[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 160 (2014), Part 8]
[House]
[Pages 11895-11943]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




   FINANCIAL SERVICES AND GENERAL GOVERNMENT APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2015


                             General Leave

  Mr. CRENSHAW. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members 
may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks 
and include extraneous material on H.R. 5016, and that I may include 
tabular material on the same.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Florida?
  There was no objection.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 661 and rule 
XVIII, the Chair declares the House in the Committee of the Whole House 
on the state of the Union for the consideration of the bill, H.R. 5016.
  The Chair appoints the gentleman from New York (Mr. Collins) to 
preside over the Committee of the Whole.

                              {time}  1911


                     In the Committee of the Whole

  Accordingly, the House resolved itself into the Committee of the 
Whole House on the state of the Union for the consideration of the bill 
(H.R. 5016) making appropriations for financial services and general 
government for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2015, and for other 
purposes, with Mr. Collins of New York in the chair.
  The Clerk read the title of the bill.
  The CHAIR. Pursuant to the rule, the bill is considered read the 
first time.
  The gentleman from Florida (Mr. Crenshaw) and the gentleman from New 
York (Mr. Serrano) each will control 30 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Florida.
  Mr. CRENSHAW. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to present to the House the fiscal year 
2015 Financial Services and General Government Appropriations bill.
  This subcommittee has jurisdiction over a great number of programs 
and activities, including the Federal Judiciary; the Treasury, which 
includes the IRS; the Federal Trade Commission; the Federal 
Communications Commission; the Small Business Administration; and 
several other activities.
  All the agencies under this subcommittee's jurisdiction play an 
important role in the functioning of the Federal Government, and I 
think it is appropriate that all the Members of the House have a chance 
to offer germane amendments that impact the funding that is provided in 
this bill.
  The bill that we are considering today provides $21.3 billion in 
discretionary funding, which is $566 million, or 2.6 percent less than 
last year, and $2.3 billion, or 9.6 percent less than the request.
  The subcommittee's allocation has been reduced, but it is one that is 
necessary to live within the confines of the budget agreement that was 
put together under the Ryan-Murray agreement. The allocation is 
sufficient to fund priority programs while reducing some of the 
programs that are not essential to the operation of the Federal 
Government or have a history of wasting taxpayer resources.
  One of the main provisions of this bill is funding for law 
enforcement. The bill provides increased funding over fiscal year 2014 
for several law enforcement activities.

                              {time}  1915

  The High Intensity Drug Trafficking Areas program receives a $6.5 
million increase. The Drug-Free Communities program receives a $3 
million increase, and the Treasury's terrorism and financial 
intelligence activities--they are the ones who develop and enforce 
sanctions--receive an $18 million increase. In addition, we have ample 
funding for the operations of the Federal judiciary and the D.C. 
Courts. We also have money for the supervision of offenders and 
defendants who are living in our communities.
  Another priority for the bill is supporting small businesses and 
assisting in private sector job creation. This bill provides $195 
million for the Small Business Administration's business loan programs, 
and that supports $18.5 billion of lending under a program called 7(a), 
and it supports $7.5 billion under 504 lending. This bill also provides 
increases over the current year for the Small Business Development 
Centers. It provides increases for the Women's Business Centers and for 
the Treasury's Community Development Financial Institutions Fund 
program. In addition, this bill asks several of the regulatory agencies 
to report to this committee and to tell us how they are doing as they 
attempt to eliminate some of the burdensome, duplicative, and just 
plain unnecessary regulations.
  In order to live within our allocation, we had to reduce funding in 
some areas. We actually eliminate funding for nine different programs, 
including the Christopher Columbus Foundation and the Election 
Assistance Commission. Those are activities that we feel are no longer 
necessary or are certainly not vital to the operation of the Federal 
Government. We further reduce funding for more than a dozen agencies 
and programs that, in our opinion, can operate on a little bit less, 
like the Bureau of the Fiscal Service, the Federal Trade Commission, 
and the Federal Communications Commission.
  For the GSA, we reduce their funding for the Federal buildings fund 
by $240 million. We continue to require them to regularly report to us 
on their spending and on the state of their building portfolio. The 
bill provides the GSA with enough funds to operate their current 
building inventory, and it provides new funding for three land port of 
entry construction projects. We also continue to push the GSA to reduce 
their surplus and vacant space. We designate some funding to help them 
consolidate their projects and dispose of some of the projects, but we 
make sure that they do that only if there are going to be savings in 
the long run.
  In an effort to increase transparency and accountability, we make the 
Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, the CFPB, subject to the annual 
appropriations process of this Congress. When Dodd-Frank set that 
agency up, they purposefully left it without any oversight from this 
Congress. We think that is not the best way to go. We think that that 
is an agency that ought to report to us what they are doing, how they 
are doing it, and how much money they are spending, and this bill will 
correct that flaw.
  The bill freezes funding for the White House and the Office of 
Management and Budget. It includes a requirement that OMB submit the 
President's budget request on time, which is something they have not 
been able to do in the last couple of years, or they will face a 
withholding of approximately 7 months of their budget until the 
President's request is sent. In addition, the bill contains a 
prohibition on funding for the White House to prepare signing 
statements and executive orders which are contradictory to existing 
law.
  I would like to touch on the IRS. This committee still remains 
outraged at some of the activities that we have seen from the IRS in 
recent times. First, we learned that they were singling out individuals 
and groups of individuals for additional scrutiny based on their 
political philosophies. Then we learned that they had wasted millions 
of dollars in having lavish conferences around the country and in 
making silly

[[Page 11896]]

videos. Then we learned that the new Commissioner paid $63 million in 
bonuses and awards after the prior Commissioner had said we are not 
going to pay those. Then we find out that some of the people who were 
receiving those bonuses and awards were, in fact, delinquent in paying 
their own taxes. So, last year, we had some reforms on spending, and we 
had reforms on the targeting, but work remains to be done.
  This bill provides the IRS with $10.95 billion. That is $341 million 
below the level last year, and it is $1.5 billion below their request. 
Now, people say that is a pretty drastic cut, but that actually leaves 
the IRS funded at the same level at which they were prior to 2008. We 
have to remember that the IRS has betrayed the trust of the American 
people in a lot of different ways, and it is going to take some time 
for the IRS to restore that trust, because it seems like, just about 
every week, we read about a new revelation of some sort of IRS 
bureaucratic incompetence or, maybe, of a willful disregard for 
existing law--or sometimes even both.
  We want to make sure that they begin to clean up their act, and this 
bill provides that they can no longer subject people to additional 
scrutiny. They can't waste money on lavish conferences anymore, and 
they can't pay bonuses and awards to people unless they at least 
consider the conduct of that individual and whether or not that 
individual is current on his taxes. We require a certain amount of 
reporting from the IRS, and we require them to tell us how much 
official time is being used on union activities.
  We also have language in there of this new, revised regulation that 
they have put forward regarding the definition of what is an 
organization under 501(c)(4) of the Internal Revenue Code, which was a 
rule that was promulgated based on the investigation that was taking 
place about the abuse of singling out individuals. In our opinion, the 
Treasury should wait until that investigation is conducted before any 
kind of new rule has been proposed. The rule was withdrawn after there 
were 150,000 comments, and a lot of those comments came from all sides 
of the political spectrum. We think there is plenty for the IRS to do 
in terms of time, in terms of energy, in terms of money before they 
spend that in trying to write a new rule. We also found out just 
recently that, while the IRS asks us to keep our records for 7 years, 
they couldn't keep their records for more than 7 months, so there is a 
provision in here that says they can't destroy any of their records if 
it is outside existing law.
  Finally, I want to say something about the Affordable Care Act. This 
committee believes that the IRS should not have a role in implementing 
the individual mandate of the Affordable Care Act. The IRS, as I said, 
has betrayed the trust of the American people. There is not much trust 
in the IRS today. People don't trust the IRS with their taxes, and they 
are certainly not going to trust the IRS with their health care. At a 
time when the IRS hasn't demonstrated much ability to either self-
correct or self-police, the bill says that they can't spend any money 
to implement the individual mandate of the Affordable Care Act and that 
they also can't transfer any money to fund it from the Department of 
Health and Human Services.
  That is it in a nutshell, Mr. Chairman. I think this is a good bill. 
It takes the money that we have and makes some tough choices, sets the 
right priorities, and spends money in a wise and efficient way.
  I want to thank all of the members of the subcommittee for the work 
that they have put in. I want to thank our staffs--both the majority 
and minority staffs--for the work that they have put in.
  I want to say a special word of thanks to the ranking member, Mr. 
Serrano, the gentleman from New York. His input has made this a better 
bill. Even though he thinks there should be more money and he doesn't 
agree with everything that is in the bill, he has been a great partner 
to work with in the spirit of cooperation and particularly in an effort 
to make sure that we return to regular order, where the appropriations 
bills are brought before this House, so I want to thank him for that.
  With that, Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

[[Page 11897]]





[[Page 11898]]



[[Page 11899]]



[[Page 11900]]



[[Page 11901]]



[[Page 11902]]



[[Page 11903]]

  Mr. SERRANO. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  I am saddened to have to rise in opposition to this legislation 
today. As a long-time appropriator, I remember the days when we were 
always able to come together to determine the funding levels for our 
government in a bipartisan manner and with little partisan warfare. 
Unfortunately, this bill is not a product of those times.
  I do not say this to blame Chairman Crenshaw or Chairman Rogers, as 
they have always listened to the concerns that our side has had and 
have tried to accommodate us when they could. Mr. Crenshaw is a great 
working partner, and he knows that that famous line is really true in 
this case: it is not personal; it is about this issue. There are many 
things we have been able to agree on as a result, but they have also 
been forced to listen to a portion of their caucus that is not 
interested in the business of governing, and as a result, the good 
portions of this bill are overwhelmed by the problems that this 
legislation has.
  Let me discuss just a few of the more serious shortfalls of this 
bill, starting with a seriously inadequate allocation. This 
subcommittee received an unacceptably low 302(b) allocation that is 
$566 million below last year's bill. Percentage wise, this is a cut of 
2.6 percent, a level that no other subcommittee has been forced to 
take. The result is that there are several agencies in this bill that 
are not funded properly.
  Primary among these is the Internal Revenue Service. The IRS is 
funded at $10.95 billion, a cut of $341 million below last year. This 
means the agency would operate at a level that is below sequestration--
funding levels that were already grossly inadequate. I assume this is 
being done both as some sort of collective punishment of the Exempt 
Organizations unit for the problems associated with their scrutiny of 
liberal and conservative 501(c)(4) organizations, and as one final 
attempt to hinder the implementation of the Affordable Care Act. We 
already heard from the chairman that they don't think this committee 
should be involved with the Affordable Care Act. We keep forgetting 
that it was passed by both Houses, signed by the President and upheld 
by the Supreme Court. These actions are irresponsible, and they do more 
to hurt the American people than does the IRS. Rather than investing in 
further training to prevent the problems that happened previously or 
ensuring that we have the resources to go after tax cheats, the 
majority has chosen to play politics with the agency that brings in the 
vast majority of our Nation's revenue. Unfortunately, these funding 
levels will prevent the agency from collecting money from tax cheats, 
expand the tax gap, and increase our deficit. Talk about fiscal 
irresponsibility.
  The Securities and Exchange Commission is also severely underfunded 
at a level of $1.4 billion. This is $300 million below the request and 
is simply insufficient to allow the agency to properly oversee Wall 
Street and protect investors, including many retirees who have 401(k) 
and pension plans that are invested in the marketplace. Both parties 
have created additional responsibilities for the SEC in recent years, 
but funding has not kept pace. If we keep asking the agency to do more 
with less, then we cannot be surprised if we experience another 
financial crisis.
  There are numerous other cuts to the bill that are harmful as well, 
including the elimination of the Election Assistance Commission, cuts 
to the Consumer Product Safety Commission, the Federal Communications 
Commission, and the General Services Administration, all of which have 
negative impacts on the operations of our Federal Government and 
private sector job growth. However, I believe that the biggest 
impediment to reaching compromise on this bill is the large number of 
partisan riders that have been added. Let me name just a few of the 
more excessive, all of which are major concerns to our side of the 
aisle.
  There are riders preventing the IRS from implementing the Affordable 
Care Act and from reforming the 501(c)(4) regulations, which have 
caused so much confusion and abuse. There is a rider limiting 
Americans' ability to travel to Cuba on people-to-people visas.

                              {time}  1930

  There is a rider preventing the SEC from requiring publicly-traded 
companies to disclose their campaign donations to their shareholders, 
even though there is no indication that the agency has plans to do so.
  There is a rider that prevents the provision of abortion services in 
multistate health plans under the Affordable Care Act.
  There are riders preventing the District of Columbia from using its 
own funds to provide legal abortion services to low-income women and to 
determine its own local criminal justice laws with regard to marijuana.
  This is, by no means, an exhaustive list. The number of riders on 
this bill seems endless. I have no doubt that we will be asked to add 
even more to this list during debate on this bill.
  Before we do that, I would point out that we have spent a lot of time 
this year discussing how to ensure a return to regular order in the 
appropriations process. I would suggest that it is extremely difficult 
to do so when the majority attempts to pack legislation with a laundry 
list of partisan priorities.
  This is irresponsible governing, at best, and they make a mockery of 
one of this institution's most important functions, to fund the Federal 
Government.
  When we choose politics over the needs of the American people, we 
should not be surprised when those same people become cynical about 
their elected representatives. The appropriations process is not and 
should not be the place to add every partisan priority that the other 
side cannot pass through the regular legislative process.
  I feel confident that the American people would rather just have us 
get on with our jobs, instead of rehashing the same arguments over the 
Affordable Care Act, Dodd-Frank, and many other issues.
  Our side will attempt to remedy some of these defects through the 
amendment process; although with the inadequate allocation, it will be 
difficult to do so. Unfortunately, as it is currently written, this is 
not a bill that I can support.
  Before I finish, let me take a moment to thank the staff on both 
sides of the aisle for their hard work on this bill. They have all 
devoted many hours to creating this bill and report, and I know I speak 
for all the Members on our side when I say that we are grateful for the 
hard work that they have put into this bill.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. CRENSHAW. Mr. Chairman, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from 
Kentucky (Mr. Rogers), the chairman of the full Appropriations 
Committee.
  Mr. ROGERS of Kentucky. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  Mr. Chairman, I urge Members to support this bill. This is a good 
bill. It provides $21.3 billion to fund many, many important programs 
and services that help our government function and our economy grow.
  For example, the bill includes $862 million for the Small Business 
Administration, to assist our small businesses--and we all know those 
small businesses are the backbone of our economy--to help them prosper.
  It also includes $6.7 billion for our Federal courts, to ensure the 
faithful execution of our laws and the timely processing of Federal 
cases.
  The bill also demonstrates a commitment to keeping poor-performing or 
misbehaving agencies and programs in check. It cuts funding for the 
IRS, as the chairman has said, by $341 million from last year, nearly 
12 percent below the President's request.
  This funding level will allow the agency to perform its core duties, 
but will require IRS management to streamline and make the very best 
use of its allocated dollars.
  We have also included language that will help ensure that each and 
every dollar spent by the IRS is spent legally, responsibly, and 
appropriately. For instance, the bill prohibits funding

[[Page 11904]]

for the production of inappropriate videos and conferences that many of 
us have seen on television and for employee bonuses or awards, unless 
their performance is considered.
  The bill also prohibits funding for the IRS to implement the 
ObamaCare individual health care mandate on the American people. In 
light of the chaotic and dysfunctional rollout of the Affordable Care 
Act, I don't see how, in good conscience, we can possibly allow the IRS 
to fine American citizens when many are just trying to comply with this 
flawed law.
  Due to the past inappropriate actions by the IRS, we have also 
prohibited funding for certain activities to prevent a repeat of these 
abuses, including targeting individuals based on their political 
beliefs, determining the tax-exempt status of organizations under 
501(c)(4), and several other provisions that will help preserve the 
First Amendment rights of all Americans.
  The bill is designed to make sure the government works for the 
people, not against the people or our laws. Bill-wide, the bill 
includes stringent oversight, accountability, and transparency measures 
to make sure each and every agency toes the line.
  This includes prohibitions on funding for the Executive Office of the 
President to prepare signing statements and executive orders that 
contradict existing law and a provision that will bring the Consumer 
Financial Protection Bureau and the Office of Financial Research under 
the annual appropriations process, so we can have oversight for the 
American people, ensuring that these agencies will remain accountable 
to the taxpayer.
  These actions fulfill our congressional duty to the American people, 
to act as faithful shepherds of Federal tax dollars, to force these 
agencies to respect our laws and our budgets, and to encourage a more 
streamlined, efficient Federal Government.
  Now, I want to take a minute to thank Chairman Crenshaw and Ranking 
Member Serrano for their dedicated work on this bill. This is a tough 
bill to write.
  In fact, this is the first time, Mr. Chairman, that the Financial 
Services bill has been brought to the floor, I think, since 2007, 
roughly; and so these gentlemen and the staff and members of their 
subcommittee--and gentleladies--have worked hard. They have worked 
together.
  I know Mr. Serrano is not perfectly happy with every provision in the 
bill. None of us are perfectly happy with it either.
  However, we need to thank them for their hard work. We appreciate it 
very much--and the staff, of course, who labored mightily to bring this 
bill out.
  This legislation, I think, reflects commonsense decisions to 
prioritize programs and services that are effective, efficient, and 
responsible with taxpayer dollars. I urge all the Members to support 
it.
  Mr. SERRANO. Mr. Chairman, I yield 5 minutes to my colleague from New 
York (Mrs. Lowey), the ranking member of the full committee.
  Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong opposition to the bill, 
which fails to prioritize the middle class, create jobs, and provide 
opportunity for every citizen to succeed, yet it contains a misguided 
political agenda, unworkable funding levels, and unnecessary riders 
that inhibit agencies' ability to crack down on special interest 
abuses.
  For our economy to succeed, investors must have faith that regulators 
do their jobs, especially when we are still recovering from the 
economic harm caused by risky industry practice, yet this bill could 
put mom-and-pop investors and our entire economy at risk with 
inadequate funding authority for the SEC at $300 million below the 
request.
  This is outrageous when you consider that the SEC's funding does not 
take a dime of U.S. taxpayer dollars or impact the deficit in any way 
because it is entirely fee-funded.
  In the last fiscal year, due to budget constraints, the SEC examined 
only about 9 percent of registered investment advisers. The number of 
investment advisers has increased by 40 percent over the past decade, 
and assets under management have more than doubled, yet the SEC's 
funding has not kept up with the need.
  It is clear this bill should do more to protect investors and ensure 
that industry does not resume practices that endanger Americans' hard-
earned money.
  This bill would cut the IRS budget by more than $340 million, to 
below fiscal year 2008 levels. These cuts would force the IRS to 
operate with 9,500 fewer staff.
  The rate of response for taxpayers who call the IRS for assistance, 
which is currently a dismal 61 percent, would fall to less than 50 
percent. Small business owners, taxpayers would waste their time on 
hold, instead of using that time to focus on strengthening their 
businesses and the economic security of their families or creating 
jobs. Disturbingly, these cuts would result in $2 billion in 
uncollected revenue compared to the request level.
  While actions at the IRS warrant further oversight and reform, these 
cuts are excessive. The IRS should receive the resources it needs to 
train its workforce to uphold the highest standards, not cut it for the 
sake of making a political point.
  These IRS cuts will only make it easier for tax cheats to go 
undetected and more difficult for law-abiding taxpayers to get 
assistance.
  Other troublesome measures attempt to dictate local government 
decisions for Washington, D.C., and prohibit implementation of health 
reforms that have given millions of Americans affordable health 
coverage for the first time. It is also full of riders that 
unnecessarily involve women's health, needle exchanges, even a denial 
of funds for D.C. voting rights.
  If Congress imposed these demands on any other area of the country, 
and particularly areas represented by some of my Republican friends, I 
expect many would yell from the rooftops that the Federal Government 
was imposing on your way of life and in your local decisions. These 
efforts are unfair to the citizens of Washington, D.C.
  What frustrates me most is that my Republican friends know that 
government agencies cannot function at the levels they would impose, 
but would rather vote to slash funding even lower because it suits 
their political purposes. Our constituents deserve better than this 
cynical political exercise.
  Vote ``no'' on this shameful bill that prioritizes special interests 
over the middle class.
  Mr. CRENSHAW. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
Arkansas (Mr. Womack), a valued member of the subcommittee.
  Mr. WOMACK. Mr. Chairman, thanks to my chairman of this very 
important subcommittee for giving me the opportunity to speak on behalf 
and even a friendly gesture to my friend from New York down there, who 
reminds me, from time to time, about the Yankee dominance in baseball. 
It is great to have his association on this committee.
  Mr. Chairman, our subcommittee is aware of our Nation's fiscal 
situation, and we closely evaluated the budget requests for the diverse 
group of agencies funded in this bill. We held numerous hearings. We 
listened to the agencies about their priorities and needs. We 
challenged them with tough questions that reflect the realities of the 
choices we, as appropriators, have to make on a daily basis.
  Using this information, Mr. Chairman, the subcommittee produced a 
bill that provides a little over $21 billion in total funding and sees 
to it that every agency funded under the bill can carry out its core 
functions.
  Take, for example, our Federal courts which, because of this bill, 
will have the resources they need to ensure that our courtrooms are 
safe and justice is served; or the Small Business Administration, which 
will be able to make entrepreneurs' dreams become a reality, leading to 
new business, more jobs, thriving communities, and a 21st century 
economy with the funds that the agency receives through this 
legislation.

                              {time}  1945

  Mr. Chairman, as Members of Congress, and especially as 
appropriators,

[[Page 11905]]

we have an obligation to carefully steward each and every taxpayer 
dollar, and in this bill, transparency and accountability rule the day.
  In this bill, the CFPB, an agency that has operated in the shadows 
with unfettered power and no accountability, is brought under the 
appropriations process. Agencies, Mr. Chairman, that have violated the 
public's trust and misused taxpayer dollars, such as the GSA and the 
IRS, they are held accountable. As an example, the IRS budget is 
returned to below fiscal 2008 levels, ensuring the agency does not have 
extra funding to target Americans based on their political beliefs 
without hampering the IRS' ability to enforce our Nation's tax laws.
  In closing, Mr. Chairman, I commend the gentleman from Florida, 
Chairman Crenshaw, and the subcommittee staff for producing a bill that 
is worthy of this Chamber's support. I urge my colleagues to join me in 
supporting this important legislation.
  Mr. SERRANO. Mr. Chairman, the gentleman mentioned baseball. I would 
like to remind folks that we are so committed and dedicated to our job 
that we are not watching the Home Run Derby right now.
  With the way we treat Washington, D.C., you would think we were 
members of the city council. But I am going to shock everyone by 
actually yielding 2 minutes of time to the gentlewoman from Washington, 
D.C. (Ms. Norton), who was elected by the folks from D.C.
  Ms. NORTON. I thank my friend for yielding and for his work, and I 
thank my friends from Florida and from New York for their work on the 
D.C. portion and regret that two riders mar that portion of the bill.
  Mr. Chairman, Congress disallows Federal money for abortions, but 17 
States assert their local prerogative to do so in our Federal Republic, 
which treasures local autonomy above all.
  Congress maintains that marijuana must be criminally penalized, but 
18 States have taken State leadership to decriminalize marijuana. The 
administration's Statement of Administration Policy respects D.C.'s 
equal right to do what 18 States have already done, and so should this 
House.
  The abortion ban deprives D.C.'s low-income women of the reproductive 
rights exercised by other American women. And the marijuana 
decriminalization law deprives African Americans in the District of 
equal rights under the law.
  Yet Blacks and Whites use marijuana at the same rate, but 90 percent 
of those arrested for possession in D.C. are Black. A Black kid in 
America with a ``drug conviction'' has his life ruined.
  Abusing pot is a bad idea, but penalizing it is worse.
  D.C. puts fines collected from civil violations of its new law in a 
substance abuse prevention and treatment fund. A D.C. bill authorizes 
public education on marijuana use and abuse. That beats what most 
decriminalization jurisdictions have done.
  The gentleman from Maryland, Andy Harris, the sponsor of this bill, 
has suspended his own professed State devolution principles. This House 
should not follow him.
  Mr. CRENSHAW. Mr. Chairman, at this time, I yield to the gentleman 
from Arizona (Mr. Gosar) for a colloquy.
  Mr. GOSAR. I thank the chairman for yielding.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise today to thank Chairman Crenshaw and, indeed, 
Ranking Member Serrano for their leadership and the hard work that they 
have dedicated to the subcommittee.
  I would further like to thank the committee for including in the 
markup a language request I made during the programmatic request 
period. The policy I mentioned would preclude the agencies funded by 
this bill from hiring or contracting with outside organizations for the 
purpose of teaching the employees of those agencies how to support or 
defeat legislation being considered here in Congress.
  I first learned of this practice when reviewing Senator Tom Coburn's 
annual Wastebook and found that NASA and other agencies had 
multimillion-dollar contracts out so that their employees could learn 
more about Congress and the legislative process.
  Though I appreciate anyone's interest in Congress and the processes 
involved with conducting legislative business, I do not find this a 
prudent use of taxpayer money. So today I humbly request that, in any 
conference committee proceedings between the House and Senate, the 
chairman push to include such language in the government-wide 
provisions title of any final bill that would be voted upon by both 
Chambers rather than limiting this policy to those agencies funded 
directly by this bill.
  It is important to me and to my constituents that Congress does not 
appropriate any money to Federal agencies so that those Federal 
agencies can use the money to pay outside organizations to teach agency 
personnel to support or defeat legislation before Congress or so that 
they may learn about the legislative process.
  There are endless no-cost resources available on legislative process, 
committee memberships, budget outlays, and the like. My office has 
taken meetings with representatives from many agencies, and during 
those meetings, those agency representatives are free to ask about the 
legislative process. It should not take multimillion-dollar contracts 
and symposiums to achieve these ends.
  Again, I thank the chairman and the ranking member for their work and 
their consideration of this request.
  Mr. CRENSHAW. Well, I thank the gentleman for engaging in this 
colloquy. I also thank him for his leadership on this particular issue 
and for making great strides regarding the rooting out of government 
waste, fraud, and abuse. The committee did include the language in 
question, and we were happy to do so.
  As the gentleman stated, this type of practice surely fits within the 
same realm of government propaganda which is barred by law. When the 
conference committee is selected and meets to discuss all spending 
programs and priorities, I will work to see the gentleman's request is 
considered appropriately and amongst all conferees.
  So again, I thank the gentleman for his efforts. I look forward to 
working with him on this item and others.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. SERRANO. Mr. Chairman, may I inquire as to how much time remains 
on both sides.
  The CHAIR. The gentleman from New York has 16 minutes remaining, and 
the gentleman from Florida has 8\1/2\ minutes remaining.
  Mr. SERRANO. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Rhode Island (Mr. Langevin) for the purpose of a colloquy.
  Mr. LANGEVIN. Mr. Chair, I want to thank Ranking Serrano for 
providing me the opportunity to enter into a colloquy on the topic of 
cybersecurity, specifically, SEC disclosure guidance relating to 
cybersecurity risks and cyber incidents. This is an issue that is of 
critical importance not only to our national security, but also to our 
economic security, affecting every American consumer and investor.
  It is no secret to anyone here that the challenges we face in the 
cyber realm are immense. Certainly, the news is rife with attacks, be 
it the massive Target breach of personal information by cyber 
criminals, Iran's reported denial-of-service attacks on U.S. banks, or 
the recently disclosed ongoing attacks on the hedge fund industry. The 
Center for Strategic and International Studies recently estimated that 
almost 1 percent of global income, or $445 billion, is lost each year 
to cyber crime and economic espionage. That is a stunning tally, yet 
such costs are rarely, if ever, reflected in financial statements.
  Protecting intellectual property, trade secrets, and custom 
information must be a priority for government, corporations, and 
consumers. I know this is a concern of yours, and I hope it is of equal 
concern to the committee.
  Institutional investors, consumers, private investors, and public 
pension funds need sufficient information to make informed decisions 
concerning a firm's cyber controls, just as Members of Congress and our 
staffs must have access to the best information possible to conduct 
proper oversight and make the best public policy decisions.

[[Page 11906]]

  The committee rightfully points out that ``corporate disclosures are 
at the core of investor protection''; however, there are real questions 
about the disclosures that companies are making to their boards and 
shareholders regarding their vulnerabilities in cyberspace. While the 
SEC made some limited efforts in 2011 with cybersecurity, there is no 
finish line. So it is incumbent on all of us to continue evolving as 
the threat evolves.
  In my current positions on the Armed Services and Intelligence 
Committees, I devote a significant amount of time to tackling this 
continuing problem. I remain extraordinarily concerned about the 
systematic and wholesale theft of corporate property for economic 
advantage.
  The CHAIR. The time of the gentleman has expired.
  Mr. SERRANO. I yield the gentleman an additional 15 seconds.
  Mr. LANGEVIN. I firmly believe that we need to do more as a country 
to secure our Nation against the threat of cyber penetrations and 
attacks, and we must do more so that investors can have the very best 
information available when making their investment decisions.
  I yield to the gentleman from New York for any comments he would 
have.
  Mr. SERRANO. I thank the gentleman for bringing this issue to our 
attention.
  The CHAIR. The time of the gentleman has again expired.
  Mr. SERRANO. I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Cybersecurity is of critical importance to our national security and 
our economic security. I look forward to working with you as we move to 
conference to ensure that the SEC can effectively address cybersecurity 
issues.
  I yield 15 seconds to the gentleman from Rhode Island to close.
  Mr. LANGEVIN. I thank you, Ranking Serrano, for your continued 
interest in this issue. I look forward to working with you as we move 
to conference to ensure that the SEC has the tools necessary to update 
their cybersecurity disclosure guidance and that the SEC includes an 
update on cybersecurity disclosure guidance in the report to the 
committee.
  Mr. CRENSHAW. I will continue to reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. SERRANO. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
Tennessee (Mr. Cohen) for a colloquy.
  Mr. COHEN. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise on the provision in this bill that would deny 
the D.C. Council the right to have a different policy on marijuana than 
they have had in the past.
  I can understand politically the other side not wanting the people of 
D.C. to have Senators and Reps because the likelihood is they would be 
Democrats, but not to let them have self-rule smacks of colonialism, 
colonialism that is of another era, colonialism that is of the days of 
Jim Crow.
  To not allow D.C. to have the right to pass their own laws and to 
have the same opportunity to have laboratories of democracy, as Louis 
Brandeis talked about, is wrong. What it will do is it will not stop 
teens from doing marijuana, but it will put more teens in jail with a 
scarlet letter and an expense and maybe prevent them from having the 
opportunity to get a scholarship, housing, and a job.
  It is against the wrong side of history for them to stop D.C.'s 
Council from having the authority and for putting African Americans, 
who are disproportionately affected, in jail and ruining their lives. I 
object to what has been included and wish that they would reconsider.
  Mr. CRENSHAW. I will continue to reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. SERRANO. Mr. Chairman, I would just like to take a second in 
closing to say that Mr. Cohen's comments were very well taken. I think 
the mistake we make here is that we continue to add riders to this 
bill, and a lot of riders in the past had to do with Washington, D.C.
  Now, as I have said on many occasions, for me, this is more than a 
legislative issue. It is a personal issue. I was born in Puerto Rico, 
raised in New York, and at times I haven't been pleased with the 
relationship and the way Puerto Rico has been treated by this Federal 
Government.
  So I would just hope that, as we go along, people will continue, 
continue, continue to realize that the District of Columbia has its own 
folks, its own elected officials at the local level, and they should be 
able to conduct their own business.
  Lastly, we do this because this country that we love so well and this 
country that I love so well and that we serve on a daily basis should 
not treat any segment of its citizens in a different way than it treats 
other people. I realize that we have a constitutional responsibility, 
but we don't have to misuse that responsibility.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. CRENSHAW. I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. ISSA. Mr. Chair, I rise in support of Chairman Crenshaw and this 
bill.
  This bill is a first step toward holding the IRS accountable for its 
targeting of conservative tax-exempt applicants for their political 
beliefs.
  The Oversight and Government Reform Committee is conducting a 
thorough investigation of the IRS targeting.
  This investigation is ongoing. But from what we know so far, it is 
clear that the IRS is in serious need of reform.
  We have found an agency that worked in fall 2010 to target 
conservative tax-exempt groups in wake of the President's campaign 
against the Supreme Court case, Citizens United.
  We have found an agency that called these conservative groups ``very 
dangerous'' and put them through an unprecedented ``multi-tier'' 
review.
  We have found an agency that coordinated with the Justice Department 
in October 2010 about the prosecution of tax-exempt groups for their 
political speech activities.
  We have found an agency that sent a 1.1 million-page registry, 
including confidential taxpayer information, to the FBI.
  We have found an agency that has been politicized by its excessive 
role in a highly partisan law, ObamaCare.
  We have found an agency that mysteriously lost two years of e-mail 
records and an agency that cautions its employees about what they say 
in e-mail for fear of congressional oversight.
  In short, we have found an agency that has become a arm of the Obama 
administration rather than an independent administrator of federal tax 
law.
  This bill takes the first steps toward making the IRS work for the 
American people.
  This bill will ensure that the IRS will never again target tax-exempt 
applicants for their political beliefs.
  This bill will prevent the IRS from finalizing a proposed rule that 
would make permanent in federal regulations its targeting of 
conservatives.
  This bill will also cut back on the misuse of taxpayer dollars for 
inappropriate conferences and employee bonuses.
  Most importantly, Mr. Chair, this bill will begin the long road 
toward restoring public trust and accountability in the Obama IRS.
  I applaud Chairman Crenshaw for his leadership and I urge my 
colleagues to support this bill.
  Mr. TERRY. Mr. Chair, I speak today regarding section 131 of the 
Financial Services and General Government Appropriations Act, 2015.
  This section is a very important provision that requires the Treasury 
to report to Congress each month on the number of individuals who have 
failed to pay their ObamaCare insurance premiums.
  Earlier this year the House passed my bill, H.R. 3362, the Exchange 
Information Disclosure Act--which also sought basic information on the 
exchanges.
  This should be easy.
  What we're talking about today is basic transparency and 
accountability.
  We are asking for information that any entity overseeing a health 
insurance operation should have at the tip of their fingers at all 
times.
  If my friends on the other side of the aisle are so confident about 
health care reform, this will prove it's working as intended.
  Mr. HOLT. Mr. Chair, I rise today in strong opposition to the 
language in this bill, or rather the lack of language, regarding the 
elimination of funding for the Election Assistance Commission (EAC).
  There is nothing more crucial to democracy than guaranteeing the 
integrity, fairness, and accuracy of elections. Voting should not be an 
act of blind faith--it should be an act of

[[Page 11907]]

record, and the EAC helps maintain the integrity of the American 
electoral process. Too many people across the country lack confidence 
in the legitimacy of election results, and dismantling the EAC will 
further erode faith in our democracy.
  The EAC helps maintain the integrity of the American electoral 
process. Too many people across the country have lost confidence in the 
legitimacy of the election results. In fact, a recent poll from 
Rasmussen Reports found that 68 percent of likely voters believe that 
elections are rigged (or favor) incumbents. Dismantling the EAC would 
further erode that necessary faith in the process.
  How quickly have we forgotten the Florida recount with its hanging 
chads, pregnant chads, and hand counts of ballots to determine voter 
intent? The 2000 election exposed critical flaws and inconsistencies in 
how elections were conducted, and in its wake the Congress under the 
leadership of Whip Steny Hoyer approved the Help America Vote Act 
(HAVA) to assist state and local jurisdictions.
  Yet the legislation we are considering today willfully ignores this 
history. The bill defunds the EAC and assumes that Congress will pass 
legislation to transfer some of its vital functions of the EAC to the 
Federal Election Commission (FEC), an agency that does not have the 
capability or the expertise to do the job. The work of the EAC does not 
fit into the mission of the FEC.
  Additionally, funding for the EAC has always included a set aside for 
the National Institute of Standards and Technology to continue its work 
on testing guidelines for voting system hardware and software. Work 
that will most likely stop as the House has already appropriated NIST 
funds for Fiscal Year 2015.
  I would have liked to offer an amendment to this legislation to 
reinstate the EAC's Fiscal Year 2014 levels, but unfortunately, the 
overall budget limitations in this bill make that nearly impossible.
  The lack of appropriations takes us in exactly the wrong direction. 
While millions of Americans are casting their ballots on un-auditable 
voting machines, eliminating the EAC would increase the risk that our 
electoral process will be compromised by voting system irregularities. 
Can we afford to take that risk? Certainly not. Do we want problems to 
go undetected? I would hope not. Less oversight, lesser standards, less 
transparency in reporting, less testing, fewer audits weakens our 
democracy. Abolishing the EAC is the wrong way to go.
  Mr. ROSS. Mr. Chair, I rise today in relation to language in H.R. 
5016 addressing Puerto Rico's financial management.
  I applaud the effort to work in tandem with the Commonwealth of 
Puerto Rico--an island composed of U.S. citizens--to provide lasting 
improvements to their financial structure and day-to-day management.
  I am concerned, however, that the taxpayer funds provided to assist 
Puerto Rico could potentially be spent in vain. I believe that stronger 
language holding the government of Puerto Rico to basic economic and 
democratic standards is essential to providing productive assistance.
  Two ongoing issues backed by the government of Puerto Rico give me 
pause.
  One was recently outlined by Mary O'Grady in the Wall Street Journal.
  In reference to the current financial woes and the enactment of a new 
bankruptcy law in Puerto Rico--O'Grady said, and I quote, ``so far 
Puerto Rico's political class seems more inclined to stick it to 
creditors and keep on keeping on,'' instead of getting their books 
straight.
  The bankruptcy bill--shepherded and signed into law by Puerto Rican 
Governor Alejandro Garcia Padilla--allows the restructuring of more 
than 19 billion dollars of debt by the government-owned electricity, 
water, and highway monopolies.
  The constitutionality of this law has also been widely called into 
question.
  This is not the approach you want from a government facing a 
potential default, especially one whose debt is `widely held by mutual 
funds and individuals'.
  It is important that any technical assistance provided by the U.S. 
Government is predicated on a strong foundation for the rule of law. 
Investors nationwide will suffer if Puerto Rico's political class does 
not stalwartly uphold the rule of law.
  This is a serious and timely matter. At the end of June--Moody's 
Analytics reported that Puerto Rico's probability of default within the 
year is higher than that of Argentina, Venezuela, and Ukraine.
  These concerns regarding the political class have already played out 
through the government's lack of respect for its contractual 
obligations.
  For example, after seven years of agreements between the government 
of Puerto Rico and a private institution--the Doral Financial 
Corporation--the government is now refusing to uphold its end of the 
contractual obligations. Puerto Rico's Government has announced a 
unilateral decision to annul the contract that required the Government 
to pay over $200 million in tax refunds to Doral.
  This example demonstrates a true lack of regard for the rule of law.
  As the U.S. Congress considers providing technical assistance to the 
Government of Puerto Rico due to the deteriorating economic and fiscal 
situation--certain assurances must be established to ensure that U.S. 
taxpayer dollars are spent on achievable, reliable, and long-lasting 
objectives.
  In conclusion, I believe that assurances should be made by the 
government of Puerto Rico to uphold all contractual obligations and 
respect for creditor rights in order to receive U.S. Treasury technical 
assistance.
  Moreover, if such assurances are made, I express my support for the 
collaboration between the U.S. Treasury and Puerto Rico to improve 
Puerto Rico's financial management.
  Mr. HOLT. Mr. Chair, this Financial Services Bill seeks to overturn 
the intent of Dodd-Frank by bringing the Consumer Financial Protection 
Bureau under the turmoil of the annual appropriations process.
  Bankers have people to look out for their interests, brokers have 
people to look out for their interests, investors and hedge fund 
managers have the same. Until the CFPB was created, the same could not 
be said for the average consumer. The current funding stream for the 
CFPB, from the Federal Reserve System, to the annual appropriations 
process, puts politics, not the consumer first.
  If we have learned only one lesson from the financial crisis of 2008, 
it should be this: when we protect consumers, we protect the health of 
the entire financial system.
  It is clear that the consumer credit and housing bubbles of the last 
decade were the result of unfair and deceptive practices and credit 
card companies and lenders that steered families into mortgages and 
financial products that they did not understand and that they could not 
afford.
  In 2010 after an open process that included a now rare House-Senate 
conference, the Congress passed historic reforms to the nation's 
financial system. Among these reforms was the creation of the Consumer 
Financial Protection Bureau. Indeed, a strong argument could be made 
that the creation of the CFPB is the most important and most beneficial 
provision of the Dodd-Frank financial reforms.
  Members of the House and Senate, after much deliberation, concluded 
that in order for the CFPB to effectively protect American consumers, 
it must be independent.
  The Dodd-Frank legislation, which is the law of the land, is clear on 
this point. This new financial watchdog would be independent, insulated 
from the partisan fights of Capitol Hill, by deriving its operating 
budget from nonappropriated funds from the Federal Reserve.
  House Republicans are once again attempting to politicize the funding 
process for the CFPB, handcuffing the CFPB in order to preserve the 
status quo that benefits big banks at the expense of American 
consumers.
  This legislation would change the nature of the CFPB and make its 
funding different from other bank regulators which remain independent 
of the appropriations process.
  In an appropriations bill that is already $566 million below last 
year's funding level, where will Congress find the $500 million, or 
$400 million, or $300 million in Fiscal year 2016 and beyond? I fear 
that the answer is that we will not fund it at all. That is not 
acceptable. That would hurt the American consumer, and would inject 
more risk into the economy.
  Instead we should continue to ensure that the Consumer Financial 
Protection Bureau will have the independence and resources it needs as 
it continues its critical work of protecting consumers and by extension 
the entire U.S. financial system.
  Mr. CONNOLLY. Mr. Chair, four of the seven appropriations bills 
considered by the House this year have passed with bipartisan support. 
Those votes harken back to the spirit of cooperation that brought an 
end to last year's reckless government shutdown and the subsequent 
Bipartisan Budget Agreement that restored some of the harmful cuts from 
sequestration. Unfortunately, this week's consideration of the 
Financial Services and General Government Appropriations Act for next 
year diverges sharply from that practice. I have multiple objections 
with the agenda House Republicans are advancing with this bill, and I 
want to highlight a few of them.
  For starters, this bill continues the majority's assault on the 
mission and personnel of the Internal Revenue Service. The bill, as 
introduced, cuts $340 million from the IRS and comes on heels of $850 
million in cuts over

[[Page 11908]]

the past four years. Making matters worse, an amendment was adopted 
during debate Monday night that would cut another $788 million or 10% 
from IRS enforcement activities. I remind my colleagues that the IRS 
plays a critical role in helping taxpayers to understand and comply 
with our nation's complex tax code and ensuring that those tax laws are 
enforced fairly.
  Unfortunately both of those activities have suffered in the last few 
years because of these punitive cuts. Basic assistance for taxpayers 
has dropped off sharply because of a reduction in workforce of 8,000 
positions, and training for those that remain has been cut 87% in the 
last four years. As a result, caller wait times have almost doubled and 
the number of unanswered calls has increased by half. It's no wonder 
public frustration has increased. Tax enforcement has also suffered. 
The amount of staff devoted to enforcing our tax laws has been cut by 
15% since 2010. As a result, revenue collected by enforcement actions 
has fallen off by $4 billion during that time.
  Yet, some of my colleagues have shown no shame in criticizing the IRS 
for not maintaining its email files when it is their actions that have 
left the agency stretched so thin. Rather than adequately fund the 
IRS--which generates nearly $6 in revenue for every $1 invested--House 
Republicans have starved the agency, crippling its ability to meet 
demands and leaving $300 billion to $400 billion per year in 
uncollected taxes. That's more than half of the projected deficit of 
$583 billion for this fiscal year.
  In addition to that contradiction, Mr. Chair, I would note that the 
conservative crowd that says, ``the level of government closest to the 
people governs best,'' is poised to overturn a decision by the local 
government right here in the District of Columbia. Twenty-three 
states--nearly 1/3rd of which have Republican governors--and the 
District have decriminalized the limited use of marijuana. In fact, the 
home state of this provision's sponsor is one of those states, but the 
reach of Congressional Republicans under this bill does not allow them 
to interfere with the decision of his home state or that of other 
states. They can, however, restrict the use of funds provided to DC, 
and so we're doing so simply because we can. There is no merit or 
consistency in this action, which is nothing more than a raw power grab 
by House Republicans, who continue to block attempt by the citizens of 
the District of Columbia to exercise local control.
  Finally, Mr. Chair, I take exception to the fact that this bill does 
not sufficiently support the Administration's Information Technology 
Oversight and Reform initiative, known as ITOR. That program is funded 
$11 million below the request of $20 million--a relatively modest 
amount in light of the considerable savings of $2.4 billion this office 
has already achieved in the last four years. Under the direction of the 
U.S. Chief Information Officer, ITOR is leading the Federal 
Government's efforts to improve the effectiveness of digital services 
to provide citizens and businesses with world class user experiences; 
reduce waste in Federal IT acquisitions; and identify savings that can 
be re-programmed to better serve taxpayers and optimize the use of 
scarce agency resources.
  In addition to these important activities, ITOR also supports 
recruiting and training the next generation of talented Federal IT 
personnel, and it supports the Office of Management and Budget's 
coordination of Federal cybersecurity programs. As the recent cyber 
breach at the U.S. Office of Personnel Management highlights, we must 
be vigilant in continuously monitoring Federal IT systems to safeguard 
sensitive information national security information.
  As the Committee notes, ITOR has notched commendable achievements in 
enabling agencies to more efficiently utilize cloud computing and begin 
optimizing and consolidating Federal data centers. Of course, much work 
remains to be done. I appreciate and share the Committee's concern over 
recent Federal IT failures. In recent decades, taxpayers have been 
forced to foot the bill for massive IT program failures that ring up 
staggeringly high costs but exhibit astonishingly poor performance. The 
deplorable rollout of the HealthCare.gov site last year is a symptom of 
a broader disease that ITOR is helping to address--the broken Federal 
IT acquisition process. The annual price tag of this wasteful spending 
on IT programs is estimated to be approximately $20 billion. That 
status quo is unacceptable and unsustainable.
  That is why I joined the chairman of the Oversight and Government 
Reform Committee to develop a comprehensive, bipartisan, Federal IT 
acquisition reform legislative proposal--commonly referred to as the 
Issa-Connolly bill, or ``FITARA.'' Our bipartisan bill represents the 
most dramatic overhaul of Federal IT procurement policy since the 
seminal Clinger-Cohen Act was enacted nearly two decades ago, and it 
would directly support and complement the mission and aims of ITOR. It 
enhances CIO authorities, empowers CIOs to recruit and retain talented 
IT staff, and accelerates data center optimization and strengthens the 
accountability and transparency of Federal IT programs The Issa-
Connolly bill has now passed the House three times--twice as an 
amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act and once as a 
standalone bill. The Senate recently passed a similar version of the 
bill, and we are working with our Senate colleagues to harmonize the 
differences.
  While I am pleased that a bipartisan consensus is finally forming 
around the urgent need to streamline and strengthen how the Federal 
government acquires and deploys IT, this bill would actually under fund 
in those programs that are proven to save money over the long term.
  Mr. Chair, as I said at the outset, this bill veers sharply from the 
bipartisan model we had been working toward. By attempting to disinvest 
in the IRS, House Republicans are actually disinvesting in our 
taxpayers and undermining our efforts to enforce the law and reduce the 
deficit. They are further eroding the notion of local control by 
continuing to meddle in the local decision making of the District of 
Columbia. And they are making a shortsighted decision to not invest 
more in IT reforms that have proven to save money. For these reasons, I 
urge my colleagues to join me in opposing the bill before us today.
  Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. Chair, while I appreciate the Appropriations 
Committee's efforts to return to regular order, the Administration has 
issued a veto threat for this bill--and it's not hard to understand 
why.
  While the bill does an adequate job funding the federal judiciary--as 
well as some important entrepreneurial initiatives at the Small 
Business Administration--virtually every other funding allocation and 
policy directive in this bill is either insufficient or misguided.
  The Internal Revenue Service is funded at below sequestration levels, 
which will unquestionably hinder taxpayer assistance and undermine 
efforts to close the tax gap. The Securities and Exchange Commission 
charged with protecting investors and policing our financial markets is 
funded at $300 million below the President's request. And the Election 
Assistance Commission tasked with ensuring the integrity of our 
elections is eliminated altogether.
  In addition to these funding decisions, H.R. 5016 contains policy 
riders hostile to the President's Climate Action Plan, the Affordable 
Care Act, women's reproductive health and standards governing the 
political activities of tax-exempt organizations. The independence of 
the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau would be terminated under this 
legislation.
  Mr. Chair, this bill is wrong on funding and wrong on policy. I urge 
a no vote, and I yield back the balance of my time.
  The CHAIR. All time for general debate has expired.
  Pursuant to the rule, the bill shall be considered for amendment 
under the 5-minute rule.
  During consideration of the bill for amendment, each amendment shall 
be debatable for 10 minutes, equally divided and controlled by the 
proponent and an opponent, and shall not be subject to amendment. No 
pro forma amendment shall be in order except that the chair and ranking 
minority member of the Committee on Appropriations, or their respective 
designees, may offer up to 10 pro forma amendments each at any point 
for the purpose of debate. The Chair of the Committee of the Whole may 
accord priority in recognition on the basis of whether the Member 
offering an amendment has caused it to be printed in the portion of the 
Congressional Record designated for that purpose. Amendments so printed 
shall be considered read.
  The Clerk will read.
  The Clerk read as follows:

                               H.R. 5016

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled, That the 
     following sums are appropriated, out of any money in the 
     Treasury not otherwise appropriated, for the fiscal year 
     ending September 30, 2015, and for other purposes, namely:

                                TITLE I

                       DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

                          Departmental Offices

                         salaries and expenses

       For necessary expenses of the Departmental Offices 
     including operation and maintenance of the Treasury Building 
     and Annex; hire of passenger motor vehicles; maintenance, 
     repairs, and improvements of,

[[Page 11909]]

     and purchase of commercial insurance policies for, real 
     properties leased or owned overseas, when necessary for the 
     performance of official business, $175,000,000: Provided, 
     That, of the amount appropriated under this heading--
       (1) not to exceed $2,000,000 is for the Office of the 
     Secretary/Deputy Secretary;
       (2) not to exceed $2,000,000 is for the Office of 
     Legislative Affairs;
       (3) not to exceed $200,000 is for official reception and 
     representation expenses;
       (4) not to exceed $258,000 is for unforeseen emergencies of 
     a confidential nature to be allocated and expended under the 
     direction of the Secretary of the Treasury and to be 
     accounted for solely on the Secretary's certificate; and
       (5) up to $21,000,000 shall remain available until 
     September 30, 2016.

                              {time}  2000


                   Amendment Offered by Mr. Sessions

  Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Page 2, line 17, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced 
     by $1,750,000)''.
       Page 152, line 15, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $1,750,000)''.

  The CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 661, the gentleman from Texas 
and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas.
  Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank the young chairman of the 
subcommittee, the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Crenshaw) for not only 
his great work that he has done on this bill but also presenting this 
bill before the Rules Committee along with the gentleman, Mr. Serrano, 
who not only ably spoke about their bill but defended its process and 
the attempt that they are trying to make today to pass this into law.
  Mr. Chairman, my amendment will reduce Department of the Treasury 
funding for salaries and expenses of departmental offices by 1 percent. 
This $1.75 million cut will not only reasonably save the government 
much-needed funds but will also send a clear signal to the Treasury 
Department that they must take seriously their oversight 
responsibilities over the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, 
known as the OCC.
  I have been engaged in a process on behalf of a constituent of mine 
for a number of years, and I am here finally on the floor today as a 
result of frustration and what I think is an outright lack of 
effectively doing their job in the OCC.
  Beginning in 2007, the OCC opened an action against T Bank, NA, with 
regard to their relationship with a payment processor, specifically 
investigating the bank's CEO, a gentleman from Dallas, Texas, Patrick 
Adams. The investigation culminated in a trial before an administrative 
law judge. That administrative law judge was picked specifically by the 
OCC as the administrative judge.
  On November 8, 2012, the judge recommended that all charges brought 
by the Comptroller of the Currency against Mr. Adams be dismissed on 
November 8, 2012. Most disturbing is that the Comptroller has refused 
to render a decision, leaving Mr. Adams all this time in legal limbo.
  12 CFR 109.40 clearly states the Comptroller ``shall render a final 
decision within 90 days after notification of the parties that the case 
has been submitted for final decision.''
  Despite being required by law, the Comptroller has refused to render 
a final decision 15 months after the official submission by the 
administrative judge. Instead, the Comptroller has extended the 90-day 
period four times, most recently in May of this year. The Code of 
Federal Regulations provides no avenue for the Comptroller to extend 
such a decision.
  I believe this delay represents a significant deficiency in the 
operations of an agency under the purview of the Treasury Department. 
Mr. Chairman, I will tell you that I have tried to work tirelessly 
through this problem with the gentleman from Dallas, Texas, my 
constituent, and it is the Federal Government, through the OCC, who 
refuses to abide by a decision made by an administrative judge that 
they chose and has waited 15 months, holding this gentleman in limbo at 
a time of his life when he has spent millions of dollars to protect 
himself against the Federal Government, and the administrative judge 
ruled against the Federal Government.
  Mr. Chairman, it is time that the OCC do their job. And since they 
are not, I am here on the floor today, and I am asking Members of this 
body to take the action that is necessary, regular, and, I consider, 
reasonable. So I urge all of my colleagues to support this amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I would yield, at this time, to the gentleman from 
Florida (Mr. Crenshaw), the subcommittee chair.
  Mr. CRENSHAW. I thank the gentleman for yielding, and I just want to 
thank him for bringing this to our attention and let him know that I am 
happy to support this amendment.
  Mr. SESSIONS. I thank the gentleman. And, Mr. Chairman, I want you to 
know that I would appreciate not only his help, but also the help of 
the inspector general of the Treasury Department, who has been advised 
of this circumstance, and we are waiting for their final decision. Even 
though it is 15 months late, I believe we should move forward and take 
the $1.7 million away from an agency that does not live within the law.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. SERRANO. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
  The CHAIR. The gentleman from New York is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. SERRANO. Mr. Chairman, I rise to oppose the amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, departmental salaries and expenses of Treasury have 
already been cut by $17.4 million this year as compared to last year. 
That includes the departmental offices account. That means that this 
portion of the bill is 4.4 percent below what the administration 
requested.
  Mr. Chairman, there is no need to cut it any further. I urge my 
colleagues to oppose this amendment, and I yield back the balance of my 
time.
  The CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman 
from Texas (Mr. Sessions).
  The amendment was agreed to.
  The CHAIR. The Clerk will read.
  The Clerk read as follows:

             office of terrorism and financial intelligence

                         salaries and expenses

                     (including transfer of funds)

       For the necessary expenses of the Office of Terrorism and 
     Financial Intelligence to safeguard the financial system 
     against illicit use and to combat rogue nations, terrorist 
     facilitators, weapons of mass destruction proliferators, 
     money launderers, drug kingpins, and other national security 
     threats, $120,000,000: Provided, That of the amount 
     appropriated under this heading: (1) not to exceed 
     $28,000,000 is available for administrative expenses; and (2) 
     $15,000,000, to remain available until September 30, 2017: 
     Provided further, That the unobligated balances of prior year 
     appropriations made available for terrorism and financial 
     intelligence activities under the heading ``Department of the 
     Treasury--Departmental Offices--Salaries and Expenses'' shall 
     be transferred to, and merged with, this account.

                    Amendment Offered by Mr. Grayson

  Mr. GRAYSON. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Page 3, line 16, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $5,000,000).''
       Page 4, line 21, after the first dollar amount, insert 
     ``(decreased by $5,000,000).''

  The CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 661, the gentleman from 
Florida and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Florida.
  Mr. GRAYSON. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank my colleague from Florida 
and the gentleman from New York for consideration of this amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, budgets are about choices. We have a choice to make 
here that is an interesting one, and I wanted to point it out in the 
form of presenting this amendment.
  The Office of Terrorism and Financial Intelligence is one of the most 
important functions of the Treasury Department. Economic and trade 
sanctions are issued and enforced by the Office of Terrorism and 
Financial Intelligence, and they protect the financial

[[Page 11910]]

system from criminal and illicit activities and counteract national 
security threats from drug lords, terrorists, weapons of mass 
destruction, proliferators, and rogue nations, among others.
  In addition to that, this office provides vital analysis with regard 
to foreign intelligence and counterintelligence across all elements of 
the national security community. I think it is fair to say that this 
office has done excellent work in connection with the Iran Sanctions 
Act, which is an act within the jurisdiction of my committee, the 
Foreign Affairs Committee.
  The committee involved here directs the Department of the Treasury to 
post online and disseminate publicly those companies that are not 
compliant with the Iran Sanctions Act as well as any foreign entities 
doing business with the Iran Revolutionary Guard Corps. In addition to 
that, this office has done excellent work with regard to cutting back 
on the threat of genocide in Sudan, South Sudan, the Central African 
Republic, and the Democratic Republic of the Congo.
  Despite the essential functioning of this office for the purpose of 
our carrying out American foreign policy, this office has a budget of 
only $120 million for the entire year. I contrast that with the budget 
being proposed of $158 million for the Treasury Inspector General for 
Tax Administration.
  In short, we are spending, or proposing to spend, $38 million more 
for the Treasury inspector general to inspect the IRS than we are 
proposing to spend for the Treasury to carry out its essential 
functions of economic trade and trade sanctions. These functions 
basically make our troops safe and keep America safe. Without the 
economic sanctions that we imposed against Iran, we might see American 
troops fighting today in the Middle East. It is essential and important 
that these functions be carried out without being curtailed for a lack 
of money.
  I don't suggest that we equalize these two accounts, although I think 
a good argument could be made to do that. Rather, I suggest that we 
reduce the disparity between these two accounts by adding $5 million to 
allow the Office of Terrorism and Financial Intelligence to carry out 
its essential functions for U.S. foreign policy and reduce the Treasury 
Inspector General for Tax Administration budget by a corresponding $5 
million.
  Again, budgets are about choices. I think that our national security 
is our number one priority, and I think that whatever may be that is 
being done by the Treasury inspector general to investigate the IRS, it 
can wait as long as that money is needed to keep America safe.
  With that, Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. CRENSHAW. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
  The CHAIR. The gentleman from Florida is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. CRENSHAW. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to this amendment 
because the bill strongly supports the Treasury's Office of Terrorism 
and Financial Intelligence and actually provides $14 million above the 
request, and that is to make sure there are robust and forceful 
sanction programs. This bill also supports the TIGTA. It provides 
$581,000 above the request to ensure that the inspector general can 
keep a careful and close eye on the IRS activities.
  So I appreciate the gentleman's support for the TFI, but it cannot 
come at the expense of the IRS watchdog. Everyone knows what has been 
happening with the IRS, and we need a strong IG to oversee the IRS. 
They are doing good and much-needed oversight, and the bill already 
provides Treasury's financial intelligence programs with a significant 
increase.
  So, Mr. Chairman, I would encourage my colleagues to vote ``no'' on 
the amendment. I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. GRAYSON. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman 
from Florida (Mr. Grayson).
  The amendment was rejected.
  The Clerk will read.
  The Clerk read as follows:

                      office of inspector general

                         salaries and expenses

       For necessary expenses of the Office of Inspector General 
     in carrying out the provisions of the Inspector General Act 
     of 1978, $35,351,000, including hire of passenger motor 
     vehicles; of which not to exceed $100,000 shall be available 
     for unforeseen emergencies of a confidential nature, to be 
     allocated and expended under the direction of the Inspector 
     General of the Treasury; and of which not to exceed $1,000 
     shall be available for official reception and representation 
     expenses.

           treasury inspector general for tax administration

                         salaries and expenses

       For necessary expenses of the Treasury Inspector General 
     for Tax Administration in carrying out the Inspector General 
     Act of 1978, including purchase and hire of passenger motor 
     vehicles (31 U.S.C. 1343(b)); and services authorized by 5 
     U.S.C. 3109, at such rates as may be determined by the 
     Inspector General for Tax Administration; $158,000,000, of 
     which $5,000,000 shall remain available until September 30, 
     2016; of which not to exceed $500,000 shall be available for 
     unforeseen emergencies of a confidential nature, to be 
     allocated and expended under the direction of the Inspector 
     General for Tax Administration; and of which not to exceed 
     $1,500 shall be available for official reception and 
     representation expenses.


                     Amendment Offered by Mr. Posey

  Mr. POSEY. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Page 4, line 21, after the first dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $1,000,000)''.
       Page 10, line 7, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced 
     by $1,000,000)''.

  The CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 661, the gentleman from 
Florida and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Florida.
  Mr. POSEY. Mr. Chairman, I would like to thank Chairman Crenshaw for 
his help on this amendment and for his support on this issue of 
critical importance to the Florida financial industry.
  My amendment transfers $1 million from the Internal Revenue Service 
enforcement division to the IRS office of the inspector general. It is 
my intent that this money be used to study the impact of IRS 
nonresident alien bank account reporting and requirements on the United 
States economy.
  The IRS has issued a final regulation requiring all banks in the 
United States to report to the IRS the amount of interest paid to 
nonresident alien individual depositors. Now these are people who are 
not taxpayers, and they do not owe us taxes.
  These payments are not subject to U.S. taxes, so these reports do not 
collect a single penny of additional revenue. This regulation also 
reverses a 90-year policy that the interest earned by foreign 
depositors in American banks would not be taxed or reported.

                              {time}  2015

  When the IRS first proposed this regulation in 2001, a bipartisan 
coalition of more than 100 Members of Congress opposed it. The IRS 
eventually withdrew the crazy proposal.
  In 2011, the entire Florida delegation signed a letter to the 
Internal Revenue Service expressing concern with the economic impact of 
this policy, and I thank my colleague, Debbie Wasserman Schultz, for 
taking the lead on that initiative.
  On July 25, 2012, the House passed my amendment to H.R. 4078, the Red 
Tape Reduction and Small Business Job Creation Act, which would have 
prevented the IRS from enforcing the IRS nonresident alien reporting 
requirement. The amendment was passed with bipartisan support, but the 
Senate failed to take up the bill.
  The IRS regulation places United States banks at a global 
disadvantage relative to foreign banks that lack such reporting 
requirements. Furthermore, United States banks hold $500 billion in 
nonresident alien bank accounts.
  Millions of dollars have already been withdrawn by foreign 
depositors, and it only promises to get worse. Because every dollar in 
bank deposits generates nearly $9 in lending, these withdrawals will 
reduce the amount of credit available to individual and commercial 
borrowers, hurting the United States' economy at a time when we need to 
be recovering, not suffering worse.

[[Page 11911]]

  A similar IRS program imposes a requirement on foreign financial 
institutions to report information on accounts held by Americans 
overseas. This has already resulted in foreign banks canceling banking 
services to U.S. citizens to avoid compliance costs.
  For these reasons, I ask that the money transferred to the IRS 
inspector general be used to conduct an economic impact study of these 
policies, including an analysis of the effect on capital levels, 
capital flight, safety and soundness, and changes to public confidence 
in depository financial institutions, something Treasury is arguably 
required to do already under current law, but has refused to do.
  I include a letter of support from the Credit Union National 
Association and the World Council of Credit Unions to be entered into 
the Record.

         Credit Union National Association, Inc., and World 
           Council of Credit Unions, Inc.,
                                                    July 14, 2014.
     Hon. Bill Posey,
     House of Representatives,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Representative Posey: On behalf of the Credit Union 
     National Association (CUNA) and the World Council of Credit 
     Unions (World Council), we are writing to thank you for your 
     efforts to address the difficulties and compliance costs 
     associated with the newly-implemented Foreign Account Tax 
     Compliance Act (FATCA). CUNA is the largest credit union 
     advocacy organization in the United States, representing 
     America's state and federally chartered credit unions and 
     their 99 million members. World Council is the leading trade 
     association and development organization for the 
     international credit union movement. Worldwide, there are 
     nearly 56,000 cooperatively owned credit unions in 101 
     countries with approximately $1.7 trillion in total assets 
     and 200 million credit union members.
       FATCA is designed to create a tax information reporting and 
     withholding system for certain payments that are made to 
     financial institutions and other entities. The FATCA statute 
     passed by Congress in 2010 requires foreign financial 
     institutions to register with the IRS and detect taxable 
     account activity by U.S. citizens in foreign countries; these 
     requirements are making it difficult for U.S. citizens living 
     overseas, including American credit union members, to 
     maintain access to financial services in the countries where 
     they live. The Internal Revenue Service's (IRS) FATCA 
     regulation also requires U.S.-based financial institutions, 
     including U.S. credit unions, to conduct due diligence and 
     tax withholding on international funds transfers even though 
     the FATCA statute passed by Congress made no mention of U.S.-
     based credit unions or banks.
       CUNA and the World Council support the amendment you intend 
     to offer to HR. 5016, the Financial Services and General 
     Government Appropriations Act of 2015. Your amendment would 
     transfer $1 million in finding for the Internal Revenue 
     Service (IRS) enforcement division and instead provide $1 
     million to the IRS Inspector General's office to conduct an 
     economic impact study of FATCA. We believe this study is 
     necessary given the complexity of implementing FATCA, the 
     complex rulemaking that has taken place, and the myriad 
     unintended consequences of the law on U.S. financial 
     institutions and U.S. citizens living abroad.
       We appreciate all of your work to ensure that credit unions 
     remain focused on their mission of serving their members 
     rather than spending precious time and resources complying 
     with unduly burdensome regulations.
       On behalf of America's credit unions and around the globe, 
     thank you for offering this amendment. We look forward to its 
     consideration and enactment.
           Sincerely,
     Bill Hampel,
       President & CEO, Credit Union National Association, Inc.
     Brian Branch,
       President & CEO, World Council of Credit Unions, Inc.

  Mr. CRENSHAW. Will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. POSEY. I yield to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Crenshaw).
  Mr. CRENSHAW. I thank the gentleman for yielding, and I appreciate 
the gentleman from Florida working with the committee on this 
amendment. We are glad to accept it.
  Recently, the IRS began enforcement of this new regulation requiring 
U.S. banks to report the amount of interest earned on deposits made by 
nonresident aliens, and this new regulation is detrimental to Florida's 
economy and the U.S. economy as a whole because it weakens the 
competitiveness of the U.S. financial institutions and forces foreign 
capital to flee our country.
  The regulation burdens U.S. financial firms with additional paperwork 
and has the unintended consequence of causing many of these foreign 
depositors to take their business and capital elsewhere, so hundreds of 
billions of dollars will flee the economy.
  That will impede small business lending and affect local communities. 
Both Congress and the administration will benefit from a fuller 
understanding of how the regulation affects banks, their clientele, and 
all of the communities, so I urge a ``yes'' vote in support of this 
amendment.
  Mr. POSEY. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. SERRANO. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition.
  The CHAIR. The gentleman from New York is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. SERRANO. Mr. Chairman, I urge opposition to this amendment. The 
IRS has already been cut overall by $341 million from last year's 
funding level. This will prevent the IRS from going after tax cheats 
and helping those who are attempting to obey the law.
  The Taxpayer Advocate has even said that insufficient funding of the 
IRS is one of the most serious problems facing taxpayers. This 
underfunding will force the IRS to operate with 9,500 fewer staff, 
which means that less than 50 percent of taxpayers who reach out to the 
IRS for assistance on the telephone help line will be able to get it, 
while waiting times for those who do get answers will rise to 35 
minutes or longer.
  As many as 24 million taxpayers would be unable to reach the IRS for 
assistance. That is unacceptable.
  The cuts in this bill will also result in $2 billion in uncollected 
revenue compared to what could have been collected at the requested 
level, thereby increasing the deficit by that amount.
  Take as contrast funding at more than $1.6 million above last year's 
level and over half a million more than was requested. I am not sure 
what they have done to deserve an increase that they didn't even ask 
for.
  During our hearing, it became clear that the IG didn't fairly 
represent the findings of its own investigator. Its lead investigator 
reviewed 5,500 emails and concluded that there was no indication of 
political motivation, yet the IG failed to mention that until months 
later after his order was released, and you will certainly not hear 
Republicans mention it now.
  So I am not sure what they are trying to reward, but it certainly is 
not good work. I oppose this amendment and urge that everyone else do 
so as well.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. POSEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time.
  This legislation would not be necessary if the IRS or the Treasury 
had already done what was required by law. When you promulgate a rule 
that has over a $100 million impact on the private sector, you are 
supposed to do a cost-benefit analysis, and they refused to do it in 
this case.
  They took the position that, well, it doesn't cost that much money 
just to fill out a little form and try and rat out foreign bank 
depositors here.
  The reality is studies show it clearly will have a multibillion-
dollar impact.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. SERRANO. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman 
from Florida (Mr. Posey).
  The amendment was agreed to.
  The CHAIR. The Clerk will read.
  The Clerk read as follows:

    special inspector general for the troubled asset relief program

                         salaries and expenses

         For necessary expenses of the Office of the Special 
     Inspector General in carrying out the provisions of the 
     Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 (Public Law 110-
     343), $34,234,000.

                  Financial Crimes Enforcement Network

                         salaries and expenses

         For necessary expenses of the Financial Crimes 
     Enforcement Network, including hire of passenger motor 
     vehicles; travel and training expenses of non-Federal and 
     foreign

[[Page 11912]]

     government personnel to attend meetings and training 
     concerned with domestic and foreign financial intelligence 
     activities, law enforcement, and financial regulation; 
     services authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109; not to exceed $7,000 
     for official reception and representation expenses; and for 
     assistance to Federal law enforcement agencies, with or 
     without reimbursement, $108,661,000, of which not to exceed 
     $34,335,000 shall remain available until September 30, 2017.

                  Amendment Offered by Ms. Jackson Lee

  Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Page 5, line 22, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced 
     by $200,000)''.
       Page 9, line 15, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $100,000)''.

  The CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 661, the gentlewoman from 
Texas and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Texas.
  Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank the chairman and the 
ranking member of this Appropriations Committee for their hard work and 
working together, Mr. Crenshaw and Mr. Serrano. These are important 
matters, and I thank them for the opportunity to present this 
amendment.
  My amendment is a simple theory, but a very important one. This 
amendment provides $100,000 to the IRS taxpayer services account to 
assist parents who have lost dependent children during the tax year 
with assistance in filing income taxes and supports one-stop IRS tax 
preparation support for parents of deceased dependent children whose 
child's SS number has been stolen and used by identity thieves to steal 
tax refunds.
  I am the founder and cochair of the Congressional Children's Caucus, 
and in many instances, we find in our work the issues of giving 
children incentives and worrying about children's health, but this is a 
very devastating posture for parents to be in.
  At a hearing held by Chairman Sam Johnson on the Ways and Means 
Committee, a hearing on Social Security death records dated February 2, 
2012, and I will read--the testimony of the statement said:

       We will hear the heartbreaking story of one family whose 4-
     year-old daughter had her identity stolen shortly after she 
     passed away. Only when their tax return was rejected by the 
     IRS did they learn that an identity thief had already filed a 
     return claiming their child as a dependent.

  In an article regarding this terrible tragedy, it indicates that this 
little girl had fought for 33 months to fight brain cancer. The parents 
were overwhelmed with grief and medical bills. The mourning parents 
decided to file for a tax extension to get their paperwork in order, 
but within 24 hours of filing in October, the family's return was 
rejected. Someone had already fraudulently claimed their daughter's 
Social Security number.
  My colleagues, I would ask that this amendment be considered because 
in actuality it deals with this very question; it provides more 
resources to address the question of protecting identity and the 
identity theft that occurs.
  My amendment, as I indicated, increases it by $100,000. As parents 
and grandparents, most of us may not know the pain these parents are 
feeling, but we can do something to make a necessary obligation easier 
for them to fulfill.
  The IRS operates a 1-800 help line and provides tax assistance at no 
charge to tens of thousands of families who prepare their own taxes. 
The funds provided in this bill are intended to be used to allow 
training to assist the IRS to do a better job of meeting the needs of 
parents who have lost a dependent child during the tax year or prior to 
their filing of taxes.
  Just put ourselves in the shoes of this family whose little 4-year-
old fought for 33 months and in their distress, with all of these 
overwhelming bills, to come and find this dastardly act of someone 
stealing the child's ID.
  This amendment would address these cases where the Social Security 
number of a recently deceased child is stolen and is used by thieves to 
claim tax funds that should have gone to the family.
  Identity theft is a terrible crime that violates the privacy of 
victims. All of us, no matter what committees we are involved in, in 
the Judiciary Committee which I sit on, Homeland Security, we are 
grappling with the issues of privacy and identity theft.
  How many of us have had the impact of such, but it has not been as 
devastating, I would imagine, as the identity theft of your deceased 
child.
  The crime first came to the attention of several House committees in 
2011. As I made note of, Sam Johnson, the chairman of the Social 
Security Subcommittee on the Ways and Means Committee, had this issue 
in 2012.
  They only need a Social Security number, a date of birth, and name of 
the child. This information would be found on medical records, school 
records, or other forms completed by parents in the course of 
registering a child for various activities.
  This is a crime. This is a shame. My amendment would give some 
comfort to help the IRS to help these parents. I ask my colleagues to 
approve this amendment.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. CRENSHAW. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition.
  The Acting CHAIR (Mr. Weber of Texas). The gentleman from Florida is 
recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. CRENSHAW. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the intent of the 
gentlewoman's amendment. I have great sympathy for the situation that 
the family found itself in, but I have to remind my colleagues that the 
bill already cuts FinCEN by $3.3 million compared to 2014, and our bill 
increases taxpayer services by $7.5 million.
  So I wish the IRS could do a better job of dealing with taxpayer 
services. That is one of the areas that they really need to get a 
handle on because there are too many stories like the one she just 
told, but FinCEN does good work.
  They work with industry to detect and discourage and apprehend money 
launderers, so I don't think we should cut them any further. As I 
pointed out, we have increased the funding for taxpayer services, and 
so for that reason, I have to oppose the gentlewoman's amendment.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chairman, let me say to my colleagues, I don't 
think there is much more that I can say than repeat the story of the 
33-month fight by their little girl.
  It is $100,000 that we are asking to help these parents who are 
desperate and mourning. I ask my colleagues to step a moment in the 
shoes of those mourning parents, to help avoid the identity theft that 
comes from a child because a child is dead and they have a Social 
Security number.
  So I ask my colleagues, again, to support the Jackson Lee amendment. 
I ask both sides of the aisle to consider the pain of parents who 
experience this.
  I yield back the balance of my time.

                              {time}  2030

  Mr. CRENSHAW. Mr. Chairman, I just want to say one final thing. In 
terms of taxpayer services, this bill already provides $2.1 billion for 
taxpayer services. As I point out, that is an increase over last year. 
We have already cut FinCEN by $3.3 million.
  So, for that reason, Mr. Chairman, I would urge my colleagues to vote 
``no'' on the amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.
  Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further 
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from Texas will 
be postponed.


                     Amendment Offered by Mr. Lynch

  Mr. LYNCH. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:


[[Page 11913]]

       Page 5, line 22, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $3,339,000)''.
       Page 67, line 16, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(reduced by $3,339,000)''.
       Page 68, line 10, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(reduced by $1,669,500)''.
       Page 68, line 15, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(reduced by $1,669,500)''.
       Page 71, line 3, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced 
     by $1,669,500)''.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 661, the gentleman 
from Massachusetts and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Massachusetts.
  Mr. LYNCH. Mr. Chairman, I thank the chairman and ranking member.
  Mr. Chairman, this amendment would increase the funding provided to 
the Treasury Department's Office of the Financial Crimes Enforcement 
Network, also known as FinCEN, by $3.339 million so that it remains at 
its current level of $112 million.
  This amendment would offset this necessary increase through 
corresponding decreases in the funding provided for the repairs and 
alterations and the rental of space accounts within the General 
Services Administration.
  If adopted, the amendment would have no effect on budget authority 
and would reduce outlays by $1 million.
  As cochair of the bipartisan Task Force on Antiterrorism and 
Proliferation Financing, I have worked closely with our cochair, Ed 
Royce, the gentleman from California, and with FinCEN, the Financial 
Crimes Enforcement Network, to help strengthen our national 
antiterrorist finance strategy, and I realize the increased need to be 
able to quickly and efficiently track and stop the flow of funds to 
terrorist groups in doing this important work.
  Through the task force, we have witnessed the critical and important 
work that the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network engages in. The 
skilled staff at FinCEN works tirelessly every day to track and stop 
the flow of elicit funds that would otherwise be used to aid terrorism 
in order to safeguard our financial system from evolving money 
laundering and mounting national security threats. We all know very 
well the risks presented by Hezbollah in Syria, al Qaeda in Yemen, ISIS 
in Iraq, and Boko Haram in Nigeria.
  By sharing financial intelligence with law enforcement, private 
industry, and its foreign counterparts, FinCEN supports financial crime 
investigations throughout the world. Congress has taken significant 
steps towards utilizing terrorist financing as a viable intelligence 
tool, as well as disrupting the financing of terrorist activities. 
Nevertheless, terrorists' proven ability to move money through 
innovative means necessitates continued progress in this critical 
counterterrorism area.
  As the chairman pointed out, FinCEN does incredibly important work. 
Most recently, FinCEN has played an instrumental role on the ground in 
Ukraine in support of international efforts to recover billions of 
dollars in missing Ukrainian funds that were misappropriated by former 
Ukrainian Government officials, including former President Viktor 
Yanukovych.
  With today's increasingly complex and rapidly evolving terrorist 
networks, we cannot risk our national security by reducing funding for 
this important department.
  I appreciate the chairman's challenges and the ranking member's 
challenges in trying to balance priorities within this bill, and I 
respect both of those gentlemen, but I do urge my colleagues on both 
sides of the aisle to support this amendment in order to make sure that 
the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network is properly funded. The 
balance here is funding for the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network 
versus a reduction in the repairs and alterations account and the 
rental space account for the General Services Administration. I think 
that we recognize where the real priorities of this Congress should be. 
This is not what the chairman mentioned in his opening remarks. This is 
not nonessential funding. This is not wasteful funding. This is very 
important funding with respect to the national security of our country.
  Mr. CRENSHAW. Will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. LYNCH. I yield to the gentleman from Florida.
  Mr. CRENSHAW. I just want to thank you for bringing this to our 
attention and am pleased to support the amendment.
  Mr. LYNCH. I thank the chairman.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Lynch).
  The amendment was agreed to.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will read.
  The Clerk read as follows:

                        Treasury Forfeiture Fund

                              (rescission)

       Of the unobligated balances available under this heading, 
     $750,000,000 are rescinded.

                      Bureau of the Fiscal Service

                         salaries and expenses

       For necessary expenses of operations of the Bureau of the 
     Fiscal Service, $348,184,000; of which not to exceed 
     $4,210,000, to remain available until September 30, 2017, is 
     for information systems modernization initiatives; and of 
     which $5,000 shall be available for official reception and 
     representation expenses.
       In addition, $165,000, to be derived from the Oil Spill 
     Liability Trust Fund to reimburse administrative and 
     personnel expenses for financial management of the Fund, as 
     authorized by section 1012 of Public Law 101-380.

                Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau

                         salaries and expenses

       For necessary expenses of carrying out section 1111 of the 
     Homeland Security Act of 2002, including hire of passenger 
     motor vehicles, $96,000,000; of which not to exceed $6,000 
     for official reception and representation expenses; not to 
     exceed $50,000 for cooperative research and development 
     programs for laboratory services; and provision of laboratory 
     assistance to State and local agencies with or without 
     reimbursement.

                           United States Mint

               united states mint public enterprise fund

       Pursuant to section 5136 of title 31, United States Code, 
     the United States Mint is provided funding through the United 
     States Mint Public Enterprise Fund for costs associated with 
     the production of circulating coins, numismatic coins, and 
     protective services, including both operating expenses and 
     capital investments: Provided, That the aggregate amount of 
     new liabilities and obligations incurred during fiscal year 
     2015 under such section 5136 for circulating coinage and 
     protective service capital investments of the United States 
     Mint shall not exceed $20,000,000.

   Community Development Financial Institutions Fund Program Account

       To carry out the Riegle Community Development and 
     Regulatory Improvements Act of 1994 (subtitle A of title I of 
     Public Law 103-325), including services authorized by section 
     3109 of title 5, United States Code, but at rates for 
     individuals not to exceed the per diem rate equivalent to the 
     rate for EX-3, $230,000,000. Of the amount appropriated under 
     this heading--
       (1) not less than $177,000,000 is available until September 
     30, 2016, for financial assistance and technical assistance 
     under sections 108(a)(1)(A) and 108(a)(1)(B), respectively, 
     of Public Law 103-325, of which up to $3,102,500 may be used 
     for the cost of direct loans: Provided, That the cost of 
     direct loans, including the cost of modifying such loans, 
     shall be as defined in section 502 of the Congressional 
     Budget Act of 1974: Provided further, That these funds are 
     available to subsidize gross obligations for the principal 
     amount of direct loans not to exceed $25,000,000;
       (2) not less than $15,000,000 is available until September 
     30, 2016, for financial assistance, technical assistance, 
     training and outreach programs, designed to benefit Native 
     American, Native Hawaiian, and Alaskan Native communities and 
     provided primarily through qualified community development 
     lender organizations with experience and expertise in 
     community development banking and lending in Indian country, 
     Native American organizations, tribes and tribal 
     organizations and other suitable providers;
       (3) not less than $18,000,000 is available until September 
     30, 2016, for the Bank Enterprise Award program; and
       (4) up to $20,000,000 may be used for administrative 
     expenses, of which up to $300,000 for the administrative 
     expenses of a direct loan program.


                  Amendment Offered by Ms. Jackson Lee

  Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Page 7, line 23, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $500,000)''.
       Page 9, line 15, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced 
     by $1,000,000)''.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 661, the gentlewoman 
from Texas and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.

[[Page 11914]]

  The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Texas.
  Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chairman, I want to again thank the chairman and 
ranking member of the subcommittee for the work that they are doing on 
H.R. 5016.
  I want to indicate that I think this is an important amendment, as 
was the previous one. It increased funding by $500,000 to the Community 
Development Financial Institutions Fund program for people receiving 
financial assistance and for the responsibilities that this very 
important subagency has.
  Treasury's Community Development Financial Institutions Fund program 
administers the Community Development Financial Institutions Fund, the 
CDFI. Through its various programs, the CDFI Fund enables locally-based 
organizations to further goals such as: economic development--job 
creation, business development, and commercial real estate development; 
affordable housing--housing development and homeownership; and 
community development financial services--provision of basic banking 
services to underserved communities and financial literacy training.
  The good news, Mr. Chairman, is that this spreads across the Nation, 
regardless of whether you are an urban center or whether you are a 
rural center, in particular, through these programs, direct investment 
in supporting and training financial institutions that provide loans, 
investment financial services, and technical assistance to underserved 
populations and communities.
  Basically, it is a yes rather than a stop sign to job creation beyond 
the borders of the urban community and into our rural communities as 
well. From the perspective of Texas, this is a good thing because it 
emphasizes overall investment and development.
  It also is good for Native Americans through its Native initiative by 
taking action to provide financial assistance, technical assistance, 
and training to Native CDFIs and other Native entities proposing to 
become or create Native CDFIs.
  I am very glad for the support that has been given by this committee 
for this particular fund. I believe that the Jackson Lee amendment, 
with the addition of the amount of $500,000, will again help expand the 
opportunity for there to be increased investment.
  Let me make this final point. The loss of wealth in rural communities 
that are creating hardships should not be forgotten where a substantial 
portion of their wealth, like urban dwellers, was in their homes. This 
restores and continues to restore opportunities to develop wealth among 
our individual families and communities. I ask that the Jackson Lee 
amendment be supported.
  Mr. CRENSHAW. Will the gentlewoman yield?
  Ms. JACKSON LEE. I yield to the gentleman from Florida.
  Mr. CRENSHAW. I just want you to know that we have no objection to 
your amendment.
  Ms. JACKSON LEE. I thank the gentleman very much.
  With that, Mr. Chairman, let me thank the members of this committee.
  As I indicated, this will be a good amendment to help the people of 
this great Nation continue their restoration of wealth and economic 
development. I ask for support of the Jackson Lee amendment.
  With that, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee).
  The amendment was agreed to.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will read.
  The Clerk read as follows:

                        Internal Revenue Service

                           taxpayer services

       For necessary expenses of the Internal Revenue Service to 
     provide taxpayer services, including pre-filing assistance 
     and education, filing and account services, taxpayer advocacy 
     services, the operating expenses of the Taxpayer Advocate 
     Service, and other services as authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109, 
     at such rates as may be determined by the Commissioner, 
     $2,130,000,000, of which not less than $5,600,000 shall be 
     for the Tax Counseling for the Elderly Program, of which not 
     less than $10,000,000 shall be available for low-income 
     taxpayer clinic grants, and of which not less than 
     $12,000,000, to remain available until September 30, 2016, 
     shall be available for a Community Volunteer Income Tax 
     Assistance matching grants program for tax return preparation 
     assistance.


                    Amendment Offered by Mr. Roskam

  Mr. ROSKAM. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Page 9, line 15, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $10,000,000)''.
       Page 10, line 7, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced 
     by $10,000,000)''.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 661, the gentleman 
from Illinois and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Illinois.
  Mr. ROSKAM. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, we have had a great deal of discussion today on the 
floor about the activity of the IRS, and these stories have been known 
to us. We have had a great deal of testimony--hours and hours and hours 
of testimony--in the Ways and Means Committee overseen by Chairman 
Camp.
  What we know is this: that the IRS has grossly overstepped its bounds 
in asking questions of groups filing for tax-exempt status that go so 
far as to ask about the content of an organization's prayers.
  Now, think about this, Mr. Chairman. The First Amendment to the 
Constitution has as its first freedom our freedom of religion in this 
country, and what have we seen? We have seen the Internal Revenue 
Service reach its long arm into different tax-exempt organizations and 
have made inquiries about what is happening as it relates to prayers.
  Here is an example, Mr. Chairman, that I have. This is a document, 
official document from the Internal Revenue Service, Department of the 
Treasury, et cetera, et cetera, to the Coalition for Life of Iowa. 
Under Penalties of Perjury, on page 2, Mr. Chairman, of this official 
document from the Internal Revenue Service, the IRS asked this in 
writing:

       Please explain in detail the activities at these prayer 
     meetings. Also, provide the percentage of your time with 
     organizations spent on prayer groups as compared with other 
     activities of the organization.

  Mr. Chairman, are you kidding me?
  The Internal Revenue Service is using its power and its influence to 
try and intimidate organizations, organizations that have as their base 
the faith that they freely wish to extend and they wish to communicate. 
Some lists were lists of questions that the IRS was so onerous that 
they asked for list after list after list.
  Here is another one. They went after a group and they said, well, 
tell us all about whether each person, board member, officer, key 
employee, or member of their family, has, was, or plans to be a 
candidate for public office.
  Now, of all the ridiculous inquiries. Do you know what that tells me? 
It tells me, Mr. Chairman, the enforcement division of the IRS has too 
much money, that is what it tells me.
  What I am trying to do with this amendment is to follow up on action 
that the House has already taken, and a House that took this action 
unanimously not long ago in February by passing a bill that I 
introduced, Protecting Taxpayers from Intrusive IRS Requests Act, that 
is now pending in the other body.
  I am very simply trying to get the attention of the Internal Revenue 
Service, the attention of the employees, the attention of the 
Commissioner that is all to say that you don't have this kind of 
authority; and if you have got this kind of money to spend messing 
around with American groups and so forth, and as the Internal Revenue 
Service is now declaring itself to be the entity that decides who gets 
to participate in the public square and who doesn't get to participate 
in the public square, then they clearly have too much money.

[[Page 11915]]



                              {time}  2045

  Very simply, Mr. Chairman, here is what I am trying to do. I am 
trying to take money out of that enforcement fund, which excludes the 
exempt services, which has been up to their eyeballs in this whole 
mess, and direct it over to an area that can actually defend taxpayers.
  I urge its consideration.
  Mr. CRENSHAW. Will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. ROSKAM. I yield to the gentleman from Florida.
  Mr. CRENSHAW. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  I am pleased to support his amendment.
  Mr. ROSKAM. Reclaiming my time, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. SERRANO. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition to the 
amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from New York is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. SERRANO. The gentleman says that the IRS has too much money. I 
haven't done the math totally, but I think if we were to accept every 
amendment that will come up in the next couple of days against the IRS, 
we would not only reach zero on the budget for the IRS, we would 
probably go under and create a crisis that we don't know how to handle.
  The enforcement account at IRS has already been cut by $72 million 
above last year and is more than $421 million below the President's 
request. The taxpayer service account is already funded above last 
year's level.
  Given the lack of funding for the IRS, there should be no need to 
plus-up an account that has actually increased while the overall 
funding for the agency has decreased. That is just a simple statement 
to understand.
  I understand the need to continue to attack the IRS under this belief 
that they went after just a certain kind of organization. They went 
after no one. They asked questions of both sides, both conservative 
groups and liberal groups. I guess we are not going to hear the end of 
it for the next couple of days. It might be 3 days of bashing the IRS.
  So I urge opposition to the amendment, and I reserve the balance of 
my time.
  Mr. ROSKAM. Mr. Chairman, there is no need to attack the IRS if the 
IRS doesn't attack the American public. The IRS is the manipulator. The 
IRS is the entity that used this power of manipulation to ask this 
question:

       Explain in detail the activities at your prayer meetings.

  That is nothing that the IRS has anything to do with. That is nothing 
that they should have anything to do with.
  And I am not for a second saying that we need to continue to go after 
the IRS until the IRS says, Here's all the emails, we've come clean, 
and so forth, but somehow the IRS being a victim here, I don't know. 
The IRS is no victim. The people that are being targeted unfairly are 
the victims. When they sought to assert their First Amendment right, 
Mr. Chairman, they are the victims.
  I am not asking you to accept every amendment. I am just asking you 
to accept the Roskam amendment.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. SERRANO. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Roskam).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the ayes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. ROSKAM. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further 
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Illinois 
will be postponed.


                    Amendment Offered by Mr. Grayson

  Mr. GRAYSON. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Page 9, line 16, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $2,800,000)''.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 661, the gentleman 
from Florida and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Florida.
  Mr. GRAYSON. Mr. Chairman, I would like a few more dimes and nickles 
for the Tax Counseling for the Elderly program. The Tax Counseling for 
the Elderly program offers free tax help to individuals who are age 60 
years old or older. I am not there yet, but I hope to be there one day.
  Cooperative grant agreements are entered into between the IRS and 
eligible organizations to provide tax assistance to elderly taxpayers. 
The funds provided by the IRS are used by organizations to reimburse 
volunteers for their out-of-pocket expenses, including transportation, 
meals, and other expenses incurred by them in providing tax counseling 
assistance at locations convenient to the taxpayers.
  This is very important because what we are saying here is that this 
money leverages volunteer help. There are tens of thousands of 
volunteers all around the country, including in my district in Orlando, 
that rely upon this funding to be able to provide the services that are 
needed by our elderly citizens.
  One of the good things about my proposal here, Mr. Chairman, is that 
we are not taking this $2.8 million from any other account. Rather, 
there is a $2.13 billion account for taxpayer services, and this simply 
adds the carveout from that total for Tax Counseling for the Elderly.
  Let's think about this. There are over 50 million seniors who qualify 
around the country for this program--that is one-quarter of our adult 
population--but the percentage of this account for taxpayer services, 
this $2 billion account, is not one-quarter for this program. It is not 
even 1 percent for this program. It is one-quarter of 1 percent of the 
total amount that we are allocating here for taxpayer services.
  I modestly propose that we increase that amount from one-quarter of 1 
percent to three-eighths of 1 percent.
  Mr. CRENSHAW. Will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. GRAYSON. I yield to the gentleman from Florida.
  Mr. CRENSHAW. I think tax counseling for the elderly is very 
important, and I am happy to accept your amendment.
  Mr. GRAYSON. Reclaiming my time, I am happy to accept your acceptance 
of this amendment. I am very grateful to you, Mr. Chairman.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Florida (Mr. Grayson).
  The amendment was agreed to.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will read.
  The Clerk read as follows:

                              enforcement

       For necessary expenses for tax enforcement activities of 
     the Internal Revenue Service to determine and collect owed 
     taxes, to provide legal and litigation support, to conduct 
     criminal investigations, to enforce criminal statutes related 
     to violations of internal revenue laws and other financial 
     crimes, to purchase and hire passenger motor vehicles (31 
     U.S.C. 1343(b)), and to provide other services as authorized 
     by 5 U.S.C. 3109, at such rates as may be determined by the 
     Commissioner, $4,950,000,000, of which not less than 
     $60,257,000 shall be for the Interagency Crime and Drug 
     Enforcement program.


                  Amendment Offered by Mrs. Blackburn

  Mrs. BLACKBURN. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Page 10, line 7, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced 
     by $2,000,000)''.
       Page 62, line 9, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $1,000,000)''.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 661, the gentlewoman 
from Tennessee and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Tennessee.
  Mrs. BLACKBURN. Mr. Chairman, I bring a very simple amendment. As the 
Clerk read, you saw it is just two lines.
  Let's reduce another $2 million of that IRS enforcement account, and 
let's move this over to help another

[[Page 11916]]

Federal agency do its job. Because we have had one agency that is 
making life difficult for taxpayers and business owners, now let's have 
an agency that is supposed to be doing their job. Let's make certain 
that they do it.
  What we are doing is redirecting this million dollars over to the 
Consumer Product Safety Commission's budget for third-party testing 
relief to assist them in completing and meeting their statutory 
requirements.
  What has happened, in August, 2011, Congress passed an amendment to 
the CPSC Improvement Act mandating that they identify ways to reduce 
the third-party testing burdens that are facing our American 
businesses. That was to reduce the burden.
  After soliciting comments in November of 2011, CPSC staff identified 
14 ways in which this could be done. In October of the following year, 
2012, they approved eight of the 14 recommendations, suggesting ways 
that the Commission could move forward. However, as we stand here 2 
years later after that period, I am sure few are surprised to hear that 
CPSC still has not followed through with this mandate. In fact, the 
only action taken thus far has been a single workshop held on April 3 
to identify materials that may not require testing. In fact, the only 
action taken thus far on these approved recommendations has been to 
solicit comments from industry on three separate occasions and to hold 
one workshop. It is clear that the agency has placed the requirements 
of burden reduction on the industry, not on the bureaucrats at the 
CPSC.
  It is important to note why Congress passed our CPSC amendment in the 
first place. Our current economic situation is indeed dire. It was then 
and continues to be. The American people depend immensely on our 
American businesses to provide jobs. Even more so, the American people 
are depending on us to help create the environment that will spur job 
growth.
  The third-party testing burden hinders the ability of these companies 
to hire more employees and to expand their product lines. It hinders 
the ability of these businesses to grow the economy. It is detrimental 
to our workforce. Additionally, the testing hinders Americans who own 
small businesses, as they are the ones who are having to absorb these 
extra costs.
  The Commission claims that these third-party testing regulations are 
paramount to our safety when, in fact, our domestic industries spend 
millions of dollars each and every year on unnecessary testing, 
including on materials known to never contain harmful chemicals.
  Congress recognized this back in 2011. We took action. We expect the 
CPSC to follow through and to take the necessary actions. It has been 3 
years since the mandate went into effect, and it is time that we 
encourage the CPSC to get their act together and move forward with the 
implementation on the mandate.
  Mr. CRENSHAW. Will the gentlewoman yield?
  Mrs. BLACKBURN. I yield to the gentleman from Florida.
  Mr. CRENSHAW. Mr. Chairman, I want the gentlewoman to know that this 
is a very good amendment. I support it, and I urge my colleagues to 
vote ``yes.''
  Mrs. BLACKBURN. Reclaiming my time, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. SERRANO. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from New York is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. SERRANO. Mr. Chairman, for a minute there, I was almost convinced 
that they are not after the IRS, but they are even willing to give 
money to an agency they traditionally do not support just to get at the 
IRS.
  The IRS has already been cut overall by $341 million from last year's 
funding level. This will prevent the IRS from going after tax cheats 
and helping those who are attempting to obey the law.
  The Taxpayer Advocate has even said that insufficient funding of the 
IRS is one of the most serious problems facing taxpayers. This IRS 
needs more funding, not less.
  The Consumer Product Safety Commission is funded $5 million below 
last year's level, and we are supportive of remedying that in 
conference. However, we simply cannot support this offset.
  It is my understanding that the sponsor of this amendment would like 
the money to be used for the CPSC to prescribe new or revised third-
party testing regulations. Hearing a Republican offering an amendment 
to fund regulations makes it very tempting for me to support this 
amendment, since it is such a rare event.
  It is also ironic in that there is another possible Republican 
amendment preventing the CPSC from even proceeding to review comments 
submitted by the public on another regulation.
  These dueling amendments point out the obvious problem when Congress 
doesn't allow the proper process to proceed and instead cherry-picks 
where and when it wants to interfere. This is clearly just another 
attack on the IRS, and I oppose the amendment and hope all my 
colleagues will also do the same.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mrs. BLACKBURN. Mr. Chairman, in the interest of time, I think it 
would be instructive to my colleague to realize what we are doing is 
saying the agency doesn't have the right to continue to cherry-pick. 
Fourteen suggestions 3 years ago; we have been waiting for 2 years. 
They have said eight were approved.
  What we have is businesses who would like to expand the business, 
businesses that would like to bring American products to the American 
marketplace, and the third-party testing burden is placed on these 
businesses. The CPSC is not doing their job to create the right 
environment.
  I would encourage everyone to support this amendment. Let's make 
certain that these agencies do their job and work with the industry to 
be certain that we create the environment for jobs growth to take place 
in this country.
  With that, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. SERRANO. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Mr. Chair, on Wednesday, July 16, 2014, the House 
will complete its consideration of H.R. 5016, the Financial Services 
and General Government Appropriations bill. The bill includes two 
amendments that would weaken important consumer product safety 
protections. I strongly oppose both provisions, as well as the 
underlying bill.
  One of the provisions would reduce funding for the Internal Revenue 
Service (IRS) by $2 million and increase funding for the Consumer 
Product Safety Commission (CPSC) by $1 million. If that money would be 
dedicated to strengthening the CPSC's efforts to protect consumers, I 
might support it. However, it is the sponsor's intention that those 
additional CPSC funds be used to support the Commission's analysis of 
third-party testing to determine whether those requirements should be 
eased. That analysis has already been conducted by the CPSC. It sought 
public comment, reviewed the comments it received, and has so far not 
decided to revise its third-party testing requirements--a decision that 
is allowed under the statute. Throwing more money at the CPSC to redo 
an analysis it has already completed is a waste of taxpayer dollars, 
and it would do nothing to further the Commission's role of promoting 
the safety of American consumers.
  The other provision would prohibit funds from being used by the 
Commission to finalize, implement, or enforce the proposed ``voluntary 
recall'' rule. It would limit the CPSC's ability to explore possible 
changes that could reduce or eliminate recall delays, make recall 
notices more effective, or address the small number of firms that do 
not follow through on agreed-upon corrective action plans. While we 
have seen significant improvements in recalls since the Consumer 
Product Safety Improvement Act was signed into law almost six years 
ago, there is no justification for preventing the CPSC from continuing 
to enhance the voluntary recall process.
  The Consumer Product Safety Commission plays a critical role in 
protecting all Americans from hazardous products. This mission is too 
important for Congress to constrain CPSC's flexibility in determining, 
through an open and responsive process, the best way to carry out its 
goals.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentlewoman from Tennessee (Mrs. Blackburn).

[[Page 11917]]

  The amendment was agreed to.

                              {time}  2100


                     Amendment Offered by Mr. Gosar

  Mr. GOSAR. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk, No. 178.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Page 10, line 7, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced 
     by $353,000,000)''.
       Page 152, line 15, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $353,000,000)''.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 661, the gentleman 
from Arizona and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Arizona.
  Mr. GOSAR. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to offer a simple but important 
amendment which will save taxpayer money and demand accountability for 
one of the Federal Government's most invasive and rogue agencies--the 
IRS.
  This amendment reduces overall appropriations in the bill for the 
Internal Revenue Service by approximately 3 percent and brings funding 
for the IRS down to the FY 2007 appropriations. Current funding is 
between 2007 and 2008 levels. Additionally, my amendment still allows 
for more than $10.5 billion to go to the IRS. In this time during which 
we have over $7 trillion in debt and a deficit this year exceeding $500 
billion, this is a modest reduction at best. Again, this amendment only 
makes a 3 percent reduction to bring the appropriations in line with 
the 2007 appropriations.
  More directly than the financial condition of the country is the fact 
that this agency has shown contempt for the American taxpayer. It has 
ignored Congress and ignored subpoenas. It has stonewalled. It has 
destroyed evidence. It has lied. It has abused its powers and targeted 
honest Americans for exercising their political beliefs. The list of 
scandals and examples of mismanagement within the IRS seems to grow 
every day. This agency, which aggressively pursues American citizens it 
believes deserve extra scrutiny, must understand that the IRS is, first 
and foremost, accountable to the American people, not the other way 
around.
  John Adams said that facts are stubborn things. In April, this body 
held former IRS Commissioner Lois Lerner in contempt of Congress for 
her role and testimony in relation to the IRS' targeting of 
conservative groups. Ms. Lerner acted with reckless disregard for the 
constitutional rights of United States citizens while working at the 
IRS, and she must be held accountable. The blatant disregard of basic 
liberties and the use of a government agency to harass, target, 
intimidate, and threaten lawful, honest citizens was the worst form of 
authoritarianism.
  President Obama erroneously claimed that there isn't even a ``smidgen 
of corruption'' in the IRS targeting scandal, and yet a trail of emails 
proves otherwise. Further, Ms. Lerner is still refusing to testify on 
the grounds that she fears criminal prosecution. She should. She lied 
to Congress. She abused her position. She violated the rights of 
Americans. She tried to harm the electoral process and intimidate 
voters.
  Getting the truth and demanding accountability from President Obama's 
IRS should not be too much to ask for. Yet officials in this 
administration continue to offer excuses and half-truths for what has 
developed into a disturbing trend of waste, fraud, and abuse. Tax 
information about the President's political opponents has been leaked, 
Americans were targeted for their political beliefs, and senior 
executives were given bonuses for their work. Waste and inefficiency 
have plagued the agency for years. The Treasury inspector general has 
reported the IRS has been wasting upwards of $15 billion a year--yes, 
that is 15 billion with a ``b''--more than $140 billion since 2003, due 
to its failure to comply with Federal law to curb improper payments.
  Democrats and Republicans across the country have been demanding that 
Congress do something other than hold hearing after hearing about the 
problems at the IRS. This amendment does something that Congress has 
the complete power to do--it uses the power of the purse. As you know, 
we don't have a lot of other options, but we do know that the IRS 
scandal is one of the most serious scandals ever engaged in by any 
administration.
  How can the American people trust the Federal Government to use their 
tax dollars efficiently when the agency tasked with collecting them 
squanders billions before they can even be appropriated?
  This amendment simply brings IRS funding to the 2007 levels. The IRS 
must prove that it can be trusted with the hard-earned tax dollars of 
the American people before it asks Congress to increase its budget.
  If you disapprove of the IRS' targeting of conservative groups for 
their political beliefs, then support my amendment. If you disapprove 
of the IRS' ignoring of congressional subpoenas, then support my 
amendment. If you disapprove of this agency's stonewalling of Congress, 
destroying evidence, and lying to the American people, then support my 
amendment.
  I thank the chairman and the ranking member for their continued work 
on the committee.
  With that, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. SERRANO. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from New York is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. SERRANO. Mr. Chairman, the good news is that the whole bill is 
not on the IRS, so, eventually, we will move on to something else, and 
we won't see any more of these attacks.
  The IRS has already been cut overall by $341 million from last year's 
funding level. This will prevent the IRS from going after tax cheats--I 
know it is repetitious, but it is a fact--and from helping those who 
are attempting to obey the law. The Taxpayer Advocate has even said 
that the insufficient funding of the IRS is one of the most serious 
problems facing taxpayers.
  This underfunding will force the IRS to operate with 9,500 fewer 
staff, which means that less than 50 percent of taxpayers who reach out 
to the IRS for assistance on the telephone help line will be able to 
get it, and the waiting times for those who do get answers will rise to 
35 minutes or longer. As many as 24 million taxpayers will be unable to 
reach the IRS for assistance, and that is unacceptable. The cuts in 
this bill will also result in $2 billion in uncollected revenue 
compared to what could have been collected at the requested level, 
thereby increasing the deficit by that amount.
  I think what is being missed here tonight with all of these 
amendments is that, yes, there is a concern on the other side--and 
there was a concern here also, and there still may be--in terms of what 
went on and what needs to be straightened out, but the answer is not to 
cut the IRS down to bare bones, because our next problem will be that 
the deficit will continue to grow because we won't be able to do the 
proper collecting of tax dollars in this country.
  I oppose this amendment, and I urge that everyone else do so as well.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. GOSAR. Mr. Chairman, I would like to point out that this is a 3 
percent reduction, and it brings it back to 2007 levels. The Treasury 
inspector general has reported that the IRS has been wasting upwards of 
$15 billion a year--more than $140 billion since 2003--due to its 
failure to comply with Federal law to curb improper payments.
  I think what we could do is save taxpayers a lot more money if they 
just didn't call the IRS. This is a blatant disregard of basic civil 
liberties in the use of a government agency to harass, target, 
intimidate, and threaten lawful, honest citizens. We need to bring the 
IRS into compliance.
  With that, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR (Mr. Rodney Davis of Illinois). The question is on 
the amendment offered by the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Gosar).
  The amendment was agreed to.


             Amendment Offered by Mr. Huizenga of Michigan

  Mr. HUIZENGA of Michigan. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the 
desk.

[[Page 11918]]

  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Page 10, line 7, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced 
     by $788,111,800)''.
       Page 152, line 15, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $788,111,800)''.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 661, the gentleman 
from Michigan and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Michigan.
  Mr. HUIZENGA of Michigan. Mr. Chairman, my friend from New York was 
pointing out that, at some point, we are going to move on from the IRS, 
but I want to point out that this section is specifically about the 
enforcement of what the IRS has been doing.
  Last year, we learned that the IRS has been targeting American 
taxpayers for their political beliefs for the last 4 or 5 years. During 
this period, a culture of shading the truth was fostered and developed 
by directors and administrators throughout the IRS. Now this culture 
within the IRS has grown to one of stonewalling, doubletalk, and 
mistrust.
  It is up to Congress to use the power of the purse, Mr. Chairman, to 
rein in the IRS and force them to conduct their analysis in an unbiased 
manner. This is our constitutional tool. The IRS has proven itself to 
be unable to do so, which is why I am introducing this amendment that 
cuts more than $788 million from the IRS' budget. With the combined 
cuts in the underlying bill of $341 million, this will approximately 
cut the IRS' budget by 10 percent from its current funding levels. The 
underlying legislation takes a good step in the right direction, and 
many of the amendments, including the last one that was just adopted, 
are a step in the right direction, but I believe, unfortunately, that 
this doesn't go far enough.
  We need to keep in mind that the IRS is one of the most feared 
agencies within the Federal Government--left, right or center. They can 
freeze bank accounts, garnish wages, and seize assets with a flick of a 
pen. Congress needs to utilize the power of the purse--our 
constitutional tool and responsibility, I might add--to send the IRS a 
message to put an end to this newfound ``business as usual.''
  It is up to Congress to prevent the IRS from ever slipping back into 
its targeting practices. The best way to do that is to force them to 
consolidate their resources and prioritize. Congress, itself, has been 
forced to do this. Our own offices, Mr. Chairman, have been forced to 
do this over the last number of years, and there is no reason why the 
IRS cannot follow suit.
  We cannot allow the IRS to be used as a political weapon because, as 
I had pointed out, it doesn't matter if an American's political views 
are left of the spectrum, right of the spectrum or somewhere in 
between. The IRS is one of the most powerful agencies that we have, and 
for them to be injected into this process as a political weapon is 
simply wrong. Political targeting is not the only example, however, and 
this is not the real problem I am trying to get at. I believe there is 
another problem, which is a tax on those who cannot defend themselves. 
Political targeting is only a part of the story.
  The other one is, in 2012, a Taxpayer Advocate Service report found 
that 69 percent of individuals who claimed the adoption tax credit were 
audited by the IRS. Okay. That seems like a pretty aggressive move. 
Unfortunately, for the IRS, only 1.5 percent of the credits claimed 
were ever disallowed. The Taxpayer Advocate Service and the Government 
Accountability Office, the GAO, have both noted that the adoption 
credit claims represented less than one-tenth of 1 percent of all 
individual returns for the 2011 filing season. By comparison, the IRS 
spent approximately 3.5 percent of its total staff days on the initial 
reviews, correspondence, and audits of these adoption tax claims. Let 
me repeat that. One-tenth of 1 percent are the total claims, yet the 
IRS spends 3.5 percent of all of its staff days in pursuing these. This 
is not about tax cheats. This is about harassment. In essence, the IRS 
spent 35 times the number of work hours investigating adoptive parents 
compared to other tax filers.
  West Michigan, which is the area I represent, is blessed to have one 
of the highest adoption rates in the entire Nation, hardworking 
families who want to bring another into their homes, someone who has 
been abused or neglected. They should not have to be burdened by the 
echoing footsteps of the taxman.
  I am angry, Mr. Chairman. The American people are angry, and they 
should be. Clearly, the IRS has too much time on its hands and not 
enough focus. The recklessness with which the IRS is acting by 
targeting Americans for their political views or as to whether they 
have adopted a child is simply wrong, and it must be stopped 
immediately.
  With that, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. SERRANO. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from New York is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. SERRANO. Mr. Chairman, my early math tells me that, if the 
amendments that we just passed stick in conference, we have already cut 
$1.154 billion from enforcement. Those are the folks who are going to 
collect taxes from people who don't want to pay taxes.
  I continue to make my comments--again, sounding repetitious--that 
there has to be a moment when this stops, when we realize that, yes, 
there are issues that have to be dealt with at the IRS. There have 
always been issues that have had to be dealt with at the IRS, but the 
idea of zeroing out this account and zeroing out the enforcement 
account just does not make any sense. I would hope that we would just 
pay attention to that and pay attention to the fact that, while we may 
have differences with an agency, we have never, ever in the years that 
I have been here seen anyone, any party or any group, go after a 
particular agency the way we have gone after the IRS, not only tonight, 
but in the last few months.
  I yield back the balance of my time.

                              {time}  2115

  Mr. HUIZENGA of Michigan. Mr. Chairman, I am stunned that my 
amendment would be characterized as zeroing it out. In fact, my 
amendment provides $4.16 billion for IRS enforcement budget.
  I want to know what employer would reward unacceptable behavior. I 
think we have the answer, Mr. Chairman, and that is my colleagues 
across the aisle.
  This is a 19 percent cut to the enforcement budget, 10 percent cut 
overall. This brings us back to 2004-2005 levels and, in fact, this 
House approved a budget last year of $3.87 billion, so my amendment 
doesn't even bring us down as low as what had been passed by the House 
just last year.
  I urge passage of my amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Huizenga).
  The amendment was agreed to.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will read.
  The Clerk read as follows:

                           operations support

       For necessary expenses of the Internal Revenue Service to 
     support taxpayer services and enforcement programs, including 
     rent payments; facilities services; printing; postage; 
     physical security; headquarters and other IRS-wide 
     administration activities; research and statistics of income; 
     telecommunications; information technology development, 
     enhancement, operations, maintenance, and security; the hire 
     of passenger motor vehicles (31 U.S.C. 1343(b)); the 
     operations of the Internal Revenue Service Oversight Board; 
     and other services as authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109, at such 
     rates as may be determined by the Commissioner; 
     $3,620,000,000, of which not to exceed $300,000,000 shall 
     remain available until September 30, 2016, of which not to 
     exceed $10,000 shall be for official reception and 
     representation expenses: Provided, That not later than 30 
     days after the end of each quarter, the Internal Revenue 
     Service shall submit a report to the Committees on 
     Appropriations of the House of Representatives and the Senate 
     and the Comptroller General of the United States detailing 
     the cost and schedule performance for its major information 
     technology investments, including the purpose and life-cycle 
     stages of the investments; the reasons for

[[Page 11919]]

     any cost and schedule variances; the risks of such 
     investments and strategies the Internal Revenue Service is 
     using to mitigate such risks; and the expected developmental 
     milestones to be achieved and costs to be incurred in the 
     next quarter:  Provided further, That the Internal Revenue 
     Service shall include, in its budget justification for fiscal 
     year 2016, a summary of cost and schedule performance 
     information for its major information technology systems.


                     Amendment Offered by Mr. Camp

  Mr. CAMP. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Page 10, line 22, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(reduced by $2,000,000)''.
       Page 152, line 15, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $2,000,000)''.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 661, the gentleman 
from Michigan and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Michigan.
  Mr. CAMP. Mr. Chairman, on Friday, June 13, the IRS admitted to 
Congress that it had destroyed 2 years of Lois Lerner's documents--
documents at the very center of the IRS targeting individuals for their 
beliefs.
  The IRS buried this fact on page 15 of a 27-page document, 4 months 
after political appointees in the Obama administration had been 
informed that the emails were destroyed.
  When IRS Commissioner Koskinen came before the Ways and Means 
Committee earlier this year, he pledged transparency, stating, ``When I 
find out something, you will be the first to know.''
  Well, we now know that is not true, as the IRS has misled Congress 
and obstructed our investigation for months. The IRS even went so far 
as promising the Ways and Means Committee that it would receive all 
Lerner documents in May, after knowing that thousands of Lerner emails 
were destroyed and they could not possibly fulfill our request. This is 
inexcusable.
  Once the Ways and Means Committee learned of the destroyed emails, we 
asked that the IRS provide all information and documents related to the 
emails, as well as make IT employees available for interview. The IRS 
has refused this request and will not make IT employees available for 
interview.
  I come to the floor today to reduce by $2 million the IRS' funds for 
the Office of the Commissioner and Office of Legislative Affairs, who 
recently have attempted to obstruct this investigation and who have 
misled Congress and the American people.
  The Committee on Ways and Means will continue to pursue this 
investigation until we understand the full scope of the targeting and 
obtain all of the documents and interviews the committee has requested.
  The American people have lost trust in the IRS, and a full accounting 
of the targeting and those responsible is necessary before the IRS can 
hope to rebuild that trust.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield to the distinguished gentleman from Florida 
(Mr. Crenshaw).
  Mr. CRENSHAW. I thank the gentleman for yielding, and I just want him 
to know that I rise in strong support of this amendment.
  We have talked about the fact that the IRS has betrayed the trust of 
the American people, and if they are just going to circle the wagons, 
that is just going to raise more suspicion, so I urge adoption of this 
amendment.
  Mr. CAMP. Mr. Chairman, I yield to the distinguished gentleman from 
Louisiana (Mr. Boustany).
  Mr. BOUSTANY. Mr. Chairman, the Ways and Means Oversight 
Subcommittee, which I chair, launched this investigation about 2 years 
ago into the targeting of conservative organizations, and the IRS has 
continued to be evasive and obstructive. It is unacceptable.
  We have kept pressure on, and cracks are now showing, illustrating a 
culture at this agency that tolerates and even encourages politically 
motivated activity.
  Mr. Chairman, the IRS has lost credibility with the American people. 
Today, the American people view this agency as a tool of political 
intimidation and retribution, instead of an unbiased nonpolitical 
agency.
  The American people demand truth and justice in this matter, and so 
do I. No American should live in fear of an administration willing to 
use the IRS to inflict pain on those who they do not agree with 
ideologically. This amendment will help solve some of that.
  By reducing the commissioner and the Office of Legislative Affairs by 
$2 million, we will use the power of the purse to put them further on 
notice that they have to come clean on this. We will not stop until we 
get the answers.
  Mr. CAMP. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. SERRANO. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from New York is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. SERRANO. Mr. Chairman, this amendment is completely irresponsible 
and unnecessary.
  My colleague may be angry at the Internal Revenue Service, but 
defunding the very entities that would supply the information he is 
requesting is not going to get him that information any faster. These 
offices actually have nothing to do with setting a policy with regard 
to email retention.
  This amendment is simply another attempt to find a conspiracy where 
the Republican Party has been unable to find one previously.
  At this point, the IRS has spent at least $14 million providing 
hundreds of thousands of pages of information to the committees of 
jurisdiction here, and, instead of providing them with more money to 
provide more information, the majority wants to cut the IRS further.
  This is not a well-thought-out or responsible amendment, and I urge 
my colleagues to oppose it because it does exactly the opposite of what 
my colleague claims it would do.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. CAMP. Mr. Chairman, I yield to the distinguished gentleman from 
Texas (Mr. Brady), a member of the Ways and Means Committee.
  Mr. BRADY of Texas. Mr. Chairman, Chairman Camp's amendment simply 
seeks the truth. It seeks the truth about what the IRS knew, what they 
targeted, what they offered up--more importantly, simply to make 
available those on the staff who dealt with, supposedly, the loss of 
these emails.
  The fact of the matter is no government should ever try to silence 
the voices of Americans who simply disagree with it. Chairman Camp's 
investigation seeks the truth, to hold those accountable who violated 
the law, and to make sure this never happens again to any American, 
Republican, Democrat, any partisan stripe or independent thought.
  We deserve the truth. This amendment gets to the truth, and it should 
be accepted by Republicans and Democrats.
  Mr. CAMP. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Camp).
  The amendment was agreed to.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will read.
  The Clerk read as follows:

                     business systems modernization

       For necessary expenses of the Internal Revenue Service's 
     business systems modernization program, $250,000,000, to 
     remain available until September 30, 2017, for the capital 
     asset acquisition of information technology systems, 
     including management and related contractual costs of said 
     acquisitions, including related Internal Revenue Service 
     labor costs, and contractual costs associated with operations 
     authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109: Provided, That not later than 30 
     days after the end of each quarter, the Internal Revenue 
     Service shall submit a report to the Committees on 
     Appropriations of the House of Representatives and the Senate 
     and the Comptroller General of the United States detailing 
     the cost and schedule performance for CADE 2 and Modernized 
     e-File information technology investments, including the 
     purposes and life-cycle stages of the investments; the 
     reasons for any cost and schedule variances; the risks of 
     such investments and the strategies the Internal Revenue 
     Service is using to mitigate such risks; and the expected 
     developmental milestones to be achieved and costs to be 
     incurred in the next quarter.

[[Page 11920]]



          administrative provisions--internal revenue service

                     (including transfer of funds)

       Sec. 101.  Not to exceed 5 percent of any appropriation 
     made available in this Act to the Internal Revenue Service 
     may be transferred to any other Internal Revenue Service 
     appropriation upon the advance approval of the Committees on 
     Appropriations.
       Sec. 102.  The Internal Revenue Service shall maintain an 
     employee training program, which shall include the following 
     topics: taxpayers' rights, dealing courteously with 
     taxpayers, cross-cultural relations, ethics, and the 
     impartial application of tax law.
       Sec. 103.  The Internal Revenue Service shall institute and 
     enforce policies and procedures that will safeguard the 
     confidentiality of taxpayer information and protect taxpayers 
     against identity theft.
       Sec. 104.  Funds made available by this or any other Act to 
     the Internal Revenue Service shall be available for improved 
     facilities and increased staffing to provide sufficient and 
     effective 1-800 help line service for taxpayers. The 
     Commissioner shall continue to make improvements to the 
     Internal Revenue Service 1-800 help line service a priority 
     and allocate resources necessary to enhance the response time 
     to taxpayer communications, particularly with regard to 
     victims of tax-related crimes.
       Sec. 105.  None of the funds made available to the Internal 
     Revenue Service by this Act may be used to make a video 
     unless the Service-Wide Video Editorial Board determines in 
     advance that making the video is appropriate, taking into 
     account the cost, topic, tone, and purpose of the video.
       Sec. 106.  The Internal Revenue Service shall issue a 
     notice of confirmation of any address change relating to an 
     employer making employment tax payments, and such notice 
     shall be sent to both the employer's former and new address 
     and an officer or employee of the Internal Revenue Service 
     shall give special consideration to an offer-in-compromise 
     from a taxpayer who has been the victim of fraud by a third 
     party payroll tax preparer.
       Sec. 107.  None of the funds made available under this Act 
     may be used by the Internal Revenue Service to target 
     citizens of the United States for exercising any right 
     guaranteed under the First Amendment to the Constitution of 
     the United States.
       Sec. 108.  None of the funds made available in this Act may 
     be used by the Internal Revenue Service to target groups for 
     regulatory scrutiny based on their ideological beliefs.
       Sec. 109.  None of funds made available by this Act to the 
     Internal Revenue Service shall be obligated or expended on 
     conferences that do not adhere to the procedures, 
     verification processes, documentation requirements, and 
     policies issued by the Chief Financial Officer, Human Capital 
     Office, and Agency-Wide Shared Services as a result of the 
     recommendations in the report published on May 31, 2013, by 
     the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration 
     entitled ``Review of the August 2010 Small Business/Self-
     Employed Division's Conference in Anaheim, California'' 
     (Reference Number 2013-10-037).
       Sec. 110.  None of the funds made available by this Act may 
     be used to pay the salaries or expenses of any individual to 
     carry out any transfer of funds to the Internal Revenue 
     Service under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act 
     (Public Law 111-148) or the Health Care and Education 
     Reconciliation Act of 2010 (Public Law 111-152).
       Sec. 111.  None of the funds made available by this Act may 
     be used by the Internal Revenue Service to implement or 
     enforce section 5000A of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, 
     section 6055 of such Code, section 1502(c) of the Patient 
     Protection and Affordable Care Act (Public Law 111-148), or 
     any amendments made by section 1502(b) of such Act.
       Sec. 112.  None of the funds made available in this Act to 
     the Internal Revenue Service may be obligated or expended 
     under any bonus, award, or recognition program that does not 
     consider, with respect to determining whether an employee 
     should receive such program funds, the conduct and Federal 
     tax compliance of such employee.

         Administrative Provisions--Department of the Treasury

                     (including transfers of funds)

       Sec. 113.  Appropriations to the Department of the Treasury 
     in this Act shall be available for uniforms or allowances 
     therefor, as authorized by law (5 U.S.C. 5901), including 
     maintenance, repairs, and cleaning; purchase of insurance for 
     official motor vehicles operated in foreign countries; 
     purchase of motor vehicles without regard to the general 
     purchase price limitations for vehicles purchased and used 
     overseas for the current fiscal year; entering into contracts 
     with the Department of State for the furnishing of health and 
     medical services to employees and their dependents serving in 
     foreign countries; and services authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109.
       Sec. 114.  Not to exceed 2 percent of any appropriations in 
     this title made available under the headings ``Departmental 
     Offices--Salaries and Expenses'', ``Office of Inspector 
     General'', ``Special Inspector General for the Troubled Asset 
     Relief Program'', ``Financial Crimes Enforcement Network'', 
     ``Bureau of the Fiscal Service'', ``Alcohol and Tobacco Tax 
     and Trade Bureau'' and ``Community Development Financial 
     Institutions Fund Program Account'' may be transferred 
     between such appropriations upon the advance approval of the 
     Committees on Appropriations of the House of Representatives 
     and the Senate: Provided, That no transfer under this section 
     may increase or decrease any such appropriation by more than 
     2 percent.
       Sec. 115.  Not to exceed 2 percent of any appropriation 
     made available in this Act to the Internal Revenue Service 
     may be transferred to the Treasury Inspector General for Tax 
     Administration's appropriation upon the advance approval of 
     the Committees on Appropriations of the House of 
     Representatives and the Senate: Provided, That no transfer 
     may increase or decrease any such appropriation by more than 
     2 percent.
       Sec. 116.  None of the funds appropriated in this Act or 
     otherwise available to the Department of the Treasury or the 
     Bureau of Engraving and Printing may be used to redesign the 
     $1 Federal Reserve note.
       Sec. 117.  The Secretary of the Treasury may transfer funds 
     from the ``Bureau of the Fiscal Service-Salaries and 
     Expenses'' to the Debt Collection Fund as necessary to cover 
     the costs of debt collection: Provided, That such amounts 
     shall be reimbursed to such salaries and expenses account 
     from debt collections received in the Debt Collection Fund.
       Sec. 118.  None of the funds appropriated or otherwise made 
     available by this or any other Act may be used by the United 
     States Mint to construct or operate any museum without the 
     explicit approval of the Committees on Appropriations of the 
     House of Representatives and the Senate, the House Committee 
     on Financial Services, and the Senate Committee on Banking, 
     Housing, and Urban Affairs.
       Sec. 119.  None of the funds appropriated or otherwise made 
     available by this or any other Act or source to the 
     Department of the Treasury, the Bureau of Engraving and 
     Printing, and the United States Mint, individually or 
     collectively, may be used to consolidate any or all functions 
     of the Bureau of Engraving and Printing and the United States 
     Mint without the explicit approval of the House Committee on 
     Financial Services; the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, 
     and Urban Affairs; and the Committees on Appropriations of 
     the House of Representatives and the Senate.
       Sec. 120.  Funds appropriated by this Act, or made 
     available by the transfer of funds in this Act, for the 
     Department of the Treasury's intelligence or intelligence 
     related activities are deemed to be specifically authorized 
     by the Congress for purposes of section 504 of the National 
     Security Act of 1947 (50 U.S.C. 414) during fiscal year 2015 
     until the enactment of the Intelligence Authorization Act for 
     Fiscal Year 2015.
       Sec. 121.  Not to exceed $5,000 shall be made available 
     from the Bureau of Engraving and Printing's Industrial 
     Revolving Fund for necessary official reception and 
     representation expenses.
       Sec. 122.  The Secretary of the Treasury shall submit a 
     Capital Investment Plan to the Committees on Appropriations 
     of the Senate and the House of Representatives not later than 
     30 days following the submission of the annual budget 
     submitted by the President: Provided, That such Capital 
     Investment Plan shall include capital investment spending 
     from all accounts within the Department of the Treasury, 
     including but not limited to the Department-wide Systems and 
     Capital Investment Programs account, Treasury Franchise Fund 
     account, and the Treasury Forfeiture Fund account: Provided 
     further, That such Capital Investment Plan shall include 
     expenditures occurring in previous fiscal years for each 
     capital investment project that has not been fully completed.
       Sec. 123. (a) Not later than 2 weeks after the end of each 
     quarter, the Office of Financial Stability and the Office of 
     Financial Research shall submit reports on their activities 
     to the Committees on Appropriations of the House of 
     Representatives and the Senate, the Committee on Financial 
     Services of the House of Representatives and the Senate 
     Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs.
       (b) The reports required under subsection (a) shall 
     include--
       (1) the obligations made during the previous quarter by 
     object class, office, and activity;
       (2) the estimated obligations for the remainder of the 
     fiscal year by object class, office, and activity;
       (3) the number of full-time equivalents within each office 
     during the previous quarter;
       (4) the estimated number of full-time equivalents within 
     each office for the remainder of the fiscal year; and
       (5) actions taken to achieve the goals, objectives, and 
     performance measures of each office.
       (c) At the request of any such Committees specified in 
     subsection (a), the Office of Financial Stability and the 
     Office of Financial Research shall make officials available 
     to testify on the contents of the reports required under 
     subsection (a).
       Sec. 124.  Within 45 days after the date of enactment of 
     this Act, the Secretary of the Treasury shall submit an 
     itemized report to the Committees on Appropriations of the

[[Page 11921]]

     House of Representatives and the Senate on the amount of 
     total funds charged to each office by the Franchise Fund 
     including the amount charged for each service provided by the 
     Franchise Fund to each office, a detailed description of the 
     services, a detailed explanation of how each charge for each 
     service is calculated, and a description of the role 
     customers have in governing in the Franchise Fund.
       Sec. 125. (a) Section 155 of Public Law 111-203 is amended 
     as follows:
       (1) In subsection (b)--
       (A) in paragraph (1)--
       (i) by striking ``immediately''; and
       (ii) by inserting ``as provided for in appropriations 
     Acts'' after ``to the Office'';
       (B) by striking paragraph (2); and
       (C) by redesignating paragraph (3) as paragraph (2).
       (2) In subsection (d), by striking the heading and 
     inserting ``Assessment Schedule.--''.
       (b) The amendments made by subsection (a) shall take effect 
     on October 1, 2015.
       Sec. 126.  None of the funds made available in this Act may 
     be used to approve, license, facilitate, authorize, or 
     otherwise allow, whether by general or specific license, 
     travel-related or other transactions incident to non-academic 
     educational exchanges described in section 515.565(b)(2) of 
     title 31, Code of Federal Regulations.
       Sec. 127. (a) The Secretary of the Treasury and the 
     Secretary of Homeland Security shall provide a joint report 
     not later than 90 days after the enactment of this Act 
     regarding travel pursuant to sections 515.560(a)(1), 
     515.560(c)(4)(i), and 515.561 of title 31, Code of Federal 
     Regulations.
       (b) Such report shall include, for each fiscal year 
     beginning with 2007 under the aforementioned category of 
     travel:
       (1) number of travelers; average duration of stay for each 
     trip;
       (2) average amount of U.S. dollars spent per traveler;
       (3) number of return trips per year; and
       (4) total sum of U.S. dollars spent collectively in each 
     fiscal year.
       Sec. 128.  During fiscal year 2015--
       (1) none of the funds made available in this or any other 
     Act may be used by the Department of the Treasury, including 
     the Internal Revenue Service, to issue, revise, or finalize 
     any regulation, revenue ruling, or other guidance not limited 
     to a particular taxpayer relating to the standard which is 
     used to determine whether an organization is operated 
     exclusively for the promotion of social welfare for purposes 
     of section 501(c)(4) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 
     (including the proposed regulations published at 78 Fed. Reg. 
     71535 (November 29, 2013)); and
       (2) the standard and definitions as in effect on January 1, 
     2010, which are used to make such determinations shall apply 
     after the date of the enactment of this Act for purposes of 
     determining status under section 501(c)(4) of such Code of 
     organizations created on, before, or after such date.
       Sec. 129.  None of the funds appropriated or otherwise made 
     available in this Act may be obligated or expended to provide 
     for the enforcement of any rule, regulation, policy, or 
     guideline implemented pursuant to the Department of the 
     Treasury Guidance for U.S. Positions on MDBs Engaging with 
     Developing Countries on Coal-Fired Power Generation dated 
     October 29, 2013, when enforcement of such rule, regulation, 
     policy, or guideline would prohibit, or have the effect of 
     prohibiting, the carrying out of any coal-fired or other 
     power-generation project the purpose of which is to increase 
     exports of goods and services from the United States or 
     prevent the loss of jobs from the United States.
       Sec. 130.  The Secretary of the Treasury, in consultation 
     with the appropriate agencies, departments, bureaus, and 
     commissions that have expertise in terrorism and complex 
     financial instruments, shall provide a report to the 
     Committees on Appropriations of the House of Representatives 
     and Senate, the Committee on Financial Services of the House 
     of Representatives, and the Committee on Banking, Housing, 
     and Urban Affairs of the Senate not later than 90 days after 
     the date of enactment of this Act on economic warfare and 
     financial terrorism.
       Sec. 131.  Each calendar month beginning after the date of 
     the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of the Treasury 
     shall submit to the Committees on Appropriations of the House 
     of Representatives and the Senate, the Committee on Ways and 
     Means of the House of Representatives, and the Committee on 
     Finance of the Senate an accounting of the number of 
     individuals who have not paid the full amount of any premium 
     owed for the preceding month for coverage under a qualified 
     health plan that was enrolled in through an Exchange under 
     title I of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.
       This title may be cited as the ``Department of the Treasury 
     Appropriations Act, 2015''.

                                TITLE II

    EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT AND FUNDS APPROPRIATED TO THE 
                               PRESIDENT

                            The White House

                         salaries and expenses

       For necessary expenses for the White House as authorized by 
     law, including not to exceed $3,850,000 for services as 
     authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109 and 3 U.S.C. 105; subsistence 
     expenses as authorized by 3 U.S.C. 105, which shall be 
     expended and accounted for as provided in that section; hire 
     of passenger motor vehicles, and travel (not to exceed 
     $100,000 to be expended and accounted for as provided by 3 
     U.S.C. 103); and not to exceed $19,000 for official reception 
     and representation expenses, to be available for allocation 
     within the Executive Office of the President; and for 
     necessary expenses of the Office of Policy Development, 
     including services as authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109 and 3 
     U.S.C. 107, $55,000,000.

                 Executive Residence at the White House

                           operating expenses

       For necessary expenses of the Executive Residence at the 
     White House, $12,700,000, to be expended and accounted for as 
     provided by 3 U.S.C. 105, 109, 110, and 112-114.

                         reimbursable expenses

       For the reimbursable expenses of the Executive Residence at 
     the White House, such sums as may be necessary: Provided, 
     That all reimbursable operating expenses of the Executive 
     Residence shall be made in accordance with the provisions of 
     this paragraph: Provided further, That, notwithstanding any 
     other provision of law, such amount for reimbursable 
     operating expenses shall be the exclusive authority of the 
     Executive Residence to incur obligations and to receive 
     offsetting collections, for such expenses: Provided further, 
     That the Executive Residence shall require each person 
     sponsoring a reimbursable political event to pay in advance 
     an amount equal to the estimated cost of the event, and all 
     such advance payments shall be credited to this account and 
     remain available until expended: Provided further, That the 
     Executive Residence shall require the national committee of 
     the political party of the President to maintain on deposit 
     $25,000, to be separately accounted for and available for 
     expenses relating to reimbursable political events sponsored 
     by such committee during such fiscal year: Provided further, 
     That the Executive Residence shall ensure that a written 
     notice of any amount owed for a reimbursable operating 
     expense under this paragraph is submitted to the person owing 
     such amount within 60 days after such expense is incurred, 
     and that such amount is collected within 30 days after the 
     submission of such notice: Provided further, That the 
     Executive Residence shall charge interest and assess 
     penalties and other charges on any such amount that is not 
     reimbursed within such 30 days, in accordance with the 
     interest and penalty provisions applicable to an outstanding 
     debt on a United States Government claim under 31 U.S.C. 
     3717: Provided further, That each such amount that is 
     reimbursed, and any accompanying interest and charges, shall 
     be deposited in the Treasury as miscellaneous receipts: 
     Provided further, That the Executive Residence shall prepare 
     and submit to the Committees on Appropriations, by not later 
     than 90 days after the end of the fiscal year covered by this 
     Act, a report setting forth the reimbursable operating 
     expenses of the Executive Residence during the preceding 
     fiscal year, including the total amount of such expenses, the 
     amount of such total that consists of reimbursable official 
     and ceremonial events, the amount of such total that consists 
     of reimbursable political events, and the portion of each 
     such amount that has been reimbursed as of the date of the 
     report: Provided further, That the Executive Residence shall 
     maintain a system for the tracking of expenses related to 
     reimbursable events within the Executive Residence that 
     includes a standard for the classification of any such 
     expense as political or nonpolitical: Provided further, That 
     no provision of this paragraph may be construed to exempt the 
     Executive Residence from any other applicable requirement of 
     subchapter I or II of chapter 37 of title 31, United States 
     Code.

                   White House Repair and Restoration

       For the repair, alteration, and improvement of the 
     Executive Residence at the White House pursuant to 3 U.S.C. 
     105(d), $500,000, to remain available until expended, for 
     required maintenance, resolution of safety and health issues, 
     and continued preventative maintenance.

                      Council of Economic Advisers

                         salaries and expenses

       For necessary expenses of the Council of Economic Advisers 
     in carrying out its functions under the Employment Act of 
     1946 (15 U.S.C. 1021 et seq.), $3,765,000.

        National Security Council and Homeland Security Council

                         salaries and expenses

       For necessary expenses of the National Security Council and 
     the Homeland Security Council, including services as 
     authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109, $12,600,000.

                        Office of Administration

                         salaries and expenses

       For necessary expenses of the Office of Administration, 
     including services as authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109 and 3 
     U.S.C. 107, and hire of passenger motor vehicles, 
     $111,000,000, of which not to exceed $12,006,000 shall remain 
     available until expended for continued modernization of the 
     information technology infrastructure within the Executive 
     Office of the President.

[[Page 11922]]



                    Office of Management and Budget

                         salaries and expenses

       For necessary expenses of the Office of Management and 
     Budget, including hire of passenger motor vehicles and 
     services as authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109, to carry out the 
     provisions of chapter 35 of title 44, United States Code, and 
     to prepare and submit the budget of the United States 
     Government, in accordance with section 1105(a) of title 31, 
     United States Code, $89,300,000, of which not to exceed 
     $3,000 shall be available for official representation 
     expenses: Provided, That none of the funds appropriated in 
     this Act for the Office of Management and Budget may be used 
     for the purpose of reviewing any agricultural marketing 
     orders or any activities or regulations under the provisions 
     of the Agricultural Marketing Agreement Act of 1937 (7 U.S.C. 
     601 et seq.): Provided further, That none of the funds made 
     available for the Office of Management and Budget by this Act 
     may be expended for the altering of the transcript of actual 
     testimony of witnesses, except for testimony of officials of 
     the Office of Management and Budget, before the Committees on 
     Appropriations or their subcommittees: Provided further, That 
     none of the funds provided in this or prior Acts shall be 
     used, directly or indirectly, by the Office of Management and 
     Budget, for evaluating or determining if water resource 
     project or study reports submitted by the Chief of Engineers 
     acting through the Secretary of the Army are in compliance 
     with all applicable laws, regulations, and requirements 
     relevant to the Civil Works water resource planning process: 
     Provided further, That the Office of Management and Budget 
     shall have not more than 60 days in which to perform 
     budgetary policy reviews of water resource matters on which 
     the Chief of Engineers has reported: Provided further, That 
     the Director of the Office of Management and Budget shall 
     notify the appropriate authorizing and appropriating 
     committees when the 60-day review is initiated: Provided 
     further, That if water resource reports have not been 
     transmitted to the appropriate authorizing and appropriating 
     committees within 15 days after the end of the Office of 
     Management and Budget review period based on the notification 
     from the Director, Congress shall assume Office of Management 
     and Budget concurrence with the report and act accordingly: 
     Provided further, That the Director of the Office of 
     Management and Budget shall: (1) consult with each standing 
     committee in the House of Representatives and the Senate with 
     respect to the number of printed and electronic copies 
     (including the appendix, historical tables, and analytical 
     perspectives) of the President's fiscal year 2016 budget 
     request that each such committee requires; and (2) provide, 
     using the funds made available under this heading, each such 
     committee with the requisite number of copies by no later 
     than the date that the President submits such budget to 
     Congress pursuant to section 1105 of title 31, United States 
     Code: Provided further, That of the amounts made available 
     under this heading, $52,000,000 shall not be available for 
     obligation until the President submits to Congress the budget 
     of the United States Government for fiscal year 2016, in 
     accordance with section 1105(a) of title 31, United States 
     Code.

                 Office of National Drug Control Policy

                         salaries and expenses

       For necessary expenses of the Office of National Drug 
     Control Policy; for research activities pursuant to the 
     Office of National Drug Control Policy Reauthorization Act of 
     2006 (Public Law 109-469); not to exceed $10,000 for official 
     reception and representation expenses; and for participation 
     in joint projects or in the provision of services on matters 
     of mutual interest with nonprofit, research, or public 
     organizations or agencies, with or without reimbursement, 
     $22,000,000: Provided, That the Office is authorized to 
     accept, hold, administer, and utilize gifts, both real and 
     personal, public and private, without fiscal year limitation, 
     for the purpose of aiding or facilitating the work of the 
     Office.

                     federal drug control programs

             high intensity drug trafficking areas program

                     (including transfers of funds)

       For necessary expenses of the Office of National Drug 
     Control Policy's High Intensity Drug Trafficking Areas 
     Program, $245,000,000, to remain available until September 
     30, 2016, for drug control activities consistent with the 
     approved strategy for each of the designated High Intensity 
     Drug Trafficking Areas (``HIDTAs''), of which not less than 
     51 percent shall be transferred to State and local entities 
     for drug control activities and shall be obligated not later 
     than 120 days after enactment of this Act: Provided, That up 
     to 49 percent may be transferred to Federal agencies and 
     departments in amounts determined by the Director of the 
     Office of National Drug Control Policy, of which up to 
     $2,700,000 may be used for auditing services and associated 
     activities: Provided further, That, notwithstanding the 
     requirements of Public Law 106-58, any unexpended funds 
     obligated prior to fiscal year 2013 may be used for any other 
     approved activities of that HIDTA, subject to reprogramming 
     requirements: Provided further, That each HIDTA designated as 
     of September 30, 2014, shall be funded at not less than the 
     fiscal year 2014 base level, unless the Director submits to 
     the Committees on Appropriations of the House of 
     Representatives and the Senate justification for changes to 
     those levels based on clearly articulated priorities and 
     published Office of National Drug Control Policy performance 
     measures of effectiveness: Provided further, That the 
     Director shall notify the Committees on Appropriations of the 
     initial allocation of fiscal year 2015 funding among HIDTAs 
     not later than 45 days after enactment of this Act, and shall 
     notify the Committees of planned uses of discretionary HIDTA 
     funding, as determined in consultation with the HIDTA 
     Directors, not later than 90 days after enactment of this 
     Act.

                  other federal drug control programs

                     (including transfers of funds)

       For other drug control activities authorized by the Office 
     of National Drug Control Policy Reauthorization Act of 2006 
     (Public Law 109-469), $108,250,000, to remain available until 
     expended, which shall be available as follows: $95,000,000 
     for the Drug-Free Communities Program, of which $2,000,000 
     shall be made available as directed by section 4 of Public 
     Law 107-82, as amended by Public Law 109-469 (21 U.S.C. 1521 
     note); $1,400,000 for drug court training and technical 
     assistance; $8,600,000 for anti-doping activities; $2,000,000 
     for the United States membership dues to the World Anti-
     Doping Agency; and $1,250,000 shall be made available as 
     directed by section 1105 of Public Law 109-469: Provided, 
     That amounts made available under this heading may be 
     transferred to other Federal departments and agencies to 
     carry out such activities.

              Information Technology Oversight and Reform

                     (including transfer of funds)

       For necessary expenses for the furtherance of integrated, 
     efficient, secure, and effective uses of information 
     technology in the Federal Government, $9,000,000, to remain 
     available until expended:  Provided, That the Director of the 
     Office of Management and Budget may transfer these funds to 
     one or more other agencies to carry out projects to meet 
     these purposes:  Provided further, That the Director of the 
     Office of Management and Budget shall submit quarterly 
     reports not later than 45 days after the end of each quarter 
     to the Committees on Appropriations of the House of 
     Representatives and the Senate and the Government 
     Accountability Office identifying the savings achieved by the 
     Office of Management and Budget's government-wide information 
     technology reform efforts:  Provided further, That such 
     reports shall include savings identified by fiscal year, 
     agency, and appropriation.

                  Special Assistance to the President

                         salaries and expenses

       For necessary expenses to enable the Vice President to 
     provide assistance to the President in connection with 
     specially assigned functions; services as authorized by 5 
     U.S.C. 3109 and 3 U.S.C. 106, including subsistence expenses 
     as authorized by 3 U.S.C. 106, which shall be expended and 
     accounted for as provided in that section; and hire of 
     passenger motor vehicles, $4,200,000.

                Official Residence of the Vice President

                           operating expenses

                     (including transfer of funds)

       For the care, operation, refurnishing, improvement, and to 
     the extent not otherwise provided for, heating and lighting, 
     including electric power and fixtures, of the official 
     residence of the Vice President; the hire of passenger motor 
     vehicles; and not to exceed $81,000 pursuant to 3 U.S.C. 
     106(b)(2), $290,000: Provided, That advances, repayments, or 
     transfers from this appropriation may be made to any 
     department or agency for expenses of carrying out such 
     activities.

Administrative Provisions--Executive Office of the President and Funds 
                     Appropriated to the President

                     (including transfer of funds)

       Sec. 201.  From funds made available in this Act under the 
     headings ``The White House'', ``Executive Residence at the 
     White House'', ``White House Repair and Restoration'', 
     ``Council of Economic Advisers'', ``National Security Council 
     and Homeland Security Council'', ``Office of 
     Administration'', ``Special Assistance to the President'', 
     and ``Official Residence of the Vice President'', the 
     Director of the Office of Management and Budget (or such 
     other officer as the President may designate in writing), 
     may, with advance approval of the Committees on 
     Appropriations of the House of Representatives and the 
     Senate, transfer not to exceed 10 percent of any such 
     appropriation to any other such appropriation, to be merged 
     with and available for the same time and for the same 
     purposes as the appropriation to which transferred: Provided, 
     That the amount of an appropriation shall not be increased by 
     more than 50 percent by such transfers: Provided further, 
     That no amount shall be transferred from ``Special Assistance 
     to the President'' or ``Official Residence of the Vice 
     President'' without the approval of the Vice President.
       Sec. 202.  Within 90 days after the date of enactment of 
     this section, the Director of

[[Page 11923]]

     the Office of Management and Budget shall submit a report to 
     the Committees on Appropriations of the House of 
     Representatives and the Senate on the costs of implementing 
     the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act 
     (Public Law 111-203). Such report shall include--
       (1) the estimated mandatory and discretionary obligations 
     of funds through fiscal year 2019, by Federal agency and by 
     fiscal year, including--
       (A) the estimated obligations by cost inputs such as rent, 
     information technology, contracts, and personnel;
       (B) the methodology and data sources used to calculate such 
     estimated obligations; and
       (C) the specific section of such Act that requires the 
     obligation of funds; and
       (2) the estimated receipts through fiscal year 2019 from 
     assessments, user fees, and other fees by the Federal agency 
     making the collections, by fiscal year, including--
       (A) the methodology and data sources used to calculate such 
     estimated collections; and
       (B) the specific section of such Act that authorizes the 
     collection of funds.
       Sec. 203.  None of funds made available in this Act may be 
     used to pay the salaries and expenses of any officer or 
     employee of the Executive Office of the President to prepare, 
     sign, or approve statements abrogating legislation passed by 
     the House of Representatives and the Senate and signed by the 
     President.
       Sec. 204.  None of the funds made available by this Act may 
     be used to pay the salaries and expenses of any officer or 
     employee of the Executive Office of the President to prepare 
     or implement an Executive Order that contravenes existing 
     law.
       Sec. 205. (a) During fiscal year 2015, any Executive Order 
     issued by the President shall include a statement from the 
     Director of the Office of Management and Budget on the 
     budgetary impact of the Executive Order.
       (b) Any such statement shall include--
       (1) a narrative summary of the costs and revenue impacts of 
     such order on the Federal Government;
       (2) the impact on mandatory and discretionary obligations 
     and outlays, listed by Federal agency, for each year in the 
     5-fiscal year period beginning in fiscal year 2015; and
       (3) the impact on revenues of the Federal Government over 
     the 5-fiscal year period beginning in fiscal year 2015.
       (c) If an Executive Order is issued during fiscal year 2015 
     due to a national emergency, the Director of the Office of 
     Management and Budget may issue the statement required by 
     subsection (a) not later than 15 days after the date that the 
     Executive Order is issued.
       This title may be cited as the ``Executive Office of the 
     President Appropriations Act, 2015''.

                               TITLE III

                             THE JUDICIARY

                   Supreme Court of the United States

                         salaries and expenses

       For expenses necessary for the operation of the Supreme 
     Court, as required by law, excluding care of the building and 
     grounds, including hire of passenger motor vehicles as 
     authorized by 31 U.S.C. 1343 and 1344; not to exceed $10,000 
     for official reception and representation expenses; and for 
     miscellaneous expenses, to be expended as the Chief Justice 
     may approve, $74,937,000, of which $2,000,000 shall remain 
     available until expended.
       In addition, there are appropriated such sums as may be 
     necessary under current law for the salaries of the chief 
     justice and associate justices of the court.

                    care of the building and grounds

       For such expenditures as may be necessary to enable the 
     Architect of the Capitol to carry out the duties imposed upon 
     the Architect by 40 U.S.C. 6111 and 6112, $11,640,000, to 
     remain available until expended.

         United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

                         salaries and expenses

       For salaries of officers and employees, and for necessary 
     expenses of the court, as authorized by law, $30,192,000.
       In addition, there are appropriated such sums as may be 
     necessary under current law for the salaries of the chief 
     judge and judges of the court.

               United States Court of International Trade

                         salaries and expenses

       For salaries of officers and employees of the court, 
     services, and necessary expenses of the court, as authorized 
     by law, $17,807,000.
       In addition, there are appropriated such sums as may be 
     necessary under current law for the salaries of the chief 
     judge and judges of the court.

    Courts of Appeals, District Courts, and Other Judicial Services

                         salaries and expenses

       For the salaries of judges of the United States Court of 
     Federal Claims, magistrate judges, and all other officers and 
     employees of the Federal Judiciary not otherwise specifically 
     provided for, necessary expenses of the courts, and the 
     purchase, rental, repair, and cleaning of uniforms for 
     Probation and Pretrial Services Office staff, as authorized 
     by law, $4,784,659,000 (including the purchase of firearms 
     and ammunition); of which not to exceed $27,817,000 shall 
     remain available until expended for space alteration projects 
     and for costs related to new space alteration and 
     construction projects; and of which not to exceed $10,000,000 
     shall remain available until September 30, 2016, for the 
     Integrated Workplace Initiative: Provided, That the amount 
     provided for the Integrated Workplace Initiative shall not be 
     available for obligation until the Director of the 
     Administrative Office of the United States Courts submits a 
     report to the Committees on Appropriations of the House of 
     Representatives and the Senate showing that the estimated 
     cost savings resulting from the Initiative will exceed the 
     estimated amounts obligated for the Initiative.

                              {time}  2130


                     Amendment Offered by Mr. Gosar

  Mr. GOSAR. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Page 41, line 10, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $42,000,000)''.
       Page 67, line 16, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(reduced by $43,000,000)''.
       Page 71, line 3, after the dollar amount, insert ``(reduced 
     by $43,000,000)''.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 661, the gentleman 
from Arizona and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Arizona.
  Mr. GOSAR. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to offer an amendment to the 
Financial Services and General Government Appropriations Act for the 
fiscal year 2015.
  My amendment is simple. It transfers resources from the General 
Services Administration, also known as GSA, to the U.S. Court of 
Appeals, the U.S. district courts, our Nation's bankruptcy courts, and 
other related judicial programs.
  Specifically, it gives the U.S. court system an additional $42 
million, and it comes directly from the wasteful spending within the 
GSA. The $42 million transfer to the courts will put their budget in 
line with the budget request for fiscal year '15.
  Let me say that I have taken issue with government waste since my 
very first days in Congress. I knew it was bad, but I did not fully 
comprehend how bad things were until I actually got here and started to 
get my hands dirty while digging around for waste, fraud, and abuse.
  I take particular issue with the GSA. The mission of the GSA is to 
``deliver the best value in real estate, acquisition, and technology 
services to government and the American people.''
  Given the major GSA scandal involving wasting hundreds of thousands 
of dollars on conferences with clowns and fortunetellers and on YouTube 
rap videos, it is clear employees within this agency have lost sight of 
this mission.
  Furthermore, by our government's own estimates, there may be 77,000 
empty or underutilized buildings across the country. The Office of 
Management and Budget estimates these buildings could be wasting hard-
earned taxpayer dollars at a rate of up to $1.7 billion a year--yes, 
$1.7 billion. That is astonishing.
  We are even spending money on buildings that are completely empty 
because the grass needs mowing, the pipes must be maintained, the 
fences surrounding the buildings must be checked and repaired, and the 
list goes on and on.
  Again, I truly appreciate and applaud the excellent work the 
committee has done on this bill. It is a particularly tough one to 
craft this year in the wake of the IRS scandals and others.
  I do take issue with any increase whatsoever to GSA's budget for 
rental of space. We are wasting billions on empty buildings, and we are 
worried about billions in rental agreements--$5.5 billion in rental 
agreements.
  I would also like to note that the amount proposed in the underlying 
bill is over $700 million more than the entire court system of the 
United States. We are talking the Supreme Court, appellate courts, 
circuit courts, bankruptcy courts, and other Justice offices and 
initiatives.
  They are the third branch of government, and their budget is still 
$700 million less than the money spent on rental agreements.

[[Page 11924]]

  The judiciary enforces the rule of law, and it administers justice in 
a fair and impartial manner. In fact, it is our justice system that is 
possibly America's most attractive component to others around the world 
that yearn to be free and have a fair day in court, those who yearn for 
rights under the law.
  So, you see, there is something wrong with this disproportionate 
appropriation. One is for billions in waste, while the courts struggle 
with a steady rise in their caseload. Again, we are spending more than 
$700 million more on rent space than our courts, and we are wasting 
nearly $2 billion a year on buildings being empty or underutilized.
  At this point, this amendment should speak for itself. We are wasting 
billions on rent when we have empty spaces all over the place. We must 
either sell the empty buildings or cut GSA's rental of space budget. I 
urge my colleagues to vote in favor of my commonsense amendment.
  I thank the chairman and ranking member for their continued 
leadership on the committee, and with that, I yield back the balance of 
my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Gosar).
  The amendment was agreed to.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will read.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       In addition, there are appropriated such sums as may be 
     necessary under current law for the salaries of circuit and 
     district judges (including judges of the territorial courts 
     of the United States), bankruptcy judges, and justices and 
     judges retired from office or from regular active service.
       In addition, for expenses of the United States Court of 
     Federal Claims associated with processing cases under the 
     National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986 (Public Law 99-
     660), not to exceed $5,423,000, to be appropriated from the 
     Vaccine Injury Compensation Trust Fund.

                           defender services

       For the operation of Federal Defender organizations; the 
     compensation and reimbursement of expenses of attorneys 
     appointed to represent persons under 18 U.S.C. 3006A and 
     3599, and for the compensation and reimbursement of expenses 
     of persons furnishing investigative, expert, and other 
     services for such representations as authorized by law; the 
     compensation (in accordance with the maximums under 18 U.S.C. 
     3006A) and reimbursement of expenses of attorneys appointed 
     to assist the court in criminal cases where the defendant has 
     waived representation by counsel; the compensation and 
     reimbursement of expenses of attorneys appointed to represent 
     jurors in civil actions for the protection of their 
     employment, as authorized by 28 U.S.C. 1875(d)(1); the 
     compensation and reimbursement of expenses of attorneys 
     appointed under 18 U.S.C. 983(b)(1) in connection with 
     certain judicial civil forfeiture proceedings; the 
     compensation and reimbursement of travel expenses of 
     guardians ad litem appointed under 18 U.S.C. 4100(b); and for 
     necessary training and general administrative expenses, 
     $1,044,394,000, to remain available until expended.

                    fees of jurors and commissioners

       For fees and expenses of jurors as authorized by 28 U.S.C. 
     1871 and 1876; compensation of jury commissioners as 
     authorized by 28 U.S.C. 1863; and compensation of 
     commissioners appointed in condemnation cases pursuant to 
     rule 71.1(h) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (28 
     U.S.C. Appendix Rule 71.1(h)), $55,827,000, to remain 
     available until expended: Provided, That the compensation of 
     land commissioners shall not exceed the daily equivalent of 
     the highest rate payable under 5 U.S.C. 5332.

                             court security

                     (including transfers of funds)

       For necessary expenses, not otherwise provided for, 
     incident to the provision of protective guard services for 
     United States courthouses and other facilities housing 
     Federal court operations, and the procurement, installation, 
     and maintenance of security systems and equipment for United 
     States courthouses and other facilities housing Federal court 
     operations, including building ingress-egress control, 
     inspection of mail and packages, directed security patrols, 
     perimeter security, basic security services provided by the 
     Federal Protective Service, and other similar activities as 
     authorized by section 1010 of the Judicial Improvement and 
     Access to Justice Act (Public Law 100-702), $525,763,000, of 
     which not to exceed $15,000,000 shall remain available until 
     expended, to be expended directly or transferred to the 
     United States Marshals Service, which shall be responsible 
     for administering the Judicial Facility Security Program 
     consistent with standards or guidelines agreed to by the 
     Director of the Administrative Office of the United States 
     Courts and the Attorney General.

           Administrative Office of the United States Courts

                         salaries and expenses

       For necessary expenses of the Administrative Office of the 
     United States Courts as authorized by law, including travel 
     as authorized by 31 U.S.C. 1345, hire of a passenger motor 
     vehicle as authorized by 31 U.S.C. 1343(b), advertising and 
     rent in the District of Columbia and elsewhere, $82,824,000, 
     of which not to exceed $8,500 is authorized for official 
     reception and representation expenses.

                        Federal Judicial Center

                         salaries and expenses

       For necessary expenses of the Federal Judicial Center, as 
     authorized by Public Law 90-219, $26,724,000; of which 
     $1,800,000 shall remain available through September 30, 2016, 
     to provide education and training to Federal court personnel; 
     and of which not to exceed $1,500 is authorized for official 
     reception and representation expenses.

                  United States Sentencing Commission

                         salaries and expenses

       For the salaries and expenses necessary to carry out the 
     provisions of chapter 58 of title 28, United States Code, 
     $16,556,000, of which not to exceed $1,000 is authorized for 
     official reception and representation expenses.

                Administrative Provisions--The Judiciary

                     (including transfer of funds)

       Sec. 301.  Appropriations and authorizations made in this 
     title which are available for salaries and expenses shall be 
     available for services as authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109.
       Sec. 302.  Not to exceed 5 percent of any appropriation 
     made available for the current fiscal year for the Judiciary 
     in this Act may be transferred between such appropriations, 
     but no such appropriation, except ``Courts of Appeals, 
     District Courts, and Other Judicial Services, Defender 
     Services'' and ``Courts of Appeals, District Courts, and 
     Other Judicial Services, Fees of Jurors and Commissioners'', 
     shall be increased by more than 10 percent by any such 
     transfers: Provided, That any transfer pursuant to this 
     section shall be treated as a reprogramming of funds under 
     sections 604 and 608 of this Act and shall not be available 
     for obligation or expenditure except in compliance with the 
     procedures set forth in section 608.
       Sec. 303.  Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the 
     salaries and expenses appropriation for ``Courts of Appeals, 
     District Courts, and Other Judicial Services'' shall be 
     available for official reception and representation expenses 
     of the Judicial Conference of the United States: Provided, 
     That such available funds shall not exceed $11,000 and shall 
     be administered by the Director of the Administrative Office 
     of the United States Courts in the capacity as Secretary of 
     the Judicial Conference.
       Sec. 304.  Section 3314(a) of title 40, United States Code, 
     shall be applied by substituting ``Federal'' for 
     ``executive'' each place it appears.
       Sec. 305.  In accordance with 28 U.S.C. 561-569, and 
     notwithstanding any other provision of law, the United States 
     Marshals Service shall provide, for such courthouses as its 
     Director may designate in consultation with the Director of 
     the Administrative Office of the United States Courts, for 
     purposes of a pilot program, the security services that 40 
     U.S.C. 1315 authorizes the Department of Homeland Security to 
     provide, except for the services specified in 40 U.S.C. 
     1315(b)(2)(E). For building-specific security services at 
     these courthouses, the Director of the Administrative Office 
     of the United States Courts shall reimburse the United States 
     Marshals Service rather than the Department of Homeland 
     Security.
       Sec. 306. (a) Section 203(c) of the Judicial Improvements 
     Act of 1990 (Public Law 101-650; 28 U.S.C. 133 note), is 
     amended in the second sentence (relating to the District of 
     Kansas) following paragraph (12), by striking ``23 years and 
     6 months'' and inserting ``24 years and 6 months''.
       (b) Section 406 of the Transportation, Treasury, Housing 
     and Urban Development, the Judiciary, the District of 
     Columbia, and Independent Agencies Appropriations Act, 2006 
     (Public Law 109-115; 119 Stat. 2470; 28 U.S.C. 133 note) is 
     amended in the second sentence (relating to the eastern 
     District of Missouri) by striking ``21 years and 6 months'' 
     and inserting ``22 years and 6 months''.
       (c) Section 312(c)(2) of the 21st Century Department of 
     Justice Appropriations Authorization Act (Public Law 107-273; 
     28 U.S.C. 133 note), is amended--
       (1) in the first sentence by striking ``12 years'' and 
     inserting ``13 years'';
       (2) in the second sentence (relating to the central 
     District of California), by striking ``11 years and 6 
     months'' and inserting ``12 years and 6 months''; and
       (3) in the third sentence (relating to the western District 
     of North Carolina), by striking ``10 years'' and inserting 
     ``11 years''.
       Sec. 307.  Section 84(b) of title 28, United States Code, 
     is amended in the second sentence by inserting 
     ``Bakersfield,'' after ``shall be held at''.
       This title may be cited as the ``Judiciary Appropriations 
     Act, 2015''.

[[Page 11925]]



                                TITLE IV

                          DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

                             Federal Funds

              federal payment for resident tuition support

       For a Federal payment to the District of Columbia, to be 
     deposited into a dedicated account, for a nationwide program 
     to be administered by the Mayor, for District of Columbia 
     resident tuition support, $20,000,000, to remain available 
     until expended: Provided, That such funds, including any 
     interest accrued thereon, may be used on behalf of eligible 
     District of Columbia residents to pay an amount based upon 
     the difference between in-State and out-of-State tuition at 
     public institutions of higher education, or to pay up to 
     $2,500 each year at eligible private institutions of higher 
     education: Provided further, That the awarding of such funds 
     may be prioritized on the basis of a resident's academic 
     merit, the income and need of eligible students and such 
     other factors as may be authorized: Provided further, That 
     the District of Columbia government shall maintain a 
     dedicated account for the Resident Tuition Support Program 
     that shall consist of the Federal funds appropriated to the 
     Program in this Act and any subsequent appropriations, any 
     unobligated balances from prior fiscal years, and any 
     interest earned in this or any fiscal year: Provided further, 
     That the account shall be under the control of the District 
     of Columbia Chief Financial Officer, who shall use those 
     funds solely for the purposes of carrying out the Resident 
     Tuition Support Program: Provided further, That the Office of 
     the Chief Financial Officer shall provide a quarterly 
     financial report to the Committees on Appropriations of the 
     House of Representatives and the Senate for these funds 
     showing, by object class, the expenditures made and the 
     purpose therefor.

   federal payment for emergency planning and security costs in the 
                          district of columbia

       For a Federal payment of necessary expenses, as determined 
     by the Mayor of the District of Columbia in written 
     consultation with the elected county or city officials of 
     surrounding jurisdictions, $10,000,000, to remain available 
     until expended, for the costs of providing public safety at 
     events related to the presence of the National Capital in the 
     District of Columbia, including support requested by the 
     Director of the United States Secret Service in carrying out 
     protective duties under the direction of the Secretary of 
     Homeland Security, and for the costs of providing support to 
     respond to immediate and specific terrorist threats or 
     attacks in the District of Columbia or surrounding 
     jurisdictions.

           federal payment to the district of columbia courts

       For salaries and expenses for the District of Columbia 
     Courts, $234,400,000 to be allocated as follows: for the 
     District of Columbia Court of Appeals, $13,400,000, of which 
     not to exceed $2,500 is for official reception and 
     representation expenses; for the Superior Court of the 
     District of Columbia, $115,000,000, of which not to exceed 
     $2,500 is for official reception and representation expenses; 
     for the District of Columbia Court System, $70,000,000, of 
     which not to exceed $2,500 is for official reception and 
     representation expenses; and $36,000,000, to remain available 
     until September 30, 2016, for capital improvements for 
     District of Columbia courthouse facilities: Provided, That 
     funds made available for capital improvements shall be 
     expended consistent with the District of Columbia Courts 
     master plan study and facilities condition assessment: 
     Provided further, That notwithstanding any other provision of 
     law, all amounts under this heading shall be apportioned 
     quarterly by the Office of Management and Budget and 
     obligated and expended in the same manner as funds 
     appropriated for salaries and expenses of other Federal 
     agencies: Provided further, That, 30 days after providing 
     written notice to the Committees on Appropriations of the 
     House of Representatives and the Senate, the District of 
     Columbia Courts may reallocate not more than $6,000,000 of 
     the funds provided under this heading among the items and 
     entities funded under this heading: Provided further, That, 
     the Joint Committee on Judicial Administration in the 
     District of Columbia may, by regulation, establish a program 
     substantially similar to the program set forth in subchapter 
     II of chapter 35 of title 5, United States Code, for 
     employees of the District of Columbia Courts.

  federal payment for defender services in district of columbia courts

       For payments authorized under section 11-2604 and section 
     11-2605, D.C. Official Code (relating to representation 
     provided under the District of Columbia Criminal Justice 
     Act), payments for counsel appointed in proceedings in the 
     Family Court of the Superior Court of the District of 
     Columbia under chapter 23 of title 16, D.C. Official Code, or 
     pursuant to contractual agreements to provide guardian ad 
     litem representation, training, technical assistance, and 
     such other services as are necessary to improve the quality 
     of guardian ad litem representation, payments for counsel 
     appointed in adoption proceedings under chapter 3 of title 
     16, D.C. Official Code, and payments authorized under section 
     21-2060, D.C. Official Code (relating to services provided 
     under the District of Columbia Guardianship, Protective 
     Proceedings, and Durable Power of Attorney Act of 1986), 
     $49,890,000, to remain available until expended: Provided, 
     That funds provided under this heading shall be administered 
     by the Joint Committee on Judicial Administration in the 
     District of Columbia: Provided further, That, notwithstanding 
     any other provision of law, this appropriation shall be 
     apportioned quarterly by the Office of Management and Budget 
     and obligated and expended in the same manner as funds 
     appropriated for expenses of other Federal agencies.

 federal payment to the court services and offender supervision agency 
                      for the district of columbia

       For salaries and expenses, including the transfer and hire 
     of motor vehicles, of the Court Services and Offender 
     Supervision Agency for the District of Columbia, as 
     authorized by the National Capital Revitalization and Self-
     Government Improvement Act of 1997, $228,500,000, of which 
     not to exceed $2,000 is for official reception and 
     representation expenses related to Community Supervision and 
     Pretrial Services Agency program, of which not to exceed 
     $25,000 is for dues and assessments relating to the 
     implementation of the Court Services and Offender Supervision 
     Agency Interstate Supervision Act of 2002; of which 
     $169,000,000 shall be for necessary expenses of Community 
     Supervision and Sex Offender Registration, to include 
     expenses relating to the supervision of adults subject to 
     protection orders or the provision of services for or related 
     to such persons, of which up to $6,990,000 shall remain 
     available until September 30, 2017, for the relocation of an 
     offender supervision field office; and of which $59,500,000 
     shall be available to the Pretrial Services Agency: Provided, 
     That notwithstanding any other provision of law, all amounts 
     under this heading shall be apportioned quarterly by the 
     Office of Management and Budget and obligated and expended in 
     the same manner as funds appropriated for salaries and 
     expenses of other Federal agencies: Provided further, That 
     amounts under this heading may be used for programmatic 
     incentives for offenders and defendants successfully meeting 
     terms of supervision: Provided further, That the Director is 
     authorized to accept and use gifts in the form of in-kind 
     contributions of the following: space and hospitality to 
     support offender and defendant programs; equipment, supplies, 
     and vocational training services necessary to sustain, 
     educate, and train offenders and defendants, including their 
     dependent children; and programmatic incentives for offenders 
     and defendants meeting terms of supervision: Provided 
     further, That the Director shall keep accurate and detailed 
     records of the acceptance and use of any gift under the 
     previous proviso, and shall make such records available for 
     audit and public inspection: Provided further, That the Court 
     Services and Offender Supervision Agency Director is 
     authorized to accept and use reimbursement from the District 
     of Columbia Government for space and services provided on a 
     cost reimbursable basis.

  federal payment to the district of columbia public defender service

       For salaries and expenses, including the transfer and hire 
     of motor vehicles, of the District of Columbia Public 
     Defender Service, as authorized by the National Capital 
     Revitalization and Self-Government Improvement Act of 1997, 
     $41,000,000: Provided, That, notwithstanding any other 
     provision of law, all amounts under this heading shall be 
     apportioned quarterly by the Office of Management and Budget 
     and obligated and expended in the same manner as funds 
     appropriated for salaries and expenses of Federal agencies: 
     Provided further, That, notwithstanding section 1342 of title 
     31, United States Code, and in addition to the authority 
     provided by section 307(b) of the District of Columbia Court 
     Reform and Criminal Procedure Act (sec. 2-1607(b), D.C. 
     Official Code), upon approval of the Board of Trustees of the 
     District of Columbia Public Defender Service, the District of 
     Columbia Public Defender Service may accept and use voluntary 
     and uncompensated services for the purpose of aiding or 
     facilitating the work of the District of Columbia Public 
     Defender Service.

      federal payment to the criminal justice coordinating council

       For a Federal payment to the Criminal Justice Coordinating 
     Council, $1,900,000, to remain available until expended, to 
     support initiatives related to the coordination of Federal 
     and local criminal justice resources in the District of 
     Columbia.

                federal payment for judicial commissions

       For a Federal payment, to remain available until September 
     30, 2016, to the Commission on Judicial Disabilities and 
     Tenure, $295,000, and for the Judicial Nomination Commission, 
     $255,000.

                 federal payment for school improvement

       For a Federal payment for a school improvement program in 
     the District of Columbia, $45,000,000, to remain available 
     until expended, for payments authorized under the Scholarship 
     for Opportunity and Results Act

[[Page 11926]]

     (division C of Public Law 112-10): Provided, That, to the 
     extent that funds are available for opportunity scholarships 
     and following the priorities included in section 3006 of such 
     Act, the Secretary of Education shall make scholarships 
     available to students eligible under section 3013(3) of such 
     Act (Public Law 112-10; 125 Stat. 211) including students who 
     were not offered a scholarship during any previous school 
     year: Provided further, That within funds provided for 
     opportunity scholarships $3,000,000 shall be for the 
     activities specified in sections 3007(b) through 3007(d) and 
     3009 of the Act.

      federal payment for the district of columbia national guard

       For a Federal payment to the District of Columbia National 
     Guard, $375,000, to remain available until expended for the 
     Major General David F. Wherley, Jr. District of Columbia 
     National Guard Retention and College Access Program.

         federal payment for testing and treatment of hiv/aids

       For a Federal payment to the District of Columbia for the 
     testing of individuals for, and the treatment of individuals 
     with, human immunodeficiency virus and acquired 
     immunodeficiency syndrome in the District of Columbia, 
     $5,000,000.

                       District of Columbia Funds

       Local funds are appropriated for the District of Columbia 
     for the current fiscal year out of the General Fund of the 
     District of Columbia (``General Fund'') for programs and 
     activities set forth under the heading ``District of Columbia 
     Funds Summary of Expenses'' and at the rate set forth under 
     such heading, as included in the Fiscal Year 2015 Budget 
     Request Act of 2014 submitted to the Congress by the District 
     of Columbia as amended as of the date of enactment of this 
     Act: Provided, That notwithstanding any other provision of 
     law, except as provided in section 450A of the District of 
     Columbia Home Rule Act (section 1-204.50a, D.C. Official 
     Code), sections 816 and 817 of the Financial Services and 
     General Government Appropriations Act, 2009 (secs. 47-369.01 
     and 47-369.02, D.C. Official Code), and provisions of this 
     Act, the total amount appropriated in this Act for operating 
     expenses for the District of Columbia for fiscal year 2015 
     under this heading shall not exceed the estimates included in 
     the Fiscal Year 2015 Budget Request Act of 2014 submitted to 
     Congress by the District of Columbia as amended as of the 
     date of enactment of this Act or the sum of the total 
     revenues of the District of Columbia for such fiscal year: 
     Provided further, That the amount appropriated may be 
     increased by proceeds of one-time transactions, which are 
     expended for emergency or unanticipated operating or capital 
     needs: Provided further, That such increases shall be 
     approved by enactment of local District law and shall comply 
     with all reserve requirements contained in the District of 
     Columbia Home Rule Act: Provided further, That the Chief 
     Financial Officer of the District of Columbia shall take such 
     steps as are necessary to assure that the District of 
     Columbia meets these requirements, including the apportioning 
     by the Chief Financial Officer of the appropriations and 
     funds made available to the District during fiscal year 2015, 
     except that the Chief Financial Officer may not reprogram for 
     operating expenses any funds derived from bonds, notes, or 
     other obligations issued for capital projects.
       This title may be cited as the ``District of Columbia 
     Appropriations Act, 2015''.

                                TITLE V

                          INDEPENDENT AGENCIES

             Administrative Conference of the United States

                         salaries and expenses

       For necessary expenses of the Administrative Conference of 
     the United States, authorized by 5 U.S.C. 591 et seq., 
     $3,000,000, to remain available until September 30, 2016, of 
     which not to exceed $1,000 is for official reception and 
     representation expenses.

                Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection

                       administrative provisions

       Sec. 501.  Section 1017(a)(2)(C) of Public Law 111-203 is 
     repealed.


                     Amendment Offered by Ms. Moore

  Ms. MOORE. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Page 59, beginning on line 20, strike section 501.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 661, the gentlewoman 
from Wisconsin and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Wisconsin.
  Ms. MOORE. I will tell you, Mr. Chair, if the Affordable Care Act, 
so-called ObamaCare, is the ultimate tempest for the Tea Party pot, 
then I guess the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, the CFPB, is a 
very, very close second.
  Since assuming the majority in 2010, House Republicans have passed 
bill after bill to gut and undermine the Consumer Financial Protection 
Bureau. Frankly, I have just lost track of all the bills and attempts 
by the majority to undermine our Nation's top financial consumer 
watchdog.
  It is well documented that Congress wanted its funding to be free of 
political influence when it created the Bureau. In order to protect the 
consumers, it needed to be free of political influence.
  So, Mr. Chair, my amendment strikes the provision in the Financial 
Services Appropriations bill, section 501, that the House is 
considering today, as it is nothing more than yet another effort by the 
majority to derail the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau from its 
mission to protect consumers.
  Originally, I had my staff draft an amendment to delete sections 501 
and 502, but after consulting with the CBO, I was informed that 
striking section 502 would score as a cost to the bill.
  I wanted to make sure that there would be no objection based on 
adding a cost to the bill, so in order to make my amendment in order, 
my amendment just strikes section 501 and not 502.
  Let me be clear, Mr. Chairman, both sections 501 and 502 of the bill 
before us today undermine the CFPB. They would alter the independent 
funding process and vision for the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau 
that was established in Dodd-Frank, the Wall Street Reform and Consumer 
Protection Act.
  This is consistent with other independent banking regulatory 
agencies. Other independent banking regulatory agencies are not at the 
beck and call of the Appropriations Committee and whoever is in control 
of the political environment.
  What has the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, our Nation's 
consumer watchdog, done for us lately? What has it done for consumers?
  Well, Mr. Chair, the agency has refunded $3 billion to 9.7 million 
victims of unfair, deceptive, and abusive practices in financial 
markets since 2011. The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau has helped 
millions of people and has stopped fraud.
  The dedicated mission of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, to 
protect consumers of financial products from fraud and deceptive 
schemes, inspires trust in our markets, which attracts capital and 
promotes the allocation of capital to productive, legitimate endeavors.

                              {time}  2145

  The CFPB is the tough cop on Wall Street, but it is also the fair cop 
on the Wall Street beat.
  The amendment before you, Mr. Chair, that I am offering affirms the 
current independent funding source for the CFPB, which is the best way 
to preserve the integrity and independence of the agency.
  Now, I know that Republicans plead that this provision is about 
oversight or transparency. But when you scratch the surface, you will 
realize that the claim is just not credible. It is just yet another 
attempt to undermine the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, and, 
ultimately, it seeks to defund the CFPB and make it a paper tiger. It 
seeks a return to the bad old days, Mr. Chair, and bad old ways that 
set the stage for the 2008 financial crisis.
  I really do urge all Members to support my amendment and to support 
the working independence of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau so 
the agency may continue to ensure U.S. markets are the fairest and most 
robust in the world.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. CRENSHAW. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Florida is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. CRENSHAW. Mr. Chairman, congressional oversight makes agencies 
both more responsive and more responsible.
  The Dodd-Frank Act authorizes the CFPB to fund itself by drawing 
money from the Federal Reserve to the extent that the Bureau Director 
deems necessary--necessary--that is all he has to

[[Page 11927]]

say. Now, the Fed doesn't oversee the Bureau. They don't exercise any 
authority over it, but they must transfer whatever funds the Bureau 
requests, up to $600 million. And since 2011, the Bureau has diverted 
over $1.5 billion--$1.5 billion--from the Fed, and those are funds that 
would otherwise be applied for deficit reduction, without any 
congressional input or approval of its activities.
  And listen to this: of that money that the Bureau has received, they 
are now planning to spend more on renovating and redecorating a 
building than the building is actually worth. The inspector general of 
the Federal Reserve, which has oversight of the Bureau, also found that 
the Bureau needs to improve its recordkeeping and controls around the 
government travel cards, purchase cards, conferences, information, 
security, and procurement.
  So section 501 neither abolishes the Bureau nor limits the Bureau's 
funding. Instead, it simply allows Congress and all Americans to 
understand what they do, how they do it, and how much it costs.
  Mr. Chairman, I urge a ``no'' vote.
  I would now like to yield as much time as he may consume to the 
gentleman from New York (Mr. Serrano), my ranking member.
  Mr. SERRANO. With all due respect to my colleague, I rise in 
opposition to this amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, when the bill was being written, I recall going to the 
sponsors of this bill both here and the Senate and saying make sure 
that this agency is under appropriation supervision, under supervision 
of the House of Representatives. And I still believe that part of the 
fiscal crisis which we are still living under was the lack of 
supervision over the SEC and over the actions of Wall Street. So I am 
strongly in support of having them answer to us and at least have input 
from the people's House--from the people's Representatives--to ask them 
to come before us and tell us what they are doing.
  It sounds great for many Members to have an agency be on its own and 
do the right thing. But past history shows us that when we did that, 
when we did not supervise, and when we did not have oversight, it did 
just the opposite.
  I am from New York, Mr. Chairman, and I tell you that Wall Street 
went berserk because we did not pay attention, we did not do oversight, 
and we did not hold them accountable. So I would hope that we defeat 
this amendment with all due respect to my colleague.
  Ms. MOORE. Well, I can tell you, Mr. Chairman, Wall Street went 
berserk because we didn't fund the SEC and the CFTC. That is the 
problem. These watchdog agencies are charged with an onerous task, and 
we don't provide the appropriations, and this is what is going to 
happen to the CFPB, as well, under this bill.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. CRENSHAW. Mr. Chairman, accountability and transparency are good 
things. I urge a ``no'' vote on this amendment, and I yield back the 
balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentlewoman from Wisconsin (Ms. Moore).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.
  Ms. MOORE. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further 
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from Wisconsin 
will be postponed.
  Mr. HOLT. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk that affects 
line 18, I believe.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Chair notes that the amendment addresses a 
portion of the bill not yet read for amendment.
  Is there objection to consideration of the amendment at this time?
  Mr. CRENSHAW. Yes, Mr. Chairman, there is an objection.
  The Acting CHAIR. Objection is heard.
  The Clerk will read the next paragraph.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Sec. 502.  Effective October 1, 2015, notwithstanding 
     section 1017 of Public Law 111-203--
       (1) the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System 
     shall not transfer amounts specified under such section to 
     the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection; and
       (2) there are authorized to be appropriated to the Bureau 
     of Consumer Financial Protection such sums as may be 
     necessary to carry out the authorities of the Bureau under 
     Federal consumer financial law.


                    Amendment Offered by Ms. Waters

  Ms. WATERS. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Page 60, line 2, strike ``and''.
       Page 60, strike lines 3 through 7 and insert the following:
       (2) the Director of the Bureau may collect an assessment, 
     fee, or other charge from any entity (defined as any bank 
     holding company with more than $50,000,000,000 in assets or 
     any nonbank financial holding company with respect to which a 
     determination has been made pursuant to section 113 of Public 
     Law 111-203) equal to the amount the Director determines is 
     necessary and appropriate to carry out the responsibilities 
     of the Bureau;
       (3) funds derived from any assessment, fee, or charge 
     collected or payment made pursuant to this section shall not 
     be construed to be Government funds or appropriated monies, 
     and shall not be subject to apportionment for purposes of 
     chapter 15 of title 31 or any other provision of law; and
       (4) the Director shall have sole authority to determine the 
     manner in which the obligations of the Bureau shall be 
     incurred and its disbursements and expenses allowed and paid, 
     in accordance with this section.

  Mr. CRENSHAW. Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order on the 
gentlewoman's amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. A point of order is reserved.
  Pursuant to House Resolution 661, the gentlewoman from California and 
a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from California.
  Ms. WATERS. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to offer an amendment that 
will address provisions within this legislation that threaten the 
independent funding of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, an 
agency that has been remarkably successful in standing up for consumers 
and taxpayers who have been subject to the deceptive practices of bad 
actors in our financial system.
  To those who have ever fallen victim to a payday or predatory loan, 
to those who have had a dispute with a credit card company over 
excessive late fees or interest rates, to those who have had issues 
with a bank account, mortgage loan, or even a credit score, the 
Consumer Financial Protection Bureau is your watchdog. It is your 
advocate. It is your cop on the beat. And, thus far, your advocate has 
done an outstanding job. To date, 12.6 million consumers have received 
more than $3.8 billion in direct refunds because of the CFPB's 
enforcement actions.
  In large part, the CFPB is able to accomplish these tasks because of 
its political independence. It is able to prosecute bad actors without 
regard for the political blow-back. This is directly due to the CFPB's 
independent funding stream. But, Mr. Chairman, this legislation would 
end the Bureau's independence by tying its funding to the highly 
political congressional appropriations process.
  The result will be a weakened CFPB, one unable to properly advocate 
on behalf of our Nation's consumers. And if enacted into law, we would 
be one step closer to the Republican goal of ending the CFPB 
altogether--and its work on behalf of our students, seniors, families, 
and servicemembers.
  Mr. Chairman, my amendment would end this reckless attempt to 
politicize consumer protection by removing this provision and replacing 
it with language that allows the Bureau to maintain its independent 
funding.
  Unfortunately, the rules of the House make it impossible to restore 
CFPB's current funding mechanism. Therefore, this amendment funds the 
Bureau through the collection of a fee imposed upon banks and financial 
institutions that have more than $50 billion in assets. I hope my 
colleagues on the other side would agree with an approach that 
preserves the independence of our Nation's only consumer financial 
watchdog without costing taxpayers a dime.
  Mr. Chairman, while it is certainly a possibility, ruling this 
amendment out

[[Page 11928]]

of order would simply demonstrate the hypocrisy of the Republican 
Party. Last week, in a letter to Chairman Sessions, I expressed my 
concerns about this and other provisions that inappropriately legislate 
on an appropriations bill. I asked him not to protect these from a 
point of order. Since he and his Republican colleagues have refused, I 
am now forced to offer this amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I would like to include for the Record this letter.

                                         House of Representatives,


                              Committee on Financial Services,

                                     Washington, DC, July 9, 2014.
     Hon. Pete Sessions,
     Chairman, Committee on Rules,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Chairman Sessions: I write to respectfully request 
     that the Committee on Rules not protect sections 125, 501, 
     625, 626 and 632 of H.R. 5016, the Financial Services and 
     General Government Appropriations Act of 2015, from points of 
     order, as these sections place improper funding restrictions 
     on our financial regulatory agencies and inappropriately 
     authorize on an appropriations bill.
       Specifically, section 125 of H.R. 5016 places improper 
     funding restrictions on the Office of Financial Research 
     (OFR), the office specifically created in the wake of the 
     worst financial crisis to study systemic risk across the U.S. 
     economy and inform the decisions of the Financial Stability 
     Oversight Council (FSOC). Section 155 of the Dodd-Frank Wall 
     Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2010 (P.L. 111-
     203) explicitly funds the OFR through assessments on both 
     bank holding companies with more than $50 billion in assets 
     and nonbank financial companies supervised by the Federal 
     Reserve. Congress provided the OFR with a funding source 
     similar to many FSOC member agencies to ensure that the OFR 
     always had sufficient funding to conduct the research needed 
     to monitor threats to our financial system. Section 125 
     disregards existing law by subjecting the OFR to the 
     appropriations process beginning in 2015.
       Additionally, section 501 of H.R. 5016 consists of 
     legislating on an appropriations bill. This section alters 
     section 1017 of the Dodd-Frank Act, which establishes the 
     process by which operations of the Consumer Financial 
     Protection Bureau are independently funded by the Federal 
     Reserve System. It has been well-established that Congress 
     intended for the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau's 
     funding to be free of political influence, similar to other 
     independent banking regulatory agencies. Sources of funding 
     for the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau have been 
     appropriately debated during the current Congress in the 
     authorizing Committee of jurisdiction. I therefore ask that 
     section 501 be exposed to a point of order.
       Further, several sections of H.R. 5016 place improper 
     restrictions on the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). 
     In particular, section 625 prevents the SEC from spending 
     from the Reserve Fund for the next year. The Reserve Fund was 
     created under section 991 of the Dodd-Frank Act in order to 
     facilitate long-range planning and budgeting by the 
     Commission, particularly since the Commission's technology 
     systems have traditionally lagged behind dramatic market 
     changes. Also, the Reserve Fund was created because Congress 
     recognized that the Commission requires resources to respond 
     to unforeseen crises such as the so-called ``Flash Crash'' of 
     May 2010, when U.S. stock markets plummeted approximately 9 
     percent in just a few minutes. Congress already has robust 
     oversight over the use of the Reserve Fund, with the SEC 
     required under the Dodd-Frank Act to notify the Committee on 
     Financial Services and the Committee on Appropriations within 
     10 days of making a Reserve Fund obligation. Section 625 
     would overturn existing law, and create uncertainty both for 
     the future of the SEC's efforts as well as the stability of 
     our financial markets.
       Additionally, section 626 of H.R. 5016 violates Rule XXI, 
     clause 2, by making changes to SEC's existing authority to 
     regulate the disclosure of material information, which may 
     include political contributions made by corporations. The SEC 
     has broad authority to protect investors by requiring that 
     companies disclose information to the public so that 
     investors can make informed decisions. Although there are 
     questions as to whether political contributions made by 
     companies are material to investors, section 626 would 
     prevent the SEC from even considering this issue. As a 
     result, this provision would hamstring our securities 
     regulator from fulfilling its statutory mandate.
       Finally, section 632 of H.R. 5016 consists of legislating 
     on an appropriations bill. This section would substantially 
     alter section 716 of the Dodd-Frank Act, which requires 
     financial institutions with access to the federal banking 
     safety net to spin-off certain swaps dealing activities to 
     separately capitalized affiliates. The underlying section in 
     Dodd-Frank is subject to significant debate, and its 
     inclusion in a spending bill is inappropriate. I therefore 
     also ask that section 632 be exposed to a point of order.
       In order to uphold the integrity of the appropriations 
     process, I ask that the Committee on Rules submit to the 
     requests contained within this letter. The funding process 
     for our financial regulatory agencies should not be used as a 
     way to side-step the proper role of authorizing Committees in 
     Congress.
           Sincerely,
                                                    Maxine Waters,
                                                   Ranking Member.

  Ms. WATERS. My amendment is a simple effort to ensure the Consumer 
Financial Protection Bureau remains an effective advocate for American 
consumers. It is an attempt to correct just one of many bad provisions 
in this legislation, which underfunds our Wall Street regulators, 
impedes our ability to identify systemic risk across the United States, 
and harms the ability of regulators to properly protect our Nation's 
investors and retirees.
  Mr. Chairman, I am saddened to be back here fighting to preserve the 
CFPB. I am disappointed that my colleagues on the other side of the 
aisle have aligned themselves with predatory lenders and other bad 
actors in the financial system at the expense of protecting consumers. 
It is shameful that, once again, this House is forced to spend precious 
time and resources tearing down this first-of-its-kind agency which 
ensures that consumers have an advocate at the highest levels of 
government--with the power to fight for them.
  So I would urge the adoption of this amendment, and I reserve the 
balance of my time.


                             Point of Order

  Mr. CRENSHAW. Mr. Chairman, I make a point of order against the 
amendment because it proposes to change existing law, and it 
constitutes legislation in an appropriation bill and, therefore, 
violates clause 2 of rule XXI.

                              {time}  2200

  The rule states in pertinent part:
  ``An amendment to a general appropriation bill shall not be in order 
if changing existing law.''
  The amendment confers new authority.
  I ask for a ruling from the Chair.
  The Acting CHAIR. Does any other Member wish to be heard on the point 
of order?
  Ms. WATERS. Mr. Chairman, I would like to be heard on the point of 
order.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman from California is recognized.
  Ms. WATERS. Mr. Chairman, as I said in my earlier presentation, I 
sent a letter to Chairman Sessions, and I expressed my concerns about 
this and other provisions that inappropriately legislate on an 
appropriations bill. While the gentleman from the opposite side of the 
aisle is saying that this is inappropriate, certainly it has been 
inappropriate to legislate on this appropriations in the way that they 
have done in order to remove the protection from the CFPB and allow it 
to be at the mercy of the politics of the appropriations process in 
this House, and so I would ask that my amendment be recognized and that 
we would have a vote on this amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. Does any other Member wish to be heard on the point 
of order?
  If not, the Chair is prepared to rule.
  The Chair finds that this amendment includes language conferring 
authority. The amendment, therefore, constitutes legislation in 
violation of clause 2 of rule XXI. The point of order is sustained, and 
the amendment is not in order.
  The Clerk will read.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Sec. 503. (a) During fiscal year 2015, on the date that a 
     request is made for a transfer of funds in accordance with 
     section 1017 of Public Law 111-203, the Bureau of Consumer 
     Financial Protection shall notify Committees on 
     Appropriations of the House of Representatives and the 
     Senate, the Committee on Financial Services of the House of 
     Representatives, and the Committee on Banking, Housing, and 
     Urban Affairs of the Senate of such requests.
       (b)(1) Any such notification shall include the amount of 
     the fundsrequested, an explanation of how the funds will be 
     obligated by object class and activity, and why the funds are 
     necessary to protect consumers.
       (2) Any notification required by this section shall be made 
     available on the Bureau's public website.
       Sec. 504. (a) Not later than 2 weeks after the end of each 
     quarter of each fiscal year, the Bureau of Consumer Financial 
     Protection shall submit a report on its activities to the 
     Committees on Appropriations of the

[[Page 11929]]

     House of Representatives and the Senate, the Committee on 
     Financial Services of the House of Representatives, and the 
     Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs of the 
     Senate.
       (b) The reports required under subsection (a) shall 
     include--
       (1) the obligations made during the previous quarter by 
     object class, office, and activity;
       (2) the estimated obligations for the remainder of the 
     fiscal year by object class, office, and activity;
       (3) the number of full-time equivalents within each office 
     during the previous quarter;
       (4) the estimated number of full-time equivalents within 
     each office for the remainder of the fiscal year; and
       (5) actions taken to achieve the goals, objectives, and 
     performance measures of each office.
       (c) At the request of any such committee specified in 
     subsection (a), the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection 
     shall make Bureau officials available to testify on the 
     contents of the reports required under subsection (a).

                   Consumer Product Safety Commission

                         salaries and expenses

       For necessary expenses of the Consumer Product Safety 
     Commission, including hire of passenger motor vehicles, 
     services as authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109, but at rates for 
     individuals not to exceed the per diem rate equivalent to the 
     maximum rate payable under 5 U.S.C. 5376, and not to exceed 
     $4,000 for official reception and representation expenses, 
     $118,000,000.

                   Federal Communications Commission

                         salaries and expenses

       For necessary expenses of the Federal Communications 
     Commission, as authorized by law, including uniforms and 
     allowances therefor, as authorized by 5 U.S.C. 5901-5902; not 
     to exceed $4,000 for official reception and representation 
     expenses; purchase and hire of motor vehicles; special 
     counsel fees; and services as authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109, 
     $322,748,000, to remain available until expended: Provided, 
     That $322,748,000of offsetting collections shall be assessed 
     and collected pursuant to section 9 of title I of the 
     Communications Act of 1934, shall be retained and used for 
     necessary expenses and shall remain available until expended: 
     Provided further, That the sum herein appropriated shall be 
     reduced as such offsetting collections are received during 
     fiscal year 2015 so as to result in a final fiscal year 2015 
     appropriation estimated at $0: Provided further, That any 
     offsetting collections received in excess of $322,748,000 in 
     fiscal year 2015 shall not be available for obligation: 
     Provided further, That remaining offsetting collections from 
     prior years collected in excess of the amount specified for 
     collection in each such year and otherwise becoming available 
     on October 1, 2014, shall not be available for obligation: 
     Provided further, That notwithstanding 47 U.S.C. 
     309(j)(8)(B), proceeds from the use of a competitive bidding 
     system that may be retained and made available for obligation 
     shall not exceed $106,000,000 for fiscal year 2015: Provided 
     further, That of the amount appropriated under this heading, 
     not less than $11,090,000 shall be for the salaries and 
     expenses of the Office of Inspector General.

                 Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation

                    office of the inspector general

       For necessary expenses of the Office of Inspector General 
     in carrying out the provisions of the Inspector General Act 
     of 1978, $34,568,000, to be derived from the Deposit 
     Insurance Fund or, only when appropriate, the FSLIC 
     Resolution Fund.

                      Federal Election Commission

                         salaries and expenses

       For necessary expenses to carry out the provisions of the 
     Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971, $67,500,000, of which 
     not to exceed $5,000 shall be available for reception and 
     representation expenses.

                   Federal Labor Relations Authority

                         salaries and expenses

       For necessary expenses to carry out functions of the 
     Federal Labor Relations Authority, pursuant to Reorganization 
     Plan Numbered 2 of 1978, and the Civil Service Reform Act of 
     1978, including services authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109, and 
     including hire of experts and consultants, hire of passenger 
     motor vehicles, and including official reception and 
     representation expenses (not to exceed $1,500) and rental of 
     conference rooms in the District of Columbia and elsewhere, 
     $25,500,000: Provided, That public members of the Federal 
     Service Impasses Panel may be paid travel expenses and per 
     diem in lieu of subsistence as authorized by law (5 U.S.C. 
     5703) for persons employed intermittently in the Government 
     service, and compensation as authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109: 
     Provided further, That, notwithstanding 31 U.S.C. 3302, funds 
     received from fees charged to non-Federal participants at 
     labor-management relations conferences shall be credited to 
     and merged with this account, to be available without further 
     appropriation for the costs of carrying out these 
     conferences.

                        Federal Trade Commission

                         salaries and expenses

       For necessary expenses of the Federal Trade Commission, 
     including uniforms or allowances therefor, as authorized by 5 
     U.S.C. 5901-5902; services as authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109; 
     hire of passenger motor vehicles; and not to exceed $2,000 
     for official reception and representation expenses, 
     $293,000,000, to remain available until expended: Provided, 
     That not to exceed $300,000 shall be available for use to 
     contract with a person or persons for collection services in 
     accordance with the terms of 31 U.S.C. 3718: Provided 
     further, That, notwithstanding any other provision of law, 
     not to exceed $100,000,000 of offsetting collections derived 
     from fees collected for premerger notification filings under 
     the Hart-Scott-Rodino Antitrust Improvements Act of 1976 (15 
     U.S.C. 18a), regardless of the year of collection, shall be 
     retained and used for necessary expenses in this 
     appropriation: Provided further, That, notwithstanding any 
     other provision of law, not to exceed $14,000,000 in 
     offsetting collections derived from fees sufficient to 
     implement and enforce the Telemarketing Sales Rule, 
     promulgated under the Telemarketing and Consumer Fraud and 
     Abuse Prevention Act (15 U.S.C. 6101 et seq.), shall be 
     credited to this account, and be retained and used for 
     necessary expenses in this appropriation: Provided further, 
     That the sum herein appropriated from the general fund shall 
     be reduced as such offsetting collections are received during 
     fiscal year 2015, so as to result in a final fiscal year 2015 
     appropriation from the general fund estimated at not more 
     than $179,000,000: Provided further, That none of the funds 
     made available to the Federal Trade Commission may be used to 
     implement subsection (e)(2)(B) of section 43 of the Federal 
     Deposit Insurance Act (12 U.S.C. 1831t).

                    General Services Administration

                        real property activities

                         federal buildings fund

                 limitations on availability of revenue

                     (including transfers of funds)

       Amounts in the Fund, including revenues and collections 
     deposited into the Fund shall be available for necessary 
     expenses of real property management and related activities 
     not otherwise provided for, including operation, maintenance, 
     and protection of federally owned and leased buildings; 
     rental of buildings in the District of Columbia; restoration 
     of leased premises; moving governmental agencies (including 
     space adjustments and telecommunications relocation expenses) 
     in connection with the assignment, allocation and transfer of 
     space; contractual services incident to cleaning or servicing 
     buildings, and moving; repair and alteration of federally 
     owned buildings including grounds, approaches and 
     appurtenances; care and safeguarding of sites; maintenance, 
     preservation, demolition, and equipment; acquisition of 
     buildings and sites by purchase, condemnation, or as 
     otherwise authorized by law; acquisition of options to 
     purchase buildings and sites; conversion and extension of 
     federally owned buildings; preliminary planning and design of 
     projects by contract or otherwise; construction of new 
     buildings (including equipment for such buildings); and 
     payment of principal, interest, and any other obligations for 
     public buildings acquired by installment purchase and 
     purchase contract; in the aggregate amount of $9,130,409,000, 
     of which--
       (1) $420,460,000 shall remain available until expended for 
     construction and acquisition (including funds for sites and 
     expenses, and associated design and construction services) of 
     additional projects at--
       (A) California, Calexico, Calexico West Land Port of Entry, 
     $98,062,000;
       (B) California, San Diego, San Ysidro Land Port of Entry, 
     $216,828,000; and
       (C) New York, Alexandria Bay, Land Port of Entry, 
     $105,570,000:
       Provided, That each of the foregoing limits of costs on new 
     construction and acquisition projects may be exceeded to the 
     extent that savings are effected in other such projects, but 
     not to exceed 10 percent of the amounts included in a 
     transmitted prospectus, if required, unless advance approval 
     is obtained from the Committees on Appropriations of a 
     greater amount;
       (2) $965,817,000 shall remain available until expended for 
     repairs and alterations, including associated design and 
     construction services, of which--
       (A) $402,282,000 is for Major Repairs and Alterations;
       (B) $378,535,000 is for Basic Repairs and Alterations; and
       (C) $185,000,000 is for Special Emphasis Programs, of 
     which--
       (i) $40,000,000 is for Fire and Life Safety;
       (ii) $100,000,000 is for Consolidation Activities: 
     Provided, That consolidation projects result in reduced 
     annual rent paid by the tenant agency: Provided further, That 
     no consolidation project exceed $10,000,000 in costs: 
     Provided further, That consolidation projects are approved by 
     each of the committees specified in section 3307(a) of title 
     40, United States Code: Provided further, That preference is 
     given to consolidation projects that achieve a utilization 
     rate of 130 usable square feet or less per person for office 
     space: Provided further, That the obligation of funds under 
     this paragraph for consolidation activities may not be made 
     until 10 days after

[[Page 11930]]

     a proposed spending plan and explanation for each project to 
     be undertaken, including estimated savings, has been 
     submitted to the Committees on Appropriations of the House of 
     Representatives and the Senate;
       (iii) $20,000,000, Judiciary Court Security Program; and
       (iv) $25,000,000 is for Real Property Disposal: Provided, 
     That disposal projects result in reduced annual operating 
     costs: Provided further, That preference is given to disposal 
     projects that are excess or surplus and have the highest fair 
     market value and the greatest potential to sell: Provided 
     further, That the obligation of funds under this paragraph 
     for property disposal activities may not be made until 10 
     days after a proposed spending plan and explanation for each 
     project to be undertaken, including estimated savings, has 
     been submitted to the Committees on Appropriations of the 
     House of Representatives and the Senate:
       Provided further, That the amounts provided in this or any 
     prior Act for ``Repairs and Alterations'' may be used to fund 
     costs associated with implementing security improvements to 
     buildings necessary to meet the minimum standards for 
     security in accordance with current law and in compliance 
     with the reprogramming guidelines of the appropriate 
     Committees of the House and Senate: Provided further, That 
     the difference between the funds appropriated and expended on 
     any projects in this or any prior Act, under the heading 
     ``Repairs and Alterations'', may be transferred to Basic 
     Repairs and Alterations or used to fund authorized increases 
     in prospectus projects: Provided further, That the amount 
     provided in this or any prior Act for Basic Repairs and 
     Alterations may be used to pay claims against the Government 
     arising from any projects under the heading ``Repairs and 
     Alterations'' or used to fund authorized increases in 
     prospectus projects;
       (3) $5,500,000,000 for rental of space to remain available 
     until expended; and
       (4) $2,244,132,000 for building operations to remain 
     available until expended, of which $1,122,727,000 is for 
     building services, and $1,121,405,000 is for salaries and 
     expenses: Provided further, That not to exceed 5 percent of 
     any appropriation made available under this paragraph for 
     building operations may be transferred between and merged 
     with such appropriations upon notification to the Committees 
     on Appropriations of the House of Representatives and the 
     Senate, but no such appropriation shall be increased by more 
     than 5 percent by any such transfers:  Provided further, That 
     section 508 of this title shall not apply with respect to 
     funds made available under this heading for building 
     operations:
       Provided further, That the total amount of funds made 
     available from this Fund to the General Services 
     Administration shall not be available for expenses of any 
     construction, repair, alteration and acquisition project for 
     which a prospectus, if required by 40 U.S.C. 3307(a), has not 
     been approved, except that necessary funds may be expended 
     for each project for required expenses for the development of 
     a proposed prospectus: Provided further, That funds available 
     in the Federal Buildings Fund may be expended for emergency 
     repairs when advance approval is obtained from the Committees 
     on Appropriations: Provided further, That amounts necessary 
     to provide reimbursable special services to other agencies 
     under 40 U.S.C. 592(b)(2) and amounts to provide such 
     reimbursable fencing, lighting, guard booths, and other 
     facilities on private or other property not in Government 
     ownership or control as may be appropriate to enable the 
     United States Secret Service to perform its protective 
     functions pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 3056, shall be available from 
     such revenues and collections: Provided further, That 
     revenues and collections and any other sums accruing to this 
     Fund during fiscal year 2015, excluding reimbursements under 
     40 U.S.C. 592(b)(2) in excess of the aggregate new 
     obligational authority authorized for Real Property 
     Activities of the Federal Buildings Fund in this Act shall 
     remain in the Fund and shall not be available for expenditure 
     except as authorized in appropriations Acts.

                           general activities

                         government-wide policy

       For expenses authorized by law, not otherwise provided for, 
     for Government-wide policy and evaluation activities 
     associated with the management of real and personal property 
     assets and certain administrative services; Government-wide 
     policy support responsibilities relating to acquisition, 
     travel, motor vehicles, information technology management, 
     and related technology activities; and services as authorized 
     by 5 U.S.C. 3109; $58,000,000.

                           operating expenses

                     (including transfer of funds)

       For expenses authorized by law, not otherwise provided for, 
     for Government-wide activities associated with utilization 
     and donation of surplus personal property; disposal of real 
     property; agency-wide policy direction, management, and 
     communications; the Civilian Board of Contract Appeals; 
     services as authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109; $61,049,000, of 
     which $26,328,000 is for Real and Personal Property 
     Management and Disposal; $25,729,000 is for the Office of the 
     Administrator, of which not to exceed $7,500 is for official 
     reception and representation expenses; and $8,992,000 is for 
     the Civilian Board of Contract Appeals: Provided further, 
     That not to exceed 5 percent of the appropriation made 
     available under this heading for Office of the Administrator 
     may be transferred to the appropriation for the Real and 
     Personal Property Management and Disposal upon notification 
     to the Committees on Appropriations of the House of 
     Representatives and the Senate, but the appropriation for the 
     Real and Personal Property Management and Disposal may not be 
     increased by more than 5 percent by any such transfer.

                      office of inspector general

       For necessary expenses of the Office of Inspector General 
     and service authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109, $65,000,000, of 
     which $2,000,000 is available until expended: Provided, That 
     not to exceed $50,000 shall be available for payment for 
     information and detection of fraud against the Government, 
     including payment for recovery of stolen Government property: 
     Provided further, That not to exceed $2,500 shall be 
     available for awards to employees of other Federal agencies 
     and private citizens in recognition of efforts and 
     initiatives resulting in enhanced Office of Inspector General 
     effectiveness.

           allowances and office staff for former presidents

       For carrying out the provisions of the Act of August 25, 
     1958 (3 U.S.C. 102 note), and Public Law 95-138, $1,672,000.

                     federal citizen services fund

                     (including transfers of funds)

       For necessary expenses of the Office of Citizen Services 
     and Innovative Technologies, including services authorized by 
     40 U.S.C. 323 and 44 U.S.C. 3604; and for necessary expenses 
     in support of interagency projects that enable the Federal 
     Government to enhance its ability to conduct activities 
     electronically, through the development and implementation of 
     innovative uses of information technology; $53,294,000, to be 
     deposited into the Federal Citizen Services Fund: Provided, 
     That the previous amount may be transferred to Federal 
     agencies to carry out the purpose of the Federal Citizen 
     Services Fund: Provided further, That the appropriations, 
     revenues, reimbursements, and collections deposited into the 
     Fund shall be available until expended for necessary expenses 
     of Federal Citizen Services and other activities that enable 
     the Federal Government to enhance its ability to conduct 
     activities electronically in the aggregate amount not to 
     exceed $90,000,000: Provided further, That appropriations 
     revenues, reimbursements, and collections accruing to this 
     Fund during fiscal year 2015 in excess of such amount shall 
     remain in the Fund and shall not be available for expenditure 
     except as authorized in appropriations Acts: Provided 
     further, That any appropriations provided to the Electronic 
     Government Fund that remain unobligated as of September 30, 
     2014, may be transferred to the Federal Citizen Services 
     Fund: Provided further, That the transfer authorities 
     provided herein shall be in addition to any other transfer 
     authority provided in this Act.

       administrative provisions--general services administration

                     (including transfer of funds)

       Sec. 507.  Funds available to the General Services 
     Administration shall be available for the hire of passenger 
     motor vehicles.
       Sec. 508.  Funds in the Federal Buildings Fund made 
     available for fiscal year 2015 for Federal Buildings Fund 
     activities may be transferred between such activities only to 
     the extent necessary to meet program requirements: Provided, 
     That any proposed transfers shall be approved in advance by 
     the Committees on Appropriations of the House of 
     Representatives and the Senate.
       Sec. 509.  Except as otherwise provided in this title, 
     funds made available by this Act shall be used to transmit a 
     fiscal year 2016 request for United States Courthouse 
     construction only if the request: (1) meets the design guide 
     standards for construction as established and approved by the 
     General Services Administration, the Judicial Conference of 
     the United States, and the Office of Management and Budget; 
     (2) reflects the priorities of the Judicial Conference of the 
     United States as set out in its approved 5-year construction 
     plan; and (3) includes a standardized courtroom utilization 
     study of each facility to be constructed, replaced, or 
     expanded.
       Sec. 510.  None of the funds provided in this Act may be 
     used to increase the amount of occupiable square feet, 
     provide cleaning services, security enhancements, or any 
     other service usually provided through the Federal Buildings 
     Fund, to any agency that does not pay the rate per square 
     foot assessment for space and services as determined by the 
     General Services Administration in consideration of the 
     Public Buildings Amendments Act of 1972 (Public Law 92-313).
       Sec. 511.  From funds made available under the heading 
     ``Federal Buildings Fund, Limitations on Availability of 
     Revenue'', claims against the Government of less than 
     $250,000 arising from direct construction projects and 
     acquisition of buildings may be liquidated from savings 
     effected in other construction

[[Page 11931]]

     projects with prior notification to the Committees on 
     Appropriations of the House of Representatives and the 
     Senate.
       Sec. 512.  In any case in which the Committee on 
     Transportation and Infrastructure of the House of 
     Representatives and the Committee on Environment and Public 
     Works of the Senate adopt a resolution granting lease 
     authority pursuant to a prospectus transmitted to Congress by 
     the Administrator of the General Services Administration 
     under 40 U.S.C. 3307, the Administrator shall ensure that the 
     delineated area of procurement is identical to the delineated 
     area included in the prospectus for all lease agreements, 
     except that, if the Administrator determines that the 
     delineated area of the procurement should not be identical to 
     the delineated area included in the prospectus, the 
     Administrator shall provide an explanatory statement to each 
     of such committees and the Committees on Appropriations of 
     the House of Representatives and the Senate prior to 
     exercising any lease authority provided in the resolution.

                     Merit Systems Protection Board

                         salaries and expenses

                     (including transfer of funds)

       For necessary expenses to carry out functions of the Merit 
     Systems Protection Board pursuant to Reorganization Plan 
     Numbered 2 of 1978, the Civil Service Reform Act of 1978, and 
     the Whistleblower Protection Act of 1989 (5 U.S.C. 5509 
     note), including services as authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109, 
     rental of conference rooms in the District of Columbia and 
     elsewhere, hire of passenger motor vehicles, direct 
     procurement of survey printing, and not to exceed $2,000 for 
     official reception and representation expenses, $40,655,000, 
     to remain available until September 30, 2016, together with 
     not to exceed $2,345,000, to remain available until September 
     30, 2016, for administrative expenses to adjudicate 
     retirement appeals to be transferred from the Civil Service 
     Retirement and Disability Fund in amounts determined by the 
     Merit Systems Protection Board.

              National Archives and Records Administration

                           operating expenses

       For necessary expenses in connection with the 
     administration of the National Archives and Records 
     Administration and archived Federal records and related 
     activities, as provided by law, and for expenses necessary 
     for the review and declassification of documents, the 
     activities of the Public Interest Declassification Board, the 
     operations and maintenance of the electronic records 
     archives, the hire of passenger motor vehicles, and for 
     uniforms or allowances therefor, as authorized by law (5 
     U.S.C. 5901), including maintenance, repairs, and cleaning, 
     $360,000,000.

                      office of inspector general

       For necessary expenses of the Office of Inspector General 
     in carrying out the provisions of the Inspector General 
     Reform Act of 2008, Public Law 110-409, 122 Stat. 4302-16 
     (2008), and the Inspector General Act of 1978 (5 U.S.C. 
     App.), and for the hire of passenger motor vehicles, 
     $4,130,000.

                        repairs and restoration

       For the repair, alteration, and improvement of archives 
     facilities, and to provide adequate storage for holdings, 
     $7,600,000, to remain available until expended.

        national historical publications and records commission

                             grants program

       For necessary expenses for allocations and grants for 
     historical publications and records as authorized by 44 
     U.S.C. 2504, $5,000,000, to remain available until expended.

                  National Credit Union Administration

               community development revolving loan fund

       For the Community Development Revolving Loan Fund program 
     as authorized by 42 U.S.C. 9812, 9822 and 9910, $2,000,000 
     shall be available until September 30, 2016, for technical 
     assistance to low-income designated credit unions.

                      Office of Government Ethics

                         salaries and expenses

       For necessary expenses to carry out functions of the Office 
     of Government Ethics pursuant to the Ethics in Government Act 
     of 1978, the Ethics Reform Act of 1989, and the Stop Trading 
     on Congressional Knowledge Act of 2012, including services as 
     authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109, rental of conference rooms in 
     the District of Columbia and elsewhere, hire of passenger 
     motor vehicles, and not to exceed $1,500 for official 
     reception and representation expenses, $15,420,000.

                     Office of Personnel Management

                         salaries and expenses

                  (including transfer of trust funds)

       For necessary expenses to carry out functions of the Office 
     of Personnel Management (OPM) pursuant to Reorganization Plan 
     Numbered 2 of 1978 and the Civil Service Reform Act of 1978, 
     including services as authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109; medical 
     examinations performed for veterans by private physicians on 
     a fee basis; rental of conference rooms in the District of 
     Columbia and elsewhere; hire of passenger motor vehicles; not 
     to exceed $2,500 for official reception and representation 
     expenses; advances for reimbursements to applicable funds of 
     OPM and the Federal Bureau of Investigation for expenses 
     incurred under Executive Order No. 10422 of January 9, 1953, 
     as amended; and payment of per diem and/or subsistence 
     allowances to employees where Voting Rights Act activities 
     require an employee to remain overnight at his or her post of 
     duty, $95,910,000; and in addition $118,425,000 for 
     administrative expenses, to be transferred from the 
     appropriate trust funds of OPM without regard to other 
     statutes, including direct procurement of printed materials, 
     for the retirement and insurance programs: Provided, That the 
     provisions of this appropriation shall not affect the 
     authority to use applicable trust funds as provided by 
     sections 8348(a)(1)(B), 8958(f)(2)(A), 8988(f)(2)(A), and 
     9004(f)(2)(A) of title 5, United States Code: Provided 
     further, That no part of this appropriation shall be 
     available for salaries and expenses of the Legal Examining 
     Unit of OPM established pursuant to Executive Order No. 9358 
     of July 1, 1943, or any successor unit of like purpose: 
     Provided further, That the President's Commission on White 
     House Fellows, established by Executive Order No. 11183 of 
     October 3, 1964, may, during fiscal year 2015, accept 
     donations of money, property, and personal services: Provided 
     further, That such donations, including those from prior 
     years, may be used for the development of publicity materials 
     to provide information about the White House Fellows, except 
     that no such donations shall be accepted for travel or 
     reimbursement of travel expenses, or for the salaries of 
     employees of such Commission.

                      office of inspector general

                         salaries and expenses

                  (including transfer of trust funds)

       For necessary expenses of the Office of Inspector General 
     in carrying out the provisions of the Inspector General Act 
     of 1978, including services as authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109, 
     hire of passenger motor vehicles, $4,384,000, and in 
     addition, not to exceed $21,340,000 for administrative 
     expenses to audit, investigate, and provide other oversight 
     of the Office of Personnel Management's retirement and 
     insurance programs, to be transferred from the appropriate 
     trust funds of the Office of Personnel Management, as 
     determined by the Inspector General: Provided, That the 
     Inspector General is authorized to rent conference rooms in 
     the District of Columbia and elsewhere.

                       Office of Special Counsel

                         salaries and expenses

       For necessary expenses to carry out functions of the Office 
     of Special Counsel pursuant to Reorganization Plan Numbered 2 
     of 1978, the Civil Service Reform Act of 1978 (Public Law 95-
     454), the Whistleblower Protection Act of 1989 (Public Law 
     101-12) as amended by Public Law 107-304, the Whistleblower 
     Protection Enhancement Act of 2012 (Public Law 112-199), and 
     the Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act 
     of 1994 (Public Law 103-353), including services as 
     authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109, payment of fees and expenses for 
     witnesses, rental of conference rooms in the District of 
     Columbia and elsewhere, and hire of passenger motor vehicles; 
     $21,452,000.

                      Postal Regulatory Commission

                         salaries and expenses

                     (including transfer of funds)

       For necessary expenses of the Postal Regulatory Commission 
     in carrying out the provisions of the Postal Accountability 
     and Enhancement Act (Public Law 109-435), $14,152,000, to be 
     derived by transfer from the Postal Service Fund and expended 
     as authorized by section 603(a) of such Act.

              Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board

                         salaries and expenses

       For necessary expenses of the Privacy and Civil Liberties 
     Oversight Board, as authorized by section 1061 of the 
     Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 (42 
     U.S.C. 2000ee), $4,500,000, to remain available until 
     September 30, 2016.

             Recovery Accountability and Transparency Board

                         salaries and expenses

       For necessary expenses of the Recovery Accountability and 
     Transparency Board to carry out the provisions of title XV of 
     the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Public 
     Law 111-5), and to develop and test information technology 
     resources and oversight mechanisms to enhance transparency of 
     and detect and remediate waste, fraud, and abuse in Federal 
     spending, and to develop and use information technology 
     resources and oversight mechanisms to detect and remediate 
     waste, fraud, and abuse in obligation and expenditure of 
     funds as described in section 904(d) of the Disaster Relief 
     Appropriations Act, 2013 (Public Law 113-2), which shall be 
     administered under the terms and conditions of the 
     accountability authorities of title XV of Public Law 111-5, 
     $15,000,000.

                   Securities and Exchange Commission

                         salaries and expenses

       For necessary expenses for the Securities and Exchange 
     Commission, including services as authorized by 5 U.S.C. 
     3109, the rental of space (to include multiple year leases) 
     in the District of Columbia and elsewhere, and

[[Page 11932]]

     not to exceed $3,500 for official reception and 
     representation expenses, $1,400,000,000 to remain available 
     until expended; of which not less than $9,239,000 shall be 
     for the Office of Inspector General; of which not to exceed 
     $50,000 shall be available for a permanent secretariat for 
     the International Organization of Securities Commissions; of 
     which not to exceed $100,000 shall be available for expenses 
     for consultations and meetings hosted by the Commission with 
     foreign governmental and other regulatory officials, members 
     of their delegations and staffs to exchange views concerning 
     securities matters, such expenses to include necessary 
     logistic and administrative expenses and the expenses of 
     Commission staff and foreign invitees in attendance 
     including: (1) incidental expenses such as meals; (2) travel 
     and transportation; and (3) related lodging or subsistence; 
     of which funding for information technology initiatives shall 
     be increased over the fiscal year 2014 level by not less than 
     $50,000,000; and of which not less than $68,872,000 shall be 
     for the Division of Economic and Risk Analysis: Provided, 
     That fees and charges authorized by section 31 of the 
     Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78ee) shall be 
     credited to this account as offsetting collections: Provided 
     further, That not to exceed $1,400,000,000 of such offsetting 
     collections shall be available until expended for necessary 
     expenses of this account: Provided further, That the total 
     amount appropriated under this heading from the general fund 
     for fiscal year 2015 shall be reduced as such offsetting fees 
     are received so as to result in a final total fiscal year 
     2015 appropriation from the general fund estimated at not 
     more than $0.


                    Amendment Offered by Ms. Waters

  Ms. WATERS. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Page 85, line 19, insert after the dollar amount insert the 
     following: ``(increased by $300,000,000)''.
       Page 86, line 16, insert after the dollar amount insert the 
     following: ``(increased by $300,000,000)''.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 661, the gentlewoman 
from California and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from California.
  Ms. WATERS. Mr. Chairman, I urge adoption of my amendment to fully 
fund the Securities and Exchange Commission, one of Wall Street's top 
sheriffs, at the President's request of $1.7 billion and at no cost to 
the taxpayer.
  The United States has the most vibrant capital markets, which are the 
envy of the world. Both large and small businesses looking to raise 
capital are able to do so with incredible efficiency and at minimal 
cost. Businesses are able to do this because their investors know that 
there are strong rules of the road and a regulator that will hold them 
accountable.
  The underlying bill, however, undermines the SEC by cutting nearly 
$300 million or nearly 20 percent from the requested level. Wall 
Street's cop is woefully underfunded already, and one need only look as 
far as its IT budget compared with just a few of the entities it 
oversees.
  In fiscal year 2013, the IT budgets of the six largest financial 
institutions equaled an amount more than 100 times that of the SEC. 
Although my Republican colleagues suggest that they are generously 
providing an increase, they use budget gimmicks to mask real cuts to IT 
infrastructure.
  The world's capital markets have grown at an ever-accelerating rate, 
and likewise, so has the SEC's responsibilities. Today, the SEC 
oversees 11,000 investment advisers, 10,000 mutual funds, 4,450 broker-
dealers, the securities exchanges, clearing agencies, credit rating 
agencies, and other self-regulatory organizations. The SEC also reviews 
the disclosures of nearly 9,000 public companies.
  Following the 2008 financial crisis, Congress significantly increased 
SEC's responsibilities by requiring oversight of hedge funds, municipal 
advisers, and certain derivatives by passing Dodd-Frank. My amendment 
is needed to support all of these activities.
  The Republican bill also includes substantial carve-outs, which will 
lead to cuts to enforcement and examinations. The SEC will have to 
impose hiring freezes for lawyers that would have brought enforcement 
cases against bad actors.
  Last year, SEC recovered $3.4 billion in 2013--or twice the amount 
that would fully fund the agency. The SEC will also have to furlough 
examiners under the Republican bill, examiners that are needed to 
reduce the backlog of investment advisers that have never been visited 
by the SEC.
  There is broad opposition to the Republican funding level. The White 
House says:

       At this level, the SEC will be unable to add critical 
     positions in market oversight, compliance, and enforcement to 
     carry out its financial oversight responsibilities.

  What is really disappointing is that Congress can fund the SEC at any 
level without affecting the debt and deficit. There are no budget 
savings from cutting the SEC. That is because the SEC's budget is paid 
through tiny fees on securities transactions.
  Here is what CalPERS, the largest public pension plan in the United 
States, says about SEC funding:

       The Commission's work can't be achieved without the 
     resources it needs to be effective. The SEC needs to be given 
     the tools to do the job: full and independent funding.

  In addition, investor advocates like the AARP, the Consumer 
Federation of America, as well as industry groups like the Investment 
Adviser Association and the Financial Planning Association all support 
fully funding the SEC, and so should you.
  A fully-funded SEC helps America's entrepreneurs raise funds to 
finance jobs and development. A fully-funded SEC ensures that our 
markets operate efficiently. A fully-funded SEC protects hard-earned 
savings funding our Nation's retirement and our children's education.
  I urge adoption of this amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The time of the gentlewoman has expired.
  Mr. CRENSHAW. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Florida is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. CRENSHAW. Mr. Chairman, this committee is not starving the SEC 
for funds. The SEC received an 11 percent increase in fiscal year 2012. 
They received an 8 percent increase over the sequester level in 2014, 
and this year, the SEC is asking for $350 million more than they 
received in 2014. That is a 26 percent increase over fiscal year 2014.
  Now, for fiscal year 2015, the committee recommends $1.4 billion. 
That is $50 million above the fiscal year 2014, and it is specifically 
for critical SEC information technology initiatives.
  Listen to this: since 2001, Congress has increased the SEC's funding 
level by more than 200 percent. Not many Federal agencies can say they 
have received that kind of increase the way the SEC has. Then you ask 
yourself: What did the Commission get for that increased funding?
  Well, the Commission missed the Madoff Ponzi scheme. They signed a 
no-bid lease for almost a million square feet of office space they 
didn't need, they produced inaccurate financial statements, they failed 
to conduct a serious and thorough review of the agency's bureaucratic 
and siloed structure in order to become more efficient and more 
effective, and they wasted over a million dollars on unnecessary 
equipment.
  I might add they have had some of their rules thrown out in court due 
to the lack of economic analysis.

                              {time}  2215

  That is just to name a few of the embarrassing moments that the SEC 
enforcement and management has endured. This is not about a lack of 
funding. Throwing more money at the SEC is not the answer.
  We believe the Commission needs to get back on track to show real 
progress before we give them hundreds of millions of dollars of new 
money. The bill has targeted extra funding in areas of need within the 
Commission. That is information technology and economic analysis.
  Over the past 3 years, this committee has consistently supported the 
SEC's information technology funding. If we could upgrade the 
information technology systems they will be better able to leverage 
their resources, catch the bad actors, and provide the quality review 
that securities filings demand.
  The fact that this agency is fee-funded in no way diminishes the need 
for

[[Page 11933]]

congressional oversight over the Commission's funding.
  The SEC, in summary, is not starved for resources. We can't buy a 
better regulator. Those are just nice talking points, but they are not 
really based on facts.
  I urge a ``no'' vote on this amendment, and I reserve the balance of 
my time.
  Mr. SERRANO. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from New York is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. SERRANO. I yield to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Waters).
  Ms. WATERS. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  Mr. Chairman and Members, listening to my friend on the opposite side 
of the aisle you would think that the SEC has no additional 
responsibilities.
  As I quoted in my presentation:
  The world's capital markets have grown at an ever accelerating rate, 
and likewise, so have the SEC's responsibilities. Today, the SEC 
oversees 11,000 investment advisers, 10,000 mutual funds, 4,450 broker-
dealers, the securities exchanges, clearing agencies, credit rating 
agencies, and other self-regulatory organizations. The SEC also reviews 
the disclosures of nearly 9,000 public companies.
  And, following the 2008 financial crisis, Congress increased SEC's 
responsibilities by requiring oversight of hedge funds, municipal 
advisors, and certain derivatives by passing Dodd-Frank.
  So, my friend on the opposite side of the aisle disregards all of 
this as if the SEC doesn't have these expanded responsibilities. They 
certainly do, and they should be paid for. Again, this does not 
increase any debt. This is paid for through the many companies that 
have to pay a small fee, and they will not allow those fees to be used 
to support the work of the SEC and the IT needs that they have. It does 
not make good sense.
  Mr. SERRANO. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the amendment, which 
is very similar to an amendment I offered in full committee during 
consideration of this bill.
  The bill currently provides $300 million less for the SEC than what 
the administration has asked for in 2015, and prohibits the SEC from 
using the reserve fund established by Dodd-Frank for missing critical 
IT needs, which is, in effect, another $70 million reduction in 
funding.
  At the proposed funding level, the SEC would have to reduce its 
current staff at the very time they need to be hiring new experts who 
help protect investors and to fully implement all of the rules and 
responsibilities required by Dodd-Frank.
  Our Nation is still feeling the effect of the complex financial 
schemes that led to the 2008 financial meltdown. The reforms in Dodd-
Frank will help prevent future problems, but the SEC needs adequate 
funding to carry them out.
  This amendment deals with that issue. Ms. Waters' amendment is one 
that really supplies the strength for creating and for supporting that 
``cop on the beat'' that we always mention on the issue of Wall Street. 
We can't allow that to happen again. The SEC has its responsibility. We 
continue to cut its funding. And I repeat, I was around when we had the 
power to do oversight, and we didn't do it, and the agency itself did 
not do it, and that led to that meltdown which we are still feeling the 
effects of.
  I support your amendment, and I hope everybody else would vote in 
support of it, and I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. CRENSHAW. Mr. Chairman, I just want to remind everyone, as I 
pointed out, in a little over 10 years, the funding for the SEC has 
increased over 200 percent--200 percent. I think there is adequate 
money to do the job they were given to do. They just need to do it 
effectively and efficiently, like other areas of government are asked 
to perform.
  With that, I urge a ``no'' vote on the amendment, and I yield back 
the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentlewoman from California (Ms. Waters).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.
  Ms. WATERS. Mr. Chair, I demand a recorded vote.
  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further 
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from California 
will be postponed.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will read.
  The Clerk read as follows:

                        Selective Service System

                         salaries and expenses

       For necessary expenses of the Selective Service System, 
     including expenses of attendance at meetings and of training 
     for uniformed personnel assigned to the Selective Service 
     System, as authorized by 5 U.S.C. 4101-4118 for civilian 
     employees; hire of passenger motor vehicles; services as 
     authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109; and not to exceed $750 for 
     official reception and representation expenses; $21,500,000: 
     Provided, That during the current fiscal year, the President 
     may exempt this appropriation from the provisions of 31 
     U.S.C. 1341, whenever the President deems such action to be 
     necessary in the interest of national defense: Provided 
     further, That none of the funds appropriated by this Act may 
     be expended for or in connection with the induction of any 
     person into the Armed Forces of the United States.

                     Small Business Administration

                         salaries and expenses

       For necessary expenses, not otherwise provided for, of the 
     Small Business Administration, including hire of passenger 
     motor vehicles as authorized by sections 1343 and 1344 of 
     title 31, United States Code, and not to exceed $3,500 for 
     official reception and representation expenses, $253,882,000, 
     of which not less than $12,000,000 shall be available for 
     examinations, reviews, and other lender oversight activities: 
     Provided, That the Administrator is authorized to charge fees 
     to cover the cost of publications developed by the Small 
     Business Administration, and certain loan program activities, 
     including fees authorized by section 5(b) of the Small 
     Business Act: Provided further, That, notwithstanding 31 
     U.S.C. 3302, revenues received from all such activities shall 
     be credited to this account, to remain available until 
     expended, for carrying out these purposes without further 
     appropriations: Provided further, That the Small Business 
     Administration may accept gifts in an amount not to exceed 
     $4,000,000 and may co-sponsor activities, each in accordance 
     with section 132(a) of division K of Public Law 108-447, 
     during fiscal year 2015: Provided further, That $6,100,000 
     shall be available for the Loan Modernization and Accounting 
     System, to be available until September 30, 2016.


                     Amendment Offered by Mr. Gosar

  Mr. GOSAR. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Page 87, line 25, after the first dollar amount, insert 
     ``(reduced by $3,882,000)''.
       Page 88, line 21, after the dollar amount, insert 
     ``(increased by $3,882,000)''.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 661, the gentleman 
from Arizona and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Arizona.
  Mr. GOSAR. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to offer a simple, but 
important, amendment, which will redirect resources in the bill to 
important entrepreneurial development programs with the SBA.
  Specifically, the amendment reduces a $3.8 million increase, above 
the fiscal year 2014 level, that was slated to go towards 
administration and bureaucracy. Instead, the amendment prioritizes 
spending and redirects those funds to important programs that actually 
help small businesses, like the HUBZone program, Small Business 
Development Centers, SCORE, women's business centers, the State and 
trade export promotion, Native American outreach, and veterans business 
outreach centers.
  If programs with the SBA are going to get an increase above fiscal 
year 2014 levels, it should be for worthwhile SBA programs, not 
bureaucracy.
  Small businesses are the backbone of our economy and create on 
average seven out of every 10 new jobs. The SBA needs to continue to 
support worthwhile efforts that foster economic growth. The 
entrepreneurial development programs within the SBA do exactly that.
  In 2013, Small Business Development Centers helped nearly 15,000 
entrepreneurs start businesses, providing

[[Page 11934]]

counseling for nearly 65,000 others. SBDCs assist more than 530,000 
clients annually and are a critical program for creating jobs and 
helping small businesses grow.
  In 2013, the SCORE program assisted with the creation of nearly 
70,000 new jobs. The program provided important services that helped 
open the doors of nearly 40,000 businesses.
  I could go on about several other of the entrepreneurial development 
programs, but I think you get my point, so in the interest of time I 
will not.
  I will discuss, however, the offset of this amendment. The committee 
was critical of the Small Business Administration in the committee 
report accompanying this bill.
  I would like to quickly read a few excerpts from that report:

       The committee believes the SBA should especially focus on 
     these ``true'' small businesses and less on larger businesses 
     in ``high-growth'' areas that have more capacity and access 
     to capital.
       The committee remains concerned about the quality of lender 
     oversight at SBA. SBA's loan programs depend on an array of 
     outside parties to be executed.
       In fiscal year 2011, the SBA Office of Inspector General 
     (OIG) found that more than half of the loan dollars 
     guaranteed by the SBA were made using delegated authorities 
     with limited oversight.
       In an OIG report released June 6, 2014, the OIG found that 
     the SBA's Loan Guarantee Processing Center (LGPC) 
     ``emphasized quantity over quality for 7(a) loan reviews,'' 
     and loan specialists were not provided adequate guidance and 
     training to conduct 7(a) loan review assignments.
       The committee has consistently provided SBA with robust 
     resources and expects the SBA to appropriately fund the LGPC 
     in order to provide a thorough review of all loans made by 
     the center. SBA loans made without an effective review 
     process leaves taxpayers on the hook for any defaults. The 
     committee expects SBA to adopt the recommendations included 
     in the OIG report and will continue to monitor the SBA's 
     progress in this area.

  I ask my colleagues to support my commonsense amendment, and I thank 
the chairman and ranking member for their continued work on the 
committee.
  With that, I yield to the gentleman from Florida, the chairman.
  Mr. CRENSHAW. I thank the gentleman for yielding, and I am pleased to 
support his amendment.
  Mr. GOSAR. I thank the chairman, and I yield back the balance of my 
time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Gosar).
  The amendment was agreed to.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will read.
  The Clerk read as follows:

                  entrepreneurial development programs

       For necessary expenses of programs supporting 
     entrepreneurial and small business development, $197,825,000, 
     to remain available until September 30, 2016.

                      office of inspector general

       For necessary expenses of the Office of Inspector General 
     in carrying out the provisions of the Inspector General Act 
     of 1978, $19,400,000.

                           office of advocacy

       For necessary expenses of the Office of Advocacy in 
     carrying out the provisions of title II of Public Law 94-305 
     (15 U.S.C. 634a et seq.) and the Regulatory Flexibility Act 
     of 1980 (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.), $8,750,000, to remain 
     available until expended.

                     business loans program account

                     (including transfer of funds)

       For the cost of direct loans, $2,500,000, to remain 
     available until expended, and for the cost of guaranteed 
     loans as authorized by section 503 of the Small Business 
     Investment Act of 1958 (Public Law 85-699), $45,000,000, to 
     remain available until expended: Provided, That such costs, 
     including the cost of modifying such loans, shall be as 
     defined in section 502 of the Congressional Budget Act of 
     1974: Provided further, That subject to section 502 of the 
     Congressional Budget Act of 1974, during fiscal year 2015 
     commitments to guarantee loans under section 503 of the Small 
     Business Investment Act of 1958 shall not exceed 
     $7,500,000,000: Provided further, That during fiscal year 
     2015 commitments for general business loans authorized under 
     section 7(a) of the Small Business Act shall not exceed 
     $18,500,000,000 for a combination of amortizing term loans 
     and the aggregated maximum line of credit provided by 
     revolving loans: Provided further, That during fiscal year 
     2015 commitments to guarantee loans for debentures under 
     section 303(b) of the Small Business Investment Act of 1958 
     shall not exceed $4,000,000,000: Provided further, That 
     during fiscal year 2015, guarantees of trust certificates 
     authorized by section 5(g) of the Small Business Act shall 
     not exceed a principal amount of $12,000,000,000. In 
     addition, for administrative expenses to carry out the direct 
     and guaranteed loan programs, $147,726,000, which may be 
     transferred to and merged with the appropriations for 
     Salaries and Expenses.

                     disaster loans program account

                     (including transfers of funds)

       For administrative expenses to carry out the direct loan 
     program authorized by section 7(b) of the Small Business Act, 
     $186,858,000, to be available until expended, of which 
     $1,000,000 is for the Office of Inspector General of the 
     Small Business Administration for audits and reviews of 
     disaster loans and the disaster loan programs and shall be 
     transferred to and merged with the appropriations for the 
     Office of Inspector General; of which $176,858,000 is for 
     direct administrative expenses of loan making and servicing 
     to carry out the direct loan program, which may be 
     transferred to and merged with the appropriations for 
     Salaries and Expenses; and of which $9,000,000 is for 
     indirect administrative expenses for the direct loan program, 
     which may be transferred to and merged with the 
     appropriations for Salaries and Expenses.

        administrative provisions--small business administration

                     (including transfer of funds)

       Sec. 513.  Not to exceed 5 percent of any appropriation 
     made available for the current fiscal year for the Small 
     Business Administration in this Act may be transferred 
     between such appropriations, but no such appropriation shall 
     be increased by more than 10 percent by any such transfers: 
     Provided, That any transfer pursuant to this paragraph shall 
     be treated as a reprogramming of funds under section 608 of 
     this Act and shall not be available for obligation or 
     expenditure except in compliance with the procedures set 
     forth in that section.

                      United States Postal Service

                   payment to the postal service fund

       For payment to the Postal Service Fund for revenue forgone 
     on free and reduced rate mail, pursuant to subsections (c) 
     and (d) of section 2401 of title 39, United States Code, 
     $58,342,000: Provided, That mail for overseas voting and mail 
     for the blind shall continue to be free: Provided further, 
     That 6-day delivery and rural delivery of mail shall continue 
     at not less than the 1983 level: Provided further, That none 
     of the funds made available to the Postal Service by this Act 
     shall be used to implement any rule, regulation, or policy of 
     charging any officer or employee of any State or local child 
     support enforcement agency, or any individual participating 
     in a State or local program of child support enforcement, a 
     fee for information requested or provided concerning an 
     address of a postal customer: Provided further, That none of 
     the funds provided in this Act shall be used to consolidate 
     or close small rural and other small post offices.

                      office of inspector general

                         salaries and expenses

                     (including transfer of funds)

       For necessary expenses of the Office of Inspector General 
     in carrying out the provisions of the Inspector General Act 
     of 1978, $243,000,000, to be derived by transfer from the 
     Postal Service Fund and expended as authorized by section 
     603(b)(3) of the Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act 
     (Public Law 109-435).

                        United States Tax Court

                         salaries and expenses

       For necessary expenses, including contract reporting and 
     other services as authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109, $50,000,000: 
     Provided, That travel expenses of the judges shall be paid 
     upon the written certificate of the judge.

                                TITLE VI

                      GENERAL PROVISIONS--THIS ACT

       Sec. 601.  None of the funds in this Act shall be used for 
     the planning or execution of any program to pay the expenses 
     of, or otherwise compensate, non-Federal parties intervening 
     in regulatory or adjudicatory proceedings funded in this Act.
       Sec. 602.  None of the funds appropriated in this Act shall 
     remain available for obligation beyond the current fiscal 
     year, nor may any be transferred to other appropriations, 
     unless expressly so provided herein.
       Sec. 603.  The expenditure of any appropriation under this 
     Act for any consulting service through procurement contract 
     pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 3109, shall be limited to those 
     contracts where such expenditures are a matter of public 
     record and available for public inspection, except where 
     otherwise provided under existing law, or under existing 
     Executive order issued pursuant to existing law.
       Sec. 604.  None of the funds made available in this Act may 
     be transferred to any department, agency, or instrumentality 
     of the United States Government, except pursuant to a 
     transfer made by, or transfer authority provided in, this Act 
     or any other appropriations Act.
       Sec. 605.  None of the funds made available by this Act 
     shall be available for any activity or for paying the salary 
     of any Government employee where funding an activity or

[[Page 11935]]

     paying a salary to a Government employee would result in a 
     decision, determination, rule, regulation, or policy that 
     would prohibit the enforcement of section 307 of the Tariff 
     Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1307).
       Sec. 606.  No funds appropriated pursuant to this Act may 
     be expended by an entity unless the entity agrees that in 
     expending the assistance the entity will comply with chapter 
     83 of title 41, United States Code.
       Sec. 607.  No funds appropriated or otherwise made 
     available under this Act shall be made available to any 
     person or entity that has been convicted of violating chapter 
     83 of title 41, United States Code.
       Sec. 608.  Except as otherwise provided in this Act, none 
     of the funds provided in this Act, provided by previous 
     appropriations Acts to the agencies or entities funded in 
     this Act that remain available for obligation or expenditure 
     in fiscal year 2015, or provided from any accounts in the 
     Treasury derived by the collection of fees and available to 
     the agencies funded by this Act, shall be available for 
     obligation or expenditure through a reprogramming of funds 
     that: (1) creates a new program; (2) eliminates a program, 
     project, or activity; (3) increases funds or personnel for 
     any program, project, or activity for which funds have been 
     denied or restricted by the Congress; (4) proposes to use 
     funds directed for a specific activity by the Committee on 
     Appropriations of either the House of Representatives or the 
     Senate for a different purpose; (5) augments existing 
     programs, projects, or activities in excess of $5,000,000 or 
     10 percent, whichever is less; (6) reduces existing programs, 
     projects, or activities by $5,000,000 or 10 percent, 
     whichever is less; or (7) creates or reorganizes offices, 
     programs, or activities unless prior approval is received 
     from the Committees on Appropriations of the House of 
     Representatives and the Senate: Provided, That prior to any 
     significant reorganization or restructuring of offices, 
     programs, or activities, each agency or entity funded in this 
     Act shall consult with the Committees on Appropriations of 
     the House of Representatives and the Senate: Provided 
     further, That not later than 60 days after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, each agency funded by this Act shall 
     submit a report to the Committees on Appropriations of the 
     House of Representatives and the Senate to establish the 
     baseline for application of reprogramming and transfer 
     authorities for the current fiscal year: Provided further, 
     That at a minimum the report shall include: (1) a table for 
     each appropriation with a separate column to display the 
     President's budget request, adjustments made by Congress, 
     adjustments due to enacted rescissions, if appropriate, and 
     the fiscal year enacted level; (2) a delineation in the table 
     for each appropriation both by object class and program, 
     project, and activity as detailed in the budget appendix for 
     the respective appropriation; and (3) an identification of 
     items of special congressional interest: Provided further, 
     That the amount appropriated or limited for salaries and 
     expenses for an agency shall be reduced by $100,000 per day 
     for each day after the required date that the report has not 
     been submitted to the Congress.
       Sec. 609.  Except as otherwise specifically provided by 
     law, not to exceed 50 percent of unobligated balances 
     remaining available at the end of fiscal year 2015 from 
     appropriations made available for salaries and expenses for 
     fiscal year 2015 in this Act, shall remain available through 
     September 30, 2016, for each such account for the purposes 
     authorized: Provided, That a request shall be submitted to 
     the Committees on Appropriations of the House of 
     Representatives and the Senate for approval prior to the 
     expenditure of such funds: Provided further, That these 
     requests shall be made in compliance with reprogramming 
     guidelines.
       Sec. 610. (a) None of the funds made available in this Act 
     may be used by the Executive Office of the President to 
     request--
       (1) any official background investigation report on any 
     individual from the Federal Bureau of Investigation; or
       (2) a determination with respect to the treatment of an 
     organization as described in section 501(c) of the Internal 
     Revenue Code of 1986 and exempt from taxation under section 
     501(a) of such Code from the Department of the Treasury or 
     the Internal Revenue Service.
       (b) Subsection (a) shall not apply--
       (1) in the case of an official background investigation 
     report, if such individual has given express written consent 
     for such request not more than 6 months prior to the date of 
     such request and during the same presidential administration; 
     or
       (2) if such request is required due to extraordinary 
     circumstances involving national security.
       Sec. 611.  The cost accounting standards promulgated under 
     chapter 15 of title 41, United States Code, shall not apply 
     with respect to a contract under the Federal Employees Health 
     Benefits Program established under chapter 89 of title 5, 
     United States Code.
       Sec. 612.  For the purpose of resolving litigation and 
     implementing any settlement agreements regarding the 
     nonforeign area cost-of-living allowance program, the Office 
     of Personnel Management may accept and utilize (without 
     regard to any restriction on unanticipated travel expenses 
     imposed in an Appropriations Act) funds made available to the 
     Office of Personnel Management pursuant to court approval.
       Sec. 613.  No funds appropriated by this Act shall be 
     available to pay for an abortion, or the administrative 
     expenses in connection with any health plan under the Federal 
     employees health benefits program which provides any benefits 
     or coverage for abortions.
       Sec. 614.  The provision of section 613 shall not apply 
     where the life of the mother would be endangered if the fetus 
     were carried to term, or the pregnancy is the result of an 
     act of rape or incest.
       Sec. 615.  In order to promote Government access to 
     commercial information technology, the restriction on 
     purchasing nondomestic articles, materials, and supplies set 
     forth in chapter 83 of title 41, United States Code 
     (popularly known as the Buy American Act), shall not apply to 
     the acquisition by the Federal Government of information 
     technology (as defined in section 11101 of title 40, United 
     States Code), that is a commercial item (as defined in 
     section 103 of title 41, United States Code).
       Sec. 616.  Notwithstanding section 1353 of title 31, United 
     States Code, no officer or employee of any regulatory agency 
     or commission funded by this Act may accept on behalf of that 
     agency, nor may such agency or commission accept, payment or 
     reimbursement from a non-Federal entity for travel, 
     subsistence, or related expenses for the purpose of enabling 
     an officer or employee to attend and participate in any 
     meeting or similar function relating to the official duties 
     of the officer or employee when the entity offering payment 
     or reimbursement is a person or entity subject to regulation 
     by such agency or commission, or represents a person or 
     entity subject to regulation by such agency or commission, 
     unless the person or entity is an organization described in 
     section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 and 
     exempt from tax under section 501(a) of such Code.
       Sec. 617.  Notwithstanding section 708 of this Act, funds 
     made available to the Commodity Futures Trading Commission 
     and the Securities and Exchange Commission by this or any 
     other Act may be used for the interagency funding and 
     sponsorship of a joint advisory committee to advise on 
     emerging regulatory issues.
       Sec. 618.  Not later than 45 days after the end of each 
     quarter, the Department of the Treasury, the Executive Office 
     of the President, the Judiciary, the Federal Communications 
     Commission, the Federal Trade Commission, the General 
     Services Administration, the National Archives and Records 
     Administration, the Securities and Exchange Commission, and 
     the Small Business Administration shall provide the 
     Committees on Appropriations of the House of Representatives 
     and the Senate a quarterly accounting of the cumulative 
     balances of any unobligated funds.
       Sec. 619. (a)(1) Notwithstanding any other provision of 
     law, an Executive agency covered by this Act otherwise 
     authorized to enter into contracts for either leases or the 
     construction or alteration of real property for office, 
     meeting, storage, or other space must consult with the 
     General Services Administration before issuing a solicitation 
     for offers of new leases or construction contracts, and in 
     the case of succeeding leases, before entering into 
     negotiations with the current lessor.
       (2) Any such agency with authority to enter into an 
     emergency lease may do so during any period declared by the 
     President to require emergency leasing authority with respect 
     to such agency.
       (b) For purposes of this section, the term ``Executive 
     agency covered by this Act'' means any Executive agency 
     provided funds by this Act, but does not include the General 
     Services Administration or the United States Postal Service.
       Sec. 620.  None of the funds made available in this Act may 
     be used by the Federal Trade Commission to complete the draft 
     report entitled ``Interagency Working Group on Food Marketed 
     to Children: Preliminary Proposed Nutrition Principles to 
     Guide Industry Self-Regulatory Efforts'' unless the 
     Interagency Working Group on Food Marketed to Children 
     complies with Executive Order No. 13563.
       Sec. 621.  None of the funds made available by this or any 
     other Act may be used to pay the salaries and expenses for 
     the following positions:
       (1) Director, White House Office of Health Reform, or any 
     substantially similar position.
       (2) Assistant to the President for Energy and Climate 
     Change, or any substantially similar position.
       (3) Senior Advisor to the Secretary of the Treasury 
     assigned to the Presidential Task Force on the Auto Industry 
     and Senior Counselor for Manufacturing Policy, or any 
     substantially similar position.
       (4) White House Director of Urban Affairs, or any 
     substantially similar position.
       Sec. 622.  None of the funds made available by this Act may 
     be used to enter into a contract, memorandum of 
     understanding, or cooperative agreement with, make a grant 
     to, or provide a loan or loan guarantee to, any corporation 
     that has any unpaid Federal tax liability that has been 
     assessed, for which all

[[Page 11936]]

     judicial and administrative remedies have been exhausted or 
     have lapsed, and that is not being paid in a timely manner 
     pursuant to an agreement with the authority responsible for 
     collecting the tax liability, where the awarding agency is 
     aware of the unpaid tax liability, unless the Federal agency 
     has considered suspension or debarment of the corporation and 
     has made a determination that this further action is not 
     necessary to protect the interests of the Government.
       Sec. 623.  None of the funds made available by this Act may 
     be used to enter into a contract, memorandum of 
     understanding, or cooperative agreement with, make a grant 
     to, or provide a loan or loan guarantee to, any corporation 
     that was convicted of a felony criminal violation under any 
     Federal law within the preceding 24 months, where the 
     awarding agency is aware of the conviction, unless the 
     Federal agency has considered suspension or debarment of the 
     corporation and has made a determination that this further 
     action is not necessary to protect the interests of the 
     Government.
       Sec. 624. (a) There are appropriated for the following 
     activities the amounts required under current law:
       (1) Compensation of the President (3 U.S.C. 102).
       (2) Payments to--
       (A) the Judicial Officers' Retirement Fund (28 U.S.C. 
     377(o));
       (B) the Judicial Survivors' Annuities Fund (28 U.S.C. 
     376(c)); and
       (C) the United States Court of Federal Claims Judges' 
     Retirement Fund (28 U.S.C. 178(l)).
       (3) Payment of Government contributions--
       (A) with respect to the health benefits of retired 
     employees, as authorized by chapter 89 of title 5, United 
     States Code, and the Retired Federal Employees Health 
     Benefits Act (74 Stat. 849); and
       (B) with respect to the life insurance benefits for 
     employees retiring after December 31, 1989 (5 U.S.C. ch. 87).
       (4) Payment to finance the unfunded liability of new and 
     increased annuity benefits under the Civil Service Retirement 
     and Disability Fund (5 U.S.C. 8348).
       (5) Payment of annuities authorized to be paid from the 
     Civil Service Retirement and Disability Fund by statutory 
     provisions other than subchapter III of chapter 83 or chapter 
     84 of title 5, United States Code.
       (b) Nothing in this section may be construed to exempt any 
     amount appropriated by this section from any otherwise 
     applicable limitation on the use of funds contained in this 
     Act.
       Sec. 625.  During fiscal year 2015, no funds shall be 
     obligated from the Securities and Exchange Commission Reserve 
     Fund established by section 991 of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street 
     Reform and Consumer Protection Act (Public Law 111-203).

                              {time}  2230


                    Amendment Offered by Ms. Waters

  Ms. WATERS. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Page 104, after line 21, insert the following:
       Sec. __.  Section 204 of the Investment Advisers Act of 
     1940 (15 U.S.C. 80b-4) is amended by adding at the end the 
     following new subsection:
       ``(e) Inspection and Examination Fees.--
       ``(1) In general.--The Commission shall collect an annual 
     fee from investment advisers that are subject to inspection 
     or examination by the Commission under this title to defray 
     the cost of such inspections and examinations.
       ``(2) Exemptions for certain state-regulated investment 
     advisers.--No fees shall be collected under this subsection 
     from any investment adviser that is prohibited from 
     registering with the Commission under section 203 by reason 
     of section 203A.
       ``(3) Fee amounts.--
       ``(A) Amount to be collected.--
       ``(i) In general.--The Commission shall seek to ensure that 
     the aggregate amount of fees collected under this subsection 
     with respect to a specific fiscal year are equal to the 
     estimated cost of the Commission in carrying out additional 
     inspections and examinations for such fiscal year.
       ``(ii) Additional inspections and examinations defined.--
     For purposes of this subparagraph and with respect to a 
     fiscal year, the term `additional inspections and 
     examinations' means those inspections and examinations of 
     investment advisers under this title for such fiscal year 
     that exceed the number of inspections and examinations of 
     investment advisers under this title conducted during fiscal 
     year 2012.
       ``(B) Fee calculation formula.--The Commission shall 
     establish by rulemaking a formula for determining the fee 
     amount to be assessed against individual investment advisers, 
     which shall take into account the following factors:
       ``(i) The anticipated costs of conducting inspections and 
     examinations of investment advisers under this title, 
     including the anticipated frequency of such inspections and 
     examinations.
       ``(ii) The investment adviser's size, including the assets 
     under management of the investment adviser.
       ``(iii) The number and type of clients of the investment 
     adviser, and the extent to which the adviser's clients pay 
     other fees established by the Commission, including 
     registration and transaction fees.
       ``(iv) Such other objective factors, such as risk 
     characteristics, as the Commission determines to be 
     appropriate.
       ``(C) Adjustment of formula.--Prior to the end of each 
     fiscal year, the Commission shall review the fee calculation 
     formula and, if, after allowing for a period of public 
     comment, the Commission determines that the formula needs to 
     be revised, the Commission shall revise such formula before 
     fees are assessed for the following fiscal year.
       ``(4) Public disclosures.--The Commission shall make the 
     following information publicly available, including on the 
     Web site of the Commission:
       ``(A) The formula used to determine the fee amount to be 
     assessed against individual investment advisers, and any 
     adjustment made to such formula.
       ``(B) The factors used to determine such formula, including 
     any additional objective factors used by the Commission 
     pursuant to paragraph (3)(B)(iv).
       ``(5) Audit.--
       ``(A) In general.--The Comptroller General of the United 
     States shall, every 2 years, conduct an audit of the use of 
     the fees collected by the Commission under this subsection, 
     the reviews of the formula used to calculate such fees, and 
     any adjustments made by the Commission to such formula.
       ``(B) Report.--After conducting each audit required under 
     subparagraph (A), the Comptroller General shall issue a 
     report on such audit to the Committee on Financial Services 
     of the House of Representatives and the Committee on Banking, 
     Housing, and Urban Affairs of the Senate.
       ``(6) Treatment of fees.--
       ``(A) In general.--Funds derived from fees assessed under 
     this subsection shall be available to the Commission, without 
     further appropriation or fiscal year limitation, to pay any 
     costs associated with inspecting and examining investment 
     advisers that are subject to inspection and examination under 
     this title.
       ``(B) Funds not public funds.--Funds derived from fees 
     assessed under this subsection shall not be construed to be 
     Government or public funds or appropriated money. 
     Notwithstanding any other provision of law, funds derived 
     from fees assessed under this subsection shall not be subject 
     to apportionment for the purpose of chapter 15 of title 31, 
     United States Code, or under any other authority.
       ``(C) Funds supplemental to other amounts.--Funds derived 
     from fees assessed under this subsection shall supplement, 
     and be in addition to, any other amounts available to the 
     Commission, under a regular appropriation or otherwise, for 
     the purpose described in subparagraph (A).''.

  Mr. CRENSHAW (during the reading). Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of 
order on the gentlewoman's amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. A point of order is reserved.
  The Clerk will continue to report the amendment.
  The Clerk continued to read.
  Ms. WATERS (during the reading). Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous 
consent to dispense with the reading.
  The Acting CHAIR. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentlewoman from California?
  There was no objection.
  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 661, the gentlewoman 
from California (Ms. Waters) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from California.
  Ms. WATERS. Mr. Chairman, my amendment is a commonsense provision 
that would help reverse some of the damaging efforts directed at the 
SEC we have seen this Congress, efforts that have been squarely aimed 
at hamstringing the Commission, including: underfunding the SEC by $300 
million, or 20 percent below the President's fiscal year 2015 request; 
bogging down the SEC in onerous cost-benefit analysis provisions that 
would divert resources away from important efforts, like enforcement; 
and myriad attempts in the Financial Services Committee to limit the 
information available to retirees that make decisions about whether to 
put their hard-earned money into public companies.
  My amendment would help to counteract these efforts by providing the 
SEC with the authority to impose and collect reasonable user fees on 
federally registered investment advisers for the purpose of increasing 
the number and frequency of SEC examinations. This is consistent with 
my bill, H.R.

[[Page 11937]]

1627, the Investment Adviser Examination Improvement Act, which I have 
coauthored with Representative Delaney.
  Today, investment advisers may go more than a decade before being 
visited by the SEC. It is absolutely essential that we improve the 
oversight of investment advisers, the people that manage the assets of 
millions of individual and institutional investors across the country. 
This is particularly true if we are underfunding the SEC by $300 
million, as this underlying bill proposes.
  The SEC currently only examines approximately 9 percent of advisers 
annually out of the almost 11,000 advisers registered with the 
Commission. The legislation and this amendment provide the SEC with 
additional resources to conduct more examinations and protect 
investors.
  I believe this amendment and our bill provides the simplest, most 
efficient solution to the problem of inadequate adviser oversight. 
Also, because the user fees contemplated in the amendment would only be 
used to fund the regulation of investment advisers and not to subsidize 
other functions at the SEC, I think that this option would be more 
cost-effective for the industry. In fact, a study by the Boston 
Consulting Group supports that point.
  This amendment will help the SEC to close this resource gap. By 
entrusting this responsibility to the Commission, it will also leverage 
their 70-year history of experience in this regulatory role and prevent 
the establishment of a duplicative SRO bureaucracy.
  In addition to consumer and retiree advocates, my bill is supported 
by the investment adviser industry, including the Investment Adviser 
Association, the Financial Planning Association, the National 
Association of Personal Financial Advisers, and the Certified Financial 
Planner Board. They support my bill because they know that clear rules 
of the road and robust examinations bolster public confidence in the 
market and ultimately help their bottom line.
  I urge the adoption of this amendment, and I yield back the balance 
of my time.


                             Point of Order

  Mr. CRENSHAW. Mr. Chairman, I make a point of order against the 
amendment because it proposes to change existing law and constitutes 
legislation in an appropriation bill and, therefore, violates clause 2 
of rule XXI.
  The rule states, in pertinent part:
  ``An amendment to a general appropriation bill shall not be in order 
if changing existing law.''
  This amendment directly amends existing law.
  I ask for a ruling from the Chair.
  The Acting CHAIR (Mr. Thompson of Pennsylvania). Does any other 
Member wish to be heard on the point of order?
  If not, the Chair is prepared to rule.
  The Chair finds that this amendment directly amends existing law. The 
amendment, therefore, constitutes legislation in violation of clause 2 
of rule XXI. The point of order is sustained, and the amendment is not 
in order.
  The Clerk will read.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Sec. 626.  None of the funds made available by this Act 
     shall be used by the Securities and Exchange Commission to 
     finalize, issue, or implement any rule, regulation, or order 
     regarding the disclosure of political contributions, 
     contributions to tax exempt organizations, or dues paid to 
     trade associations.
       Sec. 627.  Section 2(c) of the Multinational Species 
     Conservation Fund Semipostal Stamp Act of 2010 (Public Law 
     111-241; 39 U.S.C. 416 note) is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (2), by striking ``2 years'' and inserting 
     ``6 years''; and
       (2) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(5) Stamp depictions.--Members of the public shall be 
     offered a choice of 5 stamps under this Act, depicting an 
     African elephant or an Asian elephant, a rhinoceros, a tiger, 
     a marine turtle, and a great ape, respectively.''.
       Sec. 628. (a) Not later than 180 days after the date of 
     enactment of this section, the agencies specified in 
     subsection (b) shall each submit a report to the Committees 
     on Appropriations of the House of Representatives and the 
     Senate on--
       (1) increasing public participation in the rulemaking 
     process and reducing uncertainty;
       (2) improving coordination with other Federal agencies to 
     eliminate redundant, inconsistent, and overlapping 
     regulations; and
       (3) identifying existing regulations that have been 
     reviewed and determined to be outmoded, ineffective, or 
     excessively burdensome.
       (b) The agencies required to submit a report specified in 
     subsection (a) are--
       (1) the Consumer Product Safety Commission;
       (2) the Federal Communications Commission;
       (3) the Federal Trade Commission; and
       (4) the Securities and Exchange Commission.

  Mr. CRENSHAW. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent that the 
remainder of the bill through page 152, line 9, be considered as read, 
printed in the Record, and open to amendment at any point.
  The Acting CHAIR. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman 
from Florida?
  There was no objection.
  The text of that portion of the bill is as follows:

       Sec. 629.  None of the funds made available in this Act may 
     be used to award a contract for services to train any 
     employee of an Executive agency (as that term is defined in 
     section 105 of title 5, United States Code) to learn how to 
     support or defeat legislation pending before Congress.
       Sec. 630. (a) None of the funds made available in this Act 
     to the Internal Revenue Service may be used to destroy, 
     deface, or dispose of records, regardless of their physical 
     form or characteristics, in contravention of chapters 29, 31, 
     and 33 of title 44, United States Code (commonly referred to 
     as the Federal Records Act).
       (b) Not later than 90 days after the date of enactment of 
     this Act, the Archivist of the United States shall conduct an 
     inspection and submit a report to the Committees on 
     Appropriations of the House of Representatives and the 
     Senate, the House Committee on Oversight and Government 
     Reform, and the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and 
     Government Affairs on the compliance by the Internal Revenue 
     Service with the provisions of chapters 29, 31, and 33 of 
     title 44, United States Code, during calendar years 2009 
     through 2013.
       Sec. 631.  None of the funds made available by this Act may 
     be used to require the disclosure by a provider of an 
     electronic communication service or a remote computing 
     service of the contents or related information detailed in 
     section 2703(c) of title 18, United States Code, of a wire or 
     electronic communication that is in electronic storage with 
     or otherwise held or maintained by the provider, as such 
     terms are defined in section 2510 of title 18, United States 
     Code, by any other than a means authorized under section 
     2703(b)(1)(A) of title 18, United States Code.
       Sec. 632.  Section 716 of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform 
     and Consumer Protection Act (15 U.S.C. 8305) is amended--
       (1) in subsection (b)--
       (A) in paragraph (2)(B), by striking ``insured depository 
     institution'' and inserting ``covered depository 
     institution''; and
       (B) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(3) Covered depository institution.--The term `covered 
     depository institution' means--
       ``(A) an insured depository institution, as that term is 
     defined in section 3 of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act (12 
     U.S.C. 1813); and
       ``(B) a United States uninsured branch or agency of a 
     foreign bank.'';
       (2) in subsection (c)--
       (A) in the heading for such subsection, by striking 
     ``Insured'' and inserting ``Covered'';
       (B) by striking ``an insured'' and inserting ``a covered'';
       (C) by striking ``such insured'' and inserting ``such 
     covered''; and
       (D) by striking ``or savings and loan holding company'' and 
     inserting ``savings and loan holding company, or foreign 
     banking organization (as such term is defined under 
     Regulation K of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve 
     System (12 C.F.R. 211.21(o)))'';
       (3) by amending subsection (d) to read as follows:
       ``(d) Only Bona Fide Hedging and Traditional Bank 
     Activities Permitted.--
       ``(1) In general.--The prohibition in subsection (a) shall 
     not apply to any covered depository institution that limits 
     its swap and security-based swap activities to the following:
       ``(A) Hedging and other similar risk mitigation 
     activities.--Hedging and other similar risk mitigating 
     activities directly related to the covered depository 
     institution's activities.
       ``(B) Non-structured finance swap activities.--Acting as a 
     swaps entity for swaps or security-based swaps other than a 
     structured finance swap.
       ``(C) Certain structured finance swap activities.--Acting 
     as a swaps entity for swaps or security-based swaps that are 
     structured finance swaps, if--
       ``(i) such structured finance swaps are undertaken for 
     hedging or risk management purposes; or
       ``(ii) each asset-backed security underlying such 
     structured finance swaps is of a credit

[[Page 11938]]

     quality and of a type or category with respect to which the 
     prudential regulators have jointly adopted rules authorizing 
     swap or security-based swap activity by covered depository 
     institutions.
       ``(2) Definitions.--For purposes of this subsection:
       ``(A) Structured finance swap.--The term `structured 
     finance swap' means a swap or security-based swap based on an 
     asset-backed security (or group or index primarily comprised 
     of asset-backed securities).
       ``(B) Asset-backed security.--The term `asset-backed 
     security' has the meaning given such term under section 3(a) 
     of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78c(a)).'';
       (4) in subsection (e), by striking ``an insured'' and 
     inserting ``a covered''; and
       (5) in subsection (f)--
       (A) by striking ``an insured depository'' and inserting ``a 
     covered depository''; and
       (B) by striking ``the insured depository'' each place such 
     term appears and inserting ``the covered depository''.

                               TITLE VII

                  GENERAL PROVISIONS--GOVERNMENT-WIDE

                Departments, Agencies, and Corporations

                     (including transfer of funds)

       Sec. 701.  No department, agency, or instrumentality of the 
     United States receiving appropriated funds under this or any 
     other Act for fiscal year 2015 shall obligate or expend any 
     such funds, unless such department, agency, or 
     instrumentality has in place, and will continue to administer 
     in good faith, a written policy designed to ensure that all 
     of its workplaces are free from the illegal use, possession, 
     or distribution of controlled substances (as defined in the 
     Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 802)) by the officers 
     and employees of such department, agency, or instrumentality.
       Sec. 702.  Unless otherwise specifically provided, the 
     maximum amount allowable during the current fiscal year in 
     accordance with subsection 1343(c) of title 31, United States 
     Code, for the purchase of any passenger motor vehicle 
     (exclusive of buses, ambulances, law enforcement vehicles, 
     protective vehicles, and undercover surveillance vehicles), 
     is hereby fixed at $13,197 except station wagons for which 
     the maximum shall be $13,631: Provided, That these limits may 
     be exceeded by not to exceed $3,700 for police-type vehicles, 
     and by not to exceed $4,000 for special heavy-duty vehicles: 
     Provided further, That the limits set forth in this section 
     may not be exceeded by more than 5 percent for electric or 
     hybrid vehicles purchased for demonstration under the 
     provisions of the Electric and Hybrid Vehicle Research, 
     Development, and Demonstration Act of 1976: Provided further, 
     That the limits set forth in this section may be exceeded by 
     the incremental cost of clean alternative fuels vehicles 
     acquired pursuant to Public Law 101-549 over the cost of 
     comparable conventionally fueled vehicles: Provided further, 
     That the limits set forth in this section shall not apply to 
     any vehicle that is a commercial item and which operates on 
     emerging motor vehicle technology, including but not limited 
     to electric, plug-in hybrid electric, and hydrogen fuel cell 
     vehicles.
       Sec. 703.  Appropriations of the executive departments and 
     independent establishments for the current fiscal year 
     available for expenses of travel, or for the expenses of the 
     activity concerned, are hereby made available for quarters 
     allowances and cost-of-living allowances, in accordance with 
     5 U.S.C. 5922 through 5924.
       Sec. 704.  Unless otherwise specified in law, during the 
     current fiscal year, no part of any appropriation contained 
     in this or any other Act shall be used to pay the 
     compensation of any officer or employee of the Government of 
     the United States (including any agency the majority of the 
     stock of which is owned by the Government of the United 
     States) whose post of duty is in the continental United 
     States unless such person: (1) is a citizen of the United 
     States; (2) is a person who is lawfully admitted for 
     permanent residence and is seeking citizenship as outlined in 
     8 U.S.C. 1324b(a)(3)(B); (3) is a person who is admitted as a 
     refugee under 8 U.S.C. 1157 or is granted asylum under 8 
     U.S.C. 1158 and has filed a declaration of intention to 
     become a lawful permanent resident and then a citizen when 
     eligible; or (4) is a person who owes allegiance to the 
     United States: Provided, That for purposes of this section, 
     affidavits signed by any such person shall be considered 
     prima facie evidence that the requirements of this section 
     with respect to his or her status are being complied with: 
     Provided further, That for purposes of subsections (2) and 
     (3) such affidavits shall be submitted prior to employment 
     and updated thereafter as necessary: Provided further, That 
     any payment made to any officer or employee contrary to the 
     provisions of this section shall be recoverable in action by 
     the Federal Government: Provided further, That this section 
     shall not apply to any person who is an officer or employee 
     of the Government of the United States on the date of 
     enactment of this Act, or to international broadcasters 
     employed by the Broadcasting Board of Governors, or to 
     temporary employment of translators, or to temporary 
     employment in the field service (not to exceed 60 days) as a 
     result of emergencies: Provided further, That this section 
     does not apply to the employment as Wildland firefighters for 
     not more than 120 days of nonresident aliens employed by the 
     Department of the Interior or the USDA Forest Service 
     pursuant to an agreement with another country.
       Sec. 705.  Appropriations available to any department or 
     agency during the current fiscal year for necessary expenses, 
     including maintenance or operating expenses, shall also be 
     available for payment to the General Services Administration 
     for charges for space and services and those expenses of 
     renovation and alteration of buildings and facilities which 
     constitute public improvements performed in accordance with 
     the Public Buildings Act of 1959 (73 Stat. 479), the Public 
     Buildings Amendments of 1972 (86 Stat. 216), or other 
     applicable law.
       Sec. 706.  In addition to funds provided in this or any 
     other Act, all Federal agencies are authorized to receive and 
     use funds resulting from the sale of materials, including 
     Federal records disposed of pursuant to a records schedule 
     recovered through recycling or waste prevention programs. 
     Such funds shall be available until expended for the 
     following purposes:
       (1) Acquisition, waste reduction and prevention, and 
     recycling programs as described in Executive Order No. 13423 
     (January 24, 2007), including any such programs adopted prior 
     to the effective date of the Executive Order.
       (2) Other Federal agency environmental management programs, 
     including, but not limited to, the development and 
     implementation of hazardous waste management and pollution 
     prevention programs.
       (3) Other employee programs as authorized by law or as 
     deemed appropriate by the head of the Federal agency.
       Sec. 707.  Funds made available by this or any other Act 
     for administrative expenses in the current fiscal year of the 
     corporations and agencies subject to chapter 91 of title 31, 
     United States Code, shall be available, in addition to 
     objects for which such funds are otherwise available, for 
     rent in the District of Columbia; services in accordance with 
     5 U.S.C. 3109; and the objects specified under this head, all 
     the provisions of which shall be applicable to the 
     expenditure of such funds unless otherwise specified in the 
     Act by which they are made available: Provided, That in the 
     event any functions budgeted as administrative expenses are 
     subsequently transferred to or paid from other funds, the 
     limitations on administrative expenses shall be 
     correspondingly reduced.
       Sec. 708.  No part of any appropriation contained in this 
     or any other Act shall be available for interagency financing 
     of boards (except Federal Executive Boards), commissions, 
     councils, committees, or similar groups (whether or not they 
     are interagency entities) which do not have a prior and 
     specific statutory approval to receive financial support from 
     more than one agency or instrumentality.
       Sec. 709.  None of the funds made available pursuant to the 
     provisions of this or any other Act shall be used to 
     implement, administer, or enforce any regulation which has 
     been disapproved pursuant to a joint resolution duly adopted 
     in accordance with the applicable law of the United States.
       Sec. 710.  During the period in which the head of any 
     department or agency, or any other officer or civilian 
     employee of the Federal Government appointed by the President 
     of the United States, holds office, no funds may be obligated 
     or expended in excess of $5,000 to furnish or redecorate the 
     office of such department head, agency head, officer, or 
     employee, or to purchase furniture or make improvements for 
     any such office, unless advance notice of such furnishing or 
     redecoration is transmitted to the Committees on 
     Appropriations of the House of Representatives and the 
     Senate. For the purposes of this section, the term ``office'' 
     shall include the entire suite of offices assigned to the 
     individual, as well as any other space used primarily by the 
     individual or the use of which is directly controlled by the 
     individual.
       Sec. 711.  Notwithstanding 31 U.S.C. 1346, or section 708 
     of this Act, funds made available for the current fiscal year 
     by this or any other Act shall be available for the 
     interagency funding of national security and emergency 
     preparedness telecommunications initiatives which benefit 
     multiple Federal departments, agencies, or entities, as 
     provided by Executive Order No. 13618 (July 6, 2012).
       Sec. 712. (a) None of the funds made available by this or 
     any other Act may be obligated or expended by any department, 
     agency, or other instrumentality of the Federal Government to 
     pay the salaries or expenses of any individual appointed to a 
     position of a confidential or policy-determining character 
     that is excepted from the competitive service under section 
     3302 of title 5, United States Code, (pursuant to schedule C 
     of subpart C of part 213 of title 5 of the Code of Federal 
     Regulations) unless the head of the applicable department, 
     agency, or other instrumentality employing such schedule C 
     individual certifies to the Director of the Office of 
     Personnel Management that the schedule C position occupied by 
     the individual was not created solely or primarily in order 
     to detail the individual to the White House.

[[Page 11939]]

       (b) The provisions of this section shall not apply to 
     Federal employees or members of the armed forces detailed to 
     or from an element of the intelligence community (as that 
     term is defined under section 3(4) of the National Security 
     Act of 1947 (50 U.S.C. 3003(4))).
       Sec. 713.  No part of any appropriation contained in this 
     or any other Act shall be available for the payment of the 
     salary of any officer or employee of the Federal Government, 
     who--
       (1) prohibits or prevents, or attempts or threatens to 
     prohibit or prevent, any other officer or employee of the 
     Federal Government from having any direct oral or written 
     communication or contact with any Member, committee, or 
     subcommittee of the Congress in connection with any matter 
     pertaining to the employment of such other officer or 
     employee or pertaining to the department or agency of such 
     other officer or employee in any way, irrespective of whether 
     such communication or contact is at the initiative of such 
     other officer or employee or in response to the request or 
     inquiry of such Member, committee, or subcommittee; or
       (2) removes, suspends from duty without pay, demotes, 
     reduces in rank, seniority, status, pay, or performance or 
     efficiency rating, denies promotion to, relocates, reassigns, 
     transfers, disciplines, or discriminates in regard to any 
     employment right, entitlement, or benefit, or any term or 
     condition of employment of, any other officer or employee of 
     the Federal Government, or attempts or threatens to commit 
     any of the foregoing actions with respect to such other 
     officer or employee, by reason of any communication or 
     contact of such other officer or employee with any Member, 
     committee, or subcommittee of the Congress as described in 
     paragraph (1).
       Sec. 714. (a) None of the funds made available in this or 
     any other Act may be obligated or expended for any employee 
     training that--
       (1) does not meet identified needs for knowledge, skills, 
     and abilities bearing directly upon the performance of 
     official duties;
       (2) contains elements likely to induce high levels of 
     emotional response or psychological stress in some 
     participants;
       (3) does not require prior employee notification of the 
     content and methods to be used in the training and written 
     end of course evaluation;
       (4) contains any methods or content associated with 
     religious or quasi-religious belief systems or ``new age'' 
     belief systems as defined in Equal Employment Opportunity 
     Commission Notice N-915.022, dated September 2, 1988; or
       (5) is offensive to, or designed to change, participants' 
     personal values or lifestyle outside the workplace.
       (b) Nothing in this section shall prohibit, restrict, or 
     otherwise preclude an agency from conducting training bearing 
     directly upon the performance of official duties.
       Sec. 715.  No part of any funds appropriated in this or any 
     other Act shall be used by an agency of the executive branch, 
     other than for normal and recognized executive-legislative 
     relationships, for publicity or propaganda purposes, and for 
     the preparation, distribution or use of any kit, pamphlet, 
     booklet, publication, radio, television, or film presentation 
     designed to support or defeat legislation pending before the 
     Congress, except in presentation to the Congress itself.
       Sec. 716.  None of the funds appropriated by this or any 
     other Act may be used by an agency to provide a Federal 
     employee's home address to any labor organization except when 
     the employee has authorized such disclosure or when such 
     disclosure has been ordered by a court of competent 
     jurisdiction.
       Sec. 717.  None of the funds made available in this or any 
     other Act may be used to provide any non-public information 
     such as mailing, telephone or electronic mailing lists to any 
     person or any organization outside of the Federal Government 
     without the approval of the Committees on Appropriations of 
     the House of Representatives and the Senate.
       Sec. 718.  No part of any appropriation contained in this 
     or any other Act shall be used directly or indirectly, 
     including by private contractor, for publicity or propaganda 
     purposes within the United States not heretofore authorized 
     by Congress.
       Sec. 719. (a) In this section, the term ``agency''--
       (1) means an Executive agency, as defined under 5 U.S.C. 
     105; and
       (2) includes a military department, as defined under 
     section 102 of such title, the Postal Service, and the Postal 
     Regulatory Commission.
       (b) Unless authorized in accordance with law or regulations 
     to use such time for other purposes, an employee of an agency 
     shall use official time in an honest effort to perform 
     official duties. An employee not under a leave system, 
     including a Presidential appointee exempted under 5 U.S.C. 
     6301(2), has an obligation to expend an honest effort and a 
     reasonable proportion of such employee's time in the 
     performance of official duties.
       Sec. 720.  Notwithstanding 31 U.S.C. 1346 and section 708 
     of this Act, funds made available for the current fiscal year 
     by this or any other Act to any department or agency, which 
     is a member of the Federal Accounting Standards Advisory 
     Board (FASAB), shall be available to finance an appropriate 
     share of FASAB administrative costs.
       Sec. 721.  Notwithstanding 31 U.S.C. 1346 and section 708 
     of this Act, the head of each Executive department and agency 
     is hereby authorized to transfer to or reimburse ``General 
     Services Administration, Government-wide Policy'' with the 
     approval of the Director of the Office of Management and 
     Budget, funds made available for the current fiscal year by 
     this or any other Act, including rebates from charge card and 
     other contracts: Provided, That these funds shall be 
     administered by the Administrator of General Services to 
     support Government-wide and other multi-agency financial, 
     information technology, procurement, and other management 
     innovations, initiatives, and activities, as approved by the 
     Director of the Office of Management and Budget, in 
     consultation with the appropriate interagency and multi-
     agency groups designated by the Director (including the 
     President's Management Council for overall management 
     improvement initiatives, the Chief Financial Officers Council 
     for financial management initiatives, the Chief Information 
     Officers Council for information technology initiatives, the 
     Chief Human Capital Officers Council for human capital 
     initiatives, the Chief Acquisition Officers Council for 
     procurement initiatives, and the Performance Improvement 
     Council for performance improvement initiatives): Provided 
     further, That the total funds transferred or reimbursed shall 
     not exceed $17,000,000 for Government-Wide innovations, 
     initiatives, and activities: Provided further, That the funds 
     transferred to or for reimbursement of ``General Services 
     Administration, Government-wide Policy'' during fiscal year 
     2015 shall remain available for obligation through September 
     30, 2016: Provided further, That such transfers or 
     reimbursements may only be made after 15 days following 
     notification of the Committees on Appropriations of the House 
     of Representatives and the Senate by the Director of the 
     Office of Management and Budget.
       Sec. 722.  Notwithstanding any other provision of law, a 
     woman may breastfeed her child at any location in a Federal 
     building or on Federal property, if the woman and her child 
     are otherwise authorized to be present at the location.
       Sec. 723.  Notwithstanding 31 U.S.C. 1346, or section 708 
     of this Act, funds made available for the current fiscal year 
     by this or any other Act shall be available for the 
     interagency funding of specific projects, workshops, studies, 
     and similar efforts to carry out the purposes of the National 
     Science and Technology Council (authorized by Executive Order 
     No. 12881), which benefit multiple Federal departments, 
     agencies, or entities: Provided, That the Office of 
     Management and Budget shall provide a report describing the 
     budget of and resources connected with the National Science 
     and Technology Council to the Committees on Appropriations, 
     the House Committee on Science and Technology, and the Senate 
     Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation 90 days 
     after enactment of this Act.
       Sec. 724.  Any request for proposals, solicitation, grant 
     application, form, notification, press release, or other 
     publications involving the distribution of Federal funds 
     shall indicate the agency providing the funds, the Catalog of 
     Federal Domestic Assistance Number, as applicable, and the 
     amount provided: Provided, That this section shall apply to 
     direct payments, formula funds, and grants received by a 
     State receiving Federal funds.
       Sec. 725. (a) Prohibition of Federal Agency Monitoring of 
     Individuals' Internet Use.--None of the funds made available 
     in this or any other Act may be used by any Federal agency--
       (1) to collect, review, or create any aggregation of data, 
     derived from any means, that includes any personally 
     identifiable information relating to an individual's access 
     to or use of any Federal Government Internet site of the 
     agency; or
       (2) to enter into any agreement with a third party 
     (including another government agency) to collect, review, or 
     obtain any aggregation of data, derived from any means, that 
     includes any personally identifiable information relating to 
     an individual's access to or use of any nongovernmental 
     Internet site.
       (b) Exceptions.--The limitations established in subsection 
     (a) shall not apply to--
       (1) any record of aggregate data that does not identify 
     particular persons;
       (2) any voluntary submission of personally identifiable 
     information;
       (3) any action taken for law enforcement, regulatory, or 
     supervisory purposes, in accordance with applicable law; or
       (4) any action described in subsection (a)(1) that is a 
     system security action taken by the operator of an Internet 
     site and is necessarily incident to providing the Internet 
     site services or to protecting the rights or property of the 
     provider of the Internet site.
       (c) Definitions.--For the purposes of this section:
       (1) The term ``regulatory'' means agency actions to 
     implement, interpret or enforce authorities provided in law.

[[Page 11940]]

       (2) The term ``supervisory'' means examinations of the 
     agency's supervised institutions, including assessing safety 
     and soundness, overall financial condition, management 
     practices and policies and compliance with applicable 
     standards as provided in law.
       Sec. 726. (a) None of the funds appropriated by this Act 
     may be used to enter into or renew a contract which includes 
     a provision providing prescription drug coverage, except 
     where the contract also includes a provision for 
     contraceptive coverage.
       (b) Nothing in this section shall apply to a contract 
     with--
       (1) any of the following religious plans:
       (A) Personal Care's HMO; and
       (B) OSF HealthPlans, Inc.; and
       (2) any existing or future plan, if the carrier for the 
     plan objects to such coverage on the basis of religious 
     beliefs.
       (c) In implementing this section, any plan that enters into 
     or renews a contract under this section may not subject any 
     individual to discrimination on the basis that the individual 
     refuses to prescribe or otherwise provide for contraceptives 
     because such activities would be contrary to the individual's 
     religious beliefs or moral convictions.
       (d) Nothing in this section shall be construed to require 
     coverage of abortion or abortion-related services.
       Sec. 727.  The United States is committed to ensuring the 
     health of its Olympic, Pan American, and Paralympic athletes, 
     and supports the strict adherence to anti-doping in sport 
     through testing, adjudication, education, and research as 
     performed by nationally recognized oversight authorities.
       Sec. 728.  Notwithstanding any other provision of law, 
     funds appropriated for official travel to Federal departments 
     and agencies may be used by such departments and agencies, if 
     consistent with Office of Management and Budget Circular A-
     126 regarding official travel for Government personnel, to 
     participate in the fractional aircraft ownership pilot 
     program.
       Sec. 729.  Notwithstanding any other provision of law, none 
     of the funds appropriated or made available under this or any 
     other appropriations Act may be used to implement or enforce 
     restrictions or limitations on the Coast Guard Congressional 
     Fellowship Program, or to implement the proposed regulations 
     of the Office of Personnel Management to add sections 300.311 
     through 300.316 to part 300 of title 5 of the Code of Federal 
     Regulations, published in the Federal Register, volume 68, 
     number 174, on September 9, 2003 (relating to the detail of 
     executive branch employees to the legislative branch).
       Sec. 730.  Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no 
     executive branch agency shall purchase, construct, or lease 
     any additional facilities, except within or contiguous to 
     existing locations, to be used for the purpose of conducting 
     Federal law enforcement training without the advance approval 
     of the Committees on Appropriations of the House of 
     Representatives and the Senate, except that the Federal Law 
     Enforcement Training Center is authorized to obtain the 
     temporary use of additional facilities by lease, contract, or 
     other agreement for training which cannot be accommodated in 
     existing Center facilities.
       Sec. 731.  Unless otherwise authorized by existing law, 
     none of the funds provided in this or any other Act may be 
     used by an executive branch agency to produce any prepackaged 
     news story intended for broadcast or distribution in the 
     United States, unless the story includes a clear notification 
     within the text or audio of the prepackaged news story that 
     the prepackaged news story was prepared or funded by that 
     executive branch agency.
       Sec. 732.  None of the funds made available in this Act may 
     be used in contravention of section 552a of title 5, United 
     States Code (popularly known as the Privacy Act), and 
     regulations implementing that section.
       Sec. 733. (a) In General.--None of the funds appropriated 
     or otherwise made available by this or any other Act may be 
     used for any Federal Government contract with any foreign 
     incorporated entity which is treated as an inverted domestic 
     corporation under section 835(b) of the Homeland Security Act 
     of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 395(b)) or any subsidiary of such an 
     entity.
       (b) Waivers.--
       (1) In general.--Any Secretary shall waive subsection (a) 
     with respect to any Federal Government contract under the 
     authority of such Secretary if the Secretary determines that 
     the waiver is required in the interest of national security.
       (2) Report to congress.--Any Secretary issuing a waiver 
     under paragraph (1) shall report such issuance to Congress.
       (c) Exception.--This section shall not apply to any Federal 
     Government contract entered into before the date of the 
     enactment of this Act, or to any task order issued pursuant 
     to such contract.
       Sec. 734.  During fiscal year 2015, for each employee who--
       (1) retires under section 8336(d)(2) or 8414(b)(1)(B) of 
     title 5, United States Code, or
       (2) retires under any other provision of subchapter III of 
     chapter 83 or chapter 84 of such title 5 and receives a 
     payment as an incentive to separate, the separating agency 
     shall remit to the Civil Service Retirement and Disability 
     Fund an amount equal to the Office of Personnel Management's 
     average unit cost of processing a retirement claim for the 
     preceding fiscal year. Such amounts shall be available until 
     expended to the Office of Personnel Management and shall be 
     deemed to be an administrative expense under section 
     8348(a)(1)(B) of title 5, United States Code.
       Sec. 735. (a) None of the funds made available in this or 
     any other Act may be used to recommend or require any entity 
     submitting an offer for a Federal contract or otherwise 
     performing or participating in acquisition at any stage of 
     the acquisition process (as defined in section 131 of title 
     41, United States Code) of property or services by the 
     Federal Government to disclose any of the following 
     information as a condition of submitting the offer or 
     otherwise performing in or participating in such acquisition:
       (1) Any payment consisting of a contribution, expenditure, 
     independent expenditure, or disbursement for an 
     electioneering communication that is made by the entity, its 
     officers or directors, or any of its affiliates or 
     subsidiaries to a candidate for election for Federal office 
     or to a political committee, or that is otherwise made with 
     respect to any election for Federal office.
       (2) Any disbursement of funds (other than a payment 
     described in paragraph (1)) made by the entity, its officers 
     or directors, or any of its affiliates or subsidiaries to any 
     person with the intent or the reasonable expectation that the 
     person will use the funds to make a payment described in 
     paragraph (1).
       (b) In this section, each of the terms ``contribution'', 
     ``expenditure'', ``independent expenditure'', 
     ``electioneering communication'', ``candidate'', 
     ``election'', and ``Federal office'' has the meaning given 
     such term in the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 (2 
     U.S.C. 431 et seq.).
       Sec. 736.  None of the funds made available in this or any 
     other Act may be used to pay for the painting of a portrait 
     of an officer or employee of the Federal government, 
     including the President, the Vice President, a member of 
     Congress (including a Delegate or a Resident Commissioner to 
     Congress), the head of an executive branch agency (as defined 
     in section 133 of title 41, United States Code), or the head 
     of an office of the legislative branch.
       Sec. 737. (a)(1) Notwithstanding any other provision of 
     law, and except as otherwise provided in this section, no 
     part of any of the funds appropriated for fiscal year 2015, 
     by this or any other Act, may be used to pay any prevailing 
     rate employee described in section 5342(a)(2)(A) of title 5, 
     United States Code--
       (A) during the period from the date of expiration of the 
     limitation imposed by the comparable section for previous 
     fiscal years until the normal effective date of the 
     applicable wage survey adjustment that is to take effect in 
     fiscal year 2015, in an amount that exceeds the rate payable 
     for the applicable grade and step of the applicable wage 
     schedule in accordance with such section; and
       (B) during the period consisting of the remainder of fiscal 
     year 2015, in an amount that exceeds, as a result of a wage 
     survey adjustment, the rate payable under subparagraph (A) by 
     more than the sum of--
       (i) the percentage adjustment taking effect in fiscal year 
     2015 under section 5303 of title 5, United States Code, in 
     the rates of pay under the General Schedule; and
       (ii) the difference between the overall average percentage 
     of the locality-based comparability payments taking effect in 
     fiscal year 2015 under section 5304 of such title (whether by 
     adjustment or otherwise), and the overall average percentage 
     of such payments which was effective in the previous fiscal 
     year under such section.
       (2) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no 
     prevailing rate employee described in subparagraph (B) or (C) 
     of section 5342(a)(2) of title 5, United States Code, and no 
     employee covered by section 5348 of such title, may be paid 
     during the periods for which paragraph (1) is in effect at a 
     rate that exceeds the rates that would be payable under 
     paragraph (1) were paragraph (1) applicable to such employee.
       (3) For the purposes of this subsection, the rates payable 
     to an employee who is covered by this subsection and who is 
     paid from a schedule not in existence on September 30, 2014, 
     shall be determined under regulations prescribed by the 
     Office of Personnel Management.
       (4) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, rates of 
     premium pay for employees subject to this subsection may not 
     be changed from the rates in effect on September 30, 2014, 
     except to the extent determined by the Office of Personnel 
     Management to be consistent with the purpose of this 
     subsection.
       (5) This subsection shall apply with respect to pay for 
     service performed after September 30, 2014.
       (6) For the purpose of administering any provision of law 
     (including any rule or regulation that provides premium pay, 
     retirement, life insurance, or any other employee benefit) 
     that requires any deduction or contribution, or that imposes 
     any requirement or limitation on the basis of a rate of 
     salary or basic pay, the rate of salary or basic pay payable 
     after the application of this subsection shall be treated as 
     the rate of salary or basic pay.
       (7) Nothing in this subsection shall be considered to 
     permit or require the payment to

[[Page 11941]]

     any employee covered by this subsection at a rate in excess 
     of the rate that would be payable were this subsection not in 
     effect.
       (8) The Office of Personnel Management may provide for 
     exceptions to the limitations imposed by this subsection if 
     the Office determines that such exceptions are necessary to 
     ensure the recruitment or retention of qualified employees.
       (b) Notwithstanding subsection (a), the adjustment in rates 
     of basic pay for the statutory pay systems that take place in 
     fiscal year 2015 under sections 5344 and 5348 of title 5, 
     United States Code, shall be--
       (1) not less than the percentage received by employees in 
     the same location whose rates of basic pay are adjusted 
     pursuant to the statutory pay systems under sections 5303 and 
     5304 of title 5, United States Code: Provided, That 
     prevailing rate employees at locations where there are no 
     employees whose pay is increased pursuant to sections 5303 
     and 5304 of title 5, United States Code, and prevailing rate 
     employees described in section 5343(a)(5) of title 5, United 
     States Code, shall be considered to be located in the pay 
     locality designated as ``Rest of United States'' pursuant to 
     section 5304 of title 5, United States Code, for purposes of 
     this subsection; and
       (2) effective as of the first day of the first applicable 
     pay period beginning after September 30, 2014.
       Sec. 738. (a) The Vice President may not receive a pay 
     raise in calendar year 2015, notwithstanding the rate 
     adjustment made under section 104 of title 3, United States 
     Code, or any other provision of law.
       (b) An employee serving in an Executive Schedule position, 
     or in a position for which the rate of pay is fixed by 
     statute at an Executive Schedule rate, may not receive a pay 
     rate increase in calendar year 2015, notwithstanding schedule 
     adjustments made under section 5318 of title 5, United States 
     Code, or any other provision of law, except as provided in 
     subsection (g), (h), or (i). This subsection applies only to 
     employees who are holding a position under a political 
     appointment.
       (c) A chief of mission or ambassador at large may not 
     receive a pay rate increase in calendar year 2015, 
     notwithstanding section 401 of the Foreign Service Act of 
     1980 (Public Law 96-465) or any other provision of law, 
     except as provided in subsection (g), (h), or (i).
       (d) Notwithstanding sections 5382 and 5383 of title 5, 
     United States Code, a pay rate increase may not be received 
     in calendar year 2015 (except as provided in subsection (g), 
     (h), or (i)) by--
       (1) a noncareer appointee in the Senior Executive Service 
     paid a rate of basic pay at or above level IV of the 
     Executive Schedule; or
       (2) a limited term appointee or limited emergency appointee 
     in the Senior Executive Service serving under a political 
     appointment and paid a rate of basic pay at or above level IV 
     of the Executive Schedule.
       (e) Any employee paid a rate of basic pay (including any 
     locality-based payments under section 5304 of title 5, United 
     States Code, or similar authority) at or above level IV of 
     the Executive Schedule who serves under a political 
     appointment may not receive a pay rate increase in calendar 
     year 2015, notwithstanding any other provision of law, except 
     as provided in subsection (g), (h), or (i). This subsection 
     does not apply to employees in the General Schedule pay 
     system or the Foreign Service pay system, or to employees 
     appointed under section 3161 of title 5, United States Code, 
     or to employees in another pay system whose position would be 
     classified at GS-15 or below if chapter 51 of title 5, United 
     States Code, applied to them.
       (f) Nothing in subsections (b) through (e) shall prevent 
     employees who do not serve under a political appointment from 
     receiving pay increases as otherwise provided under 
     applicable law.
       (g) A career appointee in the Senior Executive Service who 
     receives a Presidential appointment and who makes an election 
     to retain Senior Executive Service basic pay entitlements 
     under section 3392 of title 5, United States Code, is not 
     subject to this section.
       (h) A member of the Senior Foreign Service who receives a 
     Presidential appointment to any position in the executive 
     branch and who makes an election to retain Senior Foreign 
     Service pay entitlements under section 302(b) of the Foreign 
     Service Act of 1980 (Public Law 96-465) is not subject to 
     this section.
       (i) Notwithstanding subsections (b) through (e), an 
     employee in a covered position may receive a pay rate 
     increase upon an authorized movement to a different covered 
     position with higher-level duties and a pre-established 
     higher level or range of pay, except that any such increase 
     must be based on the rates of pay and applicable pay 
     limitations in effect on December 31, 2013.
       (j) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, for an 
     individual who is newly appointed to a covered position 
     during the period of time subject to this section, the 
     initial pay rate shall be based on the rates of pay and 
     applicable pay limitations in effect on December 31, 2013.
       (k) If an employee affected by subsections (b) through (e) 
     is subject to a biweekly pay period that begins in calendar 
     year 2015 but ends in calendar year 2016, the bar on the 
     employee's receipt of pay rate increases shall apply through 
     the end of that pay period.
       Sec. 739. (a) The head of any Executive branch department, 
     agency, board, commission, or office funded by this or any 
     other appropriations Act shall submit annual reports to the 
     Inspector General or senior ethics official for any entity 
     without an Inspector General, regarding the costs and 
     contracting procedures related to each conference held by any 
     such department, agency, board, commission, or office during 
     fiscal year 2015 for which the cost to the United States 
     Government was more than $100,000.
       (b) Each report submitted pursuant to subsection (a) shall 
     include, with respect to each conference described in 
     subsection (a) held during the applicable period--
       (1) a description of the purpose of the conference;
       (2) the number of participants attending each conference;
       (3) a detailed statement of the costs to the government for 
     the conference, including--
       (A) the cost of any food or beverages;
       (B) the cost of any audio-visual services;
       (C) the cost of employee or contractor travel to and from 
     the conference; and
       (D) a discussion of the methodology used to determine which 
     costs relate to the conference; and
       (4) a description of the contracting procedures used, 
     including--
       (A) whether contracts were awarded on a competitive basis; 
     and
       (B) a discussion of any cost comparison conducted by the 
     departmental component or office in evaluating potential 
     contractors for the conference.
       (c) Not later than 15 days after the date of a conference 
     held by any Executive branch department, agency, board, 
     commission, or office funded by this or any other 
     appropriations Act during fiscal year 2015 for which the cost 
     to the United States Government was more than $20,000, the 
     head of any such department, agency, board, commission, or 
     office shall notify the Inspector General or senior ethics 
     official for any entity without an Inspector General, of the 
     date, location, and number of employees attending such 
     conference.
       (d) A grant or contract funded by amounts appropriated by 
     this or any other appropriations Act may not be used for the 
     purpose of defraying the costs of a conference described in 
     subsection (c) that is not directly and programmatically 
     related to the purpose for which the grant or contract was 
     awarded, such as a conference held in connection with 
     planning, training, assessment, review, or other routine 
     purposes related to a project funded by the grant or 
     contract.
       (e) None of the funds made available in this or any other 
     appropriations Act may be used for travel and conference 
     activities that are not in compliance with Office of 
     Management and Budget Memorandum M-12-12 dated May 11, 2012.
       Sec. 740.  None of the funds made available in this or any 
     other appropriations Act may be used to increase, eliminate, 
     or reduce funding for a program, project, or activity as 
     proposed in the President's budget request for a fiscal year 
     until such proposed change is subsequently enacted in an 
     appropriation Act, or unless such change is made pursuant to 
     the reprogramming or transfer provisions of this or any other 
     appropriations Act.
       Sec. 741.  Except as expressly provided otherwise, any 
     reference to ``this Act'' contained in any title other than 
     title IV or VIII shall not apply to such title IV or VIII.

                                  VIII

                GENERAL PROVISIONS--DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

                     (including transfers of funds)

       Sec. 801.  There are appropriated from the applicable funds 
     of the District of Columbia such sums as may be necessary for 
     making refunds and for the payment of legal settlements or 
     judgments that have been entered against the District of 
     Columbia government.
       Sec. 802.  None of the Federal funds provided in this Act 
     shall be used for publicity or propaganda purposes or 
     implementation of any policy including boycott designed to 
     support or defeat legislation pending before Congress or any 
     State legislature.
       Sec. 803. (a) None of the Federal funds provided under this 
     Act to the agencies funded by this Act, both Federal and 
     District government agencies, that remain available for 
     obligation or expenditure in fiscal year 2015, or provided 
     from any accounts in the Treasury of the United States 
     derived by the collection of fees available to the agencies 
     funded by this Act, shall be available for obligation or 
     expenditures for an agency through a reprogramming of funds 
     which--
       (1) creates new programs;
       (2) eliminates a program, project, or responsibility 
     center;
       (3) establishes or changes allocations specifically denied, 
     limited or increased under this Act;
       (4) increases funds or personnel by any means for any 
     program, project, or responsibility center for which funds 
     have been denied or restricted;
       (5) re-establishes any program or project previously 
     deferred through reprogramming;
       (6) augments any existing program, project, or 
     responsibility center through a reprogramming of funds in 
     excess of $3,000,000 or 10 percent, whichever is less; or

[[Page 11942]]

       (7) increases by 20 percent or more personnel assigned to a 
     specific program, project or responsibility center,
     unless prior approval is received from the Committees on 
     Appropriations of the House of Representatives and the 
     Senate.
       (b)  The District of Columbia government is authorized to 
     approve and execute reprogramming and transfer requests of 
     local funds under this title through November 7, 2015.
       Sec. 804.  None of the Federal funds provided in this Act 
     may be used by the District of Columbia to provide for 
     salaries, expenses, or other costs associated with the 
     offices of United States Senator or United States 
     Representative under section 4(d) of the District of Columbia 
     Statehood Constitutional Convention Initiatives of 1979 (D.C. 
     Law 3-171; sec. 1-123, D.C. Official Code).
       Sec. 805.  Except as otherwise provided in this section, 
     none of the funds made available by this Act or by any other 
     Act may be used to provide any officer or employee of the 
     District of Columbia with an official vehicle unless the 
     officer or employee uses the vehicle only in the performance 
     of the officer's or employee's official duties. For purposes 
     of this section, the term ``official duties'' does not 
     include travel between the officer's or employee's residence 
     and workplace, except in the case of--
       (1) an officer or employee of the Metropolitan Police 
     Department who resides in the District of Columbia or is 
     otherwise designated by the Chief of the Department;
       (2) at the discretion of the Fire Chief, an officer or 
     employee of the District of Columbia Fire and Emergency 
     Medical Services Department who resides in the District of 
     Columbia and is on call 24 hours a day or is otherwise 
     designated by the Fire Chief;
       (3) the Mayor of the District of Columbia;
       (4) the Chairman of the Council of the District of 
     Columbia;
       (5) at the discretion of the Chief Medical Examiner, an 
     employee of the Office of the Chief Medical Examiner who 
     resides in the District and is on call 24 hours a day or is 
     otherwise designated by the Chief Medical Examiner;
       (6) at the discretion of the Director of the Homeland 
     Security and Emergency Management Agency, an officer or 
     employee of the Homeland Security and Emergency Management 
     Agency who resides in the District and is on call 24 hours a 
     day or is otherwise designated by the Director; and
       (7) at the discretion of the Director of the Department of 
     Corrections, an officer or employee of the District of 
     Columbia Department of Corrections who resides in the 
     District of Columbia and is on call 24 hours a day or is 
     otherwise designated by the Director.
       Sec. 806. (a) None of the Federal funds contained in this 
     Act may be used by the District of Columbia Attorney General 
     or any other officer or entity of the District government to 
     provide assistance for any petition drive or civil action 
     which seeks to require Congress to provide for voting 
     representation in Congress for the District of Columbia.
       (b) Nothing in this section bars the District of Columbia 
     Attorney General from reviewing or commenting on briefs in 
     private lawsuits, or from consulting with officials of the 
     District government regarding such lawsuits.
       Sec. 807.  None of the Federal funds contained in this Act 
     may be used for any program of distributing sterile needles 
     or syringes for the hypodermic injection of any illegal drug.
       Sec. 808.  Nothing in this Act may be construed to prevent 
     the Council or Mayor of the District of Columbia from 
     addressing the issue of the provision of contraceptive 
     coverage by health insurance plans, but it is the intent of 
     Congress that any legislation enacted on such issue should 
     include a ``conscience clause'' which provides exceptions for 
     religious beliefs and moral convictions.
       Sec. 809. (a) None of the Federal funds contained in this 
     Act may be used to enact or carry out any law, rule, or 
     regulation to legalize or otherwise reduce penalties 
     associated with the possession, use, or distribution of any 
     schedule I substance under the Controlled Substances Act (21 
     U.S.C. 801 et seq.) or any tetrahydrocannabinols derivative 
     for any purpose.
       (b) None of the funds contained in this Act may be used to 
     enact or carry out any law, rule, or regulation to legalize 
     or otherwise reduce penalties associated with the possession, 
     use, or distribution of any schedule I substance under the 
     Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 801 et seq.) or any 
     tetrahydrocannabinols derivative for recreational purposes.
       Sec. 810.  None of the funds appropriated under this Act 
     shall be expended for any abortion except where the life of 
     the mother would be endangered if the fetus were carried to 
     term or where the pregnancy is the result of an act of rape 
     or incest.
       Sec. 811. (a) No later than 30 calendar days after the date 
     of the enactment of this Act, the Chief Financial Officer for 
     the District of Columbia shall submit to the appropriate 
     committees of Congress, the Mayor, and the Council of the 
     District of Columbia, a revised appropriated funds operating 
     budget in the format of the budget that the District of 
     Columbia government submitted pursuant to section 442 of the 
     District of Columbia Home Rule Act (D.C. Official Code, sec. 
     1-204.42), for all agencies of the District of Columbia 
     government for fiscal year 2015 that is in the total amount 
     of the approved appropriation and that realigns all budgeted 
     data for personal services and other-than-personal services, 
     respectively, with anticipated actual expenditures.
       (b) This section shall apply only to an agency for which 
     the Chief Financial Officer for the District of Columbia 
     certifies that a reallocation is required to address 
     unanticipated changes in program requirements.
       Sec. 812.  No later than 30 calendar days after the date of 
     the enactment of this Act, the Chief Financial Officer for 
     the District of Columbia shall submit to the appropriate 
     committees of Congress, the Mayor, and the Council for the 
     District of Columbia, a revised appropriated funds operating 
     budget for the District of Columbia Public Schools that 
     aligns schools budgets to actual enrollment. The revised 
     appropriated funds budget shall be in the format of the 
     budget that the District of Columbia government submitted 
     pursuant to section 442 of the District of Columbia Home Rule 
     Act (D.C. Official Code, Sec. 1-204.42).
       Sec. 813. (a) Amounts appropriated in this Act as operating 
     funds may be transferred to the District of Columbia's 
     enterprise and capital funds and such amounts, once 
     transferred, shall retain appropriation authority consistent 
     with the provisions of this Act.
       (b) The District of Columbia government is authorized to 
     reprogram or transfer for operating expenses any local funds 
     transferred or reprogrammed in this or the four prior fiscal 
     years from operating funds to capital funds, and such 
     amounts, once transferred or reprogrammed, shall retain 
     appropriation authority consistent with the provisions of 
     this Act.
       (c) The District of Columbia government may not transfer or 
     reprogram for operating expenses any funds derived from 
     bonds, notes, or other obligations issued for capital 
     projects.
       Sec. 814.  None of the Federal funds appropriated in this 
     Act shall remain available for obligation beyond the current 
     fiscal year, nor may any be transferred to other 
     appropriations, unless expressly so provided herein.
       Sec. 815.  Except as otherwise specifically provided by law 
     or under this Act, not to exceed 50 percent of unobligated 
     balances remaining available at the end of fiscal year 2015 
     from appropriations of Federal funds made available for 
     salaries and expenses for fiscal year 2015 in this Act, shall 
     remain available through September 30, 2016, for each such 
     account for the purposes authorized: Provided, That a request 
     shall be submitted to the Committees on Appropriations of the 
     House of Representatives and the Senate for approval prior to 
     the expenditure of such funds: Provided further, That these 
     requests shall be made in compliance with reprogramming 
     guidelines outlined in section 803 of this Act.
       Sec. 816. (a) During fiscal year 2016, during a period in 
     which neither a District of Columbia continuing resolution or 
     a regular District of Columbia appropriation bill is in 
     effect, local funds are appropriated in the amount provided 
     for any project or activity for which local funds are 
     provided in the Fiscal Year 2016 Budget Request Act of 2015 
     as submitted to Congress (subject to any modifications 
     enacted by the District of Columbia as of the beginning of 
     the period during which this subsection is in effect) at the 
     rate set forth by such Act.
       (b) Appropriations made by subsection (a) shall cease to be 
     available--
       (1) during any period in which a District of Columbia 
     continuing resolution for fiscal year 2016 is in effect; or
       (2) upon the enactment into law of the regular District of 
     Columbia appropriation bill for fiscal year 2016.
       (c) An appropriation made by subsection (a) is provided 
     under the authority and conditions as provided under this Act 
     and shall be available to the extent and in the manner that 
     would be provided by this Act.
       (d) An appropriation made by subsection (a) shall cover all 
     obligations or expenditures incurred for such project or 
     activity during the portion of fiscal year 2016 for which 
     this section applies to such project or activity.
       (e) This section shall not apply to a project or activity 
     during any period of fiscal year 2016 if any other provision 
     of law (other than an authorization of appropriations)--
       (1) makes an appropriation, makes funds available, or 
     grants authority for such project or activity to continue for 
     such period, or
       (2) specifically provides that no appropriation shall be 
     made, no funds shall be made available, or no authority shall 
     be granted for such project or activity to continue for such 
     period.
       (f) Nothing in this section shall be construed to affect 
     obligations of the government of the District of Columbia 
     mandated by other law.
       Sec. 817.  Except as expressly provided otherwise, any 
     reference to ``this Act'' contained in this title or in title 
     IV shall be treated as referring only to the provisions of 
     this title or of title IV.

[[Page 11943]]



                TITLE IX--ADDITIONAL GENERAL PROVISIONS

       Sec. 901. (a) No funds appropriated by this Act shall be 
     available to pay for an abortion or the administrative 
     expenses in connection with a multi-State qualified health 
     plan offered under a contract under section 1334 of the 
     Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (42 USC 18054) 
     which provides any benefits or coverage for abortions.
       (b) The provision of subsection (a) shall not apply where 
     the life of the mother would be endangered if the fetus were 
     carried to term, or the pregnancy is the result of an act of 
     rape or incest.

  The Acting CHAIR. Are there any amendments to that portion of the 
bill?
  The Clerk will read.
  The Clerk read as follows:


                       SPENDING REDUCTION ACCOUNT

       Sec. 902. The amount by which the applicable allocation of 
     new budget authority made by the Committee on Appropriations 
     of the House of Representatives under section 302(b) of the 
     Congressional Budget Act of 1974 exceeds the amount of 
     proposed new budget authority is $0.

  Mr. CRENSHAW. Mr. Chairman, I move that the Committee do now rise.
  The motion was agreed to.
  Accordingly, the Committee rose; and the Speaker pro tempore (Mr. 
Rodney Davis of Illinois) having assumed the chair, Mr. Thompson of 
Pennsylvania, Acting Chair of the Committee of the Whole House on the 
state of the Union, reported that that Committee, having had under 
consideration the bill (H.R. 5016) making appropriations for financial 
services and general government for the fiscal year ending September 
30, 2015, and for other purposes, had come to no resolution thereon.

                          ____________________