We have stepped up before, but we need to avoid this Special Immigrant Visa roulette so that these people are not in limbo, or, worse, resigned to the hell inflicted on them by the Taliban in Afghanistan. Even with the leadership of the Armed Services Committee, we will still fall short of upholding our commitments for a need as great as 9,000 visas for Afghanistan alone. That is why our appropriators must help shoulder the responsibility, and they need to hear from us, every Member of Congress. It is our moral obligation to take action to protect, not just those people, but the security interests of the United States. It is not just their innocent lives that are at stake. Think about the trust that is going to be necessary when we need help in the future from foreign nationals for our soldiers, our diplomats, and our aid workers. Let's sign the letter. Let's all detail someone on every staff to pay attention to this issue. Add our voices. It is being done by the Armed Services Committee. Help the Appropriations Committee in this next critical step. It should not be left to a comedian like John Oliver, God bless him, to carry this banner alone. Sign the letter, speak out, take up the cause. We must not fail those who are at risk only because they believed our promises and they helped Americans in some of the most difficult circumstances we have ever asked our soldiers, diplomats, and aid workers to face. This is a failure we can avoid, and we can end this Congress on a positive note that can make everybody feel better as we approach the holiday season. ____________________ RECESS The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 12(a) of rule I, the Chair declares the House in recess until noon today. Accordingly (at 10 o'clock and 6 minutes a.m.), the House stood in recess. [[Page 16344]] ____________________ {time} 1200 AFTER RECESS The recess having expired, the House was called to order by the Speaker pro tempore (Mr. Gardner) at noon. ____________________ PRAYER Reverend Dr. David Gray, Bradley Hills Presbyterian Church, Bethesda, Maryland, offered the following prayer: Gracious God, Your love is never ending. In these hallowed Halls, Your sovereign spirit comes to us, calms us, calls us, and infuses us with Your grace. Give us strength this day to look outside ourselves for the opportunities which come from connection and collaboration. Give us faith to bring our best selves and to seek Your will. Give us confidence that solutions can be found and problems solved. Grant us gratitude for the trust placed in us, for the privilege of living in this free land, and for Your presence here with us. Allow us to rest in and rely on Your hope-filled spirit. Loving God, we ask Your blessing upon this body and all who gather here. Help us to receive Your assurance, Your encouragement, Your wisdom, and Your inspiration for the tasks to which we have been called. We pray this day. Amen. ____________________ THE JOURNAL The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair has examined the Journal of the last day's proceedings and announces to the House his approval thereof. Pursuant to clause 1, rule I, the Journal stands approved. ____________________ PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The SPEAKER pro tempore. Will the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Pitts) come forward and lead the House in the Pledge of Allegiance. Mr. PITTS led the Pledge of Allegiance as follows: I pledge allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America, and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. ____________________ WELCOMING REVEREND DR. DAVID GRAY The SPEAKER pro tempore. Without objection, the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Turner) is recognized for 1 minute. There was no objection. Mr. TURNER. Mr. Speaker, I am honored to welcome my good friend Pastor David Gray as our guest chaplain today. Born in Dayton, Ohio, Pastor Gray grew up active in the Presbyterian church and has gone on to lead a distinguished life of service. Holding both a law degree and a doctorate of ministry, Pastor Gray is a former public servant, having served as a staffer in the Senate and a true spiritual leader that has helped numerous individuals and families grow in their relationship with God. Currently, Pastor Gray serves as the head pastor at Bradley Hills Church and resides in Bethesda, Maryland, with his wife, Bridget, and their four children. On behalf of the United States Congress and the people of his hometown in my district of the 10th Congressional District of Ohio, I want to thank Pastor Gray for his commitment to his faith and for opening the House today with his prayer. ____________________ ANNOUNCEMENT BY THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair will entertain up to 15 further requests for 1-minute speeches on each side of the aisle. ____________________ CALIFORNIA ABORTION MANDATE (Mr. PITTS asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.) Mr. PITTS. Mr. Speaker, we have seen this administration casually ignore the law when it comes to immigration, EPA regs, and ObamaCare. Now, we are going to see whether they ignore the law when it comes to forcing churches in California to pay for abortion. For many years now, Congress has included language in the appropriations bills that prohibits States from forcing health insurance plans to cover elective abortion: the Weldon amendment, named for my good friend and former colleague, Dr. Dave Weldon of Florida. Now, the State of California has issued a bureaucratic edict that every health insurance plan in California regulated by the State must pay for the procedure, and this includes even plans purchased by churches, religious schools, and charities. HHS must not hesitate to protect the right of Americans to prevent their health care dollars from going to something they find to be profoundly immoral. The agency is required to inform the State of California of this violation and remind them that they risk the loss of Federal funds. There doesn't need to be any delay from HHS. This is exactly why the Weldon amendment was created. ____________________ FUNDING FOR ALZHEIMER'S DISEASE RESEARCH (Mr. QUIGLEY asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.) Mr. QUIGLEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of funding for Alzheimer's disease research. Alzheimer's is a particularly devastating disease both for the patients and their families. Families watch their loved ones effectively disappear before their eyes. There are currently more than 5 million Americans suffering from this disease, with one American being diagnosed every 67 seconds. We must take preventive actions to address the growing population of Alzheimer's patients in this country. In the fiscal year 2015 appropriations process, I urge my colleagues to support increased funding for this research. This research will help find ways to prevent, treat, and even slow the progression of the disease, helping to ease the burden on patients, caregivers, and the Medicare system. Congress must continue its commitment to fight against Alzheimer's by providing this crucial funding. ____________________ ECONOMY (Ms. FOXX asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute.) Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, many North Carolina families know all too well of the struggle to find a job and pay the bills. Some are facing these challenges right now, and we all have family members, neighbors, or friends who are facing hard choices to make ends meet. Back home, I am often asked what Congress is doing to help people back to work and restore opportunity for everyone. For the last 2 years, the House has passed numerous pieces of legislation to encourage job growth and strengthen America's standing in the global economy. We have also passed bills that would decrease energy costs, that would allow workers to have more flexibility in order to spend time with their families, and that would increase transparency in how tax dollars are spent. While Congress cannot create prosperity, we can work to ensure entrepreneurs and employers aren't crushed under red tape. The 114th Congress is a fresh opportunity to help put more Americans back to work and to improve our economy. I look forward to working with the new majority in the Senate to accomplish those goals. ____________________ CONGRESS HAS YET TO TAKE UP THE BIG QUESTIONS FACING THE AMERICAN PEOPLE (Mr. KILDEE asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute.) Mr. KILDEE. Mr. Speaker, here we are just a few days short of the end of [[Page 16345]] the 113th Congress, and this Congress has yet to take up the big questions facing the American people. We are 10 days away from a budget deadline, and there is still talk among some on the other side of using the sanctity of the budget--the economy of this country--as a tool to fight against actions taken by this President that the Congress, itself, is unwilling to take up. Rather than taking up unemployment insurance, for example, despite the fact that we have seen a significant reduction in unemployment across the country--in my home State, unemployment is still above 7 percent--we haven't taken that up. Instead of taking up the jobs program, like our Make It In America agenda, which would reenergize our manufacturing sector, we have set that aside and haven't taken it up. Instead of taking up the very subject that has driven some to threaten to shut down government--comprehensive immigration reform--we haven't even seen a bill come to the floor of the House--not the Senate bill, not another bill--that even the Republicans, themselves, could put together. While we talk a good game about being willing to take on these big questions, when it comes time to put something on the floor for us to legislate, to vote on, we see no action at all. ____________________ UNESCO (Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend her remarks.) Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Mr. Speaker, when UNESCO admitted a nonexistent State of Palestine to its membership, it did so knowing U.S. law prohibits funding to any entity at the U.N. that grants the PLO the same status as other member states. The members of UNESCO also knew that admitting the so-called Palestine would have a negative impact on the future of the Israeli- Palestinian peace process; yet they enthusiastically welcomed Abu Mazen at UNESCO. The only explanation for UNESCO's willingness to allow these consequences to pass is that its members view the delegitimizing of Israel as its mission. They view helping Abu Mazen to unilaterally establish the de facto recognition for a Palestinian state as a worthy means to an end. We must not only block any attempt by the administration to restore funding to this entity which clearly has an agenda opposite to America's interests, but we must also work to block Abu Mazen's attempts at the U.N. to bypass his obligations to Israel by continuing his unilateral statehood scheme. ____________________ HONORING THE LIFE OF FORMER CONGRESSMAN JOHN KREBS (Mr. COSTA asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.) Mr. COSTA. Mr. Speaker, it is with sadness that I rise today to honor the life of former Congressman John Krebs. John was a close friend and a mentor. As a young immigrant to the United States from Tel Aviv, John was able to live the American Dream and much more. He serves as an inspiration for all of those who knew him. John served in the United States House of Representatives from 1975 to 1979. One of his proudest legislative accomplishments was incorporating the Mineral King Valley into the Sequoia National Park. In 2009, President Obama recognized John for his efforts, and he signed legislation establishing the John Krebs Wilderness area which covers 40,000 acres within Mineral King Valley. Mr. Krebs was a community leader and was active in the Democratic Party, playing key roles in both local and statewide campaigns throughout California. John will be greatly missed by his wife, Hanna; by his son, Daniel, and his wife, Susan; by his daughter, Karen, and her husband, John; and by his grandchildren, Elizabeth, Caroline, Jack, Clay, and Peter. John's strong values, work ethic, and compassion for others were evident to all who knew him and were fortunate to work with him. It is with great respect that I ask my colleagues in the United States House of Representatives to honor the life of former Congressman John Krebs, my good friend. ____________________ IN MEMORY OF EDWIN TUBBS (Mr. THOMPSON of Pennsylvania asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.) Mr. THOMPSON of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, today, the community of Coudersport, Potter County, Pennsylvania, will honor Private Edwin Franklin Tubbs, an American hero who sacrificed his life in defense of our Nation during the Vietnam war. Private Tubbs was deployed to Vietnam on December 4, 1968. Just 5 weeks later, on January 12, 1969, he was fatally wounded as he set down his rifle to assist a friend who was injured on the battlefield. With the dedication of the Private Edwin Tubbs Memorial at the West Chestnut Street Bridge, followed by one more dedication later this year, Potter County will have memorialized all nine of the county's Vietnam war casualties with specifically named bridges. On behalf of this community, I offer my thoughts and prayers as we reflect on the unique life and selfless service of Private Tubbs. While there is nothing that can be done or said to eliminate the sense of loss felt by family members and friends, today's dedication is one small token of appreciation for this hero's honored service to our country. ____________________ ASSURING A NEW ERA BETWEEN CITIZENS AND POLICE (Ms. NORTON asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend her remarks.) Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, a new generation of young people of every race is demonstrating nonviolently to make sure that the larger meaning of the Michael Brown tragedy is not lost. His death has become much more than a moment of anguish. Michael Brown has crystallized the painful experience that had found no outlet until now: the routine stops of Black men by police in the streets of our country because of the color of their skin. The body-mounted cameras, announced by the President yesterday, are a good and practical beginning. Let's hope that local communities will use this tragedy to assure a new era of genuine collaboration that citizens need with the police who serve and protect them. ____________________ {time} 1215 NUCLEAR NEGOTIATIONS WITH IRAN (Mrs. WAGNER asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend her remarks.) Mrs. WAGNER. Mr. Speaker, I come to the floor today to speak about one of our greatest national security challenges: the threat of a nuclear-armed Iran. I am deeply troubled by the Obama administration's recent 7-month extension of nuclear negotiations with Iran. The extension means that Iran will continue to have access to $700 million a month in sanctions relief. Every day that we continue these talks is another day given to Iran to develop a nuclear weapon. A nuclear-armed Iran would start a new arms race in the Middle East and pose an intolerable threat to the national security of the United States and our allies, especially Israel. The House has passed H.R. 850, the Nuclear Iran Prevention Act, which would increase sanctions on the Iranian regime. Now it is time for the United States Senate to do its part and pass legislation that would impose additional sanctions on Iran. ____________________ HANDS UP; DON'T SHOOT (Mr. AL GREEN of Texas asked and was given permission to address the [[Page 16346]] House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.) Mr. AL GREEN of Texas. Mr. Speaker, on Sunday, November 30, we had a seminal moment occur in the history of our country. When those football players came out and held their hands up, they were speaking to the masses; and they were using these words, ``Hands up; don't shoot,'' in this symbolism. I believe so strongly in what they have done that I will have flags flown over the Capitol of the United States of America in honor of each of those players, and I will pay for the flags with my personal U.S. dollars. I also want to mention something that happened this morning on the Morning Joe show. The question was posed: ``What is wrong with these people? Don't they know that this is a lie?'' meaning what happened in Ferguson in terms of the hands up; don't shoot. I want to tell you what is wrong with these people. These people refuse to accept an invidious whitewash. I will say more about this tomorrow when I will have 5 minutes around 10 a.m. or sometime shortly thereafter, because I want the American people to know that there are some people who are willing to take a stand. ____________________ WE MUST ACT NOW TO INCREASE SANCTIONS ON IRAN (Mr. MARCHANT asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute.) Mr. MARCHANT. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to call attention to the administration's recent decision to extend talks with Iran into 2015. Iran is simply stalling and buying time, time that we and our closest ally in the region, Israel, do not have. Many months ago, when sanctions were starting to have an impact on Iran, the administration relaxed them. All we have to show for these weakened sanctions is months of stalled talks. It is long overdue to increase the pressure on Iran. I call for new and immediate sanctions with the teeth to force Iran to give up its nuclear ambitions. Without new pressures, Iran won't see any reason to change its current course. Congress must act now in increasing sanctions to prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons. ____________________ DELIVERING RESULTS TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE (Mrs. DAVIS of California asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute.) Mrs. DAVIS of California. Mr. Speaker, yesterday a reporter asked me to comment on whether Speaker Boehner will be able to make his mark in the next Congress, with the largest House majority for his party since 1929. My thoughts: stand and deliver. If the Speaker wants to work, there is nothing stopping him. Democrats stand ready to work with him to tackle many of the challenges facing American families. In many ways, our economy has shown incredible resilience of late. GDP and job growth are up, but, unfortunately, many still don't feel like things are getting any better. It is long past time that we come together and enact policies that will help hardworking families instead of pandering to special interests. This election saw the worst voter turnout in 72 years because Americans didn't think we could get anything done for them. Let's show that we can. I hope we will use the remaining weeks in this Congress to show that we are capable of delivering results to the American people. ____________________ ACHIEVING BETTER LIFE EXPERIENCE ACT (Mr. YODER asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.) Mr. YODER. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of the Achieving Better Life Experience Act, commonly known as the ABLE Act. In our Nation, we believe that everyone should have the opportunity to realize their dreams, that each American should be able to have the tools and capabilities to build a bright future. Yet millions of families in our country struggle with the challenges of raising children with special needs like autism and Down syndrome. The ABLE Act doesn't put more burdens on the government or grow bureaucratic Federal programs; rather, it provides families with the opportunity to invest their own earnings in the care for their disabled children, like education, transportation, and other tools that help prepare their children for a future of independent living, without having to be taxed on those savings. These flexible savings tools will help families maintain greater financial security as they strive to raise their children to contribute to society in productive ways. Mr. Speaker, I am proud to join my colleagues in the House to stand up for these families, like Rachel Mast and her family in Kansas, to ensure that we do everything to fight for their future, too. ____________________ TERRORISM RISK INSURANCE ACT (Mrs. CAROLYN B. MALONEY of New York asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute.) Mrs. CAROLYN B. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, after 9/11, this Congress came together, and we came together to put our economy back on track. We passed TRIA, the Terrorism Risk Insurance Act. Now TRIA is set to expire in just 4 weeks, and we desperately need a long-term reauthorization of this important economic tool that has brought stability to businesses and to our economy. We cannot kick the can down the road again by pushing a short-term extension of TRIA. In fact, just last night, 45 Republicans signed a letter opposing a short-term extension of TRIA. All of the Democrats already oppose an extension of a short-term reauthorization of TRIA. This united position should take the issue off the table. While some Members have insisted that the House can't waive the CutGo rule to pass TRIA, I think it is important to note that the House has waived it 18 times; and we traditionally waive it for emergency spending, which is what TRIA is: spending in the wake of a terrorist attack. Please come together and pass a long-term reauthorization for our economic growth. ____________________ POLICE TRAINING (Ms. JACKSON LEE asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute.) Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, in the wake of Trayvon Martin's tragic death, the Nation waits. Young people wait. I could give a long litany. But certainly Michael Brown has galvanized us from north to south, from east to west. I stand with the young men, among many others, of the St. Louis Rams and the young people that I have seen taking to the streets nonviolently, peacefully. Today I rise to thank them and to applaud them as Americans deserving of honor and respect. But they wait. So I believe that it is important that we work with those who are assigned and in uniform to protect and serve. As a member of the House Judiciary Committee, I have stood alongside law enforcement, but now it is important that we realize that the system is not cracked but broken. There must be a complete overhaul of the training of local police in the nooks and crannies of America. There must be a reform of the system which provides the funding to local jurisdictions simply by traffic stops and foot citations. That is what geared Officer Wilson in the wrong direction. And finally, Mr. Speaker, there must be training to protect officers but to know when to use deadly force. Deadly force was not warranted; it was not required in the life and the loss of Michael Brown. There must be solutions, Mr. Speaker, for those young people that are out in the streets protesting. We cannot have a lopsided justice system. [[Page 16347]] ____________________ COMMUNICATION FROM THE CLERK OF THE HOUSE The SPEAKER pro tempore laid before the House the following communication from the Clerk of the House of Representatives: Office of the Clerk, House of Representatives, Washington, DC, December 2, 2014. Hon. John A. Boehner, The Speaker, House of Representatives, Washington, DC. Dear Mr. Speaker: Pursuant to the permission granted in Clause 2(h) of Rule II of the Rules of the U.S. House of Representatives, the Clerk received the following message from the Secretary of the Senate on December 2, 2014 at 11:03 a.m.: That the Senate passed without amendment H.R. 2203. With best wishes, I am Sincerely, Karen L. Haas. ____________________ ANNOUNCEMENT BY THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, the Chair will postpone further proceedings today on motions to suspend the rules on which a recorded vote or the yeas and nays are ordered, or on which the vote incurs objection under clause 6 of rule XX. Record votes on postponed questions will be taken later. ____________________ PEST MANAGEMENT RECORDS MODERNIZATION ACT Mr. THOMPSON of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 5714) to permit commercial applicators of pesticides to create, retain, submit, and convey pesticide application- related records, reports, data, and other information in electronic form. The Clerk read the title of the bill. The text of the bill is as follows: H.R. 5714 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. This Act may be cited as the ``Pest Management Records Modernization Act''. SEC. 2. USE OF ELECTRONIC RECORDS BY COMMERCIAL APPLICATORS OF PESTICIDES TO COMPLY WITH RECORDKEEPING AND REPORTING REQUIREMENTS. Section 1491 of the Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act of 1990 (7 U.S.C. 136i-1) is amended by adding at the end the following new subsection: ``(h) Electronic Recordkeeping and Reporting.-- Notwithstanding any contrary provision of Federal, State, or local law, commercial applicators of pesticides, including commercial applicators of restricted use pesticides, may create, retain, submit, and convey a pesticide application- related record, report, data, or other information in electronic form in order to satisfy any requirement for such creation, retention, submission, or conveyance, respectively, under any Federal, State, or local law.''. The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Thompson) and the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Walz) each will control 20 minutes. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Pennsylvania. General Leave Mr. THOMPSON of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks on the bill, H.R. 5714. The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Pennsylvania? There was no objection. Mr. THOMPSON of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself as much time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my good friend from Minnesota (Mr. Walz) for being here to help with this bill today. I also want to thank my good friend and colleague from Oregon, Representative Kurt Schrader, for his leadership on this important piece of legislation. I rise today in support of H.R. 5714, the Pest Management Records Modernization Act. Under the current law, the United States Department of Agriculture requires businesses that apply pesticides to maintain and provide access to records on their use, including the product name, amount, approximate date of application, and the location of application of each pesticide used. While most States allow pesticide applicator businesses to convey information electronically to customers as a way to comply with consumer information requirements, a few States still require that the information be provided in paper or hard copy format. The challenge posed to the industry is not the longstanding consumer information requirements themselves but, rather, the very limited transmission options in certain States. Today, businesses in virtually all sectors of the economy are going paperless as a way to save costs, increase efficiencies, and, yes, fulfill the range of local, State, and Federal regulatory requirements in a timely and proficient manner. Unfortunately, the transition to a paperless office for many pest management and other pesticide applicator businesses is more difficult than anticipated because of the decades-old State consumer information requirements that mandate transmission of such documents be via paper or hard copy. These requirements are especially disruptive for paperless companies that operate in multiple States, some of which permit electronic conveyance of the required information and others that don't. The USDA permits records to be retained and conveyed electronically for restricted use pesticide applications. Unfortunately, the overwhelming majority of treatments performed by pest management professionals are general use pesticides. The Pest Management Records Modernization Act is a commonsense change to existing law that will allow commercial applicators of pesticides to create, retain, and submit pesticide application-related records, reports, and other information in electronic form. As a member of the House Agriculture Committee, I am proud to be an original cosponsor of H.R. 5714, the Pest Management Records Modernization Act. I urge my colleagues to support passage of this bipartisan legislation, and I reserve the balance of my time. Mr. WALZ. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself as much time as I may consume. I want to thank my friend from Pennsylvania for his remarks and for clearly stating this commonsense piece of legislation and for his support of it. I, too, would like to thank the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. Schrader). He is the author of this piece of legislation. Something we have come to expect from Mr. Schrader is a commonsense, bipartisan piece of legislation. {time} 1230 H.R. 5714, the Pest Management Records Modernization Act, is pro- small business and pro-consumer. It improves the ability of pest management companies to communicate important information with their customers related to the products they use. As you heard from the gentleman from Pennsylvania, most States require pest management and other applicator companies to provide customers with information related to pest treatments, either automatically or upon request. Most of the requirements are implemented and enforced by State departments of agriculture, which are the State pesticide regulatory agency in 40 States. The required information is typically information directly from the pesticide label. The overwhelming majority of treatments performed by pest management professionals involve general use pesticides. Right now about 45 States permit electronic conveyance of this information directly to consumers. In fact, in the last 2 years, the States of California, Georgia, Wisconsin, Kansas, and Arizona have recognized the need to update their respective laws related to disclosure and passed legislation or taken administrative actions permitting electronic conveyance of pesticide application information. Like businesses in countless sectors of the economy, professional pest management and other pest applicator businesses are going paperless as a way to save costs and increase efficiencies. Going paperless allows businesses to back up and better safeguard data and [[Page 16348]] records in case of a fire, flood, or other disasters. It also makes it easier to prove compliance with various recordkeeping, reporting, and related requirements, plus it has the added advantage of being greener and more environmentally sound. Unfortunately, the transition to a paperless office for many pest management and other pesticide applicator businesses is more difficult than anticipated because of antiquated State consumer information requirements from the 1970s and '80s that mandated transmission of such documents be via hard copies or paper and do not permit electronic conveyance. These requirements are especially disruptive for companies that have made the transition to paperless that operate in multiple States, some of which permit electronic conveyance and others that don't. It is important to note H.R. 5714 does not put any new mandates on small businesses but, rather, provides them the ability to electronically convey information in the handful of States that have not yet addressed this in a changing e-commerce environment. As I have said previously, and as my friend from Pennsylvania stated, H.R. 5714 is commonsense, it is bipartisan, it is pro-consumer, and it is pro-small business. It deserves our support, and I encourage everyone to make its swift passage possible. With that, Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time. Mr. THOMPSON of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Minnesota for his remarks and encourage my colleagues to support passage of this important piece of legislation. I have no further comments or speakers on this bill, and I yield back the balance of my time. Mr. WALZ. Mr. Speaker, I also yield back the balance of my time. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Thompson) that the House suspend the rules and pass the bill, H.R. 5714. The question was taken; and (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the rules were suspended and the bill was passed. A motion to reconsider was laid on the table. ____________________ NO SOCIAL SECURITY FOR NAZIS ACT Mr. SAM JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 5739) to amend the Social Security Act to provide for the termination of social security benefits for individuals who participated in Nazi persecution, and for other purposes. The Clerk read the title of the bill. The text of the bill is as follows: H.R. 5739 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. This Act may be cited as the ``No Social Security for Nazis Act''. SEC. 2. FINDINGS. Congress finds the following: (1) Congress enacted social security legislation to provide earned benefits for workers and their families, should they retire, become disabled, or die. (2) Congress never intended for participants in Nazi persecution to be allowed to enter the United States or to reap the benefits of United States residency or citizenship, including participation in the Nation's Social Security program. SEC. 3. TERMINATION OF BENEFITS. (a) In General.--Section 202(n)(3) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 402(n)(3)) is amended to read as follows: ``(3) For purposes of paragraphs (1) and (2) of this subsection-- ``(A) an individual against whom a final order of removal has been issued under section 237(a)(4)(D) of the Immigration and Nationality Act on grounds of participation in Nazi persecution shall be considered to have been removed under such section as of the date on which such order became final; ``(B) an individual with respect to whom an order admitting the individual to citizenship has been revoked and set aside under section 340 of the Immigration and Nationality Act in any case in which the revocation and setting aside is based on conduct described in section 212(a)(3)(E)(i) of such Act (relating to participation in Nazi persecution), concealment of a material fact about such conduct, or willful misrepresentation about such conduct shall be considered to have been removed as described in paragraph (1) as of the date of such revocation and setting aside; and ``(C) an individual who pursuant to a settlement agreement with the Attorney General has admitted to conduct described in section 212(a)(3)(E)(i) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (relating to participation in Nazi persecution) and who pursuant to such settlement agreement has lost status as a national of the United States by a renunciation under section 349(a)(5) of the Immigration and Nationality Act shall be considered to have been removed as described in paragraph (1) as of the date of such renunciation.''. (b) Other Benefits.--Section 202(n) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 402(n)) is amended by adding at the end the following: ``(4) In the case of any individual described in paragraph (3) whose monthly benefits are terminated under paragraph (1)-- ``(A) no benefits otherwise available under section 202 based on the wages and self-employment income of any other individual shall be paid to such individual for any month after such termination; and ``(B) no supplemental security income benefits under title XVI shall be paid to such individual for any such month, including supplementary payments pursuant to an agreement for Federal administration under section 1616(a) and payments pursuant to an agreement entered into under section 212(b) of Public Law 93-66''. SEC. 4. NOTIFICATIONS. Section 202(n)(2) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 402(n)(2)) is amended to read as follows: ``(2)(A) In the case of the removal of any individual under any of the paragraphs of section 237(a) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (other than under paragraph (1)(C) of such section) or under section 212(a)(6)(A) of such Act, the revocation and setting aside of citizenship of any individual under section 340 of the Immigration and Nationality Act in any case in which the revocation and setting aside is based on conduct described in section 212(a)(3)(E)(i) of such Act (relating to participation in Nazi persecution), or the renunciation of nationality by any individual under section 349(a)(5) of such Act pursuant to a settlement agreement with the Attorney General where the individual has admitted to conduct described in section 212(a)(3)(E)(i) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (relating to participation in Nazi persecution) occurring after the date of the enactment of the No Social Security for Nazis Act, the Attorney General or the Secretary of Homeland Security shall notify the Commissioner of Social Security of such removal, revocation and setting aside, or renunciation of nationality not later than 7 days after such removal, revocation and setting aside, or renunciation of nationality (or, in the case of any such removal, revocation and setting aside, of renunciation of nationality that has occurred prior to the date of the enactment of the No Social Security for Nazis Act, not later than 7 days after such date of enactment). ``(B)(i) Not later than 30 days after the enactment of the No Social Security for Nazis Act, the Attorney General shall certify to the Committee on Ways and Means of the House of Representatives and the Committee on Finance of the Senate that the Commissioner of Social Security has been notified of each removal, revocation and setting aside, or renunciation of nationality described in subparagraph (A). ``(ii) Not later than 30 days after each notification with respect to an individual under subparagraph (A), the Commissioner of Social Security shall certify to the Committee on Ways and Means of the House of Representatives and the Committee on Finance of the Senate that such individual's benefits were terminated under this subsection.''. SEC. 5. EFFECTIVE DATE. The amendments made by this Act shall apply with respect to benefits paid for any month beginning after the date of the enactment of this Act. The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Sam Johnson) and the gentleman from California (Mr. Becerra) each will control 20 minutes. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas. General Leave Mr. SAM JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and insert extraneous materials in the Record. The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Texas? There was no objection. Mr. SAM JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, today I rise as chairman of the Ways and Means Subcommittee on Social Security--the committee of jurisdiction over Social Security benefits--in support of the No [[Page 16349]] Social Security for Nazis Act, legislation I introduced along with Ranking Member Xavier Becerra. The world must never forget the 6 million Jews and other innocents murdered in the Holocaust. America has worked hard to prevent Nazis from entering the country and reaping the benefits of U.S. citizenship, including Social Security. Social Security is an earned benefit. Hardworking Americans pay a portion of their wages for promises of future benefits. However, it is a benefit that was never intended for those who participated in the horrific acts of the Holocaust. Under the Social Security Act, Social Security benefits are terminated when individuals are deported due to participating in Nazi persecutions. Some individuals whom the Department of Justice identified as Nazi persecutors were denaturalized or voluntarily renounced their citizenship and left the country to avoid formal deportation proceedings. However, due to a loophole, certain Nazi persecutors have continued to receive Social Security benefits. Today we will put an end to this loophole. The bill amends the law to stop benefit payments to those denaturalized due to participation in Nazi persecutions or who voluntarily renounced their citizenship as part of a settlement with the Attorney General related to participating in Nazi persecution. The bill also makes sure that these individuals do not receive spousal benefits due to a marriage to a Social Security beneficiary. Lastly, the bill requires the Attorney General to certify to the Ways and Means Committee and Finance Committee that Social Security has been notified of all those whose benefits should be terminated due to participation in Nazi persecutions. It also requires the Commissioner of Social Security to certify that benefits were terminated. This legislation is currently cosponsored by over 47 Members of the Congress. Also, letters of support have been received from some of the following organizations: The Association of Mature American Citizens, B'nai B'rith International, Jewish Federations of North America, J Street, National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare, Republican Jewish Coalition, Strengthen Social Security Coalition, and the Zionist Organization of America. Mr. Speaker, I insert these letters in the Record as well. American Jewish Committee, Global Jewish Advocacy, Washington, DC, November 24, 2014. Dear Chairman Johnson and Ranking Member Becerra, I write on behalf of AJC, the global Jewish advocacy organization, to urge your support of legislation to deny federal benefits to individuals who participated in Nazi persecution. There are two House measures that seek to accomplish this: the Nazi Social Security Benefits Termination Act of 2014, introduced by Representatives Carolyn Maloney, Leonard Lance, and Jason Chaffetz, and the No Social Security for Nazis Act, introduced by Representatives Sam Johnson and Xavier Becerra. For many years, Nazi extermination camp personnel and others who found refuge in the United States after World War II--individuals who perpetrated some of the worst crimes known to humanity, including the execution of millions of innocent civilians--have received various benefits, including Social Security payments, from the United States government. While the number of Nazi recipients of Social Security payments may not be large, the continuance of this practice is an intolerable insult to those, living and dead, who suffered at the hands of the Nazis, is an affront to American taxpayers, and contradicts our nation's core values. The Nazi Social Security Benefits Termination Act will deny receipt of federal benefits to those who were accused of taking part in Nazi criminal acts and were either stripped of their citizenship or voluntarily renounced it. The No Social Security for Nazis Act amends the Social Security Act to cease payments to those stripped of U.S. citizenship as a result of participation in Nazi activities, and those who voluntarily renounced citizenship due to such participation. The United States should not be lending material support to individuals whose crimes were so egregious that a new word had to be coined to describe them: genocide. On behalf of AJC, I urge you to support legislation to deny federal benefits to individuals who participated in Nazi persecution. Thank you for considering our views on this important matter. Respectfully, Jason Isaacson. ____ Association of Mature American Citizens, November 20, 2014. Hon. Sam Johnson, House of Representatives, Longworth House Office Building, Washington, DC. Hon. Orrin Hatch, U.S. Senate, Hart Senate Office Building, Washington, DC. Hon. Xavier Becerra, House of Representatives, Longworth House Office Building, Washington, DC. Hon. Ron Wyden, U.S. Senate, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Washington, DC. Dear Representatives Johnson and Becerra and Senators Hatch and Wyden, on behalf of the 1.2 million members of AMAC, the Association of Mature American Citizens, I am writing in strong support of the ``No Social Security for Nazis Act.'' This critical bipartisan, bicameral bill is needed to address a loophole in the law that has enabled Holocaust perpetrators to wrongly collect Social Security benefits at the expense of American taxpayers and seniors. The World must never forget the atrocities committed by the Nazis or the millions of innocent Jews that were callously murdered during the Holocaust. For that reason, Congress has a responsibility to ensure that war criminals no longer benefit from U.S. government programs. Therefore, the ``No Social Security for Nazis Act'' justly amends the Social Security Act and puts an end to Nazis receiving Social Security payouts. On a broader scale, AMAC believes it is imperative for Congress to continue to protect Social Security for rightful beneficiaries. Mature Americans and seniors overwhelmingly depend on Social Security to help supplement their retirement income; yet, according to the Trustees of Social Security, the program remains at risk of becoming insolvent by 2030. Clearly, Social Security cannot sustain its current fiscal path without comprehensive reform. AMAC strongly urges Congress to take immediate action to save Social Security and to guarantee its existence for future generations of hard- working Americans. Although Social Security as a whole is in need of real legislative attention, AMAC is proud to see Congress working together on this particular issue to right a terrible wrong. Thanks to your concern for this significant matter, AMAC is pleased to support the ``No Social Security for Nazis Act.'' Sincerely, Dan Weber, President and Founder of AMAC. ____ B'nai B'rith International, November 24, 2014. Hon. Sam Johnson, Washington, DC. Hon. Xavier Becerra, Washington, DC. Dear Chairman Johnson and Ranking Member Becerra: On behalf of B'nai B'rith International's hundreds of thousands of members and supporters, we write to express our support for your bill, H.R. 5739, the ``No Social Security for Nazis Act.'' This bill, which amends the Social Security Act, will end Social Security payments to Nazi perpetrators who denaturalized and left the country many years ago as a result of their Nazi pasts. This important change in the law will treat this subgroup of Nazis in the same way as deported Nazis--who are already barred from receiving Social Security benefits. We appreciate the deliberation and care that has gone into this process, and the many members of both houses of Congress who have worked in recent weeks to address this issue. The ``No Social Security for Nazis Act'' will accomplish our shared goal of ending the payments while amending the Social Security statute directly, thereby ensuring that the many facets of social security benefit access are treated properly. Although Social Security is an earned benefit for American workers, this change would apply only to individuals who misrepresented their pasts when entering this country and applying for citizenship. Nazi perpetrators should not be allowed to continue to benefit from the lies they told long ago. Those who have so defiled the most basic of social contracts should not be allowed to receive these benefits any longer. We believe this step is necessary and appropriate, and encourage both houses of Congress to take up these bills expeditiously. We thank you for your leadership on this matter and urge each Member of Congress to join you in quickly enacting this legislation. Sincerely, Allan J. Jacobs, President. Daniel S. Mariaschin, Executive Vice President. [[Page 16350]] ____ The Jewish Federations' of North America, November 24, 2014. Hon. Sam Johnson, Chairman; Hon. Xavier Becerra, Ranking Member, Committee on Ways and Means Social Security Subcommittee, Washington, DC. Dear Chairman Johnson and Ranking Member Becerra: We write to express our support for your leadership in introducing H.R. 5739, legislation that would terminate Social Security benefits for Nazi persecutors who receive such benefits because of a loophole in current law. The Jewish Federations of North America (``JFNA'') is the national organization that represents 153 Jewish Federations, and 300 independent network communities that are the umbrella fundraising organization as well as the central planning and coordinating body for an extensive network of Jewish health, education, and social service agencies. The JFNA system raises and allocates funds for almost one thousand affiliated agencies that provide needed services to almost one million individuals throughout the country. As an organization that has been a tireless advocate to secure and provide needed support for the over 100,000 Holocaust survivors in the U.S. JFNA applauds your efforts to end benefits for war criminals that persecuted millions of innocents during the Holocaust. It is encouraging that so many of your colleagues have joined in your effort to close this egregious loophole in current law. We will urge all of our partners in the Jewish community to work with you to ensure that H.R. 5739 is enacted during this legislative session. Sincerely yours, William C. Daroff, Senior Vice President for Public Policy and Director of the Washington Office. ____ J Street. J Street applauds the introduction of the No Social Security for Nazis Act (H.R. 5739), led by Chairman Sam Johnson (R-TX-3) and Ranking Member Xavier Becerra (D-CA-34), which would change the Social Security Act to prevent those who participated in Nazi persecution from receiving social security benefits. We commend the strong bipartisan support for the bill and urge its swift passage by Congress. ____ National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare, Washington, DC, November 20, 2014. Hon. Sam Johnson, Longworth House Office Building, Washington, DC. Dear Chairman Johnson: On behalf of the millions of members and supporters of the National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare, I am writing to express our support of your bill, H.R. 5739, the ``No Social Security for Nazis Act.'' This bill amends the Social Security Act to close a loophole that allows some Nazis who gained U.S. citizenship through fraud and deception to continue receiving Social Security benefits even though they have been stripped of their citizenship and have been removed from our country. While the individuals who will be affected by this bill worked and contributed to Social Security, they gained the right to do so by lying on their applications for citizenship about the nature of their roles in the Nazi holocaust during World War II. These war criminals should not be allowed to continue to reap the fruits of their dishonesty, and on behalf of all of our members, we commend you for your leadership in bringing this travesty to an end. We urge all Members of Congress to join you in enacting this important legislation. Sincerely, Max Richtman, President and CEO. ____ Republican Jewish Coalition, Washington, DC, November 24, 2014. Hon. Sam Johnson, Chairman, House Subcommittee on Social Security, House of Representatives, Washington, DC. Dear Chairman Johnson: I'm writing to thank you for introducing H.R. 5732, the No Social Security for Nazis Act, and to encourage you and your colleagues on the House Ways and Means committee to press for enactment of legislation to close this newly discovered loophole in current law this year. As you've noted, during prior Congresses, action had been taken to cancel Social Security benefits for individuals determined to have participated in Nazi war crimes. In light of recent news reports detailing how a number of individuals in this category have maneuvered to maintain their access to benefits, it is clear that a fix is needed. H.R. 5732 ensures that Nazi war criminals who voluntarily renounced their citizenship and left the country prior to an impending deportation action cannot retain Social Security benefits they would otherwise have lost and blocks such individuals' access to spousal benefits. We are encouraged by the breadth of bipartisan support for remedial legislation targeting this loophole. On behalf of the Republican Jewish Coalition's 40,000 members, I salute you for your leadership in quickly moving to solve the problem that has recently come to light. Sincerely, Noah Silverman, Congressional Affairs Director, Republican Jewish Coalition. ____ Strengthen Social Security, Washington, DC. House Committee on Ways and Means, House of Representatives, Longworth Building, Washington, DC. Dear Chairman Camp, Ranking Member Levin, Chairman Johnson, and Ranking Member Becerra: The Strengthen Social Security Coalition, which is comprised of over 350 national and statewide organizations including women's, labor, veterans, aging, and civil rights groups appreciate your timely introduction of the No Social Security for Nazi's Act (H.R. 5739). It is under unfortunate extraordinary circumstances that a group of individuals involved in Nazi persecutions have been receiving Social Security benefits. These war criminals should never have been allowed to enter the United States and should never have received Social Security benefits. The bipartisan legislation that has been introduced presents a solution for this extraordinary circumstance and respects the hard work and contribution of Americans who have earned their benefits. Thank you for defending the Social Security benefits that have been earned by the American people. Sincerely, Eric Kingson, Coalition Co-Chair. Nancy Altman, Coalition Co-Chair. ____ Zionist Organization of America, Washington, DC, November 20, 2014. Hon. Sam Johnson, Ways and Means Social Security Subcommittee Chairman, Longworth House Office Building, Washington, DC. Congressman Johnson: The Zionist Organization of America (ZOA), the oldest and one of the largest pro-Israel organizations in the United States, strongly supports H.R. 5739, the No Social Security for Nazis Act. It is a travesty that through the loophole of passive enforcement, deported aliens who have been found to have lied about their wartime activities continue to receive Social Security from the U.S. government. We applaud the bi-partisan group of Congressmen and their Senate counterparts who are seeking to close this loophole during the November and December congressional sessions before Congress adjourns for the year. The process to identify those who participated in the World War II persecution of Jews was legally rigorous, but ultimately failed to achieve all of its objectives as long as the Nazis who fraudulently entered our country following the war continue to benefit during their advanced years from the fraud they committed against our country. This legislation will repair this defect. The ZOA urges its adoption in both houses of Congress and the swift signing into law of the prohibition of Social Security Payments to those found to be part of the Nazi atrocity machinery. The ZOA commends Members of Congress of both parties who support this legislation. Morton Klein, National President, Zionist Organization of America. Mr. SAM JOHNSON of Texas. For many years a loophole has allowed those who perpetrated horrific crimes against humanity to receive benefits paid by the United States Government. While the number of Nazi recipients of Social Security benefits may be few now, allowing payments to continue is an inexcusable insult to those who suffered at the hands of the Nazis. Mr. Speaker, I urge all Members of the House to vote ``yes'' and pass the No Social Security to Nazis Act today so the Senate can take action soon and that the President can sign it into law without delay. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time. Mr. BECERRA. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Let me begin, Mr. Speaker, by thanking my colleague, but, more importantly, my dear friend, Mr. Sam Johnson from Texas, for the work that he did to move so quickly working with his able staff to try to make sure we had a bill come before us. I also want to make sure that I salute the staff on this side of the aisle for the work they did in partnership to make sure that we could quickly put a bill on the floor of this House that could address what all of us agree is a glaring omission. And so I am pleased to stand here to say, Mr. Speaker, that we have a bill that not only will take care of those dollars that Americans contributed to Social Security on a daily basis as they go to work and pay into the system, [[Page 16351]] but it also will protect the dollars that so many Americans now rely on to receive their benefits. Today, Mr. Speaker, 160 million Americans work and pay into Social Security. They know that because they do that their families will be protected if they happen to die or if they happen to become disabled or if they decide to retire. Now, for most of the 58 million Americans who are already retired or currently receiving Social Security benefits of some sort, that Social Security benefit is the most important source of income for them. One of the greatest privileges we have as Americans living here in the U.S. is the opportunity to work and earn this Social Security protection for ourselves and for our families. We recently learned, as Mr. Johnson has mentioned, that Nazi war criminals and collaborators slipped through a loophole in our laws and began receiving Social Security benefits. The record is clear: Congress never intended for the perpetrators of the Holocaust--the systematic, bureaucratic, state-sponsored murder of more than 6 million Jews and millions of other innocents--to be allowed to enter the U.S., let alone to participate in Social Security. It has been our longstanding policy that when Nazi persecutors who came under false pretenses are discovered that they be deported and stripped of all their privileges of U.S. citizenship and residency, including, of course, Social Security. I am pleased to be here today because today what we are saying is we are ready to act. This legislation will tightly close the loophole that allows some individuals to use and retain Social Security benefits even after their Holocaust crimes have been proven and their citizenship has been revoked. As the chairman has mentioned, and as we are trying to make clear today, it is critically important that we make everyone aware that when you work for Social Security, you have earned it, and only then will you get it. So when someone comes in, uses a loophole, tries to take advantage, and then believes that they can get away with it, we want to be able to act quickly and make it clear that it will never happen again. We want those safeguards to be in place for everyone who has been working hard and paying into Social Security for years and years. They are the ones that own it, not people who have defrauded our government. Like past Congresses, we believe that we must act quickly because the issue of the Holocaust is not unresolved in our minds. We know what we must do to anyone who perpetrated those heinous acts. We must act as quickly as we can. And so, Mr. Speaker, I say with a great deal of pride and friendship that I stand with the chairman of the Social Security Subcommittee today, Mr. Sam Johnson, to urge my colleagues to join us in closing this loophole now before Social Security has to pay another dime to a Nazi war criminal. With that, Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time. Mr. SAM JOHNSON of Texas. Thank you, Mr. Becerra. I appreciate your remarks. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Tennessee (Mrs. Black), a member of the Committee on Ways and Means. Mrs. BLACK. Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for yielding to me. Mr. Speaker, for many today, the heinous acts of the Nazi party in the World War II era are a story relegated to the history books and museums. But the fact is some of these war criminals are still alive, and they are even getting a monthly check from Uncle Sam. An Associated Press investigation found that dozens of Nazi suspects have collected Social Security benefits due to a loophole in our laws. And the cost to the taxpayers has reportedly reached into the millions. Seniors in my district already have concerns about the future of Social Security. The last thing that they want to see is their government using scarce taxpayer dollars for this purpose. That is why I was proud to cosponsor Congressman Sam Johnson's No Social Security for Nazis Act, legislation to cut off benefits to anyone stripped of their U.S. citizenship related to their participation in Nazi crimes. No act of Congress could ever make right the atrocities of the Holocaust or bring justice to its 6 million victims. But ending the flow of the payments to those human rights violators would sure be a step in the right direction. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Texas for his good work on this issue and this bipartisan measure and look forward to voting in support. Mr. BECERRA. Mr. Speaker, we are expecting another speaker, but I reserve the balance of my time and let the gentleman from Texas proceed if he has another speaker. Mr. SAM JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Lance). {time} 1245 Mr. LANCE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to urge passage of H.R. 5739, the No Social Security for Nazis Act, which will correct an injustice of two generations and right a terrible wrong in the name of the lives that were lost as a result of the Holocaust. To think Nazis are receiving Social Security benefits derived from tax receipts of the American people is sickening and morally wrong. Today, Congress will move to put an end to it. This effort was originally championed in the 1990s by my predecessor from the district I have the honor of serving, the late Congressman Bob Franks, and I am proud to continue his effort and see this legislation pass on the floor of the House today. The United States, including my home State of New Jersey, stands in solidarity with the Jewish people, the State of Israel, and the decades-long struggle for peace in the world following the Nazi atrocities. This action is yet another step in demonstrating that our resolve for justice is unyielding and our commitment to pursue what is right continues even 70 years after World War II. I thank my colleague, Congresswoman Carolyn Maloney of New York City, for her leadership on this issue and for asking me to cosponsor the original bill that she had initiated. I also thank Congressman Sam Johnson and the Ways and Means Committee for taking up this effort. The world can never forget the hate and intolerance of the 1930s and 1940s that claimed the lives of millions of people of the Jewish faith and forever scarred the face of mankind. Let this effort be another chapter in the healing that has brought vigor to the pursuit of justice, attention and care to all human suffering and the work toward a world of greater understanding and peace. When given the chance to put an end to an egregious practice, we must act. I urge passage today of this important piece of legislation. Mr. BECERRA. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Carolyn B. Maloney), who has been very active on this issue. Mrs. CAROLYN B. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding, and I thank my friend and colleague on the other side of the aisle, Leonard Lance, for coming to New York, for working in meetings, and for advancing this issue before the Social Security Administration and also the Justice Department. Mr. Speaker, for decades, former Nazis complicit in war crimes have been given monthly Social Security benefit checks due to a loophole in the law. It is an outrage that began at the end of World War II, when thousands of Nazis fled to the United States. Many lied about their past, so that they could become American citizens, take jobs, and try to just blend in, but most were eventually identified and deported, and some were tried for their crimes; however, dozens were never formally deported. If a former Nazi left the U.S. on his own before a final order of removal was issued, the law allowed him to keep receiving his Social Security benefits. As the author of the Nazi War Crimes Disclosure Act of 1998, which opened up all of the files of the CIA on the Nazis and what they were doing in the United States and in Europe, I have been working on this issue for decades. In 1991, I cowrote a bill to close this loophole by creating a new legal process to terminate benefits. Earlier this [[Page 16352]] year, I wrote the Social Security Administration, seeking more information on former Nazis who continue to receive Social Security benefits. They will be issuing a report to me and others on exactly how much money is involved. After an investigative report by the Associated Press revealed new details of Nazis receiving Social Security benefits, I wrote to the IG of the Justice Department and have had meetings with them and the Social Security Administration to investigate exactly how this all occurred. I also worked with my colleagues, Republican Congressmen Leonard Lance of New Jersey and Jason Chaffetz of Utah, to craft the Nazi Benefits Termination Act of 2014. It was supported by editorials across this Nation. We received a total of 19 editorials in support of our bill. In the interest of time, I will just put in the Record roughly five of them because I think it is important that across this Nation, from the South, the West, the East, the North, all of them have come out strongly in support of not spending one taxpayer dime to support Nazis. The Ways and Means Committee took on this same effort. Our bills are similar, and either would be sufficient to address the problem. Both would affirmatively declare individuals who have been denaturalized or renounced citizenship on the grounds of participation in Nazi persecution ineligible for Social Security benefits. I urge my colleagues to end this outrage, close this loophole, and send a message that when we say we will never forget, we mean we will never forget and that we will stop this terrible abuse of taxpayer money going to Social Security benefits for Nazis. I commend all of my colleagues who have worked on this important issue. [From mydailynews.com] No SSNs for the SS A search for some small measure of justice will go on as long as Nazi war criminals remain alive and unpunished. Never mind that almost seven decades have passed since they participated in the Holocaust. Never mind that they are well up in years, perhaps approaching 100. The outrage is that some of the guilty are living out their last days with the help of Social Security payments sent out by Uncle Sam. After World War II, former SS death camp guards and others made their way to America in the hope of leaving their crimes behind. Rather than fight to boot the group, the government made odious deals: If they left the country, they would keep their Social Security benefits. As reported by the Associated Press, troops who worked in the camps, a rocket scientist accused of using slave labor to do his research, a Polish Nazi collaborator who facilitated the murder of thousands of Jews and others fled and kept their cash. At least four are still alive--and collecting. Rep. Carolyn Maloney said she will draft legislation to strip benefits from Nazis. Better late than never. ____ [From the Dallas Morning News, Oct. 22, 2014] Shameful Social Security Benefits for Expelled Nazis Jakob Denzinger gets about $1,500 a month in Social Security payments, but the 90-year-old retiree isn't a typical senior citizen. He's a former Auschwitz guard and one-time Ohio businessman who is now living comfortably overseas on U.S. Social Security benefits. His monthly check is nearly twice the take-home pay of an average worker in Croatia, where he lives. This for a man who patrolled one of the Nazi regime's most infamous death camps. It is an outrageous affront; Congress should no longer tolerate it. An Associated Press investigation published over the weekend found that the U.S. Justice Department secretly used the promise of continued retirement payments to persuade dozens of Nazi suspects in the U.S. to leave. If they agreed to go quietly, or fled before deportation, as Denzinger did in 1989, they could retain their benefits. In return, the Justice Department's Office of Special Investigations avoided messy deportation hearings and increased the number of former Nazis it expelled. Just how many Nazis cashed in isn't known. However, it's stomach-turning to know that Nazi war criminals are receiving retirement benefits, just like your father or grandfather who fought to end the Nazi reign of terror. No accountability. Just a quiet retirement with a steady stream of government checks for Hitler's henchmen. Americans deserve answers. The AP traces the program to 1979 and says at least 38 of 66 suspected Nazis removed from the country since then kept receiving their retirement benefits. By March 1999, the AP reports, 28 suspected Nazi criminals living overseas had amassed $1.5 million in Social Security benefits. That's probably just the tip of the iceberg, but Social Security and Justice Department officials aren't talking. We acknowledge that there is scant appetite in Europe or the United States to bring these aging men to trial. However, neither is there good reason for the U.S. to continue subsidizing their golden years. The deaths of millions should never be forgotten or bought off. With anti-Semitism again on the rise in Europe, sweeping these cases under the rug is the wrong way to signal to the world that we will never forget Nazi atrocities. Congress turned its back on previous measures to stop payments to keep from offending diplomatic sensibilities or slowing down the Justice Department's expulsion efforts. It's time for this insult to end. A White House spokesman says the president, rightly, wants the benefits stopped, and Rep. Carolyn Maloney, D-N.Y., has called for an inquiry into the actions of Justice Department and Social Security officials; she also plans to introduce legislation to halt the payments. It is unconscionable to reward those accused of such horrific crimes. Congress should act now to strip them of their benefits. ____ [From registerguard.com] The headline on The Associated Press story read like something one would see on the front page of a tabloid newspaper at a supermarket checkout stand: ``Nazis who left U.S. still paid Social Security.'' The difference is, the story apparently is true. The AP reported Sunday that since 1979 ``dozens of suspected Nazi war criminals and SS guards collected millions of dollars in Social Security benefits after being forced out of the United States.'' The report said at least four of the 38 known beneficiaries are still alive, including a former concentration camp guard who left Arizona and returned to Germany in 2007, just before being stripped of his U.S. citizenship, and a former guard at Auschwitz who fled Ohio in 1989, after learning ``denaturalization'' proceedings were under way against him, and settled in Croatia. State Department officials said the Justice Department used the continuation of Social Security benefits as a carrot to get the Germans to voluntarily give up their U.S. citizenship, and to avoid lengthy deportation hearings. A spokesman for the Justice Department denied that Social Security payments were thus used. At the time the Justice Department had a Nazi-hunting unit, the Office of Special Investigations, that was dedicated to expelling as many former Nazis as possible, preferably to countries where they would be prosecuted for war crimes, although only 10 were. The AP said the payments were made possible by a ``loophole'' in the law but provided no specifics. The Social Security Administration denied an AP request for the number of suspects who received payments and the amounts they received, saying it doesn't track Nazi cases. On Monday, Rep. Carol Maloney, D-NY, sent letters to the inspectors general of the Justice Department and the Social Security Administration demanding that the Obama administration investigate the payments, which she called a ``gross misuse of taxpayer dollars.'' But the son of the former Auschwitz guard, Jakob Denzinger, told The AP his father had earned the benefit payments and deserves to continue receiving them. Did the former Nazi guards who simply carried out orders, however immoral or heinous, absolve themselves by becoming upstanding, law-abiding, tax-paying U.S. citizens during the 70 years since World War II ended? Some will say yes but many others would argue their crimes can never be forgiven. For most Americans, knowing that taxpayer-funded retirement benefits are being given to people who surrendered their U.S. citizenship, and who played a direct role in the worst human- caused catastrophe in history, isn't going to sit right. And it shouldn't. It sounds as if Maloney, who's a high-ranking member of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, is bent on closing whatever ``loophole'' has allowed the Social Security payments to continue to be sent overseas. The millions that have already been paid are gone and not likely to be recoverable but the thousands not yet paid could still be withheld. It shouldn't take an act of Congress to scotch such a grievous insult to American taxpayers--but apparently it will. ____ [From the Sun Sentinel, Nov. 30, 2014] Nazi Criminals Getting Benefits? Yes, It's True Congress has finally found something its members can agree on. It's important, it's bipartisan and it's hellacious enough to make you wonder how such a practice could have been allowed to continue, with the blessing of the U.S. government, no less. But now, a group of lawmakers--including Florida Democratic Sen. Bill Nelson--has introduced legislation that would strip suspected Nazi war criminals of the Social Security benefits they've been receiving for [[Page 16353]] having agreed to leave this country and live overseas. You read that right Hard as it is to believe, an investigation by the Associated Press found that dozens of Nazi suspects who made their way to the U.S. have been receiving retirement benefits with taxpayer money. And if they agreed to leave the country quietly, or before a deportation action, the Justice Department said they could keep these benefits. That way, the government could avoid ugly deportation hearings and increase the number of former Nazis expelled. Outrageous? You bet. And it's been going on for years, with your money. The AP traced the program to 1979, and said at least 38 of 66 suspected Nazis removed from the country since that time kept receiving retirement benefits. By March 1999, the report said 28 suspected Nazi criminals living overseas had amassed $1.5 million in Social Security benefits. The number is certainly much larger by now. Now comes the Nazi Social Security Benefits Termination Act, in response to the revelations. Nelson is one of the sponsors of the Senate version. The legislation would end benefits for Nazi suspects who have lost American citizenship. Congress is hoping to get the legislation finalized during the current lame-duck session. ``Our bill will eliminate the loophole that has allowed Nazi war criminals to collect Social Security benefits,'' said Rep. Carolyn Maloney, D-N.Y. She also has called for an inquiry into the actions of Justice Department and Social Security officials. Remember, we're talking about Nazi war criminals here, people involved in the horrific death camps where millions died. As an example, Jakob Denzinger, 90, has been getting about $1,500 a month in Social Security payments. He is a former Auschwitz guard and a one-time Ohio businessman. According to the AP, some other recipients of Social Security participated in the liquidation of the Warsaw Ghetto, oversaw the use of slave labor and helped with the round-up and killing of thousands of Jews. It defies all sensibilities to learn that these payments have been going on for decades. Now that they've come to light, President Obama says he wants them, stopped. The proposed legislation would do just that. ``This legislation is long overdue,'' said Abraham Foxman, national director of the Anti-Defamation League, ``and we are pleased that lawmakers in Congress are taking this seriously.'' A serious investigation also is needed into how this happened to begin with. ____ [From the Pueblo Chieftain, Oct. 23, 2014] Closing an Abhorrent Loophole FOR ONCE, we actually do agree with the White House and the Congress. But it's hard to find fault when the president's spokesman says it's past time to cut off Social Security benefits for former Nazis who are living and aging overseas. Or with Congressional plans to solve the problem. ``Our position is we don't believe these individuals should be getting these benefits,'' White House Spokesman Eric Schultz said Monday. That's a bit of an understatement. Rather, we find it astounding these suspected murderers and thugs got benefits-- much less the millions of taxpayer dollars reported by the Associated Press--in the first place. As a bit of background, the AP reported last week that dozens of suspected Nazis have collected benefits after being driven out of the United States. Though their World War II actions led to their departure, they were never convicted of war crimes. While the exact number of beneficiaries--or the total taxpayer-underwritten benefit they received--has not been released, the list included SS troops who guarded Nazi concentration camps, a rocket scientist accused of using slave labor to advance his research in the Third Reich and a Nazi collaborator who allegedly engineered the arrest and execution of thousands of Jews in Poland, according to the Associated Press. They fled their home countries after the war and set up residency here. A legal loophole gave the Justice Department leverage to persuade the Nazi suspects to leave the U.S. If they did, or if they simply fled prior to deportation, they could keep their Social Security benefit, the AP reported. And in this rare instance, Washington's response has been both swift and appropriate. Rep. Carolyn Maloney of New York--a ranking member of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee--called on the Obama administration to investigate the payments. The Democrat called them a ``gross misuse of taxpayer dollars.'' And yesterday, Sens. Charles Schumer, D-NY, and Bob Casey, D-PA, announced plans to introduce legislation to close the loophole that allowed for the payments. A joint press release issued by the pair reflects that the bill would also provide direction to federal immigration judges adjudicating cases involving a suspected Nazi persecutors. New York's Rep. Maloney plans on carrying that bill in the U.S. House. At least four of these suspected criminals are still living comfortably on the taxpayer dole. They are doing so via a social service safety net that is now financially failing. That is a totally unacceptable and abhorrent misuse of our funds. We are pleased to see Congress is acting to fix the problem, even if--given the ages of the surviving recipients--it is too late to result in substantial savings. We strongly encourage each member of Colorado's congressional delegation to support the legislation. Be bold. Take a stance for the taxpayers, the citizens in need, the survivors and the millions who perished at the hands of these suspected criminals and their contemporaries. Pass this law and close the loophole. Mr. BECERRA. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time, and I think it is important to close on a particular note. I don't think it gets lost on the chairman or me that, when we sit as the chairman and ranking member on the Social Security Subcommittee, we have a major responsibility, and that is to make sure that what people expect when they allow a good chunk of money to come out of their paycheck, it is going to be used for what they believe, and that is for Social Security benefits for those who have earned them. When something like this comes along and you find out that someone found out a way to circumvent the laws and the process and take advantage of getting dollars out of America that have been put in for the purpose of providing security to those who retire or become disabled or who die, it really makes you want to act, but when you realize that, on top of that, the folks who are gaming the system are folks who should never have been in this country in the first place because they committed heinous crimes and were perpetrators of some of the worst evils we have seen in our history, then it makes you want to work doubly fast. At a time when we deal with major issues and oftentimes have challenges in reaching agreement, the American people should watch for a second because, in this case, we are coming together to say that we understand the purpose of Social Security. It is important to extend a thank you to the chairman of the Social Security Subcommittee for making sure that, before we ended this year and before we ended this session, we had an opportunity to put our vote on the floor saying, ``No, if you don't earn your benefits, you won't get them, and if you shouldn't have been here in the first place, then you certainly shouldn't get Social Security as well.'' It is important to get this done, and we hope the Senate will act quickly. Hopefully, before too long, the President will have an opportunity to sign this, and forever, we will be able to say that we know that no perpetrator of the Holocaust will ever have an opportunity to steal Social Security from those who worked hard to earn it. With that, Mr. Speaker, and thanking the staff on both sides of the aisle for the work they have done so diligently and to my friend and chairman, Mr. Johnson, I say thank you. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time. Mr. SAM JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume, and I thank Mr. Becerra. It takes two to tango, and fortunately, we have a compatible interest on this committee. I thank Ranking Member Xavier Becerra and his staff for working with us on this important legislation. Mr. Speaker, I urge all Members of the House to vote ``yes'' and pass the No Social Security for Nazis Act today, so the Senate can take action soon and that the President can sign it into law without delay. I yield back the balance of my time. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Sam Johnson) that the House suspend the rules and pass the bill, H.R. 5739. The question was taken. The SPEAKER pro tempore. In the opinion of the Chair, two-thirds being in the affirmative, the ayes have it. Mr. SAM JOHNSON of Texas. 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 motion will be postponed. [[Page 16354]] ____________________ ANNOUNCEMENT BY THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, proceedings will resume on motions to suspend the rules previously postponed. Votes will be taken in the following order: S. 2040, by the yeas and nays; H.R. 5050, by the yeas and nays; H.R. 3572, by the yeas and nays. The first electronic vote will be conducted as a 15-minute vote. Remaining electronic votes will be conducted as 5-minute votes. ____________________ BLACKFOOT RIVER LAND EXCHANGE ACT OF 2014 The SPEAKER pro tempore. The unfinished business is the vote on the motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill (S. 2040) to exchange trust and fee land to resolve land disputes created by the realignment of the Blackfoot River along the boundary of the Fort Hall Indian Reservation, and for other purposes, on which the yeas and nays were ordered. The Clerk read the title of the bill. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Hastings) that the House suspend the rules and pass the bill. The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 414, nays 0, not voting 20, as follows: [Roll No. 534] YEAS--414 Adams Amash Amodei Bachmann Bachus Barber Barletta Barr Barrow (GA) Barton Beatty Becerra Benishek Bentivolio Bera (CA) Bilirakis Bishop (GA) Bishop (NY) Bishop (UT) Black Blackburn Blumenauer Bonamici Boustany Brady (PA) Brady (TX) Braley (IA) Brat Bridenstine Brooks (AL) Brooks (IN) Broun (GA) Brown (FL) Brownley (CA) Buchanan Bucshon Burgess Bustos Butterfield Byrne Calvert Camp Campbell Capito Capps Cardenas Carney Carson (IN) Carter Cartwright Castor (FL) Castro (TX) Chabot Chaffetz Chu Cicilline Clark (MA) Clarke (NY) Clawson (FL) Clay Cleaver Clyburn Coble Coffman Cohen Cole Collins (GA) Collins (NY) Conaway Connolly Conyers Cook Cooper Costa Cotton Courtney Cramer Crawford Crenshaw Crowley Cuellar Culberson Cummings Daines Davis (CA) Davis, Danny Davis, Rodney DeFazio DeGette Delaney DeLauro DelBene Denham Dent DeSantis DesJarlais Deutch Diaz-Balart Dingell Doggett Duffy Duncan (SC) Duncan (TN) Edwards Ellison Ellmers Engel Enyart Eshoo Esty Farenthold Farr Fattah Fincher Fitzpatrick Fleischmann Fleming Flores Forbes Fortenberry Foster Foxx Frankel (FL) Franks (AZ) Frelinghuysen Fudge Gabbard Gallego Garamendi Garcia Gardner Gerlach Gibbs Gibson Gingrey (GA) Gohmert Goodlatte Gosar Gowdy Granger Graves (GA) Graves (MO) Grayson Green, Al Green, Gene Griffin (AR) Griffith (VA) Grijalva Grimm Guthrie Gutierrez Hahn Hanabusa Hanna Harper Harris Hartzler Hastings (FL) Hastings (WA) Heck (NV) Heck (WA) Hensarling Herrera Beutler Higgins Himes Hinojosa Holding Holt Honda Horsford Hoyer Hudson Huelskamp Huffman Huizenga (MI) Hultgren Hunter Israel Issa Jackson Lee Jeffries Jenkins Johnson (GA) Johnson (OH) Johnson, E. B. Johnson, Sam Jolly Jones Jordan Joyce Kaptur Keating Kelly (IL) Kelly (PA) Kennedy Kildee Kilmer Kind King (IA) King (NY) Kinzinger (IL) Kirkpatrick Kline Kuster Labrador LaMalfa Lamborn Lance Langevin Lankford Larsen (WA) Larson (CT) Latham Latta Lee (CA) Levin Lewis LoBiondo Loebsack Lofgren Long Lowenthal Lowey Lucas Luetkemeyer Lujan Grisham (NM) Lujan, Ben Ray (NM) Lummis Lynch Maffei Maloney, Carolyn Maloney, Sean Marchant Marino Massie Matsui McAllister McCarthy (CA) McCaul McCollum McDermott McGovern McHenry McIntyre McKeon McKinley McMorris Rodgers McNerney Meadows Meehan Meeks Meng Messer Mica Michaud Miller (FL) Miller (MI) Miller, George Moore Moran Mullin Mulvaney Murphy (FL) Murphy (PA) Nadler Napolitano Neal Neugebauer Noem Nolan Norcross Nugent Nunes Nunnelee O'Rourke Olson Owens Palazzo Pallone Pascrell Pastor (AZ) Paulsen Payne Pearce Pelosi Perry Peters (CA) Peters (MI) Peterson Petri Pingree (ME) Pittenger Pitts Pocan Poe (TX) Polis Pompeo Posey Price (GA) Price (NC) Quigley Rahall Rangel Reed Reichert Renacci Ribble Rice (SC) Richmond Rigell Roby Roe (TN) Rogers (KY) Rogers (MI) Rohrabacher Rokita Rooney Ros-Lehtinen Roskam Ross Rothfus Roybal-Allard Royce Ruiz Runyan Ruppersberger Ryan (OH) Ryan (WI) Salmon Sanchez, Linda T. Sanchez, Loretta Sanford Sarbanes Scalise Schakowsky Schiff Schneider Schock Schwartz Schweikert Scott (VA) Scott, Austin Scott, David Sensenbrenner Serrano Sessions Sewell (AL) Shea-Porter Sherman Shimkus Shuster Simpson Sinema Sires Slaughter Smith (MO) Smith (NE) Smith (NJ) Smith (TX) Smith (WA) Southerland Speier Stewart Stivers Stockman Stutzman Swalwell (CA) Takano Terry Thompson (CA) Thompson (MS) Thompson (PA) Thornberry Tiberi Tierney Tipton Titus Tonko Tsongas Turner Upton Valadao Van Hollen Vargas Veasey Vela Velazquez Visclosky Wagner Walberg Walden Walorski Walz Wasserman Schultz Waters Waxman Weber (TX) Webster (FL) Welch Wenstrup Westmoreland Whitfield Williams Wilson (FL) Wilson (SC) Wittman Wolf Womack Woodall Yarmuth Yoder Yoho Young (AK) Young (IN) NOT VOTING--20 Aderholt Bass Capuano Cassidy Doyle Duckworth Garrett Hall Hurt Kingston Lipinski Matheson McCarthy (NY) McClintock Miller, Gary Negrete McLeod Perlmutter Rogers (AL) Rush Schrader {time} 1324 Mr. ROE of Tennessee and Ms. McCOLLUM changed their vote from ``nay'' to ``yea.'' So (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the rules were suspended and the bill was passed. The result of the vote was announced as above recorded. A motion to reconsider was laid on the table. Stated for: Mr. HURT. Mr. Speaker, I was not present for rollcall vote No. 534, a recorded vote on S. 2040. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yea.'' Mr. GARRETT. Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 534, I was unable to vote due to a doctor's appointment. Had I been present, I would have voted ``aye.'' ____________________ MAY 31, 1918 ACT REPEAL ACT The SPEAKER pro tempore. The unfinished business is the vote on the motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 5050) to repeal the Act of May 31, 1918, and for other purposes, on which the yeas and nays were ordered. The Clerk read the title of the bill. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Hastings) that the House suspend the rules and pass the bill. This is a 5-minute vote. The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 418, nays 0, not voting 16, as follows: [Roll No. 535] YEAS--418 Adams Amash Amodei Bachmann Bachus Barber Barletta Barr Barrow (GA) Barton Bass Beatty Becerra Benishek Bentivolio Bera (CA) Bilirakis Bishop (GA) Bishop (NY) Bishop (UT) Black Blackburn Blumenauer Bonamici Boustany Brady (PA) Brady (TX) Braley (IA) Brat Bridenstine Brooks (AL) Brooks (IN) Broun (GA) Brown (FL) Brownley (CA) Buchanan Bucshon Burgess Bustos Butterfield Byrne Calvert Camp Campbell Capito Capps Cardenas Carney Carson (IN) Carter Cartwright Castor (FL) Castro (TX) Chabot Chaffetz Chu Cicilline Clark (MA) Clarke (NY) Clawson (FL) Clay Cleaver Clyburn Coble Coffman Cohen Cole Collins (GA) Collins (NY) Conaway Connolly Conyers Cook Cooper Costa Cotton Courtney Cramer Crawford Crenshaw Crowley Cuellar Culberson Cummings Daines Davis (CA) Davis, Danny Davis, Rodney DeFazio DeGette [[Page 16355]] Delaney DeLauro DelBene Denham Dent DeSantis DesJarlais Deutch Diaz-Balart Dingell Doggett Duffy Duncan (SC) Duncan (TN) Edwards Ellison Ellmers Engel Enyart Eshoo Esty Farenthold Farr Fattah Fincher Fitzpatrick Fleischmann Fleming Flores Forbes Fortenberry Foster Foxx Frankel (FL) Franks (AZ) Frelinghuysen Fudge Gabbard Gallego Garamendi Garcia Gardner Gerlach Gibbs Gibson Gingrey (GA) Gohmert Goodlatte Gosar Gowdy Granger Graves (GA) Graves (MO) Grayson Green, Al Green, Gene Griffin (AR) Griffith (VA) Grijalva Grimm Guthrie Gutierrez Hahn Hanabusa Hanna Harper Harris Hartzler Hastings (FL) Hastings (WA) Heck (NV) Heck (WA) Hensarling Herrera Beutler Higgins Himes Hinojosa Holding Holt Honda Horsford Hoyer Hudson Huelskamp Huffman Huizenga (MI) Hultgren Hunter Hurt Israel Issa Jackson Lee Jeffries Jenkins Johnson (GA) Johnson (OH) Johnson, E. B. Johnson, Sam Jolly Jones Jordan Joyce Kaptur Keating Kelly (IL) Kelly (PA) Kennedy Kildee Kilmer Kind King (IA) King (NY) Kinzinger (IL) Kirkpatrick Kline Kuster Labrador LaMalfa Lamborn Lance Langevin Lankford Larsen (WA) Larson (CT) Latham Latta Lee (CA) Levin Lewis Lipinski LoBiondo Loebsack Lofgren Long Lowenthal Lowey Lucas Luetkemeyer Lujan Grisham (NM) Lujan, Ben Ray (NM) Lummis Lynch Maffei Maloney, Carolyn Maloney, Sean Marchant Marino Massie Matsui McAllister McCarthy (CA) McCaul McCollum McDermott McGovern McHenry McIntyre McKeon McKinley McMorris Rodgers McNerney Meadows Meehan Meeks Meng Messer Mica Michaud Miller (FL) Miller (MI) Miller, George Moore Moran Mullin Mulvaney Murphy (FL) Murphy (PA) Nadler Napolitano Neal Neugebauer Noem Nolan Norcross Nugent Nunes Nunnelee O'Rourke Olson Owens Palazzo Pallone Pascrell Pastor (AZ) Paulsen Payne Pearce Pelosi Perry Peters (CA) Peters (MI) Peterson Petri Pingree (ME) Pittenger Pitts Pocan Poe (TX) Polis Pompeo Posey Price (GA) Price (NC) Quigley Rahall Rangel Reed Reichert Renacci Ribble Rice (SC) Richmond Rigell Roby Roe (TN) Rogers (AL) Rogers (KY) Rogers (MI) Rohrabacher Rokita Rooney Ros-Lehtinen Roskam Ross Rothfus Roybal-Allard Royce Ruiz Runyan Ruppersberger Ryan (OH) Ryan (WI) Salmon Sanchez, Linda T. Sanchez, Loretta Sanford Sarbanes Scalise Schakowsky Schiff Schneider Schock Schwartz Schweikert Scott (VA) Scott, Austin Scott, David Sensenbrenner Serrano Sessions Sewell (AL) Shea-Porter Sherman Shimkus Shuster Simpson Sinema Sires Slaughter Smith (MO) Smith (NE) Smith (NJ) Smith (TX) Smith (WA) Southerland Speier Stewart Stivers Stockman Stutzman Swalwell (CA) Takano Terry Thompson (CA) Thompson (MS) Thompson (PA) Thornberry Tiberi Tierney Tipton Titus Tonko Tsongas Turner Upton Valadao Van Hollen Vargas Veasey Vela Velazquez Visclosky Wagner Walberg Walden Walorski Walz Wasserman Schultz Waters Waxman Weber (TX) Webster (FL) Welch Wenstrup Westmoreland Whitfield Williams Wilson (FL) Wilson (SC) Wittman Wolf Womack Woodall Yarmuth Yoder Yoho Young (AK) Young (IN) NOT VOTING--16 Aderholt Capuano Cassidy Doyle Duckworth Garrett Hall Kingston Matheson McCarthy (NY) McClintock Miller, Gary Negrete McLeod Perlmutter Rush Schrader {time} 1333 So (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the rules were suspended and the bill was passed. The result of the vote was announced as above recorded. A motion to reconsider was laid on the table. Stated for: Mr. GARRETT. Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 535 I was unable to vote due to a doctor's appointment. Had I been present, I would have voted ``aye.'' ____________________ JOHN H. CHAFEE COASTAL BARRIER RESOURCES SYSTEM BOUNDARIES REVISION The SPEAKER pro tempore. The unfinished business is the vote on the motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 3572) to revise the boundaries of certain John H. Chafee Coastal Barrier Resources System units in North Carolina, as amended, on which the yeas and nays were ordered. The Clerk read the title of the bill. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Hastings) that the House suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended. This is a 5-minute vote. The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 410, nays 7, not voting 17, as follows: [Roll No. 536] YEAS--410 Adams Amash Amodei Bachmann Bachus Barber Barletta Barr Barrow (GA) Barton Bass Beatty Becerra Benishek Bentivolio Bera (CA) Bilirakis Bishop (GA) Bishop (NY) Bishop (UT) Black Bonamici Boustany Brady (PA) Brady (TX) Braley (IA) Brat Bridenstine Brooks (AL) Brooks (IN) Broun (GA) Brown (FL) Brownley (CA) Buchanan Bucshon Burgess Bustos Butterfield Byrne Calvert Camp Campbell Capito Capps Cardenas Carney Carson (IN) Carter Cartwright Castor (FL) Castro (TX) Chabot Chaffetz Chu Cicilline Clark (MA) Clarke (NY) Clawson (FL) Clay Cleaver Clyburn Coble Coffman Cohen Cole Collins (GA) Collins (NY) Conaway Connolly Conyers Cook Cooper Costa Cotton Courtney Cramer Crawford Crenshaw Crowley Cuellar Cummings Daines Davis (CA) Davis, Danny Davis, Rodney DeFazio DeGette Delaney DeLauro DelBene Denham Dent DeSantis DesJarlais Deutch Diaz-Balart Dingell Doggett Duffy Duncan (SC) Duncan (TN) Edwards Ellison Ellmers Engel Enyart Eshoo Esty Farenthold Farr Fattah Fincher Fitzpatrick Fleischmann Fleming Flores Forbes Fortenberry Foster Foxx Frankel (FL) Franks (AZ) Frelinghuysen Fudge Gabbard Gallego Garamendi Garcia Gardner Gerlach Gibbs Gibson Gingrey (GA) Gohmert Goodlatte Gosar Gowdy Granger Graves (GA) Graves (MO) Grayson Green, Al Green, Gene Griffin (AR) Grijalva Grimm Guthrie Gutierrez Hahn Hanabusa Hanna Harper Harris Hartzler Hastings (FL) Hastings (WA) Heck (NV) Heck (WA) Hensarling Herrera Beutler Higgins Himes Hinojosa Holding Holt Honda Horsford Hoyer Hudson Huelskamp Huffman Huizenga (MI) Hultgren Hunter Hurt Israel Issa Jackson Lee Jeffries Jenkins Johnson (GA) Johnson (OH) Johnson, E. B. Johnson, Sam Jolly Jones Jordan Joyce Kaptur Keating Kelly (IL) Kelly (PA) Kennedy Kildee Kilmer Kind King (IA) King (NY) Kingston Kinzinger (IL) Kirkpatrick Kline Kuster Labrador LaMalfa Lamborn Lance Langevin Lankford Larsen (WA) Larson (CT) Latham Latta Lee (CA) Levin Lewis Lipinski LoBiondo Loebsack Lofgren Long Lowenthal Lowey Lucas Luetkemeyer Lujan Grisham (NM) Lujan, Ben Ray (NM) Lummis Lynch Maffei Maloney, Carolyn Maloney, Sean Marchant Marino Massie Matsui McAllister McCarthy (CA) McCaul McCollum McDermott McGovern McHenry McIntyre McKeon McKinley McMorris Rodgers McNerney Meadows Meehan Meeks Meng Messer Mica Michaud Miller (FL) Miller (MI) Miller, George Moore Moran Mullin Murphy (FL) Murphy (PA) Nadler Napolitano Neal Neugebauer Noem Nolan Norcross Nugent Nunes Nunnelee O'Rourke Olson Owens Palazzo Pallone Pascrell Pastor (AZ) Paulsen Payne Pearce Pelosi Perry Peters (CA) Peters (MI) Peterson Petri Pingree (ME) Pittenger Pitts Pocan Polis Pompeo Posey Price (GA) Price (NC) Quigley Rahall Rangel Reed Reichert Renacci Ribble Rice (SC) Richmond Rigell Roby Roe (TN) Rogers (AL) Rogers (KY) Rogers (MI) Rohrabacher Rokita Rooney Ros-Lehtinen Roskam Ross Rothfus Roybal-Allard Royce Ruiz Runyan Ruppersberger Ryan (OH) Ryan (WI) Salmon Sanchez, Linda T. Sanchez, Loretta Sanford Sarbanes Scalise Schakowsky Schiff Schneider Schock Schwartz Schweikert Scott (VA) Scott, Austin Scott, David Sensenbrenner [[Page 16356]] Serrano Sessions Sewell (AL) Shea-Porter Sherman Shimkus Shuster Simpson Sinema Sires Slaughter Smith (MO) Smith (NE) Smith (NJ) Smith (TX) Smith (WA) Southerland Speier Stewart Stivers Stutzman Swalwell (CA) Takano Terry Thompson (CA) Thompson (MS) Thompson (PA) Thornberry Tiberi Tierney Tipton Titus Tonko Tsongas Turner Upton Valadao Van Hollen Vargas Veasey Vela Velazquez Visclosky Wagner Walberg Walden Walorski Walz Wasserman Schultz Waters Waxman Webster (FL) Welch Wenstrup Westmoreland Whitfield Wilson (FL) Wilson (SC) Wittman Wolf Womack Woodall Yarmuth Yoder Yoho Young (AK) Young (IN) NAYS--7 Blackburn Griffith (VA) Mulvaney Poe (TX) Stockman Weber (TX) Williams NOT VOTING--17 Aderholt Blumenauer Capuano Cassidy Culberson Doyle Duckworth Garrett Hall Matheson McCarthy (NY) McClintock Miller, Gary Negrete McLeod Perlmutter Rush Schrader ____________________ {time} 1340 So (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the rules were suspended and the bill, as amended, was passed. The result of the vote was announced as above recorded. The title of the bill was amended so as to read: ``A bill to revise the boundaries of certain John H. Chafee Coastal Barrier Resources System units.''. A motion to reconsider was laid on the table. Stated for: Mr. GARRETT. Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 536 I was unable to vote due to a doctor's appointment. Had I been present, I would have voted aye. ____________________ {time} 1345 SBIC ADVISERS RELIEF ACT OF 2014 Mr. LUETKEMEYER. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 4200) to amend the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 to prevent duplicative regulation of advisers of small business investment companies. The Clerk read the title of the bill. The text of the bill is as follows: H.R. 4200 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. This Act may be cited as the ``SBIC Advisers Relief Act of 2014''. SEC. 2. ADVISERS OF SBICS AND VENTURE CAPITAL FUNDS. Section 203(l) of the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 (15 U.S.C. 80b-3(l)) is amended-- (1) by striking ``No investment adviser'' and inserting the following: ``(1) In general.--No investment adviser''; and (2) by adding at the end the following: ``(2) Advisers of sbics.--For purposes of this subsection, a venture capital fund includes an entity described in subparagraph (A), (B), or (C) of subsection (b)(7) (other than an entity that has elected to be regulated or is regulated as a business development company pursuant to section 54 of the Investment Company Act of 1940).''. SEC. 3. ADVISERS OF SBICS AND PRIVATE FUNDS. Section 203(m) of the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 (15 U.S.C. 80b-3(m)) is amended by adding at the end the following: ``(3) Advisers of sbics.--For purposes of this subsection, the assets under management of a private fund that is an entity described in subparagraph (A), (B), or (C) of subsection (b)(7) (other than an entity that has elected to be regulated or is regulated as a business development company pursuant to section 54 of the Investment Company Act of 1940) shall be excluded from the limit set forth in paragraph (1).''. SEC. 4. RELATIONSHIP TO STATE LAW. Section 203A(b)(1) of the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 (15 U.S.C. 80b-3a(b)(1)) is amended-- (1) in subparagraph (A), by striking ``or'' at the end; (2) in subparagraph (B), by striking the period at the end and inserting ``; or''; and (3) by adding at the end the following: ``(C) that is not registered under section 203 because that person is exempt from registration as provided in subsection (b)(7) of such section, or is a supervised person of such person.''. The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Hultgren). Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Luetkemeyer) and the gentlewoman from Wisconsin (Ms. Moore) each will control 20 minutes. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Missouri. General Leave Mr. LUETKEMEYER. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and submit extraneous materials for the Record on H.R. 4200, currently under consideration. The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Missouri? There was no objection. Mr. LUETKEMEYER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. The legislation we consider today is a bipartisan, noncontroversial, and commonsense change that will ultimately allow for greater small business capital formation and job creation. H.R. 4200, the SBIC Advisers Relief Act, streamlines reporting requirements for advisers to small business investment companies, or SBICs. These are advisers to investment funds who make long-term investments in U.S. small businesses and who have to the tune of more than $63 billion since 1958. Under current law and for more than 55 years, SBICs have been regulated and closely supervised by the Small Business Administration. The existing regulatory regime surrounding SBICs includes an in-depth examination of management, strong investment rules, operational requirements, recordkeeping, examination and reporting mandates, and conflict of interest rules. These entities and the management of these entities are anything but unregulated. The need for exemptions for SBICs and their advisers has been well- recognized by Congress. Congress' intent by including some of these exemptions in previous legislation was to reduce the regulatory burdens facing smaller funds and SBICs. This bill fixes some unintended consequences that have arisen and need to be addressed. The SBIC Advisers Relief Act does so by doing three things: number one, it allows advisers who jointly advise SBICs and venture funds to be exempt from registration, combining two separate exemptions that already exist; number two, it excludes SBIC assets from the SEC's assets under management threshold calculation; number three, it allows SBIC funds with less than $90 million in assets under management to be regulated solely by the SBA, as they are today. The Financial Services Committee has thoroughly examined the bipartisan legislation in both a legislative hearing and a markup. H.R. 4200 garnered praise from members on both sides of the aisle and from witnesses who testified on the bill in an April hearing. This noncontroversial legislation passed the committee by a vote of 56-0 in May. It is also important to note that the legislation includes suggestions made by the SEC. Most importantly, this legislation includes sensible provisions that prevent redundant regulatory mandates and allow for a greater investment in America's small businesses. I want to thank Congresswoman Maloney for her help on this bill, and I ask my colleagues for their support. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time. Ms. MOORE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. This bill, as has been indicated, is a bipartisan bill. We support the bill. I have no requests for time; therefore, I would urge my colleagues to support the bill. I yield back the balance of my time. Mr. LUETKEMEYER. Mr. Speaker, I have no other speakers, and I yield back the balance of my time. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Luetkemeyer) that the House suspend the rules and pass the bill, H.R. 4200. The question was taken; and (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the rules were suspended and the bill was passed. A motion to reconsider was laid on the table. [[Page 16357]] ____________________ COMMODITY EXCHANGE ACT AND SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT AMENDMENTS Mr. LUETKEMEYER. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 5471) to amend the Commodity Exchange Act and the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 to specify how clearing requirements apply to certain affiliate transactions, and for other purposes. The Clerk read the title of the bill. The text of the bill is as follows: H.R. 5471 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, SECTION 1. TREATMENT OF AFFILIATE TRANSACTIONS. (a) In General.-- (1) Commodity exchange act amendment.--Section 2(h)(7)(D)(i) of the Commodity Exchange Act (7 U.S.C. 2(h)(7)(D)(i)) is amended to read as follows: ``(i) In general.--An affiliate of a person that qualifies for an exception under subparagraph (A) (including affiliate entities predominantly engaged in providing financing for the purchase of the merchandise or manufactured goods of the person) may qualify for the exception only if the affiliate enters into the swap to hedge or mitigate the commercial risk of the person or other affiliate of the person that is not a financial entity, provided that if the hedge or mitigation of such commercial risk is addressed by entering into a swap with a swap dealer or major swap participant, an appropriate credit support measure or other mechanism must be utilized.''. (2) Securities exchange act of 1934 amendment.--Section 3C(g)(4)(A) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78c-3(g)(4)(A)) is amended to read as follows: ``(A) In general.--An affiliate of a person that qualifies for an exception under paragraph (1) (including affiliate entities predominantly engaged in providing financing for the purchase of the merchandise or manufactured goods of the person) may qualify for the exception only if the affiliate enters into the security-based swap to hedge or mitigate the commercial risk of the person or other affiliate of the person that is not a financial entity, provided that if the hedge or mitigation such commercial risk is addressed by entering into a security-based swap with a security-based swap dealer or major security-based swap participant, an appropriate credit support measure or other mechanism must be utilized.''. (b) Applicability of Credit Support Measure Requirement.-- The requirements in section 2(h)(7)(D)(i) of the Commodity Exchange Act and section 3C(g)(4)(A) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended by subsection (a), requiring that a credit support measure or other mechanism be utilized if the transfer of commercial risk referred to in such sections is addressed by entering into a swap with a swap dealer or major swap participant or a security-based swap with a security-based swap dealer or major security-based swap participant, as appropriate, shall not apply with respect to swaps or security-based swaps, as appropriate, entered into before the date of the enactment of this Act. The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Luetkemeyer) and the gentlewoman from Wisconsin (Ms. Moore) each will control 20 minutes. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Missouri. General Leave Mr. LUETKEMEYER. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and submit extraneous materials for the Record on H.R. 5471, currently under consideration. The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Missouri? There was no objection. Mr. LUETKEMEYER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Hundreds of American businesses, large and small--from manufacturers, to utilities, to agricultural businesses, to airlines--use derivatives every day to manage their business risks and to reduce their exposure to price fluctuations. Without derivatives, businesses and their customers would face increased prices for the goods and services these businesses provide. The derivatives these businesses use are not risky. They played no role in the financial crisis. Nevertheless, they were targeted in the Dodd- Frank Act, which increased their price and decreased their availability. Since the beginning of the 112th Congress in 2011, the Financial Services Committee and the Agriculture Committee have worked together to clarify that title VII of the Dodd-Frank Act should not burden Main Street businesses with a costly compliance regime that would stifle growth and job creation. These efforts have produced bipartisan bills, including many sponsored by Democrats, that have passed the House with large majorities. The bill under consideration is yet another. H.R. 5471 is sponsored by my Democratic colleague on the Financial Services Committee, Representative Gwen Moore, and is cosponsored by another colleague, Representative Steve Stivers. The bill amends the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the Commodity Exchange Act, and it extends the Dodd-Frank Act, title VII, clearing exemption to nonfinancial entities that use a central treasury unit to reduce risk and net the hedging needs of affiliated businesses. Mr. Speaker, that may sound technical, but the bill is a commonsense measure to give regulatory certainty to Main Street businesses in Missouri and beyond. I encourage my colleagues to support H.R. 5471. I reserve the balance of my time. Ms. MOORE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I join my colleague, the gentleman from Missouri, in urging my colleagues to support H.R. 5471; however, before I get into why we should support the bill, I need to thank all of my partners in this effort. As has been mentioned, Mr. Stivers has been fantastic throughout this entire process. I knew going into this that I had a great Republican partner. I can't say enough about Representative Stivers, but time will not allow me to do it. I had another great bipartisan partner in Representative Gibson on the Agriculture Committee. Of course, it is always a joy to work with a good friend and colleague on the Ag Committee, Representative Marcia Fudge. Mr. Speaker, H.R. 5471 is a true ``end users'' bill. The bill is targeted as it applies to centralized treasury centers, or CTUs, of nonfinancial end user companies. The CTU model enables an end user corporation to efficiently centralize hedging risks for the entire consolidated corporate group, and it is, in fact, a corporate best practice. It permits companies to more efficiently hedge commercial business risk, which was always the intent of Dodd-Frank. The CFTC agrees with the underlying policy of the bill as they have provided no-action relief on this point; however, H.R. 5471 is still needed because, as a practical matter, no-action relief is no substitute for statutory fixes as it creates legal uncertainty when deciding how to organize your global business structure. Corporate boards may be hesitant to approve a decision, as they are required to do, that violates the law based only on an assurance that CFTC staff will not recommend enforcement. H.R. 5471 fixes the quirky result of treating companies that use a CTU model differently than companies that do not accomplish the same result. The bill also solves another far more technical issue with the no- action relief that relates to CTUs issuing swaps as a principal, as opposed to as an agent. There is simply no good reason to not address these issues. In fact, CTUs are considered a corporate best practice. I can offer you, Mr. Speaker, an example of one company in my district, MillerCoors. They summarized it best in written testimony before the House Financial Services Committee: Though it may be tempting to view all derivatives as risky financial products that were central to the credit crisis, we must remember that these are important tools upon which thousands of companies depend to manage risks in the real economy. Just remember that we all have companies in our districts that use swaps legitimately to mitigate risk. I urge all of my colleagues to support this important legislation. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time. Mr. LUETKEMEYER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Lucas), the distinguished chairman of the Agriculture Committee. [[Page 16358]] Mr. LUCAS. Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the gentleman from Missouri for yielding. I would like to thank my colleagues from the House Agriculture Committee, Mr. Gibson and Ms. Fudge, for their continued leadership on this issue; also, I would like to thank Ms. Moore and Mr. Stivers for working with my committee to introduce this compromise language as a stand-alone bill for the House's consideration. Almost identical language was included in the Agriculture Committee's CFTC reauthorization bill, H.R. 4413. I am proud to say that we moved that legislation through the Ag Committee by a voice vote and then passed it here on the House floor with overwhelming bipartisan support this summer. I am hopeful that this bill can receive the same strong bipartisan support. H.R. 5471 will provide American businesses the certainty they need to continue managing their risk in the most efficient manner possible. Today, businesses all over America rely on the ability to centralize their hedging activities to reduce their counterparty credit risk, to lower costs, and to simplify their financial dealings. It is important to remember that these transactions between affiliated corporate entities pose no systemic risk, and they should not be regulated as if they do. These transactions are used to reduce an individual firm's risk by consolidating a hedging portfolio spread across a corporate group. By doing this, firms can find savings with offsetting positions between affiliates and can reduce the need for the group to seek hedges in the wider market. H.R. 5471 will prevent the redundant regulation of these harmless interaffiliate transactions that would tie up the working capital companies with no added protections for the market or benefits for the consumers. I strongly support this bipartisan, commonsense legislation, and I urge all of my colleagues to vote ``yes.'' Ms. MOORE. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as she may consume to the gentlewoman from California, Ms. Maxine Waters, the ranking member of the committee. Ms. WATERS. Mr. Speaker, I would first like to thank Congresswoman Moore, as well as Congresswoman Fudge, for their efforts to craft the text of this bill which represents a dramatic improvement from a similar bill that was considered in the Financial Services Committee 18 months ago. At that time, Commodity Futures Trading Commission--that is, the CFTC--Chairman Gary Gensler warned that providing such a broad interaffiliate exemption from the requirement to clear derivatives could harm its efforts to regulate the market. Since that time, however, the authors of this legislation have significantly tailored the language, incorporating several technical edits provided by the CFTC, and the measure now only extends the interaffiliate exemption to instances when the commercial risk of an exempt end user is being hedged or mitigated. Last week, the CFTC provided the same tailored relief that this bill would provide. I submit for the Record the CFTC's no-action letter. U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission, Washington, DC, November 26, 2014. Re No-Action Relief from the Clearing Requirement for Swaps Entered into by Eligible Treasury Affiliates The purpose of this letter is to amend the no-action relief previously granted by the Division of Clearing and Risk (``Division'') of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (``Commission'') under No-Action Letter 13-22 to address certain challenges faced by treasury affiliates in undertaking hedging activities on behalf of non-financial affiliates within a corporate group. Those challenges pertained to certain conditions in the prior relief. The Division in this letter is altering some of those conditions to enable additional market participants to avail themselves of the treasury affiliate relief originally set forth in No Action Letter 13-22. Treasury Affiliate Exemption from Clearing On June 4, 2013, the Division granted no-action relief from the clearing requirement under section 2(h)(1) of the Commodity Exchange Act (``CEA'') and part 50 of the Commission's regulations, for swaps entered into by certain affiliates acting on behalf of non-financial affiliates within a corporate group for the purpose of hedging or mitigating commercial risk (hereinafter referred to as ``treasury affiliates''). No-Action Letter 13-22 was issued based on the Division's understanding that treasury affiliates were undertaking hedging activities on behalf of non-financial affiliates that were eligible to elect the end-user exception from clearing, but were themselves ineligible to elect the exception. As discussed further below, because treasury affiliates can act in a wider capacity as treasury centers that provide financial services for all or most of the affiliates within a corporate group, including daily cash management, debt administration, and risk hedging and mitigation, treasury affiliates met the definition of ``financial entity'' under section 2(h)(7)(C)(i)(VIII) of the CEA and thus could not elect the end-user exception. As a result, the Division granted treasury affiliates relief to continue entering into non-cleared swaps on behalf of the non-financial affiliates, subject to specific conditions and requirements. The Division has since learned that there are treasury affiliates precluded from electing the relief in No-Action Letter 13-22 because they do not meet certain conditions contained in the letter. As discussed below, based on input from market participants, the Division is hereby issuing this letter to amend some of the conditions and requirements contained in No-Action Letter 13-22 to allow additional treasury affiliates to rely on the relief from clearing. Applicable Regulatory Requirements Under section 2(h)(1)(A) of the CEA, it is unlawful for any person to engage in a swap unless that person submits such swap for clearing to a derivatives clearing organization (``DCO'') that is registered under the CEA or exempt from registration if the swap is required to be cleared. On November 29, 2012, the Commission adopted its first clearing requirement determination, requiring that swaps meeting certain specifications within four classes of interest rate swaps and two classes of credit default swaps be cleared. Pursuant to section 2(h)(7) of the CEA and Sec. 50.50 of the Commission's regulations, a counterparty to a swap that is subject to the clearing requirement may elect the end-user exception from required clearing provided that such counterparty is not a financial entity, as defined in section 2(h)(7)(C) of the CEA, and otherwise meets the requirements of Sec. 50.50 of the Commission's regulations. Thus, the end- user exception from required clearing may be elected for swaps that are entered into between two non-financial entities, or between a non-financial entity and a financial entity, for swaps that hedge or mitigate commercial risk. As noted above, the Division granted relief from required clearing for treasury affiliates of non-financial companies that fall within the definition of ``financial entity'' under section 2(h)(7)(C)(i)(VIII) of the CEA when acting on behalf of affiliates that otherwise would be eligible to elect the end-user exception from required clearing.''As such, No- Action Letter 13-22 effectively allowed treasury affiliates, subject to certain additional requirements and conditions, to take advantage of the end-user exception from clearing that its non-financial affiliates in the corporate group would otherwise have been eligible to elect had they entered into the transactions directly. Summary of Relief Since the Division issued No-Action Letter 13-22, market participants have highlighted several requirements and conditions that make use of the relief granted thereunder impractical for many treasury affiliates. As discussed below, the Division is therefore amending the following requirements and conditions. i. The requirement that the ultimate parent of a treasury affiliate identify all wholly- and majority-owned affiliates and ensure a majority qualify for the end-user exception. Market participants have expressed concerns about the second condition for eligible treasury affiliate status in No-Action Letter 13-22. The second condition requires that the ultimate parent of a treasury affiliate identify all wholly- and majority-owned affiliates within the corporate group and ensure that a majority qualify for the end-user exception. Market participants have noted the ratio of the absolute number of financial entities to nonfinancial entities does not necessarily provide meaning-fill information about the corporate family as a whole, and adds on-going surveillance responsibilities and expenses for the corporate family. The Division agrees and has removed the requirement accordingly in the revised relief set forth herein. ii. The requirement that the treasury affiliate is not itself or is not affiliated with a systemically important nonbank financial company. Market participants have also expressed concerns about the fourth condition for eligible treasury affiliate status in No-Action Letter 13-22. The fourth condition prohibits the treasury affiliate from being, or being affiliated with, a nonbank financial company that has been designated as systemically important by the Financial Stability Oversight [[Page 16359]] Council. As explained above, section 2(h)(7)(D) of the CEA permits affiliates acting as an agent and on behalf of entities eligible for the end-user exception to elect the end-user exception themselves, unless the affiliate is one of seven enumerated types of entities listed in section 2(h)(7)(D)(ii). Among others, these prohibited entities include swap dealers, commodity pools, and bank holding companies with over $50 billion in consolidated assets. Market participants have pointed out that the fourth condition for eligible treasury affiliate status provides a list of entities that generally tracks the list in section 2(h)(7)(D)(ii), except for the addition of systemically important nonbank financial companies. The Division believes that additional restrictions relating to systemically important nonbank financial companies are appropriate. As a result, the Division is maintaining the requirement that the treasury affiliate itself cannot be a systemically important nonbank financial company. However, the Division also recognizes that certain corporate families with significant non-financial operations are precluded from using the existing relief because of the affiliation with a systemically important nonbank financial company, regardless of the degree to which the operations of the financial and non-financial entities are conducted separately. The Division believes restricting the treasury affiliate from (i) entering into transactions with, or on behalf of, a systemically important nonbank financial company and (ii) providing any services, financial or otherwise, to such a designated entity, provides sufficient protection from the risks of systemically important affiliate, while allowing the treasury affiliate to provide the necessary support to its related operating entities. The Division is amending the conditions relating to systemically important nonbank financial companies accordingly. iii. The requirement that treasury affiliates act only on behalf of certain types of related affiliates. Market participants have indicated that the definition of ``related affiliates'' under No-Action Letter 13-22 unnecessarily excludes certain entities that perform a cash pooling function for a corporate family that includes a financial entity. The definition of related affiliate currently includes either: (i) a non-financial entity that is, or is directly or indirectly wholly- or majority-owned by, the ultimate parent; or (ii) a person that is another eligible treasury affiliate for an entity described in (i). Market participants claim that the limitation is unnecessary, highlighting that the third General Condition to the Swap Activity already precludes an eligible treasury affiliate from entering into swaps with, and on behalf of, its financial affiliates. The Division agrees the definition is problematic because the collection and disbursement of cash within the corporate family is a core function of a treasury affiliate. Given the existing restrictions on swap activity by the eligible treasury affiliate with or on behalf of a financial affiliate, the Division has amended the related affiliate definition to allow entities that provide financial services on behalf of a financial entity to nonetheless qualify as an eligible treasury affiliate. iv. The requirement that treasury affiliates transfer the risk of related affiliates through the use of swaps. Market participants have expressed concern with the first General Condition to Swap Activity in No-Action Letter 13-22. The condition requires the eligible treasury affiliate enter into the exempted swap for the sole purpose of hedging or mitigating the commercial risk of one or more related affiliates that was transferred to the eligible treasury affiliate by operation of one or more swaps with such related affiliates. According to market participants, there are a number of ways for commercial risk to be transferred between affiliates, and that the risk that a treasury affiliate may have been seeking to hedge or mitigate would not necessarily be transferred from the operating affiliate to the treasury affiliate by way of a swap transaction as required by No- Action Letter 13-22. The method by which the risk is transferred can be dependent on the type of risk being hedged. For example, it may be more common for foreign exchange risk to be transferred between affiliates through the use of book-entry transfers, as opposed to interest rate risk, where the use of back-to-back swaps may be more prevalent. The Division agrees that this limitation is unnecessarily strict and is revising the condition accordingly. However, as the transfer of risk from the related affiliate to the treasury affiliate will no longer be evinced by back-to-back swaps, the Division will require that the treasury affiliate be able to identify the related affiliate or affiliates on whose behalf the swap was entered into by the treasury affiliate. v. The requirement that treasury affiliates do not enter into swaps other than for hedging or mitigating the commercial risk of one or more related affiliates. Market participants have questioned whether an eligible treasury affiliate would lose its status if the entity entered into hedging transactions that were mitigating a commercial risk of the treasury affiliate itself. The second General Condition to the Swap Activity states that the eligible treasury affiliate cannot enter into swaps with related affiliates or unaffiliated counterparties other than for the purposes of hedging or mitigating the commercial risk of one or more related affiliates. The Division agrees that a treasury affiliate should not lose its status as an eligible treasury affiliate simply because it entered into a hedging transaction on its own behalf. The Division is therefore amending the language in the second condition to allow an eligible treasury affiliate to enter into its own hedging transactions. However, the Division notes that such transactions entered into by the eligible treasury affiliate on its own behalf would not be ``exempted swaps'' as defined below, and may be required to be cleared if subject to the Commission's clearing requirement and no other exception or exemption to clearing applied. Further, the Division notes that treasury affiliates entering into any speculative transaction, on its own behalf or otherwise, would not be consistent with this condition. vi. The requirement that related affiliates entering into swaps with the treasury affiliate, or the treasury affiliate itself, may not enter into swaps with or on behalf of any affiliate that is a financial entity. Market participants have expressed confusion as to whether a related affiliate can enter into transactions with multiple eligible treasury affiliates under the third General Condition to the Swap Activity in No-Action Letter 13-22. The third condition states that neither any related affiliate that enters into swaps with the eligible treasury affiliate nor the eligible treasury affiliate, may enter into swaps with or on behalf of any affiliate that is a financial entity (a ``financial affiliate''), or otherwise assumes, nets, combines, or consolidates the risk of swaps entered into by any financial affiliate. Ms. WATERS. After conversations with CFTC Chairman Massad and following this action by the regulator, I felt comfortable having H.R. 5471 be considered under a suspension of the House rules. Now, I have heard from several companies that, while the CFTC's actions are welcome, they still need the legal certainty that only H.R. 5471 could provide. On the other side, of course, I have heard concerns that if we pass this bill we may be binding the CFTC's hands to deal with a problem that could arise in the future. I believe that people on both sides of this issue are working in good faith and want to help rebuild our economy. Again, I applaud Congresswoman Moore's efforts to improve this bill. {time} 1400 Mr. LUETKEMEYER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Stivers), who is the lead cosponsor of this legislation. Mr. STIVERS. Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the gentleman from Missouri for yielding me time. I also would like to thank the gentlelady from Wisconsin (Ms. Moore) for all her work on this bill. She has been dedicated and engaged and hardworking and willing to compromise to move this effort forward to help a lot of Main Street businesses that are in my district, her district, and that dot the map of America. I also want to thank Ms. Fudge and Mr. Gibson for their collaborative efforts and their work through the Agriculture Committee on this bill as well. Mr. Speaker, this bill is the culmination of over 2\1/2\ years' work. In 2012, Ms. Moore, Ms. Fudge, Mr. Gibson, and I joined together to introduce legislation that clarified rules under the Dodd-Frank Act with regard to margin clearing and reporting requirements of interaffiliate transactions. What that means is a lot of Main Street businesses in various industries, from agriculture to consumer products, that work across international boundaries use this central treasury unit structure to offset competing or offsetting risks, and that way they can decide what their total aggregate risk is and then make it much more affordable for a corporation. Unfortunately, under the Dodd-Frank Act and the way the rules were interpreted by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, these companies were being charged double or triple the cost by imposing these central clearing unit ways of managing risk. It just didn't make sense, and it actually cost them more money. These companies did not add systemic risk, and that is what the rules on swaps were all about is to make sure we reduce systemic [[Page 16360]] risk. These companies are using these swaps to offset risk to their company and their operating risks, and so this is a commonsense piece of legislation. In fact, Barney Frank, the author of the Dodd-Frank legislation, spoke in favor of this when he was the ranking member in the last Congress. Unfortunately, there was no activity on the bill in the last Congress, and over the last 2 years both the Securities and Exchange Commission and the CFTC have worked with us--with Ms. Moore and me--on these rules. They have done a pretty good job in that regard, but there is more to be done because their rules left out the folks that use these centralized treasury units as a specific business model. Just last month, in fact, the CFTC published a no-action letter that Ms. Moore referred to; but a no-action letter means that it is still part of the law, we are just not going to enforce the law. What we need to do is fix the law. It is really common sense. So this bill that Ms. Moore introduced fixes the law for that centralized treasury unit way of doing business. It makes sense. It does not add any risk to the system, and it allows these companies that are all over America to manage their risk in a smarter way without being charged two or three times as much and without risking that they are violating the law, even though it is not going to be enforced. So I applaud the gentlelady from Wisconsin for changing the law, fixing the law, and making it work for a lot of small, medium, and even large businesses across America so they can use their cash to hire Americans in this tough time, and hire more Americans and not waste it on unneeded cost that does not provide any safety to anyone. I want to thank the gentlelady from Wisconsin as well as the gentleman from New York and the gentlelady from Ohio for all their work, and I was proud to be a small part of this. I would urge my colleagues to support this bill. Ms. MOORE. Mr. Speaker, I am so delighted to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Peterson), the ranking member of the Ag Committee. Mr. PETERSON. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from Wisconsin and the others for their work on this legislation. H.R. 5471 provides further clarity to those using the derivatives market to hedge against risk and builds upon language in H.R. 4413, legislation approved by the House last summer to reauthorize the CFTC. The bill before us today makes it clear that if an affiliate of a company already exempted from clearing engages in a swap with a swap dealer or major swap participant in order to hedge or mitigate commercial risk, those swaps would also be exempt from the clearing requirement as long as they use an appropriate credit support measure. While it is my understanding that the CFTC would prefer to address this issue through agency action, I also believe that they are supportive of this language. Because H.R. 5471 improves the work already done by the House, I urge my colleagues to support this bill. Mr. LUETKEMEYER. Mr. Speaker, I am prepared to close whenever the gentlewoman from Wisconsin is ready. Ms. MOORE. Mr. Speaker, I would now like to place the second half of the CFTC letter into the Record. No-Action Letter 13-22 contemplated the use of multiple eligible treasury affiliates within a corporate family, but the Division agrees with market participants that the third condition does not accurately reflect this. The Division is accordingly amending the third condition to clarify that the restriction on related affiliates and eligible treasury affiliates from entering into swap transactions with financial entity affiliates does not preclude the circumstance where the financial entity affiliate is an eligible treasury affiliate. vii. The requirement for the payment obligations of the treasury affiliate to be guaranteed. Market participants expressed concern with respect to the fifth General Condition to the Swap Activity in No-Action Letter 13-22. The fifth condition states that the payment obligations of the eligible treasury affiliate on the exempted swap must be guaranteed by: (i) its non-financial parent; (ii) an entity that wholly-owns or is wholly-owned by its non-financial parent; or (iii) the related affiliates for which the swap hedges or mitigates commercial risk. Market participants have explained that corporate parents and structures may avail themselves of other types of support arrangements, such as keepwell agreements, letters of credit, or revolving credit facilities for example, which would not satisfy the requirements of No-Action Letter 13-22. As a result, the Division is removing the condition to accommodate the additional support arrangements that may exist with regard to the eligible treasury affiliate's payment obligations. Division No-Action Position The Division recognizes the benefits that arise from the use of treasury affiliates within corporate groups and has determined to provide the following no-action relief; described below. For purposes of this no-action letter only, the following definitions shall apply: Eligible treasury affiliate means a person that meets each of the following qualifications: (i) The person is (A) directly, wholly-owned by a non- financial entity or another eligible treasury affiliate (its ``non-financial parent''), and (B) is not indirectly majority-owned by a financial entity, as defined in section 2(h)(7)(C)(i) of the CEA; (ii) The person's ultimate parent is not a financial entity as defined in section 2(h)(7)(C)(i) of the CEA; (iii) The person is a financial entity as defined in section 2(h)(7)(C)(i)(VIII) of the CEA solely as a result of acting as principal to swaps with, or on behalf of, one or more of its related affiliates, or providing other services that are financial in nature to such related affiliates; (iv) The person is not, and is not affiliated with, any of the following: (A) a swap dealer; (B) a major swap participant; (C) a security-based swap dealer; or (D) a major security-based swap participant. (v) The person is not any of the following: (A) a private fund as defined in section 202(a) of the Investment Advisors Act of 1940 (15 U.S.C. Sec. 80-b-2(a)); (B) a commodity pool; (C) an employee benefit plan as defined in paragraphs (3) and (32) of section 3 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (29 U.S.C. Sec. 1002); (D) a bank holding company; (E) an insured depository institution; (F) a farm credit system institution; (G) a credit union; (H) a nonbank financial company that has been designated as systemically important by the Financial Stability Oversight Council; or (I) an entity engaged in the business of insurance and subject to capital requirements established by an insurance governmental authority of a State, a territory of the United States, the District of Columbia, a country other than the United States, or a political subdivision of a country other than the United States that is engaged in the supervision of insurance companies under insurance law. (vi) The person does not provide any services, financial or otherwise, to any affiliate that is a nonbank financial company that has been designated as systemically important by the Financial Stability Oversight Council. Non-financial entity means a person that is not a financial entity as defined in section 2(h)(7)(C)(i) of the CEA. Related affiliate means with respect to an eligible treasury affiliate: (i) A non-financial entity that is, or is directly or indirectly wholly- or majority-owned by, the ultimate parent; or (ii) A person that is another eligible treasury affiliate. The Division will not recommend that the Commission commence an enforcement action against an eligible treasury affiliate for its failure to comply with the requirements under section 2(h)(1)(A) of the CEA and part 50 of the Commission's regulations to clear a swap with an unaffiliated counterparty or another eligible treasury affiliate (the ``exempted swap'') that is subject to required clearing pursuant to Sec. 50.4 of the Commission's regulations, subject to the following conditions: General Conditions to the Swap Activity (i) The eligible treasury affiliate enters into the exempted swap for the sole purpose of hedging or mitigating the commercial risk of one or more related affiliates that was transferred to the eligible treasury affiliate; (ii) The eligible treasury affiliate does not enter into swaps with its related affiliates or unaffiliated counterparties other than for the purpose of hedging or mitigating its own commercial risk or the commercial risk of one or more related affiliates; (iii) Neither any related affiliate that enters into swaps with the eligible treasury affiliate nor the eligible treasury affiliate, enters into swaps with or on behalf of any affiliate that is a financial entity (``financial affiliate''), or otherwise assumes, nets, combines, or consolidates the risk of swaps entered into by any financial affiliate, except in the case of financial affiliates that qualify as eligible treasury affiliates under this letter; and [[Page 16361]] (iv) Each swap entered into by the eligible treasury affiliate is subject to a centralized risk management program that is reasonably designed (A) to monitor and manage the risks associated with the swap, and (B) to identify the related affiliate or affiliates on whose behalf each exempted swap has been entered into by the eligible treasury affiliate. Reporting Conditions With respect to each swap that an eligible treasury affiliate (``electing counterparty'') elects not to clear in reliance on the relief provided in this letter, the reporting counterparty, as determined in accordance with Sec. 45.8 of the Commission's regulations, shall provide or cause to be provided the following information to a registered swap data repository or, if no registered swap data repository is available to receive the information from the reporting counterparty, to the Commission, in the form and manner specified by the Commission: (i) Notice of the election of the relief and confirmation that the electing counterparty satisfies the General Conditions to the Swap Activity of this no-action relief specified above; (ii) How the electing counterparty generally meets its financial obligations associated with entering into non- cleared swaps by identifying one or more of the following categories, as applicable: (A) A written credit support agreement; (B) Pledged or segregated assets (including posting or receiving margin pursuant to a credit support agreement or otherwise); (C) A written guarantee from another party; (D) The electing counterparty's available financial resources; or (E) Means other than those described in (A)-(D); and (iii) If the electing counterparty is an entity that is an issuer of securities registered under section 12 of, or is required to file reports under section 15(d) of, the Securities Exchange Act of 1934: (A) The relevant SEC Central Index Key number for such counterparty; and (B) Acknowledgment that an appropriate committee of the board of directors (or equivalent body) of the electing counterparty has reviewed and approved the decision to enter into swaps that are exempt from the requirements of section 2(h)(1), and if applicable, section 2(h)(8) of the CEA. (iv) If there is more than one electing counterparty to a swap, the information specified in the Reporting Conditions of this no-action relief specified above shall be provided with respect to each of the electing counterparties. (v) An entity that qualifies for the relief provided in this no-action letter may report the information listed in paragraphs (ii) and (iii) above, annually in anticipation of electing the relief for one or more swaps. Any such reporting under this paragraph will be effective for purposes of paragraphs (ii) and (iii) above for 365 days following the date of such reporting. During the 365-day period, the entity shall amend the report as necessary to reflect any material changes to the information reported. (vi) Each reporting counterparty shall have a reasonable basis to believe that the electing counterparty meets the General Conditions to the Swap Activity for the no-action relief specified above. This no-action letter, and the positions taken herein, represent the view of the Division only, and do not necessarily represent the position or view of the Commission or of any other office or division of the Commission. The relief issued by this letter does not excuse the affected persons from compliance with any other applicable requirements contained in the CEA or in the Commission's regulations issued thereunder. Further, this letter, and the relief contained herein, is based upon the information available to the Division. Any different or changed material facts or circumstances might render this letter void. As with all no-action letters, the Division retains the authority to, in its discretion, further condition, modify, suspend, terminate or otherwise restrict the terms of the no-action relief provided herein. This letter supersedes No-Action Letter 13-22. Sincerely, Phyllis Dietz, Acting Director. Ms. MOORE. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time. Again, I just want to thank everyone who was involved in this process. This is something that is going to protect thousands of jobs across our country. People often criticize us for not doing things in a bipartisan manner, but I think this is exemplary of what we can do when we really work at it, even though it has taken a couple of years. I yield back the balance of my time. Mr. LUETKEMEYER. I yield back the balance of my time. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Luetkemeyer) that the House suspend the rules and pass the bill, H.R. 5471. The question was taken; and (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the rules were suspended and the bill was passed. A motion to reconsider was laid on the table. ____________________ REGULATION D STUDY ACT Mr. LUETKEMEYER. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 3240) to instruct the Comptroller General of the United States to study the impact of Regulation D, and for other purposes. The Clerk read the title of the bill. The text of the bill is as follows: H.R. 3240 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. This Act may be cited as the ``Regulation D Study Act''. SEC. 2. GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY OFFICE STUDY. (a) Study.--The Comptroller General of the United States shall conduct a comprehensive study on the impact on depository institutions, consumers, and monetary policy of the requirement that depository institutions maintain reserves in accordance with subsections (b) and (c) of section 19 of the Federal Reserve Act (12 U.S.C. 461) and Regulation D (12 C.F.R. 204). (b) Matters To Be Studied.--In conducting the study under this section, the Comptroller General shall include the following: (1) An historic review of how the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System has used reserve requirements to conduct United States monetary policy, including information on how and when the Board of Governors has changed the required reserve ratio. (2) The impact of the maintenance of reserves on depository institutions, including the operational requirements and associated costs. (3) The impact on consumers in managing their accounts, including the costs and benefits of the reserving system. (4) Alternatives the Board of Governors may have to the maintenance of reserves to effect monetary policy. (c) Consultation.--In conducting the study under this section, the Comptroller General shall consult with credit unions and community banks. (d) Report.--Not later than 1 year after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Comptroller General shall submit to Congress a report containing-- (1) the results of the study conducted pursuant to this section; and (2) any recommendations based on such study. The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Luetkemeyer) and the gentlewoman from Wisconsin (Ms. Moore) each will control 20 minutes. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Missouri. General Leave Mr. LUETKEMEYER. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and submit extraneous materials for the Record on H.R. 3240, currently under consideration, The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Missouri? There was no objection. Mr. LUETKEMEYER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself as much time as I may consume. I rise in support of H.R. 3240, the Regulation D Study Act, introduced by my friend from North Carolina (Mr. Pittenger), a colleague on the Financial Services Committee. This is a simple but important bill that directs the GAO to study the impact that the Federal Reserve's Regulation D minimum reserve requirements have on depository institutions, consumers, and monetary policy. Section 19 of the Federal Reserve Act gives the Federal Reserve authority to impose reserve requirements on the deposits of member institutions. These requirements are set forth in what is commonly referred to as Reg D. Regulation D reserve requirements are calculated as a percentage of the amount of funds a financial institution's members hold in transaction accounts. A transaction account is typically an account from which the depositor or account holder is permitted to make unlimited transfers or withdrawals, such as a checking account. Because balances in those accounts can change quickly, the Federal Reserve requires institutions to reserve funds [[Page 16362]] for those accounts as a stabilizing tool for the money supply. Regulation D limits the number of transfers and withdrawals from nontransaction accounts to six per month. As legislators, it is important that we periodically review the impact of regulations on those whom we have the honor to represent. The Regulation D Study Act does just that, and I am pleased to support it. I reserve the balance of my time. Ms. MOORE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I strongly, strongly support Representative Pittenger's Reg D Study Act. Again, as my colleague from Missouri has indicated, this is a technical bill, but it is extremely important. Commentators have argued that the maintenance of these reserves imposes opportunity costs on depository institutions, namely, by requiring them to hold funds in abeyance that could otherwise be lent out, and I think that it is worth GAO studying the issue and reporting back to Congress. I just want to make a point, Mr. Speaker, and to stress this: reserve requirements are separate and distinct from capital requirements, liquidity, and leverage rules, which protect the safety and soundness of the financial system. This bill does not take away those important protections. I reserve the balance of my time. Mr. LUETKEMEYER. Mr. Speaker, I yield as much time as he may consume to the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Pittenger), the sponsor of this legislation. Mr. PITTENGER. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 3240, the Regulation D Study Act. This bill is simple. It directs the Government Accountability Office, GAO, to study the regulatory impact on depository institutions, consumers, and monetary policy. Current regulations limit common online and automated transfers and withdrawals from nontransaction accounts, such as savings accounts, to only six transfers per month. The regulators who created this rule never envisioned online banking and modern banking technology, and because only some transactions are subject to the six-per-month restriction and others are without limit, this rule is very confusing to consumers. Today, many families use online banking tools to actively manage their finances with unnecessary restrictions from these outdated rules. Regulation D requirements force financial institutions to focus on compliance concerns rather than spending more time with consumers to meet their financial needs. This is commonsense legislation that is not only good for financial institutions, but for American families as well. The issue of allowing only six transfers per month for certain bank accounts hasn't been reviewed in several decades. With new technological advancements and online banking, we owe it to our hardworking American families to revisit this regulation. H.R. 3240 enjoys support from the Credit Union National Association and the National Association of Federal Credit Unions, whose financial institutions serve millions of Americans. Mr. Speaker, I will submit for the Record a letter of support from the president of the Credit Union National Association, which serves 100 million members across the country. Credit Union National Association, Washington, DC, December 1, 2014. Hon. John Boehner, Speaker, House of Representatives, Washington, DC. Hon. Nancy Pelosi, Minority Leader, House of Representatives, Washington, DC. Dear Speaker Boehner and Leader Pelosi: On behalf of the Credit Union National Association (CUNA), I am writing in support of H.R. 3240, bipartisan legislation scheduled for consideration this week by the House of Representatives. CUNA is the largest credit union advocacy organization in the United States, representing America's state and federally chartered credit unions and their 100 million members. H.R. 3240, sponsored by Representatives Robert Pittenger (R-NC) and Carolyn Maloney (D-NY), directs the Government Accountability Office (GAO) to study the impact of the Federal Reserve Board's monetary reserve requirements, implemented through Regulation D, on depository institutions, consumers and monetary policy. The House Financial Services Committee favorably reported this bill to the House on July 20, 2014 by voice vote. Regulation D impacts credit union members by limiting the number of automatic withdrawals from a member's savings account to six transactions per month. The impact of this limit is to unnecessarily cause credit union members to overdraft their checking accounts when a debit draws the checking account balance below zero and the member has already had six automatic transfers during the month. When this happens, members who may have the funds in a savings account to cover the debit are hit with nonsufficient fund fees (NSF) from their financial institution and, when a check is involved, a returned check fee from the merchant. This is not a result of an overdraft protection program--this happens because of a regulatory cap on automatic transfers. It is difficult for credit union members affected by the cap to understand that this is out of the control of the credit union when the funds to cover the debit are sifting in their account at the credit union. We believe the cap should be increased or eliminated, but we understand that one of the reasons the regulation is in place is because the Federal Reserve Board is authorized to use it as a tool to conduct monetary policy. As a first step toward a possible change in this cap, the legislation directs the GAO to study the issue. This effort will make more information available for Congress to determine whether an increase in or the elimination of this cap would substantially affect the Federal Reserve Board's ability to conduct monetary policy. Specifically, H.R. 3240 directs the GAO to examine and report within one year of enactment on the following topics: an historic overview of how the Federal Reserve Board has used reserve requirements to conduct monetary policy; the impact of the maintenance of reserves on depository institutions, including the operations requirements and associated costs; the impact on consumers in managing their accounts, including the costs and benefits of the reserving system; and, alternatives to required reserves the Federal Reserve Board may have to effect monetary policy. The bill also directs the GAO to consult with credit unions and community banks. According to former Federal Reserve Board Chairman Ben Bernanke, ``. . . reserve balances far exceed the level of reserve requirements and the level of reserve requirements thus plays only a minor role in the daily implementation of monetary policy.'' A GAO study will allow an objective assessment of whether the rarely changed monetary reserves imposed on depository institutions and consumers are necessary in order for the Federal Reserve Board to implement monetary policy in the 21st century. CUNA strongly supports this bill. On behalf of America's credit unions and their 100 million members, thank you for scheduling H.R. 3240 for consideration. We look forward to working with you and members of the House of Representatives to swiftly enact this legislation. Sincerely, Jim Nussle, President & CEO. Mr. PITTENGER. As technology advances, we need to make sure Federal regulations keep pace. Former Federal Reserve Chairman Bernanke has said that account ``reserve balances far exceed the level of reserve requirements, and the level of reserve requirements thus plays only a minor role in the daily implementation of monetary policy.'' We can continue to protect the financial system while allowing families more flexibility to use online banking tools. This legislation has strong bipartisan support, and I would like to thank my colleague from New York, Congresswoman Maloney, who serves on the Financial Services Committee, for joining me in introducing H.R. 3240. A GAO study will allow an objective assessment of whether the rarely changed monetary reserves imposed on depository institutions and consumers are necessary in order for the Federal Reserve to implement monetary policy in the 21st century. Ms. MOORE. Mr. Speaker, I am absolutely delighted to yield such time as she might consume to the gentlelady from New York (Mrs. Carolyn B. Maloney), the Democratic cosponsor of this bill, who is the ranking member of the Capital Markets Subcommittee. Mrs. CAROLYN B. MALONEY of New York. I thank the gentlelady for her leadership and for yielding. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 3240. I am pleased to have worked on this bill with my colleague from North Carolina (Mr. Pittenger). I would also like to take this opportunity to compliment his work on attempting to end terrorism, cracking [[Page 16363]] down on terrorism financing in our country. The purpose of this particular bill is to study the current monthly limits, under Regulation D, on the number of automatic withdrawals from a consumer's savings account. {time} 1415 Currently Regulation D limits the number of automatic withdrawals from a consumer's account to six per month. This means that if a consumer has already hit his limit on automatic withdrawals for the month and then overdrafts his or her checking account, the bank won't transfer money from his savings account to cover the overdraft, and this results in an unnecessary overdraft fee. As two recent studies by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau have noted, overdraft fees disproportionately harm those of us who can least afford it. Unsophisticated consumers are most hit by them. So if there is a regulation that is causing unnecessary overdraft fees, we should study whether that regulation is necessary. That is what our commonsense bill does. It asks the GAO to study the limitation in Regulation D to determine if it is, in fact, useful or harmful. This bill is supported by many stakeholders in financial services: the Credit Union National Association, the National Association of Federal Credit Unions, and the American Bankers Association. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this commonsense bill, and I appreciate the help of my colleague. Ms. MOORE. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for speakers, so I yield back the balance of my time. Mr. LUETKEMEYER. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Luetkemeyer) that the House suspend the rules and pass the bill, H.R. 3240. The question was taken. The SPEAKER pro tempore. In the opinion of the Chair, two-thirds being in the affirmative, the ayes have it. Mr. LUETKEMEYER. 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 motion will be postponed. ____________________ NATIVE AMERICAN HOUSING ASSISTANCE AND SELF-DETERMINATION REAUTHORIZATION ACT OF 2014 Mr. PEARCE. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 4329) to reauthorize the Native American Housing Assistance and Self-Determination Act of 1996, and for other purposes, as amended. The Clerk read the title of the bill. The text of the bill is as follows: H.R. 4329 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; TABLE OF CONTENTS. (a) Short Title.--This Act may be cited as the ``Native American Housing Assistance and Self-Determination Reauthorization Act of 2014''. (b) Table of Contents.--The table of contents of this Act is as follows: Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents. Sec. 2. References. TITLE I--BLOCK GRANTS AND GRANT REQUIREMENTS Sec. 101. Block grants. Sec. 102. Recommendations regarding exceptions to annual Indian housing plan requirement. Sec. 103. Environmental review. Sec. 104. Deadline for action on request for approval regarding exceeding TDC maximum cost for project. TITLE II--AFFORDABLE HOUSING ACTIVITIES Sec. 201. National objectives and eligible families. Sec. 202. Program requirements. Sec. 203. Homeownership or lease-to-own low-income requirement and income targeting. Sec. 204. Lease requirements and tenant selection. Sec. 205. Tribal coordination of agency funding. TITLE III--ALLOCATION OF GRANT AMOUNTS Sec. 301. Authorization of appropriations. Sec. 302. Effect of undisbursed block grant amounts on annual allocations. TITLE IV--AUDITS AND REPORTS Sec. 401. Review and audit by Secretary. Sec. 402. Reports to Congress. TITLE V--OTHER HOUSING ASSISTANCE FOR NATIVE AMERICANS Sec. 501. HUD-Veterans Affairs supportive housing program for Native American veterans. Sec. 502. Loan guarantees for Indian housing. TITLE VI--MISCELLANEOUS Sec. 601. Lands Title Report Commission. Sec. 602. Limitation on use of funds for Cherokee Nation. Sec. 603. Leasehold interest in trust or restricted lands for housing purposes. Sec. 604. Clerical amendment. TITLE VII--DEMONSTRATION PROGRAM FOR ALTERNATIVE PRIVATIZATION AUTHORITY FOR NATIVE AMERICAN HOUSING Sec. 701. Demonstration program. Sec. 702. Clerical amendments. TITLE VIII--HOUSING FOR NATIVE HAWAIIANS Sec. 801. Reauthorization of Native Hawaiian Homeownership Act. Sec. 802. Reauthorization of loan guarantees for Native Hawaiian housing. SEC. 2. REFERENCES. Except as otherwise expressly provided, wherever in this Act an amendment or repeal is expressed in terms of an amendment to, or repeal of, a section or other provision, the reference shall be considered to be made to a section or other provision of the Native American Housing Assistance and Self-Determination Act of 1996 (25 U.S.C. 4101 et seq.). TITLE I--BLOCK GRANTS AND GRANT REQUIREMENTS SEC. 101. BLOCK GRANTS. Section 101 (25 U.S.C. 4111) is amended-- (1) in subsection (c), by adding after the period at the end the following: ``The Secretary shall act upon a waiver request submitted under this subsection by a recipient within 60 days after receipt of such request.''; and (2) in subsection (k), by striking ``1'' and inserting ``an''. SEC. 102. RECOMMENDATIONS REGARDING EXCEPTIONS TO ANNUAL INDIAN HOUSING PLAN REQUIREMENT. Not later than the expiration of the 120-day period beginning on the date of the enactment of this Act and after consultation with Indian tribes, tribally designated housing entities, and other interested parties, the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development shall submit to the Congress recommendations for standards and procedures for waiver of, or alternative requirements (which may include multi-year housing plans) for, the requirement under section 102(a) of the Native American Housing Assistance and Self-Determination Act of 1996 (25 U.S.C. 4112(a)) for annual submission of one- year housing plans for an Indian tribe. Such recommendations shall include a description of any legislative and regulatory changes necessary to implement such recommendations. SEC. 103. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW. Section 105 (25 U.S.C. 4115) is amended-- (1) in subsection (d)-- (A) in the matter preceding paragraph (1), by striking ``may'' and inserting ``shall''; and (B) by adding after and below paragraph (4) the following: ``The Secretary shall act upon a waiver request submitted under this subsection by a recipient within 60 days after receipt of such request.''; and (2) by adding at the end the following new subsection: ``(e) Consolidation of Environmental Review Requirements.-- If a recipient is using one or more sources of Federal funds in addition to grant amounts under this Act in carrying out a project that qualifies as an affordable housing activity under section 202, such other sources of Federal funds do not exceed 49 percent of the total cost of the project, and the recipient's tribe has assumed all of the responsibilities for environmental review, decisionmaking, and action pursuant to this section, the tribe's compliance with the review requirements under this section and the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 with regard to such project shall be deemed to fully comply with and discharge any applicable environmental review requirements that might apply to Federal agencies with respect to the use of such additional Federal funding sources for that project.''. SEC. 104. DEADLINE FOR ACTION ON REQUEST FOR APPROVAL REGARDING EXCEEDING TDC MAXIMUM COST FOR PROJECT. (a) Approval.--Section 103 (25 U.S.C. 4113) is amended by adding at the end the following new subsection: ``(f) Deadline for Action on Request to Exceed TDC Maximum.--A request for approval by the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development to exceed by more than 10 percent the total development cost maximum cost for a project shall be approved or [[Page 16364]] denied during the 60-day period that begins on the date that the Secretary receives the request.''. (b) Definition.--Section 4 (25 U.S.C. 4103) is amended-- (1) by redesignating paragraph (22) as paragraph (23); and (2) by inserting after paragraph (21) the following new paragraph: ``(22) Total development cost.--The term `total development cost' means, with respect to a housing project, the sum of all costs for the project, including all undertakings necessary for administration, planning, site acquisition, demolition, construction or equipment and financing (including payment of carrying charges), and for otherwise carrying out the development of the project, excluding off- site water and sewer. The total development cost amounts shall be based on a moderately designed house and determined by averaging the current construction costs as listed in not less than two nationally recognized residential construction cost indices.''. TITLE II--AFFORDABLE HOUSING ACTIVITIES SEC. 201. NATIONAL OBJECTIVES AND ELIGIBLE FAMILIES. The second paragraph (6) of section 201(b) (25 U.S.C. 4131(b)(6); relating to exemption) is amended-- (1) by striking ``1964 and'' and inserting ``1964,''; and (2) by inserting after ``1968'' the following: ``, and section 3 of the Housing and Urban Development Act of 1968''. SEC. 202. PROGRAM REQUIREMENTS. Section 203(a) (25 U.S.C. 4133(a)) is amended-- (1) in paragraph (1), by striking ``paragraph (2)'' and inserting ``paragraphs (2) and (3)''; and (2) by adding at the end the following new paragraph: ``(3) Application of tribal policies.--Paragraph (2) shall not apply if the recipient has a written policy governing rents and homebuyer payments charged for dwelling units and such policy includes a provision governing maximum rents or homebuyer payments.''; SEC. 203. HOMEOWNERSHIP OR LEASE-TO-OWN LOW-INCOME REQUIREMENT AND INCOME TARGETING. Section 205 (25 U.S.C. 4135) is amended-- (1) in subsection (a)(1)-- (A) in subparagraph (C), by striking ``and'' at the end; and (B) by adding at the end the following new subparagraph: ``(E) notwithstanding any other provision of this paragraph, in the case of rental housing that is made available to a current rental family for conversion to a homebuyer or a lease-purchase unit, that the current rental family can purchase through a contract of sale, lease- purchase agreement, or any other sales agreement, is made available for purchase only by the current rental family, if the rental family was a low-income family at the time of their initial occupancy of such unit; and''; and (2) in subsection (c), by adding after the period at the end the following: ``The provisions of such paragraph regarding binding commitments for the remaining useful life of the property shall not apply to improvements of privately owned homes if the cost of such improvements do not exceed 10 percent of the maximum total development cost for such home.''. SEC. 204. LEASE REQUIREMENTS AND TENANT SELECTION. Section 207 (25 U.S.C. 4137) is amended by adding at the end the following new subsection: ``(c) Notice of Termination.--Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the owner or manager of rental housing that is assisted in part with amounts provided under this Act and in part with one or more other sources of Federal funds shall only utilize leases that require a notice period for the termination of the lease pursuant to subsection (a)(3).''. SEC. 205. TRIBAL COORDINATION OF AGENCY FUNDING. (a) In General.--Subtitle A of title II (25 U.S.C. 4131 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end the following new section: ``SEC. 211. TRIBAL COORDINATION OF AGENCY FUNDING. ``Notwithstanding any other provision of law, a recipient authorized to receive funding under this Act may, in its discretion, use funding from the Indian Health Service of the Department of Health and Human Services for construction of sanitation facilities for housing construction and renovation projects that are funded in part by funds provided under this Act.''. (b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of contents in section 1(b) is amended by inserting after the item relating to section 210 the following new item: ``Sec. 211. Tribal coordination of agency funding.''. TITLE III--ALLOCATION OF GRANT AMOUNTS SEC. 301. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS. The first sentence of section 108 (25 U.S.C. 4117) is amended by striking ``such sums as may be necessary for each of fiscal years 2009 through 2013'' and inserting ``$650,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2014 through 2018''. SEC. 302. EFFECT OF UNDISBURSED BLOCK GRANT AMOUNTS ON ANNUAL ALLOCATIONS. (a) In General.--Title III (25 U.S.C. 4151 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end the following new section: ``SEC. 303. EFFECT OF UNDISBURSED GRANT AMOUNTS ON ANNUAL ALLOCATIONS. ``(a) Notification of Obligated, Undisbursed Grant Amounts.--Subject to subsection (d) of this section, if as of January 1 of 2015 or any year thereafter a recipient's total amount of undisbursed block grants in the Department's line of credit control system is greater than three times the formula allocation such recipient would otherwise receive under this Act for the fiscal year during which such January 1 occurs, the Secretary shall-- ``(1) before January 31 of such year, notify the Indian tribe allocated the grant amounts and any tribally designated housing entity for the tribe of the undisbursed funds; and ``(2) require the recipient for the tribe to, not later than 30 days after the Secretary provides notification pursuant to paragraph (1)-- ``(A) notify the Secretary in writing of the reasons why the recipient has not requested the disbursement of such amounts; and ``(B) demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Secretary that the recipient has the capacity to spend Federal funds in an effective manner, which demonstration may include evidence of the timely expenditure of amounts previously distributed under this Act to the recipient. ``(b) Allocation Amount.--Notwithstanding sections 301 and 302, the allocation for such fiscal year for a recipient described in subsection (a) shall be the amount initially calculated according to the formula minus the difference between the recipient's total amount of undisbursed block grants in the Department's line of credit control system on such January 1 and three times the initial formula amount for such fiscal year. ``(c) Reallocation.--Notwithstanding any other provision of law, any grant amounts not allocated to a recipient pursuant to subsection (b) shall be allocated under the need component of the formula proportionately amount all other Indian tribes not subject to such an adjustment. ``(d) Inapplicability.--Subsections (a) and (b) shall not apply to an Indian tribe with respect to any fiscal year for which the amount allocated for the tribe for block grants under this Act is less than $5,000,000. ``(e) Effectiveness.--This section shall not require the issuance of any regulation to take effect and shall not be construed to confer hearing rights under this or any other section of this Act.''. (b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of contents in section 1(b) is amended by inserting after the item relating to section 302 the following new item: ``Sec. 303. Effect of undisbursed grant amounts on annual allocations.''. TITLE IV--AUDITS AND REPORTS SEC. 401. REVIEW AND AUDIT BY SECRETARY. Section 405(c) (25 U.S.C. 4165(c)) is amended, by adding at the end the following new paragraph: ``(3) Issuance of final report.--The Secretary shall issue a final report within 60 days after receiving comments under paragraph (1) from a recipient.''. SEC. 402. REPORTS TO CONGRESS. Section 407 (25 U.S.C. 4167) is amended-- (1) in subsection (a), by striking ``Congress'' and inserting ``Committee on Financial Services and the Committee on Natural Resources of the House of Representatives, to the Committee on Indian Affairs and the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs of the Senate, and to any subcommittees of such committees having jurisdiction with respect to Native American and Alaska Native affairs,''; and (2) by adding at the end the following new subsection: ``(c) Public Availability to Recipients.--Each report submitted pursuant to subsection (a) shall be made publicly available to recipients.''. TITLE V--OTHER HOUSING ASSISTANCE FOR NATIVE AMERICANS SEC. 501. HUD-VETERANS AFFAIRS SUPPORTIVE HOUSING PROGRAM FOR NATIVE AMERICAN VETERANS. Paragraph (19) of section 8(o) of the United States Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437f(o)(19)) is amended by adding at the end the following new subparagraph: ``(D) Native american veterans.-- ``(i) Authority.--Of the funds made available for rental assistance under this subsection for fiscal year 2015 and each fiscal year thereafter, the Secretary shall set aside 5 percent for a supported housing and rental assistance program modeled on the HUD-Veterans Affairs Supportive Housing (HUD- VASH) program, to be administered in conjunction with the Department of Veterans Affairs, for the benefit of homeless Native American veterans and veterans at risk of homelessness. ``(ii) Recipients.--Such rental assistance shall be made available to recipients eligible [[Page 16365]] to receive block grants under the Native American Housing Assistance and Self-Determination Act of 1996 (25 U.S.C. 4101 et seq.). ``(iii) Funding criteria.--Funds shall be awarded based on need, administrative capacity, and any other funding criteria established by the Secretary in a notice published in the Federal Register, after consultation with the Secretary of Veterans Affairs, by a date sufficient to provide for implementation of the program under this subparagraph in accordance with clause (i). ``(iv) Program requirements.--Such funds shall be administered by block grant recipients in accordance with program requirements under Native American Housing Assistance and Self-Determination Act of 1996 in lieu of program requirements under this Act. ``(v) Waiver.--The Secretary may waive, or specify alternative requirements for any provision of any statute or regulation that the Secretary administers in connection with the use of funds made available under this subparagraph, but only upon a finding by the Secretary that such waiver or alternative requirement is necessary to promote administrative efficiency, eliminate delay, consolidate or eliminate duplicative or ineffective requirements or criteria, or otherwise provide for the effective delivery and administration of such supportive housing assistance to Native American veterans. ``(vi) Consultation.--The Secretary and the Secretary of Veterans Affairs shall jointly consult with block grant recipients and any other appropriate tribal organizations to-- ``(I) ensure that block grant recipients administering funds made available under the program under this subparagraph are able to effectively coordinate with providers of supportive services provided in connection with such program; and ``(II) ensure the effective delivery of supportive services to Native American veterans that are homeless or at risk of homelessness eligible to receive assistance under this subparagraph. Consultation pursuant to this clause shall be completed by a date sufficient to provide for implementation of the program under this subparagraph in accordance with clause (i). ``(vii) Notice.--The Secretary shall establish the requirements and criteria for the supported housing and rental assistance program under this subparagraph by notice published in the Federal Register, but shall provide Indian tribes and tribally designated housing agencies an opportunity for comment and consultation before publication of a final notice pursuant to this clause.''. SEC. 502. LOAN GUARANTEES FOR INDIAN HOUSING. Section 184(i)(5) of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1992 (12 U.S.C. 1715z-13a(i)(5)) is amended-- (1) in subparagraph (B), by inserting after the period at the end of the first sentence the following: ``There are authorized to be appropriated for such costs $12,200,000 for each of fiscal years 2014 through 2018.''; and (2) in subparagraph (C)-- (A) by striking ``2008 through 2012'' and inserting ``2014 through 2018''; and (B) by striking ``such amount as may be provided in appropriation Acts for'' and inserting ``$976,000,000 for each''. TITLE VI--MISCELLANEOUS SEC. 601. LANDS TITLE REPORT COMMISSION. Section 501 of the American Homeownership and Economic Opportunity Act of 2000 (25 U.S.C. 4043 note) is amended-- (1) in subsection (a), by striking ``Subject to sums being provided in advance in appropriations Acts, there'' and inserting ``There''; and (2) in subsection (b)(1) by striking ``this Act'' and inserting ``the Native American Housing Assistance and Self- Determination Reauthorization Act of 2014''. SEC. 602. LIMITATION ON USE OF FUNDS FOR CHEROKEE NATION. Section 801 of the Native American Housing Assistance and Self-Determination Reauthorization Act of 2008 (Public Law 110-411) is amended by striking ``Temporary Order and Temporary Injunction issued on May 14, 2007, by the District Court of the Cherokee Nation'' and inserting ``Order issued September 21, 2011, by the Federal District Court for the District of Columbia''. SEC. 603. LEASEHOLD INTEREST IN TRUST OR RESTRICTED LANDS FOR HOUSING PURPOSES. Section 702 (25 U.S.C. 4211) is amended-- (1) in subsection (c)(1), by inserting ``, whether enacted before, on, or after the date of the enactment of this section'' after ``law''; and (2) by striking ``50 years'' each place such term appears and inserting ``99 years''. SEC. 604. CLERICAL AMENDMENT. The table of contents in section 1(b) is amended by striking the item relating to section 206 (treatment of funds). TITLE VII--DEMONSTRATION PROGRAM FOR ALTERNATIVE PRIVATIZATION AUTHORITY FOR NATIVE AMERICAN HOUSING SEC. 701. DEMONSTRATION PROGRAM. Add at the end of the Act the following new title: ``TITLE IX--DEMONSTRATION PROGRAM FOR ALTERNATIVE PRIVATIZATION AUTHORITY FOR NATIVE AMERICAN HOUSING ``SEC. 901. AUTHORITY. ``(a) In General.--In addition to any other authority provided in this Act for the construction, development, maintenance, and operation of housing for Indian families, the Secretary shall provide the participating tribes having final plans approved pursuant to section 905 with the authority to exercise the activities provided under this title and such plan for the acquisition and development of housing to meet the needs of tribal members. ``(b) Inapplicability of NAHASDA Provisions.--Except as specifically provided otherwise in this title, titles I through IV, VI, and VII shall not apply to a participating tribe's use of funds during any period that the tribe is participating in the demonstration program under this title. ``(c) Continued Applicability of Certain NAHASDA Provisions.--The following provisions of titles I through VIII shall apply to the demonstration program under this title and amounts made available under the demonstration program under this title: ``(1) Subsections (d) and (e) of section 101 (relating to tax exemption). ``(2) Section 101(j) (relating to Federal supply sources). ``(3) Section 101(k) (relating to tribal preference in employment and contracting). ``(4) Section 104 (relating to treatment of program income and labor standards). ``(5) Section 105 (relating to environmental review). ``(6) Section 201(b) (relating to eligible families), except as otherwise provided in this title. ``(7) Section 203(g) (relating to a de minimis exemption for procurement of goods and services). ``(8) Section 702 (relating to 99-year leasehold interests in trust or restricted lands for housing purposes). ``SEC. 902. PARTICIPATING TRIBES. ``(a) Request To Participate.--To be eligible to participate in the demonstration program under this title, an Indian tribe shall submit to the Secretary a notice of intention to participate during the 60-day period beginning on the date of the enactment of this title, in such form and such manner as the Secretary shall provide. ``(b) Cooperative Agreement.--Upon approval under section 905 of the final plan of an Indian tribe for participation in the demonstration program under this title, the Secretary shall enter into a cooperative agreement with the participating tribe that provides such tribe with the authority to carry out activities under the demonstration program. ``(c) Limitation.--The Secretary may not approve more than 20 Indian tribes for participation in the demonstration program under this title. ``SEC. 903. REQUEST FOR QUOTES AND SELECTION OF INVESTOR PARTNER. ``(a) Request for Quotes.--Not later than the expiration of the 180-day period beginning upon notification to the Secretary by an Indian tribe of intention to participate in the demonstration program under this title, the Indian tribe shall-- ``(1) obtain assistance from a qualified entity in assessing the housing needs, including the affordable housing needs, of the tribe; and ``(2) release a request for quotations from entities interested in partnering with the tribe in designing and carrying out housing activities sufficient to meet the tribe's housing needs as identified pursuant to paragraph (1). ``(b) Selection of Investor Partner.-- ``(1) In general.--Except as provided in paragraph (2), not later than the expiration of the 18-month period beginning on the date of the enactment of this title, an Indian tribe requesting to participate in the demonstration program under this title shall-- ``(A) select an investor partner from among the entities that have responded to the tribe's request for quotations; and ``(B) together with such investor partner, establish and submit to the Secretary a final plan that meets the requirements under section 904. ``(2) Exceptions.--The Secretary may extend the period under paragraph (1) for any tribe that-- ``(A) has not received any satisfactory quotation in response to its request released pursuant to subsection (a)(2); or ``(B) has any other satisfactory reason, as determined by the Secretary, for failure to select an investor partner. ``SEC. 904. FINAL PLAN. ``A final plan under this section shall-- ``(1) be developed by the participating tribe and the investor partner for the tribe selected pursuant to section 903(b)(1)(A); ``(2) identify the qualified entity that assisted the tribe in assessing the housing needs of the tribe; ``(3) set forth a detailed description of such projected housing needs, including affordable housing needs, of the tribe, which shall include-- ``(A) a description of such need over the ensuing 24 months and thereafter until the expiration of the ensuing 5-year period or until the affordable housing need is met, whichever occurs sooner; and ``(B) the same information that would be required under section 102 to be included in [[Page 16366]] an Indian housing plan for the tribe, as such requirements may be modified by the Secretary to take consideration of the requirements of the demonstration program under this title; ``(4) provide for specific housing activities sufficient to meet the tribe's housing needs, including affordable housing needs, as identified pursuant to paragraph (3) within the periods referred to such paragraph, which shall include-- ``(A) development of affordable housing (as such term is defined in section 4 of this Act (25 U.S.C. 4103)); ``(B) development of conventional homes for rental, lease- to-own, or sale, which may be combined with affordable housing developed pursuant to subparagraph (A); ``(C) development of housing infrastructure, including housing infrastructure sufficient to serve affordable housing developed under the plan; and ``(D) investments by the investor partner for the tribe, the participating tribe, members of the participating tribe, and financial institutions and other outside investors necessary to provide financing for the development of housing under the plan and for mortgages for tribal members purchasing such housing; ``(5) provide that the participating tribe will agree to provide long-term leases to tribal members sufficient for lease-to-own arrangements for, and sale of, the housing developed pursuant to paragraph (4); ``(6) provide that the participating tribe-- ``(A) will be liable for delinquencies under mortgage agreements for housing developed under the plan that are financed under the plan and entered into by tribal members; and ``(B) shall, upon foreclosure under such mortgages, take possession of such housing and have the responsibility for making such housing available to other tribal members; ``(7) provide for sufficient protections, in the determination of the Secretary, to ensure that the tribe and the Federal Government are not liable for the acts of the investor partner or of any contractors; ``(8) provide that the participating tribe shall have sole final approval of design and location of housing developed under the plan; ``(9) set forth specific deadlines and schedules for activities to be undertaken under the plan and set forth the responsibilities of the participating tribe and the investor partner; ``(10) set forth specific terms and conditions of return on investment by the investor partner and other investors under the plan, and provide that the participating tribe shall pledge grant amounts allocated for the tribe pursuant to title III for such return on investment; ``(11) set forth the terms of a cooperative agreement on the operation and management of the current assistance housing stock and current housing stock for the tribe assisted under the preceding titles of this Act; ``(12) set forth any plans for sale of affordable housing of the participating tribe under section 907 and, if included, plans sufficient to meet the requirements of section 907 regarding meeting future affordable housing needs of the tribe; ``(13) set forth terms for enforcement of the plan, including an agreement regarding jurisdiction of any actions under or to enforce the plan, including a waiver of immunity; and ``(14) include such other information as the participating tribe and investor partner consider appropriate. ``SEC. 905. HUD REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF PLAN. ``(a) In General.--Not later than the expiration of the 90- day period beginning upon a submission by an Indian tribe of a final plan under section 904 to the Secretary, the Secretary shall-- ``(1) review the plan and the process by which the tribe solicited requests for quotations from investors and selected the investor partner; and ``(2)(A) approve the plan, unless the Secretary determines that-- ``(i) the assessment of the tribe's housing needs by the qualified entity, or as set forth in the plan pursuant to section 904(3), is inaccurate or insufficient; ``(ii) the process established by the tribe to solicit requests for quotations and select an investor partner was insufficient or negligent; or ``(iii) the plan is insufficient to meet the housing needs of the tribe, as identified in the plan pursuant to section 904(3); ``(B) approve the plan, on the condition that the participating tribe and the investor make such revisions to the plan as the Secretary may specify as appropriate to meet the needs of the tribe for affordable housing; or ``(C) disapprove the plan, only if the Secretary determines that the plan fails to meet the minimal housing standards and requirements set forth in this Act and the Secretary notifies the tribe of the elements requiring the disapproval. ``(b) Action Upon Disapproval.-- ``(1) Re-submission of plan.--Subject to paragraph (2), in the case of any disapproval of a final plan of an Indian tribe pursuant to subsection (a)(3), the Secretary shall allow the tribe a period of 180 days from notification to the tribe of such disapproval to re-submit a revised plan for approval. ``(2) Limitation.--If the final plan for an Indian tribe is disapproved twice and resubmitted twice pursuant to the authority under paragraph (1) and, upon such second re- submission of the plan the Secretary disapproves the plan, the tribe may not re-submit the plan again and shall be ineligible to participate in the demonstration program under this title. ``(c) Tribe Authority of Housing Design and Location.--The Secretary may not disapprove a final plan under section 904, or condition approval of such a plan, based on the design or location of any housing to be developed or assisted under the plan. ``(d) Failure To Notify.--If the Secretary does not notify a participating tribe submitting a final plan of approval, conditional approval, or disapproval of the plan before the expiration of the period referred to in paragraph (1), the plan shall be considered as approved for all purposes of this title. ``SEC. 906. TREATMENT OF NAHASDA ALLOCATION. ``Amounts otherwise allocated for a participating tribe under title III of this Act (25 U.S.C. 4151 et seq.) shall not be made available to the tribe under titles I through VIII, but shall only be available for the tribe, upon request by the tribe and approval by the Secretary, for the following purposes: ``(1) Return on investment.--Such amounts as are pledged by a participating tribe pursuant to section 904(10) for return on the investment made by the investor partner or other investors may be used by the Secretary to ensure such full return on investment. ``(2) Administrative expenses.--The Secretary may provide to a participating tribe, upon the request of a tribe, not more than 10 percent of any annual allocation made under title III for the tribe during such period for administrative costs of the tribe in completing the processes to carry out sections 903 and 904. ``(3) Housing infrastructure costs.--A participating tribe may use such amounts for housing infrastructure costs associated with providing affordable housing for the tribe under the final plan. ``(4) Maintenance; tenant services.--A participating tribe may use such amounts for maintenance of affordable housing for the tribe and for housing services, housing management services, and crime prevention and safety activities described in paragraphs (3), (4), and (5), respectively, of section 202. ``SEC. 907. RESALE OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING. ``Notwithstanding any other provision of this Act, a participating tribe may, in accordance with the provisions of the final plan of the tribe approved pursuant to section 905, resell any affordable housing developed with assistance made available under this Act for use other than as affordable housing, but only if the tribe provides such assurances as the Secretary determines are appropriate to ensure that-- ``(1) the tribe is meeting its need for affordable housing; ``(2) will provide affordable housing in the future sufficient to meet future affordable housing needs; and ``(3) will use any proceeds only to meet such future affordable housing needs or as provided in section 906. ``SEC. 908. REPORTS, AUDITS, AND COMPLIANCE. ``(a) Annual Reports by Tribe.--Each participating tribe shall submit a report to the Secretary annually regarding the progress of the tribe in complying with, and meeting the deadlines and schedules set forth under the approved final plan for the tribe. Such reports shall contain such information as the Secretary shall require. ``(b) Reports to Congress.--The Secretary shall submit a report to the Congress annually describing the activities and progress of the demonstration program under this title, which shall-- ``(1) summarize the information in the reports submitted by participating tribes pursuant to subsection (a); ``(2) identify the number of tribes that have selected an investor partner pursuant to a request for quotations; ``(3) include, for each tribe applying for participating in the demonstration program whose final plan was disapproved under section 905(a)(2)(C), a detailed description and explanation of the reasons for disapproval and all actions taken by the tribe to eliminate the reasons for disapproval, and identify whether the tribe has re-submitted a final plan; ``(4) identify, by participating tribe, any amounts requested and approved for use under section 906; and ``(5) identify any participating tribes that have terminated participation in the demonstration program and the circumstances of such terminations. ``(c) Audits.--The Secretary shall provide for audits among participating tribes to ensure that the final plans for such tribes are being implemented and complied with. Such audits shall include on-site visits with participating tribes and requests for documentation appropriate to ensure such compliance. ``SEC. 909. TERMINATION OF TRIBAL PARTICIPATION. ``(a) Termination of Participation.--A participating tribe may terminate participation in the demonstration program under [[Page 16367]] this title at any time, subject to this section. ``(b) Effect on Existing Obligations.-- ``(1) No automatic termination.--Termination by a participating tribe in the demonstration program under this section shall not terminate any obligations of the tribe under agreements entered into under the demonstration program with the investor partner for the tribe or any other investors or contractors. ``(2) Authority to mutually terminate agreements.--Nothing in this title may be construed to prevent a tribe that terminates participation in the demonstration program under this section and any party with which the tribe has entered into an agreement from mutually agreeing to terminate such agreement. ``(c) Receipt of Remaining Grant Amounts.--The Secretary shall provide for grants to be made in accordance with, and subject to the requirements of, this Act for any amounts remaining after use pursuant to section 906 from the allocation under title III for a participating tribe that terminates participation in the demonstration program. ``(d) Costs and Obligations.--The Secretary shall not be liable for any obligations or costs incurred by an Indian tribe during its participation in the demonstration program under this title. ``SEC. 910. FINAL REPORT. ``Not later than the expiration of the 5-year period beginning on the date of the enactment of this title, the Secretary shall submit a final report to the Congress regarding the effectiveness of the demonstration program, which shall include-- ``(1) an assessment of the success, under the demonstration program, of participating tribes in meeting their housing needs, including affordable housing needs, on tribal land; ``(2) recommendations for any improvements in the demonstration program; and ``(3) a determination of whether the demonstration should be expanded into a permanent program available for Indian tribes to opt into at any time and, if so, recommendations for such expansion, including any legislative actions necessary to expand the program. ``SEC. 911. DEFINITIONS. ``For purposes of this title, the following definitions shall apply: ``(1) Affordable housing.--The term `affordable housing' has the meaning given such term in section 4 (25 U.S.C. 4103). ``(2) Housing infrastructure.--The term `housing infrastructure' means basic facilities, services, systems, and installations necessary or appropriate for the functioning of a housing community, including facilities, services, systems, and installations for water, sewage, power, communications, and transportation. ``(3) Long-term lease.--The term `long-term lease' means an agreement between a participating tribe and a tribal member that authorizes the tribal member to occupy a specific plot of tribal lands for 50 or more years and to request renewal of the agreement at least once. ``(4) Participating tribes.--The term `participating tribe' means an Indian tribe for which a final plan under section 904 for participation in the demonstration program under this title has been approved by the Secretary under section 905. ``SEC. 912. NOTICE. ``The Secretary shall establish any requirements and criteria as may be necessary to carry out the demonstration program under this title by notice published in the Federal Register.''. SEC. 702. CLERICAL AMENDMENTS. The table of contents in section 1(b) is amended by inserting after the item relating to section 705 the following: ``TITLE VIII--HOUSING ASSISTANCE FOR NATIVE HAWAIIANS ``Sec. 801. Definitions. ``Sec. 802. Block grants for affordable housing activities. ``Sec. 803. Housing plan. ``Sec. 804. Review of plans. ``Sec. 805. Treatment of program income and labor standards. ``Sec. 806. Environmental review. ``Sec. 807. Regulations. ``Sec. 808. Effective date. ``Sec. 809. Affordable housing activities. ``Sec. 810. Eligible affordable housing activities. ``Sec. 811. Program requirements. ``Sec. 812. Types of investments. ``Sec. 813. Low-income requirement and income targeting. ``Sec. 814. Lease requirements and tenant selection. ``Sec. 815. Repayment. ``Sec. 816. Annual allocation. ``Sec. 817. Allocation formula. ``Sec. 818. Remedies for noncompliance. ``Sec. 819. Monitoring of compliance. ``Sec. 820. Performance reports. ``Sec. 821. Review and audit by Secretary. ``Sec. 822. General Accounting Office audits. ``Sec. 823. Reports to Congress. ``Sec. 824. Authorization of appropriations. ``TITLE IX --DEMONSTRATION PROGRAM FOR ALTERNATIVE PRIVATIZATION AUTHORITY FOR NATIVE AMERICAN HOUSING ``Sec. 901. Authority. ``Sec. 902. Participating tribes. ``Sec. 903. Request for quotes and selection of investor partner. ``Sec. 904. Final plan. ``Sec. 905. HUD review and approval of plan. ``Sec. 906. Treatment of NAHASDA allocation. ``Sec. 907. Resale of affordable housing. ``Sec. 908. Reports, audits, and compliance. ``Sec. 909. Termination of tribal participation. ``Sec. 910. Final report. ``Sec. 911. Definitions. ``Sec. 912. Notice.''. TITLE VIII--HOUSING FOR NATIVE HAWAIIANS SEC. 801. REAUTHORIZATION OF NATIVE HAWAIIAN HOMEOWNERSHIP ACT. Section 824 (25 U.S.C. 4243) is amended by striking ``such sums as may be necessary'' and all that follows through the period at the end and inserting ``$13,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2015 through 2019.''. SEC. 802. REAUTHORIZATION OF LOAN GUARANTEES FOR NATIVE HAWAIIAN HOUSING. Section 184A(j)(5) of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1992 (12 U.S.C. 1715z-13b(j)(5)) is amended-- (1) in subparagraph (B), by inserting after the period at the end of the first sentence the following: ``There are authorized to be appropriated for such costs $386,000 for each of fiscal years 2015 through 2019.''; and (2) in subparagraph (C), by striking ``for each of fiscal years'' and all that follows through the period at the end and inserting ``for each of fiscal years 2015 through 2019 with an aggregate outstanding principal amount not exceeding $41,504,000 for each such fiscal year.''. The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from New Mexico (Mr. Pearce) and the gentlewoman from Wisconsin (Ms. Moore) each will control 20 minutes. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from New Mexico. General Leave Mr. PEARCE. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and submit extraneous materials for the Record on H.R. 4329, as amended, currently under consideration. The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from New Mexico? There was no objection. Mr. PEARCE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, the Native American Housing Assistance and Self- Determination Act was first signed into law in 1996. This 5-year authorization bill was conceptualized not to simply be another Federal subsidy for Native Americans but rather a bridge to assist millions in creating a better living condition, create housing opportunities, and find prosperity for tribal members. My family's story is exactly this one: when I was born, Dad and Mom had to move the chickens out of the shack that we moved into. That building still has a dirt floor in it today and wires in the windows. I have seen housing conditions similar to this still in New Mexico. I understand that my family made its way up the prosperity ladder starting, first, with owning our own home and, second, with then finding other ways to achieve asset acquisitions, and the same thing can happen for Native Americans. In the last 10 years, NAHASDA, as it is known, has become a driving force for positive change and improvement on tribal lands. Through increased access to safe and affordable housing and lease-to-own programs aimed at providing rural tribes with a means for self-growth, the program has provided flexibility and independence to tribal members nationwide. This year we are not only reauthorizing this critical bill that provides much-needed housing; we are also attempting to continue NAHASDA's tradition of transforming housing programs. We are doing so by capturing and enhancing market efficiencies and the effectiveness of streamlined processes to continue building prosperity, something that has been elusive on tribal lands for too long. I would like to thank all of those who have assisted in the development and promotion of this legislation, Congressman Don Young, Congressman Tom Cole, Congresswoman Gwen Moore, Congressman Denny Heck, and Congresswoman Maxine Waters, who made great suggestions during the [[Page 16368]] markup of this bill. Along with their staffs, they have worked tirelessly to make the reauthorization of this act possible and a truly bipartisan effort that achieves many of the reforms requested by Native American tribes nationwide. Working together, we were able to reduce the burden on tribes and expand the opportunities in Native American housing. These reforms will result in more efficient use of taxpayer money and provide approval of projects with greater speed, allowing tribes to focus money and resources on development and innovation instead of spending inordinate amounts of time and money on administrative requirements. Ultimately, this will provide more families with homes. Mr. Speaker, I commend HUD for truly embracing the need for more modernized programs with more accountability, transparency, and increased self-determination among Native Americans. Their willingness to engage with our offices, my counterparts working on this issue, and the committee has allowed us to create a more united product. Some Native Americans, upon reading the bill, have declared these changes and ideas will become transformational if they are adopted into law. Transformational is what we all came here to do. H.R. 4329 includes a number of reforms, updates, and additions to the originating legislation, which are widely supported across Native American tribes. Since passage out of the Financial Services Committee, our office has received countless letters of support for passage of the bill. In discussions with tribal housing councils and tribal leaders, there was great frustration with HUD for continued delays, and in extreme cases, failure to respond altogether. This legislation includes a compromise way forward to address this shortcoming. It sets a requirement that HUD shall respond to tribes within a 60-day period, ensuring timely responsiveness, but it does this without jeopardizing HUD's oversight responsibility. This reauthorization has a special provision that provides tribal businesses with greater opportunities for employment on tribal housing projects. The bill provides tribes with the flexibility to create independent maximum rent requirements dictated by the needs of their communities and with the flexibility to commingle Indian Health Service funds with NAHASDA money to construct sanitation facilities and greater infrastructure around housing developments. Working with the administration, my legislation includes language to recoup unexpended funds within the program. The agreement that was reached is more accommodating to tribal needs than the original request, allowing more room for tribes to work through their balances while meeting the need for efficiencies in the system. Finally, we have included a new demonstration project in the bill designed to attract greater private financing and more developers to invest private money in housing projects on tribal lands. This program envisions the same privatization projects that occurred on military land and succeeded in providing great numbers of new houses for military individuals in a very short period of time. The objective here is to put more Native Americans in homes and work through the backlog of housing needs in ways unseen before on Native lands. NAHASDA was designed to promote development and increase flexibility so that tribes may meet the unique challenges they face and provide the self-determination tribes deserve. The legislation before you today expands upon these principles and represents an opportunity for greater prosperity for a cross-section of our society that in many parts of the Nation is truly in need of assistance. Finally, I would like to thank Chairman Hensarling and Majority Leader McCarthy and their staff for their willingness to address this issue and working with me to bring it up to date. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time. Ms. MOORE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, this day is a culmination of a lot of time, a lot of work, and a lot of conversations back and forth, but, again, it is the best work that we have been able to produce in a bipartisan manner. It is not perfect, but I do want to thank all of our partners in this process. Representatives Cole, Hanabusa, Heck, Kildee, Pearce, and Young have really been just outstanding partners. I really want to thank Ranking Member Waters. She has been supportive, constructive, and, not to mention, exceedingly patient. I also want to thank the Native American community. The National Congress of American Indians, the National American Indian Housing Council, and many individual tribes from across the country have provided their expertise, their comments, their education, and their energy every single step of the way. My very first meeting in the 112th Congress was with one of my Wisconsin tribes, and I assured them that I would keep fighting to get NAHASDA to the floor, this reauthorization that honors the unique needs and sovereignty of the Nations of the First People, and H.R. 4329 keeps that promise. It is a model for how Congress can work. Of course, again, there is not 100 percent agreement on every provision. I am waiting for the perfect bill. But we cannot let the perfect stand in the way of the possible. We must do what is the best for our tribal communities at this time. NAHASDA provides tribal governments the ability to provide safe and affordable housing to tribal communities consistent with their status as sovereign. And it is no small task. Some of the poorest and most remote communities in this country are Native American. In fact, the three poorest communities in the United States are Native American. Improvements that this bill accomplishes include expediting certain Federal approvals, providing rental assistance for Native American veterans, and providing that all Native people are eligible for NAHASDA. Expediting approval ends costly administrative duplication and delays, which is important due to unique timing and building challenges on reservations. I am hopeful that when I yield time to another one of my colleagues, Mr. Heck, that he will expand on the provisions that we are proud of in this bill regarding Native American veterans. We are going to have several speakers, Mr. Speaker, who are going to comment on how we, after much back and forth, have included all Native people in this bill. With that, I reserve the balance of my time. Mr. PEARCE. Mr. Speaker, at this time I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Alaska (Mr. Young), who has devoted not just time this year but decades of helping Native Americans. Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to support H.R. 4329, the NAHASDA reauthorization act of 2014. Over the last 2 years, I have had the privilege of working with a bipartisan group of my colleagues on this crucial legislation. I would like to first start by thanking and commending Mr. Pearce for his leadership in sponsoring this bill. This bill wouldn't have been possible without the efforts of Mr. Cole, Ms. Moore, Mr. Denny Heck, Ms. Hanabusa, Mr. Kildee, and all the others. I also would like to thank Chairman Hensarling for his dedication in moving this bill through the committee and for his statesmanship in resolving the difficult issues. I would be remiss without thanking Alex on my staff, who has done great work on this legislation for the good of the First Americans. Finally, it is important to acknowledge the many tribes and organizations that contributed to this legislation. These include the National American Indian Housing Council, which has developed a foundation for the legislation, and the Cook Inlet Housing Authority, which has been a tireless advocate in my State. As my colleagues note, NAHASDA continues to be a successful and well- liked program throughout Indian Country. NAHASDA exemplifies the spirit of self-determination by allowing Native communities to create their own [[Page 16369]] innovative housing assistance programs in ways that best serve their members. This bill upholds the success of NAHASDA and includes improvements to the programs that empower Native communities to better confront their housing challenges. {time} 1430 Furthermore, the bill responsibly streamlines administration of the programs so that both tribes and HUD will spend less time navigating red tape and more time advancing housing that makes a difference for native people. As we pass this bill, the Senate must act quickly to take up the legislation before the end of this Congress. I call on our colleagues in the Senate to recognize the bipartisan nature of the bill and listen to the voices on this side of the aisle in support of Indian Country. It is my hope that the legislation will be signed into law before the end of the year. As I said, I urge and I thank those for passage of this bill, H.R. 4329. Ms. MOORE. Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Murphy), a member on the Financial Services Committee. Mr. MURPHY of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlelady for yielding and for her hard work on the legislation. I rise in support of reauthorizing the Native American Housing Assistance and Self-Determination Act. Communities are built upon access to safe, quality, affordable housing, but for many of America's great tribal nations, bureaucratic red tape has restricted tribes' abilities to make the most of scarce Federal housing dollars. While Native Americans face some of the worst housing and economic conditions in the country, this is simply unacceptable. Giving control of housing grants to tribal nations just makes sense. In addition to providing housing, the Miccosukee Indian Tribe of Florida preserves tradition, fights to protect the Florida Everglades, and works to develop the Tamiami Trail Reservation, using the flexibility NAHASDA provides to grow native-owned construction and building material businesses. I thank the gentleman from New Mexico (Mr. Pearce), chairman and ranking member of the committee, and the tribal leaders for their work on this important bipartisan legislation that provides much-needed reform to keep our Nation's promise to tribal nations and strengthen their communities. I urge my colleagues to support this bipartisan legislation. Mr. PEARCE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. There are many different Native American groups across the country who have sent letters of support, including the National American Indian Housing Council, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, Southwest Tribal Housing Alliance, Nevada and California Indian housing authorities, and the Northwest Indian Housing Association. In New Mexico, the Acoma Pueblo, Laguna Pueblo, Mescalero Apache, Jicarilla Apache, Santa Clara Pueblo, the Northern Pueblo, Santo Domingo Pueblo, and the Navajo Nation offers its support. Indian tribes all across the country are lending their support. I did note that I had overlooked the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Kildee) on the other side of the aisle. His office was also greatly involved and instrumental in this bill, and I would like to recognize those efforts. I reserve the balance of my time. Ms. MOORE. Mr. Speaker, I am so happy to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Kildee), who came here in his running shoes and really came here because of his relationship to his uncle who is one of our former retired colleagues, Mr. Kildee of Michigan, and the younger Mr. Kildee has been a tremendous asset in terms of putting this bill together. Mr. KILDEE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from Wisconsin (Ms. Moore) for her great work on this legislation and her kind words, as well as Ranking Member Waters, and to Mr. Pearce who has pursued this legislation relentlessly, Mr. Young, and others, I think this is a fine moment for us. It is an exercise in bipartisanship which we don't see enough of around here. This is important legislation that has taken too long for Congress to bring to the floor. I think we all agree that it is long overdue. Our responsibilities, our trust relationships to the tribes has to be adhered to. I will say no bill is perfect, and I do support this legislation with some concerns primarily around, as I voiced in committee, the demonstration project that is included in this bill which is, by some, viewed as a step toward privatization of the NAHASDA program. I know most don't feel that way, but some feel it might lead to that. Tribes already have the ability to contract with nonprofit or for- profit private developers in building and rehabilitating tribal housing. This particular program, the demonstration program, is not included in the National American Indian Housing Council's NAHASDA recommendations, and I think it is important that we listen to Indian Country and those in the tribal communities because the very name of this bill has to do with self-determination, and I think it is important that we adhere to the interests of those sovereign tribes that will be administering this program. There are other provisions that will be exempt from the NAHASDA requirements if in fact the privatization effort goes forward, so I would just be cautioning those tribal organizations and housing authorities that will be implementing under this law to take care to examine those relationships that they might enter into before pursuing the pilot program. I will finish by saying that it is important that this legislation move forward. No bill is perfect. This is a very good step forward. I commend leaders on both sides of the aisle for bringing this to the floor, and I look forward to it becoming law very soon. Mr. PEARCE. Mr. Speaker, again, I appreciate the observations by the gentleman. We had time to discuss after the hearing and after the markup, and at that time, it was pointed out that the pilot project is completely voluntary, easy to opt into and easy to opt out of. It is not our intent to trap or entrap anyone, but instead open a door if they desire to go through it. I think there will be tribes that can go in and build all of houses that they need in a very short period of time. That is what we are looking for, but again, I take his observations very seriously, and we have looked for flaws in the program that might be hooks or have unintended consequences. I reserve the balance of my time. Ms. MOORE. Mr. Speaker, I am absolutely delighted to yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Hawaii (Ms. Hanabusa), who is not a member of the committee but weighed in heavily on the final draft that is before us today. Ms. HANABUSA. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from Wisconsin not only for yielding, but for her hard work and advocacy for native people. I rise in support of this important piece of legislation for all of our native people, and I want to thank the chair and the ranking member of the Financial Services Committee for moving the bill forward. Our native people, all native people, the Native Hawaiians included, have a very strong tie to the land. In Hawaii, it is called the aina. The need to have homeownership and to be tied to the land equates to the preservation of the culture and of the people. In Hawaii, we continue to have beneficiaries of a Federal law called the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act of 1920, which Congress did pass, who are still waiting to get on the land--still waiting. This reauthorization will bring us closer to fulfilling the intent and the purpose of that act. I appreciate the bipartisan efforts which have gone into this bill, and I would like to point out that title VIII, the portion that is relevant to the Native Hawaiians, expired in 2005. It is almost 10 years later, and it is only through the bipartisan efforts of this committee and those like my good friend from Alaska (Mr. Young) and [[Page 16370]] Mr. Cole from Oklahoma, who have managed to push this forward with all of our strong advocates on the committee as well. I ask that all Members of this body join me in supporting H.R. 4329 for all the native people because it is how we define and how we treat our native people that makes us a better Nation and a great Nation. Mr. PEARCE. Mr. Speaker, again, recognizing the gentlelady from Hawaii, we had an opportunity to visit on the floor multiple times, and I recognize her inputs and just again would salute her for her support of the bill. I reserve the balance of my time. Ms. MOORE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Hawaii (Ms. Gabbard), who is one of many people who participated in getting this bill to where it is today. Ms. GABBARD. Mr. Speaker, today, I rise proudly in support of H.R. 4329, the Native American Housing Assistance and Self-Determination Reauthorization of 2014. In the 18 years since its enactment, this legislation has strengthened indigenous self-determination by empowering native nations to empower their low-income families and households by assisting with their affordable housing needs. The State of Hawaii's Department of Hawaiian Home Lands uses these funds to manage a trust that Congress established for the rehabilitation of the Native Hawaiian people. Over 1,400 low-income families in Hawaii have benefited from these services, and in many cases, homeownership would not have been possible given the $640,000 median price of a single-family home on the island of Oahu. I would like to give one quick example of the Nakihei family on the island of Molokai. Brent and Amber Nakihei could not have afforded to remain in the neighborhood where Brent grew up, but they partnered with the Molokai Habitat for Humanity and Hawaiian Homes to build a new three-bedroom, one-bath house in 2007. They invested 700 hours of work towards construction of that house, and their four children will now learn the responsibility of homeownership from a young age and have a safe home to grow up in. Passage of this legislation will continue to have a tremendous impact by enabling other families like the Nakihei family. Nationwide passage of this legislation also would represent an important step to removing roadblocks to economic success in native communities and would reaffirm the House's longstanding commitment to tribal sovereignty and self-determination. I thank my colleagues, Chairman Hensarling, Ranking Member Waters, and Representative Moore for their outstanding leadership in allowing this legislation to move forward, as well as longtime advocate Representative Young, Congresswoman Hanabusa, and Dan Kildee who worked very hard on this legislation. I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting H.R. 4329. Mr. PEARCE. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time. Ms. MOORE. Mr. Speaker, I am delighted to yield such time as she may consume to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Waters), the ranking member of the Financial Services Committee, who has really put a lot of time into this bill. As the ranking member, she serves on all of the subcommittees, but she has been particularly passionate about her stewardship over this bill. Ms. WATERS. Mr. Speaker, this bill will provide an important and long overdue reauthorization of the Native American Housing Assistance and Self-Determination Act, or NAHASDA. Through NAHASDA, the Federal Government provides housing assistance to Native Americans and Native Hawaiians, two groups that not only experience some of the poorest housing conditions in the Nation, but also face unique barriers to housing due to the legal status of tribal lands. Through block grants and loan guarantees, NAHASDA ensures Federal assistance is tailored to address their needs while respecting their right to self-determination. I am encouraged that my Republican colleagues have finally agreed to include a provision to reauthorize Native Hawaiian programs. As a supporter of the reauthorization of NAHASDA, I did not object to the bill before us today moving forward under suspension; however, this is one of those times, while you understand very well why reauthorization is necessary, I must go on record to continue to support a fight and a struggle that I have been involved in with some of my colleagues for many years. The bill will do nothing to protect the Cherokee Freedmen-- descendants of former African American slaves of the Cherokee--who are facing possible expulsion by the Cherokee Nation. The ancestors of the Freedmen marched with the Cherokee on the Trail of Tears; yet, today, their tragic history continues as the Freedmen face ongoing discrimination from the tribe that they call their own. {time} 1445 For the past several years, under the leadership of former Members, including former Congresswoman Carolyn Kilpatrick and former Congressman Mel Watt, the Congressional Black Caucus has stood up for the rights of the Cherokee Freedmen. I attempted to deal with this issue by way of an amendment, but the Republicans again refused to offer protections for the Cherokee Freedmen in this legislation. During the committee markup, my amendment was rejected, which would have made NAHASDA funding to the Cherokee contingent on full recognition of the Freedmen as citizens of the Cherokee Nation. It causes me great pain to not be able to support the continued silence on this issue. Furthermore, there is one other issue that I have to be concerned about. This bill would seriously undercut the central goal of providing affordable housing for low-income Native Americans. It would waive a low-standing tenet of affordable housing known as the ``Brooke rule,'' which states that the maximum rent paid by assisted households must be no more than 30 percent of their income. I have to be concerned about this because this is a rule that is throughout HUD. I do not wish to be part of opening up that door and then having to face that later on as we deal with public housing and assisted housing. This bill strips away this basic safeguard, making low-income Native Americans vulnerable to unlimited increases in rent without any kind of hardship exemptions in place. Lastly, this bill includes a new demonstration program that moves toward increased privatization and deregulation of tribal housing activities. I remain very concerned that this program could have negative impacts on low-income Native American households in participating tribes. I would like to sincerely thank Ms. Moore, Mr. Heck, and Mr. Kildee for their efforts to reach a bipartisan agreement on this bill. I would like to thank Ms. Hanabusa and Ms. Gabbard for the work that they are doing. I won't support the reauthorization in its current form for all the reasons I have stated, but I thank all of those who have worked so hard to try and deal with the need for assistance for both the Hawaiians and the Native Americans in housing. Mr. PEARCE. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time. Ms. MOORE. Mr. Speaker, how much time do I have remaining? The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentlewoman from Wisconsin has 5\1/2\ minutes remaining. The gentleman from New Mexico has 10 minutes remaining. Ms. MOORE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Let me thank again all of the partners in getting this legislation to the floor. I do want to make mention of someone who is not a part of this debate, the gentlewoman from Minnesota, Representative Betty McCollum, who is the cochair of the Native American Caucus. She wanted to make sure that she weighed in during this discussion about the extraordinary need to deal with Native American housing. So many of us believe that Native Americans often are involved in gaming and that they are wealthy and rich, but as the ranking member mentioned, they are subjected to some of the poorest housing conditions in our country. [[Page 16371]] Although we are reauthorizing NAHASDA, none of us should be fooled at all that this will in any way deal with the tremendous need for affordable housing within Native American communities. I, again, am very, very empathetic with the issues, particularly that the ranking member has raised, and I am really hopeful that many of these issues, particularly the issue of the Cherokee Freedmen, will be dealt with. It seems promising to me because of some of the decisions that have been made in courts so far. We do seem to have a Cherokee chairman who is more open, it would seem, to providing membership and retaining membership of the Cherokee Freedmen. I, again, am happy that the Native Hawaiians are in this bill. I think that as we move forward, we should be ever mindful to make sure that nothing that we have done here will preempt the Native Americans' sovereignty or sovereignty status. Again, I want to thank all of my partners. I yield back the balance of my time. Mr. PEARCE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Cole), who is a tireless advocate for Native Americans and Native American housing. Mr. COLE. Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend for yielding. I rise to support the Native American Housing Assistance and Self- Determined Reauthorization Act of 2014. I want to begin by thanking my friend Mr. Pearce. Nobody has worked harder on this legislation and, frankly, cared more and done more to make sure that a part of our population that historically has not done well, to say the least, has the opportunity to not only receive some benefits that are appropriately and rightfully theirs, but to take more control over their own destiny and their own housing. I think this legislation does just that. I want to thank Members on both sides of the aisle. I see my good friend from Wisconsin over there who, we worked together on VAWA. I know what her commitment is on Native American issues, and I appreciate that very, very much. This legislation provides Native American tribes with much greater efficiencies when deploying NAHASDA funding. We all know government, however well intentioned, quite often is a pretty clumsy and pretty bureaucratic instrument. Consolidating the environmental review requirements, requiring the HUD Secretary to study and recommend to Congress standards to streamline the construction of Indian housing, recommendations for HUD to establish alternative reporting requirements for tribes, these are all good things that will speed the development of housing and allow tribes to deploy their funds more efficiently. There is also legislation in here to deal with taxpayer protections and tribal accountability to make sure the HUD Secretary has the authority to recoup unexpended funds that are held for too long; it strengthens tribal flexibility and sovereignty; and, finally, it allows tribes to pursue alternative funding sources by encouraging private investment, something that is desperately needed. I know, and happened to come in the last part of the debate, there was some discussion about the Cherokee Freedmen issue. That is an issue I know a fair amount about since the tribe is located in my home State of Oklahoma. I want to agree with Ms. Moore that we do have a chief, Chief Baker, who is extremely concerned about this issue and is trying to work it through. The bill itself, the language, is really just an update from what we did in 2008. We are trying to allow the courts and the tribe to solve the issue. I think they genuinely have made progress that the people here that have had legitimate concerns about this issue can be proud of. I think they will continue to do that. But there is no substantive change in what my friend Mr. Pearce has brought forward and what existing law was in this area. I just want to end once more by thanking my friend Mr. Pearce. Frankly, this bill would not have been on this floor without his diligent work. I certainly want to thank Mr. Hensarling for working with my friend Mr. Pearce, and I want to thank my friends on the other side of the aisle who also have focused a great deal of attention and concern on this issue to try and make sure that the first Americans aren't the last Americans in almost every category. So, again, I thank my friends, and I look forward to the passage of this legislation. Mr. PEARCE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the remainder of my time. I thank the gentleman from Oklahoma and, again, appreciate his leadership. As you have heard, there is no shortage of debate on the bill, but there is also no shortage of people coming together and saying let's pass this bill. I listened with interest to the ranking member. The points that she made today were made during the markup, and, again, I appreciate and respect that and have not set those concerns off on the side. It was absolutely essential that we move the bill forward in order to get this passed in this session, so I appreciate all of the support from our partners across the aisle. This support that you are hearing from Native Americans across the country from people in this Chamber is no coincidence. It comes from hard work, and that hard work has come from both sides of the aisle, but especially from Ms. Moore, Mr. Heck, Mr. Kildee, and, again, Ms. Waters. So thank you all for that dedicated effort. On our side, Mr. Young, Mr. Cole, and Mr. Hensarling have been just vital in getting this kind of pulled together in a fashion that we could bring it here today on suspension. For the past 2 years, my office and I have worked with countless tribal leaders and housing associations nationwide; we have worked with other Members of Congress from both sides of the aisle; we have worked with HUD and the administration--all for one end result, and that is to create greater prosperity for Native Americans. It is that simple. I am proud to cosponsor H.R. 4329 because it does so much to accomplish this goal. For generations, prosperity and growth has evaded many Native American communities. NAHASDA is not designed as an entitlement but, rather, as a tool of empowerment and growth. To date, each reauthorization has built upon the past to make alternations and updates designed to provide greater autonomy and prosperity on tribal lands. H.R. 4329 is no exception. I ask that you join me today in reauthorizing this commonsense yet transformative legislation, which will help millions realize the dream of prosperity. Vote ``yes'' and help break a perpetual cycle of poverty through self-determination and independence. I yield back the balance of my time. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the gentleman from New Mexico (Mr. Pearce) that the House suspend the rules and pass the bill, H.R. 4329, as amended. The question was taken; and (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the rules were suspended and the bill, as amended, was passed. A motion to reconsider was laid on the table. ____________________ HOUSING ASSISTANCE EFFICIENCY ACT Mr. PEARCE. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 2790) to authorize private nonprofit organizations to administer permanent housing rental assistance provided through the Continuum of Care Program under the McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act, and for other purposes. The Clerk read the title of the bill. The text of the bill is as follows: H.R. 2790 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. This Act may be cited as the ``Housing Assistance Efficiency Act''. SEC. 2. AUTHORITY TO ADMINISTER RENTAL ASSISTANCE. Subsection (g) of section 423 of the McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act (42 [[Page 16372]] U.S.C. 11383(g)) is amended by inserting ``private nonprofit organization,'' after ``unit of general local government,''. SEC. 3. REALLOCATION OF FUNDS. Paragraph (1) of section 414(d) of the McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 11373(d)(1)) is amended by striking ``twice'' and inserting ``once''. The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from New Mexico (Mr. Pearce) and the gentlewoman from Wisconsin (Ms. Moore) each will control 20 minutes. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from New Mexico. General Leave Mr. PEARCE. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and to include extraneous materials for the Record on H.R. 2790, currently under consideration. The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from New Mexico? There was no objection. Mr. PEARCE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, the Housing Assistance Efficiency Act was introduced by Scott Peters in July of 2013 as a technical correction to the 2009 HEARTH Act amendments to the McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act. Changes include restoring nonprofit organizations' ability to administer rental assistance programs, as well as alter the way in which HUD reallocates funds. Originally enacted in 1987 as the McKinney Homeless Assistance Act, this legislation created a number of new programs to assist homeless Americans' needs, including food, shelter, health care, and education. Since 1987, it has twice been reauthorized. In 2000, it came to be known as the McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act, with updates including the creation of the HUD Homeless Assistance Grants, the Department of Labor Homeless Veterans Reintegration Program, and others. In 2009, the Homeless Emergency Assistance and Rapid Transition to Housing, the HEARTH Act, amended McKinney-Vento Homeless to combine the Shelter Plus Care and the Supportive Housing Programs into a single, competitive program. Supported by HUD and the administration, the bill before us today will correct unintended consequences created by the HEARTH Act by allowing existing nonprofits that operate CoC programs for leased housing to homeless families and individuals to continue to manage their McKinney-Vento grants as rental assistance. It restores nonprofit participation and maximum community flexibility by delegating authority to these institutions to administer rental assistance. It allows Innovation of Promising Practices. Providing nonprofits with administration of rental assistance will allow these groups to implement new housing practices, which would better assist the communities they are in. It reduces administrative work by allowing reallocation to occur once a year instead of semiannually. I reserve the balance of my time. {time} 1500 Ms. MOORE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I really rise to congratulate and thank the gentleman from California (Mr. Peters) for championing this bill and bringing to our attention a real tremendous cost savings in this HUD program with H.R. 2790, and really providing, using the McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act to provide services to the homeless rather than just additional legal fees, operating costs, additional insurance issues, establishing new internal controls and tracking systems. This is really innovative in terms of how it maximizes the McKinney-Vento moneys. The bill does not include more money, Mr. Speaker. It just allows us to use the small ``c'' that we have more effectively. I yield as much time as he might consume to the gentleman from California (Mr. Peters), the author of H.R. 2790. Mr. PETERS of California. Mr. Speaker, many laws are intended to ensure efficiency in Federal agencies but often have unintended consequences, preventing agencies from serving the public and costing taxpayer money. Currently, the Department of Housing and Urban Development's Continuum of Care Program spends too much time fulfilling administrative obligations instead of helping individuals and families transition out of homelessness and putting them on a path to independent living. Twice a fiscal year, HUD has to reallocate emergency solutions grant program funds that are unused, returned, or otherwise become available in the program, but because almost no funds are unused or become available under the program, the reallocation of funds takes a lot of time and unwarranted human capital to complete. It is administratively more efficient to reallocate funds only once a year. This frees up HUD employees to provide more human resources toward providing better service to constituents, and we shouldn't saddle HUD with more administrative work that isn't helping anyone. In addition to mandatory fund allocations, HUD also faces a mountain of paperwork when it comes to administering rental assistance. Prior to 2009, private nonprofits could administer rental assistance through HUD's Continuum of Care. The HEARTH Act, however, obfuscated rental assistance laws, and private nonprofits were left off the list of entities allowed to administer rental assistance. Currently, only States, units of general local government, or public housing agencies can dispense housing assistance despite nonprofits' substantial experience and their ability to reach vulnerable populations. Private nonprofits can still execute other homelessness programs, but they have to go through public housing agencies or another layer of bureaucracy to get rental assistance to their clients or the landlord. This creates more bureaucratic burdens when individuals and families really need the help quickly to stay in their homes. H.R. 2790, the Housing Assistance Efficiency Act, would remedy both these problems, would make HUD a more efficient agency and get homelessness assistance to those that need it more quickly. This is important in particular to San Diego. We have the third largest homeless population, and it is widely supported in my district and across the country. I thank the gentleman from New Mexico. In their statement supporting this legislation, the San Diego Housing Federation said this bill removes barriers to helping get important resources to those who need it the most, and that is what it is all about. So I urge my colleagues to help pass this legislation to take substantive action to improve government efficiency and help fight chronic homelessness in our country. Ms. MOORE. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time. Mr. PEARCE. Mr. Speaker, I would again like to thank the gentleman for his hard work in this area and for bringing this bill forward. We have no other speakers, and I yield back the balance of my time. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the gentleman from New Mexico (Mr. Pearce) that the House suspend the rules and pass the bill, H.R. 2790. The question was taken; and (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the rules were suspended and the bill was passed. A motion to reconsider was laid on the table. ____________________ WORLD WAR I AMERICAN VETERANS CENTENNIAL COMMEMORATIVE COIN ACT Mr. PEARCE. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 2366) to require the Secretary of the Treasury to mint coins in commemoration of the centennial of World War I, as amended. The Clerk read the title of the bill. The text of the bill is as follows: H.R. 2366 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, [[Page 16373]] SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. This Act may be cited as the ``World War I American Veterans Centennial Commemorative Coin Act''. SEC. 2. FINDINGS; PURPOSE. (a) Findings.--The Congress finds the following: (1) The year 2018 is the 100th anniversary of the signing of the armistice with Germany ending World War I battlefield hostilities. (2) On the 6th of April 1917, the United States of America entered World War I by declaring war against Germany. (3) Two million American soldiers served overseas during World War I. (4) More than four million men and women from the United States served in uniform during World War I. (5) The events of 1914 through 1918 shaped the world and the lives of millions of people for decades. (6) Over 9 million soldiers worldwide lost their lives between 1914 and 1918. (7) The centennial of America's involvement in World War I offers an opportunity for people in the United States to commemorate the commitment of their predecessors. (8) Frank Buckles, the last American veteran from World War I died on February 27, 2011. (9) He was our last direct American link to the ``war to end all wars''. (10) While other great conflicts, including the Civil War, World War II, the Korean War, and the Vietnam War, have all been memorialized on United States commemorative coins, there currently exists no coin to honor the brave veterans of World War I. (11) The 112th Congress established the World War I Centennial Commission to plan, develop, and execute programs, projects, and activities to commemorate the centennial of World War I. (b) Purpose.--The purpose of this Act is to-- (1) commemorate the centennial of America's involvement in World War I; and (2) honor the over 4 million men and women from the United States who served during World War I. SEC. 3. COIN SPECIFICATIONS. (a) $1 Silver Coins.--The Secretary of the Treasury (hereafter in this Act referred to as the ``Secretary'') shall mint and issue not more than 350,000 $1 coins in commemoration of the centennial of America's involvement in World War I, each of which shall-- (1) weigh 26.73 grams; (2) have a diameter of 1.500 inches (38.1 millimeters); and (3) contain 90 percent silver and 10 percent copper. (b) Legal Tender.--The coins minted under this Act shall be legal tender, as provided in section 5103 of title 31, United States Code. (c) Numismatic Items.--For purposes of sections 5134 and 5136 of title 31, United States Code, all coins minted under this Act shall be considered to be numismatic items. SEC. 4. DESIGN OF COINS. (a) Design Requirements.-- (1) In general.--The design of the coins minted under this Act shall be emblematic of the centennial of America's involvement in World War I. (2) Designation and inscriptions.--On each coin minted under this Act, there shall be-- (A) a designation of the value of the coin; (B) an inscription of the year ``2018''; and (C) inscriptions of the words ``Liberty'', ``In God We Trust'', ``United States of America'', and ``E Pluribus Unum''. (b) Selection.--The design for the coins minted under this Act shall be selected by the Secretary based on the winning design from a juried, compensated design competition described under subsection (c). (c) Design Competition.--The Secretary shall hold a competition and provide compensation for its winner to design the obverse and reverse of the coins minted under this Act. The competition shall be held in the following manner: (1) The competition shall be judged by an expert jury chaired by the Secretary and consisting of 3 members from the Citizens Coinage Advisory Committee who shall be elected by such Committee and 3 members from the Commission of Fine Arts who shall be elected by such Commission. (2) The Secretary shall determine compensation for the winning design, which shall be not less than $5,000. (3) The Secretary may not accept a design for the competition unless a plaster model accompanies the design. SEC. 5. ISSUANCE OF COINS. (a) Quality of Coins.--Coins minted under this Act shall be issued in uncirculated and proof qualities. (b) Mint Facility.--Only one facility of the United States Mint may be used to strike any particular quality of the coins minted under this Act. (c) Period for Issuance.--The Secretary may issue coins under this Act only during the calendar year beginning on January 1, 2018. SEC. 6. SALE OF COINS. (a) Sale Price.--The coins issued under this Act shall be sold by the Secretary at a price equal to the sum of-- (1) the face value of the coins; (2) the surcharge provided in section 7 with respect to such coins; and (3) the cost of designing and issuing the coins (including labor, materials, dies, use of machinery, overhead expenses, marketing, and shipping). (b) Bulk Sales.--The Secretary shall make bulk sales of the coins issued under this Act at a reasonable discount. (c) Prepaid Orders.-- (1) In general.--The Secretary shall accept prepaid orders for the coins minted under this Act before the issuance of such coins. (2) Discount.--Sale prices with respect to prepaid orders under paragraph (1) shall be at a reasonable discount. SEC. 7. SURCHARGES. (a) In General.--All sales of coins issued under this Act shall include a surcharge of $10 per coin. (b) Distribution.--Subject to section 5134(f) of title 31, United States Code, all surcharges received by the Secretary from the sale of coins issued under this Act shall be paid by the Secretary to the United States Foundation for the Commemoration of the World Wars, to assist the World War I Centennial Commission in commemorating the centenary of World War I. (c) Audits.--The Comptroller General of the United States shall have the right to examine such books, records, documents, and other data of the United States Foundation for the Commemoration of the World Wars as may be related to the expenditures of amounts paid under subsection (b). (d) Limitation.--Notwithstanding subsection (a), no surcharge may be included with respect to the issuance under this Act of any coin during a calendar year if, as of the time of such issuance, the issuance of such coin would result in the number of commemorative coin programs issued during such year to exceed the annual 2 commemorative coin program issuance limitation under section 5112(m)(1) of title 31, United States Code. The Secretary may issue guidance to carry out this subsection. SEC. 8. FINANCIAL ASSURANCES. The Secretary shall take such actions as may be necessary to ensure that-- (1) minting and issuing coins under this Act will not result in any net cost to the United States Government; and (2) no funds, including applicable surcharges, shall be disbursed to any recipient designated in section 7 until the total cost of designing and issuing all of the coins authorized by this Act (including labor, materials, dies, use of machinery, overhead expenses, marketing, and shipping) is recovered by the United States Treasury, consistent with sections 5112(m) and 5134(f) of title 31, United States Code. The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from New Mexico (Mr. Pearce) and the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Cleaver) each will control 20 minutes. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from New Mexico. General Leave Mr. PEARCE. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous materials for the Record on H.R. 2366, as amended, currently under consideration. The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from New Mexico? There was no objection. Mr. PEARCE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, a few short weeks ago, the world marked the 96th anniversary of the signing of the peace accords between the Allied Forces and Germany that ended what, at the time, was called the Great War. Sadly, it was only the first of what we now call World Wars because it was followed only two short decades later by the beginning of what became known as World War II. That anniversary, which America today calls Veterans Day, was, for years, called Armistice Day, and it is still called that across Europe. Four years from now, November 11, 2018, will mark the signing of that armistice. It will be 100 years since the end of that ugly, bloody war that ushered in aerial warfare, chemical weapons, tanks, and a host of other horrors. Mr. Speaker, in the ensuing century we have not managed to move past war, and it is well that we remember its costs. For that reason, I rise in strong support of this legislation before us, H.R. 2366, introduced by the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Lamborn) along with the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Cleaver). The World War I American Veterans Centennial Commemorative Coin Act calls for the Treasury Secretary to [[Page 16374]] mint and make available for sale no more than 350,000 silver coins in recognition of the centenary of the end of that war. The veterans of the Great War are long gone, the last having died nearly 4 years ago. It is well that we remember, though, that nearly 4 million Americans, men and women, served in uniform during the First World War. Half of them served overseas, and some even volunteered to fight for other Allied armies even before the U.S. entered the war in April of 1917. Of those 4 million veterans, even those who are not students of military history know some of the names, such as General John Joseph Pershing, known as ``Black Jack'' Pershing, who led the American Expeditionary Forces in that war and became the only general of the armies promoted to that rank while he was alive. Sergeant Alvin York was perhaps the best known and most decorated soldier, winning a Medal of Honor for leading an attack on a nest of enemy machine guns at the height of the Meuse-Argonne battles in France, capturing 32 of them and 132 enemies while killing 28. James Norman Hall, an Iowa youngster, went to France before the U.S. entered the war to fly with the American-staffed Lafayette Escadrille of the French Air Corps, and later drifted to the South Seas where he cowrote the ``Mutiny on the Bounty'' trilogy. Mr. Speaker, the coins authorized by this legislation would be sold at a price that would recoup all costs to taxpayers. The sale price would include a surcharge that, after requirements for raising private matching funds are met, would support the work of the World War I Centennial Commission established by the 111th Congress to plan and execute activities marking the centennial of the war. This legislation currently has 302 cosponsors, and a companion bill introduced by Senator Blunt has 72. Mr. Speaker, while not celebrating this or any other war, I urge Members to soberly reflect on the horrors and tragedy of this first global conflict and to support this legislation. I reserve the balance of my time. Mr. CLEAVER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 2366, the World War I American Veterans Centennial Commemorative Coin Act, introduced by Representative Doug Lamborn of Colorado's Fifth Congressional District, and seek its immediate passage. Mr. Speaker, as you may know, this summer marked the 100th anniversary of the start of World War I. The United States formally joined the war in April of 1917. During that time, more than 4.7 million Americans served, and of those brave men and women, more than 116,000 soldiers made the ultimate sacrifice. While other great conflicts, including the Civil War, World War II, the Korean war, and the Vietnam war, have all been memorialized on United States commemorative coins, there currently exists no coin to honor the brave veterans of World War I. This bill would honor their service by directing the Secretary of the Treasury to, number one, hold a competition to design the coins and, number two, mint and issue $1 silver coins in commemoration of the centennial of America's involvement in World War I. The sale of the coins will assist the World War I Centennial Commission in raising funds that will be utilized in commemorating U.S. involvement in the Great War and educating a new generation of Americans about the role the United States assumed in that war. I am also pleased to report that the passage of this bill entails no net cost to taxpayers. I would urge my colleagues to join me in passing this commonsense, bipartisan bill without further delay. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time. Mr. PEARCE. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Lamborn). Mr. LAMBORN. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my friend and colleague from the State of New Mexico for his leadership. I rise in support of H.R. 2366, which I introduced with the help of my colleague, Representative Emanuel Cleaver, which would require the Secretary of the Treasury to mint coins in commemoration of the centennial of World War I. The year 2018 will be the 100th anniversary of the signing of the armistice with Germany, marking the end of battlefield hostilities in World War I. During the war, more than 4 million men and women from the United States served in uniform, and more than 100,000 gave their lives. To honor their service and sacrifices, Congress created the World War I Centennial Commission in 2013 and tasked them with planning and executing activities to commemorate the centennial of World War I through the use of private donations and coin sales. By requiring the Secretary of the Treasury to mint coins to commemorate this centennial, this bill would allow us to honor the memory, service, and sacrifices of the brave veterans of World War I, while also providing the means to pay tribute to the end of World War I battlefield hostilities. Other great conflicts, including the Civil War, World War II, the Korean war, and the Vietnam war, have all been memorialized on United States commemorative coins, but no such honor has been extended to the brave veterans of World War I. This year, 2014, as has been said, is the 100th anniversary of the start of World War I, making it a very fitting tribute that we pass the measure for this year. It is my pleasure to offer H.R. 2366. I am grateful for the opportunity to work with both Representative Emanuel Cleaver and Senator Roy Blunt on this important bill. Together, we have gathered 300 cosponsors in the House for this patriotic bill. It will not cost the U.S. Treasury anything, as has been said, but, on a voluntary basis, will actually raise money. It is no coincidence that Representatives and Senators from the State of Missouri are helping on this effort. There is a wonderful memorial to World War I in Kansas City, Missouri, with an adjoining museum that is a world-class museum. For those who haven't had the opportunity to visit that museum and learn about this chapter in our Nation's history, I would strongly urge them to do so. I thank Chairman Hensarling and the Financial Services Committee for their support of this legislation, and I ask my colleagues to join me in honoring the brave veterans of World War I by supporting this bill. Mr. PEARCE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Texas, Judge Poe. {time} 1515 Mr. POE of Texas. I thank the gentleman from New Mexico. Mr. Speaker, it was called the ``War to End All Wars.'' It began 100 years ago, and after 3 years, World War I was a bloody stalemate. Then the American doughboys entered the bloody trenches of Europe, and the tenacious teenagers went over there to a land they had never seen fighting for people they did not know. But soon after, the war turned in the favor of the Allies, and the war was over. Allied victory was declared in 1918. Millions and millions of people throughout the world had died. 116,000 Americans died. Many more thousands died when they came back to America from the Spanish flu that they got while they were overseas. The last surviving World War I veteran was Frank Buckles. This is a photograph of him shortly before his death. I got to know Frank Buckles before he died at the age of 110. Like I said, he was the last surviving World War I veteran from America. He lied to get into the United States Army. He was probably 15. He convinced some Army recruiter that he was 21, and they signed him up. He served in World War I. After World War I was over with, World War II started, and he found himself in the Philippines. He was captured by the Japanese and put in a prisoner-of-war camp until World War II was over. But he came to the United States Capitol and met with many Members of [[Page 16375]] the House and Senate for the sole purpose of making sure that those doughboys he fought with and who died were remembered by the United States Congress. His dying wish was that those he served with would be honored by the House of Representatives and the Senate. The proceeds from the sale of the coins will be used for the World War I Commission to help commemorate the sacrifices of those warriors. I was privileged to be appointed as an original member of the World War I Commission and still serve on the World War I Foundation. I want to thank Congressman Cleaver from Missouri for all the work he has done to remember those doughboys, not only in this specific bill of getting this coin act passed but the original commission that he worked on to make sure that we, as an American Nation, remembered them. I appreciate the work that the gentleman does in Kansas City with the first-class memorial that we have to honor those World War I veterans. Mr. Speaker, all those that served, every one of them that served in World War I, they are all gone. There are none left. Frank Buckles was the last one. But the United States World War I Commission will make sure we Americans remember and honor them, for the worst casualty of war is to be forgotten. And that is just the way it is. Mr. PEARCE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of the time. First of all, thanks to Mr. Cleaver and Mr. Lamborn for bringing this bill to the floor today. Thanks for your dedicated work on that. Thanks to Mr. Poe. Around here we just simply know him as ``Judge,'' but thanks for his poignant comments. As a Vietnam veteran returning to the United States in the 1973 era, I found a Nation that was disrespectful to young men and women who had served, myself included. I took my uniform off and put it in a closet, never to pull it out until I ran for Congress and people began to ask why I didn't tell about the military story. That is a condition and a mindset that no matter how you are registered, no matter what culture you are in, what race, what religion, we must never let this happen again. We must be willing to sacrifice for those who have sacrificed for us and those who have been willing to make the sacrifice. My grandfather was in World War I. As I was approaching my time to go to Vietnam, he visited with me about being in the Argonne Forest and about being gassed there. It left him with a lung condition and frailty throughout the rest of his life. But he never was sorry for serving, never was sorry for those things that had happened to him. It is young men and women who are willing to do anything for others' freedom that we are honoring here today. And again, I would urge all to support this legislation. It is a noble concept and a noble tradition of remembering those who have served this country in the military. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the gentleman from New Mexico (Mr. Pearce) that the House suspend the rules and pass the bill, H.R. 2366, as amended. The question was taken. The SPEAKER pro tempore. In the opinion of the Chair, two-thirds being in the affirmative, the ayes have it. Mr. PEARCE. 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 motion will be postponed. ____________________ DISCLOSURE MODERNIZATION AND SIMPLIFICATION ACT OF 2014 Mr. GARRETT. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 4569) to require the Securities and Exchange Commission to make certain improvements to form 10-K and regulation S-K, and for other purposes, as amended. The Clerk read the title of the bill. The text of the bill is as follows: H.R. 4569 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. This Act may be cited as the ``Disclosure Modernization and Simplification Act of 2014''. SEC. 2. SUMMARY PAGE FOR FORM 10-K. Not later than the end of the 180-day period beginning on the date of the enactment of this Act, the Securities and Exchange Commission shall issue regulations to permit issuers to submit a summary page on form 10-K (17 C.F.R. 249.310), but only if each item on such summary page includes a cross- reference (by electronic link or otherwise) to the material contained in form 10-K to which such item relates. SEC. 3. IMPROVEMENT OF REGULATION S-K. Not later than the end of the 180-day period beginning on the date of the enactment of this Act, the Securities and Exchange Commission shall take all such actions to revise regulation S-K (17 C.F.R. 229.10 et seq.)-- (1) to further scale or eliminate requirements of regulation S-K, in order to reduce the burden on emerging growth companies, accelerated filers, smaller reporting companies, and other smaller issuers, while still providing all material information to investors; (2) to eliminate provisions of regulation S-K, required for all issuers, that are duplicative, overlapping, outdated, or unnecessary; and (3) for which the Commission determines that no further study under section 4 is necessary to determine the efficacy of such revisions to regulation S-K. SEC. 4. STUDY ON MODERNIZATION AND SIMPLIFICATION OF REGULATION S-K. (a) Study.--The Securities and Exchange Commission shall carry out a study of the requirements contained in regulation S-K (17 C.F.R. 229.10 et seq.). Such study shall-- (1) determine how best to modernize and simplify such requirements in a manner that reduces the costs and burdens on issuers while still providing all material information; (2) emphasize a company by company approach that allows relevant and material information to be disseminated to investors without boilerplate language or static requirements while preserving completeness and comparability of information across registrants; and (3) evaluate methods of information delivery and presentation and explore methods for discouraging repetition and the disclosure of immaterial information. (b) Consultation.--In conducting the study required under subsection (a), the Commission shall consult with the Investor Advisory Committee and the Advisory Committee on Small and Emerging Companies. (c) Report.--Not later than the end of the 360-day period beginning on the date of enactment of this Act, the Commission shall issue a report to the Congress containing-- (1) all findings and determinations made in carrying out the study required under subsection (a); (2) specific and detailed recommendations on modernizing and simplifying the requirements in regulation S-K in a manner that reduces the costs and burdens on companies while still providing all material information; and (3) specific and detailed recommendations on ways to improve the readability and navigability of disclosure documents and to discourage repetition and the disclosure of immaterial information. (d) Rulemaking.--Not later than the end of the 360-day period beginning on the date that the report is issued to the Congress under subsection (c), the Commission shall issue a proposed rule to implement the recommendations of the report issued under subsection (c). (e) Rule of Construction.--Revisions made to regulation S-K by the Commission under section 3 shall not be construed as satisfying the rulemaking requirements under this section. The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Garrett) and the gentlewoman from Wisconsin (Ms. Moore) each will control 20 minutes. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from New Jersey. General Leave Mr. GARRETT. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members be given 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous materials for the Record on H.R. 4569, as amended, that is currently under consideration. The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from New Jersey? There was no objection. Mr. GARRETT. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. [[Page 16376]] Mr. Speaker, I rise now in support of H.R. 4569, which is the Disclosure Modernization and Simplification Act of 2014. Having access to the U.S. capital markets and the broad investor base that comes with it is vital--literally vital--for U.S. companies to be able to grow their businesses and create jobs in this country. Over time, as our securities laws have continued to grow and evolve, the number of new SEC rules and regulations that have been weighing down on public companies continue now to multiply, and it is becoming more and more difficult and costly for small businesses to succeed and eventually go public. Many of the disclosure rules that have been added over time are both duplicative and are no longer needed due to many technological advancements that we are all familiar with. And yet the SEC has taken little action to review these unnecessary and outdated regulations and to make appropriate changes to help U.S. companies and also investors. So we have H.R. 4569 before us, and it seeks to do what? It removes some of the outdated and unnecessary red tape and allows for the small companies and investors to benefit from a more streamlined and efficient public disclosure regime. Specifically, the legislation would direct the SEC to simplify the public company disclosure regime for issuers and investors by permitting the issuers to submit a summary page of annual reports on Form 10-Ks with cross references to the contents of the report. It is that simple. Because the typical 10-K filed by issuers is hundreds of pages long and written in legalese, investors do find it difficult to locate and to digest the truly important information about the company in the report. So permitting issuers to submit a summary page would enable companies to concisely disclose pertinent information to investors without exposing them to liability. This summary page would also enable investors to more easily access the most relevant information about that company. This legislation would also direct the SEC to revise Regulation S-K-- ``Reg S-K,'' it is called--to better scale disclosure rules for emerging growth companies and smaller issuers, and to eliminate other duplicative, outdated, or unnecessary Reg S-K disclosure rules for all issuers. In testimony before the Capital Markets Subcommittee, one witness stated: ``The burdens imposed by existing regulation, primarily Reg S-K and Reg S-X, effectively deny small companies access to the public market and make investors less willing to invest.'' He added: ``This bill, H.R. 4569, is very constructive, and the Commission is likely to be receptive to it. It might well launch a process that would substantially reduce unneeded impediments to smaller firms being able to access the public capital markets.'' Additionally, another commenter testified: Over the course of time, proxies have become voluminous, some required disclosures have becomes obsolete, and the delivery of information has changed, though the legal mandated forms of disclosure have not. This situation has commonly been referred to as ``disclosure overload'' and it is apparent that investors are not being given information in a decision-useful manner and, in some cases, they are simply overwhelmed with non-relevant information. Even SEC Chair Mary Jo White has, on several occasions, stated that a review of our current disclosure system is a top priority for the Commission this year. So this bill would help augment the SEC's effort by requiring the Commission to, first, eliminate wholly unnecessary or outdated disclosure requirements and to allow issuers to include a summary of material in the form 10-K. So this legislation builds on section 108 of the Jumpstart Our Business Startups bill--you remember that, the JOBS Act--which directed the SEC to study Reg S-K in order to simplify and modernize disclosure rules. The SEC completed the study in December of 2013. Unfortunately, the study proposed few substantive reform measures. Instead, it recommended further study of Reg S-K disclosure rules. Let me conclude with this. Given our continued economic difficulties, I believe we need to stop studying and start taking action. Simplifying and streamlining disclosure requirements will enable companies to divert fewer resources to compliance, freeing up additional capital to create American jobs. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time. Ms. MOORE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I rise in strong support of Mr. Garrett's bill, H.R. 4569, which was favorably reported from the House Financial Services Committee, and championed by my friend from New York (Mrs. Maloney). I would like to associate myself with the long and extended explanation by Mr. Garrett of New Jersey, and just to say, Mr. Speaker, that, in short, this bill will make disclosures that public companies make more streamlined, manageable, and user friendly. I really appreciate the participation of my good friend, Representative Maloney, who really worked hard to make sure that this legislation was balanced and it included language to emphasize that we needed to reduce burdens on companies, but we need to preserve investment protection. So, given the changes that Mrs. Maloney made with the Maloney amendment, I strongly support the legislation, would urge all my colleagues to support it, and I yield back the balance of my time. Mr. GARRETT. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlelady for her assistance in this matter. Also, you made reference to Mrs. Maloney from New York for her work as well. She is not on the floor right now, but I certainly do appreciate her efforts with the legislation and in full committee and in subcommittee as well in order to move forward on this piece of legislation before the House, H.R. 4569. And to your comment about perhaps I should have taken the substance of the bill to heart, I did streamline the 10 pages down to four pages to make it not duplicative, unnecessary, and outdated information. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as she may consume to the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Maloney). Mrs. CAROLYN B. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleague for his hard work on this bill. I did want to come to the floor and support it because it is one of the areas where we did work together in a positive way. I would like to also take this opportunity to congratulate him on being reappointed as chairman of the Capital Markets Committee on which I serve. And I look forward to working with you in the next Congress. When the Financial Services Committee marked up the JOBS Act in 2012, Mr. Garrett included an amendment requiring the SEC to conduct a study on how to modernize and simplify the disclosure process for emerging growth companies. The SEC published that study last December, and while the study failed to make any specific recommendations on how to streamline the disclosure process, it did provide, I thought, a very fascinating history of all the different efforts to simplify registration and disclosure processes, especially for smaller companies, which is a concern for many Members of this Congress who want to relieve the regulatory burden on particularly smaller companies. {time} 1530 For example, here are some of the studies that they did: the SEC's 1969 Disclosure Policy Study; the 1977 Advisory Committee on Corporate Disclosure; the simplified Form S-18 for small companies in 1979; a new simplified Form S-B in 1992; the 1996 Task Force on Disclosure Simplification; the 2005 Advisory Committee on Smaller Public Companies; the Advisory Committee on Improvements to Financial Reporting in 2007; and, most recently, the Advisory Committee on Small and Emerging Companies. What this history demonstrates is that the process of scaling and streamlining the reporting requirements for smaller companies is something that we all need to focus on in order to keep pace with the ever-evolving marketplace, and it is one that historically [[Page 16377]] has been revisited every 7 to 10 years. It requires strong oversight by the SEC and also by Congress. I believe that now is an excellent time for the SEC to revisit the disclosure requirements for smaller companies and to figure out how to best modernize these requirements. This bill directs the SEC to build on its 2013 study by making immediate improvements to reg S-K in the short term and then by making specific and detailed recommendations on how to simplify and modernize reg S-K in the long term. We were able to work in a bipartisan manner on this bill to clarify that any revisions the SEC makes should reduce burdens on small businesses, while also ensuring that investors still have access to all important information. This bill will ensure that the SEC properly tailors its regulations to the needs of small businesses and doesn't get caught up in a one- size-fits-all reaction. I urge my colleagues to support this commonsense bill. Mr. GARRETT. I thank the gentlewoman for her efforts. Mr. Speaker, at this point, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Stutzman). Mr. STUTZMAN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of the Disclosure Modernization and Simplification Act of 2014. For far too long, our economy has remained weak, and small businesses and wage earners have suffered greatly. Part of the reason they have suffered is from too many regulations and from an increase in red tape from Federal Government agencies, which has hindered growth and kept businesses from expanding. They also present big challenges for startup companies that are looking to gain solid footing in this shaky economy. If we are going to move this country in the right direction, we need to make it easier and not harder for Americans to do business. The least we can do in Washington is to make sure Federal regulators do not force business managers to report the same information over and over. That is what this act is all about. This legislation, along with others we will consider today, will help remove the Federal Government from the backs of small business owners and make it easier for all Americans to succeed. It will revise regulations to include startup companies, to eliminate redundant and duplicative provisions, and to discourage the disclosure of immaterial information, among other simplifications. Now is the time to remove these roadblocks on the pathway to success. The American people are looking for us to ease some of these painful economic burdens, and today, we have an opportunity to support legislation that will have a positive impact on our economy, that which limits the challenges on small business owners and job creators. Let's work together in this Chamber and pass this series of bills in a bipartisan fashion. Let's show our constituents that we are serious about recharging our economic engine by pursuing commonsense regulatory reforms. I would like to thank Chairman Hensarling, Representative Garrett, Representative Hurt, and the rest of the members of the Financial Services Committee, who worked hard on this issue. I urge my colleagues in the House to support this legislation. Mr. GARRETT. I appreciate the gentleman's coming to the floor. More importantly, I appreciate the gentleman's efforts and hard work on this legislation in committee. Thank you very much. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Garrett) that the House suspend the rules and pass the bill, H.R. 4569, as amended. The question was taken; and (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the rules were suspended and the bill, as amended, was passed. A motion to reconsider was laid on the table. ____________________ ANNOUNCEMENT BY THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, proceedings will resume on motions to suspend the rules previously postponed. Votes will be taken in the following order: H.R. 5739, by the yeas and nays; H.R. 3240, by the yeas and nays; H.R. 2366, by the yeas and nays. The first electronic vote will be conducted as a 15-minute vote. Remaining electronic votes will be conducted as 5-minute votes. ____________________ NO SOCIAL SECURITY FOR NAZIS ACT The SPEAKER pro tempore. The unfinished business is the vote on the motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 5739) to amend the Social Security Act to provide for the termination of social security benefits for individuals who participated in Nazi persecution, and for other purposes, on which the yeas and nays were ordered. The Clerk read the title of the bill. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Sam Johnson) that the House suspend the rules and pass the bill. The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 420, nays 0, not voting 14, as follows: [Roll No. 537] YEAS--420 Adams Amash Amodei Bachmann Bachus Barber Barletta Barr Barrow (GA) Barton Bass Beatty Becerra Benishek Bentivolio Bera (CA) Bilirakis Bishop (GA) Bishop (NY) Bishop (UT) Black Blackburn Blumenauer Bonamici Boustany Brady (PA) Brady (TX) Braley (IA) Brat Bridenstine Brooks (AL) Brooks (IN) Broun (GA) Brown (FL) Brownley (CA) Buchanan Bucshon Burgess Bustos Butterfield Byrne Calvert Camp Campbell Capito Capps Cardenas Carney Carson (IN) Carter Cartwright Castor (FL) Castro (TX) Chabot Chaffetz Chu Cicilline Clark (MA) Clarke (NY) Clawson (FL) Clay Cleaver Clyburn Coble Coffman Cohen Cole Collins (GA) Collins (NY) Conaway Connolly Conyers Cook Cooper Costa Cotton Courtney Cramer Crawford Crenshaw Crowley Cuellar Culberson Cummings Daines Davis (CA) Davis, Danny Davis, Rodney DeFazio DeGette Delaney DeLauro DelBene Denham Dent DeSantis DesJarlais Deutch Diaz-Balart Dingell Doggett Duffy Duncan (SC) Duncan (TN) Edwards Ellison Ellmers Engel Enyart Eshoo Esty Farenthold Farr Fattah Fincher Fitzpatrick Fleischmann Fleming Flores Forbes Fortenberry Foster Foxx Frankel (FL) Franks (AZ) Frelinghuysen Fudge Gabbard Gallego Garamendi Garcia Gardner Garrett Gerlach Gibbs Gibson Gingrey (GA) Gohmert Goodlatte Gosar Gowdy Granger Graves (GA) Graves (MO) Grayson Green, Al Green, Gene Griffin (AR) Griffith (VA) Grijalva Grimm Guthrie Gutierrez Hahn Hanabusa Hanna Harper Harris Hartzler Hastings (FL) Hastings (WA) Heck (NV) Heck (WA) Hensarling Herrera Beutler Higgins Himes Hinojosa Holding Honda Horsford Hoyer Hudson Huelskamp Huffman Huizenga (MI) Hultgren Hunter Hurt Israel Issa Jackson Lee Jeffries Jenkins Johnson (GA) Johnson (OH) Johnson, E. B. Johnson, Sam Jolly Jones Jordan Joyce Kaptur Keating Kelly (IL) Kelly (PA) Kennedy Kildee Kilmer Kind King (IA) King (NY) Kingston Kinzinger (IL) Kirkpatrick Kline Kuster Labrador LaMalfa Lamborn Lance Langevin Lankford Larsen (WA) Larson (CT) Latham Latta Lee (CA) Levin Lewis Lipinski LoBiondo Loebsack Lofgren Long Lowey Lucas Luetkemeyer Lujan Grisham (NM) Lujan, Ben Ray (NM) Lummis Lynch Maffei Maloney, Carolyn Maloney, Sean Marchant Marino Massie Matheson Matsui McAllister McCarthy (CA) McCaul McClintock McCollum McDermott McGovern McHenry McIntyre McKeon McKinley McMorris Rodgers McNerney Meadows Meehan Meeks Meng Messer Mica Michaud Miller (FL) Miller (MI) Miller, George Moore Moran Mullin Mulvaney Murphy (FL) Murphy (PA) Nadler Napolitano Neal Neugebauer Noem Nolan [[Page 16378]] Norcross Nugent Nunes Nunnelee O'Rourke Olson Owens Palazzo Pallone Pascrell Pastor (AZ) Paulsen Payne Pearce Pelosi Perry Peters (CA) Peters (MI) Peterson Petri Pingree (ME) Pittenger Pitts Pocan Poe (TX) Polis Pompeo Posey Price (GA) Price (NC) Quigley Rahall Rangel Reed Reichert Renacci Ribble Rice (SC) Richmond Rigell Roby Roe (TN) Rogers (AL) Rogers (KY) Rohrabacher Rokita Rooney Ros-Lehtinen Roskam Ross Rothfus Roybal-Allard Royce Ruiz Runyan Ruppersberger Rush Ryan (OH) Ryan (WI) Salmon Sanchez, Linda T. Sanchez, Loretta Sanford Sarbanes Scalise Schakowsky Schiff Schneider Schock Schwartz Schweikert Scott (VA) Scott, Austin Scott, David Sensenbrenner Serrano Sessions Sewell (AL) Shea-Porter Sherman Shimkus Shuster Simpson Sinema Sires Slaughter Smith (MO) Smith (NE) Smith (NJ) Smith (TX) Smith (WA) Southerland Speier Stewart Stivers Stockman Stutzman Swalwell (CA) Takano Terry Thompson (CA) Thompson (MS) Thompson (PA) Thornberry Tiberi Tierney Tipton Titus Tonko Tsongas Turner Upton Valadao Van Hollen Vargas Veasey Vela Velazquez Visclosky Wagner Walberg Walden Walorski Walz Wasserman Schultz Waters Waxman Weber (TX) Webster (FL) Welch Wenstrup Westmoreland Whitfield Williams Wilson (FL) Wilson (SC) Wittman Wolf Womack Woodall Yarmuth Yoder Yoho Young (AK) Young (IN) NOT VOTING--14 Aderholt Capuano Cassidy Doyle Duckworth Hall Holt Lowenthal McCarthy (NY) Miller, Gary Negrete McLeod Perlmutter Rogers (MI) Schrader {time} 1603 Mr. McNERNEY changed his vote from ``nay'' to ``yea.'' So (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the rules were suspended and the bill was passed. The result of the vote was announced as above recorded. A motion to reconsider was laid on the table. ____________________ REGULATION D STUDY ACT The SPEAKER pro tempore. The unfinished business is the vote on the motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 3240) to instruct the Comptroller General of the United States to study the impact of Regulation D, and for other purposes, on which the yeas and nays were ordered. The Clerk read the title of the bill. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Luetkemeyer) that the House suspend the rules and pass the bill. This is a 5-minute vote. The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 422, nays 0, not voting 12, as follows: [Roll No. 538] YEAS--422 Adams Amash Amodei Bachmann Bachus Barber Barletta Barr Barrow (GA) Barton Bass Beatty Becerra Benishek Bentivolio Bera (CA) Bilirakis Bishop (GA) Bishop (NY) Bishop (UT) Black Blackburn Blumenauer Bonamici Boustany Brady (PA) Brady (TX) Braley (IA) Brat Bridenstine Brooks (AL) Brooks (IN) Broun (GA) Brown (FL) Brownley (CA) Buchanan Bucshon Burgess Bustos Butterfield Byrne Calvert Camp Campbell Capito Capps Cardenas Carney Carson (IN) Carter Cartwright Castor (FL) Castro (TX) Chabot Chaffetz Chu Cicilline Clark (MA) Clarke (NY) Clawson (FL) Clay Cleaver Clyburn Coble Coffman Cohen Cole Collins (GA) Collins (NY) Conaway Connolly Conyers Cook Cooper Costa Cotton Courtney Cramer Crawford Crenshaw Crowley Cuellar Culberson Cummings Daines Davis (CA) Davis, Danny Davis, Rodney DeFazio DeGette Delaney DeLauro DelBene Denham Dent DeSantis DesJarlais Deutch Diaz-Balart Dingell Doggett Duffy Duncan (SC) Duncan (TN) Edwards Ellison Ellmers Engel Enyart Eshoo Esty Farenthold Farr Fattah Fincher Fitzpatrick Fleischmann Fleming Flores Forbes Fortenberry Foster Foxx Frankel (FL) Franks (AZ) Frelinghuysen Fudge Gabbard Gallego Garamendi Garcia Gardner Garrett Gerlach Gibbs Gibson Gingrey (GA) Gohmert Goodlatte Gosar Gowdy Granger Graves (GA) Graves (MO) Grayson Green, Al Green, Gene Griffin (AR) Griffith (VA) Grijalva Grimm Guthrie Gutierrez Hahn Hanabusa Hanna Harper Harris Hartzler Hastings (FL) Hastings (WA) Heck (NV) Heck (WA) Hensarling Herrera Beutler Higgins Himes Hinojosa Holding Holt Honda Horsford Hoyer Hudson Huelskamp Huffman Huizenga (MI) Hultgren Hunter Hurt Israel Issa Jackson Lee Jeffries Jenkins Johnson (GA) Johnson (OH) Johnson, E. B. Johnson, Sam Jolly Jones Jordan Joyce Kaptur Keating Kelly (IL) Kelly (PA) Kennedy Kildee Kilmer Kind King (IA) King (NY) Kingston Kinzinger (IL) Kirkpatrick Kline Kuster Labrador LaMalfa Lamborn Lance Langevin Lankford Larsen (WA) Larson (CT) Latham Latta Lee (CA) Levin Lewis Lipinski LoBiondo Loebsack Lofgren Long Lowenthal Lowey Lucas Luetkemeyer Lujan Grisham (NM) Lujan, Ben Ray (NM) Lummis Lynch Maffei Maloney, Carolyn Maloney, Sean Marchant Marino Massie Matheson Matsui McAllister McCarthy (CA) McCaul McClintock McCollum McGovern McHenry McIntyre McKeon McKinley McMorris Rodgers McNerney Meadows Meehan Meeks Meng Messer Mica Michaud Miller (FL) Miller (MI) Miller, George Moore Moran Mullin Mulvaney Murphy (FL) Murphy (PA) Nadler Napolitano Neal Neugebauer Noem Nolan Norcross Nugent Nunes Nunnelee O'Rourke Olson Owens Palazzo Pallone Pascrell Pastor (AZ) Paulsen Payne Pearce Pelosi Perry Peters (CA) Peters (MI) Peterson Petri Pingree (ME) Pittenger Pitts Pocan Poe (TX) Polis Pompeo Posey Price (GA) Price (NC) Quigley Rahall Rangel Reed Reichert Renacci Ribble Rice (SC) Richmond Rigell Roby Roe (TN) Rogers (AL) Rogers (KY) Rogers (MI) Rohrabacher Rokita Rooney Ros-Lehtinen Roskam Ross Rothfus Roybal-Allard Royce Ruiz Runyan Ruppersberger Rush Ryan (OH) Ryan (WI) Salmon Sanchez, Linda T. Sanchez, Loretta Sanford Sarbanes Scalise Schakowsky Schiff Schneider Schock Schwartz Schweikert Scott (VA) Scott, Austin Scott, David Sensenbrenner Serrano Sessions Sewell (AL) Shea-Porter Sherman Shimkus Shuster Simpson Sinema Sires Slaughter Smith (MO) Smith (NE) Smith (NJ) Smith (TX) Smith (WA) Southerland Speier Stewart Stivers Stockman Stutzman Swalwell (CA) Takano Terry Thompson (CA) Thompson (MS) Thompson (PA) Thornberry Tiberi Tierney Tipton Titus Tonko Tsongas Turner Upton Valadao Van Hollen Vargas Veasey Vela Velazquez Visclosky Wagner Walberg Walden Walorski Walz Wasserman Schultz Waters Waxman Weber (TX) Webster (FL) Welch Wenstrup Westmoreland Whitfield Williams Wilson (FL) Wilson (SC) Wittman Wolf Womack Woodall Yarmuth Yoder Yoho Young (AK) Young (IN) NOT VOTING--12 Aderholt Capuano Cassidy Doyle Duckworth Hall McCarthy (NY) McDermott Miller, Gary Negrete McLeod Perlmutter Schrader Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore The SPEAKER pro tempore (during the vote). There are 2 minutes remaining. {time} 1610 So (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the rules were suspended and the bill was passed. The result of the vote was announced as above recorded. A motion to reconsider was laid on the table. ____________________ WORLD WAR I AMERICAN VETERANS CENTENNIAL COMMEMORATIVE COIN ACT The SPEAKER pro tempore. The unfinished business is the vote on the motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 2366) to require the Secretary of the Treasury to mint coins in commemoration of the centennial of World War I, as amended, on which the yeas and nays were ordered. The Clerk read the title of the bill. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the gentleman from New Mexico (Mr. Pearce) that the House suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended. [[Page 16379]] This will be a 5-minute vote. The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 418, nays 3, not voting 13, as follows: [Roll No. 539] YEAS--418 Adams Amodei Bachmann Bachus Barber Barletta Barr Barrow (GA) Barton Bass Beatty Becerra Benishek Bentivolio Bera (CA) Bilirakis Bishop (GA) Bishop (NY) Bishop (UT) Black Blackburn Blumenauer Bonamici Boustany Brady (PA) Brady (TX) Braley (IA) Brat Bridenstine Brooks (AL) Brooks (IN) Brown (FL) Brownley (CA) Buchanan Bucshon Burgess Bustos Butterfield Byrne Calvert Camp Campbell Capito Capps Cardenas Carney Carson (IN) Carter Cartwright Castor (FL) Castro (TX) Chabot Chaffetz Chu Cicilline Clark (MA) Clarke (NY) Clawson (FL) Clay Cleaver Clyburn Coble Coffman Cohen Cole Collins (GA) Collins (NY) Conaway Connolly Conyers Cook Cooper Costa Cotton Courtney Cramer Crawford Crenshaw Crowley Cuellar Culberson Cummings Daines Davis (CA) Davis, Danny Davis, Rodney DeFazio DeGette Delaney DeLauro DelBene Denham Dent DeSantis DesJarlais Deutch Diaz-Balart Dingell Doggett Duffy Duncan (SC) Duncan (TN) Edwards Ellison Ellmers Engel Enyart Eshoo Esty Farenthold Farr Fattah Fincher Fitzpatrick Fleischmann Fleming Flores Forbes Fortenberry Foster Foxx Frankel (FL) Franks (AZ) Frelinghuysen Fudge Gabbard Gallego Garamendi Garcia Gardner Garrett Gerlach Gibbs Gibson Gingrey (GA) Gohmert Goodlatte Gosar Gowdy Granger Graves (GA) Graves (MO) Grayson Green, Al Green, Gene Griffin (AR) Griffith (VA) Grijalva Grimm Guthrie Gutierrez Hahn Hanabusa Hanna Harper Harris Hartzler Hastings (FL) Hastings (WA) Heck (NV) Heck (WA) Hensarling Herrera Beutler Higgins Himes Hinojosa Holding Holt Honda Horsford Hoyer Hudson Huelskamp Huffman Huizenga (MI) Hultgren Hunter Hurt Israel Issa Jackson Lee Jeffries Jenkins Johnson (GA) Johnson (OH) Johnson, E. B. Johnson, Sam Jolly Jones Jordan Joyce Kaptur Kelly (IL) Kelly (PA) Kennedy Kildee Kilmer Kind King (IA) King (NY) Kingston Kinzinger (IL) Kirkpatrick Kline Kuster Labrador LaMalfa Lamborn Lance Langevin Lankford Larsen (WA) Larson (CT) Latham Latta Lee (CA) Levin Lewis Lipinski LoBiondo Loebsack Lofgren Long Lowenthal Lowey Lucas Luetkemeyer Lujan Grisham (NM) Lujan, Ben Ray (NM) Lummis Lynch Maffei Maloney, Carolyn Maloney, Sean Marchant Marino Matheson Matsui McAllister McCarthy (CA) McCaul McClintock McCollum McDermott McGovern McHenry McIntyre McKeon McKinley McMorris Rodgers McNerney Meadows Meehan Meeks Meng Messer Mica Michaud Miller (FL) Miller (MI) Moore Moran Mullin Mulvaney Murphy (FL) Murphy (PA) Nadler Napolitano Neal Neugebauer Noem Nolan Norcross Nugent Nunes Nunnelee O'Rourke Olson Owens Palazzo Pallone Pascrell Pastor (AZ) Paulsen Payne Pearce Pelosi Perry Peters (CA) Peters (MI) Peterson Petri Pingree (ME) Pittenger Pitts Pocan Poe (TX) Polis Pompeo Posey Price (GA) Price (NC) Quigley Rahall Rangel Reed Reichert Renacci Ribble Rice (SC) Richmond Rigell Roby Roe (TN) Rogers (AL) Rogers (KY) Rogers (MI) Rohrabacher Rokita Rooney Ros-Lehtinen Roskam Ross Rothfus Roybal-Allard Royce Ruiz Runyan Ruppersberger Rush Ryan (OH) Ryan (WI) Salmon Sanchez, Linda T. Sanchez, Loretta Sanford Sarbanes Scalise Schakowsky Schiff Schneider Schock Schwartz Schweikert Scott (VA) Scott, Austin Scott, David Sensenbrenner Serrano Sessions Sewell (AL) Shea-Porter Sherman Shimkus Shuster Simpson Sinema Sires Slaughter Smith (MO) Smith (NE) Smith (NJ) Smith (TX) Smith (WA) Southerland Speier Stewart Stivers Stockman Stutzman Swalwell (CA) Takano Terry Thompson (CA) Thompson (MS) Thompson (PA) Thornberry Tiberi Tierney Tipton Titus Tonko Tsongas Turner Upton Valadao Van Hollen Vargas Veasey Vela Velazquez Visclosky Wagner Walberg Walden Walorski Walz Wasserman Schultz Waters Waxman Weber (TX) Webster (FL) Welch Wenstrup Westmoreland Whitfield Williams Wilson (FL) Wilson (SC) Wittman Wolf Womack Woodall Yarmuth Yoder Yoho Young (AK) Young (IN) NAYS--3 Amash Broun (GA) Massie NOT VOTING--13 Aderholt Capuano Cassidy Doyle Duckworth Hall Keating McCarthy (NY) Miller, Gary Miller, George Negrete McLeod Perlmutter Schrader Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore The SPEAKER pro tempore (during the vote). There are 2 minutes remaining. {time} 1617 So (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the rules were suspended and the bill, as amended, was passed. The result of the vote was announced as above recorded. A motion to reconsider was laid on the table. ____________________ REPORT ON RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 5771, TAX INCREASE PREVENTION ACT OF 2014, AND PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 647, ACHIEVING A BETTER LIFE EXPERIENCE ACT OF 2014 Mr. SESSIONS, from the Committee on Rules, submitted a privileged report (Rept. No. 113-643) on the resolution (H. Res. 766) providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 5771) to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to extend certain expiring provisions and make technical corrections, and for other purposes, and providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 647) to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide for the tax treatment of ABLE accounts established under State programs for the care of family members with disabilities, and for other purposes, which was referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be printed. ____________________ SUPPORT ABLE ACT OF 2014 (Mr. FITZPATRICK asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.) Mr. FITZPATRICK. Mr. Speaker, I rise to urge the House to pass the Achieving a Better Life Experience Act of 2014, also known as the ABLE Act. The ABLE Act would help ease the strain on those with physical and mental disabilities by allowing the creation of tax-free savings accounts. These savings accounts would work a lot like the popular 529 college savings plans. The accounts could be used to pay for life expenses such as education, housing, and transportation. In other words, this bill levels the playing field for those with disabilities who cannot make use of tax-free college savings plans by giving families an alternative tax-free account that they can use. It is also important to note that the bill doesn't take away any other benefits that those with disabilities might be entitled to; rather, it would serve as a supplement, giving these families the flexibility to achieve a better life. This bill has a tremendous amount of bipartisan support. The ABLE Act is an opportunity for this Congress to show that we can work together to make a real difference in the lives of American families. Mr. Speaker, this bill is about empowering those with disabilities and their families, and I urge that the House and Senate pass the ABLE Act, so that the President can sign it into law before the end of the year. ____________________ IMPERIAL EDICT FROM THE WHITE HOUSE (Mr. POE of Texas asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.) Mr. POE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, he said, ``I'm the President. I'm not king. I can't do these things by myself.'' That was President Obama in 2010. That was then; this is now. The lawless administration continues to ignore Congress in order to go it alone and implement his own authoritarian agenda. [[Page 16380]] The latest illegal kingly edict is that he will disregard immigration law, orally change the rules, grant legal status, and give work permits to millions of foreign undocumented nationals. These actions show the administration is more interested in jobs for illegal foreign nationals in America than Americans in America. That is why Congresswoman Black and I have introduced the Separation of Powers Act. This legislation would prohibit the use of funds for granting deferred action, green cards, work permits, or other immigration relief to people not lawfully present in the U.S. Most importantly, it would allow Congress to exercise its check on the out-of-control White House that treats the Constitution as a mere suggestion instead of the law. The President says he is not the emperor of the United States, but his actions show otherwise. America doesn't need a king; otherwise, we would have kept King George. And that is just the way it is. The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Messer). Members are reminded to refrain from engaging in personalities toward the President. ____________________ WORLD AIDS DAY (Ms. LEE of California asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute.) Ms. LEE of California. Mr. Speaker, yesterday marked World AIDS Day and more than 30 years since the first discovery of AIDS in the United States. As the cofounder of the HIV/AIDS caucus, I am proud to say that we have made great strides in combating the AIDS epidemic here in our own country and throughout the world. Contracting HIV is no longer the death sentence that it once was, but much more remains to be done. A recent report by UNAIDS found that we have 5 years to break the epidemic for good or risk it rebounding out of control. We cannot allow the gains we have made in fighting for an AIDS-free generation to be lost, and we can eradicate AIDS if we devote proper resources to the fight both here and abroad. We must reduce the stigma surrounding the disease by strengthening educational and outreach activities to help prevent millions of new HIV cases worldwide. We must also provide the science-based comprehensive sex education that has proven to reduce the spread of sexually transmitted diseases, and we must repeal laws that promote discrimination and hate. Mr. Speaker, now is the time to take bold action to create a world that is free from HIV and AIDS. I urge my colleagues to join me in working to achieve an AIDS-free generation. ____________________ UNCONSTITUTIONAL ACTIONS BY PRESIDENT OBAMA The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the Speaker's announced policy of January 3, 2013, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Gohmert) is recognized for 60 minutes as the designee of the majority leader. Mr. GOHMERT. Mr. Speaker, well, it has been quite an interesting couple of days coming back from Thanksgiving, and this morning, there was an interesting conference, what to do about a President who, for a number of years, a couple dozen of times or so, has made very clear he is not a king, he is not an emperor, he would rather not have to deal with Congress, Congress is a messy thing to deal with, but he can't just do what he wants regarding immigration without following the Constitution and that means, under the Constitution, article I, section 8, Congress has sole authority when it comes to issues like naturalization and immigration. Prior Congresses have passed laws and made it clear what it takes to become a United States citizen. Now, those laws need fixing. There is no question about that, and despite all of the rhetoric, our friends on the other side of the aisle, when they controlled the majority in the House, majority in the Senate, with President Obama in the White House, chose to absolutely do nothing about correcting immigration problems, securing the border--not even amnesty. Why? Because they know, they see the polls, and the polls make very clear that the American public did not want any type of amnesty. The President knew were he and the Democrats in the House and Senate, when they had the majority during their 2 years, to have done something like an amnesty bill like the bill the President passed without going through Congress, then they would have surely lost the majority, and the President would definitely not have been reelected in 2012. {time} 1630 And they did not think it was worth risking the majority over an amnesty when the vast majority of Americans did not want it. Why? Because the vast majority of Americans have to comply with the law, and fortunately those same vast number of Americans think everybody else should as well. Now, we still see emails saying, you know, if we could ever get Congress under Social Security, Congress living under the same laws as everybody else did, then a lot of our problems will be fixed, and that forgets the fact that actually Members of Congress have been paying into Social Security for years. No Member of Congress has a benefit that every other Federal employee doesn't already have. One of the promises that Republicans made, that they said they would do if they got the majority in November of 1994, is to make sure that Republicans have and Democrats in Congress have to live under the same laws everybody else does. Now, I was told when I was prevented from continuing to cook ribs that my friends across the aisle, Democrats, and Republicans love-- everybody that is not a vegetarian tells me they loved my ribs; and my dear friend Louise Slaughter had told me that her late husband, before he passed, as a vegetarian had even eaten two ribs of mine she brought home. So my ribs were a big hit with everybody but the Architect of the Capitol. He told me I couldn't continue to cook because of a violation of the fire code, and that was something Republicans actually changed to make sure that we in Congress had to live under the same laws everybody else does. So we do. We are supposed to live under the laws everybody else does, but then it comes to amnesty, and some here in the minority think it is just fine for a President to legislate since they are not able to do that while they are in the minority. Didn't do it when they were in the majority. The President didn't do it before his reelection in 2012. So it is a bit of a conundrum when the President of the United States asserts, as an alleged former constitutional professor, apparently an instructor, all these years he cannot do anything about the immigration problem because the Constitution doesn't allow it. Then, immediately before the grand jury acted in Missouri, the President acts, knowing what was about to happen in Missouri, Ferguson, and knowing Thanksgiving was coming up and a lot of people would take their eye off of what was happening with regard to amnesty, and then the President speaks a new law into existence. The law is very clear: if you are not legally in the United States, you can't legally hold a job. The President changed that law with a pronouncement and a stroke of his pen, but that is not a legal law. So we have got to stand up for the Constitution. For a President to avoid taking such action before an election because he knew it would cost him a second term, it would cost his party dramatically in the Senate and House, then to wait and do it immediately after the election and right before Thanksgiving when he thinks people will lose interest, well, Americans are not losing interest. They are still concerned. Now that the President has taken this unconstitutional action, America is looking at Republicans: You said you were against it. You ran and we elected you to the majority in the House and Senate, and you were saying you would not abide such an unconstitutional action. So what are you going to do about it? [[Page 16381]] Well, one of the things being proposed is my dear friend Ted Yoho-- sometimes people say ``dear friend'' around this body and they say it a bit tongue in cheek, but that is not true of Ted Yoho. He is a great American, and I am very, very proud he is my friend. But in H.R. 5759, titled, Preventing Executive Overreach on Immigration Act, my friend Congressman Yoho has a bill that declares that the President does not have the authority to exempt categories of persons unlawfully present in the United States from removal. Any executive action seeking to exempt these categories of person is a violation of the law and has no legal effect. The bill goes on to make clear this is a permanent solution that will apply to executive actions that attempt to circumvent the law. Further, this does not affect any appropriation, so it does not risk any government funding or shutdown issues. It is a constitutional separation of powers issue. So any reform or change to the law must come from congressional legislation, not executive fiat, and basically makes clear an executive fix of the law is unconstitutional, temporary, and establishes a dangerous precedent that could be abused by Presidents of both parties for any area of the law they disagree with. So that is a great first step, but the problem is, if we do not eliminate the funding for the President's unconstitutional action, then it may be carried out anyway. There is some talk about extending funding to next March. Well, by March people will already have been provided work permits that the law says may not legally have work permits, and it is not likely anything would be done at that point to stop it. Now is the time to stop unconstitutional action. As the President keeps saying, Congress didn't do anything. It shows that he is getting terrible advice. We had a knock-down, drag-out session the last week of July in this Chamber, and two floors below this Chamber, in the House office buildings, we were fighting it out because, as the President has said, dealing with Congress can be messy. That is the way the Founders intended it. They wanted it to be difficult to pass laws. And Jefferson, thinking it would be a good idea--though he wasn't there at the Constitutional Convention, so he didn't get this in. It would be a good idea if laws had to be on file for a year before they could even be brought up for a vote. Things done in haste in this body or the Senate are not a good idea. Yet we must do something to stop the unconstitutional action. The President wants a border bill. We passed one in the House. Somebody needs to advise President Obama's advisers that we passed a good bill. It was not a good bill on Thursday, but by Friday at 10 p.m. or so when we passed it, it was a good bill. Still had more to do. There is much more we can and should do. There is a lot of reforms that must be done, but until the border is secure, then we are just going to have to keep reforming immigration, reforming immigration, giving amnesty, giving amnesty, until the country is not the country people wanted to come to. How ironic that people have to leave countries--they believe--because there is graft, corruption, violence, because the rule of law is not enforced fairly across the board, and they want to come to America because, with all the down economy, over 92 million people having given up hope of finding a job, not even looking anymore, this is still one of the greatest economies in the world because we still pretty much try to enforce the law across the board. So people come from countries where the rule of law is not observed, not enforced fairly across the board--too many friends or people with particular interests of the leaders, they get special privileges, they get exempted from the law. So they come here where we are not supposed to do that, and once here, say, ``Look, now that we are here, having come illegally, we want you, United States, to just forget about the law, ignore your Constitution, ignore the laws on immigration, and just waive them and forget about them,'' when, in so doing, we would become like the country they felt they had to leave because we don't enforce the law fairly across the board anymore. The old saying, capital is a coward, talking about money to be invested, it is a coward. It goes to areas where it feels safest, where the laws will be most fairly applied so that there is something that can be counted on, that laws mean things. So we have had a lot of investment in the United States of people from China, from Russia, Africa, South America. People around the world have been willing to invest in the United States because we have been a country where capital could be comfortable. But when mass amnesty is applied, which will ultimately throw however many people are given illegal work permits to work legally, you are going to throw that many million people out of jobs. You will depress the working wage rate. Mr. Speaker, it can't be overemphasized that what happened since this President has been in office or in power is what we normally say about monarchs, but what has happened for the first time in American history never happened under any prior President. But this President's policies, as he talked about the fat cats on Wall Street, though he received more donations from them than Republicans did; as he bad-mouthed the oil companies, but he had friends that were doing favors for him; as he bad-mouthed capital cronyism as capital cronyism was exactly what was occurring in this country and from this administration, actually for the first time in our history, 95 percent of all income in America went to the top 1 percent of income earners. It has never happened before. I know--I know--this administration, everybody in it talks about the fat cats and going after the rich, and yet, amazingly, as they talk about going after the rich, it is as if there is a wink and a nod: We are going to talk bad about you, call you fat cats, but you are going to get richer than you have ever been. Just don't forget us when it comes to political contributions. Oh, yeah, we will trash the Koch Brothers, but they can't hold a candle to the fat-cat Democratic contributors. But when you try to get your head around 95 percent of the income going to the top 1 percent in America, it is extraordinary. The President himself acknowledged, September a year ago, that this was happening on his watch. {time} 1645 Again, people can talk about the middle class getting bigger and wages being suppressed. Their solution is to bring in 5 million new workers willing to work a lot cheaper, without health insurance, to compete with Americans that need a little more in order to live and that need health insurance. And the solution is to bring in 5 million people more? Do you really want to see minority unemployment go even higher than its current skyrocketing position? That is not fair to Americans. Our oath is to this country and the people in it, and the way we do that is by defending the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic. It is time the poor and the middle class in America were helped by having a better wage, by not continuing to leave the borders open, by not winking and nodding and unconstitutionally allowing 5 million people to work illegally but with the stamp of approval from the White House. It is time to stop it before we lose the Constitution altogether. Here is an article from Steven Camarota and Karen Ziegler. The headline, ``Immigrant Families Benefit Significantly from ObamaCare,'' and the subheadline, ``Immigrant Families Accounted for 42 Percent of Medicaid Growth Since 2011.'' The article says: A key part of the Affordable Care Act is Medicaid expansion for those with low incomes. A new analysis of government data by the Center for Immigration Studies shows that immigrants and their U.S.-born children, under age 18, have been among the primary beneficiaries of Medicaid growth. The data show that immigrants and their children accounted for 42 percent of the growth in Medicaid enrollment from 2011 to 2013. Immigrants benefited more from Medicaid expansion than natives because a much larger share of immigrants are poor and uninsured. [[Page 16382]] It seems almost certain that immigrants and their children will continue to benefit disproportionately from ObamaCare, as they remain much more likely than natives to be uninsured or poor. The available evidence indicates that Medicaid growth associated with immigrants is largely among those legally in the country. Nonetheless, immigrants, this points out: The number of immigrants and their U.S.-born children on Medicaid grew twice as fast as the number of natives and their children on Medicaid from 2011 to 2013. Immigrants and their children accounted for 42 percent of Medicaid enrollment growth from 2011 to 2013, even though they accounted for only 17 percent of the Nation's total population and 23 percent of overall U.S. population growth in the same time period. About two-thirds of the growth in Medicaid associated with immigrants was among immigrants themselves, rather than U.S.- born children of immigrants. It is an interesting issue because when my friend Steve King and I were in England in recent years, we were told there that the law is very clear. They know that their country would fail if they just say everybody that comes in is immediately entitled to every Federal subsidy the British Government offers, so they have a requirement in England that you are not entitled to any benefit, we were told, until you have paid into the British system for at least 5 years. Well, that kind of makes sense, and having just been over there and had a chance to address members from the House of Commons and House of Lords, having spoken at Cambridge and Oxford, they are trying to save their country over there, but there was a great deal of welfare that is hurting the system and their economics. Even so, they have a law that says you can't even get these kind of benefits until you have paid into their system for 5 years. Why isn't there something like that in the President's new law that he spoke into being? Perhaps that ought to be the first reform that both Houses take up. You can't receive any kind of benefit from the U.S. Government unless you have paid into the U.S. Government for at least 5 years, and that does not include getting more money back year after year than you pay in. An article yesterday indicated one woman in Virginia had been largely using people that were illegally in the country to file for child tax credits so they can get back $4,000, $7,000, $1,500 more than they paid in, and it was a scam. If one woman in Virginia can be accountable for $7,000 in child tax credits being paid out more than people paid in, how many people are there across the United States that are doing that same thing, while we have workers across the country, like in my district, that have said that because ObamaCare changed the definition of part-time work, it forced them into a situation of having to work two part-time jobs, not having health insurance anymore, and just struggling just to survive, just to live; yet when it comes to people that have not paid a dime into the system, all of a sudden, we are just going to bend over backwards and violate the Constitution for them. There is an article in Breitbart today from Tony Lee that said: One in three illegal immigrants over the age of 25 in America do not even have a high school education, according to a New Migration Policy Institute report. The Migration Policy Institute estimates there are 8.512 million illegal immigrant adults 25 years of age or older. The study found that while 49 percent of illegal immigrants 25 years or older have at least a high school diploma or a GED, 17 percent have some high school education, while 33 percent do not have any high school education. Of course, we have got people of all races, national origins, and both genders trying to get into this country. They have been trying for years and years to do so legally. They could fill needed specialized positions to help our economy grow; yet they can't get a visa. They are not about to get amnesty. We have got things completely backwards. We know, of course, when the President talks about amnesty and legal status--along with other people here in Washington--our border patrolmen make clear over and over that that increases the number of people coming across our border. Thank God Texas has stepped up. The State of Texas has been paying tremendous amounts of money to have additional people on the border. At night, you can see their profile--DPS troopers, Texas Rangers, game wardens--where they can call people in speedboats that Texas has paid for to rush up and try to catch the coyotes bringing people across illegally. The coyotes don't want to be caught. The people do. They want to turn themselves in as quick as they can. The coyotes don't want to be caught, so they are not going to come across if they think they are going to get caught before they can get across with their raft. One of the other things that ought to scare law enforcement dramatically is the fact that I have heard a number of people say, as they were questioned by our border patrolmen out in the middle of the night, and they are asked--it's not on the standard questions, but they have been asked many times by our border patrolmen, ``How much did you have to pay the gangs or the drug cartels to bring you across?'' Sometimes, it is $5,000, $6,000, $7,000, or $8,000. Sometimes, a followup question is asked, ``Where did you get that kind of money in El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, or wherever you came from?'' Often, the answer was, ``Well, some of the friends or family in the U.S. sent money. We have been trying to collect money in our home country.'' Every now and then, you get a response that scares me and is probably at the bottom of many of the people's payments to come and be brought in illegally by drug cartels and gangs. They have confided, ``They are going to let us work some of the rest of it off.'' Well, what does that mean? It means when Health and Human Services picks people up and transmits them across the country--with scabies, as we have seen happen, and whatever disease they may bring in--as some have pointed out, that means every State is a border State, thanks to Health and Human Services shipping them around the country. As they build up their numbers in different cities around the country and they owe the drug cartels that are ruthless, unscrupulous, and don't mind torturing and killing, we hear more and more about Mexican drug cartel activities around the country and our cities, how horrendous it is that the United States Department of Homeland Security and the United States Department of Health and Human Services being complicit in helping ship agents for the drug cartels and gangs around the country that can be intimidated and reminded, ``Remember, you still owe us $3,000, $4,000, $5,000, and here's how you will work it off.'' Is it sex trade? Is it drugs that are poisoning more of our American teenagers and young adults with the Mexican drugs being brought in? If the drug cartels are getting promises from people coming into the United States illegally that they will work off the rest of the money, then you can bet the drug cartels are going to see that they do. I have been told by border patrolmen that you don't cross the U.S. border without some drug cartel, some gang, some organized crime being in charge of the area of the border where you crossed, and you dare not cross across Mexico into the United States without the permission of whatever organized criminal group is in charge. They say they will come after them. We are bringing in agents of drug cartels and shipping them around the country where they can work for the drug cartels. It is what they have said there on the border. ``Yeah, they are going to let me work this off.'' Well, in talking to the border patrolmen there in the middle of the night down on the border, they tell you some interesting things. As I have been told by the border patrolmen, ``You know what the drug cartels call us Federal agents here in the U.S.? They borrow from a commercial on television and say, `We're the logistics.''' The United States Federal employees are the drug cartels' logistics. All they have to do is get their agents that are [[Page 16383]] going to work for the drug cartels into the United States, and then the United States Government ships them around the country for the drug cartels. All they have to do is say, ``This is where I've got somebody--a family member, a loved one--and that's where I need to go,'' and we ship them free of charge. The U.S. Government makes it free of charge at least to the immigrant coming in illegally. Of course, there is no free lunch, as Phil Gramm used to repeatedly say. Somebody is paying for it, and to a limited extent, it is American taxpayers. To another extent, it is our children and grandchildren who are incurring the debts that will be paid with income they have never even figured out what job they will be deriving the income from. It is immoral. {time} 1700 Here is an article from Politico saying, the DHS chief, short-term funding a very bad idea. So it turns out Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson warned Tuesday that a short-term funding measure for his agency will be ``a very bad idea,'' telling Congress such a bill would hold up everything from hiring Secret Service agents to paying for border security. Well, we still have people that are saying, though, you know, in a CR and an omnibus, we really can't put restrictions on the Federal Government in there. And yet, here is a report regarding the last omnibus highlights where there were 17 different restrictions on agencies' use of fees in the last fiscal year. This was done with the help of the Congressional Research Service that reviewed the previous spending omnibus. And Senator Jeff Sessions, dear friend, great guy, he has been able to identify 17 separate restrictions. One was a restriction in section 543 on the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services that said, notwithstanding section 1356(n), title VIII, U.S. Code, of the funds deposited into the immigration examinations fee account, $7,500,000 may be allocated by U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services fiscal year 2014 for the purpose of providing an immigrant integration grants program. There is one for the Department of Agriculture, Department of Justice, Transportation Security Administration, Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Federal Communications Commission, Security and Exchange Commission, Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Office of Surface Mining Reclamation Enforcement, Copyright Office, Export-Import Bank of the United States. So we know it can be done. It has been done. The restrictions have been made in past omnibuses, even just last year. So we can do that, and we should do that. If we don't do that, then the President's unconstitutional act is going to be a harbinger of terrible things to come. Once you no longer have a Constitution that means anything, then Presidents can pretty much do as they wish. That is what happens in Third World countries. That is why we have lasted over 200 years, because the Constitution meant something. It took a civil war to make the Constitution more enforcing of what it said. It took someone like Dr. King giving his life to ensure civil rights for everyone, as the Constitution guaranteed. But once we have moved into this post-constitutional era, where the Constitution no longer is enforced, it is just a document, then there is no skeleton on which to hang muscle and the might that makes a strong country, and we become, figuratively speaking, a blob of a nation without structure that can't defend itself adequately, that has drug cartel agents throughout the country, that continues to have people sending wives in to have children in the United States free of charge and leaving to go back home with, actually, a U.S. passport as an American citizen. I think that is how Anwar al-Awlaki, whom the President was so concerned about he blew him up with a drone strike--he was an American citizen. His parents came over from Yemen on visas, and he was born here, but taken back, grew up learning to hate America. The deputy leader of Hamas, Mousa Abu Marzook, his wife came to the U.S., had a child that, no doubt, is being taught to hate America. Palestinian Islamic jihad leader Sami Al-Arian, his wife came to the United States, had a child, American citizen. Abdul Rahman al-Amoudi, who is doing 23 years in prison for supporting terrorism, financing terrorism, his wife had a child here in the United States, an American citizen. Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the 9/11 mastermind, even has confessed to that in his own written pleadings and said, if our act of terror created terror in your heart, then praise be to Allah. Basically, in his six-page pleading, he said, you had it coming. I think there is possibly a chance he would raise a child to hate America. And then the Muslim Brother President of Egypt, Mohamed Morsi, his wife came to America. Irony of ironies, he thought he was being very clever to have an American citizen daughter, yet the Egyptian people didn't think it was so clever. They didn't like the idea. When he became such an unconstitutional actor as a President that he could no longer be tolerated, be allowed to be left in office, 20 million Egyptians were reported in the streets of Egypt demanding his removal, followed by another demonstration of 30 million to 33 million Egyptians, moderate Muslims, Christians, Jews, secularists, out in the streets demanding, we don't want a radical Islamist in control of our country, Egypt. Amazing. Such a huge event in the realm of human history in Egypt. God bless the Egyptians. We need to pray for them, we need to help them. But not this administration. This administration says, oh, so you ousted the Muslim Brother, part of the organization that wants to bring down America, and you ousted him? Well, if you don't put him back in power we are not going to send you the Apache helicopters you are using to keep the Suez Canal open. We are not going to send you what you need to deweaponize the Sinai that Morsi saw weaponized. No, we are going to hold back any weapons that will help you clean up the radicalization in Egypt and Sinai that Morsi oversaw, which is why some of the moderate Muslim leaders in the Middle East and North Africa continue to ask, why do you keep helping your enemies? Do you not understand that the Muslim Brothers are your enemy? Do you not understand that the Muslim Brothers want the United States as part of a caliphate? Well, the Department of Homeland Security and this administration and mainstream media belittled me for the last couple of years or so as I continued to point out that they had an adviser on their top Homeland Security Advisory Council who had used his classification that Janet Napolitano gave him in an inappropriate way; that he had spoken--he was listed as a speaker paying tribute to the Ayatollah Khomeini as a man of vision; that he defended the Holy Land Foundation principals who were convicted of supporting terrorism; failed to properly file the tax forms that would allow his foundation to remain a 501(c)(3). Didn't file them. And yet, he is a top adviser. Well, even the Obama administration had to finally let him go and, yes, go ahead and accept the resignation when he tweeted out that the international caliphate is inevitable so we need to get used to it. Even the Obama administration had to let him go after that. So he has resigned. He is no longer a top member advising this administration. But it is time for Americans to wake up. Ignoring the Constitution is not helpful. After over two-dozen statements by this President that he doesn't have the power to, in effect, do what he just now did right before Thanksgiving, demands congressional action. We must stand up and defund the illegal activity of this President. Mr. Speaker, I think it is also important to note that our Republican leaders got duped in July of 2011. I tried to warn. I told people back then, told our whole conference, this supercommittee [[Page 16384]] will not be allowed to reach an agreement by the Democrats. I was assured, oh, sure they will because it cuts a whole bunch of money from Medicaid and an automatic sequestration if the supercommittee doesn't reach an agreement. So the hundreds of billions, the gutting of our military will never happen because the supercommittee will reach an agreement because they don't want the cuts to Medicare. Well, it seemed very clear to me, and as I told my Republican friends, no, they are going to prevent the supercommittee from reaching agreement if we pass this bill because they want the cuts to Medicare because they cut over $700 billion of Medicare funding in ObamaCare without a single Republican vote. So the only way, in 2012, they will be able to run commercials saying, we love our rich friends more than we love seniors, is if they prevent the supercommittee from reaching an agreement. The cuts to Medicare are only a fraction of what ObamaCare did but, nonetheless, cuts to Medicare will happen. And the President has never cared much for the military anyway, and this allows him, basically, to gut our military to pre-World War II levels. So it is a win, win, win all the way around for the administration if we pass that bill creating a supercommittee. Well, we did, and the President got the military gutted, Defense Department gutted. The sequestration happened. And now I am concerned, if we say, all right, we are not going to fund Homeland Security unless you agree, you sign a bill that defunds your illegal activity in providing amnesty to 5 million people, I think we need to be careful about that, Mr. Speaker, because it just may be that the President would like to blame Republicans and say, you know what? Well, I would like to have Border Patrol securing the border, but the Republicans cut off the funding, and so, gee, there is no Border Patrol on the border. It is all the Republicans' fault because they wouldn't fund it. I think we need to be rather careful about saying we are going to bank on not funding Homeland Security, only fund them for a short time, and then threaten the President, if you don't sign off on a bill defunding your illegal activity, then Homeland Security won't be funded. As one of my Republican friends pointed out, kind of like the old adage, if you are going to take a hostage, you need to take somebody that the other side doesn't want to see killed. And there is some concern that if we take hostage, figuratively speaking, the Homeland Security Department in order to defund the illegal activity of this President's amnesty, it just may be that the President, figuratively again speaking, will say, go ahead, take out your hostage; completely defund Homeland Security. That is okay with me. {time} 1715 No, that is not the way you negotiate. If we are going to stop the President's unconstitutional amnesty, it is going to require funding everything that needs funding, but to go after something the President really wants but doesn't need. Good grief. When we are spending the trillions of dollars we are, we can certainly afford, for example, to do away with the czars, to do away with the, say, public transportation to golf outings. We can save millions of dollars just on that alone. This is what you do in negotiation. For those of us who have negotiated multimillion- dollar deals and multimillion-dollar settlements, that is what you do. You have to find something that is very important to the other side, but that is really not necessary, so that the other side, when you are negotiating, knows you mean business. I don't think Homeland Security is the place to threaten. We have got to defund the illegal activity, or of those who fought to defend the Constitution, who picked up the Stars and Stripes in representing our Nation--our constitutional Republic--and carried it as fellow soldiers were killed and who advanced freedom here in America, their blood will be on our hands because we wouldn't even stand for the Constitution when there were no bullets being fired. We have got to stand up for America and for our Constitution. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time. ____________________ ALZHEIMER'S The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Bridenstine). Under the Speaker's announced policy of January 3, 2013, the gentleman from California (Mr. Garamendi) is recognized for 60 minutes as the designee of the minority leader. Mr. GARAMENDI. Mr. Speaker, tonight, I want to spend some time with my colleagues discussing something that we actually can do for every American family, something that the Congress of the United States can take action on soon, like this week, when we pass our appropriations bill or, perhaps, next week if we fail to get the job done this week. We can help every American family tomorrow, the next day, and on into the years out ahead if we take action. The subject matter of tonight is about an issue that affects every American family wherever you are out there--my own family, your family, the families of my staff, perhaps even the families of those who are working with us tonight. This is an illness. This is an illness that has become the most expensive and will soon become the most pervasive illness in America. It is Alzheimer's. It is dementia associated with Alzheimer's. It is a devastating illness. It is one that robs individuals of their mental abilities. It robs them of their memories of their families, of their work, of their lives. It confuses and muddles their thoughts, and eventually, it will destroy that individual, so tonight, we talk about Alzheimer's. Is there anyone out there, any family, any individual, who hasn't seen this illness? I think we all have. Let's get into it in some detail. A little later, as my colleagues join us, we will continue the discussion and talk about what we can do--your Representatives. There are 535 of us--435 here in the House of Representatives from every part of this Nation and from every walk of life and from every community, and there are the 100 Senators from every State. Let's use some of these charts to see if we can get a better fix on what we are actually facing here in America. Let's see. Alzheimer's is the most expensive disease in America. One in five Medicare dollars is currently spent on people with Alzheimer's, 20 percent of every Medicare dollar. In fact, the total cost of Alzheimer's today--this year, 2014--is over $215 billion--a quarter of a trillion dollars. More and more of that money will come from Medicare as the baby boom population begins to move into its more senior years. This illness is not just found in seniors. We are also learning about the early onset of Alzheimer's, men and women in their thirties and forties--early Alzheimer's. Of course, it extends on, mostly in the more senior population, 60-65 and above. This is an illness that is also associated with genetics. If you have Alzheimer's in your family, there is a higher probability that you will have Alzheimer's yourself, but it is also an illness that is associated with brain damage that can occur from concussions. I think we have all heard about the National Football League players who have suffered with one form of dementia or another and who have died early because of it. We also know that traumatic brain injuries are the most common injuries found among our troops who have returned from Afghanistan and Iraq. Alzheimer's, it is there. It is very expensive. What can we look forward to in the future? Let's see. This is Medicare and Medicaid--the Federal Government expenditures--not the family expenditures, not the expenditures by health insurance companies. This is just the Federal Government. Today, it is about $122 billion. By the end of this decade, it will be $195 billion. As this wave of baby boomers [[Page 16385]] passes through our demography and through our society, we expect, by the year 2050, that the Federal Government will be spending over $880 billion--$120 billion short of $1 trillion--on this illness, and this may be just two-thirds of the total cost. Well over $1.2 trillion will be spent in about 35 years on this illness. Do you want to bust the budget? Do you want to see the deficits of America soar almost uncontrollably? Then look to Alzheimer's and dementia and the effect that they will have on the Federal budget deficit. Pay attention to these numbers because these numbers are the story of the American Federal budget and of the personal budgets of families across this Nation--Alzheimer's and dementia, $880 billion of Medicare and Medicaid money by 2050. There is another way of looking at it. It is a different graph but the same story. The already high cost of Alzheimer's will skyrocket as the baby boom moves through the population. There it is: the same numbers, the same graph, the same extraordinary challenge facing America. I should also mention that this is not just an American issue; this is an issue for every advanced economy in the world. If you are able to avoid the childhood illnesses--the illnesses that kill so many in the developing world--then those economies that have advanced to the more developed economies face the exact same population surge and costs associated with Alzheimer's and dementia. What can we do about it? We can actually do a lot. I suspect, if you are looking at this on your TV screens or are here in the audience, you really only see the green line. This speaks of the treatment for Alzheimer's: today, $250 billion by Federal and local and private. On this one over here is research, treatment versus research. It is the old adage: You spend it now or spend a lot more later. A penny saved is a penny earned. What does research amount to? I have to pull this up close--oh, here it is. We are spending $122 billion to $150 billion or so of Federal and State money. What are we spending on research? $566 million. Billions? Millions? What does research amount to? It actually works. Research actually will solve problems, medical research. How long have we been at polio? I remember growing up around the issues of polio. It was very common in our communities, then some money was spent on research and a polio vaccine. You don't see polio in our communities anymore. The research worked with the development of the Salk vaccine, followed by other vaccines to treat polio. It is essentially wiped out in America. It only exists in a few very isolated places in the world. If we were to spend the money on a vaccination in those areas, we would see polio disappear from our world. The same thing happened with smallpox. I want to show you something more of today. Let's look at the research budgets for those programs that are active today: investments in health research at the National Institutes of Health, 2014 cancer research, $5.4 billion on cancer research. Enough? Probably not. We probably could and should spend more on cancer research. Should we do so, I would suspect that we would see even more success in treating cancer in its earliest stages. HIV/AIDS, nearly $3 billion on HIV/AIDS--have we solved the problem? No, but we have certainly figured out how people can live with HIV/ AIDS, and we are probably going to see a vaccine sometime in the near future. This is what we are currently spending--nearly $3 billion--on HIV/AIDS. Cardiovascular issues--stroke, heart attacks, other kinds of cardiovascular illnesses--just around $2 billion or slightly more is spent on that. The most expensive, the most prevalent of all of the illnesses is Alzheimer's, $566 million. It's not billions--not $2 billion, not $3 billion, not $5.5 billion--but $566 million. What is the result of all of this? What does it mean when you spend this kind of money on research? It really means something very good happens, that something really, really good happens when you spend money on research. With polio research and a polio vaccine, polio is no longer found in the United States. Let's look at these major illnesses. What does it mean? What does it mean when we spend money on cancer research? Let's take a look here at deaths from major diseases and the change in the number of deaths from 2000 to 2012: breast cancer down 2 percent, prostate cancer down 8 percent. What happens when you spend $5.5 billion a year on cancer research? Cancer deaths fall--success. On heart disease--cardiovascular illnesses--we spend about $2 billion a year, and we see heart disease dropping by some 16 percent. That is deaths from heart disease dropping by 16 percent and stroke dropping by 28 percent. {time} 1730 So what is the use of research? Well, if you want to live, it is a pretty good thing to spend money on, particularly if you are thinking about getting cancer or any of the cardiovascular illnesses: heart disease, stroke, heart attacks and the like. HIV/AIDS, do you remember that number? HIV/AIDS, nearly $3 billion was spent on HIV/AIDS, and deaths from HIV/AIDS are down 42 percent in the United States. So what does it mean when you spend money on research? It means really good things for Americans, and around the world a similar result. You spend that money on the research dealing with these major illnesses, and you will see the death rates drop all across this Nation. HIV/AIDS is down by 42 percent, spending $3 billion a year; cardiovascular, $2 billion a year. And this purple line over here, what happens when you spend $566 million a year on research for Alzheimer's? Alzheimer's deaths from 2000 to 2010 were up, increased by 68 percent. There is a story here. There is a lesson here. There is something that 535 of your Representatives, the American people's Representatives, should be paying attention to; and that is, if we want to deal with the most devastating, the most expensive, and, increasingly, the most common illness in America--the one that always will lead to death, the one for which there is no cure presently, the one for which there is not the kind of support needed for those people that suffer from Alzheimer's-- then and we had better start talking about solutions. Research is a part of it. How much do we think could be spent this year in the appropriation bills that are now coming before us? What if we were to add $200 million, about a 40 percent increase? What would it mean? It means that we will probably, over the next couple of years, begin to see profound knowledge about the human brain, about how it functions, about the diseases of the human brain, and about how we can attack Alzheimer's. I don't expect it to be done in 2 years, but I know that out there, in the mind institutions at the University of California-San Francisco, University of California-Davis, down at UCLA and in other research institutions around this Nation, we are learning how the brain functions. We are learning about the diseases of the brain. And if we were to invest this year an additional $200 million, we would see a flourishing of knowledge. And maybe, maybe in one of those research institutes, they would find the key to solving the Alzheimer's puzzle. And if they were to do so, we would see a profound reversal in these numbers; and this blue dramatic increase of 68 percent more deaths from Alzheimer's over the last decade, we would see that reverse, and hopefully we would see it go down. I would like to continue our discussion here with my colleagues. I have noticed that my colleague from California, Jackie Speier, representing the Peninsula, has arrived. I think your district comes very close to that great research institution, the University of California-San Francisco. I am not sure if it is in your district, but I know it is on the border of your district, if not in your district. Ms. Speier, if you would join us to talk about this issue, I know it has [[Page 16386]] been on your mind and in your heart. You have been a leader in California and back here in Washington on this issue. So thank you so very much for joining us in our discussion about the most prevalent and the most expensive of all diseases in America. Ms. SPEIER. I thank the gentleman from California. You are right. For more than 25 years, I have actually represented UCSF in the State legislature and then here in Congress, except as a result of reapportionment in the last 2 years. So I no longer technically represent the institution. Mr. GARAMENDI. Well, I get to represent the University of California- Davis, and it is in my district, although the hospital and the research center are not. So I guess we share the same sadness. Ms. SPEIER. Yes, and the same real joy in knowing that there is extraordinary research going on at both of those institutions. I thank the gentleman for drawing such laser focus on the issue of Alzheimer's disease and why it is, in fact, the number one most prevalent disease in this country. I brought down this Alzheimer's Association sash that many of us wore when our constituents came into town, pleading with us to do more about Alzheimer's research. Many of us took pictures with them and said, yes, we are very supportive, but it is really time for us to put our money where our mouth is. It is not good enough to wear a purple sash and say that you are supportive of Alzheimer's research when, in fact, what we are spending in terms of Alzheimer's research is so much less than it is with every other disease. As you were pointing out with your chart--I have a very similar chart as well--we are spending $566 million a year on Alzheimer's disease. Good. There is no question about it. But it is not good enough. It is not good enough in comparison to what we are spending on cardiovascular disease, on HIV/AIDS, or on cancer--$5 billion, $5.5 billion on cancer research. But let's talk about the big elephant in the room. I mean, we already know that we are not spending nearly as much money on Alzheimer's research as we are on other conditions and we need to pump that up, but let's talk about the elephant in the room. The elephant in the room is not the Republican elephant. It is the elephant on the issue of Alzheimer's. Why is it so important for you and me and every American to be concerned about Alzheimer's research? Because it is going to choke us financially in a very short period of time. We are now spending about $214 billion a year on the cost of health care. Now, that is $150 billion in costs for Medicare, and then another $37 billion in costs for Medicaid. So it is costing us a lot of money today, but the real choker is how much it is going to cost us in 2050. In 2050, it is going to cost us over $1.2 trillion. So we owe it to our families, we owe it to our constituents; we owe it to the American people, we owe it to the Medicare system and the Medicaid system to find a cure or find a way to early detection and then to slow the process of this particular disease. Now, in my county, we have about 15,000 people living with Alzheimer's right now and more than 45,000 caregivers. Nationally, in 2012, 15.5 million caregivers provided an estimated 17 billion hours of unpaid care, valued at $220 billion, which brings me to my next point, and it is about women. This issue is a women's health issue. Now, it is true that women--60 percent of Alzheimer's and dementia caregivers are women. They are often unpaid in providing those services. But nationally, a woman in her sixties has an estimated lifetime risk for developing Alzheimer's of something like 1 in 6. For breast cancer, what we have been so focused on, it is 1 in 11. Here is the most stunning figure of all. Two-thirds of the 5 million seniors with Alzheimer's disease in this country are women. Two-thirds are women. So this is, indeed, a women's health issue and one that we have to take very seriously. So with that, Mr. Garamendi, I know you have other participants in this, and I thank you for yielding. Mr. GARAMENDI. Thank you very much, Ms. Speier. I really appreciate you bringing the women's issue to this. The last 3 years of my mother-in-law's life were spent in our home as she went through the process of Alzheimer's. And it is, indeed, a women's issue. Two-thirds, as you say, are women. And we experienced that. Fortunately, for us, it worked out very well for us and our family. But we are not unique, and while our experience was sad but good in some ways, that is not always the case. This is a huge, huge burden. Not only are the women the ones who suffer, but the women are often the ones who care for those who have it. So I thank you so much. I notice my friends from the east coast have joined us. We often do an east-west thing here. My two friends are debating who is going to go first. Mr. Fattah, why don't you go first, and we will go from there. Mr. FATTAH. Thank you. I appreciate that. We were together just recently in your district at the Staglin Scientific Symposium, focusing on some of the challenges related to diseases and disorders of the human brain. This issue that you raise on the floor tonight is the most dominant challenge that we face in terms of a degenerative brain disease. It is not by accident that Prime Minister David Cameron, when leading the G7, said that dementia was the world's global challenge. It is not by accident that here in our own country we have created, through the great work of Members like yourselves and others, a major focus now on Alzheimer's as one of the brand-name dementias that has affected millions of Americans and will affect millions going forward. I have led an effort in the appropriations process focusing on the human brain, both mapping the brain and challenging and chasing cures and treatments for diseases. This neuroscience initiative, Fattah Neuroscience Initiative, has been focused on the fact that these 600- plus diseases of the brain affect over 50 million Americans; but there is none more costly than Alzheimer's, none that are affecting more families than Alzheimer's. And it is so important. We just had an incident the other day of a very prominent restaurant owner here in Washington who was said to have gone missing in New York City because she is suffering from this disease. I was happy to be at the launch of the Give To Cure effort, which is an effort to build support so that the ``valley of death,'' as it is called, in terms of major research that needs to go forward to clinical trials, working with my good friend Rafi Gidron from the Israel Brain Technologies and so many others. This morning I met with the new president of Cal Tech and talked about the efforts there at a great university in your State, and they received well over 10 percent of the initial awards in the BRAIN Initiative from NIH because of the leading research. I have been--and some of the people think I may have some designs on retiring to California. I have spent some time there now with Stanley Prusiner, who is a Nobel laureate in neurology. He was the first one working with people like Virginia Lee and John Trojanowski to begin to really understand the early formation of this disease and how it affects people. I want to talk just for a minute about how this affects families--and then I will yield--not about the science of it. There are significant scientific hurdles, with over 100 billion neurons, tens of trillions of connections. We do not now know how the brains of human beings work, but we don't have a good understanding yet of how the brains of much smaller insects or animals actually function. This is a great scientific challenge. I think it is the most important frontier for all of science to focus on, and that is why I am so dedicated to it. When it comes to families--and I heard you speak about your own--this is something that has a tremendous impact. And dementia is something [[Page 16387]] that, as people are healthier, their bodies are healthier, their brains are degenerating. We are going to face more and more of this. We had a former Speaker of the House, Newt Gingrich, talk about, if we could just reverse for a few years the onset of Alzheimer's, it could save our country trillions of dollars. But put the dollars aside. What this is really about is valuing families and understanding that as much as science is something that we all take a great interest in, that what should focus us is to make sure that our scientific endeavors are focused on how to improve the life chances of the people who we represent. {time} 1745 So the World Health Organization says there are a billion people worldwide, NIH says 50-plus million Americans suffering from brain illnesses. We know that you have your finger on the pulse, Mr. Speaker, and I thank you for conducting this Special Order. I know that so many members want to participate, I am going to now yield back my time, but you can count on us as we go forward to continue to work with you and to work with the pharmaceutical industry and to work with our academic enterprises, and we are going to have even more success going forward not just in finding treatment but we have to put as our goal finding a cure. So thank you. Mr. GARAMENDI. Thank you so very much, Mr. Fattah, and thank you for your role on the Appropriations Committee trying to move the money into this research so that we can address this. You mentioned the Staglins out in California and their project, which is the One Mind project, our former colleague Mr. Kennedy involved in that project, trying to pull together the research from around the world and here in the United States specifically, so that there is a sharing of knowledge back and forth from these various research centers, so that the synergy would come from the knowledge that may exist at Cal Tech or New York, which we will undoubtedly hear about in a few moments, or in your country out in Pennsylvania. Mr. FATTAH. If the gentleman would yield for just a second. Mr. GARAMENDI. Sure. Mr. FATTAH. I met just a few days ago with Henry Markram with the European Human Brain Project, where the EU has put now a billion-and-a- half euros on the table to help with the mapping of the brain. One of the things that we talked about and what is clear is that we have to bring these global efforts together and connect them. This is not about one researcher somewhere discovering the solution to this. This is going to take a combined effort, and we have to have a certain urgency about it, and we have to demand that it be done now. Thank you. Mr. GARAMENDI. Well, thank you so very, very much. I am going to turn to my colleague from our normal East-West dialogue here that we have done so many days, so many times over the last few years. Mr. Tonko, thank you so very much for joining us once again as we talk this time about--we usually talk about jobs and the economy and how we can build it, but this time we are talking about Alzheimer's, so please. Mr. TONKO. Well, thank you, Representative Garamendi, for leading us in a very important discussion during this Special Order. There is no denying that all of us, Members of the House and beyond, if you are to ask individuals out there across this country if Alzheimer's or dementia issues have impacted their family, the immediate response is absolutely. I think all of us have been touched by those devastating impacts, those outcomes that befell our loved ones, and the ripple effect onto that circle of family and friends. It is devastating. You in a sense lose that individual, and it is a very painful process certainly for those individuals living with Alzheimer's and dementia, and for their immediate families and loved ones and caregivers who watch as they painfully travel the journey with those individuals. So I think for us to take that human element, that impact and that dynamic, and put it into working order, we would be well served to acknowledge that Alzheimer's is the most expensive disease in America. It is driving bankruptcy if it goes unaddressed. And when one in every five Medicare dollars is spent on a person with Alzheimer's or dementia, the warning signals should be out there for sounder budgeting, to put our focus on a cure, on research, on developing those opportunities that will bend the cost curve, so to speak, that will enable us to address with dignity and common sense and economic sustainability the issues of Alzheimer's and dementia. The impact upon our culture is so much so the economic drain is at about $214 billion in 2014. That is an immense economic toll that is placed upon budgets, be they Medicare, Medicaid, local budgets, or not- for-profits that make it their goal to best serve individuals, especially in their elderly years, and to be able to assist in that effort by advancing the efforts of the study of the brain that have been initiated by this President, by President Obama and his administration, is a very, very worthy investment. It will tell us much about several diseases out there and allow us to again approach an issue with dignity and facts at our fingertips that will then provide for the best prioritization of how to respond to those issues. Now, much has been said about research here tonight, and rightfully so. It is very critical that we, you know, grow the investment on research. I have participated in our annual town halls that are called for in the National Alzheimer's Project Act, and that National Alzheimer's Project Act requires that we gather together to understand how well the services are coming together, what the needs are, and how we plan appropriately for ongoing budgets. There you receive, all of us, the very disturbing testimony that reaches us, impacts our thinking, and certainly speaks to our hearts and souls about what we need to do, painful journeys that individuals have made. I can vividly recall a high school friend mentioning that her husband no longer knew her name but knew her voice. These are painful bits of testimony to absorb, and they motivate us. They ought to motivate us and challenge us to move more quickly in this effort to fund research and find a cure and find better treatments. The efforts that I think are important here that follow the National Alzheimer's Project Act is to put together a more clinical response, and I think the Alzheimer's Accountability Act, which I have cosponsored, allows for H.R. 4351 to respond to the Alzheimer's planning in a way that clinicians and those directly involved in the service delivery system to the Alzheimer's community, they will advise what those budgeted amounts should look like in an annual effort from here to the threshold year of 2025. That is an absolute essential. I applaud our efforts here in the House with Representative Guthrie and others--as I said, I am a cosponsor--looking to make certain that we have a much more accountable, logistic, well-planned, and professional-driven estimate that will move us forward with each and every budget year to respond to this crisis in America, and it indeed is at crisis proportion. So Representative Garamendi, these are efforts that I think need to be made. The commitment that starts with the human element, the compassion that needs to be expressed on behalf of the people of this country via this House, via Congress, both Houses speaking to a legitimate request that authorizes the investment in research, that puts together a plan that is run by clinicians that advise the United States Government as to how to best respond, what those levels, those thresholds should be from now to the benchmark year of 2025, and to make certain that we do it all within our professional capacity in harnessing the resources that are required. We grow, we cultivate an intellectual capacity in this country of which we are very proud, and one that should serve us abundantly well, and it is important to have our hearts and souls measure that opportunity, to put together the best blueprint for addressing [[Page 16388]] this crisis. Let's move forward with a sound, resounding commitment of support to these individuals and their caregivers. You know, when we look at the statistics out there, one in nine over the age of 65 is impacted by Alzheimer's, one in three in age category 85-plus. And guess what? That is the fastest-growing age demographic in our country. So in order to plan and plan well for the onslaught of baby boomers who will enter into these given demographics, we need to make commitments, and we need to again bend that cost curve by investing now in research, preventative therapies, and certainly study of the brain, efforts that are promoted by the President and the administration to make certain that we can move forward effectively and compassionately and allow for the best choices to be made. So I thank you for leading us in this very important discussion, Representative Garamendi, and I am convinced that with the facts at our fingertips and with the elements of compassion and dignity that should respond to the Alzheimer's community, we can get these important measures achieved. Mr. GARAMENDI. Mr. Tonko, thank you so very much for your bringing to us the information about actions that have already been taken. The Alzheimer's plan that you discussed lays out a process by which the National Institutes of Health will develop a program of research, bring it directly to Congress so that we can then analyze it and hopefully fund that research. It is the pragmatic way of dealing with it. As you said, it is based upon a studied step-by-step process to get to the solution of Alzheimer's. There is also other legislation. Our former colleague, now Senator Markey, put together a bill that is called the HOPE Act, and that is one that would require that Medicare take specific account of Alzheimer's, and that in the Medicare program, there be a method for Medicare to fund early diagnosis of Alzheimer's and then the early treatment. As was said by one of our colleagues earlier, a delay of a couple of years or 3 or 4 years in the onset of serious Alzheimer's is extraordinarily beneficial to the individual and to the family, and, in a larger context, to the budget of the individual family, their insurance company, as well as the Federal government through Medicare and Medicaid. So that program also speaks to the caregiving that is necessary and Medicare picking this up. It is clearly going to be the illness that will bust the bank unless we can get ahead of it, and that is where the research comes into focus and into play. We can do this. There is another angle to this. I was going to take this up with Mr. Fattah when he was here. He was talking about other agencies and other governments that are involved in dealing with this. About a month ago I had the opportunity to spend about an hour with the new Secretary of Veterans Affairs, Mr. McDonald, and we were talking about the various challenges that the Department of Veterans Affairs has dealing with all of the veterans, and it wasn't long before the conversation turned to traumatic brain injury and PTSD, post-traumatic stress syndrome, both of which are illnesses or problems of the human brain. We were discussing how the Department of Veterans Affairs is dealing with this. It turns out that they also have a research budget, and we know that he was unaware of some of the research that was going on both at the NIH and what Mr. Fattah talked about, the One Mind program that our former colleague Mr. Kennedy is involved in in pulling together the research that is available around the world, bringing that research together so that the synthesis of it could be a much more rapid solution to the problems that Mr. McDonald faces in the Veterans Administration dealing with post-traumatic stress illnesses as well as traumatic brain injury. So all of these things come together, and in dealing with it, ultimately we carry a heavy burden of responsibility here in Congress. Mr. TONKO. Absolutely. You talked too about the caregivers, and it is theorized that nearly 60 percent of those caregivers who respond to Alzheimer's patients and those living with dementia are impacted with tremendous emotional stress, and they rate that as high or very high. And then of that 60 percent of caregivers, literally one-third is suffering from some order of depression. So the impacts here continue to sprawl and cause greater expenditure for those who are doing their good deed, responding to the needs of loved ones or friends or the patient population out there, and then they are impacted by this order of depression. {time} 1800 It is assumed that has added additional cost to the system of our health care drain, and that is at $9.3 billion. That estimate goes over the year of 2013, so it is very easy to begin to do the calculus here on the cost of status quo, of not responding in deep measure or in wise capacity, so as to put together the sort of research that we require and the respite relief programs that are essential. Having talked to a number of caregivers during my tenure here, now closing out my third term, but before that in the State Assembly of New York, I would routinely hear from folks who would deal with these situations, these family issues in ways that they never imagined would be possible. I know of some spouses that indicated to me that, while they stayed home full time being the caregiver, they eventually sought employment and used every bit of that salary that came from that new employment to go toward the cost of caregivers. Now, they did that in order to save a relationship. It was a tremendous emotional drain on their relationship because it is not easy serving as a caregiver. Individuals have told me, as spouses, that they have gone out and sought full-time employment and again passed over that salary to the respite person. That is the sort of painful pressure under which individuals and couples--families--are living. It is a very difficult assignment many have chosen to keep their loved one at home. There are issues of safety, economic duress, and certainly our system has to respond to that, so the sooner we set our sights on a cure, on funding that is adequate and effective for research purposes and for developing the responsiveness of the medical teams out there, via perhaps pharmaceutical assistance and development there, the better our economic situation will be in regard to these struggles. Here is a chance for Congress to respond in very magnanimous terms that will allow us to state cumulatively that we get it, that we are there in order of compassion, that we understand it is about a dignity factor, it is about quality of life, and it is about providing hope to situations that may be rendered hopeless. Isn't that the best element of work that we can do here to bridge that order of hope to those who have been so stressed and who have been given a walk in life, a journey that is powerfully painful? I just appreciate the fact that we are utilizing these opportunities, such as this Special Order, to bring to the attention of those concerned with these issues to a laser-sharp focus and to allow for people to speak out there as the general public in support of measures that can be taken, of budget appropriations that can be secured, of opportunities that come in securing the resources essential to go forward and offer the fullest response that we can. Again, health care situations are driven by this. There are huge costs if we don't respond to the needs of individuals living with Alzheimer's, and then there is that ripple effect that is happening all too frequently for the caregiver community that is also worn thin because of this assignment, because of this mission that they embrace. It is honorable that they do these things, but we also have to work the system here on the Hill in Washington, to respond to them with a degree of reverence and common sense and fully acknowledge that there are efforts that can be made here that bend that cost curve and speak to the situations at hand in the most effective manner. [[Page 16389]] Representative Garamendi, I thank you for bringing us together on this evening of thoughtfulness here concerning dementia and Alzheimer's as a particular stress. Mr. GARAMENDI. Thank you, Mr. Tonko, for joining us in this Special Order hour. Working with you has always been a pleasure. I think this subject is one that you and I and our colleagues will want to take up as the days go forward. In the spring, the 2015 Alzheimer's Day will occur once again here in Washington, DC. There will be thousands of people coming to Congress, knocking on our doors, grabbing our lapels, and asking us to pay attention to this illness. I want to review some of the costs, and then basically wrap this up. You talked about home care. There are articles that appeared recently in The Sacramento Bee about elderly people taking care of each other, a wife taking care of her husband in their 50th year of marriage with severe Alzheimer's, the love that is so apparent, but also the difficulty of an elderly person taking care of another elderly person. We can address that. That is what the HOPE legislation is all about, bringing Medicare into this. The research thing that we talked about earlier, I am going to put up very, very quickly a couple of charts. This one, what is going to happen to the Federal budget if we do not address Alzheimer's, it is $122 billion today; in 35 years or 40 years, we are going to look at over $800 billion, and that doesn't include the private sector. It is going to be $1.2 trillion spent on this, so we are going to bust the budget. If you are a deficit hawk, you should be paying attention to this. What do we need to address it? Well, we certainly need care for the caregivers. We have talked about that. We also need research. The plan that was in the earlier legislation laying out the Alzheimer's plan called for an additional $200 million this year on top of the $566 million that we are currently spending. Keep in mind that, for cancer, it is nearly $5.5 billion; for HIV/ AIDS, nearly $3 billion; and cardiovascular illnesses, just about $2 billion annually spent in research at the National Institutes of Health. They are very good, it is very important, and not a nickel should be taken away from that, but we should add $200 million this year as we complete the appropriation process right now. People ask, ``Where can we find the money?'' Well, let's see. We just said we are going to spend $5.6 billion in Syria and Iraq--new money. I know that my work on the Armed Services Committee--I am on the Strategic Forces Subcommittee. We are talking about more than $12 billion over the next 6-7 years rebuilding a nuclear bomb that nobody knows what to do with. Maybe there are choices that we can make. Would America be better off with a new nuclear weapon or rebuilt nuclear weapon, spending $12 billion or so on that, or maybe spending it on Alzheimer's research? Our work is about choices, Mr. Tonko. How are we going to allocate the resources of this Nation? My suggestion is we go where every family in America will be affected, every family, either directly as my family has been directly impacted by this. My mother-in-law lived with us the last 3 years of her life, dying at the age of 92; yes, we were affected. We know the genetic issues. My grandchildren are looking out there and saying, ``This is a genetic thing, Papa. What about me?'' So that worry carries through our family, and I suspect it carries through every family in America, either directly or indirectly. Let's make a choice. Let's make a choice to attack with research, with care, with funding the most expensive, most common, most deadly illness in America and in other developed countries: dementia and Alzheimer's. We can do it. This is not an impossible task. This is simply a task of focusing like a laser on this issue, and when we do, we will find the same success that we have seen with heart, cancer, and HIV/AIDS-- not cured, not stopped, but a very significant drop in the deaths associated with those illnesses. Mr. Tonko, I have completed my statements tonight. I think you have another comment. Mr. TONKO. I would just like to attach my comments to those you have just closed your statement by. This bankruptcy that is driven by certain catastrophic situations with health care costs are impacting far too many families, and this order of work here in the Congress is about prioritizations. We have spent trillions on war, and we have really diminished the investment in domestic programming, including health care. We come up with all sorts of efforts called sequestration, which is a hidden attack on investments in our domestic agenda. We have to be cautious about how we are guiding those priorities that we are establishing in our budgeting here in Washington, but if we were to prioritize based on where the public demands are, let me suggest, in closing, that I have gone to the Alzheimer's walk in my district for the past several years, and every year, the same statement is made: ``This is the largest crowd ever assembled.'' It keeps growing. It tells me the consciousness of this country, that we want something done for this dreadful disease, doing something that will cure individuals who are walking and living with Alzheimer's and dementia. The people have asked for this by their participation in local fundraising events. Is that the way that we respond to a crisis, by hoping we have good weather on the walk day, that we reach our intended goal that given year, as people are strapped with expenses of caregiving and medications? There is a better way to complement that, to lead the effort here in Washington with the research, with the cure that can be found, with the advancements in the pharmaceutical industry to be able to extend life and enhance life and the quality of life. That is what I think is so powerful about the opportunity we have here. I believe we can be those agents of hope. I do believe firmly that the priority here is to address this crisis that is devastating our American families and our economy. Let's go forward and be those agents of hope. Let's provide for a better tomorrow, and let's show people that there is a compassion that accompanies the efforts here in Washington. Representative Garamendi, thank you for bringing us together on an important discussion that needs to be followed up with resources and public policy and certainly prioritization that brings us to the threshold of responsiveness that is so needed and so deserved and is so correct. Mr. GARAMENDI. I thank you very much, Mr. Tonko, for joining us tonight. I also thank my colleagues, Mr. Fattah from Pennsylvania and Ms. Speier from California, for joining us on this important subject. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time. ____________________ MESSAGE FROM THE SENATE A message from the Senate by Ms. Curtis, one of its clerks, announced that the Senate has passed without amendment a bill of the House of the following title: H.R. 5069. An act to amend the Migratory Bird Hunting and Conservation Stamp Act to increase in the price of Migratory Bird Hunting and Conservation Stamps to fund the acquisition of conservation easements for migratory birds, and for other purposes. The message also announced that the Senate has passed a bill of the following title in which the concurrence of the House is requested: S. 1000. An act to require the Director of the Office of Management and Budget to prepare a crosscut budget for restoration activities in the Chesapeake Bay watershed, and for other purposes. ____________________ LEAVE OF ABSENCE By unanimous consent, leave of absence was granted to: Mr. Aderholt (at the request of Mr. McCarthy of California) for today on account of a family illness. Mr. Doyle (at the request of Ms. Pelosi) for today on account of family medical issues. [[Page 16390]] ____________________ ADJOURNMENT Mr. GARAMENDI. Mr. Speaker, I move that the House do now adjourn. The motion was agreed to; accordingly (at 6 o'clock and 12 minutes p.m.), under its previous order, the House adjourned until tomorrow, Wednesday, December 3, 2014, at 10 a.m. for morning-hour debate. ____________________ EXECUTIVE COMMUNICATIONS, ETC. Under clause 2 of rule XIV, executive communications were taken from the Speaker's table and referred as follows: 8124. A letter from the Assistant to the Board, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, transmitting the Board's final rule -- Financial Market Utilities [Regulation HH; Docket No.: R-1477] (RIN: 7100-AE09) received November 21, 2014, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on Financial Services. 8125. A letter from the General Counsel, National Credit Union Administration, transmitting the Administration's final rule -- Federal Credit Union Ownership of Fixed Assets (RIN: 3133-AE05) received November 24, 2014, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on Financial Services. 8126. A letter from the Federal Co-Chair, Appalachian Regional Commission, transmitting the Commission's semiannual report from the Office of Inspector General for the period April 1, 2014 through September 30, 2014; to the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform. 8127. A letter from the Secretary, Department of Health and Human Services, transmitting the semiannual report on the activities of the Office of Inspector General for the period ending September 30, 2014; to the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform. 8128. A letter from the Chairman, Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission, transmitting the Commission's Performance and Accountability Report for Fiscal Year 2014; to the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform. 8129. A letter from the Director, Congressional Affairs, Federal Election Commission, transmitting the Commission's Fiscal Year 2014 Agency Financial Report; to the Committee on House Administration. 8130. A letter from the Trade Representative, Executive Office of the President, transmitting a letter regarding a new trade agreement in the World Trade Organization aimed at eliminating tariffs on a wide range of environmental goods; to the Committee on Ways and Means. 8131. A letter from the Chief, Publications and Regulations, Internal Revenue Service, transmitting the Service's final rule -- Qualified Transportation Fringe (Rev. Rul. 2014-32) received November 25, 2014, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on Ways and Means. 8132. A letter from the Chief, Publications and Regulations, Internal Revenue Service, transmitting the Service's final rule -- Treatment of Certain Amounts Paid to Section 170(c) Organizations under Certain Employer Leave- Based Donation Programs to Aid Victims of the Ebola Virus Disease (EVD) Outbreak in Guinea, Liberia, and Sierra Leone [Notice 2014-68] received November 25, 2014, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on Ways and Means. 8133. A letter from the Chief, Publications and Regulations, Internal Revenue Service, transmitting the Service's final rule -- Salvage Discount Factors and Payment Patterns for 2014 (Rev. Proc. 2014-60) received November 25, 2014, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on Ways and Means. ____________________ REPORTS OF COMMITTEES ON PUBLIC BILLS AND RESOLUTIIONS Under clause 2 of rule XIII, reports of committees were delivered to the Clerk for printing and reference to the proper calendar, as follows: Mr. HENSARLING: Committee on Financial Services. H.R. 3240. A bill to instruct the Comptroller General of the United States to study the impact of Regulation D, and for other purposes (Rept. 113-640). Referred to the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union. Mr. HENSARLING: Committee on Financial Services. H.R. 4200. A bill to amend the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 to prevent duplicative regulation of advisers of small business investment companies (Rept. 113-641). Referred to the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union. Mr. HENSARLING: Committee on Financial Services. H.R. 4569. A bill to require the Securities and Exchange Commission to make certain improvements to form 10-K and regulation S-K, and for other purposes; with an amendment (Rept. 113-642). Referred to the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union. Mr. SESSIONS: Committee on Rules. House Resolution 766. Resolution providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 5771) to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to extend certain expiring provisions and make technical corrections, and for other purposes, and providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 647) to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide for the tax treatment of ABLE accounts established under State programs for the care of family members with disabilities, and for other purposes (Rept. 113- 643). Referred to the House Calendar. Mr. BRADY of Texas: Joint Economic Committee. Report of the Joint Economic Committee on the 2014 Economic Report of the President (Rept. 113-644). Referred to the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union. ____________________ PUBLIC BILLS AND RESOLUTIONS Under clause 2 of rule XII, public bills and resolutions of the following titles were introduced and severally referred, as follows: By Mr. BENTIVOLIO (for himself, Mr. Broun of Georgia, and Mr. Stockman): H.R. 5779. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide a deduction for elementary and secondary private school tuition, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Ways and Means. By Mr. BRADY of Texas (for himself, Mr. McDermott, Mr. Camp, Mr. Levin, Mr. Rangel, Mr. Lewis, Mr. Sam Johnson of Texas, Mr. Blumenauer, Mr. Pascrell, Mr. Gerlach, Mr. Boustany, Mr. Buchanan, Mr. Roskam, Mr. Reed, Mrs. Black, Mr. Griffin of Arkansas, Mr. Kelly of Pennsylvania, Mr. Renacci, and Mr. Van Hollen): H.R. 5780. A bill to amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to improve the integrity of the Medicare program, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Ways and Means, and in addition to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned. By Mr. VALADAO (for himself, Mr. Nunes, Mr. McCarthy of California, Mr. McClintock, Mr. Calvert, Mr. LaMalfa, and Mr. Costa): H.R. 5781. A bill to provide short-term water supplies to drought-stricken California; to the Committee on Natural Resources. By Ms. KAPTUR (for herself, Mr. Frelinghuysen, Mr. Gerlach, Mr. Levin, Mr. Quigley, Mr. Stockman, Mr. Connolly, Mr. Pascrell, Mr. Engel, Mr. Keating, and Mr. Moran): H.R. 5782. A bill to impose sanctions with respect to the Russian Federation, to provide additional assistance to Ukraine, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Foreign Affairs, and in addition to the Committees on Financial Services, Oversight and Government Reform, and the Judiciary, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned. By Mr. FOSTER (for himself, Mr. Takano, Mr. Rush, Mr. Honda, Mr. Hinojosa, Mr. Langevin, Mr. Enyart, Mr. Cicilline, Mr. Ryan of Ohio, and Mr. Cardenas): H. Res. 767. A resolution expressing support for designation of December 3, 2014, as the ``National Day of 3D Printing''; to the Committee on Energy and Commerce. By Ms. HAHN: H. Res. 768. A resolution recognizing that Monsignor Diomartich through his passion of spreading the word of God, has inspired and guided the residents of Los Angeles and has brought unity and pride to the Croatian community; to the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform. By Mr. TERRY: H. Res. 769. A resolution expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that the healthcare, energy, telecommunications, and other sectors of the United States economy should continue their sector-specific efforts to protect critical infrastructure, to prevent information security breaches, and to prevent cybersecurity breaches; to the Committee on Energy and Commerce. ____________________ CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITY STATEMENT Pursuant to clause 7 of rule XII of the Rules of the House of Representatives, the following statements are submitted regarding the specific powers granted to Congress in the Constitution to enact the accompanying bill or joint resolution. By Mr. BENTIVOLIO: H.R. 5779. Congress has the power to enact this legislation pursuant to the following: Article. I. Section. 8. The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States; [[Page 16391]] By Mr. BRADY of Texas: H.R. 5780. Congress has the power to enact this legislation pursuant to the following: The constitutional authority on which this bill rests is the power of Congress to make rules for the government and regulation of the land and naval forces, as enumerated in Article I, Section 8, Clause 14 of the United States Constitution. By Mr. VALADAO: H.R. 5781. Congress has the power to enact this legislation pursuant to the following: Article I, section 8, clause 18 By Ms. KAPTUR: H.R. 5782. Congress has the power to enact this legislation pursuant to the following: Art. 1 Sec. 8 ____________________ ADDITIONAL SPONSORS Under clause 7 of rule XII, sponsors were added to public bills and resolutions, as follows: H.R. 411: Ms. DelBene. H.R. 1150: Mr. Ruiz. H.R. 1351: Ms. Kelly of Illinois. H.R. 1518: Mr. Fortenberry. H.R. 2426: Ms. Roybal-Allard. H.R. 2529: Ms. DeGette and Mr. Johnson of Georgia. H.R. 2780: Mr. Thompson of California. H.R. 2790: Mr. Kilmer. H.R. 2989: Mr. Lynch. H.R. 3116: Mr. Stutzman and Mr. Palazzo. H.R. 3369: Mrs. Davis of California and Mr. Bridenstine. H.R. 3424: Mr. Thornberry. H.R. 3426: Mr. McCaul and Mr. Griffin of Arkansas. H.R. 3465: Mr. Forbes. H.R. 3505: Mr. Price of North Carolina. H.R. 3708: Mr. Paulsen. H.R. 3833: Mr. Heck of Nevada. H.R. 3899: Ms. Kaptur. H.R. 3902: Mr. Israel. H.R. 4158: Mrs. Walorski. H.R. 4215: Mr. Lynch. H.R. 4351: Mr. Denham. H.R. 4361: Ms. Speier. H.R. 4663: Ms. Bonamici. H.R. 4664: Ms. Bonamici. H.R. 4717: Mr. Heck of Washington. H.R. 4748: Ms. Bonamici. H.R. 4885: Mr. Blumenauer. H.R. 4920: Mr. Amodei. H.R. 4969: Mr. Huffman. H.R. 5136: Mr. Cicilline, Mr. Levin, and Mrs. Napolitano. H.R. 5241: Mr. Shimkus. H.R. 5364: Mr. Loebsack, Ms. Pingree of Maine, Mr. Takano, and Ms. Clarke of New York. H.R. 5478: Mr. Nadler. H.R. 5491: Mr. Hastings of Florida. H.R. 5504: Mr. Joyce. H.R. 5505: Mr. Luetkemeyer. H.R. 5557: Mrs. Miller of Michigan. H.R. 5563: Mr. Takano. H.R. 5589: Mr. Walz, Mr. Higgins, and Mr. King of New York. H.R. 5620: Mr. Simpson. H.R. 5644: Mr. King of New York. H.R. 5646: Mr. Heck of Washington. H.R. 5650: Mr. Ryan of Ohio. H.R. 5655: Ms. DelBene and Mr. Cleaver. H.R. 5658: Mr. Walberg, Mr. Ribble, and Mr. Petri. H.R. 5675: Mr. Joyce, Ms. Esty, Mr. Ryan of Ohio, Mr. Young of Alaska, and Mrs. Bustos. H.R. 5696: Mr. Walz and Mr. Rohrabacher. H.R. 5697: Mr. Keating, Mr. Olson, and Mr. Tiberi. H.R. 5706: Mr. Serrano, Mr. Himes, and Ms. Chu. H.R. 5735: Ms. Jackson Lee and Mr. Sherman. H.R. 5739: Mr. Young of Indiana and Mr. Brady of Texas. H.R. 5759: Mr. Byrne, Mr. McClintock, Mr. Duncan of Tennessee, Mr. Jolly, Mr. Pittenger, Mr. Nugent, Mr. Rogers of Kentucky, and Mrs. Wagner. H.R. 5765: Mr. Cole and Mr. Ruiz. H.R. 5768: Mr. Olson, Mr. Schweikert, and Ms. Jenkins. H. Con. Res. 114: Mr. Loebsack. H. Res. 190: Ms. Eddie Bernice Johnson of Texas. H. Res. 622: Mr. Gibbs. H. Res. 757: Mr. Barletta. H. Res. 761: Mr. Bishop of Georgia and Mr. Swalwell of California. ____________________ CONGRESSIONAL EARMARKS, LIMITED TAX BENEFITS, OR LIMITED TARIFF BENEFITS Under clause 9 of rule XXI, lists or statements on congressional earmarks, limited tax benefits, or limited tariff benefits were submitted as follows: Offered by Mr. Camp The provisions that warranted a referral to the Committee on Ways and Means in H.R. 5771, the Tax Increase Prevention Act of 2014, do not contain any congressional earmarks, limited tax benefits, or limited tariff benefits as defined in clause 9 of rule XXI of the Rules of the U.S. House of Representatives. Offered by Mr. Kline The provisions in H.R. 5771 that warranted a referral to the Committee on Education and the Workforce do not contain any congressional earmarks, limited tax benefits, or limited tariff benefits as defined in clause 9 of rule XXI of the Rules of the House of Representatives. Offered by Mr. Ryan of Wisconsin The provisions that warranted a referral to the Committee on the Budget in H.R. 5771, the Tax Increase Prevention Act of 2014, does not contain any congressional earmarks, limited tax benefits, or limited tariff benefits as defined in clause 9 of rule XXI. [[Page 16392]] SENATE--Tuesday, December 2, 2014 The Senate met at 10 a.m. and was called to order by the President pro tempore (Mr. Leahy). ____________________ PRAYER The Chaplain, Dr. Barry C. Black, offered the following prayer: Let us pray. Eternal Lord God, our shelter in turbulent times, as voices throughout the Nation cry out for equal protection under the law, use our lawmakers to ensure that justice rolls down like waters and righteousness like a mighty stream. Thank You for not leaving or forsaking us, for You continue to be our ever-present help in trouble. We are Your people and the sheep of Your pasture. Shepherd of Love, continue to provide for our every need from the rich bounties of Your grace. In a special way bless the lawmakers who will take the oath of office today. We pray in Your great Name. Amen. ____________________ PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The President pro tempore led the Pledge of Allegiance, as follows: I pledge allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America, and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. ____________________ RECOGNITION OF THE MAJORITY LEADER The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The majority leader is recognized. ____________________ SCHEDULE Mr. REID. Following my remarks and those of the Republican leader, the Senate will resume executive session. There will be four rollcall votes at 10:30 a.m. on the confirmation of the Mamet and Bell nominations and cloture on the Coloretti and Adler nominations. The Senate will recess from 12:30 p.m. to 2:15 p.m. to allow for the weekly caucus meetings. There will be a series of three votes at 4 p.m. on confirmation of the Coloretti and Adler nominations and cloture on the Burrows nomination. I suggest the absence of a quorum. The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The clerk will call the roll. The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll. Mr. REID. I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded. The VICE PRESIDENT. Without objection, it is so ordered. ____________________ CERTIFICATES OF ELECTION The VICE PRESIDENT. The Chair lays before the Senate the certificates of election to fill the unexpired terms for the States of Hawaii and South Carolina. The certificates, the Chair is advised, are in the form suggested by the Senate. If there be no objection, the reading of the certificates will be waived, and they will be printed in full in the Record. There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in the Record as follows: CERTIFICATE OF ELECTION FOR UNEXPIRED TERM To the President of the Senate of the United States: This is to certify that on the fourth day of November, 2014, Brian Schatz was duly chosen by the qualified electors of the State of Hawaii a Senator for the unexpired term ending at noon on the 3rd day of January, 2017, to fill the vacancy in the representation from said State in the Senate of the United States caused by the death of Daniel K. Inouye. Witness: His excellency our governor Neil Abercrombie, and our seal hereto affixed at Honolulu this 24th day of November, in the year of our Lord 2014. By the Governor: Neil Abercrombie, Governor. Scott T. Nago, Chief Election Officer. [State Seal Affixed] ____ The State of South Carolina CERTIFICATE OF ELECTION FOR UNEXPIRED TERM To the President of the Senate of the United States: This is to certify that on the fourth day of November A.D. 2014, Tim Scott was duly chosen by the qualified electors of the State of South Carolina a Senator for the unexpired term ending at noon on the third day of January, 2017, to fill the vacancy in the representation from said State in the Senate of the United States caused by the resignation of Jim DeMint. Witness: Her Excellency our governor Nikki R. Haley and our seal hereto affixed at Columbia, South Carolina, this twenty- fourth day of November in the year of our Lord 2014. Nikki R. Haley, Governor. Mark Hammond, Secretary of State. [State Seal Affixed] ____________________ ADMINISTRATION OF OATH OF OFFICE The VICE PRESIDENT. If the Senators-elect will now present themselves at the desk, the Chair will administer the oath of office. Mr. Schatz and Mr. Scott, escorted by Mr. Begich and Mr. Graham, respectively, advanced to the desk of the Vice President; the oath prescribed by law was administered to them by the Vice President; and they severally subscribed to the oath in the Official Oath Book. The VICE PRESIDENT. Congratulations, Senators. (Applause, Senators rising.) Mr. REID. I suggest the absence of a quorum. The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Booker). The clerk will call the roll. The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll. Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. Mr. McCain. I ask unanimous consent that I be allowed to address the Senate on the pending nominations before the Senate. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. ____________________ RESERVATION OF LEADER TIME The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the leadership time is reserved. ____________________ EXECUTIVE SESSION ______ NOMINATION OF NOAH BRYSON MAMET TO BE AMBASSADOR EXTRAORDINARY AND PLENIPOTENTIARY OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA TO THE ARGENTINE REPUBLIC ______ NOMINATION OF COLLEEN BRADLEY BELL TO BE AMBASSADOR EXTRAORDINARY AND PLENIPOTENTIARY OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA TO HUNGARY The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the Senate will proceed to executive session to consider the following nominations, which the clerk will report. The legislative clerk read the nominations of Noah Bryson Mamet, of California, to be Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of the United States of America to the Argentine Republic; and Colleen Bradley Bell, of California, to be Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of the United States of America to Hungary. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Arizona. [[Page 16393]] Bell Nomination Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I don't usually object to the appointments and nominations by the administration to various ambassadorial positions around the world. I also understand there are numbers of political supporters, financial supporters, and that this is characteristic of Republican and Democratic administrations alike. It has never disturbed me when I have observed nominees to a Caribbean country or maybe to London or Paris or Berlin being rewarded for support both financial and otherwise. But now we are at a point where, according to the Washington Post, modern Presidents have generally followed a 70-30 rule on ambassadorial appointments--where 70 percent are career foreign service and 30 percent are political appointees. President Obama has defied this historic bipartisan political practice, and in his second term a shocking 53 percent of ambassadorial nominees have been political. This brings his 2-term average to 37--far more than any administration in the past. What is very interesting is that some of these nominees are in very sensitive positions around the world. The nomination of Ms. Colleen Bell is probably the most egregious example of that. Hungary is a close ally--in many respects--but there is no doubt that since taking office in 2010 the Hungarian Prime Minister, Mr. Viktor Orban, has centralized power, has faced scrutiny due to actions that critics charge are inconsistent with democratic principles and practices. His government has reduced the independence of Hungary's courts, pushed through controversial changes to the constitution, and placed acute restrictions on nongovernmental organizations. In other words, this is a very important country. This is a very important country where bad things are going on. Ms. Bell's experiences have been largely relegated to producing the television soap opera ``The Bold and the Beautiful.'' Now, I am sure television viewing is important in Hungary, but the fact is this nominee is totally unqualified for this position in this country. Now, if it were, as I say, some Caribbean country or some other, I would understand that. But here we are in a relationship with a country where, according to Bloomberg News, ``Orban says he seeks to end liberal democracy in Hungary. Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban said he wants to abandon liberal democracy in favor of an `illiberal state,' citing Russia and Turkey as examples.'' By the way, we have an excellent DCM there in Hungary who has been doing a great job. Ms. Bell has two qualifications. One is she is a producer of a television soap opera. She has no experience in foreign policy or national security, no familiarity with the language, country, or the region, has never been there, and lacks meaningful knowledge of history or economics. Her only significant qualification is that she bundled, as the word is used, $800,000 to President Obama in the last election, and as part of the California delegation to the 2012 Democratic convention, she bundled more than $2.1 million for President Obama's reelection effort. I want to repeat again that I understand there are awards for political support and it has grown with ``bundling.'' But when we send a person who doesn't know the language--has never been to the country, has no familiarity in foreign policy or national security--to a nation of this importance, then, my friends, we are making a serious mistake. The Hungarian Prime Minister is distancing himself from the values shared by most European Union nations. Orban said civil society organizers receiving funding from abroad needed to be ``monitored,'' as he considered those to be agents of foreign powers. We are talking about the International Republican Institute, the National Democratic Institute, Freedom House, and others. He said: We're not dealing with civil society members but paid political activists who are trying to help foreign interests here. Amazing. Orban, who has fueled employment with public works projects, said he wants to replace welfare societies with a workfare state. But the main problem is that Mr. Orban is cozying up to Vladimir Putin. He has now entered into a nuclear deal, and he is practicing the same kinds of antidemocratic practices as what seems to be his role model-- Vladimir Putin. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that a letter to Mr. Reid from the 15 former presidents of the American Foreign Service Association be printed in the Record. There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in the Record, as follows: March 6, 2014. Dear Senator Reid, Among the nominees for ambassadorships currently under consideration by the Senate, three have generated considerable public controversy: George Tsunis (Norway), Colleen Bell (Hungary), and Noah Mamet (Argentina). The nominations of Mr. Tsunis and Ms. Bell have been forwarded to the full Senate by the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. As former presidents of the American Foreign Service Association, the professional association and trade union of career members of the Foreign Service, we urge you to oppose granting Senate consent to these three candidates. Although we have no reason to doubt that the nominees are conscientious and worthy Americans, the fact that they appear to have been chosen on the basis of their service in raising money for electoral campaigns, with minimal demonstrated qualifications for their posts, has subjected them to widespread public ridicule, not only in the U.S. but also abroad. As a result, their effectiveness as U.S. representatives in their host countries would be severely impaired from the start. Their nominations also convey a disrespectful message, that relations with the host country are not significant enough to demand a chief of mission with relevant expertise. These three nominations represent a continuation of an increasingly unsavory and unwise practice by both parties. In the words of President Theodore Roosevelt, ``The spoils or patronage theory is that public office is primarily designed for partisan plunder.'' Sadly it has persisted, even after President Nixon's acknowledged rewarding of ambassadorial nominations to major campaign donors was exposed. Recognizing that the practice was inconsistent with democratic principles, the U.S. Congress in the Foreign Service Act of 1980 set the following guidelines: SEC. 304. APPOINTMENT OF CHIEFS OF MISSION.-- (a)(1) An individual appointed or assigned to be a chief of mission should possess clearly demonstrated competence to perform the duties of a chief of mission, including, to the maximum extent practicable, a useful knowledge of the principal language or dialect of the country in which the individual is to serve, and knowledge and understanding of the history, the culture, the economic and political institutions, and the interests of that country and its people. (2) Given the qualifications specified in paragraph (1), positions as chief of mission should normally be accorded to career members of the Service, though circumstances will warrant appointments from time to time of qualified individuals who are not career members of the Service. (3) Contributions to political campaigns should not be a factor in the appointment of an individual as a chief of mission. (4) The President shall provide the Committee on Foreign Relations of the Senate, with each nomination for an appointment as a chief of mission, a report on the demonstrated competence of that nominee to perform the duties of the position in which he or she is to serve. (b)(1) In order to assist the President in selecting qualified candidates for appointment or assignment as chiefs of mission, the Secretary of State shall from time to time furnish the President with the names of career members of the Service who are qualified to serve as chiefs of mission, together with pertinent information about such members. (2) Each individual nominated by the President to be a chief of mission, ambassador at large, or minister shall, at the time of nomination, file with the Committee on Foreign Relations of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives a report of contributions made by such individual and by members of his or her immediate family during the period beginning on the first day of the fourth calendar year preceding the calendar year of the nomination and ending on the date of the nomination. The report shall be verified by the oath of the nominee, taken before any individual authorized to administer oaths. The chairman of the Committee on Foreign Relations of the Senate shall have each such report printed in the Congressional Record. As used in this paragraph, the term ``contribution'' has the same meaning given such term by section 301(8) of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 (2 U.S.C. 431(8)), and the term ``immediate family'' means the spouse of the nominee, and any child, parent, grandparent, brother, or sister of the nominee and the spouses of any of them. [[Page 16394]] During his 2008 election campaign, President Obama recognized the appropriateness of these guidelines, and promised to respect them. The time for the Senate to begin enforcing its own guidelines set forth in law for U.S. diplomatic chiefs of mission is now. The nation cannot afford otherwise. Sincerely, Fifteen former presidents of the American Foreign Service Association--Marshall Adair, Thomas Boyatt, Kenneth Bleakley, Theodore Eliot, Franklyn A Harris, William Harrop, Dennis Hays, J. Anthony Holmes, Lars Hydle, Susan Johnson, Alphonse La Porta, John Limbert, John Naland, Lannon Walker, Theodore Wilkinson. Mr. McCAIN. They say: As former presidents of the American Foreign Service Association, the professional association and trade union career members of the Foreign Service, we urge you to oppose granting Senate consent to these three candidates . . . They mention George Tsunis to Norway, Colleen Bell to Hungary, and Noah Mamet to Argentina. I think we should pay attention to these former distinguished members of the diplomatic corps. I urge my colleagues for once to vote against a totally unsuitable nominee to be Ambassador to a very critical country in a struggle that is going to go on for a long time, as Colonel Vladimir Putin tries to extend the reach of Russia and restore the old Russian Empire. We will be sending a message by this appointment that it really isn't that important. I urge my colleagues to cast a ``no'' vote. I yield the floor, and I suggest the absence of a quorum. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll. The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll. Mr. McCAIN. I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. VOTE ON MAMET NOMINATION The question is, will the Senate advise and consent to the nomination of Noah Bryson Mamet, of California, to be Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of the United States of America to the Argentine Republic? Mr. McCAIN. I ask for the yeas and nays. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second? There appears to be a sufficient second. The clerk will call the roll. The legislative clerk called the roll. Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from Ohio (Mr. Brown), the Senator from Louisiana (Ms. Landrieu), and the Senator from West Virginia (Mr. Rockefeller) are necessarily absent. Mr. CORNYN. The following Senators are necessarily absent: the Senator from Oklahoma (Mr. Coburn), the Senator from Mississippi (Mr. Cochran), the Senator from Alaska (Ms. Murkowski), and the Senator from Kansas (Mr. Roberts). The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Schatz). Are there any other Senators in the Chamber desiring to vote? The result was announced--yeas 50, nays 43, as follows: [Rollcall Vote No. 293 Ex.] YEAS--50 Baldwin Begich Bennet Blumenthal Booker Boxer Cantwell Cardin Carper Casey Coons Donnelly Durbin Feinstein Franken Gillibrand Hagan Harkin Heitkamp Hirono Johnson (SD) Kaine Klobuchar Leahy Levin Manchin Markey McCaskill Menendez Merkley Mikulski Murphy Murray Nelson Pryor Reed Reid Sanders Schatz Schumer Shaheen Stabenow Tester Udall (CO) Udall (NM) Walsh Warner Warren Whitehouse Wyden NAYS--43 Alexander Ayotte Barrasso Blunt Boozman Burr Chambliss Coats Collins Corker Cornyn Crapo Cruz Enzi Fischer Flake Graham Grassley Hatch Heinrich Heller Hoeven Inhofe Isakson Johanns Johnson (WI) King Kirk Lee McCain McConnell Moran Paul Portman Risch Rubio Scott Sessions Shelby Thune Toomey Vitter Wicker NOT VOTING--7 Brown Coburn Cochran Landrieu Murkowski Roberts Rockefeller The nomination was confirmed. ____________________ bell nomination The PRESIDING OFFICER. There is now 2 minutes of debate equally divided prior to the vote on the Bell nomination. Who yields time? The Senator from Arizona. Mr. McCAIN. We are about to vote on a totally unqualified individual to be Ambassador to a nation which is very important to our national security interests. Her qualifications are as the producer of the television soap opera ``The Bold and the Beautiful.'' She contributed $800,000 to Obama in the last election and bundled more than $2.1 million for President Obama's reelection effort. I am not against political appointees. I understand how the game is played, but here we are, a nation that is on the verge of ceding its sovereignty to a neofacist dictator--getting in bed with Vladimir Putin--and we are going to send the producer of ``The Bold and the Beautiful'' as our Ambassador. I urge my colleagues to put a stop to this foolishness. I urge a ``no'' vote. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from California. Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, one would think this is the first time any President ever nominated someone who is a political appointee. That is ridiculous. Just because somebody is a producer of a very popular show doesn't disqualify them. It is ridiculous. I could point out people who had the support of the Senator from Arizona who perhaps didn't work at all. So let's be clear. This nominee is an intelligent woman. She knows how to be successful. She will do a good job. I think she will do very well in this position because I know her well. She knows how to make friends. She is not angry. I yield the floor. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is, Will the Senate advise and consent to the nomination of Colleen Bradley Bell, of California, to be Ambassador extraordinary and plenipotentiary of the United States of America to Hungary? Mr. BARRASSO. I ask for the yeas and nays. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second? There appears to be a sufficient second. The clerk will call the roll. The assistant legislative clerk called the roll. Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from Louisiana (Ms. Landrieu), and the Senator from West Virginia (Mr. Rockefeller) are necessarily absent. Mr. CORNYN. The following Senators are necessarily absent: the Senator from Oklahoma (Mr. Coburn), the Senator from Mississippi (Mr. Cochran), the Senator from Alaska (Ms. Murkowski), and the Senator from Kansas (Mr. Roberts). The PRESIDING OFFCIER. Are there any other Senators in the Chamber desiring to vote? The result was announced--yeas 52, nays 42, as follows: [Rollcall Vote No. 294 Ex.] YEAS--52 Baldwin Begich Bennet Blumenthal Booker Boxer Brown Cantwell Cardin Carper Casey Coons Donnelly Durbin Feinstein Franken Gillibrand Hagan Harkin Heinrich Heitkamp Hirono Johnson (SD) Kaine Klobuchar Leahy Levin Manchin Markey McCaskill Menendez Merkley Mikulski Murphy Murray Nelson Pryor Reed Reid Sanders Schatz Schumer Shaheen Stabenow Tester Udall (CO) Udall (NM) Walsh Warner Warren Whitehouse Wyden NAYS--42 Alexander Ayotte Barrasso Blunt Boozman Burr Chambliss Coats Collins Corker Cornyn Crapo Cruz Enzi Fischer Flake Graham Grassley Hatch Heller Hoeven Inhofe Isakson Johanns Johnson (WI) King Kirk [[Page 16395]] Lee McCain McConnell Moran Paul Portman Risch Rubio Scott Sessions Shelby Thune Toomey Vitter Wicker NOT VOTING--6 Coburn Cochran Landrieu Murkowski Roberts Rockefeller The nomination was confirmed. ____________________ CLOTURE MOTION The PRESIDING OFFICER. There is now 2 minutes equally divided prior to the cloture vote on the Coloretti nomination. Who yields time? Mrs. McCASKILL. I yield back all time. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, all time is yielded back. Under the previous order, pursuant to rule XXII, the Chair lays before the Senate the ending cloture motion, which the clerk will state. The bill clerk read as follows: Cloture Motion We, the undersigned Senators, in accordance with the provisions of rule XXII of the Standing Rules of the Senate, hereby move to bring to a close debate on the nomination of Nani A. Coloretti, of California, to be Deputy Secretary of Department of Housing and Urban Development. Harry Reid, Tim Johnson, Patrick J. Leahy, Patty Murray, Tom Udall, Brian Schatz, Charles E. Schumer, Barbara Boxer, Benjamin L. Cardin, Richard Blumenthal, Jeff Merkley, Al Franken, Robert P. Casey, Jr., Martin Heinrich, Elizabeth Warren, Richard J. Durbin, Christopher Murphy. The PRESIDING OFFICER. By unanimous consent, the mandatory quorum call has been waived. The question is, Is it the sense of the Senate that debate on the nomination of Nani A. Coloretti, of California, to be Deputy Secretary of Department of Housing and Urban Development, shall be brought to a close? The yeas and nays are mandatory under the rule. The clerk will call the roll. The bill clerk called the roll. Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from Louisiana (Ms. Landrieu) and the Senator from West Virginia (Mr. Rockefeller) are necessarily absent. Mr. CORNYN. The following Senators are necessarily absent: the Senator from Oklahoma (Mr. Coburn), the Senator from Mississippi (Mr. Cochran), the Senator from South Carolina (Mr. Graham), the Senator from Alaska (Ms. Murkowski), and the Senator from Kansas (Mr. Roberts). The PRESIDING OFFICER. Are there any other Senators in the Chamber desiring to vote? The result was announced--yeas 59, nays 34, as follows: [Rollcall Vote No. 295 Ex.] YEAS--59 Ayotte Baldwin Begich Bennet Blumenthal Booker Boxer Brown Cantwell Cardin Carper Casey Coats Collins Coons Donnelly Durbin Feinstein Flake Franken Gillibrand Hagan Harkin Hatch Heinrich Heitkamp Hirono Johnson (SD) Kaine King Klobuchar Leahy Levin Manchin Markey McCaskill Menendez Merkley Mikulski Murphy Murray Nelson Pryor Reed Reid Sanders Schatz Schumer Shaheen Stabenow Tester Toomey Udall (CO) Udall (NM) Walsh Warner Warren Whitehouse Wyden NAYS--34 Alexander Barrasso Blunt Boozman Burr Chambliss Corker Cornyn Crapo Cruz Enzi Fischer Grassley Heller Hoeven Inhofe Isakson Johanns Johnson (WI) Kirk Lee McCain McConnell Moran Paul Portman Risch Rubio Scott Sessions Shelby Thune Vitter Wicker NOT VOTING--7 Coburn Cochran Graham Landrieu Murkowski Roberts Rockefeller The PRESIDING OFFICER. On this vote, the yeas are 59, the nays are 34. The motion is agreed to. ____________________ NOMINATION OF NANI A. COLORETTI TO BE DEPUTY SECRETARY OF DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the nomination. The assistant legislative clerk read the nomination of Nani A. Coloretti, of California, to be Deputy Secretary of Department of Housing and Urban Development. The PRESIDING OFFICER. With respect to the nominations confirmed under the previous order, the motions to reconsider have been made and laid upon the table, and the President will be immediately notified of the Senate's actions. ____________________ CLOTURE MOTION The PRESIDING OFFICER. There is now 2 minutes equally divided prior to the cloture vote on the Adler nomination. Who yields time? Mr. DURBIN. I yield back all time. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, all time is yielded back. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Pursuant to rule XXII, the Chair lays before the Senate the pending cloture motion, which the clerk will state. The bill clerk read as follows: Cloture Motion We, the undersigned Senators, in accordance with the provisions of rule XXII of the Standing Rules of the Senate, hereby move to bring to a close debate on the nomination of Robert S. Adler, of the District of Columbia, to be a Commissioner of the Consumer Product Safety Commission. Harry Reid, John D. Rockefeller IV, Robert Menendez, Patty Murray, Debbie Stabenow, Benjamin L. Cardin, Amy Klobuchar, Kirsten E. Gillibrand, Christopher Murphy, Brian Schatz, Richard J. Durbin, Richard Blumenthal, Tom Harkin, Angus S. King, Jr., Tom Udall, Mazie K. Hirono, Patrick J. Leahy, Sheldon Whitehouse. The PRESIDING OFFICER. By unanimous consent, the mandatory quorum call has been waived. The question is, Is it the sense of the Senate that debate on the nomination of Robert S. Adler, of the District of Columbia, to be a Commissioner of the Consumer Product Safety Commission, shall be brought to a close? The yeas and nays are mandatory under the rule. The clerk will call the roll. The assistant legislative clerk called the role. Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from Louisiana (Ms. Landrieu), the Senator from Michigan (Mr. Levin), and the Senator from West Virginia (Mr. Rockefeller) are necessarily absent. Mr. CORNYN. The following Senators are necessarily absent: the Senator from Oklahoma (Mr. Coburn), the Senator from Mississippi (Mr. Cochran), the Senator from South Carolina (Mr. Graham), the Senator from Alaska (Ms. Murkowski), and the Senator from Kansas (Mr. Roberts). The PRESIDING OFFICER. Are there any other Senators in the Chamber desiring to vote? The yeas and nays resulted--yeas 52, nays 40, as follows: [Rollcall Vote No. 296 Ex.] YEAS--52 Baldwin Begich Bennet Blumenthal Booker Boxer Brown Cantwell Cardin Carper Casey Coons Donnelly Durbin Feinstein Franken Gillibrand Hagan Harkin Heinrich Heitkamp Hirono Johnson (SD) Kaine King Klobuchar Leahy Manchin Markey McCaskill Menendez Merkley Mikulski Murphy Murray Nelson Pryor Reed Reid Sanders Schatz Schumer Shaheen Stabenow Tester Udall (CO) Udall (NM) Walsh Warner Warren Whitehouse Wyden NAYS--40 Alexander Ayotte Barrasso Blunt Boozman Burr Chambliss Coats Collins Corker Cornyn Crapo Cruz Enzi Fischer Flake Grassley Hatch Heller Hoeven Inhofe Isakson Johanns Johnson (WI) Kirk Lee McCain McConnell Moran Paul Portman Risch Rubio Scott [[Page 16396]] Sessions Shelby Thune Toomey Vitter Wicker NOT VOTING--8 Coburn Cochran Graham Landrieu Levin Murkowski Roberts Rockefeller The PRESIDING OFFICER (Ms. Heitkamp). On this vote, the yeas are 52, the nays are 40. The motion is agreed to. ____________________ NOMINATION OF ROBERT S. ADLER TO BE A COMMISSIONER OF THE CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY COMMISSION The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the nomination. The assistant legislative clerk read the nomination of Robert S. Adler, of the District of Columbia, to be a Commissioner of the Consumer Product Safety Commission. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the time until 4 p.m. will be equally divided in its usual form. The Senator from South Dakota. Mr. THUNE. Madam President, are we in morning business? The PRESIDING OFFICER. We are postcloture on the Adler nomination. ObamaCare Mr. THUNE. Very good. Madam President, I wish to speak today about some of what is happening here with the agenda and where we might be headed. I think it is important to point out that the Democrats here, after this election, seem to be in disarray. We have fractures emerging on the left and the right. Senate Democrats and the President are blaming each other for the Democrats' devastating election loss. The President is threatening a veto on a bipartisan tax extenders package that was negotiated by the House Ways and Means Committee chairman and the Senate Democratic leader. The senior Senator from New York told an audience last week that passing ObamaCare was a mistake. To quote the Senator: But unfortunately, Democrats blew the opportunity the American people gave them. We took their mandate and put all of our focus on the wrong problem--health-care reform. . . . it wasn't the change we were hired to make. I could not agree more, but it is quite an admission from the third- ranking Democrat in the Senate. Back in 2009, Republicans tried to tell Democrats we should focus on the economy and that any health care reform should be targeted at helping those struggling to afford health care rather than upsetting our entire system, but Democrats refused to listen. Now it appears at least some of them are wishing they had. The President tried to sell the health care law as a benefit for the middle class. At a 2010 tele-town hall, he told his listeners that ``once this reform is fully in effect, middle-class families are going to pay less for their health care.'' Unfortunately, as far too many Americans have found, the President's health care law has actually forced them to pay more. I have lost count of the number of letters I have gotten from constituents in South Dakota telling me how much their health insurance has gone up since the so-called Affordable Care Act passed. One constituent emailed me in November to tell me: Please do something about the Affordable Care Act. Health insurance is no longer affordable. In March our family health insurance policy went up $150.00/month. Now [we've] received notice [of] another $112.00 increase effective January 1, 2015, for a total monthly premium of $857.00. This is more than our mortgage and we cannot afford it!! Let me just repeat part of that last line. ``This is more than our mortgage.'' How are middle-class families supposed to afford what amounts to a second mortgage payment each month? The answer of course is they can't. The President can talk all he wants about the supposed benefits of his health care law, but the fact is ObamaCare has made life worse for this South Dakota family and it has made things worse for millions of families across the United States. Since ObamaCare was signed into law, family health insurance premiums have risen by about $3,000. That is a strain on any family budget just by itself, but it is even worse when we realize that the average family's income has dropped by nearly $3,000 over the course of the Obama Presidency. On top of this, ObamaCare has forced millions of Americans off health insurance plans they had and they liked. Frequently, they have been forced to pay more for their new plans while getting less. Thanks to ObamaCare, Americans have lost access to doctors they liked and trusted, they have lost access to convenient hospitals and they have lost access to medications and that is just the damage ObamaCare is doing to Americans' health care. That is not to mention the damage it is doing to the economy at large. As the Senator from New York made clear in his comments, he thinks the Democratic Party erred in passing ObamaCare because what Americans wanted was not health care legislation but jobs legislation, and he is right. But Democrats went ahead with ObamaCare anyway, and not only has it not helped the economy, as the President said it would, it is actually hurting the economy. Take one small part of ObamaCare, the tax on lifesaving medical devices such as pacemakers and insulin pumps. This tax has already been responsible for putting thousands of Americans out of work, and it is on track to eliminate thousands more jobs if it isn't repealed. Then there is the ObamaCare 30-hour workweek rule, which is eliminating hours and reducing wages for thousands of American workers, and the numerous ObamaCare regulations that are making it difficult for small businesses to hire new workers. As Democrats are now realizing, ObamaCare was a big mistake. What Democrats should have done, as the senior Senator from New York admits, was focus on creating jobs and opportunities for middle-class families. The recent Gallup poll listing the overall health of the economy as Americans' top economic concern was just the latest poll in which Americans have listed jobs and the economy among their main worries. Yet Democrats have spent years ignoring the need for jobs and focusing on their own political priorities. As the senior Senator from New York said: When Democrats focused on health care, the average middle class person thought, ``the Democrats aren't paying enough attention to me.'' That average middle-class person is right. In a few short weeks Republicans will take over the Senate, and we will be running things very differently. Our first priority will be passing legislation to create jobs and opportunities for American workers. A significant part of that will be working to undo the damage ObamaCare has done to the economy. We will work to repeal the medical device tax and restore the 40-hour workweek. I hope Democrats will join us. I have a feeling many of them will. As we have seen, opposition to these damaging ObamaCare provisions is not limited to Republicans. Democrats have joined us before to attempt to address these issues, and I look forward to working with these same Democrats and others in the new Congress. As for the President, I hope he will finally admit his law is hurting Americans and join us in undoing the damage. Unfortunately, his actions so far have not demonstrated much openness to cooperation or any sign that he understands the American people are calling for a new era in Washington. Democrats have spent the past several years focusing on the priorities of the far leftwing of their party instead of the American people's priorities--the economy and jobs. That is what the American people have been saying over and over they want their elected leaders to be focused on. I hope the new Congress will mark the start of a new era in which Democrats join Republicans to help create jobs and opportunities for Americans and remove obstacles to success. The American people have waited a long time for relief. It is time for Congress to give it to them. [[Page 16397]] I yield the floor. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Vermont. Economic Agenda for America Mr. SANDERS. Madam President, it seems to me the American people at this particular moment in our history must make a very fundamental decision, and that decision is do we continue the status quo--which includes a 40-year decline of our middle class and a huge and growing gap between the very rich and everyone else--or do we fight for a bold and meaningful economic agenda that creates jobs, raises wages, protects our environment, and provides health care for every American? The question of our time is whether we are prepared to take on the enormous economic and political power of the billionaire class or do we continue to slide into economic and political oligarchy? That is the question which the American people must answer. I hope and expect they are prepared to answer with a resounding yes and a desire to move this country in a very different direction. The long-term deterioration of the middle class, accelerated by the Wall Street crash of 2008, has not been a pretty picture. Today we have more wealth and income inequality than any other major country on Earth, with the top 1 percent owning more wealth than the bottom 90 percent, with one family, the Walton family of Walmart, owning more wealth itself than the bottom 40 percent. Today in the United States we have the highest rate of childhood poverty of any major country on Earth, and we are the only major country on this planet that does not guarantee health care to all people as a right. The United States once led the world in terms of the percentage of our people who graduated college, and that in a global economy is an enormously important issue. We can't create jobs unless we have a well- educated workforce. We were once in first place in terms of percentage of our people who graduated college. Today we are in 12th place. I think, as most Americans understand, we once were the envy of the world in terms of the quality of our infrastructure--our roads, bridges, waste water plants, water system, rail--but today, as all Americans know, our physical infrastructure is literally collapsing before our eyes. Real unemployment today is not 5.8 percent. That is official unemployment. When we include those people who have given up looking for work and those people who are working part time when they want to work full time, real unemployment is 11.5 percent, youth unemployment is 18.6 percent, and African-American youth unemployment is over 30 percent. Today millions of Americans are working longer hours for lower wages. When we try to understand why the American people are angry, it is important to understand that, in inflation adjusted for dollars, the median male worker--that male worker right in the middle of the economy--earned $783 less last year than he made 41 years ago, despite all of the increases in productivity. The median woman worker made $1,300 less last year than she earned in 2007. Since 1999, the median middle-class family has seen its income go down by almost $5,000 after adjusting for inflation, now earning less than it did 25 years ago. Why are the American people angry? That is why: a huge increase in productivity, all of the global economy, and yet the median family income in America is $5,000 less than it was in 1999. It seems clear to me that the American people must demand that Congress and the White House start protecting the interests of working families and not just wealthy campaign contributors. We need Federal legislation to put millions of our unemployed workers back to work, to raise wages, and make certain that all Americans have the health care and education they need for healthy and productive lives. In other words, we must have a vision for the future, which talks about what this Nation can become in terms of jobs, in terms of income, in terms of education, and in terms of health care. Let me very briefly describe some of the major initiatives that I intend to fight for in the new Congress. There are 12 major initiatives which, if enacted, will transform the middle class of this country. No. 1, we need a major investment to rebuild our crumbling infrastructure--our roads, bridges, water systems, waste water plants, airports, railroads, schools, et cetera. It has been estimated that the cost of the Bush-Cheney war in Iraq, a war we should never have gotten into in the first place, will end up costing us some $3 trillion. If we invested $1 trillion in rebuilding our crumbling infrastructure, we could create 13 million decent-paying jobs and make this country more efficient and more productive. We need to invest in infrastructure, not in war. No. 2, the United States must lead the world in reversing climate change and making certain this planet is habitable for our children and grandchildren. We must transform our energy system away from fossil fuels and into energy efficiency and sustainable energies. When we do that--make our transportation system energy efficient, make our homes more energy efficient, move to wind, solar, geothermal biomass--we can also create a significant number of good-paying jobs. No. 3, we need to develop new economic models to increase job creation and productivity. Instead of giving huge tax breaks to corporations which ship our jobs to China and other low-wage countries, we need to provide assistance to workers who want to purchase their own businesses by establishing worker-owned cooperatives. Study after study shows that when workers have an ownership stake in the businesses in which they work, productivity goes up, absenteeism goes down, and employees are much more satisfied with their jobs. No. 4, union workers who are able to collectively bargain for higher wages and benefits earn substantially more than nonunion workers. Today, corporate opposition to union organizing makes it extremely difficult for workers to join a union. We need legislation which makes it clear that when a majority of workers sign cards in support of a union, they can form that union. No. 5, the current Federal minimum wage of $7.25 an hour is a starvation wage. We need to raise the minimum wage to a living wage. No one in this country who works 40 hours a week should live in poverty. No. 6, women workers today earn 78 percent of what their male counterparts earn. We need pay equity in this country--equal pay for equal work. No. 7, since 2001 we have lost more than 60,000 factories in this country and more than 4.9 million decent-paying manufacturing jobs. We once led the world in terms of our manufacturing capability. Yet in State after State, we have seen significant losses in manufacturing jobs. When people walk into a store, it is harder and harder for them to purchase products made in the United States of America. The time is now for us to end our disastrous trade policies--NAFTA, CAFTA, Permanent Normal Trade Relations with China--because these policies simply enable corporate America to shut down plants in this country and move to China and other low-wage countries. We need to end the race to the bottom and to develop trade policies which protect the interests of American workers and not just multinational corporations. American companies should start investing in this country and not simply in China and other low-wage countries. No. 8, in today's highly competitive global economy, millions of Americans are unable to afford the higher education they need in order to get good-paying jobs. About 40 or 50 years ago we had a situation in this country where some of the great public universities of our Nation--the University of California, City University of New York, and State colleges all over America were virtually tuition free, and anybody could go to those schools regardless of the income of their families. [[Page 16398]] Today, for many, many families and young people the cost of higher education is simply unaffordable. Either students choose not to go to college because they can't afford it or they come out of school deeply in debt--a debt fastened on their shoulders for decades. Quality education in America--from child care to higher education-- must be affordable for all. Without a high-quality and affordable educational system, we will be unable to compete globally in the international economy and our standard of living will continue to decline. We have to invest in education. The idea that we are laying off teachers is completely absurd. No. 9, the function of banking--the banking system--is to facilitate the flow of capital into a productive and job-creating economy. That is what banking is supposed to be. People save, people put money in banks, and that money goes out into the economy so that people can buy homes and create businesses. Financial institutions cannot be an island unto themselves, standing as huge profit centers outside of the real productive economy. In other words, banking must be a means to an end by improving society, creating jobs, providing people with decent housing, and not simply a means by which financial institutions make more and more profit. Today, six huge Wall Street financial institutions have assets equivalent to 61 percent of our gross domestic product. There is close to $10 trillion in 6 financial institutions. These institutions underwrite more than one-half of the mortgages in this country and more than two-thirds of the credit cards. The greed, recklessness, and illegal behavior of major Wall Street firms plunged this country into the worst financial crisis since the 1930s, and every day when we open up our newspapers, we see another major banking scandal. The truth of the matter is that these financial institutions on Wall Street are too powerful to be reformed. They have too much money, too much wealth, too many lobbyists, and make too much in campaign contributions. Our goal must be to break them up. They have too much power and too much wealth. They must be broken up so that our financial institutions begin to serve the needs of the American people and not simply the CEOs and the stockholders of Wall Street firms. No. 10, the United States must join the rest of the industrialized world and recognize that health care is a right of all and not a privilege. I think many Americans don't know that we are the only major country on Earth that does not guarantee health care to all people as a right. Yet, within this dysfunctional health care system, we have 40 million people who have no health insurance, more people who are underinsured, millions of people with high premiums and high deductibles, and at the end of all of that, we end up spending almost twice as much per capita on health care as do the people of any other major country on Earth. The time is now for us to declare that health care is a right of all people and not a privilege. We need to pass a Medicare-for-all, single- payer system. No. 11, millions of senior citizens in this country live in poverty, and we have the highest rate of childhood poverty of any major country on Earth. I hear a lot of discussion on the part of my Republican colleagues-- and some Democrats--that we should be cutting Social Security. Well, I strongly disagree. In my view, we must strengthen and expand Social Security--not cut it. That is terribly important, especially at a time when more and more seniors are slipping into poverty. We have millions of seniors who are trying to survive on $12,000, $13,000 and $14,000 a year. They have to decide every single day whether they should buy the medicine they need, heat their homes adequately or buy the food they need. We should not be cutting these programs; we should be expanding these programs. No. 12--and the last point I will make as part of an agenda that rebuilds America and rebuilds our middle class--at a time of massive wealth and income inequality, we need a progressive tax system in this country which is based on ability to pay. It is not acceptable that every single year we have major, profitable corporations which pay nothing in Federal income taxes. It is not acceptable that we have corporate CEOs in this country who make millions of dollars every year and enjoy an effective tax rate which is lower than that of their secretaries. That is grotesquely unfair, and it must be changed. Further, we have to address the disgrace that every single year our country loses over $100 billion in revenue because corporations and the wealthy stash their money in offshore tax havens all over the world. The time is long overdue for real tax reform which says to the wealthy and large, profitable corporations that they have to begin paying their fair share of taxes. I will conclude by getting back to the point I made in the beginning of my remarks, and that is that we are in a pivotal moment in American history. The very, very rich are becoming richer, the middle class is disappearing, and today we have more people living in poverty than at almost any other time in American history. With the wealth of the billionaire class, they are exercising their power politically because Citizens United--a disastrous Supreme Court decision--has given them the power to buy elections and control, to a significant degree, our political process. We, as a nation, have to ultimately make a decision about whether we are going to continue the process where the middle class continues to decline and the very, very richest people become richer or whether we are prepared--and this is not easy stuff--to stand together to take on the billionaire class and their greed and to say: Enough is enough. This country does not just belong to the top 1 percent or the top one- tenth of 1 percent. It belongs to all of us. I hope very much that the American people make the right choice, because if they do, we can bring about a transformation of this country so the government begins to work for all of the people and not just the billionaires who are on top. With that, I yield the floor. ____________________ RECESS The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the Senate stands in recess until 2:15 p.m. Thereupon, the Senate, at 12:42 p.m., recessed until 2:15 p.m. and reassembled when called to order by the Presiding Officer (Ms. Baldwin). ____________________ NOMINATION OF ROBERT S. ADLER TO BE A COMMISSIONER OF THE CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY COMMISSION--Continued The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Vermont. Immigration Mr. LEAHY. Madam President, I will take just about a minute. I know we are waiting for others to come. I have heard some of the discussion on the floor and in the hallways about Thanksgiving. On Thursday, when I sat down with my family over Thanksgiving dinner, I thought about our history and how my grandparents came to Vermont from Italy, my great- grandparents from Ireland, and my wife's family from the Province of Quebec in Canada. We, similar to most Americans, are a family of immigrants. It is that rich melting-pot history that makes our country so special, so strong. Thanksgiving is a good time to celebrate and honor that strength. Far too many immigrant families today, however, live in fear--fear of being torn apart, of losing a mother or father or sister or brother, to deportation. Bringing peace to those families is one of the things that most motivated me last year during the long debate on immigration reform. Both Democrats and Republicans in this Chamber praised the fair and thorough process that we had in the Judiciary Committee on the immigration bill. We had 6 hearings featuring 42 witnesses. We debated bipartisan legislation a total of 37 hours over a 3-week period. We considered 212 amendments, and we adopted 136 of them--all but 3 on a bipartisan basis. The full Senate [[Page 16399]] then debated the bill and approved it by an overwhelming bipartisan majority. But that effort was not good enough for Republican leaders in the House. They would not even allow a vote on the bill. Today, they are batting zero when it comes to addressing the broken immigration system. They now complain that the President is acting alone, but he is not. The American people support immigration reform. That is why President Obama acted. His actions are legal, but they are only a temporary fix. Congress must still act. The Republican House leadership has chosen to hold hearings attacking the President's actions, rather than simply stepping up and allowing a vote on a bill to solve the problem. Time is running out and they are wasting it on political antics. I hope that they use the remainder of this month to take up and vote on the comprehensive bill we sent them more than a year and a half ago. I applaud the President's action to keep families together. That is why next week, the Senate Judiciary Committee will again turn to the issue of family unity. I have asked Astrid Silva, whose remarkable story President Obama began to tell last week, to come and share the rest of her story and what the President's actions will mean to her family. The fact is we have done the work for an immigration bill. Why won't the Republicans at least vote--vote yes or vote no. We did, and I applaud those Republicans and Democrats in the Senate who stood and voted. Let the House act. I yield the floor. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from South Dakota. Coloretti Nomination Mr. JOHNSON of South Dakota. Madam President, I rise to urge my colleagues to vote in favor of the nomination of Ms. Nani Coloretti to be Deputy Secretary of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. The HUD Deputy Secretary is a critical component of the agency's management team, overseeing HUD's programs that provide affordable rental housing, community and economic development opportunities, and an opportunity for creditworthy families to achieve the dream of home ownership. I believe Ms. Coloretti has the skills and experience necessary to take on this role. The full Senate Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs Committee also approved Ms. Coloretti's nomination for the position on April 29, 2014, by voice vote. Ms. Coloretti is currently the Assistant Secretary for Management at the U.S. Department of the Treasury. During her tenure at Treasury, Ms. Coloretti helped create a new Treasury Operations Excellence Team, which has applied lean principles developed in the private sector to improve performance at Treasury. This work encompassed dozens of process improvement outcomes, saving the Department money and staff time while engendering a culture of continual improvement. Prior to joining the Treasury Department, Ms. Coloretti held positions in the San Francisco mayor's office, including budget director; the San Francisco Department of Children, Youth, and Their Families; the U.S. Office of Management and Budget; and the private sector. She is also a recipient of the National Public Service Award, the Public Policy and International Affairs Achievement Award, and the Federal 100 Award. In all, Ms. Coloretti would bring over 20 years of experience in budget and program analysis, as well as more than 15 years of management experience, to the position of Deputy Secretary of the Department of HUD. At a time when millions of American families struggle to find affordable rental housing, the market continues to lock many creditworthy potential borrowers out of homeownership, and HUD's State and local partners work to provide greater opportunities with limited resources, it is critical that HUD and the programs it oversees are run efficiently and effectively. As HUD's Deputy Secretary, Ms. Coloretti would be a valuable addition to Secretary Castro's management team. I urge my fellow Senators to support her nomination. I yield the floor. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Virginia. ____________________ CHESAPEAKE BAY ACCOUNTABILITY AND RECOVERY ACT OF 2013 ______ FEDERAL DUCK STAMP ACT OF 2014 Mr. WARNER. Madam President, in a moment I am going to be asking a unanimous consent request on some legislation that combines some work I have been doing and work the ranking member of the EPW Committee, my friend, the Senator from Alaska, has been doing. I want to make a brief statement first and then I am going to turn the floor over to the Senator from Louisiana. I start by thanking Chairman Boxer and Ranking Member Vitter for working with me on this important legislation. I also thank the bipartisan Virginia delegation on both sides of the Capitol, especially my friend Congressman Rob Wittman. He and I have worked on this initiative now for more than 4 years. As we all know, the Chesapeake Bay, while located around Virginia and Maryland and Delaware, is actually a national treasure. It is the centerpiece of the culture and economy of many coastal communities in Virginia and in several neighboring States. Restoring the health of the Chesapeake Bay must be a national priority. Virginia and five other States, the District of Columbia, 10 Federal agencies, and more than 1,000 local governments have spent decades on this shared priority. We have joined together over the years in a shared commitment to the Bay. We have worked across jurisdictional lines, across the political aisle, across every level of government in partnership with the private sector and with nonprofit groups such as the Chesapeake Bay Foundation. This important bipartisan legislation that we are going to be moving on shortly ensures that we maintain a Federal commitment to the partnership to restore the Chesapeake Bay. It also makes sure that during these challenging fiscal times every dollar spent on improving the health of the Bay produces real results. The Chesapeake Bay accountability bill requires the U.S. Office of Management and Budget to prepare a crosscut budget. That means we will actually track where and how Federal and State restoration dollars are being spent throughout the entire Chesapeake Bay Watershed. This will allow us to track costs and match them to results. It means more accountability and it means more transparency to our combined efforts to restore this national treasure. This bipartisan legislation is an important step forward in ensuring that the Chesapeake Bay restoration and preservation efforts remain effective, accountable, responsible, and transparent. In a moment I am going to urge all my colleagues to join us in approving it. At this moment, I yield the floor to the ranking member, the Senator from Louisiana. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Louisiana. Mr. VITTER. Madam President, I am truly honored to join my colleagues on the floor, Senators Warner and Begich. I am pleased to support Senator Warner's bill that he just described and also a second bill Senator Begich and I have been working very diligently on that will be part of the unanimous consent request. That is H.R. 5069, the Federal Duck Stamp Act of 2014. This bipartisan legislation is a real victory for sportsmen and for conservation. It is a straightforward bill that updates the fee paid by duck hunters for a duck stamp for the first time since 1991, and that is a big win for the hunters, it is a big win for conservation because the cost of the duck stamp goes directly toward conservation of waterfowl habitat. In fact, 98 cents on every $1 generated goes directly to purchase or lease wetland habitat for ducks, and where you have more habitat, you have more ducks and you have [[Page 16400]] a healthier environment. It is as simple as that. I am very pleased to say our work on this bill is exactly how this place and American democracy is supposed to work. I first heard about this real need from duck hunters, from sportsmen who live this and breathe this every day. I am an occasional hunter, but these folks absolutely live it and breathe it every day and understand the critical need. I immediately got very involved. I reached out to allies such as Senator Begich, who had a great interest in it. I met with the House sponsor, Representative John Fleming, also from Louisiana. We met with the House Natural Resources chairman, Doc Hastings. We got a strong version of the bill that passed through the House recently and that now comes to the Senate. Today, by this consent, we will pass that House bill through the Senate and send it to the President. As I said, that is the way the process is supposed to work, and this is a real win for hunters, for conservation, for the environment. I thank my colleague and partner on this, Senator Begich, and yield the floor to him. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Alaska. Mr. BEGICH. Madam President, I thank my colleague, Senator Vitter, for this incredible work. For several years we have been focused on this piece of legislation for two reasons; one, not only is it important for the hunters, the duck hunters, but a provision in there is also important for subsistence users in my State of Alaska. This is an important bill. As has been mentioned, 98 cents of every $1 that goes into a duck stamp goes back into habitat protection for hunters currently and into the future. Along with that, since 1934, almost $1 billion--three-quarters of a billion dollars--has been spent in protecting wetland habitat, again for the purpose of ensuring that we have this habitat protected not only for hunters but in my case for subsistence users. I agree with Senator Vitter, this is the kind of legislation we want to see done, where Democrats and Republicans, the House and the Senate, are working together. My colleague, Congressman Young, a Republican on the House side from Alaska, worked on his side of the equation, working with other House Members, to figure out how to move a bill. We had a Senate version over here we were working on. At the end of the day, it is not about whose name is on the bill; it is about getting the job done. Here we have a piece of legislation that will finally correct the pricing on duck stamps to ensure that we keep up with inflation, to ensure that the continued preservation of wetlands is done for our hunters and our sportsmen. But on top of that, for my State of Alaska, this recognizes the needs of subsistence hunters. Millions of acres in Alaska are set aside as refuge and others are in protected status. Our subsistence users live off the land--not for extra gain for their household, but literally for food for the winter in order to survive. So this allows a waiver to be put into place that will have minimal impact on the duck stamp program, but will ensure that subsistence users--people who live off the land in Alaska--can continue to do that without the threat of a Federal agency fining them or even dealing with them in some way because they didn't have the stamp. This allows them to go for a waiver and ensure they will be able to do their subsistence hunting they have been doing for generations before the government came along and locked up their land they have been hunting. And we will make sure this happens not only now but into the future. Again, I wish to thank Senator Vitter for his work and his efforts not only in this body but on the other side of the Capitol, working with House Members to make sure we could all work together and do this by unanimous consent. Along with them, Senator Boxer and the EPW staff did an incredible job. It is an honor to be here today. The last thing I will say to Senator Warner is this: My son just had an opportunity to go to the bay. He did an incredible field study there with some of his staff. It was a great experience. He was able to go into the mud. I am not sure what that is exactly, but he was able to go chest deep, and then he decided not to do that, but to be there to help people. But it was an incredible experience, to experience that bay, which is a national treasure. So having that bill at the same time as this other one is not only good for Senator Warner's community but good for this whole country. And for folks from my State who come to visit this community, it is another opportunity for them to see a national treasure. So it is an honor to have two pieces of legislation that will pass by unanimous consent. I yield the floor. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Virginia. Mr. WARNER. Madam President, I thank the Senator from Alaska for his comments and I will be happy to take the Senator and his whole family out to the bay again. I thank the Senator from Louisiana and the Senator from Alaska for working together. That is the way this is supposed to work. There are duck hunters in Virginia as well and they firmly support this legislation. I appreciate also the special considerations that need to be addressed in terms of the State of Alaska. I ask unanimous consent that the EPW Committee be discharged from further consideration of S. 1000, and the Senate proceed to its immediate consideration and the consideration of H.R. 5069, which is at the desk, en bloc. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. There being no objection, the Senate proceeded to consider the bills, en bloc. Mr. WARNER. I further ask unanimous consent that the Warner substitute amendment to S. 1000, which is at the desk, be agreed to; the bills, as amended, if amended, be read a third time and passed en bloc; and the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. The amendment (No. 3965) in the nature of a substitute was agreed to, as follows: (Purpose: In the nature of a substitute) Strike all after the enacting clause and insert the following: SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. This Act may be cited as the ``Chesapeake Bay Accountability and Recovery Act of 2014''. SEC. 2. DEFINITIONS. In this Act: (1) Administrator.--The term ``Administrator'' means the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency. (2) Chesapeake bay state.--The term ``Chesapeake Bay State'' or ``State'' means any of-- (A) the States of Maryland, West Virginia, Delaware, and New York; (B) the Commonwealths of Virginia and Pennsylvania; and (C) the District of Columbia. (3) Chesapeake bay watershed.--The term ``Chesapeake Bay watershed'' means all tributaries, backwaters, and side channels, including watersheds, draining into the Chesapeake Bay. (4) Chesapeake executive council.--The term ``Chesapeake Executive Council'' has the meaning given the term by section 117(a) of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1267(a)). (5) Chief executive.--The term ``chief executive'' means, in the case of a State or Commonwealth, the Governor of the State or Commonwealth and, in the case of the District of Columbia, the Mayor of the District of Columbia. (6) Director.--The term ``Director'' means the Director of the Office of Management and Budget. (7) Federal restoration activity.-- (A) In general.--The term ``Federal restoration activity'' means a Federal program or project carried out under Federal authority in existence as of the date of enactment of this Act with the express intent to directly protect, conserve, or restore living resources, habitat, water resources, or water quality in the Chesapeake Bay watershed, including programs or projects that provide financial and technical assistance to promote responsible land use, stewardship, and community engagement in the Chesapeake Bay watershed. (B) Categorization.--Federal restoration activities may be categorized as follows: (i) Physical restoration. (ii) Planning. (iii) Feasibility studies. (iv) Scientific research. [[Page 16401]] (v) Monitoring. (vi) Education. (vii) Infrastructure development. (8) State restoration activity.-- (A) In general.--The term ``State restoration activity'' means any State program or project carried out under State authority that directly or indirectly protect, conserve, or restore living resources, habitat, water resources, or water quality in the Chesapeake Bay watershed, including programs or projects that promote responsible land use, stewardship, and community engagement in the Chesapeake Bay watershed. (B) Categorization.--State restoration activities may be categorized as follows: (i) Physical restoration. (ii) Planning. (iii) Feasibility studies. (iv) Scientific research. (v) Monitoring. (vi) Education. (vii) Infrastructure development. SEC. 3. CHESAPEAKE BAY CROSSCUT BUDGET. (a) In General.--The Director, in consultation with the Chesapeake Executive Council, the chief executive of each Chesapeake Bay State, and the Chesapeake Bay Commission, shall submit to Congress a financial report containing-- (1) an interagency crosscut budget that displays, as applicable-- (A) the proposed funding for any Federal restoration activity to be carried out in the succeeding fiscal year, including any planned interagency or intra-agency transfer, for each of the Federal agencies that carry out restoration activities; (B) to the extent that information is available, the estimated funding for any State restoration activity to be carried out in the succeeding fiscal year; (C) all expenditures for Federal restoration activities from the preceding 2 fiscal years, the current fiscal year, and the succeeding fiscal year; (D) all expenditures, to the extent that information is available, for State restoration activities during the equivalent time period described in subparagraph (C); and (E) a section that identifies and evaluates, based on need and appropriateness, specific opportunities to consolidate similar programs and activities within the budget and recommendations to Congress for legislative action to streamline, consolidate, or eliminate similar programs and activities within the budget; (2) a detailed accounting of all funds received and obligated by each Federal agency for restoration activities during the current and preceding fiscal years, including the identification of funds that were transferred to a Chesapeake Bay State for restoration activities; (3) to the extent that information is available, a detailed accounting from each State of all funds received and obligated from a Federal agency for restoration activities during the current and preceding fiscal years; and (4) a description of each of the proposed Federal and State restoration activities to be carried out in the succeeding fiscal year (corresponding to those activities listed in subparagraphs (A) and (B) of paragraph (1)), including-- (A) the project description; (B) the current status of the project; (C) the Federal or State statutory or regulatory authority, program, or responsible agency; (D) the authorization level for appropriations; (E) the project timeline, including benchmarks; (F) references to project documents; (G) descriptions of risks and uncertainties of project implementation; (H) a list of coordinating entities; (I) a description of the funding history for the project; (J) cost sharing; and (K) alignment with the existing Chesapeake Bay Agreement, Chesapeake Executive Council goals and priorities, and Annual Action Plan required by section 205 of Executive Order 13508 (33 U.S.C. 1267 note; relating to Chesapeake Bay protection and restoration). (b) Minimum Funding Levels.--In describing restoration activities in the report required under subsection (a), the Director shall only include-- (1) for the first 3 years that the report is required, descriptions of-- (A) Federal restoration activities that have funding amounts greater than or equal to $300,000; and (B) State restoration activities that have funding amounts greater than or equal to $300,000; and (2) for every year thereafter, descriptions of-- (A) Federal restoration activities that have funding amounts greater than or equal to $100,000; and (B) State restoration activities that have funding amounts greater than or equal to $100,000. (c) Deadline.--The Director shall submit to Congress the report required by subsection (a) not later than September 30 of each year. (d) Report.--Copies of the report required by subsection (a) shall be submitted to the Committees on Appropriations, Natural Resources, Energy and Commerce, and Transportation and Infrastructure of the House of Representatives and the Committees on Appropriations, Environment and Public Works, and Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the Senate. (e) Effective Date.--This section shall apply beginning with the first fiscal year after the date of enactment of this Act. SEC. 4. INDEPENDENT EVALUATOR FOR THE CHESAPEAKE BAY PROGRAM. (a) In General.--There shall be an Independent Evaluator for restoration activities in the Chesapeake Bay watershed, who shall review and report on-- (1) restoration activities; and (2) any related topics that are suggested by the Chesapeake Executive Council. (b) Appointment.-- (1) In general.--Not later than 30 days after the date of submission of nominees by the Chesapeake Executive Council, the Independent Evaluator shall be appointed by the Administrator from among nominees submitted by the Chesapeake Executive Council with the consultation of the scientific community. (2) Nominations.--The Chesapeake Executive Council may nominate for consideration as Independent Evaluator a science-based institution of higher education. (3) Requirements.--The Administrator shall only select as Independent Evaluator a nominee that the Administrator determines demonstrates excellence in marine science, policy evaluation, or other studies relating to complex environmental restoration activities. (c) Reports.--Not later than 180 days after the date of appointment and once every 2 years thereafter, the Independent Evaluator shall submit to Congress a report describing the findings and recommendations of reviews conducted under subsection (a). SEC. 5. PROHIBITION ON NEW FUNDING. No additional funds are authorized to be appropriated to carry out this Act. The bill (S. 1000), as amended, was ordered to be engrossed for a third reading, was read the third time, and passed. The bill (H.R. 5069) was ordered to a third reading, was read the third time, and passed. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Louisiana. Mr. VITTER. Madam President, I have a parliamentary inquiry. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator will state it. Mr. VITTER. Did that unanimous consent agreement cover both bills? The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator is correct. Mr. VITTER. I thank the Chair. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Virginia. ____________________ NOMINATION OF ROBERT S. ADLER TO BE A COMMISSIONER OF THE CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY COMMISSION--Continued Mr. WARNER. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the time in any quorum calls be charged equally to both sides. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. Mr. WARNER. I suggest the absence of a quorum. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll. The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll. Mr. HATCH. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. Tax Extenders Mr. HATCH. Madam President, I wish to spend a few minutes today to discuss the ongoing saga of the 2014 tax extenders package. Getting this legislation passed through the Senate has been quite an ordeal from the outset. As my colleagues will recall, the Finance Committee reported its tax extenders package in April and a few weeks later progress stalled on the Senate floor when the Senate majority leadership refused to allow votes on any amendments. After that time--which was in mid-May--the tax extenders sat somewhat in limbo, although both sides acknowledged the desire to get something passed during the lameduck session, if not before. The Finance Committee extenders package, if my colleagues remember, extended 55 expired or expiring tax provisions for 2 years without making any of them permanent. [[Page 16402]] The House took a different approach which was to make certain important tax provisions, such as the R&D tax credit, for example, permanent, bringing more certainty to American businesses, families, and individuals. Over the past several weeks, negotiations have been ongoing in the hopes of producing a bill that combined the Senate Finance Committee's package with the approach taken by the House. I am generally hesitant to publicly comment about what happens behind closed doors in negotiations; but, on the other hand, much of what happened next has already been printed in the media. That being the case, I don't feel too awkward discussing the recent turn of events that has brought us to where we are now with the tax extenders. Last week, before the Thanksgiving holiday, the Speaker's office and the Senate majority leader's office were very close to reaching a deal on a tax extenders package--one that would have included all of the provisions from the EXPIRE Act, which is the Senate Finance Committee- reported tax extenders bill, as well as a number of permanent tax extender provisions. This emerging deal would have been a reasonable compromise between Republicans and Democrats and between the House and Senate approaches to this matter. It was not the legislation I would have written, but as a compromise taking place in a Congress that is, for the time being, still divided, it was likely the best both parties could hope for. As I said, we were on the cusp of a deal last week, and then something strange happened. On Tuesday, the White House caught wind of the potential deal--even though the terms had not yet been finalized-- and issued a veto threat. How often does that happen? How often does the President issue a veto threat on potential deals still under negotiation? How often do we find that extraordinary threat ratified by people who are involved in the negotiations? As I said, this was not a Republican wish list being negotiated. House Republicans were willing to make a number of tough concessions in order to get a deal across the finish line. For example, the deal would have made permanent the American opportunity tax credit--a provision that first came into law in the Democrats' partisan 2009 stimulus bill and has been a high priority item for Democrats. It would have also made the State and local sales tax deduction--which is a high priority for a number of congressional Democrats--permanent. And it would have rolled over the tax extenders that expired during 2013--including many that most Republicans do not support--for another 2 years. These were major concessions and, to its credit, the House was willing to make them in the interests of a bipartisan agreement. More importantly, the deal was supported by the Senate majority leader who, the last time I checked, was a Democrat. Yet the deal wasn't good enough for the President and for the more liberal Members of the Senate, or should I say the Senate Democratic Caucus. Apparently they weren't willing to take yes for an answer. Instead of compromising even a little bit, President Obama issued his veto threat and has been rallying Democratic Senators against the proposed deal, or at least that is what I have been told. As a result, it appears unlikely that a deal on the tax extenders package will be reached in this Congress. Instead, the most likely scenario appears to be that the Congress will pass a 1-year referendum of tax extenders that have already expired. Short of not passing anything at all, this is surely the worst of all possible worlds. Rather than the certainty that would come with making some of the more prominent individual tax extenders permanent, families, individuals, and businesses will have to once again put long- term plans on hold in hopes that Congress can get its act together the next time around. This is bad news for middle-class families. This is bad news for individuals. This is bad news for job creators. And this is bad news for those of us hoping the government will improve the way it does business any time in the near future. We all know the makeup of the next Congress will be different than it is now. I don't mean to be too presumptuous, but I think it is safe to say the President and his liberal allies are unlikely to get a better tax deal in the next Congress than the one the Senate Democratic leadership had been negotiating up until the last week. I commend the Senate Democratic leadership for its work on that matter. I commend the House leadership and congratulate them for doing the same thing. Do any of my Democratic colleagues who came out against the proposed deal really think their prospects are likely to improve next year? I have to ask because, quite frankly, this recent turn of events is mind- boggling to me. In the end, I think the only conclusion that makes sense is that this line of attack--the President's veto threat--and liberal opposition to the potential extenders deal is more about politics than about policy. It is about the President's strategy of following an electoral rebuke of his policies by tacking even further to the left. And it is about congressional Democrats' efforts to pander to their liberal base at the expense of good government. I hope I am wrong about this, but as I said, there is not another logical explanation that I have heard. I hope the White House and its Senate allies will prove me wrong and come to the table with an offer that reflects a genuine compromise with the House. I think the events of this past week have demonstrated divisions in the Democratic Party, and that those divisions are causing real problems. Once again, we had the Senate majority leader in the room and ready to make a deal, only to be undercut by the President and his liberal allies in the Senate. I find that very unfortunate. I commend the Democratic majority leader for trying. Of course, at the end of the day, I suppose none of us should be surprised at what has happened. After all, President Obama is not particularly known for being business friendly or placing his focus on job creation, which is sorely needed in this country. Whether it is crippling environmental regulations--which we are now seeing come to the forefront in dramatic terms--or whether it is labor policy or health care, the President has demonstrated that he is all too willing to put his political ideology above the needs of our economy. Make no mistake, the proposed tax extenders deal--the one the President scuttled with his veto threat--was all about job creation. It would have made the research and development tax credit, small business expensing, and other provisions permanent, giving certainty to the business community, paving the way for more investment, and paving the way for more jobs in our society. The President's latest gambit on the tax extenders is just a series in a long line of instances where politics has trumped job creation. Still, as one who has been willing to work with my colleagues on the other side of the aisle, I can't help but be disappointed. But make no mistake, things are about to change around here and we will have an opportunity to right this ship. I just hope we will have a lot of Democrats who are willing to help us. We need to focus on an agenda that will actually grow our economy. We need to focus on an agenda that will actually create jobs. And we need to focus on an agenda that will empower the American people. That is going to be the focus of this new Congress. Once again, the President and his allies here in the Senate missed a big opportunity to address some of their party's priorities with the tax extenders legislation. It is difficult to imagine that they will have another bite at the same apple in the next Congress. Absent a deal, we are now left with only one option: a 1-year extension that will likely be passed by the House this week. Once again, a 1-year extension is not a great deal for families, individuals, and businesses, but it is far better than letting these provisions lapse entirely. Indeed, if we do nothing, we run into a series of problems, including a delayed filing season, which means millions of delayed refunds for Americans who count on them. In addition, [[Page 16403]] doing nothing would essentially amount to a tax hike on millions of people and businesses. Consequently, I plan to vote in favor of the 1-year extension, unless, of course, my colleagues on the other side finally come to their senses and allow a better deal to be had. I don't understand this kind of leadership in this country. I don't understand why the President does some of these things. I don't understand why the left just can't take an offering to them that was much better than what we are going to get. The majority leader knew it. Republicans have been tough on the majority leader. I have been here for years. I care for him. I think it is a tough group of people to manage, just as they are on our side as well. It is a tough job. Frankly, I think the deal he worked out should have been followed. It would have given the President much of what he wanted initially, anyway. It would have brought us together one more time, and it would have been a wonderful thing. It would have made the end of the year--the work we are doing--much more satisfying and acceptable. It would have been a good prelude to next year of our working together--something that this body needs really badly. I want to commend the distinguished majority leader, Senator Reid, for the work he tried to do. I want to congratulate him. I want to congratulate the Speaker of the House for being willing to work on this. I think it is unfortunate we are at this point in these negotiations, where we are going to have a 1-year extension. It is not going to be anywhere near where we had negotiated with the majority leader and had negotiated with the House. There are parts of the negotiated bill that I wish I could have changed. But, we had come a long way. I want to pay tribute to the distinguished chairman of our committee. I don't think he had much confidence at first that we would put our original extenders bill through the committee. At least he didn't express it to me. I said: Let's do it, and we did. Even with the parts that I wish weren't in there and the parts he wished weren't in there, it was a classic bipartisan compromise by two sides who feel very, very deeply about all these issues--each and every one of them. I think the work that Senator Reid, the distinguished majority leader, and the Speaker had done was not only a step in the right direction but it would have been something most all of us would have been quite pleased with. I commend them for their work. I am disappointed with where we are. I hope we can solve these problems in the future. I will be working as hard as I can to bring about bipartisan efforts in that regard. Madam President, I suggest the absence of a quorum. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll. The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll. Mr. BARRASSO. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the quorum call be rescinded. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. EPA Regulation Mr. BARRASSO. Last Wednesday Americans all across the country were preparing for Thanksgiving. They were traveling. Many of them were going to visit friends and family and places around their communities, their State or the country. What did the Obama administration do when it thought nobody was actually paying attention? It snuck out a huge new regulation that imposes job-crushing environmental restrictions. Politico ran an article on it later that day. The headline was: ``The most expensive regulation ever. Obama rolls out a major EPA rule.'' Why would the President do that? Why would he put out a major rule from the Environmental Protection Agency, affecting millions of Americans, and do it right before a holiday? If these regulations were such a good idea, we would think the administration--as the administration claims it is a good idea--would put it out in a way that people would be paying attention. I want to know why the administration did this in a way to hide the regulations from the American people. President Obama didn't say a word about it that day. Instead, he pardoned a turkey. The turkey got a better deal than the American people did last week. They are the ones who are going to be paying for the President's expensive and destructive regulation. Here is what is happening. The Environmental Protection Agency has proposed a new rule that would dramatically slash the limits of ground- level ozone. The rule runs 626 pages. Then we add on the appendix--over 500 additional pages. Here is what the Wall Street Journal had to say about the new rule. They had an editorial on it Friday with this headline: ``Highway to the Danger Ozone.'' It says: ``Like so many other such rules, this one twists decades-old air pollution laws to restructure the U.S. energy industry and gradually ban fossil-fuel-fired power.'' We have fossil fuel-fired power gradually being banned as this administration tries to restructure the U.S. energy industry. It says: ``Coal is the first target.'' The article also adds: ``But natural gas is next.'' The current limit on ozone is 75 parts per billion. The Environmental Protection Agency wants to cut that number down to as little as 70, 65, even 60 parts per billion. The Agency estimates that the new rule could cost nearly $17 billion every year--$17 billion a year in costs. Most of the country would fail to meet Washington's tough new standards if they were in place today. As much as 95 percent of the country would be unable to comply with the new regulations if they go down to 60 parts per billion. States, counties, and cities would have to curb their energy production and limit manufacturing. That will mean far less economic growth and fewer people working. It will raise the cost of everyday living, and it will destroy middle-class jobs. There is no question about it. This rule will undermine energy reliability. It will stall manufacturing investment, and it will smother economic opportunity for middle-class families. It costs too much, and there is very little benefit. It doesn't matter to the extreme environmentalist wing of the Democratic Party who support it. The Obama administration is once again turning a deaf ear to Americans--the people who want Washington to focus on jobs. That is what we saw in the election earlier this month. The people of this country want the administration to focus on jobs. The administration claims its tough new rule will lead to new health benefits. What about the health damage done to people who lose their jobs because of the rule? In March 2012 the Committee on Environment and Public Works Subcommittee on Clear Air and Nuclear Safety issued a report titled ``Red Tape Making Americans Sick.'' It is a new report on the health impacts of high unemployment. According to the testimony and scientific research that was reviewed by the subcommittee, unemployment caused by excessive regulation--such as the new ozone rule--increases the likelihood of hospital visits, illnesses, and premature deaths. That raises health care costs. It hurts the health of children and the well-being of families. The Obama administration doesn't want to hear it and certainly doesn't want to talk about it. Bipartisan majorities in Congress have rejected the President's energy policies. Senate Democrats wouldn't even bring up his cap and trade plan for a vote in this body. What does the President do? Does he learn the lesson that the American people don't want his enormously expensive, job-crushing policies? Does he listen to the voters in the most recent elections--people who sent a clear message they weren't happy with the direction the country is headed? No, not President Obama--he goes ahead and does it anyway. People are concerned about jobs. They are concerned about the economy. The President is focused, though, on making it tougher for the private [[Page 16404]] sector to create jobs and tougher for the economy to grow. He purposely is going around the American people and their representatives in Congress and taking this drastic step on his own. Why? Because he knows even Democrats in Congress do not support him. So what are the Democrats who control the Senate right now going to do about it? If history is any indication, they are not going to do anything. Democrats in Congress are going to just roll over and accept another destructive policy by President Obama. That is what they did with the health care law--a terrible law. Democrats in Congress pushed it through anyway because President Obama told them to do it. Nancy Pelosi was the Speaker of the House at the time. She said: First you have to pass the bill before you get to find out what is in it. Well, now even Democrats are admitting it was a bad idea as they are learning more and more what is in this bill for which they voted. The senior Senator from New York said the other day that the health care law ``wasn't the change we were hired to make.'' He said, with the economy in bad shape, it was a focus on ``the wrong problem.'' That is from a Senator who voted for the health care law. Well, today the Senator is right when he says it was a focus on the wrong problem. With this new ozone regulation, the President is still focused on the wrong problem. He should still be looking for ways to grow America's economy, not ways to tie it up with more redtape. President Obama has made the wrong choice time and time again, adding more regulations, more rules, more bureaucracy. He continues to push extreme policies he knows the American people reject. The President is using unelected and unaccountable czars to go around Congress and the public. His latest Executive action shows his Presidency is failing and floundering. President Obama is not even waiting to try to work with a Republican Congress or when Republicans take the majority in January. He is acting on his own right now. Well, in January Republicans in Congress will listen to Americans and focus on the priorities of the American people. We will hold the Obama administration accountable for its destructive overreach. We will listen to people who are struggling under Obama's redtape and suffering because of it. We will do everything possible to stop this legislation and help Americans have better job opportunities in the future. I yield the floor, and I suggest the absence of a quorum The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Manchin). The clerk will call the roll. The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll. Mr. MENENDEZ. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. Immigration Mr. MENENDEZ. Mr. President, I come to the floor to speak about the President's Executive order on immigration. I have been listening to my colleagues, both here and on the other side of the Capitol, and I rise in amazement. It is almost incredulous that our Republican friends are against the President taking the same action Presidents Reagan and George H.W. Bush took to defer deportation to solve a critical problem that we all know exists in the country--a problem that impacts millions. When President Obama exercises the same Executive authority-- the same--they are on the air, on television, on talk shows, on Twitter, fear-mongering, calling it illegal, calling it amnesty, a constitutional crisis. Where was all of that when Presidents Reagan and Bush did it? They hold hearings in the House titled ``Open Border: The Impact of Presidential Amnesty on Border Security,'' which is a little ridiculous because we have more border security under this administration than we have had in the history of the United States. As a matter of fact, we spend more on border enforcement and immigration enforcement than we do in all of the other Federal law enforcement entities combined-- combined. The Republicans threaten to sue the government or even shut it down. The irony of that is laughable because a shutdown over conducting background checks and collecting taxes from undocumented immigrants would only cost current taxpayers billions of dollars. Certainly it would cost them billions of dollars if it is anything like the last shutdown that Republicans forced. So double standard? Absolutely. It is the very definition of ``double standard.'' On immigration reform, our Republican friends--particularly on the other side of the Capitol--have become the poster children for double standards. On the one hand, they know the political ramifications of the demographic reality. On the other, they refuse to catch up with history and fix our broken immigration system. They are sailing against the headwinds of history, and now they want to prevent the President from pulling them to shore, saving them from their own immobility, their own inaction. They are also sailing against the headwinds of what the American people want. In poll after poll we have seen that the American people want to fix our broken immigration system, and that which the Senate passed--and I was honored to be one of the Group of 8 who put it together 1\1/2\ years ago--and passed with an overwhelming bipartisan vote, still has the highest rating among the American people. It has been sitting in the House of Representatives for the last 1\1/2\ years. A new Gallup poll shows that the President's approval rating among all voters has not gone down since the Executive action announcement was made, as some predicted it would, but, rather, it has increased 5 percentage points among all voters since early November. In my view, any action--Executive or otherwise--is movement in the right direction and it is what America expects of its leaders. Americans are expecting someone to act, someone to tackle the difficult issues, and immigration, particularly for our House colleagues, seems to be a very difficult issue they can't tackle. It is not difficult for me, and it is not really difficult for most Americans who believe in the power of common sense, not for those who believe in the need to secure our borders, to secure the country, to promote economic opportunity, and preserve our history as a nation of immigrants and that core value of family values. I cannot recall anyone coming to this floor and praising inaction, praising the President for not having done enough on a matter of consequence, but that is exactly what our Republican colleagues are doing, once again standing squarely on the wrong side of history--in fact, on the wrong side of their own history--invoking the double standard and claiming what is right for their party's Presidents is wrong for this President. History, however, is a funny thing. You can choose to ignore it, but eventually it catches up with you, and it has finally caught up with my Republican colleagues. I repeat what I have said all along: The antidote to Executive action is passing immigration reform. Let's be clear. Regardless of how big or how bold the President's announcement may be, a permanent legislative solution continues to be our ultimate objective. Administrative relief will not grant anyone legal status or citizenship, but it will clear the way for many to come out of the shadows, register with the government, pass a criminal background check, get a work permit, and pay taxes as the rest of us do. Because of the President's Executive action, the nature of who is eligible is really people who have U.S. citizen families here. It will prevent needless deportations and give a chance at a better life to those who want nothing more than to keep their families together. We are talking about millions of hard-working people who--right now many are exploited, creating downward pressure on the salaries and wages of all Americans by virtue of that exploitation. We have an opportunity to change that. I would rather know who is here to pursue the American dream versus who is here to do us harm, but I can't know that unless I get people to come forward and go through a criminal background check. If our Republican colleagues are so concerned about getting immigration [[Page 16405]] policy right, if they are so concerned about the President overstepping his authority, which is the same authority Republican Presidents have used, they can exert their own authority and push our bipartisan bill over the finish line with one vote--one vote in the House of Representatives. The President himself has said he acted because there is a cost to waiting--a cost measured in the thousands of parents of U.S. citizen children who are deported, husband and wives who are separated from their U.S. citizen spouses, and the economic consequences. I know there are some who suggest: Let's wait until the next Congress. Let's wait and see. Give them a little time. If not, we will act. This is the same Republican Party--particularly in the House of Representatives--that blocked immigration reform in 2006, 2007, 2010, 2013, and 2014 despite a strong bipartisan bill here. So if they wish, they can join us at the negotiating table with their own proposals and their own solutions because doing nothing and maintaining the status quo is no longer an option. That is precisely why they didn't want the President to follow through on what he told them. He waited on Executive action. He gave them advance notice. He said: I want you to act, but if you don't act, eventually I will have to act. Now let's look at what my Republican friends find so objectionable. To put it simply, the administration is creating a new deferred action for parental accountability, a program that provides deferred action on a case-by-case basis to undocumented parents of U.S. citizens or lawful permanent residents--those who were present in the United States on November 20 of this year, those who have continuously lived in the United States for 5 years, since January 2010, and are not an enforcement priority--and also is expanding the program that already exists for DREAMers by expanding the age content. This isn't amnesty because amnesty means you did something wrong and you are forgiven and get whatever you want. Amnesty means you get something for nothing. First of all, these people have no pathway to becoming a permanent resident or citizen under the President's Executive order. Secondly, their only opportunity is not to be deported, assuming they can pass a background check and pay their taxes. As a result of the President's order, more people will go to the southern border to protect it, more people will pay taxes who may not be paying them now, more families will stay reunited, and more people who are in the shadows will come forward and go through a criminal background check. I would like to know who those people are, and I would like to make sure they don't have a criminal background. More criminals and felons will be deported because now it will be a priority to deport those individuals. What is wrong with that set of circumstances? So this is temporary relief as the Congress hopefully comes together on a more permanent basis. In my State of New Jersey, approximately 137,000 parents of U.S. citizens and legal permanent residents will benefit from the new action. About 67,000 will benefit from the new program on children. That is an estimated 204,000 people in New Jersey who can come out of the shadows and contribute to the community and the economy. These are moms and dads, good people, hardworking people who can register with the government, pass a background check, get a work permit, pay taxes, take care of their families, and no longer fear deportation. The fact is, because of the President's Executive action, more felons will be deported, more resources will go to our border, more families will stay together, and more people will pay taxes. These are all good things. The Council of Economic Advisers has found that over the next decade the range of Executive actions announced by the President will increase our gross domestic product by up to 0.9 percent, it will reduce the Federal deficit by $25 billion through increased economic growth, and it will raise the average wages for U.S. workers by 0.3 percent. The Executive action the President has taken and the Republicans have criticized will increase the productivity of our workforce. How? By allowing those--from undocumented immigrants to spouses of highly skilled H-1B visa holders--to be part of the formal economy and match the skills they have with the skills needed by entrepreneurial startups that they often create. By the way, that is a fraction of the economic benefits of what we did here on a bipartisan basis that has been sitting in the House of Representatives for the last 1\1/2\ years. The Senate bill we passed, according to the Congressional Budget Office--the nonpartisan scoring division of everything we do here--will increase the gross domestic product of the United States by over 3 percent in 2023--less than 9 years--and 5.4 percent in 2033, which is an increase of roughly $700 billion in 2023 and $1.4 trillion in 2033. It will reduce the Federal deficit by $197 billion over the next decade and another $700 billion between 2024 and 2033. That is almost $1 trillion in deficit spending which can be lifted from the backs of the next generation of Americans by giving 11 million people a pathway to citizenship. What do we ever do that we pass that grows the economy, reduces the deficit, and creates more jobs for all Americans? Very little. The immigration bill which the Senate passed and which has been pending in the House does all of that in addition to securing our border. So let's be clear. The President's Executive actions are only temporary steps. Only Congress can finish the job. Deferred action is an act of prosecutorial discretion, but it is not a path to citizenship or a permanent solution. The fact is that we have waited and waited. In the absence of any Republican action in the House on immigration reform, the President has used the power he has available, which other Presidents have used as well. If the Republicans are concerned about an Executive action, they should use their own power to pass immigration reform--either the Senate bill or their own vision of what comprehensive reform is. For those who question the legality of this, I would simply say there are three letters--one before the Executive action and two after--from law professors and former general counsels of the Immigration and Naturalization Service and chief counsels of USCIS. They say the President has the authority. He is on sound legal footing. So we are tired of waiting for Republicans to say yes to something-- yes to taking action that is in the interest of millions in this country who expect leadership, expect action, expect progress, expect cooperation, not confrontation and obstruction. Millions of families are tired of waiting. The Nation is tired of waiting for Republicans to catch up with history--in this case, with the lessons of their own history. Let's invite our Republican friends to invoke the memory of Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush and for once commend this President for following their lead in this, doing what is right by the Nation and doing what is right by our taxpayers, doing what is right for our security and doing what is right by our families. Mr. President, I yield the floor, and I suggest the absence of a quorum. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll. The assistant bill clerk proceeded to call the roll. Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. Unanimous Consent Agreement--Executive Calendar Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the vote originally scheduled for today at 4 p.m. be delayed until 4:10 p.m., and that notwithstanding rule XXII, following the vote on cloture on Calendar No. 1069, Burrows, the Senate proceed to vote on cloture on Calendar No. 1067, Lopez; further, that if cloture is invoked on either of these nominations, that at 10:00 a.m. tomorrow morning, Wednesday, December 3, 2014, all postcloture time be considered expired and the Senate proceed to vote on confirmation of the nominations in the order upon which cloture was invoked; further, [[Page 16406]] that following these votes, the Senate proceed to vote on cloture on the following nominations: Calendar Nos. 1036, Hale; 1037, Kearney; and 1038, Pappert; further, if cloture is invoked on any of these nominations, that at 3 p.m. tomorrow, all postcloture time be considered expired and the Senate proceed to vote on confirmation of the nominations in the order upon which cloture was invoked; further, that there be 2 minutes for debate prior to each vote and all rollcall votes after the first vote in the sequence be 10 minutes in length; further, with respect to the nominations in this agreement, that if any nomination is confirmed, the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table and the President be immediately notified of the Senate's action. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. Mr. REID. I suggest the absence of a quorum. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll. The assistant bill clerk proceeded to call the roll. Mr. GRAHAM. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. ____________________ NOMINATION OF NANI A. COLORETTI TO BE DEPUTY SECRETARY OF DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT--Continued The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, there will be 2 minutes of debate prior to a vote on the Coloretti nomination. Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, I would like to express my support for the consideration of the nomination of Nani Coloretti to be the Deputy Secretary of the Department of Housing and Urban Development, HUD. Ms. Coloretti has a distinguished history of public service; she currently is the Assistant Secretary for Management at the U.S. Department of Treasury, a position she has served in since 2012. Prior to joining the U.S. Treasury, Ms. Coloretti assisted setting up operations at the newly created Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, serving as the Acting Chief Operating Officer. Additionally, from 1999 to 2005, Ms. Coloretti served as director of policy, planning and budget for the San Francisco Department of Children, Youth, and their Families, as well as budget director to San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom, where she managed the implementation of San Francisco's $6.2 billion annual budget. Ms. Coloretti received a B.A. in economics and communications from the University of Pennsylvania and a master's in public policy from the Goldman School of Public Policy at the University of California at Berkeley. In 2012, Ms. Coloretti was awarded the National Public Service Award by the American Society for Public Administration and the National Academy of Public Administration. I believe that Ms. Coloretti brings a wealth of experience and knowledge to the position of Deputy Secretary, and I look forward to voting for her confirmation. Mr. GRAHAM. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to yield back all time. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. Under the previous order, the question is, Will the Senate advise and consent to the nomination of Nani A. Coloretti, of California, to be Deputy Secretary of Department of Housing and Urban Development? Mr. GRAHAM. I ask for the yeas and nays. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second? There appears to be a sufficient second. The clerk will call the roll. The assistant bill clerk called the roll. Mr. DURBIN. I announce the Senator from Louisiana (Mrs. Landrieu) and the Senator from Missouri (Mrs. McCaskill) are necessarily absent. Mr. CORNYN. The following Senators are necessarily absent: the Senator from Oklahoma (Mr. Coburn) and the Senator from Mississippi (Mr. Cochran). The PRESIDING OFFICER. Are there any other Senators in the Chamber desiring to vote? The result was announced--yeas 68, nays 28, as follows: [Rollcall Vote No. 297 Ex.] YEAS--68 Alexander Ayotte Baldwin Begich Bennet Blumenthal Booker Boxer Brown Cantwell Cardin Carper Casey Coats Collins Coons Corker Donnelly Durbin Feinstein Flake Franken Gillibrand Hagan Harkin Hatch Heinrich Heitkamp Heller Hirono Hoeven Isakson Johanns Johnson (SD) Kaine King Klobuchar Leahy Levin Manchin Markey Menendez Merkley Mikulski Murkowski Murphy Murray Nelson Portman Pryor Reed Reid Rockefeller Sanders Schatz Schumer Shaheen Stabenow Tester Toomey Udall (CO) Udall (NM) Walsh Warner Warren Whitehouse Wicker Wyden NAYS--28 Barrasso Blunt Boozman Burr Chambliss Cornyn Crapo Cruz Enzi Fischer Graham Grassley Inhofe Johnson (WI) Kirk Lee McCain McConnell Moran Paul Risch Roberts Rubio Scott Sessions Shelby Thune Vitter NOT VOTING--4 Coburn Cochran Landrieu McCaskill The nomination was confirmed. ____________________ NOMINATION OF ROBERT S. ADLER TO BE A COMMISSIONER OF THE CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY COMMISSION--Continued The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, there will be 2 minutes of debate prior to a vote on the Adler nomination. Mr. REID. Mr. President, I yield back all time. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, all time is yielded back. The question is, Will the Senate advise and consent to the nomination of Robert S. Adler, of the District of Columbia, to be a Commissioner of the Consumer Product Safety Commission? Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second? There is a sufficient second. The clerk will call the roll. The bill clerk called the roll. Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from Louisiana (Ms. Landrieu) is necessarily absent. Mr. CORNYN. The following Senators are necessarily absent: the Senator from Oklahoma (Mr. Coburn) and the Senator from Mississippi (Mr. Cochran). The PRESIDING OFFICER (Ms. Warren). Are there any other Senators in the Chamber desiring to vote? The result was announced--yeas 53, nays 44, as follows: [Rollcall Vote No. 298 Ex.] YEAS--53 Baldwin Begich Bennet Blumenthal Booker Boxer Brown Cantwell Cardin Carper Casey Coons Donnelly Durbin Feinstein Franken Gillibrand Hagan Harkin Heinrich Heitkamp Hirono Johnson (SD) Kaine Klobuchar Leahy Levin Manchin Markey McCaskill Menendez Merkley Mikulski Murphy Murray Nelson Pryor Reed Reid Rockefeller Sanders Schatz Schumer Shaheen Stabenow Tester Udall (CO) Udall (NM) Walsh Warner Warren Whitehouse Wyden NAYS--44 Alexander Ayotte Barrasso Blunt Boozman Burr Chambliss Coats Collins Corker Cornyn Crapo Cruz Enzi Fischer Flake Graham Grassley Hatch Heller Hoeven Inhofe Isakson Johanns Johnson (WI) King Kirk Lee McCain McConnell Moran Murkowski Paul Portman Risch Roberts Rubio Scott [[Page 16407]] Sessions Shelby Thune Toomey Vitter Wicker NOT VOTING--3 Coburn Cochran Landrieu The nomination was confirmed. ____________________ CLOTURE MOTION The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, there will be 2 minutes of debate prior to a vote to invoke cloture on the Burrows nomination. Who yields time? Mr. BARRASSO. I yield back all time. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, all time is yielded back. Pursuant to rule XXII, the Chair lays before the Senate the pending cloture motion, which the clerk will state. The bill clerk read as follows: Cloture Motion We, the undersigned Senators, in accordance with the provisions of rule XXII of the Standing Rules of the Senate, hereby move to bring to a close debate on the nomination of Charlotte A. Burrows, of the District of Columbia, to be a Member of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. Harry Reid, Tom Harkin, Patrick J. Leahy, Patty Murray, Tom Udall, Brian Schatz, Charles E. Schumer, Barbara Boxer, Benjamin L. Cardin, Richard Blumenthal, Jeff Merkley, Al Franken, Robert P. Casey, Jr., Martin Heinrich, Elizabeth Warren, Richard J. Durbin, Christopher Murphy. The PRESIDING OFFICER. By unanimous consent, the mandatory quorum call has been waived. The question is, Is it the sense of the Senate that debate on the nomination of Charlotte A. Burrows, of the District of Columbia, to be a Member of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, shall be brought to a close? The yeas and nays are mandatory under the rule. The clerk will call the roll. The assistant bill clerk called the roll. Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from Alaska (Mr. Begich) and the Senator from Louisiana (Ms. Landrieu) are necessarily absent. Mr. CORNYN. The following Senators are necessarily absent: the Senator from Oklahoma (Mr. Coburn) and the Senator from Mississippi (Mr. Cochran). The PRESIDING OFFICER. Are there any other Senators in the Chamber desiring to vote? The yeas and nays resulted--yeas 57, nays 39, as follows: [Rollcall Vote No. 299 Ex.] YEAS--57 Alexander Ayotte Baldwin Bennet Blumenthal Booker Boxer Brown Cantwell Cardin Carper Casey Collins Coons Donnelly Durbin Feinstein Franken Gillibrand Hagan Harkin Heinrich Heitkamp Hirono Johnson (SD) Kaine King Klobuchar Leahy Levin Manchin Markey McCaskill Menendez Merkley Mikulski Murkowski Murphy Murray Nelson Pryor Reed Reid Rockefeller Sanders Schatz Schumer Shaheen Stabenow Tester Udall (CO) Udall (NM) Walsh Warner Warren Whitehouse Wyden NAYS--39 Barrasso Blunt Boozman Burr Chambliss Coats Corker Cornyn Crapo Cruz Enzi Fischer Flake Graham Grassley Hatch Heller Hoeven Inhofe Isakson Johanns Johnson (WI) Kirk Lee McCain McConnell Moran Paul Portman Risch Roberts Rubio Scott Sessions Shelby Thune Toomey Vitter Wicker NOT VOTING--4 Begich Coburn Cochran Landrieu The PRESIDING OFFICER. On this vote, the yeas are 57, the nays are 39. The motion is agreed to. ____________________ NOMINATION OF CHARLOTTE A. BURROWS TO BE A MEMBER OF THE EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the nomination. The legislative clerk read the nomination of Charlotte A. Burrows, of the District of Columbia, to be a Member of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. ____________________ CLOTURE MOTION The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, there will be 2 minutes of debate prior to a vote on cloture on the Lopez nomination. Mr. CARDIN. I yield back all remaining time. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, all time has been yielded back. Pursuant to rule XXII, the Chair lays before the Senate the pending cloture motion, which the clerk will state. The assistant bill clerk read as follows: Cloture Motion We, the undersigned Senators, in accordance with the provisions of rule XXII of the Standing Rules of the Senate, hereby move to bring to a close debate on the nomination of P. David Lopez, of Arizona, to be General Counsel of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. Harry Reid, Tom Harkin, Patrick J. Leahy, Patty Murray, Tom Udall, Brian Schatz, Charles E. Schumer, Barbara Boxer, Benjamin L. Cardin, Richard Blumenthal, Jeff Merkley, Al Franken, Robert P. Casey, Jr., Martin Heinrich, Elizabeth Warren, Richard J. Durbin, Christopher Murphy. The PRESIDING OFFICER. By unanimous consent, the mandatory quorum call has been waived. The question is, Is it the sense of the Senate that debate on the nomination of P. David Lopez, of Arizona, to be General Counsel of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, shall be brought to a close? The yeas and nays are mandatory under the rule. The clerk will call the roll. The legislative clerk called the roll. Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from Louisiana (Ms. Landrieu) is necessarily absent. Mr. CORNYN. The following Senators are necessarily absent: the Senator from Oklahoma (Mr. Coburn) and the Senator from Mississippi (Mr. Cochran). The PRESIDING OFFICER. Are there any other Senators in the Chamber desiring to vote? The yeas and nays resulted--yeas 54, nays 43, as follows: [Rollcall Vote No. 300 Ex.] YEAS--54 Baldwin Begich Bennet Blumenthal Booker Boxer Brown Cantwell Cardin Carper Casey Coons Donnelly Durbin Feinstein Franken Gillibrand Hagan Harkin Heinrich Heitkamp Hirono Johnson (SD) Kaine King Klobuchar Leahy Levin Manchin Markey McCaskill Menendez Merkley Mikulski Murphy Murray Nelson Pryor Reed Reid Rockefeller Sanders Schatz Schumer Shaheen Stabenow Tester Udall (CO) Udall (NM) Walsh Warner Warren Whitehouse Wyden NAYS--43 Alexander Ayotte Barrasso Blunt Boozman Burr Chambliss Coats Collins Corker Cornyn Crapo Cruz Enzi Fischer Flake Graham Grassley Hatch Heller Hoeven Inhofe Isakson Johanns Johnson (WI) Kirk Lee McCain McConnell Moran Murkowski Paul Portman Risch Roberts Rubio Scott Sessions Shelby Thune Toomey Vitter Wicker NOT VOTING--3 Coburn Cochran Landrieu The PRESIDING OFFICER. On this vote, the yeas are 54, the nays are 43. The motion is agreed to. ____________________ NOMINATION OF P. DAVID LOPEZ TO BE GENERAL COUNSEL OF THE EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the nomination. The assistant bill clerk read the nomination of P. David Lopez, of Arizona, to be General Counsel of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. The PRESIDING OFFICER. For the information of the Senate, with respect to the votes to confirm the Coloretti and Adler nominations, the motions to reconsider are considered made and [[Page 16408]] laid upon the table, and the President will be immediately notified of the Senate's action. The Senator from Texas. THE ECONOMY Mr. CORNYN. Madam President, last week, before the Thanksgiving holiday, our colleague from across the aisle, the senior Senator from New York, gave a very significant speech at the National Press Club. Senator Schumer is not just a senior Senator from New York; he is an important Member of the Democratic leadership here in the Senate. While giving the speech about the midterm elections, he said what many Members on this side of the aisle have been saying for the last 4 years, and that is that the Democratic party, by making the passage of ObamaCare their top priority after they won the election of 2008, ``blew the opportunity the American people gave them.'' He said they did so by focusing ``on the wrong problem.'' What I think he meant and went on to say is that they should have focused on the lack of jobs and the wage stagnation for hardworking, middleclass families in America. As he pointed out, that broader group of the middle class represented a much larger segment of the electorate than just a small percentage of the electorate represented by the uninsured. I would add, parenthetically, that we know that even the best laid plans with the Affordable Care Act has proven to be a terrible failure. Today the Wall Street Journal reported that between 2007 and 2013 health insurance premiums for an average middleclass American family have gone up by 24 percent. As we know, when the President said if you like your doctor, you can keep him, that proved not to be true. When he said the family of four would see their premiums go down by $2,500, that ended up not to be true either. Two weeks ago, despite the overwhelming rejection the President's policies received at the polls, the President then decided to circumvent Congress and take Executive action on immigration, far exceeding any arguable authority that I believe most lawyers would think he has. Certainly, while we recognize it is within the President's discretion to prioritize the people against whom enforcement action will be taken, there is no legal authorization for doing other things he purports to have the authority to do, such as issuing work permits. Then there is this. Just when it seemed that the Senate was beginning to work on avoiding a retroactive tax increase for millions of Americans, the President threatened to veto an important tax relief package, which, as I said, had bipartisan support, including the support of the majority leader, Senator Reid, and Senator Schumer, the senior Senator from New York. He did so because it did not include every single provision he thought it should include. If we have not learned before, we should now know that if you insist on absolute perfection--in other words, you want everything you want, and the alternative is nothing--then most of the time you are going to get nothing. That is what taxpayers are getting when it comes to aborting this retroactive tax provision in the so-called tax extenders bill. To again quote our good friend from New York, by threatening to veto this job-creating tax relief, it appears that the President has once again focused on the wrong problem and is certainly going about this in a nonproductive and unconstructive way. It is unfortunate because the President seems to be positively allergic to good-faith negotiations and genuine compromise. Again, if your attitude is ``my way or the highway,'' you are going to get the highway all the time because that is not how our democratic institutions work. The only way things work is for us to find common ground and to compromise. Yet the President's attitude seems, unfortunately, out of touch. He seems more interested in getting his way by any means necessary--hence, the Executive action on immigration. We increasingly know that actions are dividing the country and hurting hard-working Texans and American families across the Nation-- and not just by not contributing to the solution but by being a positive obstacle to bipartisan resolutions of so many of these problems. I realize the President must think that it is much easier to issue Executive orders and threaten to veto legislation from the White House, but it was not helping to solve problems we were sent here by our constituents to solve. There is no real reason preventing us from getting to the tax relief I mentioned earlier that the President said he would veto. For years House and Senate Republicans--often with significant bipartisan support--have focused on making progrowth provisions of the Tax Code permanent, such as the research and development tax credit, accelerated depreciation, for example, and the section 179 provision. To show how counterproductive it is for us to do these on a short- term basis or to try to jam them through a lameduck session, I had a farmer from Texas come and see me. He said: I am prepared to spend and invest $200,000 on my farm if I know this tax provision is going to be the law. If it is not, I won't. To me, that is just another example of how what we do here--or what we don't do here--has a negative impact on our economy and on investment in job creation. While I know the bipartisan package proposed last week was not perfect, it certainly would have moved us in the right direction. It would have provided some certainty--indeed permanency--for some tax provisions and would have provided some temporary relief on others. Perhaps most importantly, it would have sent a signal to our constituents that we got the message that was delivered to us on November 4, and that we are going to commit ourselves anew to try to work together to provide certainty and protect millions of Americans from tax hikes that are just right around the corner and work on other constructive proposals to help solve problems that affect the middle class. Unfortunately, the President has persisted in his attitude of refusing to negotiate with Congress, resulting in another missed opportunity, and ultimately another short-term fix that will provide no long-term certainty to taxpayers struggling in the Obama economy. Come January, there will be a new majority in the Senate that will make the priorities of the American people the priorities of Congress. As for President Obama, we can only hope he will somehow have an epiphany and decide to work with us to unite the country rather than continue to divide the country with more Executive actions and his harmful ``take it or leave it'' approach to governing. I yield the floor. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Alaska. Mr. BEGICH. Madam President, I was not intending to come down here. I was getting ready to leave to see my 12-year-old son who just got home from school and make sure that he has dinner and do all the things that a parent would do, but I heard a speech earlier today--and I just heard another one--and it is like revisionist history. It is amazing to me to hear them talk about information that they claim is information--and really when you listen carefully, it is really more of the same. I agree with my colleague who was just here that people want something different as the new Congress comes in. I will not be here, as the Presiding Officer knows, but that does not mean I will not be a participant in my community and also making comments when I hear things. But what I heard was they are going to finally get to economic development and improve the economy. The two Members who spoke today whom I heard were here when I came to the Senate in 2009, and a few years later the Presiding Officer came to the Senate. People may have forgotten where this economy was in 2009. The stock market was in dismal shape. I believe it was around 6,500 or 6,800--somewhere in that range. Unemployment was at 10 percent, and the pundits and economists all said it was growing. Approximately 700,000 jobs were lost per month. Two of the three largest U.S. [[Page 16409]] automobile companies were basically on their back and about to go bankrupt. New housing starts didn't exist, and prices of homes across the country were crashing. Consumer confidence was at the lowest point I have ever seen in I don't know how many years. The deficit was-- annually--about $1.4 trillion. I know what happens these days--because I have experienced it for the last several years--is news by the minute. What happens today in this moment of time are these one-liners and I can tell they are very synchronized today. They said that the economy was bad, and is still bad, and the bright spot is around the corner. Actually, you have to look at where we are today, 6 years later. The stock market is at 17,000-plus. What does that mean? It means that people who have retirement accounts, such as 401(k)s or 529s--putting money aside for their kids' education--have had their value come back. For my home State, which receives a benefit called the permanent fund check--we invest in the stock market with oil revenues we put aside constitutionally, and it is put in the permanent fund and a check is issued once a year. Guess what? This year the check is double from what it was last year. Why is that? Because it works on a 5-year average. Going backwards--I took the year 2009 off; it was a very bad year--what happened to the permanent fund check? It doubled this year in Alaska, which meant that people got that money in their pocket and spent it on the economy and helped to grow the economy. Where is unemployment today? It is at 5.8 percent nationally--a 50- percent drop. GM, Ford, and Chrysler have added 500,000 jobs since mid- 2009. I know that today was like revisionist history. Amnesia has set into some people over there. They want to recreate the news because the good news is hard to talk about because it is reality. Now, there is still a challenge. The Presiding Officer has talked about this a great deal, and that is that people are still working harder and longer because the incomes have not gone up enough. They have not seen it come down to them yet, but they have seen it in certain elements. Housing prices are up. In the one single largest investment an individual makes in a lifetime--their housing prices are back up. Gasoline prices--I have no idea if my colleagues fill up their cars with gas. I do. I know what it costs to fill up my tank, and it costs less now. The average price across the country now is about $2.77. In my State, it is about $3.35. But we were up to $5 in the urban areas-- but not anymore. I saw the statistic today, and I wrote it down. I think I have this right. The price of oil has gone down and so has the price of gasoline. What does that save consumers every day? It saves consumers $630 million a day in current prices. It means that consumers are benefiting from that. When you look at job growth--I believe we are in our 55th straight month of private-sector job growth. Again, we don't have it fully trickling down to the wages yet, but first we have to right the economy. I know the voters have made a decision. Before I came in, the economy was a disaster. Before the Presiding Officer came in, the economy was barely recovering. But I will not sit here and listen to revisionist history. As a matter of fact, the consumer confidence level is the highest this month since 2007. That means consumers are finally feeling it a little bit. There is still more to go. But to pretend that nothing has happened over the last 6 years--I can't use the words on the floor here because it would be disrespectful--is just not true. It has changed. We still have more work to do. As a matter of fact, the tax extender bill--the items they didn't want to support permanently would have brought it to every single family that is still struggling. But I know there are tax provisions they want for the NASCAR owners, the horseracing owners. I get that. Those are their issues. I understand that. But we have to be realistic. Also, the deficit. Think about this. When I came to the Senate in 2009, the annual deficit in this country was $1.4 trillion. Today, it is $480 billion. It has dropped by $1 trillion per year. Now do we want it to be zero? Yes. Do we want to have a surplus so we can start paying off the debt? Absolutely. But we have to get recovery first--get some treatment, which is what we have been doing--and then reinvest in the future. That means infrastructure, education, and objectives that matter to everyday Americans and everyday Alaskans. I sit here and listen to these comments. Today it happened a little bit before 12:30 p.m., before our caucus break, because we usually break at 12:30 p.m. and I was going to go home. I turned on--my mistake. I turned on the station and I heard the commentary and I thought, Jacob is going to have to wait a little bit for dinner and I am going to come to the floor, because it is amazing to me. Exports-- businesses we create in this country we ship out, up 37 percent over the last several years. I will give an example of a company in Alaska. When I was campaigning, I ran into this company in Fairbanks. They had their manufacturing plant in China. Do my colleagues know where they have it now? It is in Fairbanks, AK. They moved it from China to Fairbanks. I told them they should put a 4-by-8 sign out there and say, We take jobs from China and bring them home. They are all good jobs. As a matter of fact, they are union jobs. So when people talk about how unions are destroying the country--they actually brought jobs back that are union jobs, paying good wages, good benefits, and took it from China and brought it to Fairbanks, AK. It is unbelievable what they do. They do business not only in Alaska, but in Hawaii and other places. I listened over and over again today, and I want to make sure people--also I should mention housing prices are up, new housing starts are up, which is important for the construction industry. It creates jobs and makes sure we have competition so prices are stabilized over time. Retail sales are strong. I have no idea if my colleague who spoke earlier has ever been in business. He talked about the 179 depreciation. I have actually used it because I have been in small business. I have no idea if he understands how it works, but for small businesses, it is a big deal. It is why Democrats have supported that time and time again. As a matter of fact, we had it in the minimum wage bill we brought to the floor, the 179 extension, which they voted against, they did not support--raising the minimum wage, bringing people out of poverty and, by the way, helping small businesses expand and invest so they can grow more. As someone who used the 179 more than once--as a matter of fact, my wife has small businesses and is now expanding and investing and is using the 179 depreciation. I hear what they are saying, but I don't know if they understand how it is used. When we had the minimum wage bill, coupled with 179, it seemed to make a lot of sense, but they didn't like that, either. So I wanted to come to the floor because I think it is important that we, No. 1, don't take things out of context. They mentioned Senator Schumer's speech several times. They should read the whole speech, because I think they selected verbiage. I don't agree 100 percent with his comments, but I agree with the concept. We actually did two things. We worked on health care and we worked on the economy. I see people sometimes when they eat their food, they eat one piece at a time--their carrots first, and then their potato, and then their steak. We actually did a little bit of everything. We dealt with health care, because it was crushing the economy, but we dealt with the economy overall. We had to take votes on a regular basis that the other side would never do, because we bet on America. And the result is 6 years later, here we are. The economy is better. It is stronger. It needs more work, there is no question about it. We need to get the deficit to zero and get a surplus, and knock the debt down. That was driven up not just by this administration but by past administrations as well. They forgot about the two wars [[Page 16410]] they didn't pay for. The extender bill is not paid for. We didn't hear one word about how that tax extender bill is not going to be paid for. It is going to be another part of the debt. But 4 or 5 months ago--my colleagues may remember this--we were on the floor debating veterans care, and all they said is how are we going to pay for it. Well, the veterans paid, but we had to find a way. But here we are going to give more corporate tax relief without paying for it--except actually we do pay for it. Everyday Americans will pay for it with their taxes, and the debt, and interest on the debt. So we have to be clear about that. I think about where we were, what we did, and where we are. It is significantly different than 6 years ago. It is better. I agree there is more work to be done to make sure we get more of the revenue stream and opportunities in the hands of individuals--hard-working Alaskans, hard-working folks from Massachusetts, and hard-working folks across this country. That is our next obligation. But to come to the floor and say the economy is a disaster is irresponsible. It is not correct. The numbers tell us differently. Actually, even the conservative Forbes, Wall Street Journal, and all of these other magazines and newspapers that I read are now talking about how the economy is moving because we have had this consecutive pattern which really tells how the economy is improving. That is important. The last thing I will say from a purely Alaska perspective is not only are exports important to us because we do a lot of business overseas--we have seen exports increase. Our unemployment in Anchorage, for example, the city I am from, is 4.9 percent--a pretty good economy. Our fisheries industry, which I know the Presiding Officer and I share--78,000 jobs are connected to that--a $5 billion, almost $6 billion industry. Our tourism industry is up, with 2 million overall visitors to our State, again, generating income. There is more activity happening around the country than ever before, and my State is seeing it every single day. But to come to the floor and continue to be naysayers and talk about how bad things are is really not responsible. We have done a great job. Can we do better? Absolutely. That is what we strive for every single day. And I hope--and I say this to the Presiding Officer because I will not be here after January--that they don't take the position where they are mad at immigration so now they are not going to do these economic development issues, or they are mad at something else and they take it out on some other program. We are going to have--the Presiding Officer will have differences with her colleagues, on immigration, maybe, on health care, on the economy, but we have to find common ground. The economy is a constant issue, and where investments should happen if we really want to have an impact down the road is investing in infrastructure, education, relieving--as the Presiding Officer has tried to do--relieving debt from students and families. There is now a $1.4 trillion debt, I think, on families for student loans. It is outrageous. We should be lowering those rates. Also, as tax reform issues come up, which they will next year, I hope the Senate and the House look at objectives such as making a big impact for individual families, lowering the rates for individual families, hard-working families, if we want to put cash in their pockets, if we want to change the dynamics, give them more of their money back, not the top 1 percent or even the top 10 percent, but I am talking about the folks we see every day--I see every day--out there working hard. We need to make sure they can start putting money aside for college education for their kids, putting money aside for retirement, spending more in the economy, because maybe that car that is 15 years old isn't running so well anymore. That is what I hope we do. Individual relief is more important than corporate relief or the top 1 percent. On top of that, when we talk about corporate tax relief, never forget who really is driving the economy. It is the small business owners, including the limited liability corporations, the subchapter S corporations, the sole proprietor individuals. They all get taxed by individual rates. We will hear about corporate rate relief, which is important to be competitive, but that is for the big guys. But the guys we see every day--when we go to the cleaners, a sole proprietor; go to a restaurant, sole proprietor, maybe it is an LLC--they are not going to see that benefit unless we lower the rates for them. That is what we should be doing if we want to make a difference for them. Because they will use the 179 depreciation. The 179 has a limit. The big boys use it a little bit, but the limit is really designed for small businesses to reinvest. But if their tax rates are still too high, they won't be able to take advantage of that as much as they can. We want them to take advantage. I didn't mean to take time here at the end of the evening. I know lots of times people want to get out. But, honestly, I couldn't sit there and listen to the revisionist history that continues to go on. The elections are over. I know now it is called the Obama economy. That is a new phrase. It is really collectively all of our economy, because we participated in trying to save it. They have objected to it for the last 6 years, so by their objection, they get to be a part of not having the result that maybe they wanted, but the result is the economy is much better. We need to do more work to make sure it gets into the hands of the individual out there. I know that is a priority to the Presiding Officer. But if I continue to hear it, I will continue to come to the floor and speak, because people can't get away with just saying over and over again that they are stating the facts, because the facts are very clear as I just stated. The stock market has gone up. Unemployment has dropped. Housing is up. Housing starts are up. The two largest automobile companies, all three of them now, over a half a million new jobs. Fifty-five consecutive months of growth. That is all good news and we should be proud of it. The Presiding Officer should be proud of it and the Senate should be proud of it. But there is no room for revisionist history when we talk about the fact of where we were 6 years ago and where we are today. I appreciate the time and yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll. The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll. Mr. WHITEHOUSE. I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. Climate Change Mr. WHITEHOUSE. Madam President, I am here for my 81st ``Time To Wake Up'' speech and to ask this body to wake up to the effects of climate change and to say this: Acting on this issue will accelerate economic growth, spur innovation, and create jobs. We have settled any real argument about the leading cause of climate change. It is carbon pollution. Measurements in the atmosphere and oceans reveal dramatic, even unprecedented changes in the climate. Our scientists know carbon pollution heats up the climate and acidifies the ocean. That is beyond debate. They know this is already a problem for Americans and the world. We had wonderful testimony from a NASA scientist today in the Environment and Public Works Committee who talked about what they actually see when they look down from the satellites. They take measurements. They are not hypothesizing. They actually measure these things. The scientists know that continued, unchecked emissions of carbon dioxide will push the climate and the oceans into dangerous unchartered new territory. In the face of overwhelming evidence of climate change, some of our Republican colleagues--just a few--are beginning to move beyond denial of basic measurements and basic classroom science and beginning to talk about the costs of action. That is progress. When he was asked recently about climate change, the junior Senator from South [[Page 16411]] Dakota acknowledged there are a number of factors that contribute to that, including human activity. The question is, he went on to say, what are we going to do about it and at what cost? Across the building, over on the House side, Congressman Paul Ryan of Wisconsin has also been talking about the costs of action. In his most recent campaign for reelection, he said that when it comes to action to reduce carbon emissions, ``the benefits don't outweigh the costs.'' Let's talk about that. When we get past the denial, which with a few of our colleagues it seems we have--not all, maybe not even many, but a few--and we talk about balancing costs and benefits, if we look at the whole ledger, there is no doubt about it that the balance favors action. Climate change carries enormous costs to our economy and to our way of life. Acting now can accelerate economic growth and create new jobs. The costs of climate change are huge. We even hear this from our own advisers at the Government Accountability Office. In its 2013 high-risk list, our Government Accountability Office said that climate change poses a significant risk to the U.S. Government and to our Nation's budget. Why? The Federal Government owns and operates infrastructure and property that is vulnerable to the effects of climate change. The Federal Government provides aid and disaster response when State agencies are overwhelmed. The Federal Government is an insurer of property and crops vulnerable to climate disruption. These are major line items in the Federal budget. Our Treasury Secretary, Jack Lew, recently explained: If the fiscal burden from climate change continues to rise, it will create budgetary pressures that will force hard trade-offs, larger deficits or higher taxes, and these tradeoffs would make it more challenging to invest in growth. One example--just one. Last month, in the GAO report on what climate change means for private and Federal insurance for crops and for floods, it warned of increased hurricane-related losses to the Federal program. They estimated between a 14- and 47-percent increase by 2040 and a 50- to 110-percent increase over the next century due to climate change. Remember, when you are doubling a number like that, you are starting with a pretty big baseline. Superstorm Sandy wrought $66 billion in damage in 2012. If we are constantly replacing damaged roads and bridges, always adapting farming and fishing practices to suit never-seen-before conditions, and frequently paying out big disaster relief and flood insurance claims, that will hit the Federal pocketbook hard. We do not even have to look to the costs of the future to justify reducing carbon pollution today. Increasingly, green energy makes economic sense for utilities, for business, and for consumers. Since 2008, prices for solar photovoltaic have dropped 80 percent--80 percent. Austin Energy in Texas recently signed a power purchase agreement for a 150-megawatt solar plant at 5 cents per kilowatt hour-- less expensive than comparable offers for natural gas at 7 cents, coal at 10 cents, or nuclear power at 13 cents. The story is similar for wind power. Since 2009, the cost of wind power has decreased by 64 percent. At the lowest end of the price range nationally, unsubsidized wind power prices are just below 4 cents per kilowatt hour. This compares favorably to new coal generation, priced between 6 and 7 cents per kilowatt hour at the lowest end. The World Resources Institute has just done a brief report called ``Seeing is Believing: Status of Renewable Energy in the United States.'' It is headlined ``Wind & solar are cheaper than coal & gas in a growing number of markets.'' It lists sales in Utah, Colorado, Texas, Georgia, and Minnesota--not States that have a lot in common except that renewables are beginning to outcompete fossil fuels in those States. Similarly, the New York Times just last week in its business section highlighted this shift in an article: ``Solar and Wind Energy Start to Win on Price vs. Conventional Fuels.'' I ask unanimous consent that the World Resources Institute report and the New York Times story be printed in the Record at the conclusion of my remarks. Green energy jobs--they are out there. They are helping communities. Indeed, they are helping communities recover from the great recession. Let me use a Rhode Island example--TPI Composites. TPI has a development and manufacturing facility in Warren, RI. It is also one of our leading manufacturers of wind turbine blades. They make them in Iowa. When the Maytag plant closed in Newton IA, leaving as many as 4,000 workers jobless, wind jobs helped the town get back on its feet. In 10 years TPI has manufactured more than 10,000 wind turbine blades. In Iowa, MidAmerican Energy pays farmers thousands of dollars each year to site their turbines on their farms. The farmers love it. They can farm right up to about 25 feet around the base of the turbine. There is a little gravel road for the maintenance trucks, but they can farm right up to that. They get paid for having the turbines on their farms. So it is a win-win that has helped Iowa generate more than one- quarter of its electricity from wind. They are investing more. They have been reducing emissions and moving the State's economy forward--step by step reducing emissions and moving the economy forward. More and more companies, in their own planning, are seeing the economic benefits from cleaning up their supply chains and reducing carbon pollution from their operations. They see green investments increasing profits. ``Too many people say it's this or that,'' Apple CEO Tim Cook explained earlier this year. ``We've found that if you set the bar high, then it's possible to do both.'' Outside these walls here in Congress, where the deniers rule and polluter money reigns, State and local political leaders also see that reducing carbon pollution and growing the economy go hand in hand. Almost 10 years ago, the Presiding officer's State and my State and others--bipartisan--nine northeastern Governors came together and formed the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative, called RGGI, which caps carbon emissions and sells permits to powerplants to emit greenhouse gasses. Since the program started, RGGI States that have cut emissions from the power sector have cut them by 40 percent. Here is the blue line. That is the emission chart from 2005 through 2012. Well, if cutting emissions was bad for the economy, you would think that the State GDP would have followed downward in that curve, but, in fact, you see that the regional economy across these States actually grew by 7 percent--grew by 7 percent. Bear in mind, this is 2008, the great recession. Here we are now. So you would think that during this period the GDP numbers would have taken a pounding. The underlying numbers are actually better than this once you adjust for the recession. Early estimates show that in its first decade, RGGI will have saved New England families and businesses in the participating States nearly $1.3 billion on their electric bills. It will have added $1.6 billion into local economies. Along the way, those RGGI States will have added 16,000 job years. Additional investments are coming online because it is such a successful program. So those benefits also grow. Rhode Island has put over 90 percent of the money generated through the RGGI auctions into energy efficiency improvements, helping residents save money on their utility bills and making small businesses more competitive. This success led Tom Wolf, the Governor-elect of Pennsylvania--a coal mining and natural gas State--to campaign for office successfully on joining RGGI. RGGI shows that improving the environment boosts the economy. Look north to Canada. British Columbia has a revenue-neutral carbon fee that has reduced the use of polluting fossil fuels by 16 percent. What has happened to the economy? The BC economy has not missed a step. The carbon fee revenue has been used to lower personal and corporate rate income taxes. British Columbia now has the lowest personal tax rate in Canada. [[Page 16412]] If our Republican colleagues would like to lower our American corporate and individual taxes, then I have a revenue-neutral carbon fee bill I am happy to discuss with them. Evidence from Rhode Island to British Columbia shows that action on carbon pollution spurs innovation, creates jobs, and economically boosts families and businesses. Today I discussed this larger report, again from the World Resources Institute, which is a group that has, for instance, executives from Alcoa and Caterpillar on its board. This is not some fringe group; it is a very responsible organization with significant corporate and international leadership. Here is the lead sentence: A growing body of evidence shows that economic growth is not in conflict with efforts to reduce emissions of greenhouse gasses. It continues: Policies are often necessary to unlock these opportunities, however, because market barriers hamper investment in what are otherwise beneficial activities. That is what we are about here. Unlock those opportunities for our economy. On the downside--here is the first chapter heading: ``Delaying action will have significant economic impacts.'' Climate change itself constitutes a significant risk to the nation's economy. The downside is on doing nothing, according to this report. The upside is on changing our policies to seize those opportunities. Why are we here fighting about this? Well, again, to quote the report: The persistence of pollution externalities-- ``Pollution externalities'' means when the cost of your product--you can ship off to somebody else and make them have to take care of it. The persistence of pollution externalities gives an unfair advantage to polluting activities. Externalities occur when a product or activity affects people in ways that are not fully captured in its price, such as the full health effects of air pollution not being factored into the cost of electricity generation. Thus, society rather than the company pays the cost. Why are we in this fight? Because there are a lot of companies that folks on the other side are supporting and representing here that have been the winners in that fight. They have had those polluting externalities work in their favor. They have enjoying that unfair advantage. They do not want to give it up. But as the report continues, the well-designed policies can overcome those market barriers and direct investment into beneficial technologies and practices. New policies can enhance the transition to a low-carbon economy while delivering net economic benefits and, in many cases, direct savings for consumers and businesses. So that is pretty good news. Equally important, taking action helps to reduce the worst effects of climate change--what is coming at us. Do not just take my word for it. Many conservative economists, writers, and officials see the benefits of market-based climate action. ``A tax on carbon,'' wrote Hudson Institute economist Irwin Stelzer, ``need not swell the government's coffers--if we pursue a second, long-held conservative objective: Reducing the tax on work. He continues: It would be a relatively simple matter to arrange a dollar- for-dollar, simultaneous reduction in payroll taxes. . . . Anyone interested in jobs, jobs, jobs should find this an attractive proposition, with growth-minded conservatives leading the applause. That is the economics of it unless you are shilling for the folks who have had the unfair advantage and want to keep it, but that is not market based, that is not economics, that is just taking care of special interests. A recent joint report from economists at the Brookings Institution and the conservative American Enterprise Institute described human- induced greenhouse gas emissions as a textbook example of a negative externality. The report proposed--guess what--a revenue-neutral carbon fee program as the efficient and elegant approach to managing carbon pollution. According to the report's authors: Taxing something we do not want (e.g. greenhouse gas emissions) rather than something we want more of (e.g., productive labor and investment) could help lower the economy-wide cost of the program and may even have economic benefits in addition to its environmental benefits. Today, in the Environment and Public Works Committee, I had a conversation with a Heritage Foundation witness in which I read to the witness a very similar quote from the economist Arthur Laffer, Reagan's economist, saying: A carbon fee--where you tax the product in the ground and relieve taxes on work and effort by people--is a net win for the economy. I asked the witness what he thought about that, and he couldn't dispute it. In fact, he considers himself to be something of an acolyte of Arthur Laffer's, so there is actually a lot of economic support for it. I will conclude by saying, if the topic is now not going to be denial but it is going to be the cost and benefits of climate action, I am ready to have that conversation all day long. Let's just make sure it is the whole conversation, not just the half of the conversation that looks at what losing their subsidy means for the big oil companies, the big coal companies, the Koch brothers and the rest of the polluters. A lot of my colleagues only look at one side of the ledger, how this affects the fossil fuel lobby. If we look at the whole ledger, if we look at both sides, when we look at all the evidence, it tells us one thing; that is, that the costs of climate change are already here. They are showing up in our lives in innumerable ways that carry real economic costs and carry real costs in terms of quality of life and our identity as a country, and in fact they may overwhelm us by century's end. Looking at all the evidence shows us that significant reductions in carbon pollution will actually support jobs and increase economic growth. Finally, a revenue-neutral carbon fee would spur innovative business models and technological development in the United States. If we lose this race to clean up our carbon mess, one of the collateral injuries we will sustain is that we will not have developed a robust clean energy economy and we will find ourselves buying products from the Chinese, the Indians, the Europeans, and others. We need to put our industry to the test. They will rise to it. They always have. We can trust them. We can count on them, but giving them a pass does not serve their interests or ours. This will drive market forces to decrease our emissions and grow our economy. We have the tools to do something big. It has been proven in British Columbia. It has been proven with RGGI. All of the economists across the economic spectrum seem to agree the time is right to put a national price on carbon. There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in the Record, as follows: [From the World Resources Institute] Seeing Is Believing: Status of Renewable Energy in the United States WIND & SOLAR ARE CHEAPER THAN COAL & GAS IN A GROWING NUMBER OF MARKETS For each region, the average wind power purchase agreement (PPA) is cheaper than new coal plants, new coal and natural gas plants, and new coal and natural gas plants, even without federal tax incentives. Wind PPA data is unavailable in the Southeast region. Well Designed Policies & Technological improvements can continue these trends Prices for solar PV systems have dropped 80 percent since 2008; analysts expect a continued decline in the coming years. New, taller wind turbines with longer blades are able to capture more energy and can open the U.S. up to new areas of wind development. Long-term regulatory certainty is needed through a price on carbon (like a carbon tax or cap-and-trade), or greenhouse gas standards for existing power plants. Additional important policy signals include: States and utilities should ensure that renewable energy providers have access to long-term contracts, which could reduce the average electricity costs of wind and solar projects by 10-15 percent. Major corporations are already taking advantage of electricity price savings from these long-term contracts, and are asking for access in more states through the Corporate Renewable Energy Buyers' Principles. Congress should address the design flaw of renewable tax incentives so that more of the value of the credit flows to project developers (as opposed to third party investors) without increasing the cost to taxpayers, for [[Page 16413]] example by making the tax incentive ``refundable''. Renewable projects can face high financing costs, so financial regulators and lending institutions should work together to develop new investment models that lower these costs. Bringing more renewables online can be challenging because the supply varies. States and utilities should update regulations and business models to promote a flexible power grid that uses more storage, distributed generation, and demand response. Federal spending on research and development in the power sector has fallen 77 percent since 1980, while the power industry itself spends only .05 percent of its earnings on R&D (compared to 11 percent for the pharmaceutical industry and 8 percent for computers and electronics). Congress should therefore increase federal funding for research, development and commercialization of low-carbon and energy-saving technologies, especially for those that could generate baseload electricity like geothermal and concentrating solar power. In the absence of other tools to provide long-term regulatory certainty, EPA has used its existing legal authority under the Clean Air Act to propose greenhouse gas standards for existing power plants. EPA should finalize these standards. ____ [From the New York Times, Nov. 23, 2014] Solar and Wind Energy Start To Win on Price vs. Conventional Fuels (By Diane Cardwell) For the solar and wind industries in the United States, it has been a long-held dream: to produce energy at a cost equal to conventional sources like coal and natural gas. That day appears to be dawning. The cost of providing electricity from wind and solar power plants has plummeted over the last five years, so much so that in some markets renewable generation is now cheaper than coal or natural gas. Utility executives say the trend has accelerated this year, with several companies signing contracts, known as power purchase agreements, for solar or wind at prices below that of natural gas, especially in the Great Plains and Southwest, where wind and sunlight are abundant. Those prices were made possible by generous subsidies that could soon diminish or expire, but recent analyses show that even without those subsidies, alternative energies can often compete with traditional sources. In Texas, Austin Energy signed a deal this spring for 20 years of output from a solar farm at less than 5 cents a kilowatt-hour. In September, the Grand River Dam Authority in Oklahoma announced its approval of a new agreement to buy power from a new wind farm expected to be completed next year. Grand River estimated the deal would save its customers roughly $50 million from the project. And, also in Oklahoma, American Electric Power ended up tripling the amount of wind power it had originally sought after seeing how low the bids came in last year. ``Wind was on sale--it was a Blue Light Special,'' said Jay Godfrey, managing director of renewable energy for the company. He noted that Oklahoma, unlike many states, did not require utilities to buy power from renewable sources. ``We were doing it because it made sense for our ratepayers,'' he said. According to a study by the investment banking firm Lazard, the cost of utility-scale solar energy is as low as 5.6 cents a kilowatt-hour, and wind is as low as 1.4 cents. In comparison, natural gas comes at 6.1 cents a kilowatt-hour on the low end and coal at 6.6 cents. Without subsidies, the firm's analysis shows, solar costs about 7.2 cents a kilowatt-hour at the low end, with wind at 3.7 cents. ``It is really quite notable, when compared to where we were just five years ago, to see the decline in the cost of these technologies,'' said Jonathan Mir, a managing director at Lazard, which has been comparing the economics of power generation technologies since 2008. Mr. Mir noted there were hidden costs that needed to be taken into account for both renewable energy and fossil fuels. Solar and wind farms, for example, produce power intermittently--when the sun is shining or the wind is blowing--and that requires utilities to have power available on call from other sources that can respond to fluctuations in demand. Alternately, conventional power sources produce pollution, like carbon emissions, which face increasing restrictions and costs. But in a straight comparison of the costs of generating power, Mr. Mir said that the amount solar and wind developers needed to earn from each kilowatt-hour they sell from new projects was often ``essentially competitive with what would otherwise be had from newly constructed conventional generation.'' Experts and executives caution that the low prices do not mean wind and solar farms can replace conventional power plants anytime soon. ``You can't dispatch it when you want to,'' said Khalil Shalabi, vice president for energy market operations and resource planning at Austin Energy, which is why the utility, like others, still sees value in combined-cycle gas plants, even though they may cost more. Nonetheless, he said, executives were surprised to see how far solar prices had fallen. ``Renewables had two issues: One, they were too expensive, and they weren't dispatchable. They're not too expensive anymore.'' According to the Solar Energy Industries Association, the main trade group, the price of electricity sold to utilities under long-term contracts from large-scale solar projects has fallen by more than 70 percent since 2008, especially in the Southwest. The average upfront price to install standard utility-scale projects dropped by more than a third since 2009, with higher levels of production. The price drop extends to homeowners and small businesses as well; last year, the prices for residential and commercial projects fell by roughly 12 to 15 percent from the year before. The wind industry largely tells the same story, with prices dropping by more than half in recent years. Emily Williams, manager of industry data and analytics at the American Wind Energy Association, a trade group, said that in 2013 utilities signed ``a record number of power purchase agreements and what ended up being historically low prices.'' Especially in the interior region of the country, from North Dakota down to Texas, where wind energy is particularly robust, utilities were able to lock in long contracts at 2.1 cents a kilowatt-hour, on average, she said. That is down from prices closer to 5 cents five years ago. ``We're finding that in certain regions with certain wind projects that these are competing or coming in below the cost of even existing generation sources,'' she said. Both industries have managed to bring down costs through a combination of new technologies and approaches to financing and operations. Still, the industries are not ready to give up on their government supports just yet. Already, solar executives are looking to extend a 30 percent federal tax credit that is set to fall to 10 percent at the end of 2016. Wind professionals are seeking renewal of a production tax credit that Congress has allowed to lapse and then reinstated several times over the last few decades. Senator Ron Wyden, the Oregon Democrat, who for now leads the Finance Committee, held a hearing in September over the issue, hoping to push a process to make the tax treatment of all energy forms more consistent. ``Congress has developed a familiar pattern of passing temporary extensions of those incentives, shaking hands and heading home,'' he said at the hearing. ``But short-term extensions cannot put renewables on the same footing as the other energy sources in America's competitive marketplace.'' Where that effort will go now is anybody's guess, though, with Republicans in control of both houses starting in January. Mr. WHITEHOUSE. I yield the floor, and I suggest the absence of a quorum. The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Donnelly). The clerk will call the roll. The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll. Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. Unanimous Consent Agreement--Executive Calendar Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the previous order be modified so the votes originally scheduled for 3 p.m. tomorrow now occur at 5:30 p.m. and that the time following the 10 a.m. cloture votes and 5:30 p.m. be equally divided in the usual form; further, that notwithstanding rule XXII, following the vote on cloture on Calendar No. 555, the Senate proceed to vote on cloture on the nomination of Calendar No. 660; that if cloture is invoked on either nomination, the time under cloture run consecutively in the order in which cloture was invoked, with all other provisions of the previous order remaining in effect. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. Mr. REID. I suggest the absence of a quorum. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll. The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll. Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. ____________________ MORNING BUSINESS Mr. REID. I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to a period of morning business, with Senators permitted to speak for up to 10 minutes each. [[Page 16414]] The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. ____________________ REMEMBERING JEFF E. CAUDILL Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I rise today to honor the life of Mr. Jeff E. Caudill--a veteran and tireless public servant who passed away last month at the age of 84. Jeff was born in a log cabin in Viper, KY, on January 20, 1930. In order to help support himself and his family, he began work in the coal mines with his father and brothers at the age of 14. Without a formal education past the seventh grade, Jeff decided to join the U.S. Army, where he proudly served his country for 22 years throughout both the Korean and Vietnam wars. After his retirement from the military, Jeff moved back to Kentucky where he continued his service to the community in other ways. Throughout London, KY, he is known as ``Santa Jeff.'' Jeff was afforded this nickname in part because his white beard gave him the ability to play the part during the Christmas season, but also because he could be counted on to serve his community in all seasons. Jeff was known to organize clothing and food drives, make hospital visits to the sick and elderly, and captain the Honor Guard at military funerals. Whatever he could do to better the lives of others, you could count on Jeff to deliver. Jeff Caudill's life of service to his country, community, and family set a shining example for us all to follow. Therefore, I ask that my U.S. Senate colleagues join me in honoring this exemplary citizen. The London-area publication the Sentinel-Echo recently published an article detailing the life of Mr. Caudill. I ask unanimous consent that it be printed in the Record. There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in the Record, as follows: [From the Sentinel-Echo, Nov. 17, 2014] Remembering Jeff (By Nita Johnson) One of the founding members of the Laurel-London Optimist Club and ``Santa Jeff'' died suddenly at his home Friday morning. Jeff Caudill, best known for his efforts in founding the local Optimist Club and for his many years of portraying Santa Claus in the annual Christmas parade, had ongoing health problems. In recent years, he had suffered two strokes and a heart attack as well as kidney failure. His wife Shirley said Caudill had breakfast Friday morning and was planning his usual daily activities when he had ``a massive heart attack'' that ended his life. Caudill, 84, was instrumental in establishing the Laurel- London Optimist Club. For many years, he hosted a Halloween party at his home, giving away bicycles and cooking for children of all ages--the predecessor of the current Optimist Club Halloween party held each year. He served as president of the local organization several times including twice as the Honor Club and again as vice president. He served as Lt. Governor for the Kentucky-West Virginia region and was named Optimist of the Year both locally and throughout the district. He was presented with a Lifetime Achievement Award in 2008 for his years of dedicated service to the Optimist Club. Caudill was also known throughout the community as ``Santa Jeff'', posing with children at Walmart for yearly Christmas pictures. He was hand-picked by former London-Laurel County Chamber of Commerce executive director Randy Smith to portray Santa Claus in the Christmas parade--a job that Caudill thrived on each year. One year, however, Caudill was hospitalized and was on life support and could not fulfill his Santa duties. ``The day of the parade, he had big tears running down his face,'' his wife said. ``That's the only Christmas parade he ever missed, once even putting on his Santa suit 10 days after having surgery.'' In fact, Caudill had just had his Santa suit dry cleaned in preparation for this year's Christmas parade. His bag was already half-full of candy canes that he always gave out to children. ``He was one of 16 children. They didn't have Christmas,'' Shirley said. ``He didn't get candy or clothes or toys. That's why he worked so hard to make sure other children had a Christmas.'' Caudill spent 22 years in the U.S. Army, 14 of which were overseas. He served in Korea in 1947 before going to Japan a year later. He was wounded during a battle but continued to serve his country, moving his family to various military posts across the world. After discharge, Caudill was considered 100 percent disabled, but he continued to honor military heroes through the Disabled American Veterans organization where he served on the Color Guard and participated in military funeral tributes. Funeral arrangements for Jeff Caudill were pending at London Funeral Home at press time Friday. Burial will be held at Camp Nelson in Jessamine County. The family asks that in lieu of flowers, donations be made to the Jeff Caudill Optimist Scholarship fund to assist local students in their college costs. ____________________ REMEMBERING SALVATORE FERRARA Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, Chicago lost its Candy Man on Thanksgiving Day. Salvatore Ferrara II passed away in Oak Brook, IL. He was the third generation of the Ferrara family who has given us memories, cavities, and the treats that lit up kids for generations. Simply listing their iconic candies takes you back in time: Original Boston Baked Beans at the Saturday movies, Red Hots after a sandlot game, Lemonheads at the swimming pool, and Atomic Fireballs on a dare. A handful of Ferrara candy was like a handful of happiness. Ferrara Pan Candy Company was started in 1908 in Chicago by Mr. Ferrara's grandfather, the original Salvatore Ferraro. Its first candy was confetti, the candy-coated almonds served at Italian weddings, symbolizing good luck. Nello Ferrara followed his dad into the business. It was Nello who invented the company's lip-puckering Lemonhead candies. Little Sal was born with forceps, giving him a temporarily misshapen head--``like a lemon,'' his dad said. And candy history was made. Nello Salvatore's military service in Japan after World War II provided the inspiration for another company classic--Atomic Fireballs. Sal II joined the family business in the mid seventies. Over the next 40 years, the company would grow from 35 to more than 500 workers, and annual revenues soared from $3.5 million to $300 million. It also acquired another iconic candy: Gummy Bears. Sal Ferrara died of esophageal cancer. His family said he hadn't smoked since 1981. His doctor reportedly linked his cancer to acid reflux disease. He was too young--just 63 years old. I want to offer my condolences to Mr. Ferrara's friends and family, especially his wife Andrea, his children Alana, Lauren, Nello II, and Erik, and his three grandchildren. I join kids and former kids all over America in thanking Sal Ferrara and his family for so many sweet treats and happy memories. ____________________ ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS ______ RECOGNIZING DAVID GADIS Mr. DONNELLY. Mr. President, today, I applaud David L. Gadis, a lifelong Hoosier, for his induction into the Indiana Basketball Hall of Fame and for his civic leadership in the Indianapolis community. Established in 1962, the Indiana Basketball Hall of Fame is dedicated to recognizing Indiana's basketball legends and inspiring the future of basketball in our State. Individuals are eligible for nomination 26 years after playing high school basketball, and all nominees are evaluated by a statewide board of directors. In recognition of his contributions to Indiana basketball, David Gadis was inducted into the Indiana Basketball Hall of Fame earlier this year. Born and raised in northwest Indianapolis, David played in his first competitive basketball league at the age of 7 at Municipal Gardens, where he went on to win several AAU-level State championships and a few national runner-up titles. While attending Pike High School, David broke 15 school records, averaged 25 points per game during his senior year, and scored 1,368 career points. David received a number of awards, including being named team MVP, Conference Player of the Year, a Street & Smith Magazine All-American, and a 1980 Indiana All Star. His success at Pike High School earned David a spot on the Southern Methodist University basketball team in Dallas, TX. As a senior and team captain in 1984, David led his team in a [[Page 16415]] successful 25 and 8 season, earning a place in the NCAA Basketball Championship. More recently, David was a member of the 2005 Indiana Basketball Hall of Fame Silver Anniversary Team. David's commitment to excellence extends beyond the court. After graduating from Southern Methodist University with a degree in marketing communication, David became vice president of shared services for the Indianapolis Water Company, now Veolia Water Indianapolis, VWI. Today, David serves as executive vice president of sales, marketing and government affairs for Veolia Water North America. David has dedicated himself to positively impacting communities by creating valuable relationships between public and private utility firms, in order to ensure there are reliable and efficient utilities for Hoosiers and our Nation. With David's leadership, VWI received the United States Conference of Mayors' 2006 Public/Private Partnership Award, as well as the mayor of Indianapolis' Celebration of Diversity Award and the Indiana Minority Supplier Development Council's Circle of Excellence Award a total of three times. David has served on the boards of the Indianapolis Urban League, Fifth Third Bank, Central Indiana Corporate Partnership, Indianapolis Sports Corporation, Indiana Business Diversity Council, Greater Indianapolis Chamber of Commerce, the Indiana Chamber of Commerce, the local Big Ten Basketball Tournament Committee, Indianapolis Downtown Incorporated, and is a member of the American Water Works Association. David is a tireless advocate for Hoosiers and everyone he advises. Whether he is inspiring us with his skills on the basketball court or developing better municipal infrastructure, David has demonstrated his devotion to civic engagement, diversity, and making Indiana an even better place to live. I want to thank David Gadis for his commitment to the city of Indianapolis and its surrounding communities and congratulate him once again on his induction into the Indiana Basketball Hall of Fame and for all of his outstanding achievements. ____________________ MESSAGE FROM THE HOUSE At 2:18 p.m., a message from the House of Representatives, delivered by Mrs. Cole, one of its reading clerks, announced that the House has passed the following bills, in which it requests the concurrence of the Senate: H.R. 2455. An act to provide for the sale or transfer of certain Federal lands in Nevada, and for other purposes. H.R. 3410. An act to amend the Homeland Security Act of 2002 to secure critical infrastructure against electromagnetic pulses, and for other purposes. H.R. 3438. An act to amend the Homeland Security Act of 2002 to authorize use of grants under the Urban Area Security Initiative and the State Homeland Security Grant Program to work in conjunction with a Department of Energy national laboratory. H.R. 4924. An act to direct the Secretary of the Interior to enter into the Big Sandy River-Planet Ranch Water Rights Settlement Agreement and the Hualapai Tribe Bill Williams River Water Rights Settlement Agreement, to provide for the lease of certain land located within Planet Ranch on the Bill Williams River in the State of Arizona to benefit the Lower Colorado River Multi-Species Conservation Program, and to provide for the settlement of specific water rights claims in the Bill Williams River watershed in the State of Arizona. H.R. 5421. An act to amend title 11 of the United States Code in order to facilitate the resolution of an insolvent financial institution in bankruptcy. ____________________ MEASURES REFERRED The following bills were read the first and the second times by unanimous consent, and referred as indicated: H.R. 3410. An act to amend the Homeland Security Act of 2002 to secure critical infrastructure against electromagnetic pulses, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs. H.R. 5421. An act to amend title 11 of the United States Code in order to facilitate the resolution of an insolvent financial institution in bankruptcy; to the Committee on the Judiciary. ____________________ MEASURES READ THE FIRST TIME The following bill was read the first time: S. 2970. A bill to reform procedures for determinations to proceed to trial by court-martial for certain offenses under the Uniform Code of Military Justice, and for other purposes. ____________________ REPORTS OF COMMITTEES The following reports of committees were submitted: By Mr. CARPER, from the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, with an amendment in the nature of a substitute and an amendment to the title: S. 1618. A bill to enhance the Office of Personnel Management background check system for the granting, denial, or revocation of security clearances or access to classified information of employees and contractors of the Federal Government (Rept. No. 113-283). ____________________ EXECUTIVE REPORTS OF COMMITTEES The following executive reports of nominations were submitted: By Mrs. BOXER for the Committee on Environment and Public Works. *Virginia Tyler Lodge, of Tennessee, to be a Member of the Board of Directors of the Tennessee Valley Authority for a term expiring May 18, 2019. *Ronald Anderson Walter, of Tennessee, to be a Member of the Board of Directors of the Tennessee Valley Authority for a term expiring May 18, 2019. *Jeffery Martin Baran, of Virginia, to be a Member of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission for the remainder of the term expiring June 30, 2018. By Mr. HARKIN for the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions. *Lauren McGarity McFerran, of the District of Columbia, to be a Member of the National Labor Relations Board for the term of five years expiring December 16, 2019. *Nomination was reported with recommendation that it be confirmed subject to the nominee's commitment to respond to requests to appear and testify before any duly constituted committee of the Senate. ____________________ INTRODUCTION OF BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS The following bills and joint resolutions were introduced, read the first and second times by unanimous consent, and referred as indicated: By Mr. VITTER: S. 2967. A bill to prohibit the Federal Government from mandating, incentivizing, or coercing States to adopt the Common Core State Standards or any other specific academic standards, instructional content, curricula, assessments, or programs of instruction; to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions. By Mr. WHITEHOUSE: S. 2968. A bill to include community partners and intermediaries in the planning and delivery of education and related programs, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions. By Mr. TOOMEY: S. 2969. A bill to authorize the transfer of certain items under the control of the Omar Bradley Foundation to the descendants of General Omar Bradley; to the Committee on Armed Services. By Mrs. GILLIBRAND: S. 2970. A bill to reform procedures for determinations to proceed to trial by court-martial for certain offenses under the Uniform Code of Military Justice, and for other purposes; read the first time. ____________________ ADDITIONAL COSPONSORS S. 772 At the request of Mr. Nelson, the name of the Senator from Kansas (Mr. Moran) was added as a cosponsor of S. 772, a bill to amend the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act to clarify the Food and Drug Administration's jurisdiction over certain tobacco products, and to protect jobs and small businesses involved in the sale, manufacturing and distribution of traditional and premium cigars. S. 864 At the request of Mr. Wicker, the name of the Senator from Iowa (Mr. Harkin) was added as a cosponsor of S. 864, a bill to amend the Safe Drinking Water Act to reauthorize technical assistance to small public water systems, and for other purposes. S. 995 At the request of Mr. Boozman, the name of the Senator from New Jersey (Mr. Menendez) was added as a cosponsor of S. 995, a bill to authorize the National Desert Storm Memorial Association to establish the National Desert [[Page 16416]] Storm and Desert Shield Memorial as a commemorative work in the District of Columbia, and for other purposes. S. 1011 At the request of Mr. Johanns, the name of the Senator from Wyoming (Mr. Enzi) was added as a cosponsor of S. 1011, a bill to require the Secretary of the Treasury to mint coins in commemoration of the centennial of Boys Town, and for other purposes. S. 1029 At the request of Mr. Portman, the name of the Senator from Utah (Mr. Hatch) was added as a cosponsor of S. 1029, a bill to reform the process by which Federal agencies analyze and formulate new regulations and guidance documents. S. 1332 At the request of Ms. Collins, the name of the Senator from Oregon (Mr. Wyden) was withdrawn as a cosponsor of S. 1332, a bill to amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to ensure more timely access to home health services for Medicare beneficiaries under the Medicare program. S. 1407 At the request of Mr. Casey, the name of the Senator from New Jersey (Mr. Booker) was added as a cosponsor of S. 1407, a bill to amend the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 to strengthen elementary and secondary computer science education, and for other purposes. S. 2621 At the request of Mr. Vitter, the name of the Senator from Mississippi (Mr. Wicker) was added as a cosponsor of S. 2621, a bill to amend the Migratory Bird Hunting and Conservation Stamp Act to increase the price of Migratory Bird Hunting and Conservation Stamps to fund the acquisition of conservation easements for migratory birds, and for other purposes. S. 2693 At the request of Ms. Cantwell, the name of the Senator from Michigan (Ms. Stabenow) was added as a cosponsor of S. 2693, a bill to reauthorize the women's business center program of the Small Business Administration, and for other purposes. S. 2714 At the request of Mr. Blunt, the name of the Senator from South Dakota (Mr. Johnson) was added as a cosponsor of S. 2714, a bill to require the Secretary of the Treasury to mint coins in commemoration of the centennial of World War I. S. 2723 At the request of Mr. Franken, the name of the Senator from Maine (Mr. King) was added as a cosponsor of S. 2723, a bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to qualify homeless youth and veterans who are full-time students for purposes of the low income housing tax credit. S. 2738 At the request of Mr. Blumenthal, the name of the Senator from Oregon (Mr. Merkley) was added as a cosponsor of S. 2738, a bill to establish in the Department of Veterans Affairs a national center for research on the diagnosis and treatment of health conditions of the descendants of veterans exposed to toxic substances during service in the Armed Forces, to establish an advisory board on exposure to toxic substances, and for other purposes. S. 2785 At the request of Mr. Brown, the name of the Senator from Michigan (Ms. Stabenow) was added as a cosponsor of S. 2785, a bill to direct the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency to publish a health advisory and submit reports with respect to microcystins in drinking water. S. 2828 At the request of Mr. Menendez, the names of the Senator from Illinois (Mr. Durbin) and the Senator from Connecticut (Mr. Blumenthal) were added as cosponsors of S. 2828, a bill to impose sanctions with respect to the Russian Federation, to provide additional assistance to Ukraine, and for other purposes. S. 2839 At the request of Mr. Whitehouse, the name of the Senator from New York (Mr. Schumer) was added as a cosponsor of S. 2839, a bill to authorize the Attorney General to award grants to address the national epidemics of prescription opioid abuse and heroin use. S. 2843 At the request of Ms. Klobuchar, the name of the Senator from Minnesota (Mr. Franken) was added as a cosponsor of S. 2843, a bill to amend title 10, United States Code, to provide certain members of the reserve components of the Armed Forces who are victims of sex-related offenses with access to a special victims' counsel. S. 2944 At the request of Mr. Hatch, the name of the Senator from Pennsylvania (Mr. Casey) was added as a cosponsor of S. 2944, a bill to amend the Social Security Act to provide for the termination of social security benefits for individuals who participated in Nazi persecution, and for other purposes. S. 2949 At the request of Mr. Thune, the name of the Senator from New Hampshire (Ms. Ayotte) was added as a cosponsor of S. 2949, a bill to improve motor vehicle safety by encouraging the sharing of certain information. S. 2964 At the request of Mr. Brown, the names of the Senator from New York (Mrs. Gillibrand), the Senator from Washington (Mrs. Murray) and the Senator from Iowa (Mr. Harkin) were added as cosponsors of S. 2964, a bill to extend the trade adjustment assistance program, and for other purposes. S. 2966 At the request of Ms. Baldwin, the name of the Senator from Maryland (Mr. Cardin) was added as a cosponsor of S. 2966, a bill to improve the understanding and coordination of critical care health services. S. RES. 578 At the request of Mr. Menendez, the names of the Senator from Massachusetts (Mr. Markey) and the Senator from Mississippi (Mr. Wicker) were added as cosponsors of S. Res. 578, a resolution supporting the role of the United States in ensuring children in the world's poorest countries have access to vaccines and immunization through Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance. ____________________ AMENDMENTS SUBMITTED AND PROPOSED SA 3965. Mr. WARNER (for himself, Mr. Vitter, Mr. Kaine, and Mr. Cardin) proposed an amendment to the bill S. 1000, to require the Director of the Office of Management and Budget to prepare a crosscut budget for restoration activities in the Chesapeake Bay watershed, and for other purposes. SA 3966. Mr. CORKER submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 2828, to impose sanctions with respect to the Russian Federation, to provide additional assistance to Ukraine, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table. SA 3967. Mr. WYDEN submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 2410, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2015 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table. SA 3968. Mr. WYDEN submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 2410, supra; which was ordered to lie on the table. SA 3969. Mr. WYDEN submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 2410, supra; which was ordered to lie on the table. SA 3970. Mr. WYDEN (for himself, Mr. Scott, and Mr. Merkley) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 2410, supra; which was ordered to lie on the table. ____________________ TEXT OF AMENDMENTS SA 3965. Mr. WARNER (for himself, Mr. Vitter, Mr. Kaine, and Mr. Cardin) proposed an amendment to the bill S. 1000, to require the Director of the Office of Management and Budget to prepare a crosscut budget for restoration activities in the Chesapeake Bay watershed, and for other purposes; as follows: Strike all after the enacting clause and insert the following: SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. This Act may be cited as the ``Chesapeake Bay Accountability and Recovery Act of 2014''. [[Page 16417]] SEC. 2. DEFINITIONS. In this Act: (1) Administrator.--The term ``Administrator'' means the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency. (2) Chesapeake bay state.--The term ``Chesapeake Bay State'' or ``State'' means any of-- (A) the States of Maryland, West Virginia, Delaware, and New York; (B) the Commonwealths of Virginia and Pennsylvania; and (C) the District of Columbia. (3) Chesapeake bay watershed.--The term ``Chesapeake Bay watershed'' means all tributaries, backwaters, and side channels, including watersheds, draining into the Chesapeake Bay. (4) Chesapeake executive council.--The term ``Chesapeake Executive Council'' has the meaning given the term by section 117(a) of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1267(a)). (5) Chief executive.--The term ``chief executive'' means, in the case of a State or Commonwealth, the Governor of the State or Commonwealth and, in the case of the District of Columbia, the Mayor of the District of Columbia. (6) Director.--The term ``Director'' means the Director of the Office of Management and Budget. (7) Federal restoration activity.-- (A) In general.--The term ``Federal restoration activity'' means a Federal program or project carried out under Federal authority in existence as of the date of enactment of this Act with the express intent to directly protect, conserve, or restore living resources, habitat, water resources, or water quality in the Chesapeake Bay watershed, including programs or projects that provide financial and technical assistance to promote responsible land use, stewardship, and community engagement in the Chesapeake Bay watershed. (B) Categorization.--Federal restoration activities may be categorized as follows: (i) Physical restoration. (ii) Planning. (iii) Feasibility studies. (iv) Scientific research. (v) Monitoring. (vi) Education. (vii) Infrastructure development. (8) State restoration activity.-- (A) In general.--The term ``State restoration activity'' means any State program or project carried out under State authority that directly or indirectly protect, conserve, or restore living resources, habitat, water resources, or water quality in the Chesapeake Bay watershed, including programs or projects that promote responsible land use, stewardship, and community engagement in the Chesapeake Bay watershed. (B) Categorization.--State restoration activities may be categorized as follows: (i) Physical restoration. (ii) Planning. (iii) Feasibility studies. (iv) Scientific research. (v) Monitoring. (vi) Education. (vii) Infrastructure development. SEC. 3. CHESAPEAKE BAY CROSSCUT BUDGET. (a) In General.--The Director, in consultation with the Chesapeake Executive Council, the chief executive of each Chesapeake Bay State, and the Chesapeake Bay Commission, shall submit to Congress a financial report containing-- (1) an interagency crosscut budget that displays, as applicable-- (A) the proposed funding for any Federal restoration activity to be carried out in the succeeding fiscal year, including any planned interagency or intra-agency transfer, for each of the Federal agencies that carry out restoration activities; (B) to the extent that information is available, the estimated funding for any State restoration activity to be carried out in the succeeding fiscal year; (C) all expenditures for Federal restoration activities from the preceding 2 fiscal years, the current fiscal year, and the succeeding fiscal year; (D) all expenditures, to the extent that information is available, for State restoration activities during the equivalent time period described in subparagraph (C); and (E) a section that identifies and evaluates, based on need and appropriateness, specific opportunities to consolidate similar programs and activities within the budget and recommendations to Congress for legislative action to streamline, consolidate, or eliminate similar programs and activities within the budget; (2) a detailed accounting of all funds received and obligated by each Federal agency for restoration activities during the current and preceding fiscal years, including the identification of funds that were transferred to a Chesapeake Bay State for restoration activities; (3) to the extent that information is available, a detailed accounting from each State of all funds received and obligated from a Federal agency for restoration activities during the current and preceding fiscal years; and (4) a description of each of the proposed Federal and State restoration activities to be carried out in the succeeding fiscal year (corresponding to those activities listed in subparagraphs (A) and (B) of paragraph (1)), including-- (A) the project description; (B) the current status of the project; (C) the Federal or State statutory or regulatory authority, program, or responsible agency; (D) the authorization level for appropriations; (E) the project timeline, including benchmarks; (F) references to project documents; (G) descriptions of risks and uncertainties of project implementation; (H) a list of coordinating entities; (I) a description of the funding history for the project; (J) cost sharing; and (K) alignment with the existing Chesapeake Bay Agreement, Chesapeake Executive Council goals and priorities, and Annual Action Plan required by section 205 of Executive Order 13508 (33 U.S.C. 1267 note; relating to Chesapeake Bay protection and restoration). (b) Minimum Funding Levels.--In describing restoration activities in the report required under subsection (a), the Director shall only include-- (1) for the first 3 years that the report is required, descriptions of-- (A) Federal restoration activities that have funding amounts greater than or equal to $300,000; and (B) State restoration activities that have funding amounts greater than or equal to $300,000; and (2) for every year thereafter, descriptions of-- (A) Federal restoration activities that have funding amounts greater than or equal to $100,000; and (B) State restoration activities that have funding amounts greater than or equal to $100,000. (c) Deadline.--The Director shall submit to Congress the report required by subsection (a) not later than September 30 of each year. (d) Report.--Copies of the report required by subsection (a) shall be submitted to the Committees on Appropriations, Natural Resources, Energy and Commerce, and Transportation and Infrastructure of the House of Representatives and the Committees on Appropriations, Environment and Public Works, and Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the Senate. (e) Effective Date.--This section shall apply beginning with the first fiscal year after the date of enactment of this Act. SEC. 4. INDEPENDENT EVALUATOR FOR THE CHESAPEAKE BAY PROGRAM. (a) In General.--There shall be an Independent Evaluator for restoration activities in the Chesapeake Bay watershed, who shall review and report on-- (1) restoration activities; and (2) any related topics that are suggested by the Chesapeake Executive Council. (b) Appointment.-- (1) In general.--Not later than 30 days after the date of submission of nominees by the Chesapeake Executive Council, the Independent Evaluator shall be appointed by the Administrator from among nominees submitted by the Chesapeake Executive Council with the consultation of the scientific community. (2) Nominations.--The Chesapeake Executive Council may nominate for consideration as Independent Evaluator a science-based institution of higher education. (3) Requirements.--The Administrator shall only select as Independent Evaluator a nominee that the Administrator determines demonstrates excellence in marine science, policy evaluation, or other studies relating to complex environmental restoration activities. (c) Reports.--Not later than 180 days after the date of appointment and once every 2 years thereafter, the Independent Evaluator shall submit to Congress a report describing the findings and recommendations of reviews conducted under subsection (a). SEC. 5. PROHIBITION ON NEW FUNDING. No additional funds are authorized to be appropriated to carry out this Act. ______ SA 3966. Mr. CORKER submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 2828, to impose sanctions with respect to the Russian Federation, to provide additional assistance to Ukraine, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows: Strike all after the enacting clause and insert the following: SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; TABLE OF CONTENTS. (a) Short Title.--This Act may be cited as the ``Ukraine Freedom Support Act of 2014''. (b) Table of Contents.--The table of contents for this Act is as follows: Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents. Sec. 2. Definitions. Sec. 3. Statement of policy regarding Ukraine. Sec. 4. Sanctions relating to the defense and energy sectors of the Russian Federation. Sec. 5. Sanctions on Russian and other foreign financial institutions. [[Page 16418]] Sec. 6. Major non-NATO ally status for Ukraine, Georgia, and Moldova. Sec. 7. Increased military assistance for the Government of Ukraine. Sec. 8. Expanded nonmilitary assistance for Ukraine. Sec. 9. Expanded broadcasting in countries of the former Soviet Union. Sec. 10. Support for Russian democracy and civil society organizations. Sec. 11. Report on non-compliance by the Russian Federation of its obligations under the INF Treaty. Sec. 12. Rule of construction. SEC. 2. DEFINITIONS. In this Act: (1) Account; correspondent account; payable-through account.--The terms ``account'', ``correspondent account'', and ``payable-through account'' have the meanings given those terms in section 5318A of title 31, United States Code. (2) Appropriate congressional committees.--The term ``appropriate congressional committees'' means-- (A) the Committee on Foreign Relations and the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs of the Senate; and (B) the Committee on Foreign Affairs and the Committee on Financial Services of the House of Representatives. (3) Defense article; defense service; training.--The terms ``defense article'', ``defense service'', and ``training'' have the meanings given those terms in section 47 of the Arms Export Control Act (22 U.S.C. 2794). (4) Financial institution.--The term ``financial institution'' means a financial institution specified in subparagraph (A), (B), (C), (D), (E), (F), (G), (H), (I), (J), (M), or (Y) of section 5312(a)(2) of title 31, United States Code. (5) Foreign financial institution.--The term ``foreign financial institution'' has the meaning given that term in section 561.308 of title 31, Code of Federal Regulations (or any corresponding similar regulation or ruling). (6) Foreign person.--The term ``foreign person'' means any individual or entity that is not a United States citizen, a permanent resident alien, or an entity organized under the laws of the United States or any jurisdiction within the United States. (7) Knowingly.--The term ``knowingly'', with respect to conduct, a circumstance, or a result, means that a person has actual knowledge, or should have known, of the conduct, the circumstance, or the result. (8) Russian person.--The term ``Russian person'' means-- (A) an individual who is a citizen or national of the Russian Federation; or (B) an entity organized under the laws of the Russian Federation. (9) Special russian crude oil project.--The term ``special Russian crude oil project'' means a project intended to extract crude oil from-- (A) the exclusive economic zone of the Russian Federation in waters more than 500 feet deep; (B) Russian Arctic offshore locations; or (C) shale formations located in the Russian Federation. SEC. 3. STATEMENT OF POLICY REGARDING UKRAINE. It is the policy of the United States to further assist the Government of Ukraine in restoring its sovereignty and territorial integrity to deter the Government of the Russian Federation from further destabilizing and invading Ukraine and other independent countries in Central and Eastern Europe, the Caucasus, and Central Asia. That policy shall be carried into effect, among other things, through a comprehensive effort, in coordination with allies and partners of the United States where appropriate, that includes economic sanctions, diplomacy, assistance for the people of Ukraine, and the provision of military capabilities to the Government of Ukraine that will enhance the ability of that Government to defend itself and to restore its sovereignty and territorial integrity in the face of unlawful actions by the Government of the Russian Federation. SEC. 4. SANCTIONS RELATING TO THE DEFENSE AND ENERGY SECTORS OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION. (a) Sanctions Relating to the Defense Sector.-- (1) Rosoboronexport.--Except as provided in subsection (d), not later than 30 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the President shall impose 3 or more of the sanctions described in subsection (c) with respect to Rosoboronexport. (2) Russian producers, transferors, or brokers of defense articles.--Except as provided in subsection (d), on and after the date that is 45 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the President shall impose 3 or more of the sanctions described in subsection (c) with respect to a foreign person the President determines-- (A) is an entity-- (i) owned or controlled by the Government of the Russian Federation or owned or controlled by nationals of the Russian Federation; and (ii) that-- (I) knowingly manufactures or sells defense articles transferred into Syria or into the territory of a specified country without the consent of the internationally recognized government of that country; (II) transfers defense articles into Syria or into the territory of a specified country without the consent of the internationally recognized government of that country; or (III) brokers or otherwise assists in the transfer of defense articles into Syria or into the territory of a specified country without the consent of the internationally recognized government of that country; or (B) knowingly, on or after the date of the enactment of this Act, assists, sponsors, or provides financial, material, or technological support for, or goods or services to or in support of, an entity described in subparagraph (A) with respect to an activity described in clause (ii) of that subparagraph. (3) Specified country defined.-- (A) In general.--In this subsection, the term ``specified country'' means-- (i) Ukraine, Georgia, and Moldova; and (ii) any other country designated by the President as a country of significant concern for purposes of this subsection, such as Poland, Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia, and the Central Asia republics. (B) Notice to congress.--The President shall notify the appropriate congressional committees in writing not later than 15 days before-- (i) designating a country as a country of significant concern under subparagraph (A)(ii); or (ii) terminating a designation under that subparagraph, including the termination of any such designation pursuant to subsection (h). (b) Sanctions Related to the Energy Sector.-- (1) Development of special russian crude oil projects.-- Except as provided in subsection (d), on and after the date that is 45 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the President shall impose 3 or more of the sanctions described in subsection (c) with respect to a foreign person if the President determines that the foreign person knowingly makes a significant investment in a special Russian crude oil project. (2) Authorization for extension of licensing limitations on certain equipment.--The President, through the Bureau of Industry and Security of the Department of Commerce or the Office of Foreign Assets Control of the Department of the Treasury, as appropriate, may impose additional licensing requirements for or other restrictions on the export or reexport of items for use in the energy sector of the Russian Federation, including equipment used for tertiary oil recovery. (3) Contingent sanction relating to gazprom.--If the President determines that Gazprom is withholding significant natural gas supplies from member countries of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, or further withholds significant natural gas supplies from countries such as Ukraine, Georgia, or Moldova, the President shall, not later than 45 days after making that determination, impose the sanction described in subsection (c)(7) and at least one additional sanction described in subsection (c) with respect to Gazprom. (c) Sanctions Described.--The sanctions the President may impose with respect to a foreign person under subsection (a) or (b) are the following: (1) Export-import bank assistance.--The President may direct the Export-Import Bank of the United States not to approve the issuance of any guarantee, insurance, extension of credit, or participation in the extension of credit in connection with the export of any goods or services to the foreign person. (2) Procurement sanction.--The President may prohibit the head of any executive agency (as defined in section 133 of title 41, United States Code) from entering into any contract for the procurement of any goods or services from the foreign person. (3) Arms export prohibition.--The President may prohibit the exportation or provision by sale, lease or loan, grant, or other means, directly or indirectly, of any defense article or defense service to the foreign person and the issuance of any license or other approval to the foreign person under section 38 of the Arms Export Control Act (22 U.S.C. 2778). (4) Dual-use export prohibition.--The President may prohibit the issuance of any license and suspend any license for the transfer to the foreign person of any item the export of which is controlled under the Export Administration Act of 1979 (50 U.S.C. App. 2401 et seq.) (as in effect pursuant to the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (50 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.)) or the Export Administration Regulations under subchapter C of chapter VII of title 15, Code of Federal Regulations. (5) Property transactions.--The President may, pursuant to such regulations as the President may prescribe, prohibit any person from-- (A) acquiring, holding, withholding, using, transferring, withdrawing, transporting, or exporting any property that is subject to the jurisdiction of the United States and with respect to which the foreign person has any interest; (B) dealing in or exercising any right, power, or privilege with respect to such property; or (C) conducting any transaction involving such property. [[Page 16419]] (6) Banking transactions.--The President may, pursuant to such regulations as the President may prescribe, prohibit any transfers of credit or payments between financial institutions or by, through, or to any financial institution, to the extent that such transfers or payments are subject to the jurisdiction of the United States and involve any interest of the foreign person. (7) Prohibition on investment in equity or debt of sanctioned person.--The President may, pursuant to such regulations as the President may prescribe, prohibit any United States person from transacting in, providing financing for, or otherwise dealing in-- (A) debt-- (i) of longer than 30 days' maturity of a foreign person with respect to which sanctions are imposed under subsection (a) or of longer than 90 days' maturity of a foreign person with respect to which sanctions are imposed under subsection (b); and (ii) issued on or after the date on which such sanctions are imposed with respect to the foreign person; or (B) equity of the foreign person issued on or after that date. (8) Exclusion from the united states and revocation of visa or other documentation.--In the case of a foreign person who is an individual, the President may direct the Secretary of State to deny a visa to, and the Secretary of Homeland Security to exclude from the United States, the foreign person, subject to regulatory exceptions to permit the United States to comply with the Agreement regarding the Headquarters of the United Nations, signed at Lake Success June 26, 1947, and entered into force November 21, 1947, between the United Nations and the United States, or other applicable international obligations. (9) Sanctions on principal executive officers.--In the case of a foreign person that is an entity, the President may impose on the principal executive officer or officers of the foreign person, or on individuals performing similar functions and with similar authorities as such officer or officers, any of the sanctions described in this subsection applicable to individuals. (d) Exceptions.-- (1) Importation of goods.-- (A) In general.--The authority to block and prohibit all transactions in all property and interests in property under subsection (c)(5) shall not include the authority to impose sanctions on the importation of goods. (B) Good defined.--In this paragraph, the term ``good'' has the meaning given that term in section 16 of the Export Administration Act of 1979 (50 U.S.C. App. 2415) (as continued in effect pursuant to the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (50 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.)). (2) Additional exceptions.--The President shall not be required to apply or maintain the sanctions under subsection (a) or (b)-- (A) in the case of procurement of defense articles or defense services under existing contracts, subcontracts, or other business agreements, including ancillary or incidental contracts for goods, or for services or funding (including necessary financial services) associated with such goods, as necessary to give effect to such contracts, subcontracts, or other business agreements, and the exercise of options for production quantities to satisfy requirements essential to the national security of the United States-- (i) if the President determines in writing that-- (I) the foreign person to which the sanctions would otherwise be applied is a sole source supplier of the defense articles or services; (II) the defense articles or services are essential; (III) alternative sources are not readily or reasonably available; and (IV) the national interests of the United States would be adversely affected by the application or maintenance of such sanctions; or (ii) if the President determines in writing that-- (I) such articles or services are essential to the national security under defense coproduction agreements; and (II) the national interests of the United States would be adversely affected by the application or maintenance of such sanctions; (B) in the case of procurement, to eligible products, as defined in section 308(4) of the Trade Agreements Act of 1979 (19 U.S.C. 2518(4)), of any foreign country or instrumentality designated under section 301(b)(1) of that Act (19 U.S.C. 2511(b)(1)); (C) to products, technology, or services provided under contracts, subcontracts, or other business agreements (including ancillary or incidental contracts for goods, or for services or funding (including necessary financial services) associated with such goods, as necessary to give effect to such contracts, subcontracts, or other business agreements) entered into before the date on which the President publishes in the Federal Register the name of the foreign person with respect to which the sanctions are to be imposed; (D) to-- (i) spare parts that are essential to United States products or production; (ii) component parts, but not finished products, essential to United States products or production; or (iii) routine servicing and maintenance of United States products, to the extent that alternative sources are not readily or reasonably available; (E) to information and technology essential to United States products or production; or (F) to food, medicine, medical devices, or agricultural commodities (as those terms are defined in section 101 of the Comprehensive Iran Sanctions, Accountability, and Divestment Act of 2010 (22 U.S.C. 8511)). (e) National Security Waiver.-- (1) In general.--The President may waive the application of sanctions under subsection (a) or (b) with respect to a foreign person if the President-- (A) determines that the waiver is in the national security interest of the United States; and (B) submits to the appropriate congressional committees a report on the determination and the reasons for the determination. (2) Form of report.--The report required by paragraph (1)(B) shall be submitted in unclassified form, but may include a classified annex. (f) Transaction-specific National Security Waiver.-- (1) In general.--The President may waive the application of sanctions under subsection (a) or (b) with respect to a specific transaction if the President-- (A) determines that the transaction is in the national security interest of the United States; and (B) submits to the appropriate congressional committees a detailed report on the determination and the specific reasons for the determination that a waiver with respect to the transaction is necessary and appropriate. (2) Form of report.--The report required by paragraph (1)(B) shall be submitted in unclassified form, but may include a classified annex. (g) Implementation; Penalties.-- (1) Implementation.--The President may exercise all authorities provided under sections 203 and 205 of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (50 U.S.C. 1702 and 1704) to carry out the purposes of this section. (2) Penalties.--The penalties provided for in subsections (b) and (c) of section 206 of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (50 U.S.C. 1705) shall apply to a person that violates, attempts to violate, or conspires to violate, or causes a violation of, subsection (a) or (b) of this section, or an order or regulation prescribed under either such subsection, to the same extent that such penalties apply to a person that commits an unlawful act described in section 206(a) of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act. (h) Termination.-- (1) In general.--Except as provided in paragraph (2), this section, and sanctions imposed under this section, shall terminate on the date on which the President submits to the appropriate congressional committees a certification that the Government of the Russian Federation has ceased ordering, controlling, or otherwise directing, supporting, or financing, significant acts intended to undermine the peace, security, stability, sovereignty, or territorial integrity of Ukraine, including through an agreement between the appropriate parties. (2) Applicability with respect to syria.--The termination date under paragraph (1) shall not apply with respect to the provisions of subsection (a) relating to the transfer of defense articles into Syria or sanctions imposed pursuant to such provisions. SEC. 5. SANCTIONS ON RUSSIAN AND OTHER FOREIGN FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS. (a) Facilitation of Certain Defense- and Energy-related Transactions.--The President may impose the sanction described in subsection (c) with respect to a foreign financial institution that the President determines knowingly engages, on or after the date of the enactment of this Act, in significant transactions involving activities described in subparagraph (A)(ii) or (B) of section 4(a)(2) or paragraph (1) or (3) of section 4(b) for persons with respect to which sanctions are imposed under section 4. (b) Facilitation of Financial Transactions on Behalf of Specially Designated Nationals.--The President may impose the sanction described in subsection (c) with respect to a foreign financial institution if the President determines that the foreign financial institution has, on or after the date that is 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, knowingly facilitated a significant financial transaction on behalf of any Russian person included on the list of specially designated nationals and blocked persons maintained by the Office of Foreign Assets Control of the Department of the Treasury, pursuant to-- (1) this Act; (2) Executive Order 13660 (79 Fed. Reg. 13,493), 13661 (79 Fed. Reg. 15,535), or 13662 (79 Fed. Reg. 16,169); or (3) any other executive order addressing the crisis in Ukraine. (c) Sanction Described.--The sanction described in this subsection is, with respect to a foreign financial institution, a prohibition [[Page 16420]] on the opening, and a prohibition or the imposition of strict conditions on the maintaining, in the United States of a correspondent account or a payable-through account by the foreign financial institution. (d) National Security Waiver.--The President may waive the application of sanctions under this section with respect to a foreign financial institution if the President-- (1) determines that the waiver is in the national security interest of the United States; and (2) submits to the appropriate congressional committees a report on the determination and the reasons for the determination. (e) Implementation; Penalties.-- (1) Implementation.--The President may exercise all authorities provided under sections 203 and 205 of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (50 U.S.C. 1702 and 1704) to carry out the purposes of this section. (2) Penalties.--The penalties provided for in subsections (b) and (c) of section 206 of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (50 U.S.C. 1705) shall apply to a person that violates, attempts to violate, or conspires to violate, or causes a violation of, subsection (a) or (b) of this section, or an order or regulation prescribed under either such subsection, to the same extent that such penalties apply to a person that commits an unlawful act described in section 206(a) of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act. (f) Termination.--This section, and sanctions imposed under this section, shall terminate on the date on which the President submits to the appropriate congressional committees the certification described in section 4(h). SEC. 6. MAJOR NON-NATO ALLY STATUS FOR UKRAINE, GEORGIA, AND MOLDOVA. Section 517 of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 2321k) is amended by adding at the end the following: ``(c) Additional Designations.-- ``(1) In general.--Effective on the date of the enactment of the Ukraine Freedom Support Act of 2014, Ukraine, Georgia, and Moldova are each designated as a major non-NATO ally for purposes of this Act and the Arms Export Control Act (22 U.S.C. 2751 et seq.). ``(2) Notice of termination of designation.--The President shall notify Congress in accordance with subsection (a)(2) before terminating the designation of a country specified in paragraph (1).''. SEC. 7. INCREASED MILITARY ASSISTANCE FOR THE GOVERNMENT OF UKRAINE. (a) In General.--The President is authorized to provide defense articles, defense services, and training to the Government of Ukraine for the purpose of countering offensive weapons and reestablishing the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Ukraine, including anti-tank and anti-armor weapons, crew weapons and ammunition, counter-artillery radars to identify and target artillery batteries, fire control, range finder, and optical and guidance and control equipment, tactical troop-operated surveillance drones, and secure command and communications equipment, pursuant to the provisions of the Arms Export Control Act (22 U.S.C. 2751 et seq.), the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 2151 et seq.), and other relevant provisions of law. (b) Report Required.--Not later than 60 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the President shall submit a report detailing the anticipated defense articles, defense services, and training to be provided pursuant to this section and a timeline for the provision of such defense articles, defense services, and training, to-- (1) the Committee on Foreign Relations, the Committee on Appropriations, and the Committee on Armed Services of the Senate; and (2) the Committee on Foreign Affairs, the Committee on Appropriations, and the Committee on Armed Services of the House of Representatives. (c) Authorization of Appropriations.-- (1) In general.--There are authorized to be appropriated to the Secretary of State $100,000,000 for fiscal year 2015, $125,000,000 for fiscal year 2016, and $125,000,000 for fiscal year 2017 to carry out activities under this section. (2) Availability of amounts.--Amounts authorized to be appropriated pursuant to paragraph (1) shall remain available for obligation and expenditure through the end of fiscal year 2018. (d) Authority for the Use of Funds.--The funds made available pursuant to subsection (c) for provision of defense articles, defense services, and training may be used to procure such articles, services, and training from the United States Government or other appropriate sources. (e) Protection of Civilians.--It is the sense of Congress that the Government of Ukraine should take all appropriate steps to protect civilians. SEC. 8. EXPANDED NONMILITARY ASSISTANCE FOR UKRAINE. (a) Assistance to Internally Displaced People in Ukraine.-- (1) In general.--Not later than 30 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of State shall submit a plan, including actions by the United States Government, other governments, and international organizations, to meet the need for protection of and assistance for internally displaced persons in Ukraine, to-- (A) the Committee on Foreign Relations, the Committee on Appropriations, and the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources of the Senate; and (B) the Committee on Foreign Affairs, the Committee on Appropriations, and the Committee on Energy and Commerce of the House of Representatives. (2) Elements.--The plan required by paragraph (1) should include, as appropriate, activities in support of-- (A) helping to establish a functional and adequately resourced central registration system in Ukraine that can ensure coordination of efforts to provide assistance to internally displaced persons in different regions; (B) encouraging adoption of legislation in Ukraine that protects internally displaced persons from discrimination based on their status and provides simplified procedures for obtaining the new residency registration or other official documentation that is a prerequisite to receiving appropriate social payments under the laws of Ukraine, such as pensions and disability, child, and unemployment benefits; and (C) helping to ensure that information is available to internally displaced persons about-- (i) government agencies and independent groups that can provide assistance to such persons in various regions; and (ii) evacuation assistance available to persons seeking to flee armed conflict areas. (3) Assistance through international organizations.--The President shall instruct the United States permanent representative or executive director, as the case may be, to the relevant United Nations voluntary agencies, including the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees and the United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs, and other appropriate international organizations, to use the voice and vote of the United States to support appropriate assistance for internally displaced persons in Ukraine. (b) Assistance to the Defense Sector of Ukraine.--The Secretary of State and the Secretary of Defense should assist entities in the defense sector of Ukraine to reorient exports away from customers in the Russian Federation and to find appropriate alternative markets for those entities in the defense sector of Ukraine that have already significantly reduced exports to and cooperation with entities in the defense sector of the Russian Federation. (c) Assistance to Address the Energy Crisis in Ukraine.-- (1) Emergency energy assistance.-- (A) Plan required.--The Secretary of State and the Secretary of Energy, in collaboration with the Administrator of the United States Agency for International Development and the Administrator of the Federal Emergency Management Agency, shall work with officials of the Government of Ukraine to develop a short-term emergency energy assistance plan designed to help Ukraine address the potentially severe short-term heating fuel and electricity shortages facing Ukraine in 2014 and 2015. (B) Elements.--The plan required by subparagraph (A) should include strategies to address heating fuel and electricity shortages in Ukraine, including, as appropriate-- (i) the acquisition of short-term, emergency fuel supplies; (ii) the repair or replacement of infrastructure that could impede the transmission of electricity or transportation of fuel; (iii) the prioritization of the transportation of fuel supplies to the areas where such supplies are needed most; (iv) streamlining emergency communications throughout national, regional, and local governments to manage the potential energy crisis resulting from heating fuel and electricity shortages; (v) forming a crisis management team within the Government of Ukraine to specifically address the potential crisis, including ensuring coordination of the team's efforts with the efforts of outside governmental and nongovernmental entities providing assistance to address the potential crisis; and (vi) developing a public outreach strategy to facilitate preparation by the population and communication with the population in the event of a crisis. (C) Assistance.--The Secretary of State, the Secretary of Energy, and the Administrator of the United States Agency for International Development are authorized to provide assistance in support of, and to invest in short-term solutions for, enabling Ukraine to secure the energy safety of the people of Ukraine during 2014 and 2015, including through-- (i) procurement and transport of emergency fuel supplies, including reverse pipeline flows from Europe; (ii) provision of technical assistance for crisis planning, crisis response, and public outreach; (iii) repair of infrastructure to enable the transport of fuel supplies; (iv) repair of power generating or power transmission equipment or facilities; [[Page 16421]] (v) procurement and installation of compressors or other appropriate equipment to enhance short-term natural gas production; (vi) procurement of mobile electricity generation units; (vii) conversion of natural gas heating facilities to run on other fuels, including alternative energy sources; and (viii) provision of emergency weatherization and winterization materials and supplies. (2) Reduction of ukraine's reliance on energy imports.-- (A) Plans required.--The Secretary of State, in collaboration with the Secretary of Energy and the Administrator of the United States Agency for International Development, shall work with officials of the Government of Ukraine to develop medium- and long-term plans to increase energy production and efficiency to increase energy security by helping Ukraine reduce its dependence on natural gas imported from the Russian Federation. (B) Elements.--The medium- and long-term plans required by subparagraph (A) should include strategies, as appropriate, to-- (i) improve corporate governance and unbundling of state- owned oil and gas sector firms; (ii) increase production from natural gas fields and from other sources, including renewable energy; (iii) license new oil and gas blocks transparently and competitively; (iv) modernize oil and gas upstream infrastructure; and (v) improve energy efficiency. (C) Prioritization.--The Secretary of State, the Administrator of the United States Agency for International Development, and the Secretary of Energy should, during fiscal years 2015 through 2018, work with other donors, including multilateral agencies and nongovernmental organizations, to prioritize, to the extent practicable and as appropriate, the provision of assistance from such donors to help Ukraine to improve energy efficiency, increase energy supplies produced in Ukraine, and reduce reliance on energy imports from the Russian Federation, including natural gas. (D) Authorization of appropriations.--There are authorized to be appropriated $50,000,000 in the aggregate for fiscal years 2016 through 2018 to carry out activities under this paragraph. (3) Support from the overseas private investment corporation.--The Overseas Private Investment Corporation shall-- (A) prioritize, to the extent practicable, support for investments to help increase energy efficiency, develop domestic oil and natural gas reserves, improve and repair electricity infrastructure, and develop renewable and other sources of energy in Ukraine; and (B) implement procedures for expedited review and, as appropriate, approval, of applications by eligible investors (as defined in section 238 of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 2198)) for loans, loan guarantees, and insurance for such investments. (4) Support by the world bank group and the european bank for reconstruction and development.--The President shall, to the extent practicable and as appropriate, direct the United States Executive Directors of the World Bank Group and the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development to use the voice, vote, and influence of the United States to encourage the World Bank Group and the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development and other international financial institutions-- (A) to invest in, and increase their efforts to promote investment in, projects to improve energy efficiency, improve and repair electricity infrastructure, develop domestic oil and natural gas reserves, and develop renewable and other sources of energy in Ukraine; and (B) to stimulate private investment in such projects. (d) Assistance to Civil Society in Ukraine.-- (1) In general.--The Secretary of State and the Administrator of the United States Agency for International Development shall, directly or through nongovernmental or international organizations, such as the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe, the National Endowment for Democracy, and related organizations-- (A) strengthen the organizational and operational capacity of democratic civil society in Ukraine; (B) support the efforts of independent media outlets to broadcast, distribute, and share information in all regions of Ukraine; (C) counter corruption and improve transparency and accountability of institutions that are part of the Government of Ukraine; and (D) provide support for democratic organizing and election monitoring in Ukraine. (2) Strategy required.--Not later than 60 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the President shall submit a strategy to carry out the activities described in paragraph (1) to-- (A) the Committee on Foreign Relations and the Committee on Appropriations of the Senate; and (B) the Committee on Foreign Affairs and the Committee on Appropriations of the House of Representatives. (3) Authorization of appropriations.--There are authorized to be appropriated to the Secretary of State $20,000,000 for fiscal year 2016 to carry out this subsection. (4) Transparency requirements.--Any assistance provided pursuant to this subsection shall be conducted in as transparent of a manner as possible, consistent with the nature and goals of this subsection. The President shall provide a briefing on the activities funded by this subsection at the request of the committees specified in paragraph (2). SEC. 9. EXPANDED BROADCASTING IN COUNTRIES OF THE FORMER SOVIET UNION. (a) In General.--Not later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Chairman of the Broadcasting Board of Governors shall submit to Congress a plan, including a cost estimate, for immediately and substantially increasing, and maintaining through fiscal year 2017, the quantity of Russian-language broadcasting into the countries of the former Soviet Union funded by the United States in order to counter Russian Federation propaganda. (b) Prioritization of Broadcasting Into Ukraine, Georgia, and Moldova.--The plan required by subsection (a) shall prioritize broadcasting into Ukraine, Georgia, and Moldova by the Voice of America and Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty. (c) Additional Priorities.--In developing the plan required by subsection (a), the Chairman shall consider-- (1) near-term increases in Russian-language broadcasting for countries of the former Soviet Union (other than the countries specified in subsection (b)), including Latvia, Lithuania, and Estonia; and (2) increases in broadcasting in other critical languages, including Ukrainian and Romanian languages. (d) Broadcasting Defined.--In this section, the term ``broadcasting'' means the distribution of media content via radio broadcasting, television broadcasting, and Internet- based platforms, among other platforms. (e) Authorization of Appropriations.-- (1) In general.--There are authorized to be appropriated to the Broadcasting Board of Governors $10,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2016 through 2018 to carry out activities under this section. (2) Supplement not supplant.--Amounts authorized to be appropriated pursuant to paragraph (1) shall supplement and not supplant other amounts made available for activities described in this section. SEC. 10. SUPPORT FOR RUSSIAN DEMOCRACY AND CIVIL SOCIETY ORGANIZATIONS. (a) In General.--The Secretary of State shall, directly or through nongovernmental or international organizations, such as the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe, the National Endowment for Democracy, and related organizations-- (1) improve democratic governance, transparency, accountability, rule of law, and anti-corruption efforts in the Russian Federation; (2) strengthen democratic institutions and political and civil society organizations in the Russian Federation; (3) expand uncensored Internet access in the Russian Federation; and (4) expand free and unfettered access to independent media of all kinds in the Russian Federation, including through increasing United States Government-supported broadcasting activities, and assist with the protection of journalists and civil society activists who have been targeted for free speech activities. (b) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized to be appropriated to the Secretary of State $20,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2016 through 2018 to carry out the activities set forth in subsection (a). (c) Strategy Requirement.--Not later than 60 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the President shall submit a strategy to carry out the activities set forth in subsection (a) to-- (1) the Committee on Foreign Relations and the Committee on Appropriations of the Senate; and (2) the Committee on Foreign Affairs and the Committee on Appropriations of the House of Representatives. (d) Transparency Requirements.--Any assistance provided pursuant to this section shall be conducted in as transparent of a manner as possible, consistent with the nature and goals of this section. The President shall provide a briefing on the activities funded by this section at the request of the committees specified in subsection (c). SEC. 11. REPORT ON NON-COMPLIANCE BY THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION OF ITS OBLIGATIONS UNDER THE INF TREATY. (a) Findings.--Congress makes the following findings: (1) The Russian Federation is in violation of its obligations under the Treaty between the United States of America and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics on the Elimination of Their Intermediate-Range and Shorter-Range Missiles, signed at Washington December 8, 1987, and entered into force June 1, 1988 (commonly referred to as the ``Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty'' or ``INF Treaty''). [[Page 16422]] (2) This behavior poses a threat to the United States, its deployed forces, and its allies. (b) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of Congress that-- (1) the President should hold the Russian Federation accountable for being in violation of its obligations under the INF Treaty; and (2) the President should demand the Russian Federation completely and verifiably eliminate the military systems that constitute the violation of its obligations under the INF Treaty. (c) Report.-- (1) In general.--Not later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, and every 90 days thereafter, the President shall submit to the committees specified in subsection (d) a report that includes the following elements: (A) A description of the status of the President's efforts, in cooperation with United States allies, to hold the Russian Federation accountable for being in violation of its obligations under the INF Treaty and obtain the complete and verifiable elimination of its military systems that constitute the violation of its obligations under the INF Treaty. (B) The President's assessment as to whether it remains in the national security interests of the United States to remain a party to the INF Treaty, and other related treaties and agreements, while the Russian Federation is in violation of its obligations under the INF Treaty. (C) Notification of any deployment by the Russian Federation of a ground launched ballistic or cruise missile system with a range of between 500 and 5,500 kilometers. (D) A plan developed by the Secretary of State, in consultation with the Director of National Intelligence and the Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA), to verify that the Russian Federation has fully and completely dismantled any ground launched cruise missiles or ballistic missiles with a range of between 500 and 5,500 kilometers, including details on facilities that inspectors need access to, people inspectors need to talk with, how often inspectors need the accesses for, and how much the verification regime would cost. (2) Form.--The report required under paragraph (1) shall be submitted in unclassified form but may contain a classified annex. (d) Committees Specified.--The committees specified in this subsection are-- (1) the Committee on Foreign Relations, the Committee on Armed Services, and the Select Committee on Intelligence of the Senate; and (2) the Committee on Foreign Affairs, the Committee on Armed Services, and the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence of the House of Representatives. SEC. 12. RULE OF CONSTRUCTION. Nothing in this Act or an amendment made by this Act shall be construed as an authorization for the use of military force. ______ SA 3967. Mr. WYDEN submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 2410, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2015 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows: At the end of subtitle D of title V, add the following: SEC. 535. REQUIREMENT TO USE HUMAN-BASED METHODS FOR CERTAIN MEDICAL TRAINING. (a) In General.--Chapter 101 of title 10, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new section: ``Sec. 2017. Requirement to use human-based methods for certain medical training ``(a) Combat Trauma Injuries.--(1) Not later than October 1, 2017, the Secretary of Defense shall develop, test, and validate human-based training methods for the purpose of training members of the armed forces in the treatment of combat trauma injuries with the goal of replacing live animal-based training methods. ``(2) Not later than October 1, 2019, the Secretary-- ``(A) shall only use human-based training methods for the purpose of training members of the armed forces in the treatment of combat trauma injuries; and ``(B) may not use animals for such purpose. ``(b) Exception for Particular Commands and Training Methods.--(1) The Secretary may exempt a particular command, particular training method, or both, from the requirement for human-based training methods under subsection (a)(2) if the Secretary determines that human-based training methods will not provide an educationally equivalent or superior substitute for live animal-based training methods for such command or training method, as the case may be. ``(2) Any exemption under this subsection shall be for such period, not more than one year, as the Secretary shall specify in granting the exemption. Any exemption may be renewed (subject to the preceding sentence). ``(c) Annual Reports.--(1) Not later than October 1, 2016, and each year thereafter, the Secretary shall submit to the congressional defense committees a report on the development and implementation of human-based training methods and replacement of live-animal based training methods for the purpose of training members of the armed forces in the treatment of combat trauma injuries under this section. ``(2) Each report under this subsection on or after October 1, 2019, shall include a description of any exemption under subsection (b) that is in force as the time of such report, and a current justification for such exemption. ``(d) Definitions.--In this section: ``(1) The term `combat trauma injuries' means severe injuries likely to occur during combat, including-- ``(A) hemorrhage; ``(B) tension pneumothorax; ``(C) amputation resulting from blast injury; ``(D) compromises to the airway; and ``(E) other injuries. ``(2) The term `human-based training methods' means, with respect to training individuals in medical treatment, the use of systems and devices that do not use animals, including-- ``(A) simulators; ``(B) partial task trainers; ``(C) moulage; ``(D) simulated combat environments; ``(E) human cadavers; and ``(F) rotations in civilian and military trauma centers. ``(3) The term `partial task trainers' means training aids that allow individuals to learn or practice specific medical procedures.''. (b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections at the beginning of chapter 101 of such title is amended by adding at the end the following new item: ``2017. Requirement to use human-based methods for certain medical training.''. ______ SA 3968. Mr. WYDEN submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 2410, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2015 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows: At the end of subtitle H of title X, add the following: SEC. 1087. CONSIDERATION OF CERTAIN TIME SPENT RECEIVING MEDICAL CARE FROM SECRETARY OF DEFENSE AS ACTIVE DUTY FOR PURPOSES OF ELIGIBILITY FOR POST-9/11 EDUCATIONAL ASSISTANCE. (a) In General.--Section 3301(1)(B) of title 38, United States Code, is amended by inserting ``12301(h),'' after ``12301(g),''. (b) Retroactive Application.--The amendment made by subsection (a) shall apply as if such amendment were enacted immediately after the enactment of the Post-9/11 Veterans Educational Assistance Act of 2008 (Public Law 110-252). ______ SA 3969. Mr. WYDEN submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 2410, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2015 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows: At the end of subtitle H of title X, add the following: SEC. 1087. CONSIDERATION BY SECRETARY OF VETERANS AFFAIRS OF RESOURCES DISPOSED OF FOR LESS THAN FAIR MARKET VALUE BY INDIVIDUALS APPLYING FOR PENSION. (a) Veterans.--Section 1522 of title 38, United States Code, is amended-- (1) in subsection (a)-- (A) by inserting ``(1)'' before ``The Secretary''; and (B) by adding at the end the following new paragraph: ``(2)(A) If a veteran otherwise eligible for payment of pension under section 1513 or 1521 of this title or the spouse of such veteran disposes of covered resources for less than fair market value on or after the look-back date described in subparagraph (C)(i), the Secretary shall deny or discontinue the payment of pension to such veteran under section 1513 or 1521 of this title, as the case may be, for months during the period beginning on the date described in subparagraph (D) and equal to the number of months calculated as provided in subparagraph (E). ``(B)(i) For purposes of this paragraph, a covered resource is any resource that was a part of the corpus of the estate of the veteran or, if the veteran has a spouse, the corpus of the estates of the veteran and of the veteran's spouse, that the Secretary considers that under all the circumstances, if the veteran or spouse had not disposed of such resource, it would be reasonable that the resource (or some portion of the resource) be consumed for the veteran's maintenance. [[Page 16423]] ``(ii) For purposes of this paragraph, the Secretary may consider, in accordance with regulations the Secretary shall prescribe, a transfer of an asset (including a transfer of an asset to an annuity, trust, or other financial instrument or investment) a disposal of a covered resource for less than fair market value if such transfer reduces the amount in the corpus of the estate of the veteran or, if the veteran has a spouse, the corpus of the estates of the veteran and of the veteran's spouse, that the Secretary considers, under all the circumstances, would be reasonable to be consumed for the veteran's maintenance. ``(C)(i) The look-back date described in this clause is a date that is 36 months before the date described in clause (ii). ``(ii) The date described in this clause is the date on which the veteran applies for pension under section 1513 or 1521 of this title or, if later, the date on which the veteran (or the spouse of the veteran) disposes of covered resources for less than fair market value. ``(D) The date described in this subparagraph is the first day of the first month in or after which covered resources were disposed of for less than fair market value and which does not occur in any other period of ineligibility under this paragraph. ``(E) The number of months calculated under this subparagraph shall be equal to-- ``(i) the total, cumulative uncompensated value of the portion of covered resources so disposed of by the veteran (or the spouse of the veteran) on or after the look-back date described in subparagraph (C)(i) that the Secretary determines would reasonably have been consumed for the veteran's maintenance; divided by ``(ii) the maximum amount of monthly pension that is payable to a veteran under section 1513 or 1521 of this title, including the maximum amount of increased pension payable under such sections on account of family members, but not including any amount of pension payable under such sections because a veteran is in need of regular aid and attendance or is permanently housebound, rounded down, in the case of any fraction, to the nearest whole number, but shall not in any case exceed 36 months.''; (2) in subsection (b)-- (A) by inserting ``(1)'' before ``The Secretary''; and (B) by adding at the end the following new paragraph: ``(2)(A) If a veteran otherwise eligible for payment of increased pension under subsection (c), (d), (e), or (f) of section 1521 of this title on account of a child, the spouse of the veteran, or the child disposes of covered resources for less than fair market value on or after the look-back date described in subparagraph (C)(i), the Secretary shall deny or discontinue payment of such increased pension for months during the period beginning on the date described in subparagraph (D) and equal to the number of months calculated as provided in subparagraph (E). ``(B)(i) For purposes of this paragraph, a covered resource is any resource that was a part of the corpus of the estate of the child that the Secretary considers that under all the circumstances, if the veteran, the spouse of the veteran, or the child had not disposed of such resource, it would be reasonable that the resource (or some portion of the resource) be consumed for the child's maintenance. ``(ii) For purposes of this paragraph, the Secretary may consider, in accordance with regulations the Secretary shall prescribe, a transfer of an asset (including a transfer of an asset to an annuity, trust, or other financial instrument or investment) a disposal of a covered resource for less than fair market value if such transfer reduces the amount in the corpus of the estate of the child that the Secretary considers, under all the circumstances, would be reasonable to be consumed for the child's maintenance. ``(C)(i) The look-back date described in this clause is a date that is 36 months before the date described in clause (ii). ``(ii) The date described in this clause is the date on which the veteran applies for payment of increased pension under subsection (c), (d), (e), or (f) of section 1521 of this title on account of a child or, if later, the date on which the veteran, the spouse of the veteran, or the child disposes of covered resources for less than fair market value. ``(D) The date described in this subparagraph is the first day of the first month in or after which covered resources were disposed of for less than fair market value and which does not occur in any other period of ineligibility under this paragraph. ``(E) The number of months calculated under this subparagraph shall be equal to-- ``(i) the total, cumulative uncompensated value of the portion of the covered resources so disposed of by the veteran, the spouse of the veteran, or the child on or after the look-back date described in subparagraph (C)(i) that the Secretary determines would reasonably have been consumed for the child's maintenance; divided by ``(ii) the maximum amount of increased monthly pension that is payable to a veteran under subsection (c), (d), (e), or (f) of section 1521 of this title on account of a child, rounded down, in the case of any fraction, to the nearest whole number, but shall not in any case exceed 36 months.''; and (3) by adding at the end the following new subsection: ``(c)(1)(A) The Secretary shall not deny or discontinue payment of pension under section 1513 or 1521 of this title or payment of increased pension under subsection (c), (d), (e), or (f) of section 1521 of this title on account of a child by reason of the application of subsection (a)(2) or (b)(2) of this section to the disposal of resources by an individual-- ``(i) if-- ``(I) a satisfactory showing is made to the Secretary (in accordance with regulations promulgated by the Secretary) that all resources disposed of for less than fair market value have been returned to the individual who disposed of the resources; or ``(II) the Secretary determines, under procedures established by the Secretary in accordance with subparagraph (B), that the denial or discontinuance of payment would work an undue hardship; or ``(ii) to the extent that any portion of the resources disposed of for less than fair market value have been returned to the individual who disposed of the resources. ``(B) Undue hardship would be worked by the denial or discontinuance of payment for purposes of subparagraph (A)(i)(II) if the denial or discontinuance of payment would deprive the individual during the period of denial or discontinuance-- ``(i) of medical care such that the individual's life or health would be endangered; ``(ii) of necessary food or clothing, or other necessities of life; or ``(iii) on such other basis as the Secretary shall specify in the procedures required by subparagraph (A)(i)(II). ``(C) If payment of pension or increased pension that would otherwise be denied or discontinued by reason of the application of subsection (a)(2) or (b)(2) is denied or discontinued only in part by reason of the return of resources as described in subparagraph (A)(ii), the period of the denial or discontinuance as determined pursuant to subparagraph (E) of subsection (a)(2) or (b)(2), as applicable, shall be recalculated to take into account such return of resources. ``(2) At the time a veteran applies for pension under section 1513 or 1521 of this title or increased pension under subsection (c), (d), (e), or (f) of section 1521 of this title on account of a child, and at such other times as the Secretary considers appropriate, the Secretary shall-- ``(A) inform such veteran of the provisions of subsections (a)(2) and (b)(2) providing for a period of ineligibility for payment of pension under such sections for individuals who make certain dispositions of resources for less than fair market value, including the exception for hardship from such period of ineligibility; ``(B) obtain from such veteran information which may be used in determining whether or not a period of ineligibility for such payments would be required by reason of such subsections; and ``(C) provide such veteran a timely process for determining whether or not the exception for hardship shall apply to such veteran.''. (b) Surviving Spouses and Children.--Section 1543 of such title is amended-- (1) in subsection (a)-- (A) by redesignating paragraph (2) as paragraph (3); (B) by inserting after paragraph (1) the following new paragraph (2): ``(2)(A) If a surviving spouse otherwise eligible for payment of pension under section 1541 of this title disposes of covered resources for less than fair market value on or after the look-back date described in subparagraph (C)(i), the Secretary shall deny or discontinue the payment of pension to such surviving spouse under section 1541 of this title for months during the period beginning on the date described in subparagraph (D) and equal to the number of months calculated as provided in subparagraph (E). ``(B)(i) For purposes of this paragraph, a covered resource is any resource that was a part of the corpus of the estate of the surviving spouse that the Secretary considers that under all the circumstances, if the surviving spouse had not disposed of such resource, it would be reasonable that the resource (or some portion of the resource) be consumed for the surviving spouse's maintenance. ``(ii) For purposes of this paragraph, the Secretary may consider, in accordance with regulations the Secretary shall prescribe, a transfer of an asset (including a transfer of an asset to an annuity, trust, or other financial instrument or investment) a disposal of a covered resource for less than fair market value if such transfer reduces the amount in the corpus of the estate of the surviving spouse that the Secretary considers, under all the circumstances, would be reasonable to be consumed for the surviving spouse's maintenance. ``(C)(i) The look-back date described in this clause is a date that is 36 months before the date described in clause (ii). ``(ii) The date described in this clause is the date on which the surviving spouse applies for pension under section 1541 of this title or, if later, the date on which the surviving spouse disposes of covered resources for less than fair market value. ``(D) The date described in this subparagraph is the first day of the first month in or [[Page 16424]] after which covered resources were disposed of for less than fair market value and which does not occur in any other period of ineligibility under this paragraph. ``(E) The number of months calculated under this subparagraph shall be equal to-- ``(i) the total, cumulative uncompensated value of the portion of the covered resources so disposed of by the surviving spouse on or after the look-back date described in subparagraph (C)(i) that the Secretary determines would reasonably have been consumed for the surviving spouse's maintenance; divided by ``(ii) the maximum amount of monthly pension that is payable to a surviving spouse under section 1541 of this title, including the maximum amount of increased pension payable under such section on account of a child, but not including any amount of pension payable under such section because a surviving spouse is in need of regular aid and attendance or is permanently housebound, rounded down, in the case of any fraction, to the nearest whole number, but shall not in any case exceed 36 months.''; (C) by adding at the end the following new paragraph: ``(4)(A) If a surviving spouse otherwise eligible for payment of increased pension under subsection (c), (d), or (e) of section 1541 of this title on account of a child or the child disposes of covered resources for less than fair market value on or after the look-back date described in subparagraph (C)(i), the Secretary shall deny or discontinue payment of such increased pension for months during the period beginning on the date described in subparagraph (D) and equal to the number of months calculated as provided in subparagraph (E). ``(B)(i) For purposes of this paragraph, a covered resource is any resource that was a part of the corpus of the estate of the child that the Secretary considers that under all the circumstances, if the surviving spouse or the child had not disposed of such resource, it would be reasonable that the resource (or some portion of the resource) be consumed for the child's maintenance. ``(ii) For purposes of this paragraph, the Secretary may consider, in accordance with regulations the Secretary shall prescribe, a transfer of an asset (including a transfer of an asset to an annuity, trust, or other financial instrument or investment) a disposal of a covered resource for less than fair market value if such transfer reduces the amount in the corpus of the estate of the child that the Secretary considers, under all the circumstances, would be reasonable to be consumed for the child's maintenance. ``(C)(i) The look-back date described in this clause is a date that is 36 months before the date described in clause (ii). ``(ii) The date described in this clause is the date on which the surviving spouse applies for payment of increased pension under subsection (c), (d), or (e) of section 1541 of this title on account of a child or, if later, the date on which the surviving spouse (or the child) disposes of covered resources for less than fair market value. ``(D) The date described in this subparagraph is the first day of the first month in or after which covered resources were disposed of for less than fair market value and which does not occur in any other period of ineligibility under this paragraph. ``(E) The number of months calculated under this clause shall be equal to-- ``(i) the total, cumulative uncompensated value of the portion of the covered resources so disposed of by the surviving spouse (or the child) on or after the look-back date described in subparagraph (C)(i) that the Secretary determines would reasonably have been consumed for the child's maintenance; divided by ``(ii) the maximum amount of increased monthly pension that is payable to a surviving spouse under subsection (c), (d), or (e) of section 1541 of this title on account of a child, rounded down, in the case of any fraction, to the nearest whole number, but shall not in any case exceed 36 months.''; (2) in subsection (b)-- (A) by inserting ``(1)'' before ``The Secretary''; and (B) by adding at the end the following new paragraph: ``(2)(A) If a child otherwise eligible for payment of pension under section 1542 of this title or any person with whom such child is residing who is legally responsible for such child's support disposes of covered resources for less than fair market value on or after the look-back date described in subparagraph (C)(i), the Secretary shall deny or discontinue the payment of pension to such child under section 1542 of this title for months during the period beginning on the date described in subparagraph (D) and equal to the number of months calculated as provided in subparagraph (E). ``(B)(i) For purposes of this paragraph, a covered resource is any resource that was a part of the corpus of the estate of the child or the corpus of the estate of any person with whom such child is residing who is legally responsible for such child's support that the Secretary considers that under all the circumstances, if the child or person had not disposed of such resource, it would be reasonable that the resource (or some portion of the resource) be consumed for the child's maintenance. ``(ii) For purposes of this paragraph, the Secretary may consider, in accordance with regulations the Secretary shall prescribe, a transfer of an asset (including a transfer of an asset to an annuity, trust, or other financial instrument or investment) a disposal of a covered resource for less than fair market value if such transfer reduces the amount in the corpus of the estate described in clause (i) that the Secretary considers, under all the circumstances, would be reasonable to be consumed for the child's maintenance. ``(C)(i) The look-back date described in this clause is a date that is 36 months before the date described in clause (ii). ``(ii) The date described in this clause is the date on which the child applies for pension under section 1542 of this title or, if later, the date on which the child (or person described in subparagraph (B)) disposes of covered resources for less than fair market value. ``(D) The date described in this clause is the first day of the first month in or after which covered resources were disposed of for less than fair market value and which does not occur in any other period of ineligibility under this paragraph. ``(E) The number of months calculated under this clause shall be equal to-- ``(i) the total, cumulative uncompensated value of the portion of the covered resources so disposed of by the child (or person described in subparagraph (B)) on or after the look-back date described in subparagraph (C)(i) that the Secretary determines would reasonably have been consumed for the child's maintenance; divided by ``(ii) the maximum amount of monthly pension that is payable to a child under section 1542 of this title, rounded down, in the case of any fraction, to the nearest whole number, but shall not in any case exceed 36 months.''; and (3) by adding at the end the following new subsection: ``(c)(1)(A) The Secretary shall not deny or discontinue payment of pension under section 1541 or 1542 of this title or payment of increased pension under subsection (c), (d), or (e) of section 1541 of this title on account of a child by reason of the application of subsection (a)(2), (a)(4), or (b)(2) of this section to the disposal of resources by an individual-- ``(i) if-- ``(I) a satisfactory showing is made to the Secretary (in accordance with regulations promulgated by the Secretary) that all resources disposed of for less than fair market value have been returned to the individual who disposed of the resources; or ``(II) the Secretary determines, under procedures established by the Secretary in accordance with subparagraph (B), that the denial or discontinuance of payment would work an undue hardship; or ``(ii) to the extent that any portion of the resources disposed of for less than fair market value have been returned to the individual who disposed of the resources. ``(B) Undue hardship would be worked by the denial or discontinuance of payment for purposes of subparagraph (A)(i)(II) if the denial or discontinuance of payment would deprive the individual during the period of denial or discontinuance-- ``(i) of medical care such that the individual's life or health would be endangered; ``(ii) of necessary food or clothing, or other necessities of life; or ``(iii) on such other basis as the Secretary shall specify in the procedures required by subparagraph (A)(i)(II). ``(C) If payment of pension or increased pension that would otherwise be denied or discontinued by reason of the application of subsection (a)(2), (a)(4), or (b)(2) is denied or discontinued only in part by reason of the return of resources as described in subparagraph (A)(ii), the period of the denial or discontinuance as determined pursuant to subparagraph (E) of subsection (a)(2), (a)(4), or (b)(2), as applicable, shall be recalculated to take into account such return of resources. ``(2) At the time a surviving spouse or child applies for pension under section 1541 or 1542 of this title or increased pension under subsection (c), (d), or (e) of section 1541 of this title on account of a child, and at such other times as the Secretary considers appropriate, the Secretary shall-- ``(A) inform such surviving spouse or child of the provisions of subsections (a)(2), (a)(4), and (b)(2), as applicable, providing for a period of ineligibility for payment of pension or increased pension under such sections for individuals who make certain dispositions of resources for less than fair market value, including the exception for hardship from such period of ineligibility; ``(B) obtain from such surviving spouse or child information which may be used in determining whether or not a period of ineligibility for such payments would be required by reason of such subsections; and ``(C) provide such surviving spouse or child a timely process for determining whether or not the exception for hardship shall apply to such surviving spouse or child.''. (c) Effective Date.--Subsections (a)(2), (b)(2), and (c) of section 1522 of title 38, United States Code, as added by subsection (a), and subsections (a)(2), (a)(4), (b)(2), and (c) of section 1543 of such title, as added by [[Page 16425]] subsection (b), shall take effect on the date that is one year after the date of the enactment of this Act and shall apply with respect to payments of pension and increased pension applied for after such date and to payments of pension and increased pension for which eligibility is redetermined after such date, except that no reduction in pension shall be made under such subsections because of any disposal of covered resources made before such date. (d) Annual Reports.-- (1) In general.--Not later than 900 days after the date of the enactment of this Act and not less frequently than once each year thereafter through 2018, the Secretary of Veterans Affairs shall submit to the appropriate committees of Congress a report on the administration of subsections (a)(2), (b)(2), and (c) of section 1522 of title 38, United States Code, as added by subsection (a), and subsections (a)(2), (a)(4), (b)(2), and (c) of section 1543 of such title, as added by subsection (b), during the most recent 12- month period. (2) Elements.--Each report submitted under paragraph (1) shall include the following, for the period covered by the report: (A) The number of individuals who applied for pension under chapter 15 of such title. (B) The number of individuals who received pension under such chapter. (C) The number of individuals with respect to whom the Secretary denied or discontinued payment of pension under the subsections referred to in paragraph (1). (D) A description of any trends identified by the Secretary regarding pension payments that have occurred as a result of the amendments made by this section. (E) Such other information as the Secretary considers appropriate. (3) Appropriate committees of congress defined.--In this subsection, the term ``appropriate committees of Congress'' means-- (A) the Committee on Veterans' Affairs and the Select Committee on Aging of the Senate; and (B) the Committee on Veterans' Affairs of the House of Representatives. ______ SA 3970. Mr. WYDEN (for himself, Mr. Scott, and Mr. Merkley) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 2410, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2015 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows: At the end of subtitle H of title X, add the following: SEC. 1087. PROHIBITION ON CLOSURE OF CERTAIN COAST GUARD FACILITIES. (a) Prohibition.--The Coast Guard may not-- (1) close a Coast Guard air facility that was in operation on November 30, 2014; (2) retire an aviation asset from an air facility described in paragraph (1); or (3) transfer an aviation asset from an air facility described in paragraph (1), except as provided in subsection (b). (b) Emergency Transfer Authority.--Notwithstanding subsection (a)(3), the Coast Guard may temporarily relocate an aviation asset for not more than 30 days in the event of an emergency, after providing notice of the pending temporary relocation to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the Senate and the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure of the House of Representatives. (c) Sunset.--This section is repealed effective January 1, 2016. ____________________ AUTHORITY FOR COMMITTEES TO MEET committee on armed services Mr. SANDERS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Armed Services be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on December 2, 2014, at 9:30 a.m. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE, SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION Mr. SANDERS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on December 2, 2014, at 2:30 p.m. in room SR-253 of the Russell Senate Office Building to conduct a hearing entitled, ``Addressing Domestic Violence in Professional Sports.'' The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. COMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENT AND PUBLIC WORKS Mr. SANDERS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Environment and Public Works be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on December 2, 2014, at 2:15 p.m. in room SD- 406 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN RELATIONS Mr. SANDERS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Foreign Relations be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on December 2, 2014, at 2:30 p.m. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. COMMITTEE ON HEALTH, EDUCATION, LABOR, AND PENSIONS Mr. SANDERS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on December 2, 2014, at 9:30 a.m. in room SD-430 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. SELECT COMMITTEE ON INTELLIGENCE Mr. SANDERS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Select Committee on Intelligence be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on December 2, 2014, at 3 p.m. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. Subcommittee on Water and Wildlife Mr. SANDERS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Subcommittee on Water and Wildlife of the Committee on Environment and Public Works be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on December 2, 2014, at 9:30 a.m., in room SD-406 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building, to conduct a hearing entitled, ``Innovation and the Utilities of the Future: How Local Water Treatment Facilities are Leading the Way to Better Manage Wastewater and Water Supplies.'' The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. ____________________ ADDING EBOLA TO THE FDA PRIORITY REVIEW VOUCHER PROGRAM ACT Mr. REID. I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the consideration of Calendar No. 602, S. 2917. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the bill by title. The assistant legislative clerk read as follows: A bill (S. 2917) to expand the program of priority review to encourage treatments for tropical diseases. There being no objection, the Senate proceeded to consider the bill. Mr. REID. I ask unanimous consent that the bill be read a third time, passed, and the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table, with no intervening action or debate. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. The bill (S. 2917) was ordered to be engrossed for a third reading, was read the third time, and passed, as follows: S. 2917 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. This Act may be cited as the ``Adding Ebola to the FDA Priority Review Voucher Program Act''. SEC. 2. PRIORITY REVIEW TO ENCOURAGE TREATMENTS FOR TROPICAL DISEASES. Section 524 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 360n) is amended-- (1) in subsection (a)(3)-- (A) by redesignating subparagraph (Q) as subparagraph (R); (B) by inserting after subparagraph (P) the following: ``(Q) Filoviruses.''; and (C) in subparagraph (R), as so redesignated, by striking ``regulation by'' and inserting ``order of''; and (2) in subsection (b)-- (A) in paragraph (2), by adding ``There is no limit on the number of times a priority review voucher may be transferred before such voucher is used.'' after the period at the end; and (B) in paragraph (4), by striking ``365 days'' and inserting ``90 days''. ____________________ MEASURE READ THE FIRST TIME--S. 2970 Mr. REID. It is my understanding that S. 2970 is due for its first reading. [[Page 16426]] The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator is correct. The clerk will read the bill by title for the first time. The assistant legislative clerk read as follows: A bill (S. 2970) to reform procedures for determinations to proceed to trial by courtmartial for certain offenses under the Uniform Code of Military Justice, and for other purposes. Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask for a second reading but object to my own request. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Objection having been heard, the bill will receive its second reading on the next legislative day. ____________________ BILL WILLIAMS RIVER WATER RIGHTS SETTLEMENT ACT OF 2014 Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of H.R. 4924, which is at the desk. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. The clerk will report the bill by title. The assistant legislative clerk read as follows: A bill (H.R. 4924) to direct the Secretary of the Interior to enter into the Big Sandy River-Planet Ranch Water Rights Settlement Agreement and the Hualapai Tribe Bill Williams River Water Rights Settlement Agreement, to provide for the lease of certain land located within Planet Ranch on the Bill Williams River in the State of Arizona to benefit the Lower Colorado River Multi-Species Conservation Program, and to provide for the settlement of specific water rights claims in the Bill Williams River watershed in the State of Arizona. There being no objection, the Senate proceeded to consider the bill. Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the bill be read a third time and passed and the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. The bill (H.R. 4924) was ordered to a third reading, was read the third time, and passed. ____________________ ORDERS FOR WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 3, 2014 Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate completes its business today, it adjourn until 9:30 a.m. on Wednesday, December 3, 2014; that following the prayer and pledge, the morning hour be deemed expired, the Journal of proceedings be approved to date, and the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day; and that following any leader remarks, the Senate resume executive session and consideration of the Burrows nomination, with the time until 10 a.m. equally divided and controlled between the two leaders or their designees. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. ____________________ PROGRAM Mr. REID. For the information of all Senators, there will be five rollcall votes at 10 a.m. tomorrow morning on the confirmation of the Burrows and Lopez nominations and cloture on the Hale, Kearney, and Pappert nominations. Another series of votes, as many as six, will occur at 5:30 p.m. ____________________ ADJOURNMENT UNTIL 9:30 A.M. TOMORROW Mr. REID. Mr. President, if there is no further business to come before the Senate, I ask unanimous consent that it adjourn under the previous order. There being no objection, the Senate, at 7:09 p.m., adjourned until Wednesday, December 3, 2014, at 9:30 a.m. ____________________ CONFIRMATIONS Executive nominations confirmed by the Senate December 2, 2014: DEPARTMENT OF STATE COLLEEN BRADLEY BELL, OF CALIFORNIA, TO BE AMBASSADOR EXTRAORDINARY AND PLENIPOTENTIARY OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA TO HUNGARY. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT NANI A. COLORETTI, OF CALIFORNIA, TO BE DEPUTY SECRETARY OF DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT. DEPARTMENT OF STATE NOAH BRYSON MAMET, OF CALIFORNIA, TO BE AMBASSADOR EXTRAORDINARY AND PLENIPOTENTIARY OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA TO THE ARGENTINE REPUBLIC. CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY COMMISSION ROBERT S. ADLER, OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, TO BE A COMMISSIONER OF THE CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY COMMISSION FOR A TERM OF SEVEN YEARS FROM OCTOBER 27, 2014. [[Page 16427]] EXTENSIONS OF REMARKS ____________________ REMEMBERING DELORES ``DEE'' PIPINO ______ HON. TIM RYAN of ohio in the house of representatives Tuesday, December 2, 2014 Mr. RYAN of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to remember and honor the life of Delores M. ``Dee'' Pipino, 83, who passed away on October 17, 2014 surrounded by her loving family. Dee devoted her life to her family. Her children, grandchildren, and great-grandchildren were her favorite topic of conversation and were her greatest source of pride and joy. As a lifelong resident of Poland, Ohio, Dee was an active part of her community as a longtime member of the Holy Family Parish and Fonderlac Country Club. Aside from being dedicated to her home and her family, she was an excellent cook and baker, a great sewing and interior design student, all while remaining an avid reader. Dee's three year battle with cancer was exhausting, but she faced it with a resilient courage and strength that will remain an inspiration to all who knew her. Preceded in death by her loving parents and husband, Donald; four sisters, Anne, Mary, Clara, and Janet; and her brother, Anthony. She will be deeply missed and her memory cherished by her children Mary, Chris, Sam, and Joe; grandchildren Eddie, Deloran and Donielle, Candace and Donald, Sammy, Grayson; great-grandchildren Luca and Dane. Although no longer with us Dee's loving memory will be cherished by all who knew her. We miss her. ____________________ RECOGNIZING DeGRAFF MEMORIAL HOSPITAL AS THE 2014 BUSINESS OF THE YEAR ______ HON. BRIAN HIGGINS of new york in the house of representatives Tuesday, December 2, 2014 Mr. HIGGINS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize DeGraff Memorial Hospital as the 2014 Chamber of Commerce of the Tonawandas Business of the Year. This award is especially relevant this year, as DeGraff Memorial is celebrating 100 years of service and care to Western New York. DeGraff Memorial Hospital is a Kaleida Health Facility that has served the Tonawandas and the Northtowns since 1914. A major employer in North Tonawanda, the hospital has 70 inpatient beds to provide necessary services. DeGraff's versatility in health services is known throughout the region. The hospital is equipped to provide medical, surgical, and diagnostic services to both inpatients and outpatients. In addition, long term residential care is offered through a Skilled Nursing Facility, and special rehabilitation units are available for patients that require extensive recovery through acute and subacute care. The progressive mission of DeGraff Memorial places the community at the center. Each day, those employed by the hospital work to advance the health of the community and provide exceptional quality services to those in need, paired with a commitment to education and research that is accessible to all. The values of the hospital are accountability, patient-centered, integrity, and excellence. The hospital has received national recognition as a Nurses Improving Care for Healthsystem Elders Hospital for their excellence in providing sensitive and exemplary care for those over 65 years of age. Mr. Speaker, thank you for allowing me to recognize DeGraff Memorial Hospital as the 2014 Business of the Year for the Chamber of Commerce of the Tonawandas. I commend the hard work of those employed by the hospital and their dedication to the health of our community. ____________________ HONORING THE SERVICE OF MR. JAMES T. CECIL ______ HON. ANDY BARR of kentucky in the house of representatives Tuesday, December 2, 2014 Mr. BARR. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize an outstanding individual, Mr. James T. Cecil of Lexington, Kentucky, for his distinguished military service during World War II. Mr. Cecil served our nation in uniform from August 26, 1942 to September 15, 1945. At the age of 19 years old, Mr. Cecil was one of 70 young men from Central Kentucky who voluntarily enlisted as a private in the Marine Corps with what was known as the Lexington Platoon. Today, Mr. Cecil is the only surviving member of the original Lexington Platoon. During the United States' campaign to achieve victory over the Axis Powers, Mr. Cecil entered the war by joining some of the bloodiest battles of the Pacific and continued to fight until the Empire of Japan signed the Japanese Instrument of Surrender on board the USS Missouri on September 2, 1954. Mr. Cecil was a member of the first wave of U.S. forces that stormed the islands of Saipan and Tarakan. He was delayed entering the battles on the island of Okinawa for one day due to a Japanese kamikaze plane striking the naval ship he was aboard and causing him and his fellow service members to abandon ship. Astonishingly, after floating in the shark infested waters for about 45 minutes, Mr. Cecil was rescued by a nearby U.S. naval vessel. On June 20, 1944, during fierce combat on the islands of Saipan, Mr. Cecil received shrapnel wounds throughout his body caused by an enemy's exploding artillery ordinance. Because of a severe concussion that left him unconscious, Mr. Cecil was believed by his comrades to be dead. Miraculously, Mr. Cecil recovered and courageously returned to the battlefield, fighting until the Marines took control of the islands. When asked how he was able to make it through the dangers and challenges of war, Mr. Cecil said, ``I took it one day at a time, and I did what I was supposed to do.'' Today, he can still vividly recall his experience, and is often reminded of his involvements by gazing at a portrait of a Japanese officer whom he killed in combat. However, it was Mr. Cecil's discovery of a map in the officer's pocket which outlined many of the enemy's artillery positions that earned him a battlefield promotion from private to corporal. Mr. Cecil also earned a Purple Heart due to the injuries he sustained during battle. Mr. Cecil's bravery and that of his fellow men and women in uniform secured our freedoms for future generations. He is truly an outstanding American, a protector of freedom, and an inspiration to us all. ____________________ TRIBUTE TO ADVERTISING INNOVATOR JOE PHILPORT, Ph.D. ______ HON. DAVID SCOTT of georgia in the house of representatives Tuesday, December 2, 2014 Mr. DAVID SCOTT of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, today I rise to offer a tribute to a leader in advertising research and innovation--Joe Philport, Ph.D.--who plans to retire at the end of this year. I have a special appreciation for advertising, based on my professional background. After earning an MBA from Wharton, I started an advertising business in Atlanta, Georgia, representing major corporations and other clients. Therefore, I know the importance of ratings when buying and selling media for advertising. All parties benefit from the availability of a trusted currency to measure audience. Dr. Philport led the development of a modernized method to measure audiences for out of home advertising. In 2002, he became chief executive officer of the Traffic Audit Bureau (TAB). In those days, out of home media was measured by traffic counts, or how many people were likely to pass by a billboard or a bus shelter. By early 2010, guided by Dr. Philport's leadership, TAB introduced a new ratings system that measures audiences that actually see out of home ads. The modernized TAB Out of Home Ratings provides detailed information about audiences, including age, gender, and ethnicity. This sort of information is important to those buying media, the customers. Mr. Speaker, I [[Page 16428]] have been a longtime billboard customer, so these types of improvements in audience measurement are important to me personally. The ability to collect and analyze vast amounts of data offers benefits in the efficiency of communicating messages. We all know the need to balance the use of data with respect for privacy. As a former advertising executive and as a buyer of advertising, I ask my colleagues to join me in commending Dr. Joe Philport for his contributions to the advertising industry and to wish him well in retirement. ____________________ IN RECOGNITION OF MRS. PENNY LUKENBILL'S SERVICE TO MARSHALL COUNTY, INDIANA ______ HON. JACKIE WALORSKI of indiana in the house of representatives Tuesday, December 2, 2014 Mrs. WALORSKI. Mr. Speaker, today I rise to recognize Mrs. Penny Lukenbill, for her service and dedication to Marshall County and the State of Indiana for the past 15 years. A resident of Plymouth, Indiana, Penny and her husband Kenneth have been married for 39 years. In 1981 they welcomed their son Adam who is now an attorney and partner in his father's law firm Lukenbill and Lukenbill. Eager to continue her own education, Mrs. Lukenbill received her bachelor's degree in psychology from Indiana University South Bend in 1995, where she graduated cum laude. Mr. Speaker, Mrs. Lukenbill has displayed a constant commitment to serving Hoosiers of Marshall County. In 1999 she was elected to serve as the county treasurer, and held that position until 2007, when she was elected as the Marshall County Auditor. In addition to her duties as auditor, she served as president of both the Association of Indiana Counties and the Indiana County Treasurers Association. Mrs. Lukenbill's dedication to her community is evident from her past membership on the Plymouth Public Library Board of Trustees, Plymouth Park Board, and the Plymouth Industrial Development Corporation Board. During Mrs. Lukenbill's distinguished career in public service, she has received multiple awards and recognitions. In 2012, she received Outstanding County Auditor from the Indiana Association of County Commissioners and in 2004, she was awarded the Plymouth Chamber of Commerce Public Servant of the Year. These awards are just a small reminder of how much Mrs. Lukenbill's service has meant to the citizens of Marshall County. Her exemplary dedication to the community is seen in her service as an elder at the First Presbyterian Church of Plymouth and in leading past Lions Sight mission trips to Mexico. On behalf of Indiana's Second Congressional District, I am honored to recognize Penny Lukenbill's service and her unprecedented community involvement throughout Marshall County. ____________________ RECOGNIZING THE ZONTA CLUB OF THE TONAWANDAS ______ HON. BRIAN HIGGINS of new york in the house of representatives Tuesday, December 2, 2014 Mr. HIGGINS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the Zonta Club of the Tonawandas as the Chamber of Commerce of the Tonawandas honors the club for their outstanding community service at their 2014 Awards Dinner. The Zonta Club of the Tonawandas was formed on April 15th, 1931, by founding officers Mrs. Helen Annis, Miss Althea Wilson, Miss Emma Barnard, Mrs. Lillian Dickson, Mrs. Benjamin Rand. Their Charter Members were Pauline VanVorhees, Marian Strum, Margaret McNerney, Catherine Rowley Lautz, Clara Collins, Grace Eaton, Rena Hilton, and Edna Sutton. The mission of the Zonta Club is a worldwide network of executives and professionals working together to advance the status of women worldwide through service and advocacy. The Zonta Club of the Tonawandas focuses on scholarship awards to college bound students and providing financial assistance to local outreach organizations. Annual scholarships have been awarded to Tonawanda and North Tonawanda High School graduates. Local aid organizations that have benefitted from the generosity of the Zonta Club include Inner Faith Food Pantry, Meals on Wheels, Salvation Army and YWCA Carrel House. In partnership with the YWCA of the Tonawandas, the Zonta Club has developed ZAP, a computer education and training program for women. ZAP teaches basic keyboarding, Microsoft Word, and Microsoft Excel skills, which helps participants build independence and self-worth. Mr. Speaker, thank you for allowing me a few moments to recognize the Zonta Club of the Tonawandas for their excellent community service work. I wish them the best in all their future endeavors and commend their honorable mission. ____________________ TRIBUTE TO RICHARD S. GOLDSTEIN ON HIS INDUCTION INTO THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING HALL OF FAME ______ HON. ANNA G. ESHOO of california in the house of representatives Tuesday, December 2, 2014 Ms. ESHOO. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Richard Goldstein on his induction into the Affordable Housing Hall of Fame. Affordable Housing Finance magazine created the Hall of Fame in 2006, honoring those who shape, develop and preserve affordable housing by advocacy, drafting policy and legislation, and building projects. Rick Goldstein has earned and richly deserves his place in the Hall of Fame. Rick earned his undergraduate degree from the State University of New York at Buffalo and his Juris Doctor from Boston College School of Law and he is a partner in the law firm of Nixon Peabody LLP. He has worked tirelessly to preserve the low-income tax credit since its enactment in 1986, and is a national authority on the program. One of Rick's partners wrote, ``This is a significant tribute recognizing Rick's leadership and experience counseling syndicators, investors, developers and others on complex transactions and policy involving the low-income housing tax credit.'' Rick Goldstein's stellar legal career has been dedicated to preserving the low-income housing tax credit and advising clients on how the tax credit will impact their businesses. He is a trusted advisor to many Members of Congress who rely on him to assist in their legislative efforts on affordable housing. Rick is keenly aware of the need for more affordable housing in our nation and has said, ``Sometimes Congress gets the Tax Code right,'' referring to the Affordable Housing Credit. He attributes the bipartisan support of the program to the fact that the tax credit truly goes to those it purports to benefit, not investors or developers of affordable rental housing, but the actual tenants of these housing developments. Mr. Speaker, I ask the entire House of Representatives to join me in saluting and congratulating Rick Goldstein as he receives this great honor. Thousands of families and individuals live in affordable, decent housing across our country today because of his work. Rick Goldstein has strengthened communities and our country through his extraordinary work and it is an honor to pay tribute to a great man, a prized professional and a valued friend. ____________________ RECOGNIZING COACH KEN SPARKS OF CARSON-NEWMAN UNIVERSITY ______ HON. DAVID P. ROE of tennessee in the house of representatives Tuesday, December 2, 2014 Mr. ROE of Tennessee. Mr. Speaker, I submit these remarks today to recognize Coach Ken Sparks of the Carson-Newman's Eagles football program on becoming number 6 on the NCAA's all-time career wins list with 324 victories. As a member of this distinguished group, Coach Sparks has helped set the bar for athletic excellence in our corner of East Tennessee. This recognition stands as a testament to his hard work and dedication. Over his 35 year career at Carson-Newman, Coach Sparks has led the Eagles to five NAIA championships and 24 playoff appearances. Personally, he has attained many awards including the12-time SAC Coach of the Year, the 2002 Division II Coach of the Year, and was inducted into the Tennessee Sports Hall of Fame. In addition to his successes on the field, Coach Sparks has also devoted his career to the development of his players within the community. Serving as mentor to countless young athletes, he has instilled the values of hard work and perseverance into those playing for him. Coach Sparks has served as an inspiration to our community and has impacted the lives of those around him. [[Page 16429]] I thank Coach Sparks for his service to Carson-Newman University and our community. ____________________ TRIBUTE TO HER EXCELLENCY DEBORAH-MAE LOVELL, AMBASSADOR OF ANTIGUA AND BARBUDA ______ HON. DONALD M. PAYNE, JR. of new jersey in the house of representatives Tuesday, December 2, 2014 Mr. PAYNE. Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues here in the House of Representatives to join me as I rise to pay tribute to H.E. Deborah-Mae Lovell, Antigua and Barbuda's Ambassador to the United States of America and Antigua and Barbuda's Permanent Representative to the Organization of American States (OAS) who distinguished herself in strengthening the bonds of friendship between Antigua and Barbuda and our country as well as by her work through the OAS in promoting peace and goodwill in our hemisphere. Ambassador Lovell will enter into retirement on December 1, 2014 having served her country for over thirty-one years, ten of which were spent in the roles of Ambassador and Permanent Representative in Washington D.C. As Ambassador to the United States of America, Ambassador Lovell built bridges of understanding at both the executive and legislative branches where she consistently engaged officials on the imperative of implementing mutually beneficial policies. Beyond this, she earned the trust of the fourteen member independent countries of the Caribbean Community (CARICOM) to lead discussions with members of the legislative branch on issues ranging from energy through security and immigration to trade. Always active in promoting the rights of the underserved and the underrepresented, Ambassador Lovell was a passionate advocate for youth, afro-descents and women at the OAS. Propelled by the belief that young people are our investment in the future, she identified youth empowerment as the theme when she chaired the Permanent Council of the OAS. Her initiative was complemented by the thirty-four Foreign Ministers and Representatives of the highest policy making body of the OAS, the General Assembly, (the Thirty-Eighth Regular Session) who crafted a declaration, Youth and Democratic Values, that committed the hemisphere to strengthening the political, social and economic participation of youth in the democratic process. During Ambassador Lovell's tenure, Antigua and Barbuda spearheaded the adoption of two landmark Conventions at the OAS that would help to eliminate racism and intolerance. These were the Inter-American Convention against Racism, Racial Discrimination and Related Forms of Intolerance and the Inter-American Convention on All Forms of Discrimination and Intolerance. Furthermore, on the question of women's rights, Ambassador Lovell has championed women entrepreneurship and has worked against domestic violence. Ambassador Lovell is an ardent believer in international cooperation and by forming partnerships with friendly countries; she has laid the groundwork in establishing a modern address system for her country that would lead to the better provision of government services such as the distribution of utilities. In 2010, Ambassador Lovell was bestowed a knighthood, the highest honor of Antigua and Barbuda for her services rendered in the field of diplomacy and carries the title Dame Commander of the Most Distinguished Order of the Nation. Ambassador Lovell has received commendations by the State of Maryland, the City of Baltimore, the Maryland House of Delegates, the Lieutenant Governor of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, the National Association of Negro Business and Professional Women's Club and the Consulate General of Antigua and Barbuda. Under Ambassador Lovell's leadership, the Embassy of Antigua and Barbuda had been selected as one of the top ten embassies in Washington D.C. Mr. Speaker, I know my fellow members of the House of Representatives agree that Ambassador Lovell deserves to be recognized for a job well done and for her many years of service to the people of Antigua and Barbuda, the United States of America and the Organization of American States. ____________________ IN RECOGNITION OF N.E. REED ON HIS RETIREMENT AS EDMONSON COUNTY JUDGE- EXECUTIVE ______ HON. BRETT GUTHRIE of kentucky in the house of representatives Tuesday, December 2, 2014 Mr. GUTHRIE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in recognition of N.E. Reed. After serving more than 20 years as the Edmonson County Judge- Executive, N.E. will retire at the end of the year. Prior to taking elected office in 1994, N.E. taught at Kyrock Elementary School, was an employee at Cutler Hammer and worked in the dairy industry doing quality assurance. Throughout each of these jobs, N.E. has always been a fixture in the Edmonson County community. His list of accomplishments is long; from purchasing buildings to serve as the home of key local offices, to rebuilding others, N.E. has left his mark on Edmonson County. During his time as Chair of the Regional Development Board, N.E. expanded the county's buildings--all while leaving Edmonson County debt free. Basketball courts, playgrounds and walking trails are among the many additions he made by investing in local parks for the community. Mammoth Cave, which covers a large part of Edmonson County, didn't become what it is today overnight. N.E. ensured that families who sold land to create the park were protected and that the land would be preserved for future generations to enjoy. N.E.'s commitment and selflessness is clear to everyone in Edmonson County. But it is even more evident that by putting the people first, he has established a strong community that will benefit the entire region for years to come. I am grateful for all of N.E.'s hard work and dedication to the people of Edmonson County. I wish him well on his retirement and look forward to continuing to work with him in the community. ____________________ HONORING ``RAMBLIN' LOU'' SCHRIVER AS HE RECEIVES THE 2014 LIFETIME ACHIEVEMENT AWARD ______ HON. BRIAN HIGGINS of new york in the house of representatives Tuesday, December 2, 2014 Mr. HIGGINS. Mr. Speaker, today I rise to honor Lou Schriver as he receives the Lifetime Achievement Award from the Chamber of Commerce of the Tonawandas. Known as Ramblin' Lou, the Tonawanda native's distinguished career in broadcasting is worthy of praise. Born and raised on Young Street in Tonawanda, New York, Ramblin' Lou worked at his father's riding academy during his childhood. While he has earned national recognitions, he has always remained close to his roots, doing all he can to promote the Tonawandas. In 1947, Ramblin' Lou started a ``Twin Cities'' radio show on 1440AM in Niagara Falls, New York to honor merchants in the Tonawandas. He has performed many assemblies at Tonawanda High School to benefit various charitable causes and community members. Annually, Lou and Charlie Fleischman organized an annual benefit show for the ``Twin Cities'' for over 25 years. Since the introduction of Canal Fest in 1983, the Ramblin' Lou Family Band has performed at the iconic Tonawanda festival. A lifetime member of Musicians' Local #209/106 of Tonawanda, Lou served as the president and general manager of WXRL Radio. Ramblin' Lou is the recipient of many local and national honors. In 1978, he was inducted into the Walkway of Stars in the Country Music Hall of Fame in Nashville, Tennessee. Other honors include the induction into the Buffalo Music Hall of Fame in 1996; the Distinguished Broadcaster Award from the Buffalo Broadcaster Pioneers in May 1998; the Tonawanda High School Distinguished Alumni Award in May 2002; serving as Grand Marshall for the Canal Fest Parade in July 2007; and election into the New York State Country Music Hall of Fame in 2010. Mr. Speaker, thank you for allowing me a few moments to recognize the life and career of Ramblin' Lou Schriver. His broadcast excellence and promotion of his hometown are honorable, and I wish him the best in all his future endeavors. ____________________ HONORING RETIREMENT OF POLICE OFFICER JOHN M. POPPE ______ HON. JOHN GARAMENDI of california in the house of representatives Tuesday, December 2, 2014 Mr. GARAMENDI. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize Police Officer George M. Poppe as he retires after more than 24 years of law enforcement service. [[Page 16430]] Officer Poppe began his law enforcement career in 1990 as a Police Officer with the City of Albany. On November 3, 1997, he was hired as a Police Officer with the Fairfield Police Department. Officer Poppe served the community in various capacities that included Patrol, Violent Crime Suppression, and Major Crimes Investigation. Some of his most significant contributions to the Police Department have been the special assignments he held including Special Activity and Felony Enforcement (SAFE Team), Special Weapons and Tactics (SWAT Team), K-9 Handler, Firearms Instructor, and Field Training Officer. Officer Poppe has received numerous commendations from citizens and coworkers, and he was awarded two Lifesaving Medals, the first in 2000 and the second in 2001, for his heroic intervention, exemplary performance and dedication to duty during two critical and life- threatening incidents. Officer Poppe has been a valued employee and his commitment to the community was evidenced on a daily basis. He is a loyal representative of the law enforcement community and admired for his hard work, dedication, and positive work ethic. ____________________ IN MEMORY OF THOMAS ``TOMMY'' THOMPSON ______ HON. JOE BARTON of texas in the house of representatives Tuesday, December 2, 2014 Mr. BARTON. Mr. Speaker, I rise with a heavy heart today to honor an amazing life, and a legendary career. On November 6th, America lost one of the great innovators in medical technology and a dear friend of mine, Thomas ``Tommy'' Thompson. While Tommy Thompson may not be a household name, there is not one household in America who has not been touched by his life's work. Tommy was a dynamic medical device innovator whose passion in life was to improve the human condition. And in this pursuit he was immensely successful. But Tommy wasn't content with his own successes, he wanted to make sure that the countless doctors, engineers and other innovators in this field also had an environment where they could develop medical breakthroughs. Tommy was the type of leader who didn't just point out problems, he tirelessly fought to fix them. In 1992, he joined with a group of innovators to establish the Medical Device Manufacturers Association to give the innovative and entrepreneurial sector of the industry a strong and independent voice in the nation's capital. What started as a handful of medical technology companies has grown to nearly 300 members across the United States. Under Tommy's leadership, the association helped drive countless policies and regulations that improved patient care and innovation. For the past few years, Tommy discussed the devastating impact the medical device tax was having on innovators trying to develop the cures of tomorrow. Tommy was also a tireless advocate to ensure patients and physicians had access to the technologies they needed, and worked to remove barriers and roadblocks so that they could obtain the best care possible. There is no question that medical technology innovators today are standing on the shoulders of Tommy and all the passion and hard work he dedicated towards improving the innovation ecosystem. To honor Tommy, I will continue to work to repeal this tax. Tommy's passion also extended to helping organizations and individuals in his home state of Texas. He devoted countless hours to many of his favorite organizations there including the Fairhill School, the Foundation for Lovejoy Schools, and Phi Kappa Sigma at The University of Texas. Our thoughts and prayers go out to his wife Betty and all his family and loved ones at this difficult time. We have all lost a great man whose love of improving patient care was second only to that for his family. At one time or another everyone wonders what kind of legacy our lives might produce, and what it is that future generations may say about our brief time here on Earth. Tommy never said it--he was too humble and too magnanimous--but I will: Tommy Thompson was a legend and a leader in the medical device industry, allowing patients around the world to live longer, healthier lives. He gave so much of his time, treasure and talents, never expecting anything in return. Whether helping a local school or giving time to mentor an engineer just starting in the field, Tommy cared about people and improving this world. That is his legacy. That is what he will always be known for. That is a legacy anyone would be proud of, and we will be forever grateful for all that Tommy did on behalf of patients and innovators. Thomas ``Tommy'' Thompson led a life dedicated to that old-fashioned notion that if you're focused on helping others, you truly can change the world. Tommy did change the world, and we are all better off thanks to his selfless passion and generosity. ____________________ IN RECOGNITION OF DR. MIKE McCALL ON HIS RETIREMENT AS PRESIDENT OF THE KENTUCKY COMMUNITY AND TECHNICAL COLLEGE SYSTEM ______ HON. BRETT GUTHRIE of kentucky in the house of representatives Tuesday, December 2, 2014 Mr. GUTHRIE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in recognition of Dr. Mike McCall. After more than 15 years serving as the President of the Kentucky Community and Technical College System (KCTCS), Dr. McCall will retire in January 2015. KCTCS, a network of 16 colleges located throughout the Commonwealth of Kentucky, currently educates more than 92,000 students. Kentucky's Second District is fortunate to be the home of three of those campuses--Owensboro Community and Technical College, Southcentral Kentucky Community and Technical College and Elizabethtown Community and Technical College. During Dr. McCall's tenure, KCTCS has grown to be the largest provider of post-secondary education in the Commonwealth. Today, KCTCS represents nearly 50 percent of all undergraduate college students, serving more than 5,000 businesses and training more than 52,000 employees on an annual basis. Dr. McCall has been the recipient of numerous awards and honors, but it is Kentucky that is the real winner. Dr. McCall's career dedicated to better serving community and technical colleges has been one that will create a lasting impact on the Commonwealth. I wish Dr. McCall well during this new phase of his life and know that KCTCS will continue to grow and prosper. ____________________ HONORING MARK E. SALTARELLI AS THE 2014 CITIZEN OF THE YEAR ______ HON. BRIAN HIGGINS of new york in the house of representatives Tuesday, December 2, 2014 Mr. HIGGINS. Mr. Speaker, today I rise to honor Mr. Mark E. Saltarelli as he is recognized as Citizen of the Year by the Chamber of Commerce of the Tonawandas. Mr. Saltarelli is a practicing attorney and former acting City Court Judge, whose dedication to public service and the law is commendable. A graduate of the University of Buffalo and Syracuse Law School, Mr. Saltarelli practices at Saltarelli and Associates, P.C., in the city of Tonawanda. He is a trusted attorney whose sound legal advice has helped many in the community for decades. In addition to his legal work, Mr. Saltarelli has leadership roles in many non-profit organizations, including the Knights of Columbus, the Tonawanda Club, the Kiwanis Club of the Tonawandas, the Riviera Theatre, Gateway Harbor, Inc., and Buffalo's Franciscan Center. Mr. Saltarelli is involved heavily in the St. Francis of Assisi Parish Council and their school board. While the school is in danger of closing, Mr. Saltarelli has joined with many in the community in an attempt to keep the school open. A family man, Mr. Saltarelli enjoys spending time with his wife Marcia and their two children, Rachel and Mark Thomas. Mr. Speaker, thank you for allowing me a few moments to recognize the accomplishments of Mark Saltarelli, the Chamber of Commerce of the Tonawandas Citizen of the Year. I congratulate Mr. Saltarelli on this honor and wish him continued success in all his future endeavors. ____________________ CELEBRATING STEP AFRIKA! ON ITS 20TH ANNIVERSARY ______ HON. ELEANOR HOLMES NORTON of the district of columbia in the house of representatives Tuesday, December 2, 2014 Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to ask the House of Representatives to join me in celebrating Step Afrika! on its 20th anniversary, which will be celebrated on December 4, 2014. Founded two decades ago, Step Afrika! was originally created as a cultural exchange program with the Soweto Dance Theatre of Johannesburg, South Africa, and has grown to [[Page 16431]] become an internationally recognized dance company. Stepping is a uniquely American art form that originated on the campuses of Historically Black Colleges and Universities. Step Afrika! is the first professional company dedicated to the art of stepping. Step Afrika! promotes an appreciation for stepping through performances and arts education programs in the District of Columbia, across the rest of the United States and around the world. Step Afrika! specializes in the use of stepping as an educational tool for young students. Step Afrika! brings stepping and its associated values of teamwork, commitment and discipline to students in classrooms, non-traditional dance venues and performing arts venues. Step Afrika! introduced stepping to the Kennedy Center's Teaching Artist program in 1998, and served as the first step group for the Washington Performing Arts' Concerts in Schools program. In 2005, Step Afrika! earned its first DC Mayor's Arts Award for Outstanding Contribution to Education, in acknowledgement for its expanding role in arts education. Step Afrika! brings stepping to more than 20,000 students each year. Step Afrika! is also globally renowned. The organization serves as an official Cultural Ambassador for the U.S. State Department. It has represented the United States and countries around the world including South Sudan. Step Afrika! has also provided moral, welfare, and recreation programs for service members overseas in Bahrain and Djibouti. Mr. Speaker, I ask the House of Representatives to join me in congratulating Step Afrika!, its Founder and Executive Director, C. Brian Williams, and the Chair of Step Afrika!'s Board of Directors, Jacqueline N. Francis, M.D. on 20 years of service to the District of Columbia and the rest of the United States. ____________________ HISTORICAL RECORD OF OPINION EDITORIAL ON CANNED TUNA MADE BY CHILD LABOR ______ HON. ENI F. H. FALEOMAVAEGA of american samoa in the house of representatives Tuesday, December 2, 2014 Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to include, for historical purposes, the following opinion editorial on canned tuna made by child labor. [From The Hill, Jan. 8, 2014] Tuna Firms Spar Over School Lunch Access (By Kevin Bogardus) The world's largest tuna companies are making a splash in Washington with a fight over rules that keep some catches out of school lunches. StarKist and Tri Marine are clashing with Bumble Bee and Chicken of the Sea over the Agriculture Department's strict Buy American standards for where tuna is cleaned, canned and shipped. Bumble Bee and Chicken of the Sea lose under the rules. Both companies have facilities that process tuna in the United States, but their product is also cleaned overseas. Under the USDA standards, their tuna cannot be served in schools, denying them access to a lucrative market. StarKist, on the other hand, has a major operation in the U.S. territory of American Samoa. Tri Marine is building up a new facility in the territory as well. The two factions are sparring over language in the House agricultural appropriations bill that would require the USDA to issue a report on how the department could revise its Buy American standards, including ``the option for less than 100 percent of the value of the tuna product be United States produced.'' The language could be slipped into the omnibus spending bill that lawmakers aim to release sometimes this week. If it becomes law, that report could clear the way for Bumble Bee and Chicken of the Sea to begin selling to schools. Millions of dollars in government sales are at stake, including for American Samoa, where tuna is a linchpin of the island economy. The fight over the provision has become bitter, with both sides hurling charges of child labor and inhumane working conditions at the other. ``I suspect most members don't have the facts yet on where Bumble Bee and Chicken of the Sea source their tuna. And if they would be informed, they would not be supportive of this language,'' said Jim Bonham, chairman of the government affairs practice at Manatt, Phelps & Phillips. Bonham lobbies for Tri Marine, founded in Singapore, and StarKist, which is headquartered in Pittsburgh but owned by Korea's Dongwon Industries. StarKist's tuna qualifies for the USDA's school nutrition program because it's processed in American Samoa, and Tri-Marine's catch should as well once its plant is up and running. But their competitors want in on the action. ``For years, we have been trying to revise these standards. So instead of 100 percent U.S. content, we would revise it down to 80 percent,'' said Jeff Pike, CEO of Pike Associates, which lobbies for Bumble Bee. ``We are buying fish from U.S. boats. We are working with U.S. fishermen. We have a U.S. factory and we are the only U.S.-owned major brand.'' Tuna purchases by the U.S. government represent a significant chunk of change. The USDA's purchases of canned and pouched tuna have equaled around $20 million per year over the past decade. The provision under scrutiny could upend that market, critics argue. ``The parameters of the study are so narrow, we know what the outcome will be. It asks them [the USDA] to come up with multiple options to erode the Buy American standards,'' Bonham said. Bumble Bee's advocate contends that changing the standards would simply bring competition to American Samoa's tuna industry. ``There is a lot of sympathy for American Samoa. I'm convinced, even with the change, the government will still buy tuna from American Samoa,'' Pike said. ``Tuna is high in protein. Tuna is low in fat. What is your objection to putting competition into the school lunch program so kids can eat more tuna fish?'' American Samoa has consolidated lobbying forces to protect its golden industry. Last summer, StarKist, Tri Marine, the Chamber of Commerce of American Samoa and others formed the Stronger Economy for American Samoa Coalition. The group has worked to promote American Samoa, including highlighting a Pittsburgh Post-Gazette op-ed by Pittsburgh Steeler Troy Polamalu that discussed the ``economic distress'' in the territory. Mark McCullough, a coalition spokesman, said loosening the Buy American standards would hurt American Samoa. ``Congress needs to be partnering with the islands' public and private industry leaders on a new economic development plan, not costing more Americans their jobs by weakening what it means to buy America,'' McCullough said. Del. Eni Faleomavaega (D), American Samoa's delegate on Capitol Hill, has sought to substitute the report language with his own measures that would target Bumble Bee and Chicken of the Sea. One proposal would have USDA study whether child labor was used to process tuna bought by the government. Faleomavaega's aides have given a PowerPoint presentation, obtained by The Hill, that cites human rights reports that blast Bumble Bee and Chicken of the Sea for using Thai facilities, where workers allegedly suffer terrible conditions while cleaning tuna. ``It is disgraceful to suggest that poor kids in Asia should be forced to provide tuna sandwiches for America's school lunch program. Bumble Beeware! It is time for America to know the truth about Bumble Bee and Chicken of the Sea,'' Faleomavaega said in a statement to The Hill. In opposition to the language, Faleomavaega has sent letters to select members of the House and Senate Agriculture panels, Appropriations agriculture subcommittees and to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.). The delegate has also asked for help from House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), according to his office. ``I suspect most consumers don't want to buy child labor tuna. . . . Bumble Bee and Chicken of the Sea are kicking a hornet's nest here,'' Bonham said. StarKist's critics said the company has used the Thai plants as well, but its supporters say the company has made sure not to sell any foreign-processed tuna to the U.S. government. StarKist has had to contend with a Food and Drug Administration ``warning letter'' for poor workplace conditions in 2011. That halted its tuna sales to the USDA, but backers of the company say the issue has since been resolved. Bumble Bee and Chicken of the Sea also have their supporters in Congress. Rep. Linda Sanchez (D-Calif.) introduced legislation last year that would loosen the Buy American standards for tuna. ``It simply provides more flexibility to the Department of Agriculture's canned tuna purchasing program. The Tuna Competition Act is designed to bolster domestic industry,'' said Mattie Munoz, a Sanchez spokeswoman. Bumble Bee has a tuna canning plant in Santa Fe Springs, Calif.--based in Sanchez's district--that employs more than 300 workers. ``Congresswoman Sanchez is always happy to fight for job creators in the 38th District. However, it is important to note that this bill will help US tuna producers nationally,'' Munoz said. ____ [From The Hill, Jan. 14, 2014] Boycott Canned Tuna Made by Child Labor (By Rep. Eni Faleomavaega (D-American Samoa)) As an Asia-Pacific American and former chairman and current ranking member of [[Page 16432]] the House Foreign Affairs subcommittee on Asia and the Pacific, I hope that Congress and consumers will boycott efforts by Bumble Bee and Chicken of the Sea to introduce canned tuna made by child labor into America's school lunch program. Bumble Bee and Chicken of the Sea are disqualified from providing canned tuna to the Department of Agriculture's school lunch program because both companies clean their tuna in factories in Thailand, which use child, trafficked, and other forced and exploited labor. The Environmental Justice Foundation says ``the processing industry in Thailand does not just have a problem with human rights abuses, but is built on it.'' This brutal business practice is a gross violation of the Department of Agriculture's Buy America program and is simply un-American. USDA provisions exist to ensure that federal dollars are spent on products that are available and produced 100 percent in the United States. Buy America provisions also exist to ensure the highest quality goods are being purchased by the U.S. government, and they are being manufactured in a manner consistent with American policies as related to child labor, working conditions and wages. StarKist, which operates in the U.S. Territory of American Samoa, complies with Buy America provisions. At StarKist Samoa, our workers fully manufacture canned tuna from the whole fish through to the final, labeled product. On occasion, if enough whole fish is not available, StarKist has in the past used frozen loins to supplement the whole fish. However, in compliance with USDA regulations, StarKist uses segregated lines to make sure only whole fish processed 100 percent in the U.S. is used for the school lunch program. Despite misinformation put forward by Bumble Bee and Chicken of the Sea, American Samoa's workers are local citizens and legal residents from the neighboring country of Samoa. StarKist abides by U.S. labor and environmental laws, and pays workers in accordance with federal minimum wage standards as determined by the U.S. Congress, unlike tuna factories in Thailand where Bumble Bee and Chicken of the Sea clean their fish. In response to proponents who say there is no competition in America's school lunch program, Tri Marine is making a $50 million investment in American Samoa. Tri Marine intends to use the same business model as StarKist by cleaning the whole fish through to the final, labeled product. And as for those trying to take advantage of a temporary interruption of canned tuna to America's school lunch program due to a warning letter StarKist received from the Food and Drug Administration in 2011 about deviations from the Hazard Analysis and Critical Control of Point and Low Acid Food requirements, the suspension has been lifted and had nothing to do with the debate at hand. Furthermore, Bumble Bee and Chicken of the Sea have come under fire from the FDA due to problems with seams on their can lids not meeting safety standards. In 2013, both Bumble Bee and Chicken of the Sea issued a nationwide recall of their canned tuna products because their faulty seals could make the tuna vulnerable to spoilage and contamination, which could sicken consumers. Tragically, in 2012, a tuna worker was cooked to death at Bumble Bee's plant in California, and the company was fined and cited for egregious safety violations. Once you unveil the truth, it is crystal clear that proponents of changing the Buy America requirements for canned tuna in our school lunch program are the same proponents who believe poor children should sweep floors in exchange for their lunch. It is bad enough that child labor and human rights abuses exist. But it is disgraceful to suggest that poor kids in Asia or anywhere else should be forced to provide tuna sandwiches for America's school lunch program. ____ [From The Hill, Jan. 28, 2014] The Buzz on Bumble Bee (By Del. Eni Faleomavaega (D-American Samoa)) Bumble Bee has been lobbying Capitol Hill since 2007 to introduce canned tuna made by child labor to America's schoolchildren and troops under the guise of creating competition, reducing prices for government agencies and increasing the presence of a healthy school lunch option for our children. Chicken of the Sea (COS) joined the effort in 2009. Both companies clean their tuna in low-wage countries like Thailand where human rights abuses, including the use of child labor, are rampant in the processing industry. Chicken of the Sea is owned by Thai Union, which is under investigation for employing 14- to 17-year-old migrants. Bumble Bee's supplier in Thailand is Sea Value, and Unicord is part of the Sea Value group, which is also under heavy criticism for the same human rights and child labor violations. Bumble Bee owns a 10 percent share in Sea Value. The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) knows about human trafficking in the canned tuna industry and said no to the guise. However, with the support of Rep. Jack Kingston (R- Ga.), Bumble Bee and COS succeeded in getting language inserted in the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2014, which now requires the USDA to submit a report within 60 days regarding potential ways that would allow a revision of the Master Solicitation for Commodity Procurements for the purchase of canned tuna. This is just a disingenuous way of requesting that the USDA weaken the USDA's 100 percent Buy America provisions and permit canned tuna made by child labor into America's school lunch program. In response, I called for a boycott on Jan. 14. And on Jan. 15, Rep. Kingston, who is my friend, clarified his intent regarding Buy America provisions. As reported by The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, Kingston stated, ``I think the concern is, what can you do to not necessarily go into the Buy American provision, but are there alternatives?'' On Jan. 16, Chris Lischewski--CEO of Bumble Bee--perhaps troubled that he may be losing Kingston's support, buzzed all about how Bumble Bee uses companies in Thailand to clean some of its tuna (The Hill's Congress blog: ``Sorry, Charlie, but that's a fishy story'') and how he ``knows'' those companies don't violate child labor standards because they sign a statement saying they don't. Every schoolchild in America knows you can't rely on an offender to tell the truth about whether or not they have offended. According to the Environmental Justice Foundation, Thailand's processing workforce is ``90 percent migrant and a large proportion is unregistered and trafficked.'' As acknowledged by Thailand, its government cannot account for the well-being of its migrant workers. The U.S. Department of Labor reported in 2012 that ``the Government [of Thailand] lacks current nationwide data on child labor . . . and children continue to be engaged in the worst forms of child labor, including in hazardous activities in . . . seafood processing.'' And so, while Chicken of the Sea and Bumble Bee opt to continue the un-American practice of having their canned tuna made by child labor in Thailand. StarKist chooses to clean its tuna in American Samoa. And yes, unlike Lischewski, every schoolchild in America also knows that American Samoa is part of the United States. Canned tuna supplied by StarKist for America's school lunch program is 100 percent made in the USA. On the rare occasion that StarKist uses frozen loins, it maintains a separate, segregated line in accordance with USDA guidelines to assure no frozen loins or foreign-cleaned fish is used in America's school lunch program. StarKist, a U.S. corporation and a subsidiary of the Dongwon Group of South Korea, abides by all U.S. labor and environmental laws. As for monopolies, according to a Government Accountability Office report, since 2006, companies like Bumble Bee that use child labor to make their canned tuna operate at a $7.5 million per year advantage and climb over companies like StarKist that make their canned tuna in the USA. Regarding safety standards, in 2013, both Chicken of the Sea and Bumble Bee issued a nationwide recall of their canned tuna products because their faulty seals could make the tuna vulnerable to spoilage and contamination, which could sicken consumers. Tragically, in 2012, a tuna worker was cooked to death at Bumble Bee's plant in California, and the company was fined and cited for egregious safety violations. And so, while Bumble Bee's slogan may be Eat, Live and BeeWell, I believe consumers should consider a new label for a company so intent on selling tuna made by child labor to America's school children and troops: Bumble Bee Ware. ____ [For Immediate Release, Mar. 16, 2014] Bumble BeeWare, Why America's School Kids Should Just Say No to Tuna Sandwiches Made by Child Labor The WSJ opines about how fish is brain food and ought to be served up in school cafeterias. I would agree except for the whale of a tale the WSJ has penned up about Bumble Bee and Chicken of the Sea. The WSJ reports that the FDA found StarKist's American Samoa processing operation wasn't up to health standards, and that's why we have no tuna in school cafeterias. Only last year, Chicken of the Sea and Bumble Bee issued a nationwide recall of their canned tuna due to spoilage and contamination. In 2012, an employee was cooked to death at Bumble Bee's plant in California. Bumble Bee has little regard for its workers much less kids here or abroad, and neither does Chicken of the Sea. Both companies use child labor in Thailand to clean their tuna. Asian kids and other exploited workers are paid approximately $0.75 cents an hour to manually cut off the head, fins, and tail, and scrape off the skin. After the hard work is done, Bumble Bee and Chicken of the Sea ship the clean tuna back to the U.S. where about 200 workers in California and 200 in Georgia are paid to $12 to $18 an hour to put it in a can. By hook or crook both companies then claim they're American as apple pie and ought to be able to provide canned tuna for the USDA's 100% Buy America school lunch [[Page 16433]] program. Thankfully, reputable human rights organizations, including FinnWatch, and renowned human rights activists like Andy Hall, who is known to Nobel Peace Prize winner and Congressional Gold Medal recipient Aung San Suu Kyi, have documented the fraud. Chicken of the Sea is owned by Thai Union, the world's largest tuna exporter. Bumble Bee is supplied by and has interest in the Sea-Value owned Unicord factory in Thailand. FinnWatch found that both factories in Thailand employed 14- to 17-year old migrants. More than half of those interviewed reported workplace abuses including physical and verbal harassment, dangerous working conditions, high employment registration fees, and confiscation of passports. When your work papers and passports are confiscated, you become a slave to your employer. This is why the U.S. State Department's 2013 Trafficking in Persons (TIP) report underscores that ``the risk of labor trafficking among Burmese migrant workers in the seafood industry in [Thailand]'' is high; ``57 percent of those surveyed experienced conditions of forced labor.'' The AFL-CIO has filed a petition with the U.S. Trade Representative asking that the trade preferences for Thailand be suspended or terminated because the government in that country has failed to take meaningful steps to address worker and human rights abuses in a number of sectors, including seafood processing, or fish cleaning. Wal-Mart should also call for a boycott and take canned tuna made by Bumble Bee and Chicken of the Sea off their shelves. Most of all, the USDA shouldn't feed canned tuna made by child labor to America's school kids. Neither should Congress. It would be un-American to do so. StarKist, a subsidiary of a Korean company, is headquartered in Pennsylvania, USA and cleans its tuna in the U.S. Territory of American Samoa where our sons and daughters have served in record numbers in every U.S. military engagement from World War II to present. Our enlistment rates per capita are one of the highest in any State or Territory. Yes, StarKist employs our cousins from the neighboring island of Samoa, but we don't employ children, and we don't pay workers $0.75 cents and less per hour. Our employees are legal residents, paid in accordance with federal minimum wage laws and our canneries abide by all U.S. laws and regulations. That's why canned tuna made in American Samoa qualifies for the USDA's 100% Buy America school lunch program. Once upon a time, Chicken of the Sea and Bumble Bee also qualified. For more than 50 years, Chicken of the Sea operated in American Samoa and Bumble Bee in Puerto Rico. In 2009, Chicken of the Sea closed its operations, outsourced more than 2,000 jobs to its parent company in Thailand, and set up a skeletal crew in Georgia USA. In 2012, Bumble Bee left Puerto Rico, also outsourced American jobs to Thailand, and now keeps a small crew in California. By choice, neither company qualifies anymore to sell canned tuna to America's school kids because by choice their tuna is no longer 100% Made in the USA. And that's why Chicken of the Sea and Bumble Bee are having a tuna meltdown. ____________________ PERSONAL EXPLANATION ______ HON. SAM GRAVES of missouri in the house of representatives Tuesday, December 2, 2014 Mr. GRAVES of Missouri. Mr. Speaker, on Monday, December 1, I missed a series of Roll Call votes. Had I been present, I would have voted ``YEA'' on #532 and #533. ____________________ IN RECOGNITION OF EL CATANO ``LA CASITA'' COMMUNITY GARDEN ______ HON. CHARLES B. RANGEL of new york in the house of representatives Tuesday, December 2, 2014 Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Speaker, today I rise to recognize El Catano, affectionately known as ``La Casita'' Community Garden, which celebration took place on Saturday, June 7th in celebration of the 2014 National Puerto Rican Day Parade. In 1994, Jose and his sister Esther Reyes decided to look for an empty lot to start a community garden. The garden would be named after the Town of Catano, which is located across from the bay of San Juan, Puerto Rico. The lot was a rat infested dumping ground for garbage, needles and crack vials, before Jose and Esther took on the challenge and collected over 200 signatures throughout the immediate neighborhood to acquire the lot in support of a community garden. Support grew from community organizations and businesses, which enabled Jose and Esther to acquire the lot and to clean it. In 1995, La Casita de Catano Community Garden was born. Traditionally, there is a Puerto Rican Day Festival held each Saturday before the parade--New York City's third largest--along Third Avenue in East Harlem, with community members transforming the El Catano Community Garden into a celebration of Puerto Rican food and music. The presiding Mayor of Catano often joins local residents in the festivities at the garden, where a past mayoral plaque commends the successful work of its founder Jose Reyes--who established the garden 20 years ago--in organizing tournaments between the El Catano Community Garden's own baseball team and teams in Puerto Rico. La Casita stood up to the Giuliani's Administration efforts to close the garden in favor of market rate and commercial development. In 2008, under the leadership of the late City Councilman Philip Reed, El Catano Community Garden was saved. Councilman Reed enlisted the New York Restoration Project (NYRP) to restore this 2,500-square-foot site in partnership with Denali Construction. Re-envisioned by acclaimed landscape designer Billie Cohen, the space--Cohen's tenth garden design for NYRP--features an intricate pattern of bluestone tiles in front and pavers arranged in concentric circles in the back of the garden. Additional highlights include planting beds for perennials such as roses and rhododendron. El Catailo's new design is well-suited to the garden's primary use as a community gathering space and frequent site of birthday parties, christenings and baby showers, as well as children's activities and educational workshops. In addition, local senior citizens use the garden to play cards and dominoes and, each year, NYRP partners with garden members to host a family-friendly domino tournament. This garden is situated in an area starved for open green space within blocks of 10 schools and in close proximity to five New York City Housing Authority properties. The densely populated neighborhood's residents are primarily of Hispanic, Latino and African- American descent. The Board of Directors of the El Catano Community Garden remain in constant contact with their counterparts in their hometown of Catano, Puerto Rico. Every June and through the assistance of Carmen ``Puruca'' Ruiz they are honored to receive the Honorable Jose A. Rosario Melendez, Mayor of Catano during their annual National Puerto Rican Day weekend of activities at La Casita Community Garden. Mr. Speaker, I ask that you and my distinguished colleagues join me and the New York Congressional Delegation in paying tribute to Jose and Esther Reyes as they continue to maintain and keep the culture of Puerto Rico alive at ``La Casita de Catano''. ____________________ HISTORICAL RECORD OF NATIONAL EMERGENCY GRANT FUNDING IN AMERICAN SAMOA ______ HON. ENI F. H. FALEOMAVAEGA of american samoa in the house of representatives Tuesday, December 2, 2014 Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to include, for historical purposes, information about National Emergency Grant funding in American Samoa. [Press Release, Oct. 20, 2009] Faleomavaega Thanks U.S. Department of Labor for Releasing Over $24 Million to Assist Clean-Up and Recovery Efforts in American Samoa Congressman Faleomavaega announced today that the U.S. Department of Labor has released over $24 million in National Emergency Grant Funds to assist clean-up and recovery efforts in American Samoa. ``I want to personally thank my good friend and former colleague, U.S. Secretary of Labor Hilda Solis, for releasing more than $24 million in National Emergency Grant funds to help American Samoa rebuild,'' Faleomavaega said. ``The people of American Samoa are deeply appreciative of the support we are receiving from the federal government in the aftermath of the earthquake and tsunami that struck our islands on September 29, and I thank the Obama Administration, the U.S. Congress, FEMA, Secretary Solis, and all others for standing with us as we begin the long and difficult process of rebuilding our homes and lives.'' ``I also want to thank Senator Inouye and Senator Akaka for their unwavering support. Earlier today, we released a joint statement applauding Secretary Solis' decision to release more than $24 million in aid and, during these trying times, I want to thank both Senators for their heartfelt words and condolences.'' [[Page 16434]] ``With the outpouring of prayers being offered in our behalf, I have every confidence that American Samoa will rebuild but we will never be the same without the ones we have lost. This is why I continue to convey my condolences to the families and friends who have lost loved ones, and pledge to do all I can as we work to recover.'' The full text of the U.S. Department of Labor's notification, which was sent to Faleomavaega, Senator Inouye, Senator Akaka, and to members of the Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus (CAPAC), of which Faleomavaega serves as Vice-Chair, is included below: NOTIFICATION Dear Faleomavaega/ Inouye/ Akaka Staff and CAPAC, Attached is a release announcing a $24,857,608 National Emergency Grant award from the U.S. Department of Labor to assist clean-up and recovery efforts in the wake of a tsunami that struck American Samoa on Sept. 29. This grant is for clean-up and recovery from a natural disaster. National Emergency Grants are part of the secretary of labor's discretionary fund and are awarded based on a state's ability to meet specific guidelines. ____ [Press Release, Oct. 20, 2009] $25 Million Grant for American Samoa Clean-Up and Recovery U.S. Senators Daniel K. Akaka and Daniel K. Inouye (D- Hawaii) and Delegate Eni Faleomavaega (D-American Samoa) today applauded a $24,857,608 federal grant to assist cleanup and recovery efforts in American Samoa following last month's destructive tsunami. The U.S. Department of Labor awarded the funds to American Samoa's Department of Human Resources to create more temporary jobs to assist in recovery efforts. ``I attended a memorial service in Washington this past weekend and was reminded of the tremendous toll this tsunami took: Entire villages destroyed, children and grandparents lost, livelihoods ruined,'' Senator Akaka said. ``This grant will help American Samoa create temporary on-island jobs so residents can begin rebuilding their homes and infrastructure, surveying environmental damage, and repairing damaged industries.'' ``Our thoughts and prayers continue to be with those affected by the earthquakes and tsunami in American Samoa. The trauma suffered by the people dealing with the devastation and tragic loss of life is difficult to comprehend. These funds will help rebuild and restore the property that was destroyed and damaged and hopefully restore some semblance of the lifestyle that was lost,'' said Senator Inouye. Delegate Faleomavaega said: ``I want to personally thank my good friend and former colleague, U.S. Secretary of Labor Hilda Solis, for releasing more than $24 million in National Emergency Grant funds to assist clean-up and recovery efforts in American Samoa. The people of American Samoa are deeply appreciative of the support we are receiving from the federal government since the earthquake and tsunami struck our islands on September 29 and, once more, I thank the Obama Administration, the U.S. Congress, FEMA, Secretary Solis and all others for standing with American Samoa as we begin the long and difficult process of rebuilding.'' ``Our hearts go out to the victims and survivors of the recent tsunami in American Samoa,'' said Secretary of Labor Hilda L. Solis. ``Today's grant will support ongoing recovery efforts and help American Samoans put their lives back together.'' Of the $24,857,608 announced today, $8,285,870 will be released initially. Additional funding up to the amount approved will be made available as the territory demonstrates a continued need for assistance, according to the Department of Labor. On September 29, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) declared all islands in the United States territory of American Samoa eligible for FEMA's Public Assistance Program. As a senior member of the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, Senator Akaka has been briefed by FEMA officials on initial recovery efforts to send food, water, cots, medical supplies, and working vehicles from the FEMA Pacific Area Office warehouse in Honolulu to American Samoa. Senator Akaka worked to establish and maintain this office beginning in 1991 in order to protect isolated Pacific island communities. For more information on National Emergency Grants, visit http://www.doleta.gov/NEG. ____ [Press Release, Apr. 21, 2010] U.S. Department of Labor Notifies Faleomavaega that Over $16 Million Will Be Released to ASG for About 2,200 Temporary Workers to Continue Clean-up and Recovery Efforts Congressman Faleomavaega announced today that the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) notified him this evening that it will release $16,571,738 to ASG for about 2,200 temporary workers to continue clean-up and recovery efforts in the wake of the tsunami that struck American Samoa on September 29, 2009. On October 19, 2009 a National Emergency Grant (NEG) was approved for up to $24,857,608, with $8,285,870 released initially. This incremental and final NEG award will bring total NEG funds awarded for clean-up and recovery efforts to $24,857,608. ``I want to again thank my good friend and former colleague, U.S. Secretary of Labor Hilda Solis, for releasing more than $24 million in NEG funds to help create about 2,200 temporary jobs in American Samoa,'' Faleomavaega said. ``I first contacted Secretary Solis in May of 2009 regarding NEG funds in response to Chicken of the Sea's announced closure and, on May 7, 2009, I provided Governor Togiola with the contact information necessary to request assistance for our workers, noting that any request put forward must originate with the Governor.'' ``While that effort was underway between ASG and DOL, American Samoa was struck by a tsunami on September 29, 2009. In response to the tsunami, DOL immediately and preemptively reached out to ASG and assisted ASG in preparing and processing a disaster national emergency grant application. On October 19, 2009, ASG was then awarded over $24 million to create about 2,200 temporary jobs for clean-up and recovery efforts.'' ``Discussions continue about how this grant might be more fully expanded, if necessary. For now, the American Samoa Department of Human Resources is responsible for the administration of the grant and ASG, in consultation with the DOL, determines who qualifies for temporary work.'' ``Again, I thank DOL for its swift response in providing temporary work for the people of American Samoa. The DOL can be assured that the people of American Samoa are appreciative of the support the federal government is providing them, especially as we work together to rebuild and retool,'' Faleomavaega concluded. ____ [Press Release, June 28, 2012] U.S. Department of Labor Awards $500,000 in Supplemental National Emergency Grant Funding to American Samoa Department of Human Resources Congressman Faleomavaega today announced that the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) this week awarded approximately $500,000 in supplemental National Emergency Grant (NEG) funding to the American Samoa Department of Human Resources. According to DOL, the funding will provide for the continuation of workforce development services to workers who held temporary jobs to assist with the clean-up and recovery efforts following the earthquake and tsunami and subsequent flooding that struck American Samoa in 2009. The initial NEG award of $24,857,608 was approved on October 19, 2009, with $8,285,870 released initially and a second increment of $16,571,738 was approved and released on April 21, 2010. The supplemental funding of $500,000 announced this week will bring the total NEG funds awarded for this project to $25,357,608. With the supplemental funding, the project's period of performance is also extended for two quarters, so that all participants have more time to finish their full complement of reemployment services. ``I want again to thank my good friend and former colleague, U.S. Secretary of Labor Hilda Solis, for releasing more than $25 million over the past three years in National Emergency Grant funds for American Samoa,'' Faleomavaega stated. ``Immediately following the devastating earthquake and tsunami that struck our islands on September 29, 2009, the Department of Labor notified my office as well as the offices of Senator Inouye, Senator Akaka, and the Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus, informing us of the outpouring of millions of dollars of federal funding to help American Samoa with clean-up and recovery efforts. The funding also provided for needed jobs to employ American Samoans and help with our local economy,'' Faleomavaega added. ``I also want to thank and acknowledge the great work by our local leaders in the American Samoa Department of Human Resources, including Department Director Evelyn Langford and NEG Program Manager Tuimavave Tauapa'i Laupola, for the tremendous job they've done in managing this program as well as their tireless efforts in addressing the multifaceted needs of the Territory in the aftermath of the devastating 2009 tsunami. I have every confidence that this funding will continue to help our Territory rebuild,'' Congressman Faleomavaega concluded. ____________________ HONORING CLYDE HAWES ______ HON. JASON T. SMITH of missouri in the house of representatives Tuesday, December 2, 2014 Mr. SMITH of Missouri. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Clyde Hawes from New Madrid, Missouri for his exceptional years of service as Presiding Commissioner of New Madrid County. Mr. Hawes has set a wonderful example of public service and dedication to bettering our [[Page 16435]] community. This month he will be retiring after serving as Presiding Commissioner for 36 years. Before that Mr. Hawes also served as Assessor of New Madrid County for 20 years while owning and operating his family farm. Mr. Hawes has spoken at several public events sharing his knowledge about business, agriculture, and civic matters. Apart from his work as commissioner, Mr. Hawes is a Sunday school teacher at his church. As a devoted family man, Clyde sets a precedent for others to follow by committing to a balancing work and family. For his years of service and all the work he has done to strengthen our community, it is my pleasure to recognize the achievements of Clyde Hawes and congratulate him on his retirement before the House of Representatives. ____________________ RECOGNIZING DR. ROBERT HEINEMAN ______ HON. TOM REED of new york in the house of representatives Tuesday, December 2, 2014 Mr. REED. Mr. Speaker, I rise to pay my respects to a long time leader in higher education in my district. Dr. Robert Heineman has taught at Alfred University, my alma mater, since 1971, and was one of my professors of political science. He has shaped the thought of generations of Alfred University students and encouraged them to get involved in their communities and, specifically, to get involved in the political process. Dr. Heineman holds a BA from Bradley University and both a MA and a Ph.D from American University. He has taught at Eastern Washington State College, Bradley University and Alfred University. He is a two time recipient of Alfred University's Excellence in Teaching Award and is the author of many book chapters and articles on the American Political System. His activities extend beyond the classroom and into the Alfred community. Dr. Heineman served as an elected member of the Allegany County Legislature, Village of Alfred Board and as Village Justice in the Village of Alfred. He is the current chair of the advisory board of the Allegany County Youth Court. He has worked extensively to make the communities of Alfred and Allegany County better places to live. Dr. Heineman has been married to his wife Alice for over 55 years and they have raised three children Phillip, Karen and Cheryl. Our system of representative democracy cannot endure without each new generation of citizens being educated to appreciate its underlying philosophy and precepts. A community cannot flourish without engaged citizens of all ages participating in civic life. Dr. Robert Heineman has dedicated his life to the work of encouraging young people to love and respect the political process handed down to us by the founders and, more importantly encouraged them to not just watch from the sidelines but get in the game and be part of our democracy. It is a privilege as one of Dr. Heineman's former students to be able to praise him as a member of the House of Representatives. ____________________ IN RECOGNITION OF NAOMI PATRIDGE ______ HON. JACKIE SPEIER of california in the house of representatives Tuesday, December 2, 2014 Ms. SPEIER. Mr. Speaker, I rise to honor Naomi Patridge who is leaving the Half Moon Bay City Council after serving a remarkable career of leadership spanning almost two decades. Naomi and her husband, Howard, have lived in Half Moon Bay for nearly 45 years. Naomi is the Energizer Bunny of Half Moon Bay. For example, prior to serving on the council, she served for 14 years on the city's Parks and Recreation Commission. She has also served on the board of the Half Moon Bay Beautification Committee, the organizer of the annual Art and Pumpkin Festival. Half Moon Bay is a thriving, seaside community that annually hosts tens of thousands of visitors on one weekend in October when the pumpkins come to market and the tourists from around the country come to this charming town. The festival is a major fundraising event for civic improvements. Naomi has been at the heart of the festival for many years. When the girls of Half Moon Bay think of softball, they think of Naomi Patridge. She has spent decades with the Half Moon Bay Girls Softball League and was instrumental in creating a permanent field as a home for generations of young ball players. Some may mourn the recent passing of Candlestick Park in San Francisco, but in Half Moon Bay the citizens celebrate the field that Naomi spent decades to secure. Her focus is on healthy living, and it is evident in the energy she poured into teams that always had good sportsmanship and fun as the center of their purposes. Naomi has also been instrumental in creating a coastside bike trail that bears her name. Half Moon Bay is filled with bicyclists who travel for both pleasure and work. Naomi was concerned about the workers who had to peddle in the early morning hours and who were not safe. She was equally concerned about tourists who might get into trouble riding along the coastal highway. While she joined with others to create this wonderful amenity, it was her advocacy before local funding agencies that helped to secure much of the money for a trail that ultimately bore her name. Mr. Speaker, as fun as it may be to bicycle along the coast or on Main Street in Half Moon Bay, Highway 92 can be a real headache for coastside residents. Naomi Patridge pushed relentlessly for a coastal road that fit in with local sensibilities about growth and development while also helping to relieve the frazzled nerves of residents. When one thinks of Naomi, one also thinks of the quiet, dedicated employee of the school district. One thinks of the quiet, dedicated advocate and volunteer for seniors. One thinks of the vocal advocate for Half Moon Bay's library, and of the woman behind the table dishing out a heaping plate of hot food at the annual Farm Day luncheon. One also thinks of the advocate for housing the elderly and lower income farm worker residents of Half Moon Bay. However, when thinking of Naomi, one must inevitably also think of the cool city councilmember evaluating a tough decision, and then casting a tough vote. There were times in the city's history when its finances were in order and times, particularly after recessions or a court judgment, that the city's finances were in deep distress. Naomi took the heat for difficult decisions during all of these budget hearings. When improving, fixing or supplementing basic public infrastructure was the concern, Naomi was a well-reasoned voice. In fact, Naomi has been a voice of moderation and common sense for so many decades that one might also call her a civic thermometer. If it gets too hot in the debate, Naomi acts to cool things down. If the community isn't concerned enough about needed services or improvements, Naomi switches on to heat things up a bit, and to stir up questions and dialogue. Always moderate, Naomi can be counted on to keep the civic area of Half Moon Bay as comfortable as possible despite the inevitable challenges that occur in local democratic governance. Mr. Speaker, I am honored to call Naomi a dear friend and colleague. I dare say there has not been a more constructive leader in Half Moon Bay than Naomi Patridge. While we will miss her service to us all, we will have her example of thoughtful citizenship to inspire us for years to come. ____________________ HISTORICAL RECORD OF FALEOMAVAEGA'S EFFORTS TO ESTABLISH A NATIONAL GUARD PRESENCE IN AMERICAN SAMOA ______ HON. ENI F. H. FALEOMAVAEGA of american samoa in the house of representatives Tuesday, December 2, 2014 Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to include, for historical purposes, information about efforts to establish a National Guard presence in American Samoa. [Press Release, Sept. 28, 2005] Faleomavaega Requests Expedited Assistance in Establishing a Hawaii National Guard Presence in American Samoa Congressman Faleomavaega announced today that as a follow up to his discussions with Major General Robert Lee, Adjutant General for the State of Hawaii, he is requesting expedited assistance in establishing a Hawaii National Guard presence in American Samoa. General Lee and I have been discussing how best to establish a National Guard Unit in American Samoa, Congressman Faleomavaega said. We have agreed that the best way is to establish a branch of the Hawaii National Guard in American Samoa. Governor Linda Lingle of the State of Hawaii supports our efforts as does Governor Togiola. At this time, General Lee and I have agreed that it is in the best interest of American Samoa that our Guard unit should be a weapons of mass destruction and civil support team which will respond to terrorist threats and natural disasters. Our team will be locally recruited in American Samoa and will be based in the Territory. The only remaining issue is that we must encourage the National Guard Bureau to expedite our request. The Bureau has been [[Page 16436]] working on this request for more than a year and, for this reason, I have written to General Lee and asked for his assistance. General Lee is the Commander of all National Guard Units for the State of Hawaii and our branch would be under his Command. Once our request is approved, ASG will need to enter into a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the State of Hawaii. Governor Linda Lingle and Governor Togiola stand ready to sign this MOU and I am hopeful that with our latest efforts this will be in the very near future. As always, I thank General Lee for his continued support for the people and troops of American Samoa. General Lee is to be commended for his dedication, commitment and leadership. I also thank Governor Lingle for without her support we could not move forward in establishing a branch of the Hawaii National Guard in American Samoa. I also thank Governor Togiola and, above all, I thank our military men and women for their service to our country, the Congressman concluded. ____ [Press Release, Nov. 16, 2005] Faleomavaega and Major General Robert Lee Meet To Discuss their Ongoing Efforts To Establish National Guard Unit in American Samoa Congressman Faleomavaega announced today that he met with Major General Robert Lee, Adjutant General for the State of Hawaii, to discuss their ongoing efforts to establish a National Guard Unit in American Samoa. The meeting was held in the Congressmans Washington office. As a follow-up to our efforts to establish a National Guard unit in American Samoa, Major General Lee and I met again to discuss the progress we are making, Congressman Faleomavaega said. Senator Inouye has been supportive of our work for a number of years now and I am pleased that based on our discussions Major General Lee has forwarded my most recent correspondence and also a new Memorandum to Lieutenant General Stephen Blum, Chief, National Guard Bureau. Dated October 26, 2005, Major General Lees Memorandum requests allowances for Hawaii to support a National Guard Unit in American Samoa. The Memorandum states: American Samoa continues to express great concern about the lack of local response capability. The CSTs (Civil Support Teams) currently within the region would be hard pressed to support an incident in American Samoa without substantially degrading its own abilities to respond to and sustain operations in support of a local incident. The additional team would be in lieu of creating and stationing a CST, or portion thereof, in American Samoa. The team will be stationed in Hawaii with the HIARNG responsible for recruiting to fill the additional positions. Soldiers will be sought from Hawaii and American Samoa. The additional team will operate and train under the command and control of the 93d CST. The primary training location will be Hawaii, with training in American Samoa also being a necessity in order to provide for advance planning and coordination with proper offices and agencies local to American Samoa. We are pleased that Governor Togiola of American Samoa and Governor Lingle of Hawaii have joined in to support our efforts and that both are ready to enter into an agreement regarding the stationing, training, and employment of the Civil Support Team. At this time, General Lee and I are hopeful that General Blum will act to expedite our most recent request especially since this matter has been pending for some time. Once again, Major General Lee has noted that the Hawaii National Guard stands ready to support its neighbors in the Pacific and, in turn, we thank the State of Hawaii for standing with us. At this time and on behalf of the people of American Samoa, I thank General Lee for his continued support. As a people, we are deeply appreciative of the service he renders in support of our troops and we commend him for his dedication, commitment and leadership, the Congressman concluded. ____ [Press Release, Mar. 13, 2009] Faleomavaega Pushes Air National Guard for American Samoa Congressman Faleomavaega announced today that he is pushing to establish a Hawaii Air National Guard unit in American Samoa. On January 28, 2009, Faleomavaega wrote to Senator Inouye and also met with the Senator on January 29. On March 12, 2009, he sent a letter to General Craig R. McKinley, Chief of the National Guard Bureau. A complete text of the letter, which was copied to Senator Daniel K. Inouye, follows: Dear General McKinley: I am writing as a follow-up to discussions I have had with U.S. Senator Daniel K. Inouye, Major General Robert Lee who is The Adjutant General (TAG) for the State of Hawaii, and also Major General Darryll D.M. Wong, Commander of Hawaii Air National Guard, regarding the establishment of a Hawaii Air National Guard unit in Pago Pago, American Samoa. Major General Lee and Major General Wong have informed me that you are aware of this request, and that our efforts look promising. I thank you for your support which is critical to our success, and I am hopeful that you will join me in sending a joint letter to Governor Togiola Tulafono so that we may expedite this process. As you may know, American Samoa has a per capita enlistment rate in the U.S. military which is higher than any State or U.S. Territory. Our sons and daughters have served in record numbers in every U.S. military engagement from WWII to present operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. We have stood by the United States in good times and bad, and I believe this relationship would only be strengthened by establishing a detachment of the Hawaii Air National Guard in American Samoa. Faleomavaega concluded his letter by stating, ``I am hopeful to work with you on this important initiative, and I congratulate you on being the first four-star General in National Guard history.'' ____ [Press Release, June 11, 2014] Congressman Faleomavaega Meets with General Wojtecki To Discuss National Guard Feasibility Study Congressman Faleomavaega announced today that he met with Brigadier General Timothy Wojtecki, Vice-Director of Force Structure, Resources and Assessment for the National Guard Bureau (NGB) to discuss the feasibility study now underway for a National Guard unit in American Samoa. Colonel Mike Mellor, Branch Chief of the Force Capabilities and Requirements Analysis Division, and Master Sergeant (MSG) Bryan Rotherham, Joint Programs Legislative Liaison, also attended the meeting held in the Congressman's Washington, DC office. ``I want to personally thank BG Wojtecki for the update he provided me regarding the feasibility study on establishing National Guard units in American Samoa and CNMI,'' Faleomavaega said. ``In 2013, the House and Senate agreed to my request to include language in the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) authorizing a feasibility study and I am pleased that the Department of Defense (DOD) and the National Guard Bureau have formed the study team and are now conducting an assessment.'' ``BG Wojtecki works under the command of General Grass of the National Guard Bureau, and the NGB is coordinating with the DOD as this study moves forward. With the United States pivoting towards the Asia Pacific, I have asked the DOD and NGB to consider foremost the strategic importance of both American Samoa and CNMI, especially since our military men and women serve our nation in record numbers. BG Wojtecki agreed that this would be a top consideration.'' ``Other areas that are being reviewed are force structure, demographics, what units would be best suited and if a National Guard unit can be sustained in American Samoa since the local government would have to participate in cost- sharing. Also, there are many legal matters which must be addressed, including the need for lawyers to assess how National Guard legalities would fit with local law but I am confident we can resolve any issues that might be of concern.'' ``One issue that BG Wojtecki and I agreed on, which Governor Lolo also supports, is that due to legal issues American Samoa may not be able to have a guard unit function under the Hawaii National Guard because, unlike the Reserve, different rules govern the National Guard.'' ``And so, if the study team recommends a guard unit for American Samoa and should the DOD agree, our next step would be to include funding in the National Defense Authorization Act for 2016, and after that we could still be looking at three years out before we transition into a fully functioning National Guard. If we succeed, then the Governor would select an Adjutant General but a Colonel would also be appointed who would work directly with General Grass of the National Guard Bureau. The Colonel would oversee all U.S. fiscal funding, property, and equipment and would report directly to the National Guard Bureau.'' ``In hopes that we can one day make this a reality, I also suggested, and the Brigadier General Wojtecki agrees, that we should consider having a National Guard unit co-share the Reserve building, and the study team would review this option as a cost-savings to strengthen our case for establishing a National Guard presence in American Samoa.'' ``BG Wojtecki also informed me that the timeline for the study to be completed could be as early as September or as late as November or December of this year, given that the NGB needs to coordinate with DOD, USAR, and other federal agencies to make sure the study team has the most accurate information possible upon which to base its recommendation. BG Wojtecki and I firmly believe the NGB and DOD must receive input from Command Sergeant Major Iuniasolua Savusa, who was once a candidate for CSM of the Army.'' ``In fact, they said that the study requires his input since he is the Director of Homeland Security in American Samoa. To alleviate any concern about his time commitment, I was assured in today's meeting that the time commitment on CSM Savusa's part [[Page 16437]] would be minimal making it possible for him to devote all of his time and attention to his job as Director of Homeland Security while also contributing his unparalleled expertise to this historic study.'' ``I very much look forward to working closely with Governor Lolo to make sure that the study put forward by the team is as strong as possible in hopes that the recommendation from the NGB and the DOD will be for the establishment of a National Guard unit in American Samoa. With the support and the prayers of the people of American Samoa, it is my intent to work hand in hand with Governor Lolo and our local leaders until we accomplish our goal,'' Faleomavaega concluded. ____ [Press Release, Dec. 11, 2013] National Defense Authorization Act for 2014 Congressman Faleomavaega announced today that the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for 2014 contains a provision requiring the Department of Defense (DOD) to do a feasibility study on establishing National Guard units in American Samoa and the CNMI. The House is expected to vote later this week. In the case of American Samoa, Faleomavaega has worked on this issue since 2004 with the late Senator Daniel K. Inouye and 2005 with Major General Robert Lee, former General of the 9th Regional Support Command. As previously stated, ``While I am pleased that the U.S. Congress supported efforts to construct a new $20 million U.S. Army Reserve Center in American Samoa, I am hopeful that the Congress will now give serious consideration to the establishment of a National Guard unit in the Territory as I believe that it is in our national interest for the United States to increase its military presence in American Samoa,'' Faleomavaega said. ``During WWII, the naval station in American Samoa served as a critical refueling point for U.S. troops. With increasing tensions in the Asia Pacific region, now more than ever the U.S. needs to reconsider its relationship with U.S. insular areas in the Pacific.'' After many discussions and delays in Congress, in May 2013, the Congressman provided testimony before the House Committee on Armed Services where he urged the Committee to finally include language for a feasibility study for a National Guard in American Samoa. The Committee decided to include CNMI as well because it does not have a National Guard unit. In June 2013, Congresswoman Bordallo offered an amendment at Faleomavaega's request and the amendment was passed. The language is now included in the final bill to be considered. A feasibility study is the first step for the establishment of a National Guard unit in American Samoa, and the conferees to the NDAA agreed to include language authorizing the study. The House is now expected to vote on the NDAA as early as tomorrow. ____________________ JORDAN'S MIXED SIGNALS HARM REGIONAL PEACE AND STABILITY ______ HON. MATT SALMON of arizona in the house of representatives Tuesday, December 2, 2014 Mr. SALMON. Mr. Speaker, I want to bring to my colleagues' attention an incident that occurred on November 16, 2014 in which two American rabbis and three Israeli citizens were brutally murdered in a West Jerusalem synagogue by two cousins associated with the Har Nof terrorist group. While I appreciate the role Jordan, her government, and her people play in fighting terrorism and promoting regional stability, I am deeply disappointed at the Jordanian government's response to this sickening, ruthless act of terrorism and murder. While the Prime Minister's office officially condemned the action and its extremist ideology, these admonishments are rendered moot when they are followed by a letter of condolence from Jordanian Prime Minister Abdullah Ensour to the terrorists' family. Additionally, the Jordanian parliament not only condoned but celebrated the murders by holding a minute of silence on the parliament floor to memorialize the perpetrators. Such mixed signals from the Jordanian government are unconscionable and counterproductive to ongoing efforts toward regional stabilization and peace. Praising those who commit acts of terrorism promotes the culture of political violence that continually shocks the neighborhoods of East and West Jerusalem, further derailing an already strained reconciliation process at each turn. Such official endorsements send the wrong message to Jordanian citizens and Muslims worldwide, especially youth who are faced each day with the decision to turn to violence or toward peace. The U.S. Congress must encourage the Jordanian government to stand in condemnation of such acts of violence. ____________________ A TRIBUTE TO MRS. GERALDINE ``JEWEL'' BLUE ______ HON. DANNY K. DAVIS of illinois in the house of representatives Tuesday, December 2, 2014 Mr. DANNY K. DAVIS of Illinois. Mr. Speaker, I wish to pay tribute to a wonderful Chicagoan, Geraldine Blue, who passed from this world on November 22, 2014. Affectionately known as ``Jewel'' to her friends and family, she was born in Little Rock, Arkansas on March 8, 1940 to Blanche and Willie Johnson, Sr. Jewel's passion for music and dance started early. As a young child and teenager, Jewel competed in multiple talent competitions with her sisters and cousins. Indeed, the multiple invitations to perform locally that they received serve as testimony to the skill she and her family possessed. Her family used to say that Jewel would ``sing her way to heaven and dance right out of her shoes''. This description makes me smile because it captures her zeal for music and life. As a young woman, Jewel decided to move to Chicago where she met the love of her life, L.C. Blue, with whom she celebrated 30 years of marriage. Her friends emphasize her devotion to her family and commitment to ensuring their well-being. Jewel was a wonderful stay-at-home mother to four lovely children, Norris Timothy, Regina Pierre, Vonda Yvette and Levelle Christopher. Her nurturing nature and talent with children led her husband to encourage her to start a home day care. Her 30 years of service to her Chicago community as a local child care provider gave hundreds of children and families the strong foundation and support needed to thrive in life. Jewel's enthusiasm for life and dedication to others also showed in her work with the church. She served God via multiple ministries; she used her glorious voice in the music ministry and her passion for helping others as a member of the Adult Usher Board, Junior Missionary Board, and Altar Workers. I understand that her church family appreciated the unconditional love she gave to so many without judgment or shame. She was genuine and loving. What a beautiful combination. Jewel was preceded in death by: her husband L.C. Blue; son Norris Timothy; parents Blanche and Willie Johnson, Sr.; and siblings Credale Johnson, Emma Jean Brown, Robert Johnson, Sr., and Willie Johnson, Jr. Jewel leaves many family members and loved ones to cherish her lasting memories, including: her children Regina Pierre, Vonda Yvette, and Levelle Christopher; her sisters Rosetta Williams, Lula Phillips, and Mary Walton (Raymond); her grandchildren Monique D. Johnson-Smith (Rodney), Chanel E. Moore, Jarrett L. Moore, Brandon D. Brazziel, Maya A. Moore; her great-grandchild Myles X. Smith; and her 38th Street Church family. We are grateful to Geraldine ``Jewel'' Blue for her tremendous contribution to so many in Chicago and our nation; her nurture and love strengthened individuals and communities. ____________________ ST. PAUL UNITED CHURCH OF CHRIST 175TH ANNIVERSARY ______ HON. WILLIAM L. ENYART of illinois in the house of representatives Tuesday, December 2, 2014 Mr. ENYART. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to ask my colleagues to join me in congratulating St. Paul United Church of Christ on its 175th anniversary. From humble beginnings in 1839, St. Paul's has seen an incredible cross section of American history in the Midwest. Born from Belleville's German immigrants, the church first held services at the local court house, while awaiting a physical structure to be built. St. Paul's provides worship and community appeal to the Belleville area and beyond. What makes St. Paul's exceptional is its mission to serve those who need it most. Through Christmas and Thanksgiving charitable programs, the Franklin Community Neighborhood Association, Tuesday Community Dinner, afterschool programs, a food pantry, and much more, the church reaches out to every age group and background in the community. A shining star of St. Paul's Church is the love and care that developed and grew St. Paul's Home into the senior community it is today. For over 85 years, St. Paul's Home has faithfully provided respite care, memory care, assisted living services, and skilled nursing to the elderly in Belleville and surrounding communities. And today, the church can proudly boast its new additions coming soon. [[Page 16438]] St. Paul's is proud to call the Illinois metro east home, and Belleville is proud to call St. Paul's one of its own. Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues to join me in congratulating St. Paul's United Church of Christ on 175 years in the Belleville community. ____________________ HISTORICAL RECORD OF U.S. SECRETARY OF STATE HILLARY CLINTON'S AUTHORIZATION OF EMERGENCY RELIEF SUPPLIES TO SAMOA IN RESPONSE TO DEVASTATING TSUNAMI ______ HON. ENI F. H. FALEOMAVAEGA of american samoa in the house of representatives Tuesday, December 2, 2014 Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to include, for historical purposes, information about former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's authorization of emergency relief supplies to Samoa in response to the devastating tsunami of September 29, 2009. [Press Release, Oct. 10, 2009] Secretary Clinton Gets It Done; Emergency Relief Supplies To Be Airlifted from Greater Los Angeles Area to Samoa in Response to Devastating Tsunami Chairman of the Subcommittee on Asia, the Pacific and the Global Environment, Congressman Eni F.H. Faleomavaega, and Congresswoman Laura Richardson (D-CA), announced today that the U.S. Department of State called them this morning to inform them that Secretary Clinton has authorized the use of funds from the Office of Foreign Disaster Assistance (OFDA) to get emergency relief supplies airlifted from the greater Los Angeles area to Samoa in response to the devastating tsunami that struck Apia on September 29. In his capacity as Chairman of the Asia Pacific Subcommittee which has broad jurisdiction for U.S. foreign policy affecting the region, including Samoa, Chairman Faleomavaega personally spoke to Secretary Clinton on Oct 1 and, in letters dated Oct 4 and Oct 5, followed up with her regarding the specific need to airlift emergency supplies to Apia, which were gathered by the Samoan communities and congregations in the greater Los Angeles area. The Samoan communities in the greater Los Angeles directly contacted Faleomavaega for assistance because many of their families and relatives live in his district of American Samoa or Samoa. Congresswoman Laura Richardson has worked closely with Faleomavaega throughout this process given that she represents part of the greater Los Angeles area, and the Samoan communities living in that area are her constituents. ``I want to personally thank Secretary Clinton for her untiring efforts in getting these relief supplies airlifted,'' Chairman Faleomavaega said. ``Since the tsunami struck, Secretary Clinton has spared no effort in coming to our aid, and even called upon the U.S. Department of Defense (DOD) to quickly move these supplies from the West Coast to Samoa. Last evening, Congresswoman Richardson and I learned that DOD had agreed to move the supplies but that due to legalities of moving privately-donated goods, the process would take too long.'' ``In a previous conference call yesterday, anticipating that DOD might be unable to quickly move these supplies, we requested the State Department to fund a commercial flight through the Office of Foreign Disaster Assistance should we encounter any problems with DOD,'' Faleomavaega and Rep. Richardson said. ``Last night, upon learning that the DOD process would take too long and in consideration of our request for a more immediate airlift, Secretary Clinton assessed the options while en route to Europe, and this morning the State Department informed us that Secretary Clinton has agreed to fund the flight with OFDA funds.'' ``The agreement is that this will be a one-time airlift, and our Samoan communities should make future donations in cash, rather than in commodities. We will not be able to airlift frozen goods, and our offices will work closely with the communities to gather the supplies to a central location for the airlift. Also, the airlift provided by the U.S. Department of State can only be authorized to land in Samoa. While we were also hopeful to get supplies in to American Samoa, all matters relating to American Samoa are decided between the Governor and FEMA, according to federal law.'' ``I know from my meeting earlier this week with Prime Minister Tuilaepa Sailele Malielegaoi that he is thankful to the Samoan congregations and communities in the greater Los Angeles area who responded from the heart by collecting critical supplies that will now be airlifted to those in need,'' Faleomavaega said. ``For this reason, I want to thank the Prime Minister for agreeing to accept this gift, and I also want to thank Reverend Liki Tiatia, Reverend John Mailo, Reverend Misipouena Tagaloa, and High Chief Loa Pele Faletogo for all the good work they have done. Reverend Tiatia and Reverend Mailo will be taking a flight to Samoa to make the presentation to the Government of Samoa on behalf of our Samoan community on the West Coast and also on behalf of Congresswoman Richardson and myself.'' ``I especially want to thank Congresswoman Richardson for working around the clock in support of our Samoan communities living in her district, and in Samoa and American Samoa,'' Faleomavaega continued. ``Congresswoman Richardson has stood by us every step of the way and has left no stone unturned in getting this done. She has been staunch and solid in her dedication to us, and has earned her rightful place in our hearts. It is my honor to welcome Congresswoman Richardson into our Pacific Island family.'' ``With so many people in need of basic supplies in Samoa, it has been a privilege to work with Chairman Faleomavaega to assist the people of my district in making sure the items they have collected will soon be in the hands of their families and friends,'' Congresswoman Richardson said. ``This feat is only possible because of the dedication of Chairman Faleomavaega and Secretary Clinton. Over 60 local organizations in the 37th district of California, including church groups, non-profit organizations and caring others collected over 100,000 pounds of essential items to send to victims of the tragedy that recently occurred. The lives of thousands of Samoans will be immediately and directly improved by the actions taken by Secretary Clinton, Chairman Faleomavaega and all of us who answered the call to help. I am proud to be a part of this exceptional team.'' ``It is clear that change has come and that Secretary Clinton is restoring America's stature once again, especially in a part of the world that the U.S. has too long neglected. We thank Secretary Clinton for her leadership and commitment, and for standing with the people of Samoa when they need her most, and we continue to extend our deepest condolences to the families and friends of those who are suffering so much,'' Faleomavaega and Rep. Richardson concluded. ____________________ DR. KENNETH H. COOPER ______ HON. ROGER WILLIAMS of texas in the house of representatives Tuesday, December 2, 2014 Mr. WILLIAMS. Mr. Speaker, I am proud to announce that Dr. Kenneth H. Cooper will be inducted into the National Football Foundation's Leadership Hall of Fame on January 8th, 2015. ____________________ IN RECOGNITION OF THE NATIONAL ORGANIZATION OF BLACK VETERANS AND NATIONAL COMMANDER BRIGADIER GENERAL (RET.) ROBERT A. COCROFT ______ HON. CHARLES B. RANGEL of new york in the house of representatives Tuesday, December 2, 2014 Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Speaker, today I rise to recognize the National Organization of Black Veterans (NABVETS) and its visionary and founder, Brigadier General (Ret.) Robert A. Cocroft for his distinguished service as National Commander. This year, under the leadership of President and Chief Executive Officer Wendy McClinton, Black Veterans for Social Justice, Inc. hosted the National Organization of Black Veterans National Conference and Convention in New York City, which took place from August 14th to August 17th, 2014. The theme for the 2014 Convention was ``Transitioning to the Next Level: Fighting for Your Focus''. This theme was very apropos, because the conference honored Brigadier General (Ret.) Robert A. Cocroft who retired as National Commander. The National Association for Black Veterans, Inc. (NABVETS) is a membership service organization with the charge to address issues concerning Black and other minority veterans. NABVETS has served as a leader to address the unmet concerns of minority and low-income veterans through direct services, empowerment training and collaborative partnerships; and in the service design to address the ``holistic'' issues of homelessness among veterans. Since inception, NABVETS has provided direct services to 65,000 veterans and on behalf of 240,000 veterans--primarily of the Vietnam and post-Vietnam era. Robert A. Cocroft served with the Army in Korea during the Vietnam War and had an active career in the Army Reserve. He served as the Deputy Secretary of the Wisconsin Department of Veterans Affairs, President of the National Association for Black Veterans, and [[Page 16439]] President and CEO of the Center for Veterans Issues (Milwaukee, Wisconsin). Robert A. Cocroft was born in Conway, Mississippi, Nov. 16, 1946 and was raised in Milwaukee, Wisconsin. He entered military service via the draft in 1966, while as a student at the University of Wisconsin- Oshkosh, where he studied and played football. During his illustrious military career and service, he was once offered a position in military intelligence, but declined because he believed that as a Black officer he would be used to spy on student demonstrators such as the Black Panther Party. He describes going to Panama for jungle training and becoming anemic due to taking required anti-malaria drug Primaquine, which reacted with his G6PD deficiency. Sent to Korea, he mentions assignment to headquarter Special Troops and processing military personnel with the 8th Army and touches on racial tension, infiltrators along the Demilitarized Zone, attitudes towards Republic of Korea soldiers, and estimates of military strength. After return to Wisconsin, he joined the 84th Division of the Reserve, while also working and going to school full time. He graduated from the Army War College, climbing the chain of command to Assistant Division Commander for Operations with the 98th Division. Cocroft examines the problem with minorities getting administrative discharges and then having great difficulty getting veteran benefits, and the unfairness of this compared to the amnesty offered to draft dodgers, who were mostly white. He reports that now the segregation problems are not racial, but gender-based, and he addresses the issues of fraternization and different standards for women. Cocroft emphasizes that the American people need to decide what they want from their military. He retired at the rank of Brigadier General. Mr. Speaker, I ask that you and my distinguished colleagues join me and a very grateful Nation in paying tribute and salute to Brigadier General (Ret.) Robert A. Cocroft. ____________________ HONORING THE LIFE OF MARION BARRY ______ HON. BENNIE G. THOMPSON of mississippi in the house of representatives Tuesday, December 2, 2014 Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the life and legacy of Marion Barry, former Mayor of Washington, D.C., civil rights activist, community organizer, and Mississippi native. Born in Itta Bena, MS, on March 6, 1936, into a family of sharecroppers, Marion Barry immediately developed a work ethic that would be on display throughout his entire life. Even as a child growing up in the Mississippi Delta and later in Memphis, TN, he would work jobs as a paperboy, a waiter, and a bag boy at a grocery store to help his family in which he was the third of 10 children. Mr. Barry was always a great student and graduated with a degree in chemistry from Lemoyne-Owen College in Memphis and later received a master's degree in organic chemistry from Fisk University in Nashville, TN. While a graduate student at Fisk, Mr. Barry began what would be a long, storied life in public service and civil rights and helped found the campus's chapter of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) and, subsequently, helped to form and became the first National Chairman of the Student Non-Violent Coordinating Committee (SNCC). As Chairman of SNCC, Mr. Barry led protests against racial segregation and discrimination, played a central role in many voter registration efforts, worked for the recognition of the Mississippi Freedom Democratic Party and, despite the imminent danger involved, participated in the Freedom Rides organized by the Congress of Racial Equality (CORE), during the spring and summer of 1961, to help African- Americans in the South register to vote. In 1965, Mr. Barry came to D.C. to manage the local SNCC office. His advocacy for the people of Washington, D.C., started that year and would continue for nearly five decades. At the time Mr. Barry arrived in Washington, D.C., the city, though more than fifty percent Black, had few Black people in the ranks of the city's leadership and was being held under the thumb of often all-white congressional committees whose members' segregationist policies worked to prevent the black community from growing and thriving. In response to these conditions, Mr. Barry organized a ``Free D.C. Movement'' to advocate for D.C. Home Rule. Additionally, he often spoke against the policies and regulations put in place by the House Committee on the District of Columbia. In 1967, Mr. Barry resigned from his leadership position in the D.C., SNCC office and organized Pride, Inc.--a program that provided job training to uplift unemployed black men in Washington, D.C., and put them in a better position to be contributing members of the community. This program helped to build and develop a generation of Black men who may have otherwise been lost. Mr. Barry began his life in electoral politics in 1971, when he was elected to the Washington, D.C., school board. He would go on to serve as president of the board from 1972 to 1974. Mr. Barry would then go on to run for and be elected to an at-large seat on the D.C. City Council. Mr. Barry immediately became a leader on the council and helped to make real changes in the city including, getting a pay raise for the police department and defeating a gross-receipts tax on all city businesses. On March 9, 1977, Mr. Barry's personal will and courage were on display as he survived a gunshot wound he received when radical terrorists took siege of the City Council building during a hostage crisis. This event would only add to the reverence that was building for the man and his leadership abilities. In 1978, Mr. Barry was elected as the Mayor of Washington, D.C.--a post he would hold for 16 years between 1979 and 1999. Like me, Mr. Barry was one of the nearly 250 black mayors elected in the years following Martin Luther King Jr.'s assassination and he became one of the many black elected leaders who rose from the struggles of the civil rights era. As mayor of Washington, D.C., Marion Barry was a powerhouse. He helped to create a local government that had barely existed before his arrival at City Hall. He was an advocate for diversity and inclusivity in City government hiring and appointed new and talented black leaders who, ultimately, proved the viability of self-governance by Black leaders in D.C. Mr. Barry instituted budget reforms that had not previously existed and was able to get the city's financial books in order. Additionally, Mr. Barry worked to build up downtown Washington, D.C., and turn it into a thriving business center that would eventually include the Verizon Center--home to the Washington Wizards and Washington Capitals. Moreover, Mr. Barry would raise the national and international profile of Washington, D.C., through his charismatic leadership and effective results. Though he moved the city forward and became an ally to the business community, the upper middle class and the professional working class alike, Marion Barry never forgot where he came from and the people who he was elected to serve. During his mayoralty, Mr. Barry continued to be a champion for the poor and downtrodden. He would often say that he could ``walk with kings but not lose the common touch.'' He helped steer millions of dollars into job training, employment, senior citizen, and social welfare programs. He also hired thousands of blue- collar workers into his administration to perform many of the jobs that helped build a thriving metropolis. Marion Barry was often referred to as ``Mayor for Life'' due in part to the unyielding support he received from his constituents. This support would often be tested in his political life. But even in the face of controversy that prevented him from seeking mayoral office in 1990 and eventually cost him his freedom, the people of D.C. trusted the leadership of Mr. Barry enough to re-elect him as D.C.'s Mayor in 1994 and subsequently to several more terms as a City Council member. Despite any of Mr. Barry's personal struggles and downfalls, he always kept one thing front and center in his mind--the well being and progression of the people of his beloved Washington, D.C., and the continued advancement of the black community. Until his dying day, Marion Barry carried the flag for his city. Marion Barry is a great example of what can happen when the system tries to choose our heroes for us and the people push back. While the media and various individuals worked as hard as they could to break him down and turn their collective backs on him, the people-- the ones who should be the most important to an elected official-- always welcomed him with open arms and received him even more warmly at the ballot box. This speaks volumes about the kind of man and the kind of leader Marion Barry was in Washington, D.C. Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues to join me in recognizing Mayor Marion Barry, an undaunted activist, a community leader, a devoted public servant, and an unforgettable personality in American politics. [[Page 16440]] ____________________ LEGISLATIVE HISTORY ON PASSAGE OF FALEOMAVAEGA BILL TO PROVIDE ASG AUTHORITY TO ISSUE BONDS EXEMPT FROM STATE AND LOCAL TAXATION ______ HON. ENI F. H. FALEOMAVAEGA of american samoa in the house of representatives Tuesday, December 2, 2014 Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to include, for historical purposes, information about the passage of a bill to provide the American Samoa Government the authority to issue bonds exempt from state and local taxation. [Press Release, Nov. 5, 2003] House Passes Faleomavaega Bill To Provide ASG Authority To Issue Bonds Exempt From State and Local Taxation Congressman Faleomavaega announced that on November 4, 2003 the U.S. House of Representatives unanimously passed H.R. 982, a bill he introduced to provide the American Samoa Government with the authority to issue bonds exempt from state and federal taxation. I would like to thank Chairman Pombo and Ranking Member Rahall of the Resources Committee and Chairman Sensenbrenner and Ranking Member Conyers of the Judiciary Committee for their continued support regarding the needs of American Samoa and for their efforts to bring H.R. 982 to the Floor, Congressman Faleomavaega said. H.R. 982 would amend the U.S. Code to allow interest earned from American Samoa bonds to be exempt from both state and local taxation. Under the U.S. Code, Congress has expressly provided for the exemption of state and local taxes for bonds issued by Guam, the Virgin Islands, Puerto Rico and the Northern Mariana Islands. While American Samoa can issue bonds similar to the other territories, the interest earned from American Samoa bonds is subject to taxation by the several States, Washington, DC and the other territories. H.R. 982 would provide parity to American Samoa. H.R. 982 will also make American Samoa bonds more attractive to investors and could save the American Samoa Government between $20,000 and $50,000 a year in interest costs on municipal bonds it may issue, the Congressman said. The American Samoa Power Authority has indicated that it would like to sell bonds to purchase new diesel generator sets to accommodate our growing population. This legislation would lower the interest costs of the prospective sales and will also enable the government to address deficiencies in its current infrastructure. This legislation is identical to H.R. 1448 which I introduced in the 107th Congress. H.R. 1448 was adopted by the Judiciary and Resources Committees and was finally agreed to by voice vote on the House Floor on September 24, 2002. Unfortunately, the Senate was unable to consider this legislation before the 107th Congress adjourned. However, the Judiciary and Resources Committees once again supported American Samoa's interests by unanimously passing H.R. 982 in the 108th Congress and I am thankful that my friends, both Republican and Democrat, also voted in favor of H.R. 982 when this matter was brought to the Floor for consideration. This legislation is beneficial and critical to the needs of American Samoa and in due time will help us build and strengthen our local economy. At this time, I also want to thank Governor Togiola for his support and I look forward to working with my friends in the U.S. Senate to make sure that this legislation is passed before the 108th Congress adjourns next year, the Congressman concluded. ____ [Press Release, Sept. 30, 2004] Senate Passes Faleomavaega's Bill To Develop American Samoa's Economy by Providing ASG With Authority To Issue Bonds Exempt From Taxation Congressman Faleomavaega announced today that on Wednesday September 29, 2004 the Senate passed H.R. 982, a bill he introduced to help develop American Samoas economy by providing the American Samoa Government with the authority to issue bonds exempt from state and federal taxation. Bonds encourage economic investment in the Territory and H.R. 982 will make American Samoa bonds more attractive to investors and will immediately save the American Samoa Government between $20,000 and $50,000 a year in interest costs on municipal bonds it may issue, the Congressman said. Not long ago, the American Samoa Power Authority said that it would like to sell bonds to purchase new diesel generator sets to accommodate our growing population. This legislation would lower the interest costs of the prospective sales and will also enable the government to address deficiencies in its current infrastructure. This legislation is identical to H.R. 1448 which I introduced in the 107th Congress. H.R. 1448 was adopted by the Judiciary and Resources Committees and was finally agreed to by voice vote on the House Floor on September 24, 2002. Unfortunately, the Senate was unable to consider this legislation before the 107th Congress came to a close. However, the Judiciary and Resources Committees once again supported American Samoa's interests by unanimously passing H.R. 982 in the 108th Congress and I am thankful that my friends, both Republican and Democrat, also voted in favor of H.R. 982 when this matter was brought to the House Floor for consideration. This legislation is beneficial and critical to the needs of American Samoa and in due time will help us build and strengthen our local economy. At this time, I thank my friends, especially Senator Harry Reid, Assistant Democratic Leader of the U.S. Senate who responded to my letter dated September 20, 2004 in which I requested his support in bringing H.R. 982 to the Senate floor for passage. The Senate Finance Committee favorably reported the bill on July 20, 2004 and placed it on the Senate Calendar for consideration and vote. As Assistant Democratic Leader, I am thankful that Senator Reid was able to hotline this bill. I also appreciate the support of Senator Charles Grassley, Chairman of the Committee on Finance, and Ranking Member Max Baucus for supporting the bill. This bill is good news for American Samoa and, again, will encourage more investment in the Territory. Now that this bill has passed both the House and Senate, H.R. 982 now awaits the President's signature which I am confident will be forthcoming, the Congressman concluded. ____________________ TRIBUTE TO KENNY HALE ______ HON. TODD ROKITA of indiana in the house of representatives Tuesday, December 2, 2014 Mr. ROKITA. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize and salute a notable Hoosier, Mr. Kenny Hale, for his retirement from public service, most recently as President of the Morgan County Council. I wish to express my heartfelt gratitude and appreciation for his leadership and service to our community, state, and country. Kenny was first elected to the Morgan County Council in 1999, and assumed a leadership role immediately. He served as the council's Vice President for his first six years on the body and has served as President for the past ten years. He also served as the county's plan director, 911 coordinator, floodplain administrator, county purchasing agent of land acquisition, and heavy equipment operator. In addition to serving the people of Morgan County, Kenny is an ASE and Moog Certified Technician, and a Certified Welder. Kenny's leadership was critical in the county's coordinated response to several unforgettable disasters over the years, including the devastating F-3 tornado in 2002 and the massive floods of 2008. His generosity and expertise even extended outside of the county to fellow Hoosiers following the disastrous 2010 tornado that claimed lives in Henryville, Indiana. Kenny has been recognized by his community and peers over the past several years. The Morgan County Sheriff's Department awarded him for coordinating the Jefferson Township Crime Watch program. He has been recognized by the Association of Indiana Counties as Outstanding County Councilman in 2004, and other organizations for his leadership, achievement and community service. Kenny has been a dedicated public servant and I wish him well during his well-deserved retirement from public service, though I suspect we will see his continued leadership in the community for years to come. Thank you, Kenny, for your service and leadership. ____________________ COMMENDING KRISHNA BHADRIRAJU ______ HON. PETE OLSON of texas in the house of representatives Tuesday, December 2, 2014 Mr. OLSON. Mr. Speaker, I rise to congratulate Krishna Bhadriraju for appreciating the value of life at the young age of four and working to save the life of an injured bird. Krishna documented his care of a blue jay that he rescued and nursed back to health. The story of healing and the care an individual can provide for another species resonated so strongly that his teachers encouraged him to put pen to paper. The result, produced at age six, is his book, ``Krishna Saves a Bird.'' His compassion and dedication to helping an animal in trouble at such a young age has become an inspirational opportunity to show [[Page 16441]] other children the value of helping others and tapping your creative skills. I commend Krishna Bhadriraju for using his experience to inspire action in others. On behalf of the residents of the Twenty-Second Congressional District of Texas, I again congratulate Krishna on the completion of ``Krishna Saves a Bird.'' We are grateful for his work to promote kindness and compassion. ____________________ HONORING GOLDEN LIVING CENTER ______ HON. JASON T. SMITH of missouri in the house of representatives Tuesday, December 2, 2014 Mr. SMITH of Missouri. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Golden LivingCenter in St. James as the 2014 recipient of the Gold-Excellence in Quality National Quality Award. Golden LivingCenter is the only long term care center that has received this prestigious award from the National Quality Award program for three consecutive years. Since 1964, as a role model for providing skilled nursing and post- acute care, Golden LivingCenter has been dedicated to improving the lives of their patients and residents. Their employees have continuously been committed to provide exceptional care for the residents of the communities they serve. For the years of service and commitment to helping others, it is my pleasure to recognize Golden LivingCenter in St. James before the United States House of Representatives. ____________________ HISTORICAL RECORD OF CITIZENSHIP ISSUE IN AMERICAN SAMOA ______ HON. ENI F. H. FALEOMAVAEGA of american samoa in the house of representatives Tuesday, December 2, 2014 Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to include, for historical purposes, the following information about the citizenship issue in American Samoa. [Press Release, June 11, 2008] Washington, D.C.--Faleomavaega Responds to Governor Togiola's Comments About Citizenship Legislation Congressman Faleomavaega announced today that he is clarifying the intent of H.R. 6191, a bill he introduced to make it easier for U.S. nationals living in American Samoa to become U.S. citizens, if they so choose. ``Recently, the Governor has publicly expressed that he strongly opposes the legislation and, while I respect his right to oppose, I disagree with his position,'' Faleomavaega said. ``Also, given that the Governor has made statements that are not factual, I believe it is important to clear up the misinformation he has relayed to the newspapers and radio.'' ``First, Governor Togiola states that H.R. 6191 will force U.S. citizenship on U.S. nationals. This is not true. H.R. 6191 is about choice, not force, and only applies to those U.S. nationals living in American Samoa who choose to become U.S. citizens if they wish to apply.'' ``Secondly, the Governor states that this legislation is contrary to the findings of the Future Political Status Study Commission which recommended that American Samoa not seek U.S. citizenship for its people at this time. Again, this is false. H.R. 6191 does not make citizenship automatic for American Samoa's people. H.R. 6191, which my staff hand- delivered to Governor Togiola's office on June 7, 2008, states that the intent of this legislation is to allow nationals to become citizens by more expeditious means. In other words, it speeds up the process. It does not make citizenship automatic.'' ``For those nationals who choose to become citizens, H.R. 6191 speeds up the process by doing away with certain requirements and treating nationals like nationals rather than foreigners. As the law now stands, in order for a national to become a citizen, our people must follow the same procedures as aliens, or foreigners, and this is not right since nationals owe permanent allegiance to the United States.'' ``For nationals living in American Samoa, it is not right that our people are currently required to pass an English proficiency and civics exam given that American Samoa's education system is patterned after that of public schools in the U.S.'' ``Also, our people should not be required, as they now are, to move to the mainland to pass the residency requirement. Our people already live in a U.S. Territory and should not be subjected to the financial hardship and burdens of moving to California or Hawaii or elsewhere just to establish residency. While the Governor may believe that our people should be treated like foreigners and forced to move and take exams, I do not and this is where we disagree.'' ``I believe the provisions of physical residency and exams should be waived, and this is what H.R. 6191 does. H.R. 6191 waives the requirements of physical residency but keeps in place all other provisions of section 316 as to good moral character, etc. H.R. 6191 also makes sure that U.S. nationals are required to file an application, complete an interview, be fingerprinted, take an oath and meet all other requirements as expressed in the Immigration and Nationality Act.'' ``Regarding the Governor's concerns about H.R. 6191 opening up the floodgate to foreigners, I am pleased that after all these years the Governor has finally agreed to stop the flow of foreigners entering the territory if H.R. 6191 is passed. If H.R. 6191 accomplishes nothing else, it has been well worth the effort because ASG should have closed the floodgate years ago. ASG's weak immigration and corporate laws, which allow for sponsorship of foreigners, like Daewoosa, who set up shop and send their money back home, have brought embarrassment to our Territory and jeopardized our communal lands and customs. If ASG does not clean up its mess and establish fair laws for fair business, our people will lose everything.'' ``Regarding the Governor's point that he believes H.R. 6191 will lead to our people being drafted in the U.S. military, I would respectfully suggest that he review H.R. 6191. H.R. 6191 does not make anyone subject to the draft.'' ``Finally, like the Governor, I welcome input, and I introduced this legislation based on the input of the people. Many of our people have requested my assistance because, like me, they believe U.S. nationals who choose to become citizens should be able to do so without being treated like foreigners in the process. This is why I introduced H.R. 6191, and stand by it, and intend to open it up for nationals living in the U.S. as well,'' Faleomavaega concluded. ____ [Press Release, July 12, 2012] Washington, D.C.--Faleomavaega Opposes the Recently Filed Lawsuit To Force Citizenship on Every Person Born in American Samoa Congressman Faleomavaega today announced his continued strong opposition to the efforts to use the judicial system to force citizenship upon every person who is born in American Samoa. On July 10, 2012, a lawsuit was filed by Murad Hussain of Arnold & Porter LLP, in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia. Mr. Hussain represents several plaintiffs born in American Samoa, and the Samoan Federation of America located in Carson, California. The plaintiffs in the lawsuit are seeking a declaratory judgment from the court that the Citizenship Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution should apply to American Samoa. The plaintiffs are also seeking an injunction to prevent the U.S. Department of State from imprinting Endorsement Code 09 on passports of persons born in American Samoa noting that the ``Bearer is a U.S. National and Not a U.S. Citizen. A copy of the complaint or lawsuit can be found at this link: http://www.house.gov/faleomavaega/pdfs/1- main.pdf. ``I respect the rights of the plaintiffs, who were born in American Samoa, to file their lawsuit. I also appreciate the frustration of the Samoan Federation of America that struggles to meet the needs of Samoans who are U.S. nationals who cannot vote in national elections and are precluded from certain jobs that requires U.S. citizenship. However, I believe the choice of becoming a U.S. citizen belongs to the people of American Samoa, and not by judicial legislation,'' Faleomavaega said. ``I have sent letters to the leadership of the Fono, both the President of the Senate, and the Speaker of the House, that summarizes the lawsuit that was filed this week in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. In the letters I further reiterated my opposition to the lawsuit which if successful will force citizenship upon everyone born in American Samoa.'' Faleomavaega added. ``The future of our territory is being threatened by outside forces and we must unite in our opposition to this lawsuit. I firmly believe the future of American Samoa should be decided by the people living in the territory, not by a court 7,000 miles away,'' Faleomavaega concluded. The full text of the Congressman's letter to the President of the Senate and the Speaker of the House follows: I am writing to bring to your attention a lawsuit that was filed this week in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia on behalf of several persons born in American Samoa. The plaintiffs in the lawsuit are seeking a declaratory judgment from the court that the Citizenship Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution should apply to American Samoa. The plaintiffs are also seeking an injunction to prevent the U.S. Department of State from imprinting Endorsement Code 09 on passports of persons born in American Samoa noting that the ``Bearer is a U.S. National and Not a U.S. Citizen''. The lawsuit, filed against the United States of America, the U.S. Department of [[Page 16442]] State, the Secretary of State and the U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for Consular Affairs, could have significant ramifications on American Samoa's political relationship with the U.S. government. If the court rules in favor of the plaintiffs and the Citizenship Clause is applied to American Samoa, this will set the precedent for other provisions of the U.S. Constitution to be applied in the Territory. This is a cause for concern as the courts may invalidate any of our local laws that protect our Matai system and communal lands. For years, I have warned the people of American Samoa of the dangers of outside forces determining the future of our territory. The lawsuit filed this week is the manifestation of our greatest fear, that citizenship will be forced upon us and we could lose our Matai system and communal lands. For example, in King v. Andrus, 452 F. Supp. 11 (D.D.C. 1977), a federal court applied the jury system to the American Samoa judiciary system against our will. This week a federal court is again asked to decide an issue critical to American Samoa, whether American Samoans should be considered U.S. citizens. We must ask ourselves do we want a court to decide whether we become citizens or do we want to decide our own destiny. I respect the right of the plaintiffs to file this lawsuit. However, I believe the issue of citizenship should be decided by the people currently living in American Samoa and who plan on remaining in American Samoa. Since any potential negative consequences of citizenship being granted to all persons born in American Samoa will affect persons living in American Samoa not those living in the United States. For those living in the United States, there are existing pathways to citizenship that allow them to become U.S. Citizens. There is also a fee waiver available for some individuals who are not able to pay filing fee for the naturalization application. I have enclosed a copy of the complaint. My hope is for a thorough review by the Fono on this important issue. I will also make the complaint available for download on my website at http://www.house.gov/faleomavaega/pdfs/1-main.pdf. ____ [Press Release, August 12, 2014] Faleomavaega Commends U.S. Department of State's Brief in Tuaua v. United States Washington, D.C.--Congressman Faleomavaega today issued the following statement offering his support for the U.S. Department of State's recently filed brief against the plaintiffs in the citizenship case formally known as Tuaua v. United States, a case in which five individuals want the U.S. Government to grant automatic citizenship to anyone born in American Samoa. ``On behalf of the people of American Samoa, I submitted a legal brief to the court in 2012 asserting that U.S. citizenship by birthright should only be decided by the will of the people and granted through legislation passed by the U.S. Congress,'' Faleomavaega said. ``I now commend the State Department for emphasizing that only Congress has the authority to grant U.S. citizenship to American Samoa, a position which I have publicly expressed for years. As I have stated on and off the record, I am not against birthright citizenship for American Samoans; however, there is a process in place. Every U.S. territory that currently possesses birthright citizenship obtained it through an `organic act' passed by the U.S. Congress. Each organic act was supported by the will of the people in each respective territory. American Samoa must also go through this process if our people decide that birthright citizenship is in their best interest.'' ``We cannot allow our political status with the United States to be decided by five individuals or by a court thousands of miles away. If our people decide that they want to be granted automatic citizenship by birthright, I will work with Congress and our local leaders, as provided by governing law and years of legal precedent, to pass such legislation. Until then, I will continue to keep the people updated as this case moves through the court,'' Faleomavaega concluded. ____________________ THE NO SOCIAL SECURITY FOR NAZIS ACT ______ HON. SANDER M. LEVIN of michigan in the house of representatives Tuesday, December 2, 2014 Mr. LEVIN. Mr. Speaker, this is one of the rare occasions where the name of the bill speaks for itself. The No Social Security for Nazis Act is designed to close a loophole that has allowed some Nazi persecutors and their collaborators in the Holocaust to receive Social Security benefits. By leaving the country before they were officially deported, these people were able to keep their Social Security benefits. It is unbearable that those responsible for the deaths of millions during the Holocaust continue to receive Social Security benefits due to this loophole. This legislation stops benefit payments to Nazi persecutors and ensures that these individuals do not receive spousal benefits from marrying a Social Security beneficiary or through other channels. Congress never intended for Nazi war criminals and collaborators to be able to receive Social Security benefits. This bipartisan legislation reaffirms that intent. Social Security is an earned benefit, and it is our job in Congress to preserve and protect it. We must stop these inappropriate payments now, and that is exactly what this legislation does. I thank Representatives Johnson and Becerra and the work of Representatives Carolyn Maloney, Jason Chaffetz and Leonard Lance, and all others for their leadership on this legislation. ____________________ OUR UNCONSCIONABLE NATIONAL DEBT ______ HON. MIKE COFFMAN of colorado in the house of representatives Tuesday, December 2, 2014 Mr. COFFMAN. Mr. Speaker, on January 20, 2009, the day President Obama took office, the national debt was $10,626,877,048,913.08. Today, it is $18,005,549,328,561.45. We've added $7,378,672,279,648.37 to our debt in 5 years. This is over $7.3 trillion in debt our nation, our economy, and our children could have avoided with a balanced budget amendment. ____________________ FUNDING FOR ALZHEIMER'S RESEARCH ______ HON. GENE GREEN of texas in the house of representatives Tuesday, December 2, 2014 Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to urge my colleagues to appropriate an additional $200 million to the National Institutes of Health for research on Alzheimer's disease. More than five million Americans currently have Alzheimer's disease. Today, someone develops Alzheimer's every 67 seconds and by 2050, it will be every 33 seconds. Alzheimer's is the most expensive disease in America. Unless action is taken, the cost of Alzheimer's will total $1.2 trillion in 2050, and Medicare and Medicaid spending on Alzheimer's will increase 500 percent. My mother-in-law battled this disease, so I appreciate how devastating it can be to patients and their loved ones. The bipartisan National Alzheimer's Project Act (NAPA) was passed by Congress unanimously. NAPA called for the creation of a National Alzheimer's Plan, which has resulted in some notable accomplishments. However, scientists and researchers must have the necessary funds to carry out the blueprint set forth in the Plan. Congress provided an additional $100 million in Alzheimer's research for fiscal year 2014, yet we continue to underinvest. To address a disease of this magnitude, we must further our commitment by increasing funding for Alzheimer's research by $200 million in fiscal year 2015. ____________________ HISTORICAL RECORD OF POLITICAL STATUS ISSUE IN AMERICAN SAMOA ______ HON. ENI F. H. FALEOMAVAEGA of american samoa in the house of representatives Tuesday, December 2, 2014 Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to include, for historical purposes, the following information on the political status of American Samoa. [Press Release, Oct. 2, 2006] Faleomavaega Testifies Before Political Status Commission Congressman Faleomavaega announced today that he testified before the American Samoa Political Status Commission in a hearing held on Saturday, September 29, 2006 at BYU-Hawaii in Laie, Hawaii. I believe the work of this commission is critical for American Samoas political future, Faleomavaega said. I am honored to provide input as the commissioners deliberate our political status options. In my opinion, before we get too far ahead of ourselves in examining our political options we need to look inward to resolve some lingering ambiguities regarding our current territorial status. Currently, American Samoas political relationship with the United States is governed by the two Treaties or Deeds of Cession signed in 1900 (Tutuila) and [[Page 16443]] 1904 (Manua). These documents provide no clear protections for our culture, no clear guidance for our relationship with the United States, and no expression of political unity between our own islands. To me, it makes sense that we should address these issues first before we can develop a roadmap for our future. Otherwise, unresolved questions will always remain regarding our internal (Tutuila and Manua) and external (with the United States) political relationships. One source of ambiguity in these documents is that, in a Samoan context, this was understood to be a treaty of cession, rather than a deed of cession. In the Samoan version of these documents, our chiefs used the term feagaiga, which means treaty, but in the English version, the word treaty is never mentioned. To our Samoan chiefs this treaty relationship meant that Samoans would maintain a measure of autonomy the terms of the agreement allowed the U.S. the right to use the land and the harbor, in exchange for providing protection against hostile nations. Viewed as a deed, however, this agreement would have meant that the chiefs were giving over the land as well as their sovereignty over the land. The problem inherent in this ambiguity is that a deed of cession offers our people something less than the sovereign status that a treaty would provide, and in fact the term deed implies ownership of property rather than a sense of the rights and privileges of a sovereign people. Another source of ambiguity related to these two treaties/ deeds is that they were negotiated separately between the United States and each of the island groups. Because these two instruments were two separate acts, by themselves they did not unite American Samoa into one political entity. Therefore, the fact remains that to this day, there is no officially declared political union between the island groups of Tutuila and Manua, only separate understandings with the United States. Furthermore, despite what others may have said was the understanding in the past, these treaties do not provide for the protection of the basic rights of American Samoas people. While these two treaties have proven instrumental in providing stability to the people of American Samoa for the past 106 years, the deeds do not cover many of the most basic issues of concern for our people, such as citizenship, immigration, international trade and commerce, national security, marine and communal property rights, or membership in international organizations, to name a few. Rather than being instruments that express some vague obligation on the part of the United States to protect our culture, I see these two treaties as asserting United States sovereignty over our lands and our lives. While the Deeds of Cession still stand as the basis upon which American Samoa can claim a political relationship with the United States, there is still some confusion even within the United States government as to the effect of these two treaties. A review of the U.S. Department of State listing of U.S. treaties in force makes no mention of any treaty existing between the United States and the island groups of Tutuila and Manua. Also, as a current conflict in federal law illustrates, the U.S. Congress has its own problems in defining the U.S. relationship with American Samoa. The U.S. Congress approved these documents under the 1929 Ratification Act (48 U.S.C. 1661). Section 1661 states as follows: Until Congress shall provide for the government of such islands, all civil, judicial, and military powers shall be vested in such person or persons and shall be exercised in such manner as the President of the United States shall direct; and the President shall have power to remove said officers and fill the vacancies so occasioned. (emphasis added) Congress did not ratify the 1900 and 1904 Deeds until 1929, and then delegated its constitutional authority to administer the territory to the President, who transferred the administration of American Samoa to the Secretary of the Navy, primarily because the U.S. wished to establish a naval station in Pago Pago Bay. In 1951, President Truman transferred the administration of American Samoa to the Secretary of the Interior. The transfer of all administrative, judicial, and military authority from the Congress to the President has not been amended since 1929. Notwithstanding this 1929 law delegating authority over the territory to the President, in 1984 Congress passed a bill, signed into law by the President (Pub. L. 98-213, codified at 48 U.S.C. 1662a), that now requires congressional approval of any amendment to the territory's constitution. In view of this new law, several questions and problems are now being raised. First, why does American Samoa now require Congressional approval of any amendments to its territorial constitution when Congress never expressly approved the territorial constitution to begin with? Second, there are several provisions in our territorial constitution that would raise serious constitutional issues that Congress has not yet addressed. In fact, it is questionable if Congress would approve such provisions in light of the U.S. Constitution. Unfortunately, Congress has never fully examined the contradictions between these two statutes. The question here is whether the territorial constitution should be subject to congressional or presidential authority. If the authority is congressional, the 1929 law should be amended to rescind the authority delegated to the President; if the authority is presidential, the 1984 law should be rescinded and the approval of changes to our constitution should be returned to the complete authority of the President via the Secretary of the Interior. In either case, we have to face the fact that our present constitution and our current measure of sovereignty are nothing more than an extension of the presidential power of the Secretary of the Interior. As we discuss our possible options in our quest for a greater measure of self-government, where are we now in our relationship with the United States? American Samoa is described as an unorganized and unincorporated territory of the United States. American Samoa is considered unorganized because since 1929 Congress has not officially organized a government for the separate island kingdoms of Tutuila and Manua under one organic act. Our territory is unincorporated because, according to Supreme Court decisions regarding the constitutional rights of insular territories, Congress has never intended to incorporate American Samoa into the Union. From 1900 to 1951, the U.S., through the Department of the Navy, appointed military officers to govern the affairs of the islands. According to the 1921 Codification of the Regulations and Orders of the Government of American Samoa, on May 1, 1900 Commander Benjamin Tilley, the first naval commandant of Tutuila and Manua, declared that the Governor, for the time being, of American Samoa is the head of the Government. For fifty-one years, this self-made regulation governed American Samoa's course with one appointed Naval Governor after another acting as the maker of all laws and appointments with little regard for the will of the people. During this period of martial law there were no elected leaders. With the transfer of power in 1951 to the Department of the Interior, American Samoa experienced little more than a transition from military to civilian rule. Civilian-appointed governors still had full authority over island affairs. In the 1960s a territorial constitution was drafted and there began to be some involvement from the Samoan Legislature. One unintended consequence of the law passed in 1984 requiring Congressional approval of amendments to the American Samoa constitution is that, whereas between 1960 and 1984 our local leaders had extensive practice at constitution-writing, after the law was passed this practice ceased. To date, the final steps toward some measure of self-government were taken when in 1977 the first Governor was elected by popular vote and in 1980 when American Samoa elected its first Delegate to the U.S. Congress. Given this background and history of our political relationship with the United States, Faleomavaega offered the following recommendations. First, Tutuila and Manua must officially declare a union as one political entity or governing body, thereby sanctioning its authority to deal with the United States as we negotiate our future status. This would address one of the major shortcomings of the separately negotiated Deeds of Cession. Second, I would recommend that a national convention be called to deliberate the specific provisions of the 1900 and 1904 Deeds of Cession. As I mentioned, these Deeds do not provide any real protection for our communal lands and culture as our forefathers intended. I believe we need to formulate a statement of principles underlining our desire to either amend certain provisions of the two deeds or establish an entirely new agreement with the United States. The provisions of any such agreement should define our political relationship with the United States, whether it is a covenant status like the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, free association status like the Federated States of Micronesia, Palau, and the Marshall Islands, commonwealth status like Puerto Rico, or even an Organic Act such as the one governing Guam's relationship with the United States. Third, once we have defined what American Samoa's relationship should be with the United States under the terms of an agreement that is agreeable to both sides, the leadership of Samoa should then call a constitutional convention and organize a government based upon the terms and conditions outlined in the agreement, not the U.S. Constitution. Moreover, I believe this must be done as soon as possible the longer this uncertainty surrounding these two Deeds remains, the further we drift from our forefathers' treaty intentions and risk the erosion of our culture, of becoming less Samoan and more American or, in other words, Americans of Samoan ancestry. As it stands, we cannot claim loyalty to the United States and at the same time refuse to apply federal standards that are incompatible with our local traditions and land-tenure system. To summarize, Faleomavaega said, what I asked of the esteemed members of the Political Status Study Commission is that, before [[Page 16444]] they become too deeply involved in examining all possible future options, they focus first on clarifying the original sources of authority underpinning our current political relationship with the United States, the two Deeds of Cession, as a foundation for a unified approach to determining our political future. The full text of the Treaties/Deeds of Cession, in English and Samoan, as well as the 1929 and 1983 laws discussed in the Congressman's statement are available on Congressman Faleomavaega's website at www.house.gov/faleomavaega/ historical .shtml ____ [Press Release, May 24, 2007] Future Political Status Study Commission Report Now Available Online Congressman Faleomavaega announced today that a copy of the Future Political Status Study Commission Report is now available online for the public and particularly members of the Samoan community all around the world to read. ``Many people in our Samoan community, especially those residing outside of American Samoa, have contacted my office to request copies of or to find out how to obtain a copy of the Future Political Status Study Commission Report,'' Faleomavaega said. ``So, I am pleased to inform everyone that a copy of the report is now available online on my website and on the American Samoa Governor's website for anyone to read.'' ``I want to congratulate and thank The Honorable Tufele Li'amatua--Chairman, The Honorable Tuaolo Fruean--Vice Chairman, High Talking Chief Fofo Sunia--Executive Director, and all the Commissioners and staff of the Future Political Status Study Commission for the tremendous work they did in completing this report.'' ``Now that we have the report, everyone concerned should take time to thoroughly review the Commission's recommendations, especially our Fono and the Administration. As I have stated before, I believe the next logical step in this important process is for the Fono to conduct hearings to discuss the different recommendations made by the Commission. Only after such a careful review and discussion I feel we should proceed to the next steps or implementation,'' Faleomavaega concluded. ____________________ PERSONAL EXPLANATION ______ HON. JIM GERLACH of pennsylvania in the house of representatives Tuesday, December 2, 2014 Mr. GERLACH. Mr. Speaker, unfortunately, on December 1, 2014, I missed two recorded votes on the House floor. Had I been present, I would have voted YEA on Roll Call 532 and YEA on Roll Call 533. ____________________ RECOGNIZING THE TWENTY-FIFTH ANNIVERSARY OF HOPE ______ HON. LUCILLE ROYBAL-ALLARD of california in the house of representatives Tuesday, December 2, 2014 Ms. ROYBAL-ALLARD. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to commend Hispanas Organized for Political Equality, or HOPE, on the celebration of its twenty-fifth anniversary. On December 4, 2014, HOPE will celebrate a quarter-century of success in championing the full participation of Latinas in America's democracy and economy. HOPE's efforts have benefited not just Latinas, but men and women of all backgrounds throughout our nation. A cross-section of Latinas from business, political, and social backgrounds came together to found HOPE in 1989, the same year the first Latina was elected to Congress. Since that time, HOPE has been a valuable partner to Latinas who have pushed political limits, broken barriers, and defined what it means to be a leader. HOPE has directly served more than 50,000 Latinas throughout the state of California, as well as millions more through advocacy efforts. HOPE's achievements include: The HOPE Leadership Institute (HLI), California's only statewide leadership program specifically designed to train Latina leaders in vital leadership and advocacy skills. More than ninety percent of HLI alumnae have attained leadership positions in their careers or communities, and thirty percent have gone on to serve on a local or statewide commission. The HOPE Youth Leadership Program (HYLP), which has prepared hundreds of low-income Latina high school students for college, and trained them in civic participation. Eighty-seven percent of HYLP participants have enrolled in college after graduation. HOPE's Latina Action Day and Latina History Day, which inspire and empower over 1,300 attendees each year to succeed and take responsibility to ensure the prosperity of their communities. Mr. Speaker, it is with great pleasure and pride that I salute HOPE, its Board, and its supporters. They have played a vital role in inspiring, empowering, and supporting so many of California's leaders over the last twenty-five years. California, and the entire United States, are stronger for their leadership. I wish HOPE continued success as it continues its mission to ensure political and economic parity for Latinas. ____________________ CONGRATULATING CASSIDY NUSSMAN FOR HONORABLE MENTION SELECTION ______ HON. PETE OLSON of texas in the house of representatives Tuesday, December 2, 2014 Mr. OLSON. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate Cassidy Nussman for being named an honorable mention selection on the Under Armour Girls High School All-America Team by the American Volleyball Coaches Association (AVCA). Nussman is a senior at Pearland High School in Pearland, Texas. This award recognizes Nussman's outstanding athletic achievements. She is among an elite group of high school athletes, joining a list of 150 high school All-American honorable mentions. After this season, Nussman will go on to compete at the highest level of intercollegiate athletics at Northwestern University. On behalf of the residents of the Twenty-Second Congressional District of Texas, congratulations again to Cassidy Nussman for being selected as an honorable mention on the Under Armour Girls High School All-America Team. We look forward to her continued success both on and off the court. ____________________ HISTORICAL RECORD OF U.S. TREASURY $20.4 MILLION STIMULUS PAYOUT TO QUALIFYING RESIDENTS IN AMERICAN SAMOA ______ HON. ENI F. H. FALEOMAVAEGA of american samoa in the house of representatives Tuesday, December 2, 2014 Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to include, for historical purposes, information about the U.S. Treasury's $20.4 million stimulus payout to qualifying residents in American Samoa. [Press Release, Apr. 28, 2008] U.S. Treasury Sending $20.4 Million to ASG To Pay Out Economic Stimulus Payments to Qualifying Residents Congressman Faleomavaega announced today that the American Samoa Government will receive $20.4 million from the U.S. Department of Treasury to be paid out to qualifying residents as part of the Economic Stimulus Package that was signed into law to jumpstart the economy. Faleomavaega and Congresswoman Madeleine Bordallo urged the Leadership of the House and Senate to include the Territories in the stimulus package and make child tax credits and tax rebates available to qualifying residents. The Members were successful in their efforts and, prior to the bill being signed into law, in a letter dated January 29, 2008, Faleomavaega informed Governor Togiola and the Fono that, for American Samoa, the U.S. Treasury would send a check of an estimated amount and ASG must have a plan approved promptly to disburse the money quickly. In a joint letter dated February 15, 2008 to Secretary Henry M. Paulson of the Department of Treasury, Faleomavaega along with Congresswoman Madeleine Bordallo, Congresswoman Donna Christensen, and Resident Commissioner Luis Fortuno also urged the Secretary to implement an arrangement that will provide for the funds to be transferred in advance of the actual payouts of the rebates. ``Today, Secretary Paulson has honored our request and I thank him for informing my office that he has accepted ASG's plan for distributing stimulus payments to residents of American Samoa, and that ASG will receive a check for $20.4 million in order to payout tax rebates and child tax credits to those who qualify,'' Faleomavaega said. ``This payment is in accordance of the Economic Stimulus Act of 2008 that was signed by the President on February 13, 2008.'' ``The stimulus package was easily passed by both the House and Senate and I, again, thank Chairman Charles Rangel of the House Committee on Ways and Means and Chairman Max Baucus of the Senate Finance Committee for supporting our request to include the territories in the Economic Stimulus Act of 2008.'' ``I also commend Governor Togiola and our local Tax Office for acting quickly and submitting a plan that has been approved by the [[Page 16445]] U.S. Treasury. I am especially pleased that the people of American Samoa will benefit from these rebates which will help bolster our local economy,'' Faleomavaega concluded. The full text of Secretary Paulson's letter of April 28 informing Governor Togiola of the approval of ASG's Distribution Plan was forwarded to Faleomavaega's office by the U.S. Department of Treasury and follows: Dear Governor Tulafono: Thank you for your letter of April 23, 2008, submitting the Distribution Plan for the Recovery Rebates (the Plan) in American Samoa. The Economic Stimulus Act of 2008, P.L. 110- 185 (the Act), requires that I approve American Samoa's plan for distributing stimulus payments to residents of American Samoa. The Act also requires that once such a plan is approved, the Treasury Department make a payment to American Samoa in an amount estimated as being equal to the aggregate benefits that would have been provided to residents of American Samoa by reason of the amendments made to the Internal Revenue Code by section 101(c) of the Act if a ``mirror code'' tax system had been in effect in American Samoa. In accordance with the Act, I approve the Plan, a copy of which is enclosed. Also, we have estimated the aggregate benefits that would have been provided to residents of American Samoa by reason of section 101(c) of the Act if a mirror code tax system had been in effect in American Samoa at $20.4 million. A payment in this amount will be made by the Treasury Department to American Samoa to fund the prompt distribution of stimulus payments to residents of American Samoa pursuant to the Plan. Sincerely, Henry M. Paulson, Jr. ____________________ RECOGNIZING THE PUBLIC SERVICE OF DR. JERI PHEIFER ______ HON. MARC A. VEASEY of texas in the house of representatives Tuesday, December 2, 2014 Mr. VEASEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the honorable public service of Dr. Jeri Pheifer as she retires from her position as Superintendent of the Everman Independent School District. Dr. Pheifer was appointed Superintendent of Schools in 2004, after serving the Venus and Albany Independent School Districts. Under her tenure with Everman Schools, the district has thrived and provided quality education for the thousands of children who attend class each day. Most notably, under Dr. Pheifer's leadership the Everman Joe C. Bean High School Graduation Class of 2013 achieved a one hundred percent graduation rate. Her tireless work to improve and strengthen Everman schools has not gone unnoticed. Earlier this year Dr. Pheifer worked with Tarrant County College to open its newest Early College High School. Partnerships like these work to provide students, who likely would not otherwise consider attending college, an opportunity to earn a high school diploma and an associate's degree at the same time. Over the past 35 years, Dr. Pheifer has worked tirelessly in the field of education. She has served as a teacher and administrator for public and private schools, serving students from pre-Kindergarten through the university level. These positions exemplify Dr. Pheifer's dedication to not only the community she currently serves, but to the State of Texas and its citizens. Dr. Pheifer received her Bachelor of Arts and Master of Education degrees from Abilene Christian University and her Doctor of Education degree from Texas Tech University. It is an honor to recognize Dr. Pheifer on the occasion of her retirement from over three decades of contributions to Texas communities. Mr. Speaker, I ask you to please join me in recognizing Dr. Jeri Pheifer's dedicated service to the Everman Independent School District and the State of Texas. ____________________ IN RECOGNITION OF ALLAN ALIFANO ______ HON. JACKIE SPEIER of california in the house of representatives Tuesday, December 2, 2014 Ms. SPEIER. Mr. Speaker, I rise to honor Allan Alifano, a retiring member of the Half Moon Bay City Council. Allan Alifano has served the people of Half Moon Bay with distinction through eight years on the city's planning commission and since 2009 on the city council. Councilman Alifano has also served his community through countless meetings of the Local Agency Formation Commission and as a member of the local wastewater treatment board. While on the board during our period of intense drought, he supported recycling water from the treatment plant to meet local landscaping and golf course requirements. During his time on the council, Half Moon Bay underwent tremendous challenges including the historic recession and consequent reductions in sales tax receipts, as well as a legal judgment involving land use decisions. The combined impact of these events placed the city's finances in great peril. Councilman Alifano was committed to seeing his community pull through despite the odds. Ultimately, Half Moon Bay emerged with essential services intact and a renewed commitment to community betterment. Councilman Alifano is the proud owner of Alifano Technologies in Half Moon Bay. Among many offerings, it specializes in computer support, complex IT design and customer service through the provision of needed supplies. The company is a prominent business on Main Street, a location that demonstrates the commitment of Councilman Alifano and his family to Half Moon Bay's historic business district. Alifano Technologies is also philanthropic, with the proceeds of e-waste recycling going towards the Boys and Girls Club of the Coastside. Mr. Speaker, serving on a city council is a challenging form of public service. Neighbors may have your phone number or buttonhole you in the store. You are privy to the most optimistic projections about the future of your town, and to some of the biggest challenges to continued prosperity. Allan Alifano handled his responsibilities with aplomb, enthusiasm and decisiveness. Half Moon Bay is a better community because he offered his services on behalf of its future. Please join me in congratulating Allan Alifano on his service to the outstanding community of Half Moon Bay as he returns to private life in a city that was guided by his hopes for its future and by his service to all. ____________________ CELEBRATING THE LIFE OF HARLEM'S TUSKEGEE AIRMAN JOSEPH HERMAN SPOONER ______ HON. CHARLES B. RANGEL of new york in the house of representatives Tuesday, December 2, 2014 Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to celebrate the life of Tuskegee Airman Joseph Herman Spooner, a life-long resident of the Village of Harlem. As noted by the family: On September 11th, 2014, America surrendered a living legend to the annals of Black American history. Inextricably intertwined to the importance of this day ``September 11th'' in American history, a Tuskegee Airman at 94 years old, has passed over. September 11 reminds all of us every year that `freedom is not free' and the strength of our nation depends on men and women, such as Joe Spooner, a decorated World War II original member of the 99th Fighter Squadron/332 Fighter Group stationed out of Tuskegee, Alabama. Joseph Spooner was born on October 30th, 1919 to Joseph and Georgianna Spooner. Joseph was hilarious and loved to play jokes on people. He was high spirited and the life of the party. He had 6 children and three generations of grandchildren. He attended PS 179 Elementary School, PS 165 Robert E. Simon, and graduated from Dewitt Clinton High School in which he excelled in academics and athletics. He loved to play and watch sports. In his early years, he played Semi-Pro Basketball on a team called the Columbians. At the time he was drafted Joseph Spooner was a freshman at The City College of New York. Having played with the likes of Negro Basketball League legend John Issacs and ``Pop'' Gates of the original Harlem Globetrotters he made his family proud qualifying to pursue a college education during such a racially charged and segregated time period. America in the 1940's, was unforgiving for people of color, it was an impossible dream come true, yet a dream deferred. Joseph Spooner left college, abandoning a basketball scholarship to serve his country. Joe enlisted into service in 1942, and in 1943 this Black American hero was commissioned for duty with the Tuskegee Airmen. On April 1943, the 99th Fighter Squadron in their P-47 Thunderbolt fighters went into combat bound for North Africa, where it would join the 33rd Fighter Group and its commander, Colonel William W. Momyer. Given little guidance from battle-experienced pilots, the 99th's first combat mission was to attack the small strategic volcanic island of Pantelleria in the Mediterranean Sea to clear the sea lanes for the Allied invasion of Sicily in July 1943. The air assault on the island began on 30 May 1943. The 99th flew its first combat mission on June [[Page 16446]] 2, 1943. The surrender of the garrison of 11,121 Italians and 78 Germans due to air attack was the first of its kind. The 99th moved on to Sicily and received a Distinguished Unit Citation for its performance in combat led by Col. Benjamin O. Davis, Jr., Commander of the Tuskegee Airmen 332nd Fighter Group. Though subject to racial discrimination, both at home and abroad, the 996 pilots and more than 15,000 ground personnel who served with the all- black units would be credited with some 15,500 combat sorties and earn over 150 Distinguished Flying Crosses for their achievements. With over 200 combat missions the Tuskegee Airmen did not lose a single bomber. They did everything in their power to protect and shield the bombers. As American history has now recognized the heroism and amazing exploits and air battles that took place in the skies over Europe by the 99th Fighter Squadron/332 Fighter Group, Joe as Armorer may have had the most important role by which he was responsible for loading the fighter planes with ammunition. In 2006, I introduced legislation to honor the Tuskegee Airmen with the Congressional Gold Medal. In March of 2007, Tuskegee Airman Joseph Herman Spooner received the Congressional Gold Medal of Honor from President George W. Bush Great men, like our beloved Tuskegee Airman Joseph Herman Spooner are temporary gifts we have in this world, but their accomplishments and achievements are far remembered and forever lasting. Mr. Speaker, I ask my distinguished colleagues to join me in celebrating the life of Tuskegee Airman Joseph Herman Spooner. ____________________ HISTORICAL RECORD OF SENATE AND HOUSE HEARINGS ON FALEOMAVAEGA'S BILL TO PROTECT VOTING RIGHTS OF AMERICAN SAMOA'S ACTIVE DUTY SERVICE MEMBERS AND OVERSEAS VOTERS ______ HON. ENI F. H. FALEOMAVAEGA of american samoa in the house of representatives Tuesday, December 2, 2014 Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to include, for historical purposes, information on Senate and House hearings on a bill to protect the voting rights of American Samoa's active duty service members and overseas voters. [Press Release, July 14, 2004] Senate Holds Hearing on Faleomavaega Bill To Protect Voting Rights of Active Duty Service Members and Overseas Voters Congressman Faleomavaega announced today that the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Subcommittee on Public Lands and Forests held a hearing on H.R. 2010, a bill he introduced to protect the voting rights of active duty service members and overseas voters whose home of residence is American Samoa. At this time, I want to thank Chairman Larry Craig and Ranking Member Ron Wyden for holding this hearing and for entering the full text of my statement into the record, Congressman Faleomavaega said. I also want to thank Senator Daniel Akaka who is a senior member of both the Energy Committee and the Subcommittee on Public Lands. Senator Akaka was instrumental in getting this hearing held and I thank him for his support and kind words. At today's hearing, Senator Akaka said, ``H.R. 2010 was introduced by my good friend, Eni Faleomavaega, a senior member of the House who couldn't testify himself because of the centennial celebration for the islands of Manua. On this occasion, I d like to send the people of American Samoa our best wishes as they celebrate the 100th anniversary since the stars and stripes were first raised by their traditional chiefs.'' Senator Akaka continued by saying, ``I do not have a question, Mr. Chairman, but a comment as someone who is very familiar with the challenges of transportation and communications out in the Pacific. This bill would resolve a long-standing problem in electing the Delegate from American Samoa: How to conduct a run-off election in just 14 days in a territory with a very large number of absentee voters and only two regular flights from the U.S. each week? This bill would provide for election of the Delegate by a plurality vote. Or, if the local government wants, by a majority vote following a primary election. It would resolve a long- standing problem.'' Chairman Craig thanked Senator Akaka for his opening comments and I also thank Senator Akaka for being at today's hearing. Although I was invited to testify before the Senate Subcommittee, I thought it was equally important to attend Flag Day celebrations being held in American Samoa to recognize Manua's 100 year relationship with the United States, Congressman Faleomavaega said. This celebration is an historic event and I am pleased to be with the people on this important occasion and, again, I am pleased that Chairman Craig recognized the importance of Flag Day and included my written testimony in the Committee records. I am also pleased to welcome the MV Sili to Manua. It is most fitting for our new vessel to arrive from Louisiana just in time to commemorate Manuas history and to honor our traditional leaders and chiefs, past and present. The arrival of this vessel has been more than a year in the making and I am grateful to our friends in the House and Senate who supported our efforts to set aside funding for this vessel. When Republicans in the Senate wanted to cut funding for the Territories from the Tax Act of 2003, Democratic Senator Benjamin Nelson from Nebraska fought hard to help us keep our funding in place. Later, Republican Chairman Bill Thomas of the House Ways and Means Committee sent me a letter saying that he was pleased he could assist me in this effort. Because we were successful in including the Territories, American Samoa received more than $10 million from the Tax Act of 2003 and I am grateful that Senator John Breaux of Louisiana and Ranking Member Charles Rangel of the House Committee on Ways and Means stood with me in establishing Congressional intent on how these funds should be spent, Congressman Faleomavaega said. I am also pleased that Governor Togiola stood with me and agreed that $5 million should be set aside for the purchase of a new vessel for Manua. I am also thankful that Senator Breaux put us in touch with one of the best shipyards in the world located in Louisiana and then personally made sure that American Samoa was receiving one of the best vessels Louisiana had to offer at a cost of $4 million. I consider Senator Breaux a good friend and I can say with certainty that he is also a friend of American Samoa. This year, we have much to be thankful for including this historic legislation which is moving through Congress to protect the voting rights of our active duty service members and our college students and other overseas voters. H.R. 2010 is a bipartisan bill which is supported by Republican Chairman Richard Pombo and Ranking Democratic Member Nick Rahall of the House Committee on Resources, Faleomavaega said. On May 5, 2004, the House Committee on Resources passed this bill by unanimous consent. On June 14, 2004, a Republican controlled House passed H.R. 2010 without objection. I am pleased that the Senate is now considering H.R. 2010 and I would like to note for the record that on October 29, 2003 the House Committee on Resources also held a hearing on this bill. On behalf of the U.S. Department of the Interior, Mr. David Cohen, the Assistant Secretary for Insular Affairs, was invited to testify but declined citing that this was a local issue. Locally, H.R. 2010 is supported by the Governor of American Samoa, the President of the Senate, the Speaker of the House, and 85% of those surveyed in American Samoa agree that overseas voters and active duty service members should have the right to vote in federal elections held in the Territory, Faleomavaega said. Given that Assistant Secretary Cohen accepted todays invitation to testify before the Senate Subcommittee on Public Lands and Forests, I am pleased that his testimony was supportive. Two weeks ago, when the Senate first informed me that H.R. 2010 would be considered today, I called Mr. Cohen to discuss the bill and determine where the Department of Interior stood on the issue. Assistant Secretary Cohen and I came to an understanding prior to the hearing and I thank him for his support. While the Assistant Secretary focused his comments on the will of the people, when asked by Chairman Craig how he believed the will of the people should be determined, Mr. Cohen said he believed the Committee should rely on the statements which I included in the Record. As I have said on many occasions, this matter has been before the people and the local leaders of American Samoa for the past six years. Since 1998, I have written to our Governors, past and present. I have written and testified before our local Legislature and I have also included copies of my testimony, my letters, and local responses in the House and Senate Committee records. These enclosures now on file with the Committees are more than 70 pages in length. Included in the record is Governor Togiola's support of H.R. 2010. Once more, I want to commend Governor Togiola for supporting this bill as we have always agreed that our military men and women should have the right to vote especially when they contribute almost a million dollars per year in taxes to our local government. I also thank the President of the American Samoa Senate, the Honorable Lutu Tenari S. Fuimaono, and Speaker Matagi Ray McMoore for their support, Faleomavaega said. H.R. 2010 is an historic bill. It is a bill that immediately restores the voting rights of our overseas voters and active duty military members. It is also a bill that makes clear in [[Page 16447]] no uncertain terms that the American Samoa Legislature is vested with the authority it needs to establish primary elections for the office of the Delegate, if it so chooses. H.R. 2010 also protects American Samoa's future in the U.S. Congress. Without H.R. 2010, future Delegates could miss out on key committee assignments as a result of delayed outcomes and run-off elections. Like Governor Togiola, I do not believe American Samoa's future should be weakened or disadvantaged and this is one more reason I appreciate his support of H.R. 2010. Given the importance and urgency of this bill, I thank the members of the House Resources Committee, both Democrats and Republicans, who unanimously voted in favor of this bill. H.R. 2010 is the right thing to do and, as a Vietnam veteran, I will not rest until we fully guarantee that our active duty service members have the right to vote in federal elections held in American Samoa. To alleviate any concerns that I will personally benefit from this legislation, I offered an amendment in the nature of a substitute for purposes of changing the effective date of this bill from January 2004 to January 2006. This amendment was unanimously supported at mark-up by the House Resources Committee and, as such, any change in law will not go into effect until the 2006 election cycle, Faleomavaega said. As I have repeatedly stated, H.R. 2010 in no way affects how the American Samoa Government chooses to elect its local leaders and, having made every change requested of me by our local leaders and after years of good-faith efforts on my part, I believe the time has come to do right by our overseas voters and men and women in the military. Our sons and daughters have fought and died to preserve our freedoms and I will do everything I can to protect their right to vote. Again, I thank the Chairman and Ranking Member of the Senate Subcommittee on Public Lands and Forests for holding this historic hearing on H.R. 2010 and I am hopeful that they will support its successful passage. In a dramatic moment before the hearing came to a close, Senator Akaka said, ``As a person from the Pacific, I want to make a final comment about H.R. 2010.'' Chairman Craig granted the Senators request and Senator Akaka said, ``As you know, Mr. Cohen, H.R. 2010 will resolve a long standing problem made worse by the current conflict in the Middle East where many American Samoans are now serving. Those Americans are fighting for democracy and I speak out in support of this bill. Mr. Chairman, I believe we should act quickly to pass this bill so that those men and women will have the opportunity to vote to help select their representative to the U.S. House of Representatives.'' Like Senator Akaka, I also believe the Senate should act on this bill and I thank my dear friend Senator Akaka for standing with the people of American Samoa on this important issue. I also thank our men and women from American Samoa who are serving on active duty at a time when our nation is at war. I wish them the very best and I pray for their safe return, the Congressman concluded. ____ [Press Release, Oct. 31, 2003] Resources Committee Holds Hearing on Election Bill, Lieutenant Governor Testifies Congressman Faleomavaega announced today that on Wednesday October 29, 2003 the House Committee on Resources held a hearing on H.R. 2010, a bill he introduced to protect the voting rights of military men and women whose home of record is American Samoa. Governor Togiola asked the Lieutenant Governor to testify in support of the bill and I am pleased by the outcome, Congressman Faleomavaega. At this time, we are in full agreement that H.R. 2010 is the right thing to do. Like 85% of those surveyed in American Samoa, we believe that our active duty service members should be afforded the same rights and privileges as every other man and woman serving in the U.S. Armed Forces. Our service members and college students deserve the right to vote and we believe it is our duty to protect their rights. I am also pleased that Senator Fuimaono, President of the Senate, has also agreed to support our efforts. On October 27, 2003, he sent me a letter stating his full support for H.R. 2010 and wishing Chairman Pombo the best of luck in moving the bill forward. In a statement submitted to the Committee, Governor Togiola stated that although I had previously expressed misgivings about the bill, after further review, I have come to support the measure for the following reasons: 1) The bill in its current form provides that when American Samoa devises a system for primary elections for election of our Congressman, the U.S. Congress will amend the section to restore the election of the Congressman by majority vote. 2) Currently there is no other way to maximize the participation of American Samoan residents serving in the U.S. Armed Forces and those attending college, as well as their families, to fully participate in the election of our Congressional Delegate. As I have said before, H.R. 2010 is a good compromise and includes the suggestions of our local leaders. H.R. 2010 provides for both plurality and majority voting. It also clearly authorizes the Fono to establish primary elections, if it so chooses, Congressman Faleomavaega said. I am pleased that the Governor, the Lieutenant Governor, and the President of the Senate are now fully supportive of this bill. I thank them for their support and I also thank Chairman Pombo and Ranking Member Nick Rahall of the House Resources Committee for holding a hearing on this bill. Finally, I want to thank our college students and our men and women serving in the U.S. Armed Forces. We are living in difficult times and we must work together to make a difference for generations to come, the Congressman concluded. ____________________ HONORING MRS. DEBORAH MOORE ______ HON. BENNIE G. THOMPSON of mississippi in the house of representatives Tuesday, December 2, 2014 Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor a remarkable Unsung Hero in Cleveland, Mississippi. Deborah Moore is the Associate Vice President of Community Relations at Delta Health Alliance. Mrs. Moore is assigned to the Indianola Promise Community where she provides administrative oversight and technical assistance to the community and organizations. Mrs. Moore worked one year as Project Manager IV at Delta Health Alliance before being promoted to Assistant Vice President and then to Associate Vice President. Mrs. Moore is a retiree from the state of Mississippi where she served 27 years in community and economic development. She spent the last 12 years of her career before coming to Delta Health Alliance at Delta State University's Center for Community and Economic Development in Cleveland, MS where she served as AmeriCorps director for two programs and then as director of the Center for Community and Economic Development the last five years. In her role as director of the Center for Community and Economic Development she assisted grass-root communities by empowering individuals, strengthening relationships and developing projects and programs to strengthen communities. Moore has extensive work with proposal writing having secured grants in excess of $15,000,000.00. Mrs. Moore is a member of several nonprofit boards, the Mississippi Center for Nonprofits, Cleveland Youth Council and Friends of the Environment. She currently serves as chair of the board for the Delta Fresh Foods Initiative. Moore serves in an advisory capacity for the Breast Education-Early Detection Project and the School-based Asthma Management Project at Delta State University. She also serves on the advisory board of the Excel By 5 program in Cleveland, MS and is a member of the Excel By 5 Coalition in Indianola, MS. Mrs. Moore works tirelessly in assisting: the elderly by running errands and doing other tasks they may desire; mentoring youth in diverse subject areas, so they can become an asset to society and work faithful with her husband's ministry to enhance congregants both spiritually and naturally. Mrs. Moore is a native of Cleveland, MS. She is a graduate of Delta State University with a B.B.A. degree and a M.B.A. degree. She has a certification as an Economic Development Finance Professional from the National Development Council (NDC) and received her PhD from the University of Southern Mississippi in Human Capital Development. Mrs. Moore is married to Dr. Billy Moore and they are the proud parents of two daughters, A'ndrea and Alicia. Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues to join me in recognizing Mrs. Deborah Moore, an amazing Unsung Hero, for her dedication and service to mankind. ____________________ CONGRATULATING MEMORIAL HERMANN LIFE FLIGHT ______ HON. PETE OLSON of texas in the house of representatives Tuesday, December 2, 2014 Mr. OLSON. Mr. Speaker, I rise to congratulate Memorial Hermann Life Flight for being named the 2014 EMS Air Medical Service of the Year by the Texas Department of State Health Services. This award recognizes Memorial Hermann Texas Trauma Institute's commitment to excellence in providing emergency care to critically ill and injured patients. Life Flight, Houston's only hospital-based air medical service, operates 24 hours a day, seven days a week and performs more than 3,000 life-saving missions each year. Since Memorial Hermann began its air medical program, it has completed more than 140,000 [[Page 16448]] missions. Life Flight continually adds new in-flight medical innovations into its quick transport system to provide better care for the fast-growing Houston community. Thanks to the Memorial Hermann Texas Trauma Institute for their tireless work in ensuring our community's health and safety. On behalf of the residents of the Twenty-Second Congressional District of Texas, congratulations again to Memorial Hermann for being honored with the 2014 EMS Air Medical Service of the Year Award. ____________________ HISTORICAL RECORD ON PASSAGE OF FALEOMAVAEGA'S BILL TO PROTECT VOTING RIGHTS OF AMERICAN SAMOA'S ACTIVE DUTY SERVICE MEMBERS AND OVERSEAS VOTERS ______ HON. ENI F. H. FALEOMAVAEGA of american samoa in the house of representatives Tuesday, December 2, 2014 Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to include, for historical purposes, information on the passage of a bill to protect the voting rights of American Samoa's active duty service members and overseas voters. [Press Release, Oct. 11, 2004] Senate Passes Faleomavaega's Bill To Protect Voting Rights of American Samoa's Active Duty Service Members; President Bush Expected To Sign Bill Into Law Within 30 Days Congressman Faleomavaega announced today that on Wednesday September 15, 2004 the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources passed, by unanimous consent, H.R. 2010, a bill he introduced to allow military and overseas voters to participate in federal elections held in American Samoa. On the evening of Sunday October 10, 2004, the United States Senate also unanimously passed H.R. 2010 and the bill has now been sent to President George W. Bush who is expected to sign Faleomavaega's bill into law within the next thirty days. First and foremost, I want to thank American Samoa's military men and women who are proudly serving our country at a time when our nation is at war, the Congressman said. American Samoa's sons and daughters have fought and died for the right to vote and, as a Vietnam Veteran, I promised I would do everything I could to make sure our military men and women could fully participate in federal elections held in American Samoa. This is why I introduced H.R. 2010 and why I am thankful that this bill has enjoyed the full support of Republicans and Democrats in the House and Senate. For the record, it should be noted that not one Republican or Democrat in the House or Senate objected to H.R. 2010 and I am thankful to my colleagues for their support. No matter what is said, Congress is not about who is in the Majority. Congress is about seniority, friendship, and influence. It takes both Republicans and Democrats to get the job done and it also takes the support of our local leaders, Faleomavaega said. This is why I commend Governor Togiola, the late Senate President Lutu T. Fuimaono, and Speaker McMoore who also stood in support of H.R. 2010. I also commend the people of American Samoa, the Congressman continued. Of those surveyed, more than 85% agreed that our active duty military members deserve the right to vote and, as a result of your support and prayers, H.R. 2010 has now passed the House and Senate and has been sent to the President of the United States who is also expected to fully support this bill. Once signed, H.R. 2010 will become effective in 2006. Again, H.R. 2010 is an historic bill. It is a bill that restores the voting rights of our college students and active duty military members and makes clear in no uncertain terms that the American Samoa Legislature is vested with the authority it needs to establish primary elections for the office of the Delegate, if it so chooses. While my opponents continue to call this a plurality bill, nothing could be further from the truth, Faleomavaega said. Those who understand this bill know that this bill includes both plurality and majority voting. If, for example, the American Samoa Legislature establishes primary elections, the general election for the office of the Delegate will be by majority. If the American Samoa Legislature fails to establish primary elections, the general election for the office of the Delegate will be by plurality. Either way, our military men and women and college students will have the right to vote for their Representative to the United States House of Representatives. Also, H.R. 2010 in no way affects how the American Samoa Government chooses to elect its local leaders. Furthermore, this matter is not new to the people or the Legislature of American Samoa. The truth is this matter has been before the people and our local leaders for the past five years. Since 1998, I have written to our Governors, past and present. I have written and testified before our local Legislature and I have brought this matter to the attention of our people through press releases, newsletters, radio and tv programs. In 2001, I also conducted a Congressional survey and 85% of those surveyed agreed that American Samoas active duty service members should be afforded the same rights and privileges as every other American serving in the U.S. Armed Forces. Having made every change requested of me by our local leaders and after years of good-faith efforts on my part, I am pleased that once the President signs H.R. 2010 into law our military men and women and college students will have the right to vote in federal elections held in American Samoa and will no longer be disenfranchised from the process as a result of Public Law 95-556 which was passed on October 31, 1978, Faleomavaega said. Federal, or PL 95-556, requires a runoff election to be held only 14 days after the general election. As Governor Togiola said, this creates a situation where it is virtually impossible for American Samoas Election Office to send out absentee ballots to the men and women in the military and expect to receive them back in time for those votes to be counted in a run-off election. In other words, this is an injustice that has been made worse by the current conflict in the Middle East where many American Samoans are now serving and fighting for democracy. H.R. 2010 corrects the injustice and, for this reason, I am thankful that the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of Representatives, Governor Togiola, the late Senate President Fuimaono, Speaker McMoore, and 85% of those surveyed in American Samoa agreed with me that some measure should be put in place to assure that the votes of our military men and women are counted in federal elections held in American Samoa, Faleomavaega said. I am also thankful that Senator Akaka, a senior Member of the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, spoke out in support of H.R. 2010 and urged the Senate to act quickly to pass this bill so that American Samoas military men and women will have the opportunity to vote to help select their representative to the US. House of Representatives. Simply put, H.R. 2010 is the right thing to do and, to alleviate any concerns that I will personally benefit from this legislation, I would like to reiterate that I offered an amendment in the nature of a substitute for purposes of changing the effective date of this bill from January 2004 to January 2006. This amendment was unanimously supported at mark-up by the House Resources Committee and, as such, any change in law will not go into effect until the 2006 election cycle. At this time, I thank Chairman Pete Domenici and Ranking Member Jeff Bingaman of the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources for supporting H.R. 2010. I also thank our Commander in Chief, President George W. Bush, who I am confident will soon sign H.R. 2010 into law. Above all, I thank our military men and women from American Samoa who are fighting for democracy so that you and I and future generations may live in peace. As a Vietnam veteran, I wish them the very best and, as always, I pray for their safe return, the Congressman concluded. ____ [Press Release, Oct. 30, 2004] President Bush Signs Faleomavaega's Bill and Agrees that American Samoa's Troops Should Have the Right To Vote Congressman Faleomavaega announced today that on the evening of October 30, 2004 President Bush signed into law H.R. 2010, a bill he introduced to restore the voting rights of American Samoa's troops and college students. I made a promise that I would not rest until American Samoa's active duty military men and women and other overseas voters had the right to vote in federal elections held in our Territory, Congressman Faleomavaega said. And, today, I thank the President of the United States for signing my bill and supporting our troops. American Samoa's military men and women have put their lives on the line time and time again and some have even given their lives for us to live in a free and democratic society. Now we have come together to thank them for their service by restoring their right to vote. Governor Togiola, Lieutenant Governor Aitofele Sunia, the late and honorable President of the Senate, Lutu T. Fuimaono, and many other members of the Fono supported this historic legislation and I thank them for their support. More than 85% of those surveyed in American Samoa also agreed that our military men and women should have the right to vote and I thank you for your support, Faleomavaega said. The U.S. House of Representatives and the United States Senate also unanimously supported H.R. 2010. In fact, not one Republican or Democrat in the House or Senate objected to my bill. This is because H.R. 2010 is the right thing to do. H.R. 2010 includes both plurality and majority voting. If, for example, the American Samoa Legislature establishes primary elections, the general election for the office of the Delegate will be by majority. If the American Samoa Legislature fails to establish primary elections, the general election [[Page 16449]] for the office of the Delegate will be by plurality. Either way, our military men and women and college students will have the right to vote for their Representative to the United States House of Representatives, Faleomavaega said. Also, H.R. 2010 in no way affects how the American Samoa Government chooses to elect its local leaders and this matter is not new to the people or the Legislature of American Samoa. The truth is this matter has been before the people and our local leaders for the past five years. Since 1998, I have written to our Governors, past and present. I have written and testified before our local Legislature and I have brought this matter to the attention of our people through press releases, newsletters, radio and tv programs. In 2001, I also conducted a Congressional survey and 85% of those surveyed agreed that American Samoa's active duty service members should be afforded the same rights and privileges as every other American serving in the U.S. Armed Forces. Having made every change requested of me by our local leaders and after years of good-faith efforts on my part, I am pleased that H.R. 2010 has now been signed into law. As a result of the Presidents support, our military men and women and college students will now have the right to vote in federal elections held in American Samoa and they will no longer be disenfranchised from the process as a result of Public Law 95-556 which was passed on October 31, 1978. Federal, or PL 95-556, requires a runoff election to be held only 14 days after the general election. As Governor Togiola said, this creates a situation where it is virtually impossible for American Samoa's Election Office to send out absentee ballots to the men and women in the military and expect to receive them back in time for those votes to be counted in a run-off election. In other words, this is an injustice that has been made worse by the current conflict in the Middle East where many American Samoans are now serving and fighting for democracy. H.R. 2010 corrects the injustice and, for this reason, I am thankful that President Bush, the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of Representatives, many of our local leaders and the people of American Samoa agreed with me that some measure should be put in place to assure that the votes of our military men and women are counted in federal elections held in American Samoa. Again, I thank Senator Akaka, Chairman Pete Domenici and Ranking Member Jeff Bingaman of the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources for supporting H.R. 2010. I also thank Chairman Richard Pombo and Ranking Member Nick Rahall of the House Committee on Resources for their support. Above all, I thank our military men and women from American Samoa who are fighting for democracy so that you and I and future generations may live in peace. As a Vietnam veteran, I wish them the very best and, as always, I pray for their safe return, the Congressman concluded. ____________________ PERSONAL EXPLANATION ______ HON. TAMMY DUCKWORTH of illinois in the house of representatives Tuesday, December 2, 2014 Ms. DUCKWORTH. Mr. Speaker, on November 11, 2014, on Roll Call #516 on the Motion to Concur in the Senate Amendment to H.R. 4194-- Government Reports Elimination Act, I am not recorded because I was absent for medical reasons. Had I been present, I would have voted YEA. On November 12, 2014, on Roll Call #517 on H. Res. 748, Providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 5682) to approve the Keystone XL Pipeline, I am not recorded because I was absent for medical reasons. Had I been present, I would have voted NAY. On November 13, 2014, on Roll Call #518 on the Democratic Motion to Recommit H.R. 5682, I am not recorded because I was absent for medical reasons. Had I been present, I would have voted YEA. On November 13, 2014, on Roll Call #519 on H.R. 5682, to approve the Keystone XL Pipeline, I am not recorded because I was absent for medical reasons. Had I been present, I would have voted NAY.