Watch U.S. House Debate on Immigration LIVE Now on C-SPAN
House Session - December 14, 2017

The House passed a bill that exempts more financial institutions from a requirement to deliver annual privacy notices to customers.

Speakers:
Time
Action
  • 09:00:29 AM

    The House convened, starting a new legislative day.

    • 09:00:34 AM

      Today's prayer was offered by the House Chaplain, Rev. Patrick J. Conroy.

      • 09:01:00 AM

        THE SPEAKER

        THE CHAIR HAS EXAMINED THE JOURNAL OF THE LAST DAY'S PROCEEDINGS AND…

        THE CHAIR HAS EXAMINED THE JOURNAL OF THE LAST DAY'S PROCEEDINGS AND ANNOUNCES TO THE HOUSE HIS APPROVAL THEREOF. PURSUANT TO CLAUSE 1 OF RULE 1, THE JOURNAL STANDS APPROVED. THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE WILL BE LED BY THE GENTLEMAN FROM NEW JERSEY, MR. LANCE.

        Show Full Text
    • 09:01:03 AM

      The Speaker announced approval of the Journal. Pursuant to clause 1, rule I, the Journal stands approved.

    • 09:01:04 AM

      PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

      The Chair designated Mr. Lance to lead the Members in reciting the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag.

      • 09:01:15 AM

        MR. LANCE

        I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND TO THE…

        I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS, ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL.

        Show Full Text
    • 09:01:20 AM

      ONE MINUTE SPEECHES

      The House proceeded with one minute speeches, which by direction of the Chair would be limited to 5 per side of the aisle.

      • 09:01:28 AM

        THE SPEAKER

        THE CHAIR WILL ENTERTAIN UP TO FIVE REQUESTS FOR ONE-MINUTE SPEECHES ON…

        THE CHAIR WILL ENTERTAIN UP TO FIVE REQUESTS FOR ONE-MINUTE SPEECHES ON EACH SIDE OF THE AISLE. I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS, ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL. FOR WHAT PURPOSE DOES THE GENTLEMAN FROM NEW JERSEY SEEK RECOGNITION? WITHOUT OBJECTION, THE GENTLEMAN IS RECOGNIZED.

        Show Full Text
      • 09:01:41 AM

        MR. LANCE

        THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. I RISE TODAY TO CONGRATULATE THREE STATE HIGH…

        THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. I RISE TODAY TO CONGRATULATE THREE STATE HIGH SCHOOL FOOTBALL CHAMPIONS IN NEW JERSEY'S SEVENTH CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT. WESTFIELD HIGH SCHOOL, NORTH HUNTERTON HIGH SCHOOL, AND SUMMERVILLE HIGH SCHOOL. WESTFIELD HIGH SCHOOL FINISHED ITS YEAR WITH ITS THIRD CONSECUTIVE STATE CHAMPIONSHIP AND WITH ITS 37 CONSECUTIVE GAME WINNING STREAK INTACT. THE NORTH HUNTERTON LIONS WON THEIR DIVISION. AND SUMMERVILLE HIGH SCHOOL FINISHED AS STATE FOOTBALL CHAMPIONS WITH AWARD WINNING COACH JEFF AT THE HELM. I CONGRATULATE THE COMMUNITIES AND FAMILIES SUPPORTING STUDENT ATHLETES. I ALSO CONGRATULATE ALL OF THE FACULTY AND COACHES WHO DEVOTE THEMSELVES IN CULTIVATING AND NURTURING THE TALENT OF THESE ATHLETES. EACH OF THESE PUBLIC SCHOOLS IN ADDITION TO ATHLETIC ACHIEVEMENT HAS ALSO BEEN RECOGNIZED FOR ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT. REGULARLY ACROSS THE NATION. HIGHLIGHTING THAT NEW JERSEY'S REPUTATION AS HAVING AMONG THE BEST PUBLIC SCHOOLS IN THE NATION CONTINUES. MR. SPEAKER, I YIELD BACK THE BALANCE OF MY TIME.

        Show Full Text
      • 09:02:47 AM

        THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

        FOR WHAT PURPOSE DOES THE GENTLEMAN FROM MICHIGAN SEEK RECOGNITION?

      • 09:02:51 AM

        MR. KILDEE

        MR. SPEAKER, I SEEK UNANIMOUS CONSENT TO ADDRESS THE HOUSE FOR ONE MINUTE.

      • 09:03:01 AM

        TEMPORE WITHOUT

        WITHOUT OBJECTION. THE GENTLEMAN FROM MICHIGAN IS RECOGNIZED FOR ONE…

        WITHOUT OBJECTION. THE GENTLEMAN FROM MICHIGAN IS RECOGNIZED FOR ONE MINUTE.

        Show Full Text
      • 09:03:03 AM

        MR. KILDEE

        THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. TO ADDRESS THE HOUSE FOR ONE MINUTE.

      • 09:03:06 AM

        TEMPORE AS

        AS REPUBLICANS CONTINUE TO RUSH THEIR TAX PLAN THROUGH BOTH HOUSES OF…

        AS REPUBLICANS CONTINUE TO RUSH THEIR TAX PLAN THROUGH BOTH HOUSES OF CONGRESS, THEY LEAVE BEHIND TENS OF MILLIONS OF AMERICANS FUNDED BY DEFICIT EXPLODING TAKES TO THE -- TAX BREAKS TO THE ABSOLUTE WEALTHIEST. THEY ARE ALSO LEAVING BEHIND SOME REALLY IMPORTANT AMERICANS, OUR NATIVE AMERICAN BROTHERS AND SISTERS. FOR YEARS ISSUES OF TAXATION AND HOW FEDERAL TAX POLICY IMPACTS TRIBAL GOVERNMENTS HAS BEEN THE SUBJECT OF DISCUSSION. AND FOR THOSE YEARS THAT WE HAVE TALKED ABOUT THE NEED FOR TAX REFORM, THERE HAVE BEEN CONTINUOUS PROMISES MADE TO TRIBAL GOVERNMENTS THAT WE WILL DEAL WITH THESE INEQUITIES, THESE ISSUES OF DOUBLE TAXATION IN TRIBES. FOR EXAMPLE, THE ABILITY OF A TRIBAL MEMBER WHO GETS AN ADOPTION THROUGH A TRIBAL COURT, THEY DON'T QUALIFY FOR AN ADOPTION TAX CREDIT. THAT'S ONE EXAMPLE OF THE MANY WAYS THAT FEDERAL TAX POLICY DOES NOT ANTICIPATE OR RECOGNIZE TRIBAL GOVERNMENTS. BUT THEY HAVE BEEN LEFT BEHIND AGAIN. THIS BILL SHOULD BE WRITTEN IN WAY THAT ACTUALLY ADDRESSES THE REAL PROBLEMS IN THE TAX CODE. IT DOES NOT. I YIELD BACK.

        Show Full Text
      • 09:04:16 AM

        THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

        FOR WHAT PURPOSE DOES THE GENTLEMAN FROM CALIFORNIA SEEK RECOGNITION

      • 09:04:21 AM

        >>

        UNANIMOUS CONSENT TO ADDRESS THE HOUSE FOR ONE MINUTE.

      • 09:04:24 AM

        TEMPORE WITHOUT

        WITHOUT OBJECTION, THE GENTLEMAN FROM CALIFORNIA IS RECOGNIZED FOR ONE…

        WITHOUT OBJECTION, THE GENTLEMAN FROM CALIFORNIA IS RECOGNIZED FOR ONE MINUTE

        Show Full Text
      • 09:04:26 AM

        >>

        THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. TODAY I WISH TO COMMEMORATE THE BILL OF RIGHTS DAY.

      • 09:04:39 AM

        MR. LAMALFA

        INITIALLY THIS WAS PASSED BY CONGRESS IN 1941 AS A JOINT RESOLUTION,…

        INITIALLY THIS WAS PASSED BY CONGRESS IN 1941 AS A JOINT RESOLUTION, SIGNED BY FRANKLIN DELANO OF ROOSEVELT ON NOVEMBER 27, 1941. WHERE IN HIS WORDS HE SAYS DO HEREBY DESIGNATE DECEMBER 15, 1941 BILL OF RIGHTS DAY. I CALL UPON THE OFFICIALS OF THE GOVERNMENT, UPON THE PEOPLE OF THE UNITED STATES TO 1941. WHERE IN HIS OBSERVE THE DAY BY DISPLAYING THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES ON PUBLIC BUILDINGS AND BY MEETING TOGETHER FOR SUCH PRAYERS AND CEREMONIES AS MAY SEEM TO THEM APPROPRIATE. IT WAS FIRST INTRODUCED BY JAMES MADISON WHO LATER BECAME THE FOURTH PRESIDENT. INITIALLY 12 AMENDMENTS WERE PROPOSED. TWO WERE NOT RATIFIED. ONE DID BECOME RATIFIED LATER ON. THERE WERE 14 ORIGINAL COPIES PRODUCED OF THE BILL OF RIGHTS AT THE TIME. ONE EACH FOR THE 13 STATES AND ONE FOR THE NATIONAL ARCHIVES. 12 OF THEM SURVIVE TODAY. WHEN FRANKLIN DELANO ROOSEVELT SIGNED THAT PROCLAMATION ON NOVEMBER 27, 1941, HE HAD NO IDEA WHAT WAS COMING JUST NINE DAYS LATER. INDEED, HIS WORDS IN THE LETTER AT THE TIME, THOSE WHO HAVE LONG ENJOYED SUCH PRIVILEGES AS WE ENJOY, FORGET IN TIME THAT MEN HAVE DIED TO WIN THEM. THEY COME IN TIME TO TAKE THESE RIGHTS FOR GRANTED AND ASSUME THE PROTECTIONS ASSURED. WE HOWEVER NOW SEEN THESE PRIVILEGES LOST ON ANOTHER CONTINENTS IN OTHER COUNTRIES. INDEED. PRESCIENT WORDS FOR THE TIME. I YIELD BACK.

        Show Full Text
      • 09:06:07 AM

        THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

        FOR WHAT PURPOSE DOES THE GENTLEMAN FROM CALIFORNIA SEEK RECOGNITION?…

        FOR WHAT PURPOSE DOES THE GENTLEMAN FROM CALIFORNIA SEEK RECOGNITION? WITHOUT OBJECTION, THE GENTLEMAN FROM CALIFORNIA IS RECOGNIZED FOR ONE MINUTE. BACK.

        Show Full Text
      • 09:06:14 AM

        >>

      • 09:06:52 AM

        MR. PANETTA

        THE GOVERNOR CALLS THIS A NEW NORMAL. WE SHOULD CALL IT UNACCEPTABLE AND…

        THE GOVERNOR CALLS THIS A NEW NORMAL. WE SHOULD CALL IT UNACCEPTABLE AND MUST DO SOMETHING. WE MUST FULLY WE WATCH FIRES BURN IN THE HILLS FROM LOS ANGELES TO SANTA BARBARA, FUND THE COST OF FIRE SUPPRESSION. AND INCLUDE FIRE RELIEF IN THIS YEAR'S DISASTER PACKAGE AND THINK OUTSIDE THE BOX WHEN IT COMES TO FIRE PREVENTION AND FOCUS OUR EFFORTS TO BETTER MANAGE OUR FORCE IN THE FUTURE. THANK YOU, I YIELD BACK.

        Show Full Text
      • 09:07:06 AM

        THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

        FOR WHAT PURPOSE DOES THE GENTLEMAN FROM TEXAS SEEK RECOGNITION?

      • 09:07:09 AM

        >>

        I REQUEST UNANIMOUS CONSENT TO ADDRESS THE HOUSE FOR ONE MINUTE.

      • 09:07:13 AM

        TEMPORE WITHOUT

        WITHOUT OBJECTION, THE GENTLEMAN FROM TEXAS IS RECOGNIZED FOR ONE MINUTE.

      • 09:07:20 AM

        >>

        MR. SPEAKER, MILLIONS OF AMERICAN TRUCK DRIVERS HELPED ELECT PRESIDENT…

        MR. SPEAKER, MILLIONS OF AMERICAN TRUCK DRIVERS HELPED ELECT PRESIDENT TRUMP LAST NOVEMBER AND I'M CALLING ON HIM TO STEP IN AND GIVE THEM A HAND. PRESIDENT OBAMA LEFT OFFICE BACK IN JANUARY, BUT A $2 BILLION REGULATION THAT HE WROTE IN 2015 TO REQUIRE ELECTRONIC TRACKING DEVICES TO BE PUT IN EVERY TRUCK IN AMERICA IS STILL SCHEDULED TO GO INTO EFFECT THIS MONDAY.

        Show Full Text
      • 09:07:45 AM

        MR. BABIN

        YES, AN OBAMA REGULATION THAT SHAMEFULLY SEEMS TO REMAIN ON THE BOOKS IS…

        YES, AN OBAMA REGULATION THAT SHAMEFULLY SEEMS TO REMAIN ON THE BOOKS IS GOING INTO EFFECT THIS MONDAY UNDER A REPUBLICAN CONGRESS AND WHITE HOUSE. THE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION CAN GIVE A 90-DAY WAIVER FOR ALL TRUCKERS FROM THIS MANDATE GIVING SEVERAL WAIVERS FOR SPECIFIC INDUSTRIES, INCLUDING ONE JUST THIS WEEK. INSTEAD OF OFFERING FAIRNESS AND RELIEF, THEY ARE PICKING WIN EARNS LOSERS. MILLIONS OF AMERICAN TRUCKERS ARE PLEADING 24/7 FOR RELIEF FROM THIS MANDATE USING THE HASH TAG ELD OR ME. IT HAS FALLEN ON DEAF HERE'S IN THE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION. MR. PRESIDENT, YOU CALL THE SHOTS IN YOUR ADMINISTRATION. PLEASE ISSUE AN EXECUTIVE ORDER TODAY AND INSTRUCT THE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION TO GIVE ALL TRUCKERS RELIEF FROM THIS MANDATE FOR THREE MONTHS. DON'T IMPLEMENT THIS COLOSSAL OBAMA MANDATE A WEEK BEFORE CHRISTMAS. THANK YOU. I YIELD BACK.

        Show Full Text
      • 09:08:44 AM

        TEMPORE MEMBERS

        MEMBERS ARE ADVISED TO DIRECT THEIR COMMENTS TO THE CHAIR. FOR WHAT…

        MEMBERS ARE ADVISED TO DIRECT THEIR COMMENTS TO THE CHAIR. FOR WHAT PURPOSE DOES THE GENTLEMAN FROM ILLINOIS SEEK RECOGNITION?

        Show Full Text
      • 09:08:50 AM

        >>

        I ASK UNANIMOUS CONSENT TO ADDRESS THE HOUSE FOR ONE MINUTE. REVISE AND…

        I ASK UNANIMOUS CONSENT TO ADDRESS THE HOUSE FOR ONE MINUTE. REVISE AND EXTEND. THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE: WITHOUT OBJECTION, THE GENTLEMAN FROM ILLINOIS IS RECOGNIZED FOR ONE MINUTE.

        Show Full Text
      • 09:08:55 AM

        TEMPORE W

        WITHOUT OBJECTION, THE GENTLEMAN FROM ILLINOIS IS RECOGNIZED FOR ONE…

        WITHOUT OBJECTION, THE GENTLEMAN FROM ILLINOIS IS RECOGNIZED FOR ONE MINUTE.

        Show Full Text
      • 09:08:59 AM

        >>

        MR. SPEAKER, ON THIS DAY IN 2012 WE WATCHED TOGETHER IN HORROR AS NEWS…

        MR. SPEAKER, ON THIS DAY IN 2012 WE WATCHED TOGETHER IN HORROR AS NEWS BROKE OF A SHOOTING IN NEWTOWN, CONNECTICUT. 20 INNOCENT CHILDREN AND SIX BRAVE EDUCATORS WERE GUNNED DOWN AT SANDY HOOK. IN THE FIVE YEARS SINCE THIS HOUSE HAS PAUSED 40 TIMES IN SILENCE TO RECOGNIZE THE VICTIMS OF MASS SHOOTINGS. THE NAMES A SINCE THIS HOUSE HAS FAMILIAR, LAS VEGAS, SUTHERLAND SPRINGS. SINCE NEWTOWN THERE HAVE BEEN MORE THAN 1,700 MASS SHOOTINGS, NEARLY ONE EVERY SINGLE DAY.

        Show Full Text
      • 09:09:36 AM

        MR. SCHNEIDER

        THAT WOULD IMPROVE SAFETY FOR ALL OF OUR COMMUNITIES. I YIELD BACK.

      • 09:10:24 AM

        THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

        FOR WHAT PURPOSE DOES THE GENTLEMAN FROM UTAH SEEK RECOGNITION?

      • 09:10:30 AM

        E WITHOUT

        WITHOUT OBJECTION, THE GENTLEMAN FROM UTAH IS RECOGNIZED FOR ONE MINUTE.

      • 09:10:32 AM

        >>

        MR. SPEAKER, WOULD IMPROVE SAFETY FOR ALL THE HOUSE IS IN THE MIDST OF…

        MR. SPEAKER, WOULD IMPROVE SAFETY FOR ALL THE HOUSE IS IN THE MIDST OF HISTORIC TAX REFORM. NOW THAT THE HOUSE AND SENATE HAVE ALMOST REACHED AGREEMENT, I WOULD LIKE TO TAKE A MOMENT TO EXPRESS A FEW IDEALS THAT I HOPE WILL BE GUIDING PRINCIPLES AS WE COMPLETE THIS PROCESS. THE FINAL TAX BILL SHOULD CUT TAX FORCE ALL AMERICANS WHILE ALSO RETAINING IMPORTANT INCENTIVES MAKING HOMEOWNERSHIP, RAISING A FAMILY, AND OBTAINING HIGHER EDUCATION POSSIBLE. ADDITIONALLY THE BILL SHOULD CONTINUE TO UPHOLD AMERICAN VALUES BY ENCOURAGING OUR PEOPLE TO BE GENEROUS AND CHARITABLE. THE LOWERING OF OUR CORPORATE TAX RATE IS CRITICAL. AS A FORMER BUSINESS OWNER I KNOW FIRSTHAND THE DIFFICULTY OF THE TAX BURDEN. MOST OF OUR CORPORATE TAX RATE IS CRITICAL. AS A FORMER BUSINESS OWNER I KNOW FIRSTHAND THE DIFFICULTY OF THE TAX BURDEN. MOST IMPORTANTLY, THE BILL MUST HELP WORKING AMERICAN FAMILIES KEEP MORE OF THEIR HARD-EARNED MONEY.

        Show Full Text
      • 09:11:28 AM

        MR. CURTIS

        I AM CONFIDENT THAT CONGRESS WILL DELIVER ON ITS PROMISE TO SIMPLIFY THE…

        I AM CONFIDENT THAT CONGRESS WILL DELIVER ON ITS PROMISE TO SIMPLIFY THE TAX CODE AND TO CUT TAXES TO ALL AMERICANS. I KNOW THAT THIS HISTORIC LEGISLATION WILL SPUR ECONOMIC GROWTH AND PROSPERITY. WITH THAT, MR. SPEAKER, I YIELD MY TIME. THANK YOU.

        Show Full Text
      • 09:11:36 AM

        THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

        FOR WHAT PURPOSE DOES THE GENTLEMAN FROM OREGON SEEK RECOGNITION?

      • 09:11:39 AM

        >>

        TO ADDRESS THE HOUSE FOR ONE MINUTE. REVISE AND EXTEND.

      • 09:11:41 AM

        THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

        DOES THE GENTLEMAN SEEK UNANIMOUS CONSENT?

      • 09:11:43 AM

        >>

        YES, SIR.

      • 09:11:44 AM

        THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

        THE GENTLEMAN IS RECOGNIZED FOR ONE MINUTE.

      • 09:11:46 AM

        >>

        SCHRADER: HOW DO YOU MAKE A BAD INEQUITABLE TAX BILL BETTER? FOR MY…

        SCHRADER: HOW DO YOU MAKE A BAD INEQUITABLE TAX BILL BETTER? FOR MY REPUBLICAN COLLEAGUES THAT MEANS CUTTING TAX RATES FOR THE WEALTHY EVEN MORE THAN THE ORIGINAL BILLS WE HEARD OVER THE LAST COUPLE DAYS. WHERE'S THE FAIRNESS FOR AVERAGE HARDWORKING AMERICANS? MEDICAL EXPENSES ARE NO LONGER DEDUCTIBLE. STUDENT LOAN AND TUITION WAIVERS ARE NO LONGER DEDUCTIBLE. INTEREST IS NOT DEDUCTIBLE FOR FAMILIES BUT FOR BUSINESS. EMPLOYEE BUSINESS DEDUCTIONS GO AWAY. MORTGAGE INTEREST DEDUCTION IS REDUCED. STATE AND LOCAL TAXES ARE NOW FULLY DEDUCTIBLE. SMALL BUSINESSES DON'T GET THE SAME TAX CUTS THAT BIG BUSINESSES DO. NO HELP FOR CAPITAL GAINS. NO HELP FOR DIVIDENDS. ADVERTISING, ENTERTAINMENT, OTHER BUSINESS EXPENSES NO LONGER DEDUCTIBLE. RENEWABLE ENERGY TAX CREDITS GO AWAY. PRIVATE ACTIVITY TO HELP VETERANS AND OTHERS ARE ALSO GONE. WORST OF ALL, INDIVIDUAL TAX CUTS FLIP BACK AND RESCINDED IN A FEW YEARS WHILE CORPORATIONS GO ON FOREVER. WHERE'S THE FAIRNESS FOR SENIORS, FOR OUR YOUTH, FOR OUR FAMILIES, AND FOR SMALL BUSINESSES? NOT IN THIS PARTISAN TAX BILL. I YIELD BACK.

        Show Full Text
      • 09:12:47 AM

        THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

        FOR WHAT PURPOSE DOES THE GENTLELADY FROM MISSOURI SEEK RECOGNITION?

      • 09:12:51 AM

        >>

        I ASK UNANIMOUS CONSENT TO ADDRESS THE HOUSE FOR ONE MINUTE.

      • 09:12:55 AM

        TEMPORE WITHOUT

        WITHOUT OBJECTION, THE GENTLELADY FROM MISSOURI IS RECOGNIZED.

      • 09:12:57 AM

        >>

        THANK YOU. MR. SPEAKER, I RISE TODAY TO CONGRATULATE THE UNIVERSITY OF…

        THANK YOU. MR. SPEAKER, I RISE TODAY TO CONGRATULATE THE UNIVERSITY OF CENTRAL MISSOURI WOMEN'S SOCCER TEAM ON WINNING THE NCAA DIVISION 2 NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIP. THIS IS THE FIRST NCAA WOMEN'S SOCCER NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIP IN PROGRAM HISTORY.

        Show Full Text
      • 09:13:14 AM

        MRS. HARTZLER

        THE SEASON WITH A PERFECT RECORD OF 26-0. MAKING THEM ONLY THE THIRD…

        THE SEASON WITH A PERFECT RECORD OF 26-0. MAKING THEM ONLY THE THIRD WOMEN'S DIVISION 2 NATIONAL CHAMPION TO FINISH A SEASON WITH A PERFECT RECORD. THE TEAM'S 26 WINS SET A NEW SINGLE SEASON NCAA DIVISION 2 WOMEN'S RECORD. IN ADDITION TO WINNING THE NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIP, THEY HAD FIVE ATHLETES JOIN THE DIVISION 2 CONFERENCE COMMISSIONERS ASSOCIATION ALL-AMERICAN TEAM. THE TEAM'S OUTSTANDING ACCOMPLISHMENTS MARK A GREAT MILESTONE FOR THE UNIVERSITY OF CENTRAL MISSOURI'S ATHLETICS DEPARTMENT AND ITS HEAD COACH OF 11 YEARS. PLEASE JOIN ME IN CONGRATULATING THE CENTRAL MISSOURI GENNIES ON THIS ACHIEVEMENT. I YIELD BACK.

        Show Full Text
      • 09:14:02 AM

        THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

        FOR WHAT PURPOSE DOES THE GENTLEMAN FROM VIRGINIA SEEK RECOGNITION?…

        FOR WHAT PURPOSE DOES THE GENTLEMAN FROM VIRGINIA SEEK RECOGNITION? WITHOUT OBJECTION, THE GENTLEMAN FROM VIRGINIA IS RECOGNIZED FOR ONE MINUTE.

        Show Full Text
      • 09:14:11 AM

        >>

        THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. MR. SPEAKER, I STAND HERE TODAY ON THE ANNIVERSARY…

        THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. MR. SPEAKER, I STAND HERE TODAY ON THE ANNIVERSARY OF THE TRAGIC SHOOTING AT SANDY HOOK ELEMENTARY SCHOOL.

        Show Full Text
      • 09:14:20 AM

        MR. MCEACHIN

        ON DECEMBER 14, 2012, NEWTOWN, CONNECTICUT LOST 20 INNOCENT CHILDREN. MOST…

        ON DECEMBER 14, 2012, NEWTOWN, CONNECTICUT LOST 20 INNOCENT CHILDREN. MOST 6 YEARS OLD, TO GUN VIOLENCE. WE ALSO LOST SIX BRAVE TEACHERS AND TAFF WHO DID EVERYTHING POSSIBLE TO PROTECT THE STUDENTS IN THEIR CARE. AS A FATHER I CANNOT IMAGINE ANYTHING MORE PAINFUL AS THE LOSS OF A CHILD. AS AN AMERICAN I STRUGGLE TO IMAGINE THE MORE HORRIFIC TRAGEDY THAN THAT WHICH HAPPENED IN NEWTOWN. MR. SPEAKER, MANY OF US THOUGHT THIS TRAGEDY WOULD FINALLY MOVE THE NEEDLE ONPOLICY. THAT DID NOT HAPPEN. JUST LAST WEEK THE HOUSE PASSED MAJOR LEGISLATION LOOSENING GUN SAFETY LAWS. I WANT TO REMIND MY COLLEAGUES AND THE MAJORITY THAT IT IS NOT TOO LATE TO ACT. WE CANNOT BRING BACK THOSE THAT WE HAVE LOST, BUT WE CAN AND MUST ENSURE THAT MORE FAMILIES DO NOT FACE THE PAIN THAT NEWTOWN FAMILIES FACED. I URGE MY COLLEAGUES AND THE MAJORITY TO JOIN THIS SIDE OF THE AISLE IN SUPPORTING COMMONSENSE GUN SAFETY REFORM. THOUGHTS AND PRAYERS ARE NOT ENOUGH. HELP US TO END THIS SCOURGE. THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. I YIELD BACK. .

        Show Full Text
      • 09:15:33 AM

        THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

        FOR WHAT PURPOSE DOES THE GENTLEMAN FROM TEXAS SEEK RECOGNITION?

      • 09:15:35 AM

        Considered under the provisions of rule H. Res. 657. H.R. 2396 — "To amend the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act to update the exception for certain annual notices provided by financial institutions."

        • 09:15:37 AM

          MR. HENSARLING

          MR. SPEAKER, PURSUANT TO HOUSE RESOLUTION 657, I CALL UP H.R. 2396 AND ASK…

          MR. SPEAKER, PURSUANT TO HOUSE RESOLUTION 657, I CALL UP H.R. 2396 AND ASK FOR ITS IMMEDIATE CONSIDERATION IN THE HOUSE.

          Show Full Text
      • 09:15:40 AM

        Previous question shall be considered as ordered without intervening motions except motion to recommit with or without instructions. Rule provides for one hour of general debate for each bill. The amendment in the nature of a substitute printed in H.R. 2396 shall be considered as adopted. The rule also makes in order the amendment printed in the report. An amendment in the nature of a substitute to H.R. 4015 consisting of Rules Committee Print 115-46, shall be considered as adopted.

        • 09:15:45 AM

          THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

          THE CLERK WILL REPORT THE TITLE OF THE BILL.

        • 09:15:47 AM

          THE CLERK

          UNION CALENDAR NUMBER 321, H.R. 2396, A BILL TO AMEND THE…

          UNION CALENDAR NUMBER 321, H.R. 2396, A BILL TO AMEND THE GRAMM-LEACH-BLILEY ACT TO UPDATE THE EXCEPTION FOR CERTAIN ANNUAL NOTICES PROVIDED BY FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS.

          Show Full Text
        • 09:16:01 AM

          TEMPORE PURSUANT

          PURSUANT TO HOUSE RESOLUTION 657, THE AMENDMENT IN THE NATURE OF A…

          PURSUANT TO HOUSE RESOLUTION 657, THE AMENDMENT IN THE NATURE OF A SUBSTITUTE RECOMMENDED BY THE COMMITTEE ON FINANCIAL SERVICES PRINTED IN THE BILL IS ADOPTED, AND THE BILL, AS AMENDED, IS CONSIDERED AS READ. THE BILL, AS AMENDED, SHALL BE DEBATABLE FOR ONE HOUR EQUALLY DIVIDED AND CONTROLLED BY THE CHAIR AND RANKING MINORITY MEMBER OF THE COMMITTEE ON FINANCIAL SERVICES. AFTER ONE HOUR OF DEBATE ON THE BILL, AS AMENDED, IT SHALL BE IN ORDER TO CONSIDER THE FURTHER AMENDMENT PRINTED IN HOUSE REPORT 115-462 IF OFFERED BY THE MEMBER DESIGNATED IN THE REPORT WHICH SHALL BE CONSIDERED AS READ, SHALL BE SEPARATELY DEBATABLE FOR THE TIME SPECIFIED IN THE REPORT EQUALLY DIVIDED AND CONTROLLED BY THE PROPONENT AND AN OPPONENT, SHALL NOT BE SUBJECT TO A DEMAND FOR DIVISION OF THE QUESTION. THE GENTLEMAN FROM TEXAS, MR. HENSARLING, AND THE GENTLEWOMAN FROM CALIFORNIA, MS. WATERS, EACH WILL CONTROL 30 MINUTES. THE CHAIR RECOGNIZES THE GENTLEMAN FROM TEXAS.

          Show Full Text
        • 09:16:51 AM

          MR. HENSARLING

          MR. SPEAKER, I ASK UNANIMOUS CONSENT THAT ALL MEMBERS MAY HAVE FIVE…

          MR. SPEAKER, I ASK UNANIMOUS CONSENT THAT ALL MEMBERS MAY HAVE FIVE LEGISLATIVE DAYS TO REVISE AND EXTEND THEIR REMARKS AND SUBMIT EXTRANEOUS MATERIALS ON THE BILL UNDER CONSIDERATION.

          Show Full Text
    • 09:16:54 AM

      DEBATE

      The House proceeded with one hour of debate on H.R. 2396.

      • 09:17:01 AM

        TEMPORE WITH

        WITHOUT OBJECTION.

      • 09:17:02 AM

        MR. HENSARLING

        MR. SPEAKER, I YIELD MYSELF SUCH TIME AS I MAY CONSUME.

      • 09:17:05 AM

        THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

        THE GENTLEMAN IS RECOGNIZED.

      • 09:17:07 AM

        MR. HENSARLING

        MR. SPEAKER, I RISE TODAY IN SUPPORT OF H.R. 2396, THE PRIVACY…

        MR. SPEAKER, I RISE TODAY IN SUPPORT OF H.R. 2396, THE PRIVACY NOTIFICATION TECHNICAL CLARIFICATION ACT, WHICH IS AN IMPORTANT BILL CO-SPONSORED BY A BIPARTISAN GROUP OF MEMBERS OF THE HOUSE AND A BILL THAT WAS APPROVED BY THE FINANCIAL SERVICES COMMITTEE WITH A STRONG BIPARTISAN VOTE OF 2-1, QUITE LITERALLY, 40-20. THIS BILL BUILDS UPON AN IMPORTANT -- UPON AN ISSUE THAT HAS A LONG TRACK RECORD OF STRONG BIPARTISAN SUPPORT IN CONGRESS. I WANT TO THANK CONGRESSMAN TROTT, A MEMBER OF THE FINANCIAL SERVICES COMMITTEE, FOR INTRODUCING THIS LEGISLATION, AND FOR LEADING CONGRESSIONAL EFFORTS TO MODERNIZE THE PRIVACY NOTIFICATION PROCESS FOR CONSUMERS AND TO PROVIDE REGULATORY RELIEF FOR OUR STRUGGLING FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS. THERE ARE -- THERE IS A SERIOUS ISSUE, MR. SPEAKER, WITH THE SHEER VOLUME, COMPLEX, WEIGHT LOAD AND COST OF THE REGULATORY BURDEN UPON PARTICULARLY OUR STRUGGLING COMMUNITY FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS, OUR COMMUNITY BANKS, AND CREDIT UNIONS. IT'S NO ONE SPECIFIC REGULATION , BUT THE TOTALITY, THE COMBINATION OF THEM ALL ARE CAUSING US TO LOSE A COMMUNITY BANK OR CREDIT UNION A DAY IN AMERICA, AND AS WE LOSE THEM, OUR CONSTITUENTS LOSE THEIR OPPORTUNITY FOR CREDIT OPPORTUNITIES TO SHARE IN THEIR VERSION OF THE AMERICAN DREAM. IT MAKES IT MORE COSTLY, MORE DIFFICULT FOR THEM TO FINANCE SOMEBODY TO GO TO COLLEGE, FOR THEM TO PERHAPS BUY AN AUTO TO GET THEM TO WORK, OR PERHAPS CAPITALIZE THEIR OWN SMALL BUSINESS. AND SO WE FREQUENTLY HEAR FROM OUR COMMUNITY FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS. YOU KNOW, I HEARD FROM A BANKER, A COMMUNITY BANKER FROM NEBRASKA NOT LONG AGO WHO EXPLAINED, QUOTE, I HAVE EXPLAINED ABOUT HOW THINGS HAVE CHANGED SINCE I STARTED IN BANKING 10 YEARS AGO. EFFORTS FOR OUR GOVERNMENT TO MAKE THINGS FAIRER, EASIER FOR CONSUMERS, IT HAS BECOME INCREASINGLY MORE DIFFICULT FOR PEOPLE TO OBTAIN FAVORABLE LOAN TERMS AND NOT TO MENTION OBTAIN LOANS IN A TIMELY MANNER. I HEARD FROM A BANKER IN ALABAMA ABOUT REAL ESTATE REGULATIONS THAT SAID THEY WERE INTENDED TO HELP CUSTOMERS BUT IT'S ACTUALLY HURTING THEM AS WAIT TIMES INCREASE AND BANKS ARE NO LONGER OFFERING CERTAIN PRODUCTS, NOT ALL OF THESE PEOPLE CAN BE PROTECTED FROM THEMSELVES NO MATTER HOW MANY RULES AND REGS THE BANKS FOLLOW TO PROTECT THEM. I HEARD FROM A BANKER IN UTAH, COMMUNITY BANKER IN UTAH WHO SAID, I'VE BEEN IN BANKING FOR 29 YEARS AND AT TIME THE REGULATORY BURDEN HAS INCREASED DRAMATICALLY. THE ABILITY TO HELP CUSTOMERS AND SMALL BUSINESSES SUCCEED IN RURAL AMERICA HAS BEEN GREATLY HAMPERED BY REGULATION INTENDED TO PROTECT THE CUSTOMER FROM WALL STREET BANKS, BUT IN THE PROCESS SMALLER COMMUNITY BANKS, SUCH AS MINE, HAVE BEEN CAUGHT IN THE FRAY OR BROAD BRUSH OF REGULATIONS. BANKER IN OKLAHOMA SAID, BECAUSE OF DODD-FRANK REGULATIONS, QUOTE, WE NO LONGER OFFER PURCHASE HOUSE LOANS. AND THE LES GOES ON AND ON -- AND THE LIST GOES ON AND ON AND ON. AND SO THIS IS ONE REGULATION, ONE REGULATION THAT SIMPLY SAYS UNDER THE GRAMM-LEACH-BLILEY ACT THAT IF A FINANCIAL INSTITUTION DOESN'T CHANGE THEIR PRIVACY NOTIFICATION THEY DON'T HAVE TO SEND OUT A PIECE OF PAPER ANNUALLY. A PIECE OF PAPER LIKE THIS THAT 99% OF THE TIME CUSTOMERS THROW AWAY AND DON'T READ IN THE FIRST PLACE. AND DON'T TAKE MY WORD FOR IT, PROFESSOR ADAM LEVINTON WHO IS A FREQUENT DEMOCRAT, DEMOCRAT WITNESS BEFORE THE HOUSE FINANCIAL SERVICES COMMITTEE, TESTIFIED BEFORE OUR COMMITTEE, QUOTE, ONE THING I THINK SHOULD GO THE WAY OF THE DOO-DOO BIRD ARE THE GRAMM-LEACH-BLILEY PRIVACY NOTICES. NOBODY READS THEM. THAT'S A DEMOCRAT WITNESS, MR. SPEAKER. IT'S NOT THE REPUBLICAN. IT'S A DEMOCRAT WITNESS. GOES ON TOWAY SAY, NO ONE SHOULD, EVEN THE LARGE BANKS, SHOULD BE SPENDING MONEY ON GIVING THESE NOTICES. THAT'S NOT WHAT THIS BILL DOES. IT JUST SIMPLY SAYS IF A FINANCIAL INSTITUTION DOES NOT, DOES NOT CHANGE THEIR PRIVACY NOTIFICATION, THEY DON'T HAVE TO SEND OUT A PAPER NOTIFICATION THAT CREATES MORE COST, THAT GETS PASSED ONTO THE CUSTOMER THAT NOBODY READS IN THE FIRST PLACE. NUMBER ONE, IT'S IMPORTANT REGULATORY RELIEF FOR OUR FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS, BUT IT'S ALSO IMPORTANT WHEN WE THINK IN TERMS OF THE SHEER VOLUME OF FINANCIAL DISCLOSURES THAT OUR CONSTITUENTS RECEIVE. AND THIS GOES BACK TO THE FACT, MR. SPEAKER, THAT IF YOU DISCLOSE EVERYTHING, YOU EFFECTIVELY DISCLOSE NOTHING BECAUSE YOU OVERWHELM THE CUSTOMER. AND SO WE MUST VIGILANTLY ENSURE THAT OUR CONSTITUENTS ARE RECEIVING EFFECTIVE DISCLOSURE, NOT JUST VOLUME MUSS DISCLOSURE, -- VOLUMIOUS DISCLOSURE, WRITTEN IN CLEAR, UNDERSTANDABLE, LANGUAGE. NOT VOW LUMINOUS DISCLOSURE WRITTEN IN LEAGUIES AND FINE PRINT. THAT DOESN'T DO -- THAT DOESN'T DO ANYBODY ANY GOOD. I WANT TO THANK THE GENTLEMAN FOR HIS BIPARTISAN SUPPORT BECAUSE IT IS A SIMPLE, TECHNICAL CORRECTION TO CLARIFY THAT CUSTOMERS HAVE TO BE MAILED PHYSICALLY -- PHYSICALLY MAILED AN ANNUAL PRIVACY NOTICE ONLY IF THE PRIVACY CHANGED FROM THE PREVIOUS YEAR. IMPORTANTLY, THIS BILL WAS CAREFULLY CRAFTED TO MAINTAIN AND RETAIN CURRENT PRIVACY AND OPT OUT POLICY AND DOES NOT, DOES NOT EXEMPT ANY FINANCIAL SERVICES PROVIDER FROM AN INITIAL PRIVACY NOTICE, NOR DOES IT ALLOW ANY LOOPHOLES FOR AN INSTITUTION TO AVOID ISSUING AN UPDATED NOTICE. IN FACT, THIS LEGISLATION, MR. SPEAKER, DOES NOT CHANGE PRIVACY PROVISIONS AT ALL. JUST HOW THEY'RE DELIVERED. LET ME REPEAT. THE LEGISLATION DOES NOT CHANGE PRIVACY PROVISIONS AT ALL. JUST HOW THEY ARE DELIVERED. AGAIN, MR. TROTT'S BILL HAS STRONG BIPARTISAN SUPPORT, PROVIDES A SIMPLE AND FLEXIBLE APPROACH THAT MODERNIZES PRIVACY NOTIFICATION TO THE BENEFIT OF OUR CUSTOMERS AND TO THE BENEFIT OF OUR FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS. I URGE ADOPTION OF THE MEASURE AND URGE EVERY MEMBER TO VOTE FOR IT AND I RESERVE THE BALANCE OF MY TIME.

        Show Full Text
      • 09:24:09 AM

        THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

        THE GENTLEMAN'S TIME IS RESERVED. THE GENTLEWOMAN FROM CALIFORNIA.

      • 09:24:12 AM

        MS. WATERS

        THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I YIELD MYSELF SUCH TIME AS I MAY CONSUME.

      • 09:24:18 AM

        THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

        THE GENTLEWOMAN IS RECOGNIZED.

      • 09:24:20 AM

        MS. WATERS

        THANK YOU. I RISE TO SPEAK IN OPPOSITION TO H.R. 2396, THE PRIVACY…

        THANK YOU. I RISE TO SPEAK IN OPPOSITION TO H.R. 2396, THE PRIVACY NOTIFICATION TECHNICAL CLARIFICATION ACT. CONTRARY TO THE BILL TITLE, THIS BILL IS FAR FROM A TECHNICAL CLARIFICATION, SO I WANT TO BE VERY CLEAR WHAT THIS BILL WOULD ACTUALLY DO. H.R. 2396 WOULD REDUCE THE MEANINGFUL AND CLEAR DISCLOSURES THAT FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS MUST CURRENTLY PROVIDE TO THEIR CUSTOMERS EVERY YEAR. EVEN IF THOSE COMPANIES SHARE THEIR CUSTOMERS' NONPUBLIC PERSONAL INFORMATION BROADLY WITH NONAFFILIATED THIRD-PARTY COMPANIES. UNLIKE OTHER PRIVACY BILLS CONGRESS HAS CONSIDERED, THIS BILL COMES WITH NO GUARDRAILS WHATSOEVER TO DISCOURAGE THE COMPANY FROM BROADLY SHARING CONSUMERS' SENSITIVE PERSONAL INFORMATION. WHILE THE BILL PROVIDES SEVERAL ALTERNATIVE MECHANISMS TO DELIVER PRIVACY REMINDERS, ONE OPTION WOULD RESULT IN THE CUSTOMER RECEIVING NO WRITTEN DISCLOSURE AT ALL. THE CURRENT ANNUAL PRIVACY NOTICES SERVE AS A REMINDER, DESCRIBING A CUSTOMER'S RIGHT TO RESTRICT THE SHARING OF THEIR NONPUBLIC PERSONAL INFORMATION TO NONAFFILIATED THIRD PARTIES AND INFORMATION ABOUT HOW TO EXERCISE THIS RIGHT IF THEY SO CHOOSE. THIS PRIVACY RIGHT WAS CREATED IN THE GRAMM-LEACH-BLILEY ACT, WHICH WAS SIGNED INTO LAW IN 1999. I SERVED ON THE CONFERENCE COMMITTEE, SO I KNOW FIRSTHAND THAT THE INITIAL AND ANNUAL PRIVACY NOTICES IN THE GRAMM-LEACH-BLILEY ACT WERE ENACTED PARTLY IN RESPONSE TO PUBLIC CONCERNS ABOUT THE SALE OF PERSONAL DATA FOR MARKETING PURPOSES THAT WERE HIGHLIGHTED IN A NUMBER OF LEGAL ACTIONS BROUGHT BY STATE ATTORNEYS GENERAL AT THE TIME. IN 1999, FOR EXAMPLE, THERE WAS A SETTLEMENT BETWEEN THE MINNESOTA ATTORNEY GENERAL AND U.S. BANK RESOLVING ALLEGATIONS THAT THE BANK MISREPRESENTED ITS PRACTICE OF SELLING HIGHLY PERSONAL AND CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION ABOUT ITS CUSTOMERS TO TELEMARKETERS. THESE CONCERNS ARE JUST AS RELEVANT TODAY. IN FACT, I FIND THE TIMING OF THE CONSIDERATION OF THIS BILL VERY TROUBLING AS IT IS BEING BROUGHT TO THE FLOOR JUST MONTHS AFTER THE MASSIVE EQUIFAX DATA BREACH. IN THE EQUIFAX BREACH, 145.5 MILLION AMERICANS HAD THEIR SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS, DATES OF BIRTH, AND OTHER SENSITIVE FINANCIAL AND PERSONALLY IDENTIFIABLE INFORMATION EXPOSED TO THIEVES. EQUIFAX IS NOT THE ONLY MAJOR CREDIT BUREAU TO EXPERIENCE LARGE DATA BREACH. ABOUT TWO YEARS AGO, EXPERIAN, ONE OF THE OTHER THREE MAJOR CREDIT BUREAUS IN THIS COUNTRY, HAD A BREACH THAT EXPOSED MILLIONS OF T-MOBILE CUSTOMERS' INFORMATION. THESE BREACHES ARE ON TOP OF A LONG LIST OF OTHER BREACHES WE HAVE SEEN AT OTHER COMPANIES WHERE SENSITIVE CUSTOMER INFORMATION WAS COMPROMISED. CONSUMERS HAVE CALLED ON THEIR REPRESENTATIVES IN CONGRESS TO ENACT TOUGHER LAWS THAT WOULD STRENGTHEN THEIR CONTROL OVER THEIR PERSONAL INFORMATION, NOT WEAKEN IT. CONSUMERS ARE INCREASINGLY WEARY ABOUT THE UNFETTERED SHARING OF THEIR PERSONAL INFORMATION BY FINANCIAL FIRMS TO NONAFFILIATED THIRD PARTIES THAT CAN RESULT IN CONSUMER PROFILING, FRAUD, AGGRESSIVE TARGET MARKETING, AND IDENTITY THEFT. UNFORTUNATELY, THIS BILL GOES IN THE OPPOSITE DIRECTION. INSTEAD OF WORKING TO STRENGTHEN CONSUMERS' PRIVACY PROTECTIONS, H.R. 2396 WOULD EASE OBLIGATIONS ON FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS TO PROVIDE NOTICES TO THEIR CUSTOMERS DESCRIBING THEIR PRIVACY PRACTICES AND POLICIES, AND IMPORTANTLY, FULLY EXPLAINING TO THESE CUSTOMERS THEIR RIGHT TO RESTRICT THE SHARING OF THEIR INFORMATION TO NONAFFILIATED THIRD PARTIES. THIS IS COMMONLY REFERRED TO AS THE CONSUMER'S RIGHT TO OPT OUT OF HAVING A FINANCIAL INSTITUTION SHARE THEIR INFORMATION TO COMPANIES THAT ARE OUTSIDE OF THEIR COMMON CORPORATE STRUCTURE OR ORGANIZATION. THESE NONAFFILIATED THIRD-PARTY COMPANIES ARE GENERALLY NOT ONES THAT THE CONSUMERS HAVE AN EXISTING RELATIONSHIP WITH. MEANING THEY HAVE NOT RECEIVED A PRODUCT OR SERVICE FROM THE COMPANY IN THE PAST. NOW THE PROPONENTS OF H.R. 2396 MAY SAY THE BILL HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH EQUIFAX OR THAT EQUIFAX WOULD NOT BE COVERED. IF THE AMENDMENT BEING OFFERED LATER TODAY IS AGREED TO. BUT THE BILL WOULD ROLL BACK PRIVACY NOTICE REQUIREMENTS FOR MANY FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS THAT ENGAGE IN VEHICLE FINANCING, INCLUDING MEGABANKS LIKE WELLS FARGO, EVEN IF THEY BROADLY SHARE THEIR CUSTOMERS' NONPUBLIC PERSONAL INFORMATION WITH OTHER COMPANIES. SO LET'S DISCUSS WELLS FARGO AND THEIR AUTO LENDING PRACTICES AND THEIR WORK WITH NONAFFILIATED THIRD PARTIES. EARLIER THIS YEAR, THE DEMOCRATIC STAFF OF THE FINANCIAL SERVICES COMMITTEE PRODUCED A REPORT ON WELLS FARGO'S EGREGIOUS MISCONDUCT WHICH HAS RESULTED IN EXTENSIVE CONSUMER HARM. FOR EXAMPLE, WELLS FARGO CHARGED OVER 570,000 CONSUMERS FOR AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE POLICIES THEY DID NOT NEED, WHICH RESULTED IN AT LEAST 20,000 CUSTOMERS, INCLUDING ACTIVE DUTY SERVICE MEMBERS, HAVING THEIR VEHICLES INAPPROPRIATELY REPOSSESSED. THESE AUTO INSURANCE POLICIES WERE PROVIDED THROUGH A NONAFFILIATED THIRD PARTY COMPANY CALLED NATIONAL GENERAL. THE BANK HAS ALSO DEMONSTRATED A CLEAR PATTERN OF MISUSING MILLIONS OF THEIR CUSTOMERS' INFORMATION TO OPEN ACCOUNTS IN THEIR NAME WITHOUT THEIR PERMISSION. SO WHY SHOULD CONGRESS CONSIDER RELAXING THE PRIVACY REQUIREMENTS FOR RECIDIVIST BANK LIKE WELLS FARGO? LET ME ALSO ADDRESS ARGUMENTS THAT CUSTOMERS DON'T READ THESE NOTICES ANYWAY. AS WE HAVE DISCUSSED, I THINK CUSTOMERS ARE PAYING CLOSER ATTENTION NOW AFTER THE EQUIFAX INCIDENT. POSING A LINCOLN THEIR WEBSITE ISN'T SO BAD AND THE CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION BUREAU ALLOWED FOR IT, BUT IN THE CONSUMER BUREAU, PROVIDED AN ALTERNATIVE TO THE ANNUAL PRIVACY NOTICES FOR COMPANIES THAT DO NOT SHARE DATA IN WAYS THAT TRIGGER CONSUMERS OPT OUT RIGHTS UNDER THE LAW. . OVER THE LAST DECADE CONGRESS HAS HEARD REPEATEDLY FROM BANKS AND CREDIT UNIONS THAT IF A COMPANY DOES NOT SHARE PERSONAL INFORMATION WITH AN UNAFFILIATED THIRD PARTY THAT ALLOWS CONSUMERS TO OPT OUT FROM HAVING IT SHARED, AND IF THEY DO NOT CHANGE THEIR PRIVACY POLICIES, THEY SHOULD BE EXEMPT FROM THE ANNUAL NOTICE REQUIREMENTS. IN BOTH INSTANCES THE CUSTOMER DOES NOT HAVE THE ABILITY TO OPT OUT OF HAVING THE INFORMATION SHARED. AFTER SEVERAL YEARS OF RESEARCH AND DEBATE, WE MADE THAT TARGETED CHANGE IN THE LAST CONGRESS. SINCE THEN OTHER COMPANIES SPECIFICALLY CAPTIVE AUTO FINANCE COMPANIES, HAVE MADE THE CASE. THEY SHOULD HAVE MORE FLEXIBILITY, SATISFYING THE ANNUAL NOTICE REQUIREMENT BECAUSE THEY HAVE A UNIQUE AND CLOSE RELATIONSHIP WITH AUTOMOBILE DEALERS THEY WORK WITH. THAT STILL REQUIRES THEM TO SEND THE ANNUAL NOTICE. THIS UNAFFILIATED THIRD PARTY RELATIONSHIP TRIGGERS CONSUMERS' RIGHT UNDER THE LAW TO OPT OUT AND NOT HAVE THEIR INFORMATION SHARED. I OFFERED AN AMENDMENT IN COMMITTEE THAT WOULD HAVE GRANTED THIS TARGETED RELIEF, BUT IT WAS REJECTED. SO WHILE I APPRECIATE THAT H.R. 2396 PROVIDES FLEXIBILITY TO CAPTIVE AND AUTO FINANCE COMPANY, THE BILL IS NOT LIMITED TO THEM AND GOES MUCH, MUCH FURTHER. MR. CHAIRMAN, OVER 30 CONSUMER COMMUNITY, PRIFECY, AND CIVIL RIGHTS GROUPS HAVE PUBLICLY OPPOSED THIS BILL, INCLUDING U.S. HERG AND SO DO I. THIS IS AN AREA WHERE MORE STUDY IS NEEDED BEFORE POLICYMAKERS CRAFT SWEEPING CHANGES. THE BOTTOM LINE IS I BELIEVE WE SHOULD NOT OPEN THE DOOR TOO WIDELY AT THIS TIME TO GIVE THE SAME DEGREE OF FLEXIBILITY TO ALL AND EVERY FINANCIAL INSTITUTION. INCLUDING RESID VIST BANKS LIKE WELLS FARGO -- RECIDIVIST BANKS LIKE WELLS FARGO. THERE SHOULD BE MORE NOT LESS PRIVACY PROTECTIONS AND CONSUMER CONTROL RELATING TO PERSONAL INFORMATION FOLLOWING THE MASS NIFF DATA BREACH AT EQUIFAX THIS YEAR. FOR ALL THESE REASONS I URGE OPPOSITION TO H.R. 2396. I RESERVE THE BALANCE OF MY TIME.

        Show Full Text
      • 09:34:02 AM

        TEMPORE EQUIFAX

        EQUIFAX THIS YEAR. FOR ALL THESE THE GENTLELADY'S TIME IS RESERVED. THE…

        EQUIFAX THIS YEAR. FOR ALL THESE THE GENTLELADY'S TIME IS RESERVED. THE GENTLEMAN FROM TEXAS.

        Show Full Text
      • 09:34:26 AM

        MR. HENSARLING

        I YIELD MYSELF 30 SECONDS TO SAY I KWLINSED VERY CAREFULLY. IT WAS A THE…

        I YIELD MYSELF 30 SECONDS TO SAY I KWLINSED VERY CAREFULLY. IT WAS A THE GENTLELADY'S TIME IS RESERVED. THE GENTLEMAN FROM TEXAS.

        Show Full Text
      • 09:34:31 AM

        MR. HENSARLING

        I YIELD MYSELF 30 SECONDS TO SAY I KWLINSED VERY CAREFULLY. IT WAS A…

        I YIELD MYSELF 30 SECONDS TO SAY I KWLINSED VERY CAREFULLY. IT WAS A FASCINATING SPEECH FROM THE RANKING MEMBER. TOO BAD IT HAS ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO WITH THE BILL THAT IS BEFORE US. SHE WAS SPEAKING OF PRIVACY POLICIES. THE BILL HAS TO DO WITH NOTIFICATION. NOTIFICATION. BUT I DO AGREE WITH THE RANKING MEMBER THAT WE DO NEED MORE EFFECTIVE DISCLOSURE AND IN H.R. 2396 WE REQUIRE FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS TO MAKE THEIR CURRENT POLICIES AVAILABLE ON ITS WEBSITE AT ALL TIMES. THAT ACTUALLY IMPROVES DISCLOSURE. THE ONLY PEOPLE WHO CAN BE MORE THE STATUS QUO ARE THOSE WHO OWN PAPER MILLS. SO WE CAN WASTE MORE PAPER. MR. SPEAKER, I'M NOW PLEASED TO YIELD FIVE MINUTES TO THE GENTLEMAN FROM MICHIGAN, THE SPONSOR OF THE LEGISLATION, AND AN OUTSTANDING HARDWORKING MEMBER OF THE FINANCIAL SERVICES COMMITTEE, MR. TROTT.

        Show Full Text
      • 09:35:01 AM

        EMPORE GENTLEMAN

        GENTLEMAN FROM MICHIGAN IS RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.

      • 09:35:03 AM

        MR. TROTT

        THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. I'D ALSO LIKE TO THANK THE GENTLEMAN FROM TEXAS,…

        THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. I'D ALSO LIKE TO THANK THE GENTLEMAN FROM TEXAS, THE CHAIRMAN OF OUR COMMITTEE, FOR YIELDING TIME AND FOR BRINGING THIS BILL TO THE FLOOR. I RISE IN SUPPORT OF H.R. 2396, THE PRIVACY NOTIFICATION TECHNICAL CORRECTION ACT. I WOULD LIKE TO THANK MY GOOD FRIEND, THANK THE GENTLEMAN FROM TEXAS, THE CHAIRMAN OF OUR COMMITTEE, FOR YIELDING TIME AND FOR BRINGING THIS BILL TO THE FLOOR. MR. CLAY, FOR HIS LEADERSHIP ON THIS BILL. IT'S BEEN A PLEASURE TO WORK ACROSS THE AISLE ON THIS COMMONSENSE MEASURE WITH SOMEONE FOR WHOM I HAVE SUCH GREAT RESPECT. THIS BILL MAKES A SIMPLE TECHNICAL CORRECTION TO FEDERAL LAW. UNDER THE LEGISLATION, FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS ARE NO LONGER REQUIRED TO MAIL DUPE CANIVE -- DUPE CANIVE AND CONFUSING PRIVACY NOTIFICATIONS EVERY YEAR WHEN NO CHANGES HAVE BEEN MADE. PRIVACY INFORMATION MUST BE MADE AVAILABLE ON THE COMPANY WEBSITE AND FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS MUST SEND PAPER COPIES TO CONSIRMSE UPON REQUEST. UNDER THE LEGISLATION, COMPANIES ARE REQUIRED TO PROVIDE A TOLL FREE NUMBER SO CUSTOMERS CAN REQUEST THE POLICY AT ANY TIME. ADDITIONALLY, CONSUMERS WILL BE REMINDED OF THEIR RIGHT TO OPT OUT OF INFORMATION SHARING WHEN THEY RECEIVE THEIR BILLS. IF YOU'RE LIKE ME YOU THROW AWAY THESE DOCUMENTS. THEY ARE CONFUSING, DENSE, FULL OF FINE PRINT LEGALESE. I CAN OF INFORMATION SHARING HAS CHANGED AND I'M A LAWYER. THIS LEGISLATION WILL ENSURE NEVER TELL IF ANYTHING THAT CONSUMERS ARE ALERTED OF CHANGES AND WILL NO LONGER BE INUNDATED WITH JUNK MAIL. THIS MEASURE WILL ALSO HELP COMPANIES PROVIDE BETTER SERVICE TO THEIR CUSTOMERS. SOME COMPANIES SPEND OVER $2 MILLION ANNUALLY ON THESE MAILINGS. MONEY THAT COULD BE PUT TO BETTER USE MAKING CURRENT LOANS OR PERHAPS WILL ALSO HELP COMPANIES PROVIDE BETTER SERVICE TO THEIR CUSTOMERS. SOME COMPANIES SPEND OVER LOWERING THE COST OF THEIR PRODUCT. DURING A RECENT HEARING ON THIS BILL A COMMUNITY BANKER TOLD US ABOUT A SIMILAR PROVISION THAT PASSED FOR BANKS LAST YEAR. HE SPOKE ABOUT HOW POSITIVE IT HAD BEEN FOR HIS COMMUNITY AND HIS CUSTOMERS. HE TOOK THE MONEY HE WOULD HAVE SPENT ON POSEAGE AND PAPER AND -- POSTAGE AND PAPER AND GIVE IT BACK TO THE COMMUNITY IN TERMS OF MORE LOANS. THIS HELPED PEOPLE START NEW BUSINESS, CREATE MORE JOBS, AND RESULTED IN A FEW MORTGAGES BEING MADE TO PURCHASE NEW HOMES. LOWERING THE COST OF THEIR PRODUCT. I BELIEVE EVERY MEMBER SHOULD SUPPORT GETTING RID OF OUTDATED, UNNECESSARY REGULATIONS. THIS BILL WILL ALLOW THOSE WHO LEND MONEY WHEN WE BUY A NEW CAR TO REALIZE THE SAME SAVINGS AND EFFICIENCIES AS BANKS. NOT ONLY WILL THIS LEGISLATION REDUCE UNNECESSARY COSTS, IT WILL IMPROVE TRANSPARENCY AND ACCOUNTABILITY AND ENSURE INDIVIDUALS BETTER UNDERSTAND WHEN A COMPANY HAS ACTUALLY CHANGED ITS PRIVACY POLICY. A FEW MINUTES AGO THE RANKING MEMBER SPOKE IN OPPOSITION TO THIS BILL. I'M NOT SURE WHEN BILL SHE READ BUT IT WAS NOT 2396. THE BILL IN NO WAY PUTS CONSUMERS' PRIVACY INFORMATION AT RISK. IT IN NO WAY DENIES CONSUMERS IMPORTANT PRIVACY PROTECTIONS. IT IN NO WAY HAS ANYTHING TO DO WITH EQUIFAX. HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH WELLS FARGO. HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH SERVICE MEMBERS HAVING THEIR CARS IMPROPERLY REPOSSESSED. HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH CONSUMER PROFILING. HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH FRAUD. AND SHE DIDN'T BRING IT UP, HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE PRESIDENT'S TAX RETURNS. THIS BILL SHOULD HAVE BEEN ON THE SUSPENSION CALENDAR. THERE ARE ONLY TWO GROUPS THAT CAN OPPOSE THIS GROUP. THE UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE BECAUSE IT'S GOING TO MEAN LESS BUSINESS FOR THEFMENT AND AS THE CHAIRMAN MENTIONED, PAPER MILLS. SHE DIDN'T-D, THE RANKING MEMBER, OFFER AN AMENDMENT, THE AMENDMENT WAS SO CONVOLUTED IF I WAS BANK OR FINANCIAL INSTITUTION OR A CAR LENDER, I WOULD PREFER TO DO THE MAILINGS BECAUSE THE AMENDMENT AT THE END OF THE DAY WAS REALLY JUST A HAVEN FOR CLASS ACTION LAWYERS TO FILE FRIVOLOUS LAWSUITS WHEN SOMEONE DIDN'T PUT SOMETHING ON THEIR WEBSITE EXACTLY AS OUTLINED IN THE AMENDMENT. THIS IS A PRO-CONSUMER PIECE OF LEGISLATION. I HAVE LETTERS FROM -- THAT I'D LIKE TO INCLUDE WITH MY COMMENTS FROM THE AMERICAN FINANCIAL SERVICES ASSOCIATION, THE NATIONAL BANKERS ASSOCIATION, THE AMERICAN BANKERS ASSOCIATION, THE CONSUMER BANKERS ASSOCIATION, THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF MINORITY AUTOMOTIVE DEALERS, AND LETTERS SIGNED BY FORD MOTOR CREDIT, TOYOTA FINANCIAL SERVICE, EBB AND V.W. -- AND V.W. CREDIT. IT WILL LOWER THE COST FOR THESE COMPANIES WHICH WILL HELP CONSUMERS OBTAIN MORE LOANS. THIS IS A BIPARTISAN, COMMONSENSE PIECE OF LEGISLATION WHICH TRUE COMMUNITY BENEFITS. I URGE ALL MEMBERS TO SUPPORT H.R. 2396. MR. SPEAKER, I YIELD BACK THE BALANCE OF MY TIME.

        Show Full Text
      • 09:39:44 AM

        TEMPORE THE

      • 09:39:45 AM

        TEMPORE WITHOUT

        WITHOUT OBJECTION, THE LETTERS ARE INCLUDED AS A MATTER OF THE RECORD. THE…

        WITHOUT OBJECTION, THE LETTERS ARE INCLUDED AS A MATTER OF THE RECORD. THE GENTLEWOMAN FROM CALIFORNIA.

        Show Full Text
      • 09:39:48 AM

        MS. WATERS

        THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I YIELD THREE MINUTES TO THE GENTLELADY FROM NEW…

        THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I YIELD THREE MINUTES TO THE GENTLELADY FROM NEW YORK, A SENIOR MEMBER OF THE FINANCIAL SERVICES COMMITTEE, AND THE RANKING MEMBER OF THE SMALL BUSINESS COMMITTEE, MS. VELAZQUEZ.

        Show Full Text
      • 09:39:55 AM

        THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

        THE GENTLEWOMAN FROM NEW YORK IS RECOGNIZED FOR THREE V.W. CREDIT. IT WILL…

        THE GENTLEWOMAN FROM NEW YORK IS RECOGNIZED FOR THREE V.W. CREDIT. IT WILL LOWER THE COST FOR THESE COMPANIES WHICH WILL HELP CONSUMERS OBTAIN MORE LOANS. MINUTES.

        Show Full Text
      • 09:40:01 AM

        MS. VELAZQUEZ

        THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. LET ME TAKE THIS OPPORTUNITY TO THANK RANKING…

        THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. LET ME TAKE THIS OPPORTUNITY TO THANK RANKING MEMBER WATERS FOR HER EXTRAORDINARY LEADERSHIP ON THIS ISSUE. I RISE IN OPPOSITION TO H.R. 2396, THE PRIVACY NOTIFICATION TECHNICAL CLARIFICATION ACT. THIS BILL CLAIMS TO AMEND THE GRAHAM-LEECH-BLILEY ACT TO EXEMPT VEHICLE FINANCE COMPANIES FROM PROVIDING CUSTOMERS WITH PRIVACY STATEMENTS. IF A COMPANY HASN'T RECENTLY CHANGED ITS POLICIES AND PRACTICES AND THE COMPANY MAKES ITS POLICY AVAILABLE ONLINE. BUT THIS BILL GOES FAR BEYOND PROVIDING A SMALL EXEMPTION AND TAYLORED -- TAILORED FLEXIBILITY TO VEHICLE FINANCE COMPANIES AS THE PROPONENTS OF THIS BILL WILL HAVE YOU BELIEVE. AND SOMETHING I'M REALLY READY TO SUPPORT. THIS BILL WILL EXEMPT ONLINE. BUT THIS BILL GOES FAR ALL FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS FROM PROVIDING CUSTOMERS WITH PRIVACY NOTICES. AS CURRENTLY DRAFTED UNDER THE BILL, FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS SUCH AS PAYDAY LERNSD, CHECK CASH SERVICE, AND LARGE INSTITUTIONS LIKE WELLS FARGO, ARE EXEMPTED FROM PROVIDING ANNUAL PRIVACY NOTICES AND ARE CONSTRAINED ON WHO THEY CAN SHARE AND ARE CONSTRAINED ON WHO THEY CAN SHARE THEIR CUSTOMERS' PERSONAL INFORMATION -- UNCONSTRAINED WITH WHO THEY CAN SHARE THEIR CUSTOMER'S PERSONAL INFORMATION WITH. THIS GOES FAR BEYOND THE ORIGINAL INTENT OF THE BILL. AS WE HAVE SEEN IN THE GROWING NUMBER OF DATA BREACHES AT COMPANIES LIKE EQUIFAX, THE PROTECTION OF CUSTOMERS' PERSONAL INFORMATION IS SOMETHING CONGRESS MUST CONSIDER CAREFULLY. WHILE I CONTINUE TO THINK THAT IT MAKES SENSE FOR AUTO FINANCE COMPANY TO HAVE SOME DEGREE OF FLEXIBILITY TO THE EXTEND THEY ONLY SHARE CUSTOMER PERSONAL INFORMATION WITH THE DEALERSHIP, THIS LEGISLATION IS FAR TOO BROAD. TO THAT END, I WILL ASK MY COLLEAGUES TO OPPOSE THIS MEASURE. I THANK THE GENTLELADY FROM CALIFORNIA. I YIELD BACK.

        Show Full Text
      • 09:42:15 AM

        THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

        THE GENTLEMAN FROM TEXAS.

      • 09:42:17 AM

        MR. HENSARLING

        MR. SPEAKER, AT THIS TIME I AM VERY PLEASED TO YIELD FIVE MINUTES TO THE…

        MR. SPEAKER, AT THIS TIME I AM VERY PLEASED TO YIELD FIVE MINUTES TO THE GENTLEMAN FROM MISSOURI, MR. LUETKEMEYER, THE CHAIRMAN OF THE FINANCIAL SERVICES SUBCOMMITTEE ON FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS AND CONSUMER CREDIT.

        Show Full Text
      • 09:42:32 AM

        THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

        THE GENTLEMAN FROM MISSOURI IS RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.

      • 09:42:34 AM

        MR. LUETKEMEYER

        THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. I WANT TO START BY THANKING THE GENTLEMAN FROM…

        THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. I WANT TO START BY THANKING THE GENTLEMAN FROM MICHIGAN FOR HIS DILIGENT WORK ON THIS ISSUE AND ALL THE LEADERSHIP OUR CHAIRMAN, CHAIRMAN HENSARLING FROM TEXAS, HAS GIVEN US THROUGHOUT THE YEARS ON THIS PARTICULAR ISSUE AS WELL LAST YEAR WHEN I CARRIED THE BILL ALSO. SEVERAL YEARS AGO THE GENTLEMAN FROM CALIFORNIA, MR. SHERRMAN, AND I INTRODUCED BIPARTISAN LEGISLATION TO REQUIRE DEPOSITORY INSTITUTIONS TO PROVIDE PRIVACY INFORMATION TO THEIR CUSTOMERS ONLY IF THEY HAD CHANGED ANY POLICY OR PRACTICE RELATED TO THAT CUSTOMER'S PRIVACY. THAT BILL WAS ULTIMATELY SIGNED INTO LAW BY PRESIDENT OBAMA. IT HAS ELIMINATED MILLIONS OF CONFUSED MAILINGS THAT COSTS MILLIONS TO PRODUCE EACH YEAR. OUR LEGISLATION PROVIDED RELIEF TO BANKS AND CREDIT UNIONS, IT DID NOT EXTEND RELIEF TO OTHER COMPANIES. NAMELY CAPTIVE FINANCE COMPANIES TO OPERATE IN A MANNER LARGELY SIMILAR TO DEPOSITORY INSTITUTIONS. SAFEGUARDS FEATURED IN OUR BILL FROM THE 114TH CONGRESS AND CODIFIED INTO LAW ARE INCLUDED IN MR. TROTT'S BILL. MR. LEAF WILL NOT BE GRANTED TO A COMPANY -- RELIEF WILL NOT BE GRANTED TO A COMPANY--ALSO THERE IS A REQUIREMENT THE PRIVACY NOTICE MUST BE MADE TO CONSUMERS IN A VARIETY OF WAYS. THE CONSUMERS WILL CONTINUE TO HAVE ACCESS TO PRIVACY NOTICES TO ONLINE RESOURCES AND BILLING STATEMENTS. REQUIREMENTS FOR FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS TO RELEASE ANNUAL PRIVACY NOTICES TO CUSTOMERS EVEN WHEN NO CHANGES HAVE BEEN MADE ARE BOTH REDUNDANT AND A WASTE OF RESOURCES. WITH PASSAGE OF THIS BILL, INFORMATION INCLUDED IN THESE MAILINGS WOULD LIKELY BE MORE SIGNIFICANT TO THE CONSUMER BECAUSE THEY WOULD ONLY COME AFTER A CHANGE IN PRIVACY POLICY. MR. SPEAKER, THIS IS ABOUT ACCOUNTABILITY OR THE INSTITUTION TO THEIR CUSTOMER FOR HOLDING THAT INFORMATION. IT'S ABOUT ACCESS FOR THE CUSTOMER TO THEIR PRIVACY INFORMATION -- OWN INFORMATION WITH REGARDS TO PRIVACY OF IT. AND WHILE THE -- A GOOD EXAMPLE AS POINTED OUT BY THE RANKING MEMBER WAS EQUIFAX. LET'S STOP AND TALK ABOUT EQUIFAX FOR A SECOND. WHAT HAPPENED? THEY HAD THE LARGEST BREACH IN HISTORY, 150 MILLION PEOPLE. MR. SPEAKER, THERE'S PROBABLY YOU AND I AND EVERYBODY IN THIS ROOM AND 12 PEOPLE WATCH RIGHT NOW AFFECTED BY THIS. BUT I GUARANTEE YOU THAT YOU AND I ALL THE PEOPLE IN THIS ROOM, NOBODY KEPT THEIR PRIVACY NOTICES SENT OUT LAST YEAR D. WE? THEY ARE ALL IN FILE PRIVACY INFORMATION -- OWN INFORMATION WITH REGARDS TO PRIVACY OF IT. AND 13, LONG FORGOTTEN ABOUT. AND THE INFORMATION IN THOSE NOTICES IS FORGOTTEN ABOUT AND NOT PROBABLY READ TO BEGIN WITH. IT'S IMPORTANT THE GENTLEMAN'S BILL HERE AS IN HERE THAT THE PRIVACY NOTICE CAN BE ACCESSED ONLINE. . THEY COULD CHECK FOR THE PRIVACY POLICIES OF EQUIFAX AND SEE WHAT THE POLICIES WERE AND WHETHER THEY WERE ADHERED TO BY THE COMPANY ITSELF IN NOTIFYING THEM AND TAKING CARE OF THEIR CONCERNS AND REIMBURSING THEM, WHATEVER WAS IN THE NOTICE WAS IN THAT ONLINE NOTICE AS WELL. SO IT PROVIDED THAT ACCESS WHICH IS NOT GOING TO HAVE -- CONSUMERS NOT GOING TO HAVE IN A PIECE OF PAPER THAT'S PROBABLY GOING TO GET FILED. I WILL TELL YOU WHEN I GOT HOME LAST WEEKEND, GOT HOME, SAID I AM NOT GOING TO READ THIS, THREW IT AWAY. THIS IS A WASTE OF TIME AND RESOURCES. AND IN THIS SITUATION WITH THE EQUIFAX BREACH, THIS BILL POINTS OUT THE GREAT THINGS THAT CAN HAPPEN IF YOU ENACT THIS LEGISLATION ALLOWING CONSUMERS HAVE ACCESS 24/7 THROUGH THE NOTIFICATIONS AND PRIVACY POLICIES. ONCE AGAIN, I WANT TO THANK THE GENTLEMAN FROM MICHIGAN FOR PICKING UP THE MANTLE ON THIS ISSUE, ASK MY COLLEAGUES TO JOIN ME IN SUPPORTING H.R. 2396. I YIELD BACK.

        Show Full Text
      • 09:46:29 AM

        THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

        THE GENTLEWOMAN FROM CALIFORNIA.

      • 09:46:31 AM

        MS. WATERS

        THANK YOU. MR. SPEAKER AND MEMBERS, I HEARD MORE THAN ONCE MEMBERS…

        THANK YOU. MR. SPEAKER AND MEMBERS, I HEARD MORE THAN ONCE MEMBERS SPEAKING FOR CONSUMERS ARE SAYING, THESE PRIVACY NOTICES ARE NOT THAT IMPORTANT. NOBODY READS THEM. THEY THROW THEM IN THE WASTE BASKET. WELL, I DON'T KNOW HOW MEMBERS WOULD KNOW THAT, AND I DON'T THINK WE SHOULD BE SATISFIED THAT CONSUMERS ARE BEING REPRESENTED THAT WAY WITH INDICATIONS THAT THEY DON'T REALLY CARE ABOUT THESE NOTICES AND THE OPPORTUNITY TO OPT OUT SO THAT THEIR INFORMATION WON'T BE SHARED. BUT LET ME TELL YOU WHAT CONSUMERS ARE SAYING TO US. I HAVE HERE LETTERS THAT HAVE BEEN SENT BY CONSUMER ORGANIZATIONS THAT REALLY DO CARE ABOUT WHAT IS HAPPENING WITH THIS BILL TODAY. AND I'D LIKE TO SHARE THAT INFORMATION WITH YOU. LET ME JUST TELL YOU WHO THESE CONSUMER ORGANIZATIONS ARE AND WHO THEY REPRESENT. AMERICANS FOR FINANCIAL REFORM. AMERICANS FOR FINANCIAL REFORM IS A NONPARTISAN AND NONPROFIT COALITION OF MORE THAN 200 CIVIL RIGHTS, CONSUMER, LABOR, BUSINESS, INVESTOR, FAITH-BASED, AND CIVIC AND COMMUNITY GROUPS FORMED IN THE WAKE OF THE 2008 CRISIS WORKING TO LAY THE FOUNDATION FOR A STRONG, STABLE, AND ETHICAL FINANCIAL SYSTEM, ONE THAT SERVES THE ECONOMY AND THE NATION AS A WHOLE. AND THEN THERE'S L.I. -- ALLIED PROGRESS. IT'S A CONSUMER WATCHDOG ORGANIZATION THAT USES HARD-HITTING RESEARCH TO STAND UP TO WALL STREET AND POWERFUL SPECIAL INTERESTS AND HOLD THEIR ALLIES IN CONGRESS AND THE WHITE HOUSE ACCOUNTABLE. AND THEN THERE'S CENTER FOR DIGITAL DEMOCRACY. THE CENTER FOR DIGITAL DEMOCRACY IS RECOGNIZED AS ONE OF THE LEADING CONSUMER PROTECTION AND PRIVACY ORGANIZATIONS IN THE UNITED STATES, AND SINCE ITS FOUNDING IN 2001 AND PRIOR TO THAT THROUGH ITS PREDECESSOR ORGANIZATION, THE CENTER FOR MEDIA EDUCATION, C.D.D. HAS BEEN AT THE FOREFRONT OF RESEARCH, PUBLIC EDUCATION, ANDED A VOW CASEY PROTECTING CONSUMERS -- AND ADVOCACY PROTECTING CONSUMERS IN THE DIGITAL AGE. AND THEN THERE'S CONSUMER ACTION. THROUGH MULTILINGUAL EDUCATION MATERIALS, COMMUNITY OUTREACH, AND ISSUE FOCUSED ADVOCACY, CONSUMER ACTION EMPOWERS UNDERREPRESENTED CONSUMERS NATIONWIDE TO ASSERT THEIR RIGHTS IN THE MARKETPLACE AND FINANCIALLY PROSPER. THERE'S CONSUMER FEDERATION OF AMERICA. THE CONSUMER FEDERATION OF AMERICA IS AN ASSOCIATION OF NONPROFIT CONSUMER ORGANIZATIONS THAT WAS ESTABLISHED WAY BACK IN 1968 TO ADVANCE THE CONSUMER INTERESTS THROUGH RESEARCH, ADVOCACY AND EDUCATION. TODAY, NEARLY 300 OF THESE GROUPS PARTICIPATE IN THE FEDERATION AND GOVERN IT THROUGH THEIR REPRESENTATIVES ON THE ORGANIZATION'S BOARD OF DIRECTORS. C.F.A. IS A RESEARCH, ADVOCACY, EDUCATION, AND SERVICE ORGANIZATION. AND THEN THERE'S CONSUMER WATCHDOG. CONSUMER WATCHDOG IS A NONPROFIT ORGANIZATION DEDICATED TO PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE VOICE FOR TAXPAYERS AND CONSUMERS IN AN ERA WHEN SPECIAL INTERESTS DOMINATE PUBLIC DISCOURSE, GOVERNMENT AND POLITICS, AND THEY DESCRIBE THEMSELVES AS DEPLOYING AN IN-HOUSE TEAM OF PUBLIC INTEREST LAWYERS, POLICY EXPERTS, STRATEGISTS, AND GRASSROOTS ACTIVISTS TO EXPOSE, CONFRONT, AND CHANGE CORPORATE AND POLITICAL INJUSTICE IN EVERY WAY EVERY DAY, SAVING AMERICANS BILLIONS OF DOLLARS AND IMPROVING COUNTLESS LIVES. FOR DECADES, CONSUMER WATCHDOG HAS BEEN THE NATION'S MOST AGGRESSIVE CONSUMER ADVOCATE, TAKING ON POLITICIANS OF BOTH PARTIES AND THE SPECIAL INTERESTS THAT FUND THEM. AND THEN THERE'S THE NATIONAL COALITION OF CONSUMER ADVOCATES. THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF CONSUMER ADVOCATES IS A NONPROFIT ASSOCIATION OF MORE THAN 1,500 ATTORNEYS AND CONSUMER ADVOCATES COMMITTED TO REPRESENTING CONSUMERS' INTERESTS. OUR MEMBERS, THEY SAY, ARE PRIVATE AND PUBLIC SECTOR ATTORNEYS, LEGAL SERVICES ATTORNEYS, LAW PROFESSORS AND LAW STUDENTS WHOSE PRIMARY FOCUS IS THE PROTECTION AND REPRESENTATION OF CONSUMERS. THEY HAVE REPRESENTED HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF CONSUMERS VICTIMIZED BY FRAUDULENT, ABUSIVE, AND PREDATORY BUSINESS PRACTICES. AS THE NATIONAL ORGANIZATION FULLY COMMITTED TO PROMOTING JUSTICE FOR CONSUMERS, THEIR MEMBERS AND THEIR CLIENTS ARE ACTIVELY ENGAGED IN PROMOTING A FAIR AND OPEN MARKETPLACE THAT FORCEFULLY PROTECTS THE RIGHTS OF CONSUMERS, PARTICULARLY THOSE OF MODEST MEANS. THEY ALSO HAVE A CHARITABLE AND EDUCATIONAL FUND INCORPORATED UNDER 501-C-3. THERE'S ANOTHER VERY PROMINENT CONSUMER ORGANIZATION, THE NATIONAL CONSUMER LAW CENTER, WORKING ON BEHALF OF LOW-INCOME CLIENTS. SINCE 1969, THE NONPROFIT NATIONAL CONSUMER LAW CENTER HAS USED ITS EXPERTISE IN CONSUMER LAW AND ENERGY POLICY TO WORK FOR CONSUMER JUSTICE AND ECONOMIC SECURITY FOR LOW-INCOME AND OTHER DISADVANTAGED PEOPLE, INCLUDING OLDER ADULTS IN THE UNITED STATES. THIS ORGANIZATION'S EXPERTISE INCLUDES POLICY ANALYSIS ANDED A VOW CASE -- AND ADVOCACY, CONSUMER LAW, LITIGATION, EXPERT WITNESS SERVICES, AND TRAINING AND ADVICE FOR ADVOCATES. THIS ORGANIZATION WORKS WITH NONPROFITS AND LEGAL SERVICES ORGANIZATIONS, PRIVATE ATTORNEYS, POLICYMAKERS AND FEDERAL, STATE GOVERNMENTS AND COURTS ACROSS THE NATION TO STOP EXEMPLOY TATIVE PRACTICES, -- EXPLOITED PRACTICES. AND THEN THERE'S PRIVACY TIMES. PRIVACY TIMES IS THE LEADING SUBSCRIPTION ONLY NEWSLETTER COVERING PRIVACY AND FREEDOM OF INFORMATION LAW AND POLICY. IT IS READ LARGELY BY ATTORNEYS AND PROFESSIONALS WHO MAY STAY ABREAST OF THE LEGISLATION, LITIGATION, AND THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH ACTIVITIES AS WELL AS CONSUMER NEWS, TECHNOLOGY TRENDS, AND BUSINESS DEVELOPMENTS. SINCE 1981, PRIVACY TIMES HAS PROVIDED ITS READERS WITH ACCURATE REPORTING, OBJECTIVE ANALYSIS, AND THOUGHTFUL INSIGHT INTO THE EVENTS THAT SHAPE THE ONGOING DEBATE OVER PRIVACY AND FREEDOM OF INFORMATION. AND THEN THERE'S THE PRIVATE RIGHTS CLEARING -- PRIVACY RIGHTS CLEARING-HOUSE. PRIVACY RIGHTS CLEARING-HOUSE, AN ADVOCACY ORGANIZATION, LOCATED IN SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA, THE MISSION IS TO ENGAGE, EDUCATE, AND EMPOWER CONSUMERS TO PROTECT THEIR PRIVACY. THEY ENGAGE IN OUTREACH, PROVIDE EDUCATIONAL MATERIALS, AND SERVICES TO INDIVIDUALS NATIONWIDE AND HAVE AN ACTIVE MEDIA PRESENCE. THE P.R.C. USES THE INFORMATION WE LEARN DIRECTLY, THEY SAY, FROM CONSUMERS TO FORM THE BASIS OF THEIR ADVOCACY WORK. AND THEN THERE'S PUBLIC CITIZEN. PUBLIC CITIZEN HAS A TEAM OF RESEARCHERS. THEY UNCOVER THE FACTS. THEIR STAFF BRINGS THEIR FINDINGS TO THE PUBLIC. THEY BRING THE VOICE OF THE PUBLIC TO THE HALLS OF POWER ON BEHALF OF CONSUMERS. AND THEN THERE'S PUBLIC KNOWLEDGE. PUBLIC KNOWLEDGE PROMOTES FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION AND OPEN INTERNET AND ACCESS TO AFFORDABLE COMMUNITYCATIONS TOOLS AND CREATIVE WORKS. THEY WORK TO SHAPE POLICY ON BEHALF OF THE PUBLIC INTEREST. AND THEN THERE'S REINVESTMENT PARTNERS. REINVESTMENT PARTNERS' MISSION IS TO ADVOCATE FOR ECONOMIC JUSTICE AND OPPORTUNITY. THEY DO THIS BY PROVIDING DIRECT SERVICES TO PEOPLE, REVITALIZING PLACES AND ADVOCATING FOR JUST POLICIES. FOUNDED AS A PROJECT OF LEGAL SERVICES IN 1986 AS THE COMMUNITY REINVESTMENT ASSOCIATION OF NORTH CAROLINA, THE AGENCY HAS WORKED TO ENSURE FAIR LENDING TO UNDERSERVED COMMUNITIES IN ORDER TO BUILD AND PROTECT WEALTH. IN 2012, THEY CHANGED THEIR NAME TO RECOGNIZE THE EXPANDED DIVERSITY OF THEIR PROGRAMS AND THEIR LOCAL AND STATE AND NATIONAL OUTREACH. AND THEN THERE'S U.S. PURGE. U.S. PURGE IS AN ADVOCATE FOR THE PUBLIC INTEREST, WORKING TO WIN CONCRETE RESULTS ON REAL PROBLEMS THAT AFFECT MILLIONS OF LIVES AND STANDING UP FOR THE PUBLIC AGAINST POWERFUL INTERESTS WHEN THEY PUSH AWAY. THEY SAY, AND I QUOTE, THE PROBLEMS WE FACE DON'T CARE IF YOU'RE LIBERAL OR CONSERVATIVE, IF YOU LIVE IN A RED OR BLUE STATE. THEY AFFECT EACH AND EVERY ONE OF US. THAT'S WHY FOR DECADES THEY HAVE TAKEN A NONPARTISAN, FACT-DRIVEN, RESULTS-ORIENTED APPROACH TO THEIR WORK. AND SO, MR. SPEAKER AND MEMBERS, I DO NOT LIKE HEARING THAT OUR CONSUMERS DON'T CARE, THAT THEY DON'T NEED A YEARLY NOTIFICATION ABOUT THEIR PRIVACY RIGHTS, THAT THEY SIMPLY THROW THIS INFORMATION THAT DESCRIBES THEIR RIGHTS INTO THE WASTE BASKET. AND I'M SO PLEASED THAT OVER THE YEARS AND THROUGH THE HISTORY OF THIS NATION TOO MANY CONSUMERS HAVE BEEN IGNORED, TAKEN ADVANTAGE OF, THAT KNOW WHAT THEIR RIGHTS WERE AND ALL OF THESE ORGANIZATIONS THAT I HAVE TAKEN TIME TO SHARE WITH YOU TODAY WORK ON BEHALF OF CONSUMERS. AND THEY WORK, NOT ONLY IN ORGANIZING AND EDUCATING, BUT THEY SEND THIS INFORMATION TO THEIR MEMBERS OF CONGRESS, ALL OF THESE ORGANIZATIONS HAVE SENT IN THIS INFORMATION, NOT ONLY ABOUT THEIR BACKGROUND BUT ABOUT THIS BILL. AND SO I RESERVE THE BALANCE OF MY TIME.

        Show Full Text
      • 09:58:53 AM

        THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

        THE LADY'S TIME IS RESERVED. THE GENTLEMAN FROM TEXAS.

      • 09:58:58 AM

        MR. HENSARLING

        THAT SCHOOLCHILDREN FROM AROUND THE NATION HAVE BEEN LISTENING TO THIS…

        THAT SCHOOLCHILDREN FROM AROUND THE NATION HAVE BEEN LISTENING TO THIS DEBATE BECAUSE THEY WOULD BE EDUCATED ON THE HOUSE VERSION OF THE FILIBUSTER. I THOUGHT THAT THE RANKING MEMBER WAS GOING TO BREAK OUT THE WASHINGTON, D.C., PHONE BOOK AND BEGIN TO READ FROM IT. IT WAS A FASCINATING DISCUSSION OF A LITANY OF WASHINGTON-BASED SPECIAL INTEREST GROUPS I KNOW APPRECIATED THE SHOUTOUT, I KNOW HELPS THEM IN THEIR FUNDRAISING EFFORTS BUT HAS ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO WITH THE BILL THAT WE ARE DEBATING. NOTHING TO DO WITH THE BILL THAT WE ARE DEBATING. SO THE RANKING MEMBER SAID HOW IMPORTANT IT IS THAT CONSUMERS RECEIVE AN ANNUAL, AN ANNUAL NOTICE OF THE PRIVACY POLICIES OF FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS. WELL, UNDER THIS BILL, H.R. 2396, THEY DON'T GET IT ANNUALLY, THEY GET IT MONTHLY. THEY GET IT WEEKLY. THEY GET IT DAILY. THEY GET IT HOURLY. I YIELD MYSELF ANOTHER MINUTE. IN FACT, UNDER H.R. 2396, THE PRIVACY NOTIFICATION MUST BE CONTINUOUS, CONTINUOUS. IT HAS TO BE PUT ON THE WEBSITE. THIS HELPS THE CONSUMER. THE CONSUMER HAS ACCESS 24/7 TO THE PRIVACY NOTIFICATION UNDER THE GENTLEMAN FROM MICHIGAN'S BILL AS OPPOSED TO THE STATUS QUO BEING DEFENDED BY MY FRIENDS ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE AISLE WHO SAYS ONCE A YEAR, ONCE A YEAR YOU OUGHT TO GET A PIECE OF PAPER THAT'S PROBABLY GOING TO END UP IN THE ROUND FILE ANYWAY. AGAIN, MR. SPEAKER, THIS DEBATE HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE PRIVACY POLICIES OF FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS. IT HAS EVERYTHING TO DO WITH THE NOTIFICATION OF SUCH POLICIES. . WHAT WE PROVIDE FOR IS THE CONTINUOUS NOTIFICATION. AND SHOULD THAT POLICY CHANGE, THEN AND ONLY THEN DOES THAT NECESSITATE THE KILLING OF TREES. MR. SPEAKER, I AM NOW PLEASED TO YIELD FIVE MINUTES TO THE GENTLEMAN FROM GEORGIA, AN OUTSTANDING MEMBER OF THE FINANCIAL SERVICES COMMITTEE, MR. LOUDERMILK.

        Show Full Text
      • 10:01:21 AM

        THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

        THE GENTLEMAN FROM GEORGIA IS RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.

      • 10:01:24 AM

        MR. LOUDERMILK

        THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. I THANK THE GENTLEMAN FROM TEXAS FOR YIELDING TIME…

        THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. I THANK THE GENTLEMAN FROM TEXAS FOR YIELDING TIME THAT I CAN SPEAK NOT JUST SUPPORT OF THIS LEGISLATION BUT IN STRONG SUPPORT OF LEGISLATION BY MY COLLEAGUE AND FRIEND FROM MICHIGAN, MR. TROTT. SHORT TIME I HAVE BEEN IN CONGRESS, ONE THING I HAVE COME TO REALIZE, THERE ARE SOME PEOPLE IN THIS CHAMBER THAT NEVER MET A REGULATION IT DIDN'T LIKE. REGARDLESS HOW EFFECTIVE, INEFFECTIVE, OR MISGUIDED THAT REGULATION IS OR HOW OUTDATED IT IS, THEY ALWAYS WANT TO HOLD ON TO A PIECE OF GOVERNMENT REGULATION. I DO APPRECIATE THE RANKING MEMBER FOR GOING THROUGH THE LITANY OF MISSION STATEMENTS OF SPECIAL INTEREST GROUPS HERE IN WASHINGTON, D.C. BUT THIS IS PRECISELY WHAT THE AMERICAN PEOPLE ARE TIRED OF. THEY ARE TIRED OF WASHINGTON, D.C. SWAMP. THEY ARE TIRED OF THE SPECIAL INTEREST. AND THEY WANT LEGISLATION THAT AFFECTS THEM PERSONALLY. THIS PIECE OF LEGISLATION WILL AFFECT MILLIONS OF AMERICANS DIRECTLY. I'M NOT JUST SPEAKING TODAY FROM PREPARED REMARKS WHICH I HAVE, BUT I'M SPEAKING FROM SOMEONE WITH EXPERIENCE IN THIS AREA. I SPENT 30 YEARS, MR. SPEAKER, IN THE I.T. SERVICES BUSINESS. 10 OF THOSE YEARS I SPENT PROTECTING SOME OF OUR NATION'S SECRETS. THROUGH MILITARY INTELLIGENCE AND THEN WORKING IN THE DEFENSE INDUSTRY. 20 OF THOSE YEARS I HAD MY OWN BUSINESS AND WE WERE RESPONSIBLE FOR PROTECTING THE SENSITIVE INFORMATION OF BUSINESSES AND THEIR CUSTOMERS. SO I AM WELL VERSED IN THE IDEA OF PROTECTION AND AS A CONSTITUTIONAL CONSERVATIVE, I'M VERY SENSITIVE TO PRIVACY PROTECTION. THIS PIECE OF LEGISLATION IS COMMONSENSE LEGISLATION. THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT THE AMERICAN PEOPLE WANT US TO PASS. I CAN GIVE YOU SOME GREAT EXAMPLES OF WHY. BECAUSE ONE OF THE ASPECTS OF SECURITY, ESPECIALLY DATA SECURITY, IS BEING CONTINUOUSLY -- CONTINUE YOWLLY AWARE OF THE -- CONTINUALLY AWARE OF THE THREAT. I WAS STILL IN MY I.T. BUSINESS WHEN THE ORIGINAL LEGISLATION WAS PASSED AND ALL OF A SUDDEN I'M RECEIVING A PRIVACY NOTICE OF WHAT MY RIGHTS ARE AND UNLIKE MOST AMERICANS, I PROBABLY -- I SAT DOWN AND ACTUALLY READ ALL OF IT. WHERE THE CONFUSION CAME IN IS WHEN A YEAR LATER I RECEIVE ANOTHER ONE AND THEN I RECEIVE ANOTHER ONE AND I'M LITERALLY COMPARING THE TWO TO SEE WHAT'S CHANGED AND I FIND OUT THAT NOTHING HAS CHANGED. WHAT WAS THE REACTION AFTER THAT? EVERY TIME I GET A NOTICE, A BIG ENVELOPE INSTEAD OF A BANK STATEMENT, I WOULD JUST TAKE IT AND THROW IT IN THE TRASH, NOT KNOWING IF SOMETHING HAS ACTUALLY CHANGED, WHICH WOULD BE IMPORTANT. MR. LUETKEMEYER, ANOTHER COLLEAGUE OF MY MINE, PASSED A BILL TWO YEARS AGO TO PROVIDE CORRECTION TO THAT PROBLEM. ALL MR. TROTT'S BILL IS DOING NOW IS EXPANDING THAT TO OTHER INDUSTRIES. THIS IS A CONSUMER PROTECTION BILL BECAUSE NOW IF SOMEONE IN THOSE INDUSTRIES, THERE IS A CHANGE, THEY RECEIVE A NOTICE, THEY KNOW THAT THERE'S BECAUSE NOW IF SOMEONE IN BEEN A CHANGE. BUT AS THE CHAIRMAN HAS POINTED OUT TIME AND TIME AGAIN, THIS IS ACTUALLY GOING TO GIVE MORE IMMEDIATE ACCESS TO KNOW WHAT THE PRIVACY POLICY IS OF FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS TO IDENTIFY IF THERE HAS BEEN ANY CHANGES BECAUSE THEY CAN GO ONLINE TO SEE IT. I MEAN, YOU CAN GET THAT STAINS -- INSTANTANEOUS WITH THESE DEVICES THAT ALMOST EVERYONE CARRIES TO BRING US INTO THE CURRENT CENTURY ANTI-TECHNOLOGY THAT WE HAVE. SO I -- AND THE TECHNOLOGY THAT WE HAVE. I COMMEND MY COLLEAGUE ON ACTUALLY BRINGING COMMONSENSE LEGISLATION. THE TYPE OF LEGISLATION THAT AMERICANS WANT, THAT CONSUMERS WANT. THEY WANT TO KNOW WHAT THEIR RIGHTS ARE BUT THEY DON'T WANT TO BE INUNDATED WITH USELESS INFORMATION CONTINUALLY OVER AND OVER AGAIN BECAUSE THEN THEY WOULD ACTUALLY NOT BE AWARE OF WHAT THEIR RIGHTS ARE AND WHAT HAS CHANGED. THIS IS ESPECIALLY BENEFICIAL TO GEORGIA BECAUSE GEORGIA HAS BECOME AN AUTO MANUFACTURING HUB. AS WE CONTINUE TO GROW THIS ECONOMY AND MORE PEOPLE -- I BELIEVE IN THE NEXT FEW DAYS WHEN WE PASS THIS TAX BILL, YOU'RE GOING TO SEE A RISE IN PEOPLE BUYING AUTOMOBILES. WHY? BECAUSE THEY ARE GOING TO HAVE MORE MONEY IN THEIR BACK POCKET, SPEND MORE MONEY, AND TAKE OUT MORE LOANS. WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY KNOW IMMEDIATELY WHAT THEIR PRIVACY RIGHTS ARE. AND THIS BILL WILL MAKE IT TO WHERE THOSE WILL BE AVAILABLE ONLINE. THIS SIMPLY MAKES IT -- IT RIGHT SIZES GOVERNMENT BY MAKING GOVERNMENT SMARTER, MORE EFFECTIVE, AND ACTUALLY THAT THE REGULATION IS TAILORED TOWARD THE CONSUMER NOT THE SPECIAL INTEREST GROUPS AND THE TRIAL LAWYERS IN WASHINGTON, D.C. WITH THAT, MR. SPEAKER, I STRONGLY SUPPORT THIS LEGISLATION. I URGE MY COLLEAGUES TO JOIN ME IN A FAVORABLE VOTE FOR THIS. WITH THAT I YIELD BACK.

        Show Full Text
      • 10:06:19 AM

        THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

        THE GENTLEWOMAN FROM CALIFORNIA WITH 5 1/2 MINUTES REMAINING.

      • 10:06:24 AM

        MS. WATERS

        THANK YOU VERY MUCH . MR. SPEAKER AND MEMBERS, AGAIN IT IS INTERESTING HOW…

        THANK YOU VERY MUCH . MR. SPEAKER AND MEMBERS, AGAIN IT IS INTERESTING HOW MY COLLEAGUES ON THE OPPOSITE SIDE OF THE AISLE DESCRIBE THEIR CONSUMERS. THESE ARE PEOPLE, THEY SAY, THAT DON'T WANT TO BE INUNDATED WITH USELESS INFORMATION. THEY ARE SAYING THAT THE PRIVACY INFORMATION IS OF NO USE. IT IS INTERESTING THAT MR. LOUDERMILK SAID, HE READ HIS PRIVACY NOTICE, UNLIKE MOST OF THE AMERICANS WHO DON'T READ THEIR PRIVACY NOTICE. I THINK THAT'S VERY INTERESTING. TO DESCRIBE HIMSELF AS SOMEONE WHO READ HIS PRIVACY NOTICE BUT ABLE TO SPEAK FOR ALL OTHER IT IS INTERESTING AMERICANS WHO DON'T READ THEIR PRIVACY NOTICE. WHAT'S VERY INTERESTING ALSO ABOUT HIS COMMENTS IS HE REFERS TO THE CONSUMER GROUPS AS SPECIAL INTERESTS. WHILE HE'S REPRESENTING THE BANKS. AND THE FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS. THE REAL SPECIAL INTERESTS. WHY IS IT REPRESENTATIVES WHO COME TO THIS CONGRESS TO REPRESENT PEOPLE WHO WILL VOTE FOR THEM SOMEHOW SEE THEIR RESPONSIBILITY TO PROTECT THE REAL SPECIAL INTERESTS SUCH AS THE FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS WHO HAVE LOBBYISTS RUNNING UP AND DOWN THESE HALLS EVERY DAY WHO MAKE CONTRIBUTIONS TO CONGRESS, RATHER THAN CONSUMERS REPRESENTED BY THE KINDS OF GROUPS I HAVE TAKEN TIME TO DESCRIBE HERE THIS MORNING BECAUSE THESE INDIVIDUALS AND THE AVERAGE CITIZEN DOES NOT HAVE PAID LOBBYISTS FROM FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS AND BANKS REPRESENTING THEM HERE. AND SO IT IS ALSO INTERESTING THAT MR. LOUDERMILK TALKED ABOUT HOW MANY OF THESE CONSUMERS ARE GOING TO BE BUYING AUTOMOBILES. BECAUSE OF THE TAX FRAUD BILL THAT HE IS REFERRING TO THAT'S BEEN ADVANCED BY THE OPPOSITE SIDE OF THE AISLE. THE ONLY THING THAT BILL IS GOING TO DO FOR CONSUMERS, WHICH WILL HURT OUR ECONOMY, IS CREATE A $1.5 TRILLION DEBT. WELL, HE SAID, THAT CONSUMERS WERE GOING TO BE BUYING MORE CARS. YEAH, THE WEALTH THEY WILL BE. THE ONES WHO ARE GIVEN THE BREAKS IN THIS TAX BILL. THE WEALTHY MAY BE BUYING MORE AUTOMOBILES. BUT THE VERY PEOPLE REPRESENTED BY THESE CONSUMERS THAT I HAVE SHARED THE INFORMATION ON THIS MORNING, THEY WON'T BE ABLE TO BUY AUTOMOBILES BECAUSE THEY ARE GOING TO BE HARMED. IT IS ONLY THE WEALTHY. ONLY THOSE WHO ARE MAKING EXTRAORDINARY AMOUNTS OF MONEY AND CORPORATIONS THAT ARE GOING TO BENEFIT FROM THE TAX BILL. I DON'T EVEN KNOW HOW I -- WHY HE TALKED ABOUT IT IN THE SAME BREATH THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT OUR CONSUMERS THAN ABLE TO BE RESPECTED WITH PRIVACY INFORMATION THAT THEY WOULD GET BECAUSE WE HAVE LAWS THAT GIVE THEM THE RIGHT TO HAVE THIS INFORMATION. AND SO WITH THAT I WILL RESERVE THE BALANCE OF MY TIME.

        Show Full Text
      • 10:09:48 AM

        THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

        THE GENTLEMAN FROM TEXAS WITH SEVEN MINUTES REMAINING.

      • 10:09:53 AM

        MR. HENSARLING

        MR. SPEAKER, I ONCE AGAIN AM HAPPY TO YIELD TO THE GENTLEMAN FROM…

        MR. SPEAKER, I ONCE AGAIN AM HAPPY TO YIELD TO THE GENTLEMAN FROM MICHIGAN, MR. TROTT, THE SPONSOR OF THIS LEGISLATION, THREE MINUTES.

        Show Full Text
      • 10:10:04 AM

        THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

        THE GENTLEMAN FROM MICHIGAN IS RECOGNIZED FOR THREE MINUTES.

      • 10:10:06 AM

        MR. TROTT

        I THANK MY FRIEND AND CHAIRMAN FROM TEXAS FOR YIELDING TIME. MR. SPEAKER,…

        I THANK MY FRIEND AND CHAIRMAN FROM TEXAS FOR YIELDING TIME. MR. SPEAKER, WE'RE HAVING AN ARGUMENT HERE ABOUT A BILL THAT HAS STRONG BIPARTISAN SUPPORT. WHEN YOU BOIL IT ALL DOWN, THE ARGUMENT IS PRETTY SIMPLE. AND THE QUESTION FOR US TO CONSIDER THIS MORNING, AND I WOULD SUBMIT WE HAVE MORE IMPORTANT THINGS TO WORK ON THAN THIS QUESTION, BUT THAT'S WHAT WE'RE DEBATING THIS MORNING. SO LET'S CONSIDER IT. THE QUESTION WE'RE ARGUING ABOUT IS DO CONSUMERS WHEN THEY GET THEIR MAIL AND THEY FIND AN ENVELOPE FILLED WITH 30 PAGES OF SMALL PRINT, LEGALESE, BOILERPLATE LANGUAGE, DO THEY OPEN UP THAT ENVELOPE AND POUR THEMSELVES A CUP OF COULD HAVEINE SETTLE IN, WE HAVE NINE INCHES OF SNOW TODAY BACK IN MICHIGAN, THEY SETTLE IN NEXT TO THE FIRE AND SPEND THE NEXT TWO HOURS READING THAT PRIVACY NOTICE. THAT'S THE QUESTION. THE RANKING MEMBER HAS BEEN QUITE CRITICAL OF THE SPEECHES THAT HAVE BEEN GIVEN THIS MORNING SUBMITTING THAT PEOPLE DO READ THESE NOTICES. WHO ARE WE TO JUDGE WHETHER PEOPLE READ THESE NOTICES. WE'RE NOT MAKING JUDGMENT, WE'RE JUST SUBMITTING ON A COMMONSENSE BASIS AN ARGUMENT THAT PEOPLE DON'T READ THESE NOTICES. PEOPLE THROW THESE NOTICES AWAY. AND THAT LOGIC AND COMMON SENSE WOULD PARTICULAR DATE IF THE PRIVACY NOTICE CHANGES -- DICTATE IF THE PRIVACY NOTICE CHANGES AND A NEW ONE REALIZES, AND THE CONSUMER REALIZES I GOT A NOTICE BECAUSE THE POLICY CHANGED, I BETTER REID THIS. IF THERE IS EVER A TIME THEY WILL READ IT, THEY WILL READ T IF THE RANKING MEMBER IS CORRECT IN HER AAL SINCE MILLIONS OF CONSUMERS ARE WAITING BY THE MAILBOX EACH AND EVERY DAY SO THEY CAN STUDY, DISSECT, COMPARE AND CONTRAST THESE PRIVACY NOTICES, THEN SHE'S CORRECT. THIS BILL WOULD ADD AN EXTRA STEP BECAUSE INSTEAD OF GOING TO THE MAILBOX THEY HAVE TO CLICK ON THE WEBSITE OR PERHAPS CALL A TOLL FREE NUMBER AND HAVE THE DOCUMENT MAILED TO THEM. IF THAT BURDEN IS MORE IMPORTANT BECAUSE PEOPLE THE MAILBOX EACH AND ARE READING THESE NOTICES, THEN HER ARGUMENTS ARE COMPELLING. JUST LET'S EXAM ALL THOSE GROUPS SHE SPENT -- EXAMINE ALL THOSE GROUPS SHE SPENT SO MUCH TIME TELLING US ABOUT THIS MORNING. ALL THOSE GROUPS ARE INTERESTED IN ONE THING. THEY ARE INTERESTED IN MAKING SURE THE LAWS ARE AS COMPLICATED AND CONVOLUTED AS POSSIBLE BECAUSE ALL THOSE GROUPS, INCLUDING THE RANKING MEMBER, BELIEVE, INCORRECTLY, ALL BUSINESS IS BAD, ALL BANKS ARE BAD. WE HAVE TO MAKE IT AS CONVOLUTED AND COMPLICATED AS POSSIBLE SO THAT CLASS ACTION LAWYERS CAN FIND REASON TO FILE FRIVOLOUS LAWSUITS TO SUE THEM BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT CONSUMERS NEED. THAT'S ILLOGICAL. BECAUSE WHEN THESE CLASS ACTION LAWSUITS AND ALL THESE CONVOLUTED REGULATIONS GET PLACED ON THE BOOKS AND THE BANKS HAVE TO HIRE HUNDREDS OF LAWYERS TO DEAL WITH COMPLIANCE, WHO DO YOU THINK PAYS FOR THAT? THE CONSUMER PAYS FOR IT. SO THIS BILL SAVES A LITTLE MONEY, SAVES A FEW TREES, MAYBE WE'LL HAVE A FEW MORE FORESTS FOR OUR GRANDCHILDREN. IT'S A SIMPLE BILL. AND I FEEL BAD FOR SOME OF THE DEMOCRATS, THE 20 IN OUR COMMITTEE -- THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. I FEEL BAD FOR ALL THOSE DEMOCRATS THAT SUPPORT THIS BILL BECAUSE APPARENTLY THEY ARE AGAINST CONSUMERS, TOO. THIS BILL HAS GOT NOTHING TO DO WITH ANY OF THE ARGUMENTS THAT THE RANKING MEMBER HAS PROFFERED THIS MORNING. I ASK FOR STRONG SUPPORT FOR H.R. 2396. I YIELD BACK.

        Show Full Text
      • 10:13:45 AM

        THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

        THE GENTLEWOMAN FROM CALIFORNIA.

      • 10:13:48 AM

        MS. WATERS

        THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MR. SPEAKER AND MEMBERS, I HAVE NO OTHER MEMBERS. SO…

        THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MR. SPEAKER AND MEMBERS, I HAVE NO OTHER MEMBERS. SO I WILL CLOSE. WILL I TAKE THIS TIME TO CLOSE. -- I WILL TAKE THIS TIME TO CLOSE. IT IS VERY SIMPLE, THE CONSUMER GROUPS THAT I TOOK TIME TO HELP PEOPLE TO UNDERSTAND WHO THEY ARE AND WHAT THEY DO REPRESENTING THE CONSUMERS ARE THE FOLKS WHO ARE CONCERNED ABOUT PEOPLE KNOWING THEIR RIGHTS. THIS IS WHAT THEY WORK AT DOING. THOSE OF US WHO ALIGN OURSELVES WITH CONSUMER GROUPS CARE ABOUT THE AVERAGE CITIZEN. WE CARE THAT THE AVERAGE CITIZEN GETS THE KIND OF INFORMATION THAT'S GOING TO MAKE THEIR LIVES MUCH EASIER. THE PEOPLE ON THE OPPOSITE SIDE OF THE AISLE REPRESENT BANKS AND FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS. WE'RE NOT OPPOSED TO BUSINESS AND WE WORK WITH BUSINESSES IN VARIOUS WAYS. WE'RE OPPOSED TO RIP-OFFS. WE'RE OPPOSED TO FRAUD. WE'RE OPPOSED TO DENYING CONSUMERS THE OPPORTUNITY TO KNOW THEIR RIGHTS, BUT FOR THOSE MEMBERS OF CONGRESS WHO COME HERE AND BASICALLY MIMIC AND MOCK THE CONSUMERS BY TALKING ABOUT THOSE CONSUMERS WHO WAIT BY THEIR MAILBOXES FOR PRIVACY INFORMATION, CERTAINLY ARE NOT REPRESENTING THE CITIZENS OF THEIR DISTRICT. AND I CAN TELL YOU THIS, WHEN YOU TAKE A LOOK AT WHO THE REAL SPECIAL INTERESTS ARE AND WHO ARE REPRESENTING THE INTERESTS OF THE SPECIAL INTERESTS, WHO IN THIS HOUSE STANDS UP FOR BANKS, FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS AND WALL STREET AND HEDGE FUNDS , YOU LOOK AT THE OPPOSITE SIDE OF THE AISLE TIME AND TIME AGAIN AND YOU WILL FIND THEM PUTTING ALL OF THEIR TIME AND THEIR EFFORT INTO REPRESENTING THOSE SPECIAL INTERESTS. . AND FOR THOSE OF US THAT STAND ON THE SIDE OF AVERAGE CITIZENS, YES, WE ALIGN OURSELVES WITH CONSUMER GROUPS. NO, WE DON'T DISMISS THEM AS UNNECESSARY PEOPLE JUST MESSING AROUND IN THE BUSINESS OF BIG BUSINESS. THESE ARE THE REPRESENTATIVES, AGAIN, OF PEOPLE WHO DON'T HAVE FANCY LOBBYISTS WALKING THESE HALLS AND FOLLOWING THE MEMBERS OF CONGRESS GETTING INTO THEIR EAR AND INFLUENCING THEM. AND SO I STAND TODAY WITH OUR CONSUMERS. I APPLAUD ALL OF OUR CONSUMER GROUPS, AND I STAND ON THE SIDE OF OUR CONSUMERS BEING ABLE TO KNOW THEIR RIGHTS AND ALL OF THE WORK THAT WENT INTO PROVIDING THIS OPPORTUNITY IN LAW, I STAND WITH THEM, AND I RESIST ANY EFFORT BY THE OPPOSITE SIDE OF THE AISLE TO DENY THE RIGHT OF OUR CITIZENS TO BE NOTIFIED ABOUT THEIR RIGHTS AND THEIR ABILITY TO OPT OUT IF THEY DO NOT WANT THEIR INFORMATION SHARED WITH THESE UNAFFILIATED GROUPS. AND SO I'M VERY PROUD. I KNOW THAT WE'RE DOING WHAT OUR CITIZENS WANT US TO DO, WHY THEY SEND US TO THIS CONGRESS, AND I SAY TO THE OPPOSITE SIDE OF THE AISLE --

        Show Full Text
      • 10:17:28 AM

        THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

        THE GENTLELADY'S TIME HAS EXPIRED. THE GENTLELADY'S TIME HAS EXPIRED.

      • 10:17:32 AM

        MS. WATERS

        MORE RESPECT TO OUR --

      • 10:17:35 AM

        THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

        3 1/2 MINUTES REMAINING.

      • 10:17:37 AM

        MR. HENSARLING

        THANK YOU, I YIELD MYSELF THE BALANCE OF THE TIME.

      • 10:17:39 AM

        THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

        THE GENTLEMAN IS RECOGNIZED.

      • 10:17:41 AM

        MR. HENSARLING

        MR. SPEAKER, THERE HAVE BEEN SEVERAL SURREAL MOMENTS ON THE HOUSE FLOOR…

        MR. SPEAKER, THERE HAVE BEEN SEVERAL SURREAL MOMENTS ON THE HOUSE FLOOR THIS WEEK, AND TODAY CERTAINLY IS ONE MORE OF THEM. THE DEBATE TODAY IS NOT BETWEEN REGULATION AND DEREGULATION BUT MANY RESPECTS THE DEBATE IS BETWEEN SMART REGULATION AND DUMB REGULATION. AND WHAT WE HAVE TODAY IS A DUMB REGULATION THAT FORCES A NUMBER OF FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS ANNUALLY TO SEND OUT A PAPER NOTIFICATION EVEN IF THEY DON'T CHANGE THEIR PRIVACY POLICY. CUT DOWN TREES, ENGAGE AN EXPENSE AND BY THE WAY, THE EXPENSE, I GUESS, DOESN'T COME OUT OF EXECUTIVE BONUSES BUT COMES OUT OF THE CREDIT AVAILABILITY AND THE CREDIT COST OF THE CUSTOMER. IT GETS PASSED ON TO THE CONSUMER. AND THE DEBATE WE'RE HAVING, AND I ENCOURAGE MY COLLEAGUES ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE AISLE, IF IN DOUBT, READ THE BILL. IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE, GUESS WHAT, MR. SPEAKER, IT'S A TWO-PAGE BILL. IT REALLY DOESN'T TAKE THAT LONG TO READ. AND IF YOU READ IT, WHAT YOU'LL FIND OUT IS THAT THIS IS A BILL THAT IS PRO-CONSUMER BECAUSE WE GO FROM A NOTIFICATION THAT HAPPENS ONCE A YEAR TO A CONTINUOUS NOTIFICATION. WE IMPROVE THE CONSUMER NOTIFICATION BY ENSURING THAT IT IS CONSISTENTLY ON THE WEBSITE OF THE FINANCIAL INSTITUTION. AND WHAT WE HEAR FROM THE RANKING MEMBER IS, NO. I WANT TO STAY IN THE 20TH CENTURY. GRAMM-LEACH-BLILEY IS A LAW FROM THE 20TH CENTURY. MR. SPEAKER, WE'RE IN THE 21ST CENTURY. WHY DON'T WE ENSURE THAT THE PRIVACY NOTIFICATION FOR THE CONSUMER IS ACTUALLY ON THE WEBSITE? THIS IS WHAT IS TRULY PRO-CONSUMER, NOT FORCING PEOPLE TO GO AND SUBSIDIZE THE PAPER MILLS AND THE U.S. POSTAL SERVICE BY SENDING OUT A NOTIFICATION ON PAPER THAT DOESN'T CHANGE ANYTHING AND MERELY CONFUSES CONSUMERS. IF YOU'RE REALLY PRO-CONSUMER, THEN TRY TO RESPECT THEIR MARKET AND TRY NOT TO PASS ADDITIONAL COSTS ONTO THEM. AGAIN, RAILROAD REGARDLESS WHAT YOU HEARD ON THE OTHER -- AGAIN, REGARDLESS WHAT YOU HEARD ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE AISLE, IT IS 21ST CENTURY, NOT 20TH CENTURY. IT'S PRO-CONSUMER REGARDLESS WHAT THE SPECIAL INTERESTS AND WASHINGTON, D.C.-BASED LOBBYISTS CITED. THE GENTLEMAN FROM MICHIGAN BRINGS US PRO-CONSUMER LEGISLATION. THE PRIVACY NOTIFICATION TECHNICAL CLARIFICATION ACT. AND I'M KIND OF EMBARRASSED WE'RE HAVING TO SPEND THIS MUCH TIME DEBATING SOMETHING THAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN ON OUR EXPEDITED SUSPENSION CALENDAR. I MEAN, IT'S ALMOST LIKE THERE IS A KNEE JERK REACTION ANYTIME WE ATTEMPT TO MODIFY ANY GOVERNMENT REGULATION. THIS IS PRO-CONSUMER. FRANKLY, IT'S PRO-ENVIRONMENT. EVERY MEMBER OF THE HOUSE SHOULD EMBRACE H.R. 2396. I'M SORRY WE'VE HAD TO TAKE SO MUCH TIME FOR IT. THERE ARE THOUSANDS OF REGULATIONS THAT HURT OUR FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS, THAT HURT OUR CONSUMERS. WE'RE TRYING TO GET RID OF EVERY DUMB ONE ONE AT A TIME. THIS SHOULD -- AGAIN, THIS SHOULD BE PASSING UNANIMOUSLY. I DON'T UNDERSTAND IT, BUT I'M GLAD THE AMERICAN PEOPLE COULD SEE THIS DEBATE FOR WHAT IT IS. AGAIN, LET'S BE PRO-CONSUMER. LET'S BE PRO-COMMUNITY FINANCIAL INSTITUTION. LET'S BE PRO-ENVIRONMENT. LET'S ENACT 2396, AND I YIELD BACK THE BALANCE OF MY TIME.

        Show Full Text
      • 10:21:38 AM

        THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

        ALL TIME FOR DEBATE ON THE BILL HAS EXPIRED. FOR WHAT PURPOSE DOES THE…

        ALL TIME FOR DEBATE ON THE BILL HAS EXPIRED. FOR WHAT PURPOSE DOES THE GENTLEMAN FROM MISSOURI SEEK RECOGNITION?

        Show Full Text
      • 10:21:44 AM

        MR. CLAY

        MR. SPEAKER, I MOVE FOR THE ADOPTION OF THE AMENDMENT -- I HAVE AN…

        MR. SPEAKER, I MOVE FOR THE ADOPTION OF THE AMENDMENT -- I HAVE AN AMENDMENT.

        Show Full Text
      • 10:21:49 AM

        THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

        THE CLERK WILL DESIGNATE THE AMENDMENT.

      • 10:21:51 AM

        THE CLERK

        AMENDMENT NUMBER 1 PRINTED IN HOUSE REPORT 115-462 OFFERED BY MR. CLAY OF…

        AMENDMENT NUMBER 1 PRINTED IN HOUSE REPORT 115-462 OFFERED BY MR. CLAY OF MISSOURI.

        Show Full Text
      • 10:21:58 AM

        TEMPORE PURSUANT

        PURSUANT TO HOUSE RESOLUTION 657, THE GENTLEMAN FROM MISSOURI, MR. CLAY,…

        PURSUANT TO HOUSE RESOLUTION 657, THE GENTLEMAN FROM MISSOURI, MR. CLAY, AND A MEMBER OPPOSED, EACH WILL CONTROL FIVE MINUTES. THE CHAIR RECOGNIZES THE GENTLEMAN FROM MISSOURI.

        Show Full Text
      • 10:22:00 AM

        An amendment, offered by Mr. Clay, printed in Part A of House Report 115-462 to strike the term "financial institution" and replace it with "vehicle financial company" and define "vehicle financial company".

      • 10:22:01 AM

        DEBATE

        Pursuant to the provisions of H. Res. 657, the House proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Clay No. 1.

        • 10:22:06 AM

          MR. CLAY

          THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. THE AMENDMENT OFFERED MAKES IMPORTANT CHANGES TO…

          THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. THE AMENDMENT OFFERED MAKES IMPORTANT CHANGES TO OUR BILL, H.R. 2396, WHICH IS A STRAIGHTFORWARD, COMMONSENSE MEASURE THAT SEEKS TO STREAMLINE THE PRIVACY INFORMATION CONSUMERS GET FROM FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS AND MAKES THE INFORMATION AVAILABLE MUCH MORE FREQUENTLY VIA ELECTRONIC DELIVERY. WE HAVE BEEN WORKING ON THIS WHAT I CONSIDER A SIMPLE BUT NECESSARY FIX TO A 20-YEAR-OLD LAW. THROUGHOUT THIS YEAR, AND I BELIEVE THE AMENDMENT WE PRESENT FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION WILL UNDOUBTEDLY BENEFIT CONSUMERS. WE HAVE WORKED WITH OUR COLLEAGUES ON THE FINANCIAL SERVICES COMMITTEE TO MODIFY AND STRENGTHEN THE UNDERLYING BILL, AND I APPRECIATE EVERYONE'S EFFORTS. I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO THANK THE COMMITTEE'S RANKING MEMBER, MS. WATERS, FOR HER AND HER STAFF'S EFFORTS TO IMPROVE OUR BILL. I CONSIDER THIS AMENDMENT TO BE AN EFFORT TO IMPROVE ON THE UNDERLYING LEGISLATION. AND WHILE MS. WATERS STILL HAS SOME OUTSTANDING CONCERNS, I DO APPRECIATE HER WORKING WITH US. THE AMENDMENT CLARIFIES THE PROCESS BY WHICH CONSUMERS CAN OPT OUT OF HAVING THEIR INFORMATION SHARED WITH UNAFFILIATED THIRD PARTIES. IT LIMITS THE APPLICATION OF THE ALTERNATIVE DELIVERY MECHANISM TO VEHICLE FINANCIAL COMPANIES. IT'S SIMPLY WHAT THE AMENDMENT DOES. RATHER THAN ALL FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS AS DEFINED UNDER GRAMM-LEACH-BLILEY AND OTHER TECHNICAL AND CONFORMING CHANGES. AND WE BELIEVE THESE CHANGES MAKE OUR BILL STRONGER, AND WE URGE THE ADOPTION OF THE AMENDMENT. MR. SPEAKER, I RESERVE MY TIME.

          Show Full Text
        • 10:24:45 AM

          THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

          THE GENTLEMAN RESERVES HIS TIME. FOR WHAT PURPOSE DOES THE GENTLELADY FROM…

          THE GENTLEMAN RESERVES HIS TIME. FOR WHAT PURPOSE DOES THE GENTLELADY FROM CALIFORNIA SEEK RECOGNITION?

          Show Full Text
        • 10:24:51 AM

          MS. WATERS

          I RISE TO CLAIM TIME IN OPPOSITION TO THE AMENDMENT.

        • 10:24:54 AM

          THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

          THE GENTLELADY IS RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.

        • 10:24:56 AM

          MS. WATERS

          THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I APPRECIATE MR. CLAY'S EFFORT TO MAKE THE BILL…

          THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I APPRECIATE MR. CLAY'S EFFORT TO MAKE THE BILL BETTER, AND HE'S ABSOLUTELY CORRECT. WE'VE BEEN ATTEMPTING TO WORK TOGETHER TO SEE IF THERE WAS SOME WAY THAT WE COULD DEAL WITH THE ISSUE AT HAND AND ABSOLUTELY ENSURE THAT OUR CONSUMERS NOT ONLY HAVE A RIGHT TO INFORMATION THAT EXPLAINS TO THEM WHAT THEIR RIGHTS ARE AND HOW THEY CAN OPT OUT WHEN THEIR INFORMATION IS BEING SOLD, REALLY, TO UNAFFILIATED ORGANIZATIONS. AND JUST IN CASE PEOPLE ARE NOT FOLLOWING EXACTLY WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT WHEN WE TALK ABOUT OPT OUT RIGHTS, LET ME DRAW YOUR ATTENTION TO THE FACT THAT YOU OFTENTIMES ARE RECEIVING LOADS OF MAIL IN YOUR MAILBOX FROM EVERYTHING FROM SOMEBODY SELLING PET FOOD TO CLOTHING TO SERVICES TO ALL KINDS OF PRODUCTS AND YOU DON'T KNOW WHY THEY'RE SENDING YOU ALL THIS JUNK. THEY'RE SENDING YOU THIS JUNK BECAUSE SOMEBODY SOLD YOUR INFORMATION TO ALL OF THESE ORGANIZATIONS BECAUSE YOU DIDN'T KNOW THAT YOU HAD NOT OPTED OUT, YOU DIDN'T MAYBE KNOW WHAT YOUR RIGHTS ARE. BUT THE CITIZENS HAVE A RIGHT TO HAVE THAT INFORMATION AND THEY HAVE A RIGHT TO BE RESPECTED AND NOT THOUGHT TO BE SIMPLY THROWING IT INTO THE WASTE BASKETS, AND IT DOESN'T MATTER WHETHER IT'S FOR ALL BUSINESSES IN THE UNITED STATES OR JUST FOR AUTOMOBILE DEALERS. IT IS ABOUT EVERY CITIZEN HAVING THE RIGHT TO HAVE THEIR PRIVACY PROTECTED AND NOT HAVING PEOPLE SELL THEIR INFORMATION TO UNAFFILIATED ORGANIZATIONS THAT WILL CAUSE THEM TO BE PRESSURED OR SOLICITED OVER AND OVER AGAIN AND THEIR MAILBOXES FILLED WITH INFORMATION BECAUSE THEIR PRIVACY INFORMATION HAS BEEN SOLD TO ONE OF THESE UNAFFILIATED ORGANIZATIONS. SO I THINK THAT MR. CLAY IS ATTEMPTING TO STREAMLINE THE BILL, AND I APPRECIATE THE EFFORTS THAT HE'S PUT INTO ATTEMPTING TO DO THIS, BUT THIS DOES NOT CORRECT THE PROBLEM. THIS UNDERMINES THE EFFORTS FOR ALL OF THESE CONSUMER GROUPS WHO WORKED FOR YEARS TO GET THESE NOTICES SENT TO OUR CONSUMERS. DESPITE THE FACT THAT WE HAVE TRIED AND WE HAVE WORKED AND WE HAVE LISTENED TO EACH OTHER, I WOULD ASK FOR A NO VOTE ON THE AMENDMENT. I YIELD BACK THE BALANCE OF MY TIME.

          Show Full Text
        • 10:28:17 AM

          THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

          THE GENTLELADY YIELDS BACK HIS TIME. THE GENTLEMAN FROM MISSOURI TO CLOSE.

        • 10:28:21 AM

          MR. CLAY

          YEAH, MR. SPEAKER, JUST IN CLOSING, LET ME OFFER SOME CLARIFICATION. IN…

          YEAH, MR. SPEAKER, JUST IN CLOSING, LET ME OFFER SOME CLARIFICATION. IN THE FALL OF 2014, THE CFPB FINALIZED A RULE ALLOWING FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS TO POST THEIR ANNUAL PRIVACY NOTICES ONLINE INSTEAD OF DELIVERING THEM INDIVIDUALLY IF THEY MET A SERIES OF CONDITIONS, INCLUDING NOT SHARING THE CUSTOMER'S NONPUBLIC INFORMATION WITH UNAFFILIATED THIRD PARTIES. IN DECEMBER OF 2015, CONGRESS WENT FURTHER BY ENACTING AN OUTRIGHT EXEMPTION FROM THE MAILING REQUIREMENT FOR FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS THAT, ONE, DO NOT SHARE NONPUBLIC PERSONAL INFORMATION ABOUT CONSUMERS WITH UNAFFILIATED THIRD PARTIES AND, TWO, HAVE NOT CHANGED ITS DISCLOSURE POLICY AND PRACTICES SINCE THE MOST RECENT DISCLOSURE WAS SENT TO CONSUMERS. INSTITUTIONS THAT PROVIDE FINANCING FOR VEHICLE PURCHASES OR LEASES DO NOT MEET THE CRITERIA SET FORTH BY CONGRESS AND ARE THEREFORE REQUIRED TO CONTINUE ISSUING PAPER BRIFE IS I NOTICES TO CONSUME -- PRIVACY NOTICES TO CONSUMERS. MR. SPEAKER, THIS AMENDMENT HELPS TO IMPROVE THIS BILL. IT MODERNIZES THIS REQUIREMENT, AND I JUST URGE THE BODY TO ADOPT THE AMENDMENT AND I YIELD BACK THE BALANCE OF MY TIME.

          Show Full Text
        • 10:30:06 AM

          TEMPORE PURSUANT

          PURSUANT TO THE RULE, THE PREVIOUS QUESTION IS ORDERED ON THE AMENDMENT…

          PURSUANT TO THE RULE, THE PREVIOUS QUESTION IS ORDERED ON THE AMENDMENT OFFERED BY THE GENTLEMAN FROM MISSOURI, MR. CLAY. THE QUESTION IS ON THE AMENDMENT OFFERED BY THE GENTLEMAN FROM MISSOURI. THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. THOSE OPPOSED, NO. IN THE OPINION OF THE CHAIR, THE AYES HAVE IT. THE AMENDMENT IS AGREED TO. THE QUESTION IS ON ENGROSSMENT AND THIRD READING OF THE BILL. THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. THOSE OPPOSED, NO. THE AYES HAVE IT. THIRD READING.

          Show Full Text
        • 10:30:10 AM

          The previous question was ordered on the amendment and the bill pursuant to the rule.

        • 10:30:14 AM

          On agreeing to the Clay amendment Agreed to by voice vote.

          • 10:30:25 AM

            THE CLERK

            A BILL TO AMEND THE GRAMM-LEACH-BLILEY ACT TO UPDATE THE EXCEPTION FOR…

            A BILL TO AMEND THE GRAMM-LEACH-BLILEY ACT TO UPDATE THE EXCEPTION FOR CERTAIN ANNUAL NOTICES PROVIDED BY FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS.

            Show Full Text
          • 10:30:30 AM

            Ms. Waters, Maxine moved to recommit with instructions to the Committee on Financial Services.

            • 10:30:32 AM

              THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

              FOR WHAT PURPOSE DOES THE GENTLEWOMAN FROM CALIFORNIA SEEK RECOGNITION?

            • 10:30:37 AM

              MS. WATERS

              I HAVE A MOTION TO RECOMMIT AT THE DESK.

            • 10:30:39 AM

              THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

              IS THE GENTLEWOMAN'S TIME HAS EXPIRED OPPOSED TO THE BILL -- IS THE…

              IS THE GENTLEWOMAN'S TIME HAS EXPIRED OPPOSED TO THE BILL -- IS THE GENTLEWOMAN OPPOSED TO THE BILL?

              Show Full Text
        • 10:30:41 AM

          DEBATE

          The House proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the motion to recommit with instructions. The instructions contained in the motion seek to require the bill to be reported back to the House with an amendment to prohibit the vehicle financial company term from including a financial institution that is engaging or has engaged in a pattern or practice of unsafe or unsound banking practices and other violations related to consumer harm.

          • 10:30:46 AM

            THE CLERK

            MS. MAXINE WATERS OF CALIFORNIA MOVES TO RECOMMIT THE BILL TO THE…

            MS. MAXINE WATERS OF CALIFORNIA MOVES TO RECOMMIT THE BILL TO THE COMMITTEE ON FINANCIAL SERVICES WITH INSTRUCTIONS TO REPORT THE SAME BACK TO THE HOUSE FORTHWITH WITH THE FOLLOWING AMENDMENT -- IN SUBSECTION G-3 OF THE MATTER PROPOSED TO BE INSERTED BY SECTION 2 OF THE BILL, INSERT AFTER SUBPARAGRAPH 2 THE FOLLOWING FLUSH LEFT TEXT, FOR PURPOSES OF THIS SUBSECTION, THE TERM VEHICLE COMPANY DOES NOT INCLUDE A FINANCIAL INSTITUTION THAT IS ENGAGING OR HAS ENGAGED IN A PATTERN OR PRACTICE OF UNSAFE OR UNSOUND BANKING PRACTICES AND OTHER VIOLATIONS RELATED TO CONSUMER HARM. ADD AT THE END THE FOLLOWING -- FOUR, ADDITIONAL DEFINITIONS --

            Show Full Text
          • 10:31:27 AM

            MS. WATERS

            I ASK UNANIMOUS CONSENT TO DISPENSE WITH THE READING?

          • 10:31:29 AM

            THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

            IS THERE OBJECTION? WITHOUT OBJECTION, THE READING IS DISPENSED WITH.…

            IS THERE OBJECTION? WITHOUT OBJECTION, THE READING IS DISPENSED WITH. PURSUANT TO THE RULE, THE GENTLEWOMAN FROM CALIFORNIA IS RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES IN SUPPORT OF HER MOTION. .

            Show Full Text
          • 10:31:41 AM

            MS. WATERS

            FOR WHAT PURPOSE DOES THE GENTLEMAN FROM TEXAS SEEK RECOGNITION?

          • 10:34:09 AM

            THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

            FOR WHAT PURPOSE DOES THE GENTLEMAN FROM TEXAS SEEK RECOGNITION?

          • 10:34:12 AM

            MR. HENSARLING

            I CLAIM TIME IN OPPOSITION.

          • 10:34:13 AM

            THE SPEAKE PRO TEMPORE

            THE GENTLEMAN IS RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.

          • 10:34:15 AM

            MR. HENSARLING

            MR. SPEAKER, AGAIN, I WOULD ENCOURAGE THE RANKING MEMBER AND ALL MEMBERS…

            MR. SPEAKER, AGAIN, I WOULD ENCOURAGE THE RANKING MEMBER AND ALL MEMBERS ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE AISLE TO READ THE UNDERLYING BILL. IT IS TWO PAGES LONG. IT HAS NOW BEEN AMENDED BY PERHAPS A ONE-PAGE AMENDMENT. THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH WELLS FARGO. IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH EQUIFAX. IT IS LIMITED TO THE ANNUAL PAPER NOTIFICATION FROM AUTO FINANCE COMPANIES, PURE AND SIMPLE. AGAIN, FOR THOSE WHO LISTENED TO THE EARLIER DEBATE, THE QUESTION IS, WHETHER OR NOT THESE AUTO FINANCE COMPANIES ARE GOING TO BE FORCED TO SPEND MONEY THAT COMES OUT OF THEIR CUSTOMERS' POCKETS TO SEND OUT A PAPER NOTIFICATION, PRIVACY POLICIES, EVEN WHEN THE POLICY DOESN'T CHANGE. OR WHETHER OR NOT WE SHOULD MODERNIZE INTO THE 21ST CENTURY AND ENSURE THERE IS CONTINUOUS NOTIFICATION ON A WEBSITE AND A PAPER NOTIFICATION ONLY GOES OUT UPON A CHANGE, AN ACTUAL CHANGE. SO WHAT THE RANKING MEMBER IS DOING WITH THE MOTION TO RECOMMIT IS ONCE AGAIN EMPOWERING THE UNCONSTITUTIONAL AND UNACCOUNTABLE CFPB TO ENGAGE IN EVEN MORE ACTIVITIES THAT HARM CONSUMERS. IT OUGHT TO BE REJECTED AND WE OUGHT TO ENSURE THAT WE ADOPT H.R. 2396 AND SIMPLIFY AND MODERNIZE ONE REGULATION THAT IS HARMING CONSUMERS AND HARMING FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS. I URGE REJECTION OF THE MOTION TO RECOMMIT AND I YIELD BACK THE BALANCE OF MY TIME.

            Show Full Text
          • 10:35:52 AM

            ORE WITHOUT

            WITHOUT OBJECTION, THE PREVIOUS QUESTION IS ORDERED ON THE MOTION TO…

            WITHOUT OBJECTION, THE PREVIOUS QUESTION IS ORDERED ON THE MOTION TO RECOMMIT. THE QUESTION IS ON THE MOTION. SO MANY AS ARE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. THOSE OPPOSED, NO. IN THE OPINION OF THE CHAIR, THE NOES HAVE IT. THE GENTLELADY FROM CALIFORNIA.

            Show Full Text
          • 10:36:03 AM

            MS. WATERS

            I ASK FOR THE YEAS AND NAYS.

          • 10:36:05 AM

            THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

            THE YEAS AND NAYS ARE REQUESTED. THOSE FAVORING A VOTE BY THE YEAS AND…

            THE YEAS AND NAYS ARE REQUESTED. THOSE FAVORING A VOTE BY THE YEAS AND NAYS WILL RISE. A SUFFICIENT NUMBER HAVING ARISEN, THE YEAS AND NAYS ARE ORDERED. MEMBERS WILL RECORD THEIR VOTES BY ELECTRONIC DEVICE. PURSUANT TO CLAUSE 8 AND CLAUSE 9 OF RULE 20, THIS 15-MINUTE VOTE ON THE MOTION TO RECOMMIT WILL BE FOLLOWED BY FIVE-MINUTE VOTES ON PASSAGE OF H.R. 2396, IF ORDERED. THE MOTION TO RECOMMIT ON H.R. 4324. AND PASSAGE OF H.R. 4324, IF ORDERED. THIS IS A 15-MINUTE VOTE. [CAPTIONING MADE POSSIBLE BY THE NATIONAL CAPTIONING INSTITUTE, INC., IN COOPERATION WITH THE UNITED STATES HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. ANY USE OF THE CLOSED-CAPTIONED COVERAGE OF THE HOUSE PROCEEDINGS FOR POLITICAL OR COMMERCIAL PURPOSES IS EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED BY THE U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.]

            Show Full Text
          • 10:36:16 AM

            The previous question on the motion to recommit with instructions was ordered without objection.

            • 10:36:23 AM

              On motion to recommit with instructions Roll Call 681 - Yea and Nay vote pending.

              • 11:02:45 AM

                THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

                ON THIS VOTE THE YEAS ARE 185. THE NAYS ARE 235. THE MOTION IS NOT…

                ON THIS VOTE THE YEAS ARE 185. THE NAYS ARE 235. THE MOTION IS NOT ADOPTED. THE QUESTION IS ON PASSAGE OF THE BILL. SO MANY AS ARE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. THOSE OPPOSED, NO. IN THE OPINION OF THE CHAIR, THE AYES HAVE IT MS. WATERS:

                Show Full Text
              • 11:03:05 AM

                WATERS MR.

                WATERS:

          • 11:03:05 AM

            House Vote 681 - On Motion to Recommit with Instructions

            Privacy Notification Technical Clarification Act

            Failed (185 - 235)
            Yea
            Nay

            Vote Details: Yea - 185
            Democratic - 185

            Vote Details: Nay - 234
            Republican - 232
            Democratic - 2

            Vote Details: Not Voting - 11
            Republican - 5
            Democratic - 6

            • 11:03:06 AM

              THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

              THE YEAS AND NAYS ARE REQUESTED. THOSE FAVORING A VOTE BY THE YEAS AND…

              THE YEAS AND NAYS ARE REQUESTED. THOSE FAVORING A VOTE BY THE YEAS AND NAYS WILL RISE. A SUFFICIENT NUMBER HAVING ARISEN, THE YEAS AND NAYS ARE ORDERED. MEMBERS WILL RECORD THEIR VOTES BY ELECTRONIC DEVICE. THIS IS A FIVE-MINUTE VOTE. FIVE MINUTES. [CAPTIONING MADE POSSIBLE BY THE NATIONAL CAPTIONING INSTITUTE, INC., IN COOPERATION WITH THE UNITED STATES HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. ANY USE OF THE CLOSED-CAPTIONED COVERAGE OF THE HOUSE PROCEEDINGS FOR POLITICAL OR COMMERCIAL PURPOSES IS EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED BY THE U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.]

              Show Full Text
            • 11:03:09 AM

              On passage Roll Call 682 - Yea and Nay vote pending.

              • 11:09:24 AM

                THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

                ON THIS VOTE THE YEAS ARE 275.

              • 11:10:15 AM

                THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

                ON THIS VOTE THE YEAS ARE 275. THE NAYS ARE 146. THE BILL IS PASSED.…

                ON THIS VOTE THE YEAS ARE 275. THE NAYS ARE 146. THE BILL IS PASSED. WITHOUT OBJECTION THE MOTION TO RECONSIDER IS LAID UPON THE TABLE. THE UNFINISHED BUSINESS IS THE QUESTION ON AGREEING TO THE MOTION TO RECOMMIT ON H.R. 4324 OFFERED BY THE GENTLEMAN FROM CALIFORNIA, MR. SWALWELL, ON WHICH THE YEAS AND NAYS WERE ORDERED. THE THE CLERK WILL DESIGNATE THE MOTION.

                Show Full Text
          • 11:10:23 AM

            House Vote 682 - On Passage

            Privacy Notification Technical Clarification Act

            Passed (275 - 146)
            Yea
            Nay

            Vote Details: Yea - 274
            Republican - 230
            Democratic - 44

            Vote Details: Nay - 146
            Democratic - 144
            Republican - 2

            Vote Details: Not Voting - 10
            Republican - 5
            Democratic - 5

            • 11:10:25 AM

              Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.

            • 11:10:26 AM

              UNFINISHED BUSINESS

              The Chair announced that the unfinished business was on the motion to recommit with instructions, which was debated earlier and on which further proceedings had been postponed.

              • 11:10:35 AM

                Considered as unfinished business. H.R. 4324 — "To require the Secretary of the Treasury to make certifications with respect to United States and foreign financial institutions' aircraft-related transactions involving Iran, and for other purposes."

                • 11:10:37 AM

                  THE CLERK

                  MOTION TO RECOMMIT ON H.R. 4324, OFFERED BY MR. SWALWELL OF CALIFORNIA.

                • 11:10:41 AM

                  THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

                  THE QUESTION IS ON AGREEING TO THE MOTION TO RECOMMIT. MEMBERS WILL RECORD…

                  THE QUESTION IS ON AGREEING TO THE MOTION TO RECOMMIT. MEMBERS WILL RECORD THEIR VOTES BY ELECTRONIC DEVICE. THIS IS A FIVE-MINUTE VOTE. [CAPTIONING MADE POSSIBLE BY THE NATIONAL CAPTIONING INSTITUTE, INC., IN COOPERATION WITH THE UNITED STATES HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. ANY USE OF THE CLOSED-CAPTIONED COVERAGE OF THE HOUSE PROCEEDINGS FOR POLITICAL OR COMMERCIAL PURPOSES IS EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED BY THE U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.]

                  Show Full Text
              • 11:10:53 AM

                On motion to recommit with instructions Roll Call 683 - Yea and Nay vote pending.

                • 11:16:47 AM

                  THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

                  ON THIS VOTE, THE YEAS ARE 188, THE NAYS ARE 233. THE MOTION IS NOT…

                  ON THIS VOTE, THE YEAS ARE 188, THE NAYS ARE 233. THE MOTION IS NOT ADOPTED. THE QUESTION IS ON PASSAGE OF THE BILL. THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. THOSE OPPOSED, NO. THE AYES HAVE IT. THE GENTLEMAN FROM TEXAS.

                  Show Full Text
            • 11:16:54 AM

              House Vote 683 - On Motion to Recommit with Instructions

              Strengthening Oversight of Iran's Access to Finance Act

              Failed (188 - 233)
              Yea
              Nay

              Vote Details: Yea - 188
              Democratic - 188

              Vote Details: Nay - 232
              Republican - 232

              Vote Details: Not Voting - 10
              Republican - 5
              Democratic - 5

              • 11:17:03 AM

                MR. HENSARLING

                I REQUEST THE YEAS AND NAYS.

              • 11:17:06 AM

                THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

                THE YEAS AND NAYS ARE REQUESTED. THOSE FAVORING A VOTE BY THE YEAS AND…

                THE YEAS AND NAYS ARE REQUESTED. THOSE FAVORING A VOTE BY THE YEAS AND NAYS WILL RISE. YEAS AND NAYS ARE ORDERED. MEMBERS WILL RECORD THEIR VOTES BY ELECTRONIC DEVICE. THIS IS A FIVE-MINUTE VOTE. [CAPTIONING MADE POSSIBLE BY THE NATIONAL CAPTIONING INSTITUTE, INC., IN COOPERATION WITH THE UNITED STATES HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. ANY USE OF THE CLOSED-CAPTIONED COVERAGE OF THE HOUSE PROCEEDINGS FOR POLITICAL OR COMMERCIAL PURPOSES IS EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED BY THE U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.]

                Show Full Text
            • 11:27:50 AM

              House Vote 684 - On Passage

              Strengthening Oversight of Iran's Access to Finance Act

              Passed (252 - 167)
              Yea
              Nay

              Vote Details: Yea - 251
              Republican - 228
              Democratic - 23

              Vote Details: Nay - 167
              Democratic - 163
              Republican - 4

              Vote Details: Not Voting - 12
              Republican - 5
              Democratic - 7

              • 11:27:51 AM

                THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

                THE YEAS ARE 252 AND THE NAYS ARE 167. THE BILL IS PASSED AND WITHOUT…

                THE YEAS ARE 252 AND THE NAYS ARE 167. THE BILL IS PASSED AND WITHOUT OBJECTION IS LAID ON THE TABLE.

                Show Full Text
              • 11:27:51 AM

                Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.

              • 11:27:52 AM

                ASSUMING FIRST SPONSORSHIP

                Mr. Cohen asked unanimous consent that he may hereafter be considered as the first sponsor of H.R. 3771, a bill originally introduced by Representative Conyers, for the purpose of adding cosponsors and requesting reprintings pursuant to clause 7 of rule XII. Agreed to without objection.

                • 11:27:53 AM

                  The Clerk was authorized to correct section numbers, punctuation, and cross references, and to make other necessary technical and conforming corrections in the engrossment of H.R. 4324.

                  • 11:27:54 AM

                    The Clerk was authorized to correct section numbers, punctuation, and cross references, and to make other necessary technical and conforming corrections in the engrossment of H.R. 2396.

                    • 11:28:08 AM

                      >>

                      AS A PRIMARY SPONSOR OF H.R. 3771, A BILL SPONSORED BY REPRESENTATIVE…

                      AS A PRIMARY SPONSOR OF H.R. 3771, A BILL SPONSORED BY REPRESENTATIVE CONYERS AND REQUESTING REPRINTINGS AND WHATEVER OTHER PURPOSES ARE APPROPRIATE.

                      Show Full Text
                    • 11:28:29 AM

                      THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

                      WITHOUT OBJECTION. FOR WHAT PURPOSE DOES THE GENTLEMAN FROM TEXAS RISE?

                    • 11:28:33 AM

                      >>

                      I ASK UNANIMOUS CONSENT THAT IN THE ENGROSSMENT OF H.R. 4324 THE CLERK…

                      I ASK UNANIMOUS CONSENT THAT IN THE ENGROSSMENT OF H.R. 4324 THE CLERK INSERT THE WORD AND OF THE SEMI-COLON IN SECTION 2-3-1 OF THE BILL. WITHOUT OBJECTION.

                      Show Full Text
                    • 11:28:50 AM

                      THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

                      THE GENTLEMAN FROM TEXAS.

                    • 11:28:53 AM

                      MR. WILLIAMS

                      3396 THE CLERK MAKE THE CORRECTION I PLACED AT THE DESK.

                    • 11:29:02 AM

                      THE CLERK

                      AMENDMENT NUMBER ONE INSTRUCTION RELATING TO PAGE 4 LINE 21 IS MODIFIED TO…

                      AMENDMENT NUMBER ONE INSTRUCTION RELATING TO PAGE 4 LINE 21 IS MODIFIED TO READ AS FOLLOWS. PAGE FOUR LINE 21, STRIKE FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS AND INSERT VEHICLE FINANCIAL COMPANIES.

                      Show Full Text
                    • 11:29:17 AM

                      THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

                      WITHOUT OBJECTION, SO ORDERED. PURSUANT TO CLAUSE 8 OF RULE 20 THE…

                      WITHOUT OBJECTION, SO ORDERED. PURSUANT TO CLAUSE 8 OF RULE 20 THE UNFINISHED BIGGS IS QUESTION ON SUSPENDING THE BILL 4042.

                      Show Full Text
                  • 11:29:20 AM

                    Considered as unfinished business. H.R. 4042 — "To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 1415 West Oak Street, in Kissimmee, Florida, as the "Borinqueneers Post Office Building"."

                    • 11:29:30 AM

                      THE CLERK

                      H.R. 4042 A BILL TO DESIGNATE THE FACILITY OF THE UNITED STATES POSTAL…

                      H.R. 4042 A BILL TO DESIGNATE THE FACILITY OF THE UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE OAK STREET OF THE BORINQUENEERS POST OFFICE BUILDING

                      Show Full Text
                    • 11:29:45 AM

                      THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

                      THE QUESTION IS WILL THE HOUSE PASS THE BILL? THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.…

                      THE QUESTION IS WILL THE HOUSE PASS THE BILL? THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. THOSE OPPOSED, NO. IN THE OPINION OF THE CHAIR, 2/3 BEING IN THE AFFIRMATIVE, THE RULES ARE SUSPENDED AND BILL IS PASSED AND THE MOTION TO RECONSIDER IS LAID ON THE TABLE. FOR WHAT PURPOSE DOES THE GENTLEMAN FROM MONTANA SEEK RECOGNITION?

                      Show Full Text
                • 11:29:51 AM

                  On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by voice vote.

                  • 11:29:53 AM

                    Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.

                    • 11:29:54 AM

                      Considered as unfinished business. H.R. 2815 — "To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 30 East Somerset Street in Raritan, New Jersey, as the "Sergeant John Basilone Post Office"."

                      • 11:30:05 AM

                        MR. GIANFORTE

                        I ASK UNANIMOUS CONSENT THAT THE TEXT OF H.R. 2815 AS PROPOSED BE PASSED…

                        I ASK UNANIMOUS CONSENT THAT THE TEXT OF H.R. 2815 AS PROPOSED BE PASSED UNDER SUSPENSION OF THE RULES, BE MODIFIED BY THE AMENDMENT I PLACED AT THE DESK.

                        Show Full Text
                      • 11:30:15 AM

                        THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

                        THE CLERK WILL REPORT THE AMENDMENT.

                      • 11:30:17 AM

                        THE CLERK

                        AMENDMENT OFFERED BY THE GENTLEMAN FROM DRK

                      • 11:30:21 AM

                        MR. GIANFORTE

                        I ASK UNANIMOUS CONSENT TO DISPENSE WITH THE READING

                    • 11:30:25 AM

                      An amendment, offered by Mr. Gianforte, inserting new text and title to the bill.

                      • 11:30:27 AM

                        THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

                        IS THERE AN OBJECTION TO THE REQUEST OF THE THE GENTLEMAN FROM MONTANA.…

                        IS THERE AN OBJECTION TO THE REQUEST OF THE THE GENTLEMAN FROM MONTANA. WITHOUT OBJECTION, THE MODIFICATION IS AGREED TO. PURSUANT TO CLAUSE 8, RULE 20 THE UNFINISHED IS PASSING H.R. 2815 AS AMENDED.

                        Show Full Text
                      • 11:30:42 AM

                        THE CLERK

                        H.R. 2815 A BILL TO DESIGNATE THE FACILITY OF THE UNITED STATES POSTAL…

                        H.R. 2815 A BILL TO DESIGNATE THE FACILITY OF THE UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE LOCATED AT 30 EASTSOMER STREET IN RARITAN, NEW JERSEY AS THE JOHN BASILONE POST OFFICE. THOSE IN FAVOR WILL SAY EYE. THOSE OPPOSED, NO. IN THE OPINION OF THE CHAIR, 2/3 BEING IN THE AFFIRMATIVE, THE BILL IS PASSED AND WITHOUT OBJECTION, THE MOTION TO CONSIDER IS AMENDED.

                        Show Full Text
                      • 11:31:15 AM

                        THE CLERK

                        A BILL TO AMEND 30 EAST SOMERSET AS THE GUNNER SERGEANT JOHN BASILONE POST…

                        A BILL TO AMEND 30 EAST SOMERSET AS THE GUNNER SERGEANT JOHN BASILONE POST OFFICE. .

                        Show Full Text
                  • 11:31:20 AM

                    On agreeing to the Gianforte amendment; Agreed to without objection.

                    • 11:31:32 AM

                      MR. HOYER

                      I ASK TO SPEAK OUT OF ORDER FOR ONE MINUTE FOR THE PURPOSE OF ACQUIRING OF…

                      I ASK TO SPEAK OUT OF ORDER FOR ONE MINUTE FOR THE PURPOSE OF ACQUIRING OF THE MAJORITY LEADER OF THE SCHEDULE FOR THE WEEK TO COME. THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MR. SPEAKER. I NOW YIELD TO MY FRIEND, THE MAJORITY LEADER FROM CALIFORNIA, MR. MCCARTY.

                      Show Full Text
                    • 11:31:44 AM

                      THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

                      THE GENTLEMAN IS RECOGNIZED.

                    • 11:31:46 AM

                      MR. MCCARTHY

                      I THANK THE GENTLEMAN FOR YIELDING. I ASK UNANIMOUS CONSENT TO REVISE AND…

                      I THANK THE GENTLEMAN FOR YIELDING. I ASK UNANIMOUS CONSENT TO REVISE AND EXTEND MY REMARKS.

                      Show Full Text
                    • 11:31:51 AM

                      MR. HOYER

                      MR. SPEAKER, THE HOUSE IS NOT IN ORDER.

                    • 11:31:57 AM

                      THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

                      THE GENTLEMAN IS CORRECT. THE HOUSE WILL BE IN ORDER. PLEASE TAKE YOUR…

                      THE GENTLEMAN IS CORRECT. THE HOUSE WILL BE IN ORDER. PLEASE TAKE YOUR CONVERSATIONS OFF THE FLOOR. THE GENTLEMAN IS RECOGNIZED.

                      Show Full Text
                    • 11:32:07 AM

                      MR. MCCARTHY

                      ON MONDAY, THE HOUSE WILL MEET AT NOON FOR MORNING HOUR AND 2:00 P.M. FOR…

                      ON MONDAY, THE HOUSE WILL MEET AT NOON FOR MORNING HOUR AND 2:00 P.M. FOR LEGISLATIVE BUSINESS. VOTES WILL BE POSTPONED UNTIL 6:30 P.M. ON TUESDAY AND THE BALANCE OF THE WEEK THE HOUSE WILL MEET AS EARLY AS 10:00 A.M. FOR LEGISLATIVE BUSINESS. MR. SPEAKER, THE HOUSE WILL CONSIDER A NUMBER OF SUSPENSIONS NEXT WEEK, COMPLETE LIST OF WHICH COMPLETE LIST OF WHICH WILL BE ANNOUNCED BY CLOSE OF BUSINESS TOMORROW. THIS LIST WILL INCLUDE SEVERAL BILLS FROM THE SCIENCE COMMITTEE THAT ARE PART OF THE HOUSE INNOVATION INITIATIVE. THESE BILLS SUPPORT AMERICANS PURSUING CAREERS IN SCIENCE, TECHNOLOGY, ENGINEERING, AND MATH WITH A FOCUS COMMITTEE THAT ARE PART OF THE HOUSE INNOVATION ON VETERANS AND INDIVIDUALS HISTORICALLY UNDERREPRESENTED IN THOSE FIELDS. MR. SPEAKER, MY FRIEND AND I RECENTLY CO-HOSTED THE THIRD CONGRESSIONAL HACK-A-THON. I THINK HE AND I WOULD AGREE THAT STEM EDUCATION IS AN ISSUE OF NATIONAL COMPETITIVENESS AND I LOOK FORWARD TO THE HOUSE PASSING THESE BILLS NEXT WEEK. IN ADDITION, THE HOUSE WILL CONSIDER TWO MEASURES FROM THE FINANCIAL SERVICES COMMITTEE. FIRST, H.R. 4015, THE CORPORATE GOVERNANCE REFORM AND TRANSPARENCY ACT SPONSORED BY REPRESENTATIVE SEAN DUFFY. THIS BILL LIM PROVE THE QUALITY OF PROXY RESEARCH WHILE INCREASING TRANSPARENCY FOR PUBLIC COMPANIES AND THEIR INVESTORS. SECOND, H.R. 3312, SYSTEMIC RISK IMPROVEMENT ACT, SPONSORED BY MR. LUETKEMEYER, THIS REPLACES IT WITH A PROCESS THAT ANALYZES EACH INSTITUTION WITH INDIVIDUAL RISK FACTORS. THE HOUSE WILL ALSO CONSIDER THE CONFERENCE REPORT TO ACCOMPANY H.R. 1, THE TAX CUTS AND JOBS ACT SPONSORED BY REPRESENTATIVE KEVIN BRADY. THIS HISTORIC LEGISLATION WILL CAP OFF A 31-YEAR JOURNEY TO REFORM AMERICA'S BROKEN TAX CODE. WE WILL DOUBLE THE STANDARD DEDUCTION MAKING THE FIRST $12,000 OF INCOME FOR AN INDIVIDUAL AND $24,000 FOR A FAMILY TAX FREE. WE WILL INCREASE THE CHILD TAX CREDIT BECAUSE INVESTING IN FAMILIES IS AMONG THE MOST IMPORTANT INVESTMENTS WE MAKE. WE'LL REDUCE THE TAX RATE ON SMALL BUSINESSES TO THE LOWEST RATES THAT HAVE SEEN IN 40 YEARS. AND WE DO ALL THIS WHILE SIMPLY FILING THE TAX CODE SO AMERICANS CAN FILE IN MINUTES ON A FORM THE SIZE OF A POSTCARD. REPUBLICANS HAVE CHAMPIONED CUTTING TAXES AND GROWING OUR ECONOMY FOR YEARS AND I AM EXCITED TO DELIVER THIS IMPORTANT PROMISE. FINALLY, MR. SPEAKER, ADDITIONAL LEGISLATIVE ITEMS ARE EXPECTED, INCLUDING LEGISLATION RELATED TO GOVERNMENT FUNDING AND A NUMBER OF OTHER END OF THE YEAR PRIORITIES. I WILL BE SURE TO INFORM ALL MEMBERS IF ADDITIONAL ITEMS ARE ADDED TO OUR SCHEDULE. WITH THAT, I THANK MY FRIEND AND YIELD BACK TO HIM.

                      Show Full Text
                    • 11:35:02 AM

                      MR. HOYER

                      I THANK THE GENTLEMAN FOR THAT INFORMATION. FIRST OF ALL, MR. SPEAKER, I…

                      I THANK THE GENTLEMAN FOR THAT INFORMATION. FIRST OF ALL, MR. SPEAKER, I WANT TO SAY THAT THE MAKE THE ACTIONS OF THIS BODY ACCESSIBLE TO THE GENERAL PUBLIC AS THEY HAPPEN. I WANT TO THANK THE MAJORITY LEADER FOR CONTINUING TO CO-SPONSOR THIS EFFORT WITH ME AND TO BE A LEADER ON THIS EFFORT. WE JUST HAD THE PRESIDENT SIGN, I THINK YESTERDAY, MAY HAVE BEEN THE DAY BEFORE, A PIECE OF LEGISLATION WHICH WILL TRY TO MAKE THE GOVERNMENT MORE FASSEL IN BRINGING IT'S TECHNOLOGY UP TO DATE SO IT CAN OPERATE MORE EFFICIENTLY AND EFFECTIVELY. I THANK THE MAJORITY LEADER FOR WORKING TOGETHER IN A POSITIVE WAY TO MAKE THIS INSTITUTION WORK BET EARN MAKE IT MORE ACCESSIBLE AND BETTER KNOWN TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. I THANK ALSO FOR THE SCHEDULE THAT HE HAS PUT FORWARD. MR. SPEAKER, THE MAJORITY LEADER MENTIONED A NUMBER OF THINGS THAT -- TAX BILL THAT WILL BE COMING BEFORE US WILL DO. I DON'T BELIEVE THAT THE CONFERENCE REPORT IS AVAILABLE FOR REVIEW AT THIS POINT IN TIME. CAN THE MAJORITY LEADER PERHAPS ENLIGHTEN ME AS TO WHETHER OR NOT THE CONFERENCE REPORT IS AVAILABLE NOW TO BE REVIEWED, OR IF NOT, WHEN IT WILL BE AVAILABLE? I YIELD TO MY FRIEND.

                      Show Full Text
                  • 11:36:12 AM

                    On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill as amended Agreed to by voice vote.

                    • 11:36:18 AM

                      Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.

                      • 11:36:21 AM

                        The title of the measure was amended. Agreed to without objection.

                        • 11:37:01 AM

                          MR. MCCARTHY

                          I THANK MY FRIEND FOR YIELDING. I EXPECT THE REPORT TO BE FILED AND ONLINE…

                          I THANK MY FRIEND FOR YIELDING. I EXPECT THE REPORT TO BE FILED AND ONLINE TOMORROW. AS YOU KNOW YOU GOT TO GO THROUGH AND MAKE SURE FROM A JOINT TAX FILLING IN THE DOLLAR FIGURES AND ALL ANTICIPATION IT WILL BE ON LINE TOMORROW FOR ALL AMERICA TO READ.

                          Show Full Text
                        • 11:37:22 AM

                          MR. HOYER

                          IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT THAT WILL BE ON THE FLOOR AS EARLY AS TUESDAY…

                          IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT THAT WILL BE ON THE FLOOR AS EARLY AS TUESDAY OF NEXT WEEK? IS THAT ACCURATE? I YIELD TO MY FRIEND.

                          Show Full Text
                    • 11:37:29 AM

                      COLLOQUY HOUSE SCHEDULE

                      The Chair recognized Mr. Hoyer for the purpose of engaging in a colloquy with Mr. McCarthy on the expectations regarding the legislative schedule for the House for the upcoming week.

                      • 11:37:31 AM

                        MR. MCCARTHY

                        THAT IS ACCURATE.

                      • 11:37:35 AM

                        MR. HOYER

                        MR. SPEAKER, I WOULD SIMPLY OBSERVE THAT WHAT THE MAJORITY LEADER DID NOT…

                        MR. SPEAKER, I WOULD SIMPLY OBSERVE THAT WHAT THE MAJORITY LEADER DID NOT MENTION , AND AGAIN I HAVE NOT SEEN THE CONFERENCE REPORT SENATE BILL AND THE HOUSE BILLS THAT WERE PASSED BY BOTH BODIES, IT WILL INCREASE THE DEBT OF OUR COUNTRY BY SOME $1.5 TRILLION. AND A MINIMUM OF $1 TRILLION. IT WILL RAISE TAXES ON SOME 78 MILLION AMERICANS. BETWEEN $50,000 OF FAMILY INCOME AND $150,000 OF INCOME. I AM ASSUMING THAT THE ELIMINATION OF THE MANDATE IS STILL IN THE CONFERENCE REPORT. I'M NOT SURE BUT THE INFORMATION I HAVE IS THAT IT'S STILL IN THE REPORT. THAT, MR. SPEAKER, WILL COST 13 MILLION PEOPLE TO BE UNINSURED. AS A RESULT. I HAVE INFORMATION, MR. SPEAKER, THAT WHAT THE CONFERENCE REPORT DOES IS REDUCES TAXES ON SOME OF THE WEALTHIEST PEOPLE IN AMERICA. I'M NOT SURE HOW THEY OFFSET THAT. MAYBE WITH THAT. MAYBE WITH A MANDATE. MAYBE WITH SOMETHING ELSE. BUT 62% OF THE BILL'S RESOURCES GO TO THE TOP 1% IN AMERICA. MR. SPEAKER, -- THE SPEAKER, SPEAKER RYAN, SPOKE ABOUT ON THIS FLOOR THE AVERAGE FAMILY MAKING $59,000 A YEAR. HE MENTIONED THAT THAT FAMILY WILL GET UNDER THE HOUSE BILL, AGAIN I HAVEN'T SEEN THE CONFERENCE REPORT, GET FAMILY MAKING $1,182 PER YEAR IN A TAX CUT. WHAT THE SPEAKER DID NOT MENTION IS THAT THE FAMILY IN THE TOP 1% WILL GET A TAX CUT OF $1,198 PER WEEK. PER WEEK, MR. SPEAKER. IN OTHER WORDS, 52 TIMES WHAT THE STRUGGLING AMERICAN WILL GET. WHAT THE AMERICAN THAT SPEAKER RYAN SAID MAY NOT BE ABLE TO COME UP WITH $500 IF THEY HAVE A CRISIS WITH A REFRIGERATOR OR THEIR HEATING UNIT, SOMETHING OF THAT NATURE, OR THEIR CAR BREAKS DOWN. MR. SPEAKER, WE ON THIS SIDE OF THE AISLE DO NOT BELIEVE THAT THIS BILL ADDRESSES RELIEF FOR THE STRUGGLING WORKING MEN AND WOMEN OF THIS COUNTRY. MR. SPEAKER, IT'S CLEAR IN ALL OF THE POLLING THAT THE AVERAGE WORKING AMERICAN SHARES THAT VIEW. THEY BELIEVE CORRECTLY THAT THIS IS A TAX CUT FOR THE RICH AND A FEW SPRINKLES ALL OF THE POLLING THAT THE AVERAGE WORKING AMERICAN SHARES THAT VIEW. TO THE MIDDLE CLASS. I'M SURE THE LEADER WILL HAVE SOMETHING TO SAY ON THAT. IN ADDITION, MR. SPEAKER, IT IS IRONIC THAT WHAT WILL HAPPEN IN THIS TAX BILL IS WE WILL PHASE OUT -- AGAIN, TO THE MIDDLE CLASS. I HAVE NOT SEEN THE CONFERENCE REPORT SO I DON'T KNOW EXACTLY WHETHER THAT'S TRUE OR NOT, BUT IN BOTH THE HOUSE AND SENATE BILLS, WE PHASED OUT -- WE DIDN'T PHASE OUT, PROPOSED TO BE PHASED OUT, THE BENEFITS TO THOSE MIDDLE INCOME, HARDWORKING AMERICANS WILL SEE THEIR BENEFITS PHASED OUT. THAT WILL NOT BE TRUE OF CORPORATIONS AND WILL NOT BE TRUE OF THE WEALTHIEST IN OUR COUNTRY. SO IT'S TROUBLING, MR. SPEAKER, THAT A BILL OF THIS MAGNITUDE IS BEING RUSHED TO JUDGMENT. IN 1986, THE GENTLEMAN IN MAKING HIS ANNOUNCEMENT SAID WE HAVE BEEN WORKING ON THIS FOR 31 YEARS. I PRESUME HE WAS TALKING ABOUT FROM 1986 TO 2017. WHAT HE DID NOT SAY, 31 YEARS. MR. SPEAKER, IS IN 1986 WE HAD 30 DAYS OF PUBLIC HEARINGS ON A BILL. 30 DAYS OF PUBLIC HEARINGS. WHAT HE DID NOT SAY IS THAT WE HAD 450 WITNESSES DURING THOSE PUBLIC HEARINGS TESTIFYING ABOUT THE TAXES. WHAT HE DID NOT SAY IS THAT THERE WERE NEARLY FOUR MONTHS OF HEARINGS ON THE 1986 REFORM BILL. AND WHAT HE DID NOT SAY IS THAT THE WAYS AND MEANS COMMITTEE CONDUCTED 26 DAYS OF MARKUP. THIS BILL HAS RECEIVED LESS THAN SEVEN DAYS OF MARKUP IN BOTH BODIES AND IN THE CONFERENCE. THIS IS BEING RUSHED TO JUDGMENT AND THE AMERICAN PEOPLE BY SUBSTANTIAL NUMBERS BELIEVE THIS BILL IS NOT GOOD FOR THEM. MR. COLLINS SAID THAT HE TALKED TO A DONOR AND THE DONOR SAID DON'T CALL ME AGAIN IF YOU DON'T PASS THIS TAX BILL. I GET THAT. I DON'T KNOW WHO THE DONOR WAS, I DON'T KNOW HOW RICH THE DONOR WAS. OBVIOUSLY THE DONOR THOUGHT HE HAD A REAL STAKE, OR SHE, IN THIS TAX BILL. WE REGRET THAT WE ARE NOT DOING AS WE DID IN 1986, BECAUSE WHAT THE MAJORITY LEADER DID NOT MENTION EITHER WAS THAT THE 1986 BILL WAS A BIPARTISAN BILL. WITH PRESIDENT REAGAN AND PRESIDENT O'NEILL SUPPORTING IT, WITH CHAIRMAN ROSTENKOWSKI, A DEMOCRATIC CHAIR OF THE HOUSE WAYS AND MEANS COMMITTEE, AND A REPUBLICAN CHAIR OF THE SENATE FINANCE COMMITTEE, BOB PACKWOOD FROM OREGON, SUPPORTING THE BILL. IT WAS A BIPARTISAN BILL. AND WHAT THE MAJORITY LEADER DID NOT MENTION IS THE 1986 BILL DID NOT ADD A SINGLE CENT TO THE DEFICIT. IT WAS IT WAS PAID FOR. MR. SPEAKER, THIS BILL IS A MUCH LESSER PRODUCT THAN IT COULD HAVE BEEN. WE ON THIS SIDE OF THE AISLE, MR. SPEAKER, THINK WE NEED TAX REFORM. WE'RE PREPARED TO SUPPORT TAX REFORM. WE BELIEVE WE NEED TO BRING DOWN THE CORPORATE RATE. WE BELIEVE WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT SMALL BUSINESSES CAN GROW AND PROSPER AND GROW INTO LARGE BUSINESSES. WHAT WE DON'T BELIEVE IN, MR. SPEAKER, IS SIMPLY HAVING A BILL THAT ADVANTAGES THE BEST OFF IN OUR COUNTRY AND SAYS THAT THE ADVANTAGES WE GIVE TO THE MIDDLE CLASS WILL BE PHASED OUT IN A LITTLE BIT, ABOUT FIVE YEARS. SO, MR. SPEAKER, WE WILL, ACCORDING TO THE MAJORITY LEADER, CONSIDER THIS BILL NEXT WEEK. IT WILL NOT BE BIPARTISAN. AND THAT'S A SHAME. IT WILL NOT BE POSITIVE FOR THE COUNTRY BECAUSE IT WILL PUT US EVEN MORE DEEPLY INTO DEBT. AND THE PEOPLE WILL PAY THAT BILL -- WHO PAY THAT BILL ULTIMATELY WILL BE OUR CHILDREN. ON BOTH SIDES OF THE AISLE, WE DON'T HAVE A LOT OF MEMBERS ON THE FLOOR, BUT I SAY TO EVERY MEMBER ON THE FLOOR, EVERY MEMBER ON THIS FLOOR, I'M SURE AT SOME POINT IN TIME YOU HAVE GIVEN A SPEECH SOMEWHERE THAT SAID, WE CARE ABOUT THE DEBT. WE'RE GOING TO BRING DOWN THE DEBT. THIS BILL DOES NOT THIS BILL DOES NOT DO IT. AND ANYBODY WHO BELIEVES THAT THIS BILL IS GOING TO PAY FOR ITSELF THROUGH DYNAMIC SCORING AND ECONOMIC GROWTH IS KIDDING THEMSELVES A RATIONALIZATION TO VOTE FOR A VOTE THAT IS POLITICAL, NOT POLICY. BECAUSE MY REPUBLICAN COLLEAGUES, MR. SPEAKER, BELIEVE IF THEY DON'T PASS THIS BILL, THEY WILL LOSE THE NEXT ELECTION. I HAVE HEARD THAT ARGUMENT OVER AND OVER AND OVER AGAIN. THAT IS NOT A REASON TO VOTE FOR THIS BILL. IT IS A REASON TO SAY, LET'S GO BACK TO THE TABLE. LET'S INCLUDE MR. NEAL IN THE CONSIDERATION, THE RANKING MEMBER. LET'S INCLUDE MR. WYDEN, THE RANKING MEMBER MEMBER OF THE SENATE FINANCE COMMITTEE AND LET'S INCLUDE MR. MCCARTHY AND MYSELF TO SEE IF WE CAN REACH A BIPARTISAN BIPARTISAN, CONSTRUCTIVE PIECE OF LEGISLATION WILL ENJOY THE SUPPORT OF A WIDE RANGE OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE AND THEIR REPRESENTATIVES. NOW, MR. SPEAKER, WE HAD AN ELECTION YESTERDAY IN ALABAMA. MR. JONES WON THAT ELECTION. MR. STRANGE, THE INCUMBENT REPUBLICAN REPRESENTING ALABAMA RIGHT NOW LOST IN THE PRIMARY. HE HAS NO MANDATE. WHY RUSH THIS BILL THROUGH? THIS BILL, IF IT WAS PASSED ON DECEMBER 31 OF NEXT YEAR WOULD AFFECT THE 2018 TAXES THAT WOULD BE FILED IN APRIL OF 2019. THE NEED TO RUSH THIS BILL, MR. SPEAKER, SEEMS TO BE AND THE REASON FOR HAVING NO HEARINGS, THE REASON FOR HAVING NO WITNESSES IS BECAUSE THIS BILL ON ITS MERIT CANNOT SUSTAIN ITSELF. NOW LET ME READ YOU A QUOTE, MR. SPEAKER. I THINK THE MESSAGE OF THE MOMENT IS THAT THE AMERICAN PEOPLE ALL ACROSS THE COUNTRY ARE ASKING US EVEN IN THE MOST LIBERAL STATE, MASSACHUSETTS, TO STOP THIS HEALTH CARE BILL. I THINK THAT MEANS THERE WILL BE MORE HEALTH CARE VOTES IN THE SENATE PRIOR TO THE SWEARING IN OF SCOTT BROWN, WHENEVER THAT MAY BE. THAT STATEMENT WAS MADE ON JANUARY 20, 2010, BY THE PRESIDENT MAJORITY LEADER, WHO WAS THEN, OF COURSE, THE MINORITY LEADER. AND HIS PROPOSITION WAS, YOU OUGHT TO WAIT UNTIL SCOTT BROWN IS HERE SO THAT MASSACHUSETTS CAN HAVE ITS VOTE COUNTED. BUT HINT CRITICALLY, HE HAS CHANGED HIS TUNE TODAY. WHEN ALABAMA, A VERY CONSERVATIVE STATE, THE OPPOSITE OF MASSACHUSETTS, HAS VOTED TO ELECT DOUG JONES TO THE SENATE. AND I DON'T HEAR MR. MCCONNELL OR ANYBODY ELSE SAYING LET'S WAY FOR THE DULY ELECTED MEMBER OF THE UNITED STATES SENATOR FROM ALABAMA SO HE CAN VOTE ON THIS BILL AND NEGATIVE CONSEQUENCES TO OUR COUNTRY. MR. SPEAKER, I'M SURE THE MAJORITY LEADER MIGHT HAVE SOME COMMENTS HE WANTS TO MAKE. AND THEREFORE, I YIELD TO MY FRIEND, MR. MCCARTHY.

                        Show Full Text
                      • 11:49:54 AM

                        MR. MCCARTHY

                        I THANK THE GENTLEMAN FOR YIELDING. I TOOK NOTE THERE ARE A LOT OF THINGS…

                        I THANK THE GENTLEMAN FOR YIELDING. I TOOK NOTE THERE ARE A LOT OF THINGS SAID. LET ME MAKE SURE TO GET THROUGH ALL OF THEM. YOU FIRST MENTIONED MANY TIMES THAT I DID NOT MENTION AND I WAS ASKED THE QUESTION WHEN WE WOULD VOTE ON THE TAX BILL. I ANSWERED THE QUESTION. I SAID YES, WE'LL VOTE ON IT TUESDAY. YOU SAID YOU HEARD IT COULD BE TUESDAY AND I WASN'T ASKED OTHER QUESTIONS. BUT NOW THAT WE HAVE, LET'S WALK THROUGH THIS. ONE OF YOUR FIRST ARGUMENTS WAS DEBT. DO YOU REALIZE IN THIS PRO-GROWTH TAX CUTTING TAX BILL, IT PAYS FOR ALL OF IT. WHAT IS INTERESTING, DON'T TAKE MY WORD FOR IT. WHAT HAPPENS EVERY DAY TO THE MARKET WHEN THEY REALIZE CONGRESS IS ONE DAY CLOSER TO PASSING THE TAX BILL. EVERYONE WITH A 401-K GETS A INCREASE. AND THE MOVEMENT IS PASSING THE TAX BILL. AND THAT'S FOR ALL AMERICANS INVESTED. EVERYBODY'S RETIREMENT IS GETTING A LITTLE BETTER BECAUSE OF IT. NOW WHAT ABOUT ON THE JOBS' PROSPECTIVE. BROADCOMM WAS CREATED IN AMERICA BUT LEFT AMERICA, ON THE DAY OF THE ANNOUNCEMENT SAID WE'RE COMING BACK. NOT JUST THAT WE ARE BRINGING SO MANY JOBS BACK, WE ARE GOING TO SPEND $3 BILLION A YEAR IN R&D AND $6 BILLION IN MANUFACTURING. AND THAT'S $20 BILLION A YEAR IN REVENUE FOR THAT COMPANY THAT IS GOING TO PAY TAXES IN REVENUE. THAT'S A BIG COMPANY. YOU KNOW WHAT I JUST READ THE OTHER DAY? COMPANY ANNOUNCING THEY ARE GOING TO SYRACUSE, NEW YORK, BASED UPON OUR TAX BILL. YES, THINGS ARE CHANGING THINGS IN AMERICA. PEOPLE ARE EXCITED, BUT NOT JUST THOSE WHO ARE GOING TO HIRE THESE THOUSANDS OF AMERICANS TO WORK, I WANT TO MAKE SURE IT HAPPENS IN MARYLAND AS WELL. SO I WANTED TO LOOK AT YOUR DISTRICT. SO HERE WE GO. MY GOOD FRIEND REPRESENTS MARYLAND'S 5TH AND DONE IT FOR QUITE SOME TIME. CURRENTLY YOU HAVE 47% OF FILERS IN MARYLAND 5 THAT TAKE THE STANDARD DID HE DEDUCTION. SO THEY WILL BE BETTER OFF BECAUSE THEY WILL GET A DOUBLING THE PRESIDENT SIGNS IT. ANOTHER 11% HAVE ITEMIZED DEDUCTIONS THAT ARE LESS THAN OUR NEW HIGHER STANDARD DEDUCTION. THEY WILL SAVE. NOT ONLY SAVE MONEY BUT SAVE TIME. INSTEAD OF SPENDING WEEKS OF TRYING TO FILL OUT A TAX CODE -- YOU KNOW WHEN THEY FILL IT OUT, THEY WILL GET MONEY. THEY DON'T HAVE TO WAIT UNTIL APRIL 15 NOT ONLY IN YOUR DISTRICT BUT ACROSS THIS COUNTRY. CHECK YOUR CHECK COME FEBRUARY. YOU KNOW WHAT WILL BE IN THAT CHECK? MORE MONEY. BECAUSE THE STANDARD DEDUCTION GOES UP. SO THAT'S 58% OF MY FRIEND'S DISTRICT IS BETTER OFF THAN DAY ONE. BUT FROM WHAT YOU TELL ME, YOU DON'T THINK THAT'S GOOD ENOUGH TO VOTE FOR. A MAJORITY OF YOUR DISTRICT IS BETTER OFF ON DAY ONE. THAT'S NOT EVEN TALKING ABOUT THE SMALL BUSINESSES. THE SMALL BUSINESSES IN YOUR DISTRICT, THOSE THAT ARE EARNING $400,000, THEY ARE GOING TO SAVE $19,000. I'M NOT SURE -- I KNOW WE ARE DEAR FRIENDS BUT I'M NOT SURE YOU OWNED A BUSINESS. WHEN I WAS 20, I STARTED MY FIRST BUSINESS. THERE ARE THREE LESSONS I LEARNED, I WAS THE FIRST ONE TO WORK AND LAST ONE TO LEAVE AND LAST ONE TO BE PAID. THIS IS GOING TO CREATE NOR ENTREPRENEURSHIP, MORE OPPORTUNITY AND MORE PEOPLE ARE GOING TO BE HIRED. NOW, I KNOW YOU ARE WORRIED ABOUT THE DEBT, BUT IT JUST STRIKES ME. THIS YEAR, YOU VOTED FOR A BUDGET, JUST A COUPLE OF MONTHS AGO AND I'M NOT GOING TO GO BACK TO ANOTHER CONGRESS THAT INCREASED THE DEFICIT BY $6.8 TRILLION. ONLY WORRIED ABOUT DEBT AT CERTAIN TIMES? THIS BILL IS GOING TO GROW THE ECONOMY HAS WE HAVE WATCHED QUARTER AFTER QUARTER AFTER QUARTER IN THE NEW ADMINISTRATION. I HAVE TO MAKE SURE I GET ALL OF IT. YOU TALK ABOUT HEARINGS. WE HAD 59 PUBLIC HEARINGS. WE PRINTED IT OUT ABOUT WHAT WE WOULD DO ON TAX. LET'S GET TO THE CORE. LET'S SAY TO ALL AMERICANS, DOESN'T MATTER WHERE YOU LIVE WHETHER YOU SIT ON THIS SIDE OF THE AISLE, OR THAT SIDE OF THE AISLE, DEMOCRAT, REPUBLICAN, YOU ARE AN AMERICAN FIRST. LET'S TAKE THE AVERAGE FAMILY. THE AVERAGE FAMILY OF FOUR MAKING $5 -- $55,000. YOU KNOW HOW MUCH TAX THEY ARE GOING TO PAY? ZERO. ZERO. BUT THAT STILL ISN'T GOOD ENOUGH FOR YOU. IT'S VERY INTERESTING IN MY SOCIAL SCIENCE STUDY OF WHAT THE PARTY ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE AISLE USED TO SAY THEY WERE FOR. I BELIEVE IN THE DAY IF YOU WOULD HAVE STOOD UP HERE AND SAID I HAVE A TAX BILL TO MAKE SURE THE FAMILY OF FOUR MAKING $55,000 IS GOING TO PAY ZERO, THEY WOULD BE EXCITED. YOU TALK TO ME ABOUT BIPARTISANSHIP. THAT'S A QUESTION FOR YOU. BIPARTISANSHIP, BIPARTISANSHIP WHEN WE REACH OUT TO YOU ABOUT CHIP, A PLACE NOT TO PLAY POLITICS, WE EVEN STOPPED A HEARING AND A MARKUP THAT WE HAD SCHEDULED WELL IN THE FUTURE BECAUSE YOU CAME TO US, YOUR SIDE OF THE AISLE, AND ASKED US TO BECAUSE YOU THOUGHT YOU COULD COME TO AN AGREEMENT AND TOLD BY YOUR LEADERSHIP THAT NO, NOBODY COULD VOTE FOR IT. WE PUT A BILL THAT PUT THINGS IN THE BILL THAT WE THOUGHT YOU WOULD EVEN WANT. BUT NO, YOU STILL VOTED NO. HOW MANY TIMES HAVE YOU TOLD ME ON THIS FLOOR, MAYBE IT WAS A FEW MONTHS AGO -- AND I'LL QUOTE YOU IF I MAY -- ABOUT GOVERNMENT FUNDING. BECAUSE I WAS CONCERNED, BECAUSE I HAD READ SOME ARTICLES IN THE "NEW YORK TIMES" THAT SUGGESTED AS THE MINORITY PARTY SHOWING RESISTANCE IN THE ERA OF PRESIDENT TRUMP, THE DEMOCRATS ARE WILLING TO LET THE LIGHTS OF GOVERNMENT GO DARK. I WANTED TO KNOW IF THAT WAS TRUE OR FALSE. YOU SAID TO ME, WHEN I ASKED MY FRIEND WHETHER THAT RUMOR WAS TRUE, YOU SAID NOBODY IS WANTING TO SHUT THE GOVERNMENT DOWN. WE DON'T WANT TO SHUT THE GOVERNMENT DOWN. YOU CONTINUED TO SAY, I ASSURE IT IS NEITHER OUR INTENT OR DESIRE. MATTER OF FACT WE WANT TO WORK QUICKLY TO AVOID THAT HAPPENING. THAT'S NOT GOOD OBVIOUSLY FOR THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. IT'S NOT GOOD FOR MANAGERS TRYING TO PLAN ON HOW TO DELIVER SERVICES AND IT'S CERTAINLY NOT GOOD FOR OUR FEDERAL EMPLOYEES. SO I WANT TO WORK WITH YOU TO MAKE SURE THAT DOESN'T HAPPEN. MR. SPEAKER, THAT WAS IN MARCH, JUST NINE MONTHS AGO. AND I WONDER WHAT CHANGED IN THOSE NINE MONTHS BECAUSE JUST LAST WEEK, AND I TELL MY FRIEND THERE WAS NO PARTISANSHIP INPUTTING A CONTINUING RESOLUTION ON THE FLOOR FOR TWO WEEKS. THERE WAS NO POISON PILL ON THIS SIDE OF THE AISLE. IT WAS A CLEAN ONE. AND I WATCHED SITTING AT THIS DESK WHERE THE VOTE WAS GOING AND I WATCHED THE OTHER SIDE. I WATCHED PEOPLE NOT THAT THEY JUST VOTED NO, THEY WERE WHIPPED INTO THE POSITION TO VOTE NO. I WATCHED THE TALLY. AND ONCE THE TALLY GOT PASSED THE MAGIC NUMBER OF 218, HE PUT HIS THUMB UP BECAUSE HE GAVE THE OK IN HIS CONFERENCE THAT WERE TOLD NOT TO VOTE UNTIL IT PASSED. I JUST WONDER WHAT HAPPENED TO BIPARTISANSHIP ON SOMETHING THAT IS SO BIPARTISAN. I KNOW THAT THOUSANDS OF FEDERAL EMPLOYEES YOU HAVE IN YOUR DISTRICT. BUT THAT IS JUST -- I LISTENED, MR. SPEAKER, TO THE LEADER OF THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY ON THE OTHER SIDE, YOU SAID JUST TWO DAYS PRIOR, THE ONLY PERSON TALKING ABOUT THE SHUTDOWN IS PRESIDENT TRUMP. THE ONLY PERSON TAKING ACTION AND WHIPPING TO GET TO A SHUTDOWN WAS ON THIS FLOOR. WE HAVE HAD OPEN HEARINGS, REPUBLICAN AND DEMOCRAT. WE HAD AN OPEN, BIPARTISAN, BICAMERAL CONFERENCE. THEY HAVE WALKED THROUGH AN ENTIRE BILL. WE'VE MADE SURE THE AMERICANS ARE GOING TO GET A TAX CUT AND JOBS ARE GOING TO BE CREATED. IT IS ALREADY HAPPENING BEFORE THE BILL IS EVEN SIGNED. I'M NOT SURE IF I DIDN'T MENTION SOMETHING ELSE. BECAUSE YOU TRY TO CORRECT IF SOMETHING WAS NOT MENTIONED, BUT I WANTED TO MAKE SURE I ANSWERED ALL THOSE QUESTIONS FOR YOU, BECAUSE I KNOW NOT JUST IN YOUR DISTRICT, THAT EVERY FAMILY OF FOUR MAKING $55,000 WILL PAY NOTHING, ALL OF THE SMALL BUSINESSES THAT ARE GOING TO HIRE NEW PEOPLE. AND I DIFFER FROM YOU. MAYBE YOU WHIPPED STRONGLY DEPENS LIKE YOU WHIPPED STRONGLY AGAINST THE C.R. IN KEEPING GOVERNMENT OPEN, BUT WHEN I LOOK AT THAT TALLY ON THE TAX BILL, THERE WILL BE SOME ON YOUR SIDE. WHY DO I THINK SO? THEY TOLD ME SO. THE ONLY DIFFERENCE AT THE END IF THEY DON'T AND KEEP THE STRONG ARM AND RELEASING THE THUMB UP ONCE IT PASSES AND PUT IT DOWN, THAT'S THE ONLY REASON WE WON'T HAVE BIPARTISANSHIP ON THE FLOOR. BUT I BELIEVE IN AMERICA AND I BELIEVE IN THE INDIVIDUALS WHO FIGHT SO STRONGLY TO GET HERE TO REPRESENT THEIR CONSTITUENTS THAT THEY KNOW THE NEW JOBS IN THEIR DISTRICT AND KNOW HOW MUCH THOSE FAMILIES WILL SAVE AND WILL NOT POLITICS GET THE BEST OF THEM. THEY WILL GO AGAINST THE TIED TO STOP, BUT THEY BELIEVE IT WILL EVEN BE BETTER. SO I LOOK FORWARD TO THAT DAY. I LOOK FORWARD YOU COMING BACK TO THE QUOTE YOU TOLD ME NINE MONTHS AGO, BECAUSE YOU KNOW WHAT? IT IS CLOSE TO CHRISTMAS. WE HAVE MILITARY MEN AND WOMEN DEFENDING US. YOU TALKED ABOUT THAT BILL THE PRESIDENT RECENTLY SIGNED THAT YES YOU WORKED WITH ME THAT IS GOING TO MAKE GOVERNMENT MORE EFFECTIVE, EFFICIENT AND ACCOUNTABLE AND ALSO HAD A PAY RAISE FOR OUR MEN AND WOMEN. WHEN YOU VOTED THEM, YOU TOLD THEM YOU WEREN'T GETTING THEIR RAISE. WORST, YOU EVEN WENT FURTHER, YOU QUESTIONED WHETHER THEY HAVE THE FUNDS TO CONTINUE TO BATTLE. WE HAVE BEEN THROUGH SHUTDOWNS AND NOBODY WINS. I BELIEVE YOU WHAT YOU TOLD ME NINE MONTHS AGO. I WANT YOU TO COME BACK. I YIELD BACK. .

                        Show Full Text
                      • 12:01:31 PM

                        MR. HOYER

                        I THANK THE GENTLEMAN FOR HIS COMMENTS. HE MADE A NUMBER OF POINTS. FIRST…

                        I THANK THE GENTLEMAN FOR HIS COMMENTS. HE MADE A NUMBER OF POINTS. FIRST GENERALLY, I'VE BEEN HERE LONG ENOUGH TO HAVE HEARD THE DEBATE IN THE 1981 BILL. THE SO-CALLED SUPPLY SIDE, JACK KEMP, GEORGE BUSH, VICE PRESIDENT BUSH REFERRED TO AS VOODOO ECONOMICS. IN POINT OF FACT, AS THE GENTLEMAN KNOWS, BUT A I'M SURE HE KNOWS THE RECORD -- BECAUSE I'M SURE HE KNOLLS THE RECORD, WE INCREASED THE DEBT UNDER RONALD REAGAN -- KNOWS THE RECORD, WE INCREASED THE DEBT UNDER RONALD REAGAN 189%. LARGER THAN ANY OTHER PRESIDENT WITH WHOM I'VE SERVED OVER THE LAST 37 YEARS. 189%. STOCKMAN SAID THAT WE KNEW IT WASN'T GOING TO BALANCE THE BUDGET. WE JUST SAID THAT FOR POLITICAL PURPOSES. STOCKMAN SAID THAT. HE WAS DIRECTOR FOR THE O.M.B. UNDER RONALD REAGAN. THEN IN 2001 AND 2003 WE HAD TAX CUTS. WE HEARD THE SAME ARGUMENTS. HOW IT'S GOING TO GROW ROBUSTLY THE ECONOMY. AND IT BROUGHT IN THE DEEPEST RECESSION ANYBODY IN THIS CHAMBER, OTHER THAN PERHAPS SAM JOHNSON, WHO I THINK IS PROBABLY OUR OLDEST MEMBER, BECAUSE THE REST OF US DIDN'T EXPERIENCE THE DEPRESSION, IT USHERED IN NOT THE BIGGEST GROWTH RATE IN AMERICA, BUT THE LEAST JOB-PRODUCING EIGHT YEARS OF ANY AMERICAN PRESIDENT THAT I'VE SERVED WITH. AND THE DEEPEST RECESSION THAT ANYBODY IN THIS BODY HAS EXPERIENCED. AND A HEMORRHAGING OF JOBS. AND IN FACT, THE STOCK MARKET, AS THE GENTLEMAN REFERS TO, HAD A 25% DECLINE IN VALUE OVER THE EIGHT YEARS OF THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION. WITH TWO TAX CUTS. WHERE EXACTLY THE SAME ARGUMENT FOR GROWTH WAS MADE. AND IT DIDN'T HAPPEN. ON THE OTHER HAND, I WAS HERE IN 1993 WHEN WE RAISED TAXES. NOT MUCH. BUT A LITTLE BIT. PARTICULARLY FOR INFRASTRUCTURE. AND THE PREDICTION, MR. LEADER, ON YOUR SIDE OF THE AISLE, WE WOULD TANK AS AN ECONOMY. WE WOULD HAVE A TERRIBLE RECESSION. EXACTLY THE OPPOSITE HAPPENED. YOU WERE DEAD -- NOT YOU PERSONALLY, BUT THE -- THOSE WHO MADE THAT REPRESENTATION WERE 180 DEGREES WRONG. FIRST OF ALL, WE BALANCED THE BUDGET FOUR YEARS IN A ROW. NOBODY HAS DONE THAT OTHER THAN PRESIDENT CLINTON. YOU CAN SAY YOU WERE IN CHARGE OF THE CONGRESS. YOU WERE. AND I WILL RESPOND TO YOU, WHY COULDN'T YOU DO IT UNDER GEORGE WUSH BUSH? WHEN YOU HAD -- GEORGE BUSH? WHEN YOU HAD EVERYTHING? THERE'S NO ANSWER TO THAT. SO IN TERMS OF THE EXPERIENCE THAT WE'VE HAD, WHEN WE HAD TAX CUTS, THE DEBT DID IN FACT EXPLODE. 189% INCREASE IN THE NATIONAL DEBT. THAT WAS APPROXIMATELY 2 1/2 TIMES THE INCREASE UNDER OBAMA AND THE INCREASE UNDER GEORGE BUSH. BUT WE CONTINUED -- CONTINUE TO ARGUE THIS IS GOING TO BE GREATH FOR GROWTH. NO REPUTABLE -- GREAT FOR GROWTH. NO REPUTABLE ECONOMIST AGREES WITH THAT PROPOSITION. WELL, YOU READ THEM OUT TO ME, I'LL BE GLAD TO HEAR THEM. THE STOCK MARKET INCREASED UNDER THIS PRESIDENT, IT'S GOING UP. IT WENT UP 300% UNDER BARACK OBAMA. 300%. 300%. FROM 6,500 TO OVER 18,000. HE HAD THE LARGEST JOB PRODUCTION. AND I TOLD MY FRIEND, IN THE LAST -- 2016, AS OPPOSED TO 2017, THERE WERE 279,000 MORE JOBS CREATED IN 2016 UNDER BARACK OBAMA THAN HAVE BEEN CREATED UNDER THIS PRESIDENT. 279,000 MORE. THAT'S NOT A GREAT DEAL. BUT IN TERMS OF GROWTH, THERE WAS MORE GROWTH OF JOBS IN 2016 WHEN OBAMA WAS PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES THAN HAS OCCURRED UNDER DONALD TRUMP. CHECK THE RECORDS. I'M SURE YOU'LL REVIEW MY -- LET'S SEE IF HOYER'S JUST GIVING US SOME MALARKEY. THE GENTLEMAN TALKS ABOUT THIS GREAT TAX BENEFIT. WHAT HE DIDN'T MENTION, AND WHAT I WAS REFERRING TO BY THE WAY, WAS WHEN YOU WERE GIVING THE SCHEDULE. NOT IN RESPONSE TO THE QUESTION. BUT THAT ASIDE, DOESN'T MENTION THE STATE AND LOCAL TAX. I'M NOT SURE EXACTLY WHAT'S HAPPENED TO STATE AND LOCAL TAXES. BUT IN MY STATE IT WILL HAVE A VERY SUBSTANTIAL NEGATIVE EFFECT. WHY? BECAUSE WE HAVE A SIGNIFICANT INCOME TAX. WHY? BECAUSE WE THINK THAT'S A PROGRESSIVE TAX. AND PUTS THE BURDEN ON THOSE WHO HAVE MORE. YOU MAY DISAGREE WITH THAT. HAVE A FLAT TAX, NO MATTER WHAT YOU HAVE. PAY THE SAME THING. I'M NOT SURE EXACTLY WHAT YOU'VE DONE -- SHUTDOWN, YOU TALK ABOUT. YOU HAD 90 PEOPLE VOTE AGAINST A C.R. THAT YOU RECOMMENDED THEY VOTE FOR IN SEPTEMBER, WHICH WAS A CLEAN C.R. YOU WOULD NOT HAVE PASSED THAT C.R., YOU WOULD HAVE SHUT DOWN GOVERNMENT. YOU'RE RESPONSIBLE FOR KEEPING GOVERNMENT OPEN. YOU BEING YOUR PARTY. YOU'RE IN THE MAJORITY. THE ONLY REASON THAT C.R. PASSED WAS BECAUSE WE VOTED FOR IT. YOU HAD 906 YOUR PEOPLE VOTE AGAINST IT. 9 -- 90 OF YOUR PEOPLE VOTE AGAINST IT. 90. WHO APPARENTLY DIDN'T WANT TO PAY THE MILITARY. DIDN'T WANT TO PROTECT THEM OVERSEAS. THAT PROPOSITION, LIKE THEY SAY , WON'T HUNT. BECAUSE THE CHAIRMAN OF THE ARMED SERVICES COMMITTEE VOTED AGAINST THAT C.R. WHY? BECAUSE HE THOUGHT IT WAS HARMFUL TO THE NATIONAL SECURITY OF OUR COUNTRY. SECRETARY MATTIS BELIEVES THE C.R. IS DAMAGING. SO DON'T -- IT IS INAPPROPRIATE IN MY VIEW WHEN WE DO SOMETHING AND SAYS WE DON'T LIKE THIS BILL. AND THE ONLY PARTY WITH WHOM I'VE SERVED, WHO IS CONSCIOUSLY, PURPOSEFULLY SHUT DOWN -- WHO HAS CONSCIOUSLY, PURPOSEFULLY SHUT DOWN THE GOVERNMENT, I TELL MY FRIEND, MR. SPEAKER, IS THE REPUBLICAN PARTY. THEY DID IT IN 1995 UNDER NEWT GINGRICH. AND THEY DID IT LAST YEAR WITH MR. CRUZ COMING OVER HERE AND SAYING SHUT DOWN THE GOVERNMENT UNLESS THEY REPEAL THE A.C.A. SHUT IT DOWN. CONSCIOUSLY. WE HAVE NEVER DONE THAT. HAVE WE HAD TO SHUT DOWN BECAUSE WE COULDN'T GET AGREEMENT? WE'VE DONE THAT FOR A FEW DAYS. BUT FOR 16 DAYS, YOU CUT IT DOWN CONSCIOUSLY. AND WHEN YOU VOTED TO OPEN UP THE GOVERNMENT, GUESS WHO VOTED AGAINST IT? MR. MULVANEY, THE DIRECTOR OF THE O.M.B. HE VOTED AGAINST OPENING UP GOVERNMENT. I GUESS HE WAS AGAINST THE ARMED FORCES. I GUESS HE WAS AGAINST DEFENDING OUR COUNTRY. THAT'S YOUR PROPOSITION. SCHIP. YOU'RE RIGHT. YOU WAITED. WE DIDN'T GET AN AGREEMENT. BUT WE WAITED LONG AFTER 9:30 WHEN THE GENTLEMAN SAYS HE'S VERY CONCERNED ABOUT FUNDING IT. THE AUTHORIZATION EXPIRED. YOU PASSED ULTIMATELY A BILL THAT WE DIDN'T VOTE FOR. YOU PASSED IT ON YOUR OWN. IF YOU REALLY WERE THAT CONCERNED, YOU WOULD HAVE PASSED IT BEFORE THE BILL AUTHORIZATION EXPIRED, SEPTEMBER 30. WE PASSED IT SOME WEEKS LATER. AND WE PASSED IT WITH A PIECE OF FUNDING IN THERE THAT'S GOING TO UNDERMINE, FOR INSTANCE, THIS IS ONE EXAMPLE, VACCINATION FOR CHILDREN. BECAUSE YOU FUNDED IT IN PART BY REDUCING SUBSTANTIALLY THE PREVENTION FUND, WHICH SEEKS TO PREVENT ILLNESS. ON BIPARTISANSHIP. VERY FRANKLY, WE HAD A TWO-WEEK C.R. THE ONLY THING YOU'VE WORKED ON FROM OUR PERSPECTIVE IS THE TAX BILL. AND YOU DID NOT INCLUDE US IN THOSE DISCUSSIONS. YOU HAD CLOSED HEARINGS. WE HAD A CONFERENCE HEARING YESTERDAY. MR. NEAL TRIED TO MOVE AN AMENDMENT OUT OF ORDER. WASN'T ACCEPTED. IT WAS A DONE DEAL. DONE DEAL IN SECRET. I TOLD MY FRIEND, I RE-READ A LITTLE BIT OF "YOUNG GUNS REQUEST "-- "YOUNG GUNS" LAST NIGHT. TALK ABOUT TRANSPARENCY, TALK ABOUT OPENNESS. TALK ABOUT DOING THINGS ONE AT A TIME. NOT PACKAGING A LOT OF BILLS. THE REASON WE ALL HATE C.R. SEAS BECAUSE NOBODY KNOWS WHAT'S IN A C. -- C.R.'S IS BECAUSE NOBODY KNOWS WHAT'S IN A C.R. AND THIS C.R. IS LOADED DOWN WITH NUMEROUS, AND WE'RE TALKING ABOUT TAX BILL, BUT THE C.R. THAT THE GENTLEMAN TALKED ABOUT IS FIVE OR SIX MAJOR PIECES OF LEGISLATION PUT IN ONE PACKAGE. TAKE IT OR LEAVE IT. THAT'S NOT THE WAY TO RUN THIS ORGANIZATION. AND THAT'S WHAT YOU GUYS SAID IN "YOUNG GUNS" AND I AGREE WITH YOU. BUT IT'S NOT WHAT YOU'VE DONE. IT'S WHAT YOU SAID. BUT IT'S NOT WHAT YOU'VE DONE. LET ME JUST CLOSE ON THIS SIDE, AND FRANKLY I WAS GOING TO TALK ABOUT THE CRRMENT R., BUT I'M TALKING -- C.R., BUT I'M TALKING ABOUT IT NOW. WE DON'T HAVE A BUDGET CAPS DEAL. TODAY'S THE 12TH. 13TH. 14TH. SO WE ARE ESSENTIALLY 15 DAYS, 17 DAYS FROM THE END OF THE YEAR. WE DON'T HAVE A CAPS DEAL. WE DON'T HAVE A DISASTER SUPPLEMENTAL. FOR TEXAS, FLORIDA, PUERTO RICO AND THE VIRGIN ISLANDS. THAT'S PROPOSED TO BE IN THIS C.R., AS I UNDERSTAND IT. AND THE FIRES IN CALIFORNIA. THE GENTLEMAN'S ABSOLUTELY CORRECT. WE'RE GOING TO SUPPORT HELPING THE FOLKS OF CALIFORNIA WHO HAVE BEEN DEVASTATED BY THESE FIRES. THE GENTLEMAN'S ABSOLUTELY CORRECT. WE DON'T HAVE ANY ON -- ANYTHING ON DREAMERS. WE THINK THAT'S CRITICALLY IMPORTANT. I SAID TO THE MAJORITY LEADER, FOUR MONTHS AGO, THAT WE FELT THIS WAS CRITICALLY IMPORTANT AND WE NEEDED TO GET THIS DONE. I THINK, AS I'VE SAID TO THE GENTLEMAN, WE HAVE OVER 300 VOTES ON THIS FLOOR FOR A BILL TO GET THIS DONE. THE ALEXANDER MURRAY, I DON'T THINK -- I DON'T KNOW, I HAVEN'T SEEN THE CONFERENCE REPORT. BUT ALEXANDER MURRAY, WHICH TRIES TO STABILIZE THE AVAILABILITY OF HEALTH CARE AT A REASONABLE PRICE TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE, I DON'T THINK THAT'S IN THE TAX BILL, AS I UNDERSTAND IT. V.A. CHOICE FUNDING I THINK IS IN THE C.R. I HAVEN'T SEEN EXACTLY WHAT IT SAYS. OPIOIDS FUNDING, I HAVE A THING IN MY DISTRICT, IN EVERY DISTRICT IN AMERICA OPIOIDS IS A CRITICAL CRISIS. THERE'S NO FUNDING IN C.R. AS I UNDERSTAND FOR THAT. A FIRE GRANTS PROGRAM FOR OUR EMERGENCY RESPONDERS. NO MONEY FOR THAT. PERKINS LOANS, NOTHING FOR THAT. THE DEBT LIMIT IS GOING TO COME LATER. NATIONAL FLOOD INSURANCE PROGRAM, NOTHING FOR THAT, AS I UNDERSTAND IT. MEDICARE AND OTHER HEALTH EXTENDERS. 702 OF FISA, TO KEEP AMERICA SECURE AND STRONG AND SAFE. AS I UNDERSTAND IT NONE OF THAT'S BEING DEALT WITH. SO THE REASON WE VOTED AGAINST THE LAST C.R. IS BECAUSE WE'RE TIRED OF KICKING THINGS DOWN THE ROAD. WE'RE TIRED OF KICKING THE CAN DOWN THE ROAD. WE WANT TO GET TO AGREEMENT ON A BIPARTISAN BASIS TO PASS LEGISLATION THAT'S POSITIVE FOR OUR COUNTRY. AND THAT'S WHY WE MAY VOTE AGAINST THIS NEXT C.R. BECAUSE WE OUGHT TO STOP JUST KICKING THE CAN DOWN THE ROAD. AND WE'RE GOING TO KICK THE CAN, AS I UNDERSTAND IT, DOWN THE ROAD AT SOME POINT IN TIME UNTIL JANUARY 19 IS THE DISCUSSION. MR. LEADER, MR. SPEAKER, WE'RE PREPARED TO SIT DOWN AND TRY TO REACH AGREEMENT ON THESE ISSUES THAT HAVE GOT TO BE REACHED. AND IF WE DON'T REACH THEM, AMERICA WILL BE LESS SAFE. LESS SECURE. LESS HEALTHY. AS AN ECONOMY, AND LESS HEALTHY LITERALLY IN TERMS OF MAKING SURE THAT THE HEALTH CARE AVAILABLE TO AMERICA IS ON A STABLE PATH. SO, MR. SPEAKER, I WILL YIELD TO THE MAJORITY LEADER AND THEN MAKE A FEW COMMENTS AND THEN WE'LL CLOSE. I YIELD TO MY FRIEND.

                        Show Full Text
                      • 12:14:28 PM

                        MR. MCCARTHY

                        I THANK THE GENTLEMAN. I DO LOOK FORWARD TO THESE COLLOQUIES. I FIRST WANT…

                        I THANK THE GENTLEMAN. I DO LOOK FORWARD TO THESE COLLOQUIES. I FIRST WANT TO MAKE SURE HISTORY HAS IT RIGHT. 137 ECONOMISTS SENT A LETTER TO CONGRESS SUPPORTING OUR TAX REFORM EFFORT AND SAYING IT WILL ACCELERATE GROWTH. I DON'T KNOW IF YOU DISEASE LIKE THESE 137. BUT THESE ARE -- DISLIKE THESE 137. BUT THESE ARE ECONOMISTS. I DON'T JUDGE THE DIFFERENCE. HISTORY SAYS PRESIDENT OBAMA ADDED MORE THAN $8 TRILLION TO THE NATIONAL DEBT. NOW, HOW DOES THAT MEASURE AGAINST ALL THE OTHERS? WELL, THAT'S MORE THAN 43 PRIOR PRESIDENTS COMBINED. THAT'S WHAT HISTORY SHOWS. MY FRIEND IS CORRECT, HE'S BEEN HERE MUCH LONGER THAN I HAVE. . YOU ACTUALLY HAD THE MAJORITY IN 40 YEARS. YOU DIDN'T BALANCE THE BUDGET. THERE WAS A COMMON DENOMINATOR. HAD TO FIGHT FOR IT TO GET THERE. YOU RAISED SOME OTHER ISSUES. YOU BROUGHT AN ISSUE UP FOR A NUMBER OF DAYS. I DON'T THINK WE SHOULD WASTE ANY TIME. YOU BROUGHT AN ISSUE UP OF WE DON'T HAVE AR CAP AGREEMENT TO BE ABLE TO WORK FORWARD. WASN'T YOU, BUT IT WAS YOUR LEADER ON THE OTHER SIDE WHO DECIDED NOT TO GO TO A MEETING AT THE WHITE HOUSE. YOU SAID WE SHOULD NOT WASTE OUR TIME ON THE FLOOR. WASN'T THIS SIDE, BUT WE DID TAKE UP TIME ON THIS FLOOR TO IMPEACH THE PRESIDENT. WE TOOK THAT TIME UP ON THE FLOOR. WE DIDN'T TAKE TIME UP FOR CHIP AND THE OTHERS. I DO REMEMBER THE QUOTE FROM MY FRIEND. WE DIFFER SOMETIMES FILL COULD HAVICALLY. -- PHILOSOPHICALLY. I ADMIRE PRINCIPLE. I WATCH YOU AND WHAT YOU HAVE STOOD FOR YEARS AND MAYBE YOUR PARTY HAS A DIFFERENT POSITION. YOU DON'T HIDE FROM IT. AND YOU VOTE THAT WAY. AND YOU WILL STAND AND OPPOSE ME BECAUSE OF WHAT YOU SAID IN THE PAST AND WHAT YOU SAID YOU WOULD DO. BUT THIS IS NOT SOMETHING NEW. YOU HAVE ALWAYS SAID FUNDING OUR GOVERNMENT IS NOT A GAME. WHEN ONE SIDE WINS AND THE OTHER SIDE LOSES, SHUTDOWN IS NOT A POLITICAL FOOTBALL TO BE TOSSED AROUND SO CASUALLY. I WAS PERSONALLY SHOCKED LAST WEEK. I WONDERED WHAT WOULD HAVE HAPPENED AS I WATCHED YOUR OPERATION WHIP PEOPLE TO A NO. AS WE WATCHED THE TIME CLICK, AS YOU WATCHED, YOU HELD THOSE WHO STOOD BY THE VOTING BOOTH WHO WANTED TO VOTE YES, BUT COULD NOT. HAD WE NOT GOTTEN ENOUGH VOTES TO KEEP GOVERNMENT OPEN, WHICH YOUR SIDE OF THE AISLE APPLAUDED, WHAT YOUR SIDE OF THE AISLE THOUGHT THEY WON. THERE WERE 90 MEMBERS ON THIS SIDE OF THE AISLE THAT DIDN'T VOTE FOR A C.R., BUT YOU, LIKE MYSELF, UNDERSTAND A C.R. IS USUALLY THE RESPONSIBILITY OF BOTH, BECAUSE IT'S BIPARTISAN. NO ONE IS GETTING ANYTHING AND NO ONE WANTS AN END TO THAT POSITION. WE DON'T WANT TO BE IN A C.R. THAT'S WHY WE CAME SO MANY TIMES TO YOU IN THE PAST WHEN IT COMES TO CHIP. I UNDERSTAND SOMETIMES PEOPLE CAN USE IT FOR POLITICS AND MAYBE PUSH IT TO THE END AND GET AN ADVANTAGE ON SOMETHING ELSE. WE WANTED AN AGREEMENT AND THAT'S WHY STAFF OF THE FOUR LEADERS HAVE BEEN MEETING. WHAT DO THEY DO NEXT? LET'S GO TO THE WHITE HOUSE BECAUSE THE WHITE HOUSE HAS BEEN IN THOSE MEETINGS AT THE SAME TIME BECAUSE THE PRESIDENT HAS TO SIGN THE BILL, THE SENATE, THE HOUSE AND LEADERS ON BOTH SIDES. BUT WHEN THAT MEETING CAME JUST A FEW SHORT WEEKS AGO, WOULDN'T SHOW UP. AND I TAKE YOU AT YOUR WORD THAT YOU ARE WILLING TO SIT DOWN. THE REST OF YOUR LEADERSHIP HAS TO BE WILLING TO SIT DOWN, TOO. BUT THIS IDEA THAT WE WANT TO HOLD GOVERNMENT HOSTAGE, SO MANY TIMES I HAVE HEARD YOU IN THE PAST SAY THAT WAS WRONG. YOU ASK ABOUT THE THINGS THAT HAVEN'T BEEN DONE. THE THING I LOVE THE MOST, I BELIEVE -- YOU HAVE TO BE HONEST. AND I'LL SHARE THEM WITH YOU, BECAUSE I WANT US TO BE JUDGED. I WANT US TO KNOW WHERE WE ARE AND NOT WHERE WE SAID WE ARE GOING TO BE, WE SHOULD WORK HARDER. I TOOK THE FIRST CONGRESS OF EVERY NEW CONGRESS. WHEN YOU READ THE "YOUNG GUNS" BOOK AND I DON'T WANT TO CAUSE ANY ETHIC ISSUES AND I DON'T GET ANY MONEY, I GIVE IT TO THE VETERANS -- I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S IN PRINT. BUT I WANT THE BILLS TO COME THROUGH COMMITTEE. THAT'S WHERE THE OPEN PUBLIC PROCESS IS AND THAT'S WHERE AMENDMENTS ARE WON OR LOST. MORE BILLS IN THE FIRST CONGRESS SINCE H.W. BUSH, HAVE GONE THROUGH COMMITTEE. LET'S MEASURE HOW MANY BILLS HAVE GOTTEN OFF THIS FLOOR. DO YOU REALIZE MORE BILLS HAVE BEEN PASSED OUT OF THIS CONGRESS THAN ANY CONGRESS IN THE FIRST TERM OF A PRESIDENT IN MODERN HISTORY BACK TO H.W. BUSH? AND WE DID IT BY GOING THROUGH A TRANSPARENT, OPEN PROCESS, EXACTLY WHAT WE PLEDGED WE WOULD DO IN THAT BOOK. SO YES, I'M GLAD YOU READ IT AND I'M GLAD YOU TOOK THE WORDS AND I WOULD LOVE TO SHOW YOU THE GRAPHS. LET'S WALK BACK TO THIS. GOVERNMENT FUNDING IS IMPORTANT. AND LET'S TALK ABOUT IT. HERE ARE THE FACTS. BY MID-JULY ALL 12 APPROPRIATION BILLS PASSED BOTH SUBCOMMITTEE AND FULL QUESTION. THAT WAS JULY. ON JULY 27TH, WE PASSED THE FOUR APPROPRIATION BILLS OFF THE HOUSE FLOOR, WHICH PROVIDED FOR CRITICAL NATIONAL SECURITY. NOW MY FRIEND AND NEARLY ALL THE DEMOCRATS, THEY VOTED NO. ON SEPTEMBER 14, WE PASSED THE REMAINING EIGHT APPROPRIATION BILLS OFF THIS FLOOR. NOW MY FRIEND AND NEARLY ALL THE DEMOCRATS VOTED NO. BUT THE MOST DISAPPOINTING VOTE AS I MENTIONED WAS LAST WEEK ON DECEMBER 7, TO FUND THE GOVERNMENT. MY FRIEND AND DEMOCRATS ALL VOTED NO. WHEN I WAS YOUNG AND I DIDN'T ALWAYS GET MY WAY, I WOULD GO TO MY PARENTS AND I WOULD COMPLAIN. BUT IT'S REALLY ODD THAT WE GOT TO THIS FLOOR IN A DIFFERENT NATURE THAT SOMEONE WOULD COMPLAIN ABOUT SOMETHING NOT GETTING DONE AND NEVER VOTING FOR ANYTHING. I LIKE MY FRIEND. I WANT MY FRIEND WHO FOR DECADES HAS TALKED ABOUT NOT TO PLAY GAMES WITH THE FUNDING OF GOVERNMENT. I DON'T KNOW WHERE YOU HAVE GONE, BUT I WANT YOU TO COME BACK. I THINK AMERICA NEEDS YOU BACK. THAT LEADERSHIP WILL BE IMPORTANT FOR BOTH SIDES. AND I WOULD TELL YOU, I WOULD HAVE BEEN DISAPPOINTED IN YOU IF I WATCHED YOU APPLAUD IF YOU WERE SUCCESSFUL IN SHUTTING DOWN GOVERNMENT, BECAUSE I KNOW THAT'S NOT THE MAN YOU ARE. I KNOW THAT'S NOT THE PERSON AND PRINCIPLES FOR WHAT YOU STAND FOR. AND YOU KNOW WHAT? ALL THOSE VOTES YOU GO BACK AND SAID THIS SIDE OF THE AISLE DIDN'T VOTE FOR, I STOOD AND VOTED FOR THOSE, BECAUSE LEADERSHIP IS DIFFERENT. WE DO TAKE VOTES THAT ARE TOUGHER THAN OTHERS. WE DO HAVE TO PUT POLITICS ASIDE. WE DO HAVE TO LOOK OUT FOR THE BEST OF THIS COUNTRY. IT MAY NOT BE THE MOOD OF THE POLITICS ON TV THAT MAYBE WANTS TO FIGHT MORE OR THROW ANOTHER MOTION ON THE FLOOR TO IMPEACH, BUT THERE IS A TIME THAT WE SHOULD RISE ABOVE. AND I THINK GOING INTO THE END OF THIS YEAR, WE SHOULD THINK ANEW AND ACT ANEW. I THINK AMERICA SHOULD NOT SEE A CHRISTMAS BECAUSE ONE SIDE OF THE AISLE WANTED TO SHUT IT DOWN. NOT FOR ANY OTHER REASON THEY VOTED NO ON ALL THE BILLS THAT WOULD HAVE KEPT IT OPEN. YOU HAD A CAUSE, YOU HAD A DESIRE AND IF YOU HAD A BIG DESIRE, YOU WOULD HAVE SHOWN UP TO THE MEETING TO ACTUALLY GET THE ANSWER. WE COULD HAVE A CAP DEAL. WE COULD BE DONE WITH IT. WE COULD MAKE SURE OUR MEN AND WOMEN GET THE RAISE THEY DESERVE AND WE COULD MAKE SURE THAT THOSE IN THEATER HAVE EVERY OPPORTUNITY TO BE ABLE TO CARRY OUT THEIR MISSION THAT WE ASKED THEM TO DO AND IN THE SAFEST MANNER POSSIBLE. THAT'S WHAT I WANT TO SEE. I YIELD BACK.

                        Show Full Text
                      • 12:24:07 PM

                        MR. HOYER

                        COME BACK, SHANE. MANY OF YOU AREN'T OLD ENOUGH TO REMEMBER THAT WONDERFUL…

                        COME BACK, SHANE. MANY OF YOU AREN'T OLD ENOUGH TO REMEMBER THAT WONDERFUL MONEY AS SHANE RODE OFF AND THE LITTLE BOY, COME BACK, SHANE. I HAVEN'T GONE ANYWHERE. DEMOCRATS HAVE NO ABILITY TO SHUT DOWN THE GOVERNMENT ON THE FLOOR OF THIS HOUSE. HEAR ME. WE DON'T HAVE THE VOTES TO SHUT DOWN GOVERNMENT. AND WE DON'T WANT TO SHUT DOWN GOVERNMENT. AND MAYBE THE LEADER ALSO WANTS THOSE 90 OF HIS -- HE'S NOT OUR LEADER, HE'S THE LEADER OF THE MA THE GENTLEMAN RESERVES THE BALANCE OF HIS TIME. PARTY AND 90 OF HIS PEOPLE DID NOT FOLLOW HIM. I PRESUME HE MUST BE MUCH MORE CONCERNED ABOUT THAT, WITH ALL DUE RESPECT, HE'S MY FRIEND, BUT NOT MY LEADER. AND WE VOTED TO GIVE 90 DAYS AND NOTHING WAS ACCOMPLISHED IN THAT 90 DAYS OTHER THAN WORK ON A TAX BILL THAT WE THINK IS A DISASTER FOR THIS COUNTRY. NOTHING. AND HE TALKS ABOUT PASSING THESE APPROPRIATION BILLS. WE KNEW THEY WOULDN'T PASS THE SENATE. AND WE TOLD HIM SO. AND WE SAID LET'S DO IT ON A BIPARTISAN BASIS. BUT NO, AND BY THE WAY, MR. SPEAKER, IT WAS THE LEAST REGULAR ORDER PRIOR TO AN OMNIBUS ON DEALING WITH APPROPRIATION BILLS THAN I HAVE EVER SEEN. THEY PACKAGED FOUR OR FIVE, AND THEN THE BALANCE OF EIGHT. WE DIDN'T CONSIDER THEM INDIVIDUALLY. WE DIDN'T HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO CONSIDER THOUGHTFULLY. NO, IT WAS ONE BIG PACKAGE. I SAID I READ THAT BOOK. IT WAS ANYTHING BUT REGULAR ORDER. BY THE WAY, MR. SPEAKER, THE MAJORITY PARTY THAT PASSED THEM IS THE MAJORITY IN THE UNITED STATES SENATE, AND NOT A SINGLE ONE OF THOSE BILLS, NOT A SINGLE ONE HAS PASSED OUT OF THE HOUSE -- EXCUSE ME, THE SENATE. NOT A SINGLE ONE HAS GONE TO THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES. NOT ONE. AND THE REPUBLICANS ARE IN CHARGE OF THE HOUSE AND THE SENATE. NOT A SINGLE BILL HAS GONE TO THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES. AND HARRY REED IS NOT THERE. NOW WHAT IT WOULD HAVE TAKEN TO PASS SOME OF THOSE APPROPRIATION BILLS IN THE SENATE IS SOME COMPROMISE. AND THAT DIDN'T HAPPEN. SO DON'T RING YOUR HANDS ABOUT HOW BAD IT IS THAT WE HAVEN'T HAD BIPARTISANSHIP ON THE APPROPRIATION BILLS. WE HAVEN'T. OR BIPARTISANSHIP ON THE C.R. WHEN YOU LOSE 90 OF YOUR PEOPLE. 90 REPUBLICANS VOTED AGAINST A SIMPLE C.R. YOU SAID SIMPLE C.R., NOTHING TO BE BIPARTISAN. 90 OF YOUR PEOPLE VOTED NO. I YIELD TO MY FRIEND.

                        Show Full Text
                      • 12:27:32 PM

                        MR. MCCARTHY

                        LET'S MAKE SURE WE ARE GROWING APPLES TO APPLES. THAT HAD A DEBT CEILING…

                        LET'S MAKE SURE WE ARE GROWING APPLES TO APPLES. THAT HAD A DEBT CEILING IN IT.

                        Show Full Text
                      • 12:27:41 PM

                        MR. HOYER

                        RECLAIMING MY TIME, DOES THAT MEAN 90 OF YOUR PEOPLE DID NOT WANT TO PAY…

                        RECLAIMING MY TIME, DOES THAT MEAN 90 OF YOUR PEOPLE DID NOT WANT TO PAY THE BILLS OF THE UNITED STATES AND DEFAULT ON OUR DEBT? AND I YIELD TO MY FRIEND.

                        Show Full Text
                      • 12:27:53 PM

                        MR. MCCARTHY

                        I THANK MY FRIEND FOR YIELDING. IF YOU ARE GOING TO COMPARE A C.R. THAT IS…

                        I THANK MY FRIEND FOR YIELDING. IF YOU ARE GOING TO COMPARE A C.R. THAT IS SIMPLE, IT'S NOT SIMPLE. IF YOU COMPARE IT TO THE C.R. YOU VOTED AGAINST THAT HAD NO DEBT CEILING ON IT. YOU EXPLAINED TO ME HOW MANY C.R.'S YOU VOTED IN THE PAST, HOW DEMOCRATS CAME OVER WITH REPUBLICANS, BECAUSE YOU KNOW WHAT? YOU AND I BOTH KNOW THAT'S HOW IT WORKS. BECAUSE A C.R. IS NOT AN ADVANTAGE FOR ONE OR THE OTHER. AND THIS IS WHAT I'M MOST UPSET WITH. OUR FOUNDING FATHERS CREATED A BODY THAT COULD HAVE COMPROMISE. BUT FOR SOME REASON IN TODAY'S SOCIETY, IT'S NOT JUST THAT YOU WANT ONE SIDE TO WIN, YOU WANT TO CRUSH THE OTHER SIDE. THAT'S ACTUALLY HURTING THE AMERICAN PUBLIC. SO IN A SITUATION THAT WE KNOW OF A CONTINUING RESOLUTION IS GOING TO BE SHORT-TERM, TWO WEEKS, YEAH, I WOULD EXPECT HALF OF THE VOTES TO COME FROM OUR SIDE AND HALF THE VOTES COME FROM OURS. THAT IS WHAT HAS HAPPENED IN THE PAST. I'M WONDERING WHERE THAT WENT.

                        Show Full Text
                      • 12:29:00 PM

                        MR. HOYER

                        RECLAIMING MY TIME. MR. LEADER, LET ME SAY TO YOU VERY RESPECTFULLY, DO…

                        RECLAIMING MY TIME. MR. LEADER, LET ME SAY TO YOU VERY RESPECTFULLY, DO NOT EXPECT COOPERATION FROM OUR SIDE IF WE DON'T GET COOPERATION FROM YOUR SIDE, IF WE DON'T GET SOME INCLUSION IN MAKING DECISIONS. WE ARE 194 MEMBERS OF THIS BODY. FROM TIME TO TIME, YOU AND I DO WORK TOGETHER AND WHEN WE WORK TOGETHER, WE GET MAJORITIES, WE PASS PIECES OF LEGISLATION. YOU HAVE NOT PASSED A SINGLE CONTROVERSIAL FISCAL BILL ON THIS BILL ON THIS FLOOR WITHOUT OUR SUBSTANTIAL HELP UNTIL LAST WEEK. YOU GOT 220 OR 230 ON THAT LAST BILL. BUT LET ME TELL YOU, THE REASON WE VOTED AGAINST IT BECAUSE WE KNEW WHAT WAS GOING TO HAPPEN, NOTHING. THERE WOULD BE NO AGREEMENT ON CHIP. THERE IS NO AGREEMENT ON CHIP. THERE WILL BE NO AGREEMENT ON FISA. THERE HAS BEEN NO AGREEMENT ON FACEA. THERE WOULD BE NO AGREEMENT ON FLOOD CONTROL. THERE HAS BEEN NO AGREEMENT ON FLOOD CONTROL. SO WE KNEW THAT WE WERE NOT GOING TO GET ANY BIPARTISAN BUY-IN SO ALL WE WERE DOING IS DELAYING THE INEVITABLE. YOU REMEMBER THE HOMELAND SECURITY BILL. . YOU SAID WE'RE GOING TO MEET TOMORROW AND WE REACHED AN AGREEMENT AND WE PASSED IT. VERY FRANKLY, YOU HAVE NEVER HEARD US SAY THAT AS A POLICY, IN ORDER TO GET THE A.C.A. REPEALED OR GINGRICH WANTED TO GET SOME FISCAL THING DONE, THAT WE WOULD SHUT DOWN THE GOVERNMENT, THREE TIMES YOU SHUT IT DOWN IN 1995 AND 1996, THREE TIMES. INTENTIONALLY. THAT WAS YOUR POLICY. AND, YES, IF YOU'RE GOING TO TAKE THE GOVERNMENT HOSTAGE AND FORCE US TO DO SOMETHING THAT WE THINK IS INIMICAL TO THE BEST INTEREST OF THIS COUNTRY, YES, MR. LEADER, YOU WILL LEAVE US WITH NO OTHER OPTION. TO PRETEND THAT WE'RE KEEPING GOVERNMENT MOVING, BUT NOT GETTING ANY AGREEMENT. I TALKED TO YOU VERY SINCERELY FOUR MONTHS AGO ABOUT ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE WANTED TO GET DONE BEFORE THE END OF THIS YEAR, WERE DREAMERS. PROTECTED. WHO ARE NOW VULNERABLE AND VERY SCARED. THAT THEY'RE GOING TO BE SENT BACK TO SOMEPLACE THEY DO NOT KNOW. HAVE NOT LIVED IN. BROUGHT HERE AS CHILDREN THROUGH NO FAULT OF THEIR OWN. GONE TO ELEMENTARY SCHOOL. JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL. HIGH SCHOOL. COLLEGE. SERVED IN THE MILITARY. WORKING AT JOBS. BEEN VETTED TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY HAVEN'T DONE ANYTHING WRONG. THEY'RE AFRAID OF BEING SENT BACK HOME. NOT BACK HOME. EXCUSE ME. I SAY THAT. THAT'S NOT THEIR HOME. THIS IS THEIR HOME. AND NOTHING'S BEEN DONE ON THAT. I KNOW YOU HAVE A TASK FORCE, TALKED ABOUT IT. BUT WE HAVEN'T DONE ANYTHING. THERE'S NO REASON WHY WE CAN'T. I THINK WE HAVE 300 VOTES ON THIS FLOOR TO GET THAT DONE.

                        Show Full Text
                      • 12:31:58 PM

                        MR. MCCARTHY

                        MAY I RESPOND?

                      • 12:32:00 PM

                        MR. HOYER

                        I YIELD TO MY FRIEND.

                      • 12:32:02 PM

                        MR. MCCARTHY

                        THE GENTLEMAN IS CORRECT. THERE ARE MANY TIMES WE'VE WORKED TOGETHER. FROM…

                        THE GENTLEMAN IS CORRECT. THERE ARE MANY TIMES WE'VE WORKED TOGETHER. FROM SANCTION FROM HOMELAND FROM OTHERS. WE -- FROM SANCTION, FROM HOMELAND, FROM OTHERS. WE WORK VERY WELL TOGETHER. BUT THE GENTLEMAN KNOWS, I CAME TO YOU ABOUT CHIP. WHEN THE COMMITTEE WAS DIRECTED ON YOUR SIDE OF THE AISLE NOT TO DO ANYTHING WITH THE MAJORITY PARTY. SO I CAME TO YOU. BECAUSE OF OUR HISTORY.

                        Show Full Text
                      • 12:32:30 PM

                        MR. HOYER

                        I DON'T KNOW WHO THE GENTLEMAN IS RELYING ON FOR THAT INFORMATION BUT I'LL…

                        I DON'T KNOW WHO THE GENTLEMAN IS RELYING ON FOR THAT INFORMATION BUT I'LL TELL YOU, I'VE TALKED TO MR. PALLONE. THAT IS NOT CORRECT. I DON'T KNOW WHO YOU THINK DIRECTED HIM NOT TO REACH AN AGREEMENT, BUT I WILL TELL YOU, AFTER YOU MADE THAT ASSERTION, I THINK LAST WEEK OR THE WEEK BEFORE, I WENT TO MR. PALLONE, I ASKED HIM THAT. HE SAID ABSOLUTELY NOT. I YIELD BACK.

                        Show Full Text
                      • 12:32:50 PM

                        MR. MCCARTHY

                        WELL --

                      • 12:32:53 PM

                        MR. HOYER

                        I YIELD TO MY FRIEND.

                      • 12:32:55 PM

                        MR. MCCARTHY

                        I CAME TO YOU. IT WAS UNDER MY IMPRESSION THAT A MEMBER CAME TO ME AND…

                        I CAME TO YOU. IT WAS UNDER MY IMPRESSION THAT A MEMBER CAME TO ME AND SAID THAT. MAYBE THAT'S NOT TRUE. BUT I SAID, YOU KNOW WHAT, LET'S GET TOGETHER AND LET'S WORK THIS OUT. I DON'T WANT TO MAKE CHIP PARTISAN IN ANY SHAPE OR FORM. AND WE MET AND WE TRIED TO WORK AND YOU CAME BACK TO ME AND SAID, YOU GOT TO GO IT ALONE. I SAID, THAT'S NOT HOW I WANT TO DO IT. SO WHAT WE DID WAS WE TOOK EVERYTHING WE HEARD FROM THE HEARINGS, I EVEN IN GOOD FAITH, THE CHAIRMAN OF THAT COMMITTEE, GREG WALDEN, STOPPED A MARKUP. IN THE HOPES, BECAUSE YOU REQUESTED, NOT YOU, BUT YOUR RANKING MEMBER, THAT THEY WEREN'T PREPARED, THAT THEY WANTED MORE TIME. SO WE WANT TO DO EVERYTHING IN OUR POWER. BUT AT THE END OF THE DAY YOU COULDN'T BE THERE. AND TWICE YOUR SIDE OF THE AISLE AND YOURSELF VOTED AGAINST CHIP. YOU CAN'T ARGUE AGAINST IT NOW. YOU VOTED AGAINST IT. AND WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT APPROPRIATIONS, I'M VERY PROUD WHAT HAVE WE DID ON APPROPRIATIONS. WE HAVEN'T BEEN ABLE TO DO THAT IN QUITE SOME TIME. BUT THERE WERE IN THOSE FIRST FOUR BILLS, EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THOSE 12 BILLS WENT THROUGH SUBCOMMITTEE AND FULL COMMITTEE. THERE WAS 126 AMENDMENTS IN THE FIRST FOUR. THERE WERE 342.

                        Show Full Text
                      • 12:34:09 PM

                        MR. HOYER

                        LET ME RECLAIM MY TIME AND THEN YIELD BACK TO YOU. IS THE GENTLEMAN PROUD…

                        LET ME RECLAIM MY TIME AND THEN YIELD BACK TO YOU. IS THE GENTLEMAN PROUD THAT YOU CONTROL THE HOUSE, YOU CONTROL THE SENATE, AND YOU HAVEN'T SENT A SINGLE APPROPRIATION BILL TO THE PRESIDENT? I YIELD.

                        Show Full Text
                      • 12:34:20 PM

                        MR. MCCARTHY

                        I THANK THE GENTLEMAN.

                      • 12:34:22 PM

                        MR. HOYER

                        NOT A SINGLE ONE. NOT ONE.

                      • 12:34:23 PM

                        MR. MCCARTHY

                        THAT'S WHY I WANT YOU TO JOIN WITH ME AND GET THE SENATE TO MOVE. AS THE…

                        THAT'S WHY I WANT YOU TO JOIN WITH ME AND GET THE SENATE TO MOVE. AS THE GENTLEMAN KNOWS, YOU DON'T CONTROL THE SENATE WHEN YOU HAVE 51 OR 52 MEMBERS. BECAUSE YOU KNOW WHAT HAPPENS? IT TAKES 60. I DON'T FIRMLY BELIEVE IN THAT. BUT THAT'S THE WAY THEY PLAY IT OVER IN THE SENATE. THAT IS WHY WHEN YOU DON'T HAVE A CAP AGREEMENT, THAT YOU NEED ALL FOUR LEADERS TO GO TO THE WHITE HOUSE, BUT WHEN THE TWO WON'T SHOW UP, THE BEST THING TO DO IS DON'T SHOW UP AND DON'T COMPLAIN. I DON'T HAVE AN AGREEMENT. THE BEST WAY TO COMPLAIN IS, GET ALL 12 VOTES, ALL 12 BILLS OFF THIS FLOOR, WITH THE SIMPLE MAJORITY. IF THAT'S GOOD ENOUGH FOR AMERICA INSIDE CONGRESS, IT SHOULD BE GOOD ENOUGH ON THE SENATE SIDE.

                        Show Full Text
                      • 12:35:03 PM

                        MR. HOYER

                        RECLAIMING MY TIME.

                      • 12:35:05 PM

                        MR. MCCARTHY

                        UNFORTUNATELY THAT'S NOT THE CASE. YOUR SIDE IS ABLE TO HOLD IT UP AND I'M…

                        UNFORTUNATELY THAT'S NOT THE CASE. YOUR SIDE IS ABLE TO HOLD IT UP AND I'M ASHAMED OF THAT AS WELL.

                        Show Full Text
                      • 12:35:10 PM

                        MR. HOYER

                        RECLAIMING MY TIME. WHAT IT WOULD HAVE MEANT, YOU WOULD HAVE HAD A…

                        RECLAIMING MY TIME. WHAT IT WOULD HAVE MEANT, YOU WOULD HAVE HAD A COMPROMISE. THAT'S WHY THE SENATE HAS THAT 60-VOTE RULE. I'M NOT CRAZY ABOUT IT MYSELF. BUT THAT'S WHY THEY HAVE THE 60-VOTE RULE. AND THEY THINK IT'S GOOD. BECAUSE THAT'S WHY THEY'VE KEPT IT. THEY THINK IT'S GOOD BECAUSE IT REQUIRES COMPROMISE. IT REQUIRES AGREEMENT. IT REQUIRES MOVING AHEAD ON A PIECE OF LEGISLATION. AND I WILL TELL YOU, I SERVED ON THE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE FOR 23 YEARS AND WE REACHED AGREEMENT BETWEEN REPUBLICANS AND DEMOCRATS ON ALMOST EVERY BILL. AND WHEN WE HAD THE BILLS, THEY WEREN'T PARTISAN BILLS. AND THEY GOT A LOT OF REPUBLICAN VOTES. ALMOST ALWAYS. WHEN WE WERE IN CHARGE. NOT ALL THE TIME. ALMOST ALWAYS. AND IF YOU ARE A PARTY ENOUGH COMPROMISE, YOU CAN'T MOVE THINGS IN THE UNITED STATES SENATE. I GET THAT. BUT THAT'S THE REASON. THAT'S THE REASON. BECAUSE YOU COULDN'T REACH COMPROMISE. NOW, VERY FRANKLY, A LOT OF THE BILLS HAVE COME OUT OF COMMITTEE. YOU KNOW WHY THEY CAME OUT OF COMMITTEE? BECAUSE THEY WERE BIPARTISAN. BUT THEY HAVEN'T BEEN BROUGHT TO THE FLOOR BY MR. MCCONNELL AND THEY HAVEN'T BEEN SENT TO THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES. SO, CROCODILE TEARS. AND YES, YOU PASSED THOSE 12 BILLS. JUST LIKE YOU CAN PASS THE C.R.'S. ON YOUR OWN. WITHOUT ANY HELP FROM US. AND IF THE GOVERNMENT SCHUTZ DOWN, IT IS BECAUSE YOU CAN'T GET -- SHUTS DOWN, IT IS BECAUSE YOU CAN'T GET THE MAJORITY OF YOUR PARTY TO PASS BILLS. YOU'RE IN CHARGE.

                        Show Full Text
                      • 12:36:42 PM

                        MR. MCCARTHY

                        I ASK THE GENTLEMAN TO YIELD.

                      • 12:36:44 PM

                        MR. HOYER

                        I STILL HAVE THE TIME. I'M GOING TO YIELD TO YOU. THERE IS NO DOUBT WHEN…

                        I STILL HAVE THE TIME. I'M GOING TO YIELD TO YOU. THERE IS NO DOUBT WHEN WE WERE IN CHARGE AND YOU DIDN'T SUPPORT US, WE PASSED EVERY PIECE OF LEGISLATION WE WANTED TO PASS ON THIS FLOOR WITH 218 DEMOCRATS. WE WERE UNITED AS A PARTY. WE LOST SOME. BUT NEVER ENOUGH TO MAKE IT THAT WE DIDN'T GET 218. YOU LOST 90. YOU COULD SAY IT WAS ON THE DEBT. YOU COULD SAY IT WAS ON NATIONAL SECURITY. YOU CAN SAY WHATEVER YOU WANT ON IT. YOU BROUGHT A BILL TO THE FLOOR AND 90 OF YOUR PEOPLE VOTED AGAINST IT. TO KEEP GOVERNMENT OPEN, TO KEEP GOVERNMENT OPERATING. AND VERY FRANKLY WE VOTED WITH YOU SO THAT WE COULD GET SOME WORK DONE. AND WE HAVEN'T GOTTEN WORK DONE. THAT'S WHAT FRUSTRATES US. THAT'S WHAT FRUSTRATES THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. AND I WILL TELL MY FRIEND, AT THE END OF THE DAY, AFTER THIS CONGRESS IS GONE, HISTORIANS ARE NOT GOING TO BE KIND. NOTWITHSTANDING THE FACT YOU SAY YOU PASSED SO MANY BILLS. YOU PASSED SO MANY BILLS ON A PARTISAN BASIS AND YOU USED ESSENTIALLY THE 51 VOTES BECAUSE YOU DIDN'T WANT TO COMPROMISE. WE GET IT. YOU DON'T WANT TO COMPROMISE. YOU DON'T WANT TO WORK WITH US. YOU DIDN'T HAVE ANY HEARINGS ON THIS TAX BILL. YOU DIDN'T -- WE WERE NOT INCLUDED IN ANY PHASE OF THE MARKING UP AND FASHIONING OF THIS TAX BILL. I'M ABOUT READY TO YIELD BACK THE BALANCE OF MY TIME. I'M SURE EVERYBODY WHO WANTS TO GIVE A ONE-MINUTE OR A SPECIAL ORDER IS VERY HAPPY TO HEAR THAT. BUT I'LL YIELD TO MY FRIEND.

                        Show Full Text
                      • 12:38:11 PM

                        MR. MCCARTHY

                        THANK YOU. THE GENTLEMAN IS CORRECT ABOUT COMPROMISE. BUT THERE IS A REAL…

                        THANK YOU. THE GENTLEMAN IS CORRECT ABOUT COMPROMISE. BUT THERE IS A REAL BIG DIFFERENCE BETWEEN COMPROMISE AND OBSTRUCTION.

                        Show Full Text
                      • 12:38:20 PM

                        MR. HOYER

                        AND WHAT?

                      • 12:38:22 PM

                        MR. MCCARTHY

                        TO OBSTRUCT. WHEN YOU TALKED ABOUT THE SENATE. IT TAKES 60 VOTES TO EVEN…

                        TO OBSTRUCT. WHEN YOU TALKED ABOUT THE SENATE. IT TAKES 60 VOTES TO EVEN GET ONTO A BILL. I KNOW AS WELL AS MY FRIEND THAT YOU CAN UTILIZE THE SENATE AND THE LEADERSHIP IN THE HOUSE TO STOP SOMETHING IF YOU WANT TO. AND I WILL TELL MY FRIEND THAT I AM DISAPPOINTED. WHAT WILL YOU SAY TO THE 62,000 ? WHAT WILL YOU SAY TO THE 62,000 FEDERAL EMPLOYEES WHO LIVE IN YOUR DISTRICT? WHAT WILL YOU SAY TO THEM THAT EVERY QUOTE YOU MADE IN THE PAST, THAT YOU SHOULD NOT PLAY GAMES WITH FUNDING AND SHUTTING DOWN THE GOVERNMENT, YOU MAY THINK YOU CAN MAKE THAT STATEMENT HERE, YOUR LEADER MAY THINK THAT SHE CAN SAY THAT ONLY THE PRESIDENT WAS TALKING ABOUT A SHUTDOWN. THE PRESIDENT WHIPPED ONE -- WHIPPED A VOTE TO STAY OPEN. HISTORY WON'T BE KIND. YES, WE WILL COME TO A CONCLUSION NEXT WEEK.

                        Show Full Text
                      • 12:39:23 PM

                        MR. HOYER

                        WILL THE GENTLEMAN YIELD?

                      • 12:39:25 PM

                        MR. MCCARTHY

                        EVERY TIME YOU ASK ABOUT A VOTE --

                      • 12:39:27 PM

                        MR. HOYER

                        WILL THE GENTLEMAN YIELD? RECLAIMING MY TIME. DOES THE GENTLEMAN REMEMBER…

                        WILL THE GENTLEMAN YIELD? RECLAIMING MY TIME. DOES THE GENTLEMAN REMEMBER PRESIDENT TRUMP SAYING A GOOD SHUTDOWN WILL BE GOOD FOR GOVERNMENT? DID YOU REMEMBER HIM SAYING THAT? WHEN YOU TELL ME ABOUT HOW HE'S BEEN DOWN HERE LOBBYING -- HE SAID, QUOTE, A GOOD SHUTDOWN MAY BE GOOD FOR GOVERNMENT. I DWREELED MY FRIEND.

                        Show Full Text
                      • 12:39:48 PM

                        MR. MCCARTHY

                        I THANK MY FRIEND FOR YIELDING. I UNDERSTAND WHAT HIS WORDS SAID. I ALSO…

                        I THANK MY FRIEND FOR YIELDING. I UNDERSTAND WHAT HIS WORDS SAID. I ALSO WATCHED HIS ACTIONS. I ALSO WATCHED WHAT HE DID LAST WEEK. TO GET MEMBERS TO VOTE TO KEEP IT OPEN BECAUSE YOU KNOW WHAT? THINGS DID CHANGE. THERE WAS NOT COMPROMISE. EVEN THOUGH THE BILL WAS A COMPROMISE. BECAUSE THERE WAS NO POISON PILL IN IT. MAYBE WE LOOK BACK, IF WE'RE GOING CARRY EVERYTHING OURSELVES, MAYBE WE SHOULD PUT SOMETHING IN. BUT IT WAS A COMPROMISE. BUT UNFORTUNATELY IT CHANGED OR THE -- ON THE OTHER SIDE. HE DECIDED -- YOU DECIDED NOW IS THE TIME TO SHUT THE GOVERNMENT DOWN. TRY TO MAKE BLAME TO SOMEBODY ELSE. THE AMERICAN PEOPLE WILL SEE THROUGH THAT. AND I WILL GUARANTEE THAT YOU 62,000 PEOPLE WHO WORK FOR THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT IN THE MARYLAND FIFTH DISTRICT WILL NOT TAKE AS AN ANSWER. -- TAKE THAT AS AN ANSWER. I YIELD BACK.

                        Show Full Text
                      • 12:40:38 PM

                        MR. HOYER

                        I THANK THE GENTLEMAN FOR YIELDING. MR. SPEAKER, I WOULD AGAIN REITERATE…

                        I THANK THE GENTLEMAN FOR YIELDING. MR. SPEAKER, I WOULD AGAIN REITERATE THE MAJORITY PARTY CAN DO WHATEVER IT WANTS ON THIS FLOOR. IT COULD HAVE KEPT GOVERNMENT OPEN, IT COULD HAVE KEPT POLICIES MOVING WITH ITS VOTES. TIME AFTER TIME AFTER TIME ON CRITICAL ISSUES CONFRONTING THIS COUNTRY, THEY COULDN'T COME UP WITH A MAJORITY. AS A MATTER OF FACT, ON ONE OCCASION MR. MCCARTHY WAS THE WHIP, MR. CANTOR WAS THE MAJORITY LEADER, MR. BOEHNER WAS THE SPEAKER. AND THEY OFFERED A BILL TO KEEP GOVERNMENT MOVING. THEY ONLY GOT 84 OF THEIR COLLEAGUES, APPROXIMATELY 1/3, 1/3 OF THEIR COLLEAGUES ON THEIR SIDE OF THE AISLE TO VOTE WITH THEM. I DON'T WANT TO HEAR ABOUT US SHUTTING DOWN GOVERNMENT. WE CAN'T SHUT DOWN GOVERNMENT. THEY'RE IN CHARGE. THE MAJORITY HAS THE VOTES. YOU CAN DO WHATEVER YOU WANT. WE GET IT. WE MAY NOT LIKE IT ANY MORE THAN YOU LIKED IT. BUT WE GET IT. BUT WE VOTED ON THE HOPE THAT WE WOULD GET SOME WORK DONE. WE HAVEN'T MOVED ANYPLACE EXCEPT ON THE TAX BILL. WHICH WE THINK IS BAD FOR THIS COUNTRY. IN THE LAST 90 DAYS SINCE WE PASSED -- AND WE PASSED, IT WOULD NOT HAVE PASSED WITHOUT US, THAT C.R. AND, YES, WE WILL NOT BE HELDS WHO TAFPBLGT AND, YES, WE WILL OPPOSE -- -- HOSTAGE. AND, YES, WE WILL OPPOSE WHAT WE THINK IS A VERY, VERY BAD TAX BILL AND WE THINK IS AN EFFORT TO AVOID GETTING THE WORK OF THIS HOUSE DONE. AND YIELD BACK THE BALANCE OF MY TIME.

                        Show Full Text
                      • 12:42:15 PM

                        Mr. McCarthy asked unanimous consent that when the House adjourns today, it adjourn to meet at 5:30 p.m. on December 15. Agreed to without objection.

                        • 12:42:24 PM

                          THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

                          THE CHAIR WOULD REMIND MEMBERS TO DIRECT THEIR REMARKS TO THE CHAIR. FOR…

                          THE CHAIR WOULD REMIND MEMBERS TO DIRECT THEIR REMARKS TO THE CHAIR. FOR WHAT PURPOSE DOES THE GENTLEMAN FROM CALIFORNIA, MR. MCCARTHY, SEEK RECOGNITION?

                          Show Full Text
                        • 12:42:32 PM

                          MR. MCCARTHY

                          MR. SPEAKER, I ASK UNANIMOUS CONSENT THAT WHEN THE HOUSE ADJOURNS TODAY IT…

                          MR. SPEAKER, I ASK UNANIMOUS CONSENT THAT WHEN THE HOUSE ADJOURNS TODAY IT ADJOURN TO MEET AT 5:30 P.M. TOMORROW. AND FURTHER, WHEN THE HOUSE ADJOURNS ON THAT DAY, IT ADJOURN TO MEET ON MONDAY, DECEMBER 18, 2017, WHEN IT SHALL CONVENE AT NOON FOR MORNING HOUR DEBATE AND 2:00 P.M. FOR LEGISLATIVE BUSINESS.

                          Show Full Text
                        • 12:42:50 PM

                          TEMPORE WITHOUT

                          WITHOUT OBJECTION, SO ORDERED. THE CHAIR WILL NOW ENTERTAIN REQUESTS FOR…

                          WITHOUT OBJECTION, SO ORDERED. THE CHAIR WILL NOW ENTERTAIN REQUESTS FOR ONE-MINUTE SPEECHES. FOR WHAT PURPOSE DOES THE GENTLEMAN FROM MONTANA SEEK RECOGNITION? WITHOUT OBJECTION, THE GENTLEMAN IS RECOGNIZED FOR ONE MINUTE.

                          Show Full Text
                      • 12:42:55 PM

                        Mr. McCarthy asked unanimous consent That, when the House adjourns on Friday, Dec. 15, 2017, it adjourn to meet at noon on Monday, Dec. 18, 2017 for Morning-Hour Debate and 2:00 p.m. for legislative business Agreed to without objection.

                      • 12:43:00 PM

                        ONE MINUTE SPEECHES

                        The House proceeded with further one minute speeches.

                        • 12:43:16 PM

                          MR. GIANFORTE

                          MR. SPEAKER, AMERICA LOST A HERO THIS WEEK AND I LOST A FRIEND. TIM FRABLE…

                          MR. SPEAKER, AMERICA LOST A HERO THIS WEEK AND I LOST A FRIEND. TIM FRABLE TRAINED AT MALSTROM AIR FORCE BASE IN MONTANA AND FLEW MISSIONS IN A P-51 OVER JAPAN DURING WORLD WAR II. DURING ONE MISSION, HE HAD TO DITCH IN THE PACIFIC AND HE AND A WINGMATE FLOATED FOR DAYS BEFORE BEING RESCUED. TIM WAS MY SCIENCE TEACHER IN JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL. HE TOLD HIS OCEAN RESCUE STORY IN A FIVE -- IN FIVE-MINUTE INSTALLMENTS AT THE END OF CLASS EACH DAY. BECAUSE OF HIS STORY TELLING, NO ONE MISSED CLASS. TIM LOVED MONTANA. IN 1976 HE BROUGHT ME AND 17 OTHER CLASSMATES FROM PENNSYLVANIA TO RED LODGE, TO HIKE IN THE BACK COUNTRY. WE HIKED BLACK CANYON LAKE, GRASSHOPPER GLACIER, FROZE TO DEATH PLATEAU, AND ANOTHER PLATEAU. TIM HAD TREMENDOUS IMPACT ON MANY LIVES IN HIS 93 YEARS. INCLUDING MY OWN. I'LL ALWAYS BE GRATEFUL FOR HIS SERVICE TO OUR COUNTRY AND FOR HIS DEDICATION AS A TEACHER. I WILL MISS MY FRIEND, TIM FRABLE. THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. WITH THAT, I YIELD BACK.

                          Show Full Text
                        • 12:44:36 PM

                          THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

                          FOR WHAT PURPOSE DOES THE GENTLEWOMAN FROM CALIFORNIA SEEK RECOGNITION?…

                          FOR WHAT PURPOSE DOES THE GENTLEWOMAN FROM CALIFORNIA SEEK RECOGNITION? WITHOUT OBJECTION, THE GENTLEWOMAN IS RECOGNIZED.

                          Show Full Text
                        • 12:44:46 PM

                          MS. PELOSI

                          THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. MR. SPEAKER, IT IS WITH PROFOUND SORROW THAT I…

                          THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. MR. SPEAKER, IT IS WITH PROFOUND SORROW THAT I RISE TO PAY TRIBUTE TO A DEAR FRIEND AND AN EXTRAORDINARY LEADER, MAYOR ED LEE, MAYOR OF SAN FRANCISCO. ALL WHO KNEW MAYOR LEE UNDERSTOOD HIM TO BE A TRUE GENTLEMAN OF GREAT WARMTH, POSITIVITY AND KINDNESS. HIS PASSING IS NOT ONLY A TRAGIC LOSS, OFFICIAL LOSS, FOR OUR CITY, BUT ALSO AN IMMENSE PERSONAL LOSS FOR ALL WHO WERE FORTUNATE ENOUGH TO CALL HIM FRIEND. MAYOR LEE'S FIRST PRIORITY WAS ALWAYS THE PEOPLE. LEE'S STRONG MORALE COMPASS WAS ROOTED IN HIS IDENTITY AS A HARDWORKING SON OF AN IMMIGRANT FAMILY OF MODEST MEANS AND WAS GUIDED BY HIS YEARS AS A COMMUNITY ORGANIZER AND CIVIL RIGHTS LAWYER. ED LEE FUNDAMENTALLY UNDERSTOOD THE STRENGTH OF A COMMUNITY IS MEASURED BY ITS SUCCESS IN MEETING THE NEEDS OF ALL OF ITS PEOPLE. HE KNEW THE RHYTHMS AND WORKINGS OF SAN FRANCISCO AT THE MOST GRAND LAR LEVEL AND DEDICATED DECADES TO IMPROVING THE LIVES OF SAN FRANCISCO. AS MAYOR LEE SERVED WITH EXCEPTIONAL DIGNITY AND GREAT EFFECTIVENESS, HIS LEADERSHIP HELPED DRIVE THE CITY INTO A STRONG ECONOMIC EXPANSION. HIS FIRM COMMITMENT TO EQUALITY MADE PROGRESS FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND A LIVING WAGE FOR ALL. HIS UNWAVERING BELIEF IN JUSTICE HELPED COMBAT HOMELESSNESS IN SAN FRANCISCO, PARTICULARLY FOR OUR VETERANS. AND HIS BOLD HOPEFUL VISION FOR THE FUTURE FURTHER SECURED SAN FRANCISCO'S ROLE AS A MODEL CITY FOR THE NATION. MAYOR HE HAS A LEGACY THAT SAN FRANCISCO WILL ENY. THE PEOPLE WILL TELL OF HIS WISDOM AND THE CONGREGATION WILL SING HIS PRAISE. HE NEVER HAD AN UNKIND WORD FOR ANYONE AND NO ONE EVER HAD AN UNKIND WORD FOR HIM. WE THINK OF THE PERSON THAT ED LEE WAS AND WE SMILE. HE TOOK GREAT PRIDE SERVING AS THE FIRST AMERICAN-ASIAN MAYOR. THE CITY OWES A DEBT OF GRATITUDE TO HIS WIFE AND HIS TWO DAUGHTERS FOR SHARING THIS EXCEPTIONAL PERSON WITH US. MAY DEEPEST LOVE AND PRAYERS ARE WITH HIS FAMILY AND SO MANY PEOPLE THROUGHOUT THE WORLD MOURN WITH THEM AND CONTINUE TO BE INSPIRED BY HIM. AND I'M PLEASED IN OUR CONGRESSIONAL RECORD STATEMENT WE ARE JOINED BY SO MANY MEMBERS OF CONGRESS FROM THE CALIFORNIA DELEGATION AND FROM THE ASIAN-PACIFIC CAUCUS AS WELL. I THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER.

                          Show Full Text
                        • 12:47:26 PM

                          THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPOR

                          FOR WHAT PURPOSE DOES THE GENTLEMAN FROM FLORIDA SEEK RECOGNITION?

                        • 12:47:30 PM

                          >>

                          PERMISSION TO ADDRESS THE HOUSE FOR ONE MINUTE AND REVISE AND EXTEND MY…

                          PERMISSION TO ADDRESS THE HOUSE FOR ONE MINUTE AND REVISE AND EXTEND MY REMARKS.

                          Show Full Text
                        • 12:47:36 PM

                          THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

                          WITHOUT OBJECTION.

                        • 12:47:37 PM

                          >>

                          WITHOUT OBJECTION.

                        • 12:48:35 PM

                          THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

                          FOR WHAT PURPOSE DOES THE GENTLEMAN FROM NEW JERSEY SEEK RECOGNITION?

                        • 12:48:38 PM

                          >>

                          ASK UNANIMOUS CONSENT TO ADDRESS THE HOUSE FOR ONE MINUTE AND REVISE AND…

                          ASK UNANIMOUS CONSENT TO ADDRESS THE HOUSE FOR ONE MINUTE AND REVISE AND EXTEND.

                          Show Full Text
                        • 12:48:42 PM

                          THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

                          WITHOUT OBJECTION. THE GENTLEMAN IS RECOGNIZED FOR ONE MINUTE.

                        • 12:48:57 PM

                          MR. PAYNE

                          MR. SPEAKER, CHILDREN'S HEALTH IS NOT A PARTISAN ISSUE, EAS A HUMAN ISSUE.…

                          MR. SPEAKER, CHILDREN'S HEALTH IS NOT A PARTISAN ISSUE, EAS A HUMAN ISSUE. NFERTLGS THE MAJORITY PARTY LET THE CHILDREN'S HEALTH INSURANCE PROGRAM EXPIRE MONTHS AGO. AS A RESULT, STATES ACROSS THE COUNTRY ARE GOING TO BE FORCED TO TERMINATE MILLIONS OF UNDERSERVED CHILDREN'S ONLY LIFELINE TO A DOCTOR. RATHER THAN WORKING WITH DEMOCRATS, THE REPUBLICAN LEADERSHIP PASSED A BILL THAT WOULD EXTEND CHIP, BUT STRIP HEALTH COVERAGE FROM AS MANY AS 668,000 AMERICAN CHILDREN. PARTISANSHIP HAS POISONNED THIS WELL. MR. SPEAKER, NEARLY 231,000 CHILDREN IN NEW JERSEY RELY ON CHIP TO GET THEM TO THE DOCTOR. MANY MORE PEOPLE IN MY STATE RELY ON COMMUNITY HEALTH CENTERS, MEDICARE AND THE AFFORDABLE CARE ACT PREVENTION FUND TO STAY HEALTHY. CONGRESS MUST PROTECT THESE PROGRAMS. I URGE MY COLLEAGUES TO PASS A BILL BEFORE THE END OF THE YEAR TO EXTEND THE FUNDING FOR THESE CRITICALLY IMPORTANT HEALTH CARE PROGRAMS INCLUDING CHIP AND COMMUNITY HEALTH CENTERS WITHOUT TAKING HEALTH CARE AWAY FROM MORE THAN HALF A MILLION AMERICANS. AND I YIELD BACK.

                          Show Full Text
                        • 12:50:19 PM

                          THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

                          FOR WHAT PURPOSE DOES THE GENTLEMAN FROM IOWA SEEK RECOGNITION?

                        • 12:50:23 PM

                          >>

                          ASK UNANIMOUS CONSENT TO ADDRESS THE HOUSE FOR ONE MINUTE AND REVISE AND…

                          ASK UNANIMOUS CONSENT TO ADDRESS THE HOUSE FOR ONE MINUTE AND REVISE AND EXTEND MY REMARKS.

                          Show Full Text
                        • 12:50:29 PM

                          THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

                          WITHOUT OBJECTION.

                        • 12:50:32 PM

                          >>

                          MR. SPEAKER, I RISE TODAY TO CALL ON MY COLLEAGUES IN CONGRESS TO QUICKLY…

                          MR. SPEAKER, I RISE TODAY TO CALL ON MY COLLEAGUES IN CONGRESS TO QUICKLY PASS A FIVE-YEAR EXTENSION OF THE CHILDREN'S HEALTH INSURANCE PROGRAM. IN IOWA, 85,000 CHILDREN RELY ON CHIP FOR THEIR HEALTH. THIS IS VERY IMPORTANT TO SO MANY FAMILIES IN OUR 3RD DISTRICT. I'M GRATEFUL A SHORT-TERM SOLUTION WAS INCLUDED AS PART OF THE CONTINUING RESOLUTION PASSED LAST WEEK. ON NOVEMBER 3, THE HOUSE PASSED FUNDING TO PASS CHIP WITH EVERY IOWA REPRESENTATIVE. HOWEVER SINCE THAT TIME, WE HAVE BEEN WAITING FOR OUR COLLEAGUES IN THE SENATE TO ACT. THEY NEED TO ACT NOW. WE MUST WORK TOGETHER TO FUND THIS BIPARTISAN PROGRAM. THE HEALTH OF OUR CHILDREN IS AT STAKE. CHILDREN OF LOW AND MIDDLE INCOME FAMILIES WILL BE HIT THE HARDEST IF WE DO NOT FULLY FUND CHIP. IF FAMILIES ARE LEFT WITHOUT COVERAGE AND ACCESS TO NEEDED MEDICAL COVERAGE TO OUR CHILDREN, WE MUST ACT. I URGE MY COLLEAGUES TO INCLUDE AN EXTENSION FOR CHIP AND THE IMPORTANT BILLS THAT WE ARE CONSIDERING IN THE WEEKS AHEAD BECAUSE FAMILIES SHOULDN'T BE WORRIED ABOUT LOSING COVERAGE FOR THEIR CHILDREN. AS CONGRESS WORKS ON THE MOST IMPORTANT ISSUES FACING OUR COUNTRY, I AND OTHER COLLEAGUES WILL CONTINUE TO SUPPORT THIS. I YIELD BACK.

                          Show Full Text
                        • 12:51:58 PM

                          THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

                          FOR WHAT PURPOSE DOES THE GENTLEMAN FROM ILLINOIS SEEK RECOGNITION?

                        • 12:52:02 PM

                          >>

                          ADDRESS THE HOUSE FOR ONE MINUTE AND REVISE AND EXTEND MY REMARKS.

                        • 12:52:07 PM

                          THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

                          WITHOUT OBJECTION.

                        • 12:52:09 PM

                          >>

                          TIMOTHY BRADFORD PASSED AWAY LAST WEEK.

                        • 12:52:15 PM

                          MR. DAVIS

                          HE WAS A COMMISSIONER OF THE COOK COUNTY METROPOLITAN WATER RECLAMATION…

                          HE WAS A COMMISSIONER OF THE COOK COUNTY METROPOLITAN WATER RECLAMATION DISTRICT BUT MUCH MORE THAN THAT. TIM GREW UP ON THE WEST SIDE OF THE CITY OF CHICAGO AND MOVED TO THE SOUTH SUBURBS AND BECAME KNOWN AS THE GODFATHER OF POLITICS IN SOUTH SUBURBAN COOK COUNTY. HE WAS IN LOVE WITH EVERYBODY HE MET, INVOLVED IN EVERYTHING THAT EXISTED, AND I EXPRESS CONDOLENCES TO HIS WIFE AND FAMILY ON HIS PASSING. AND I YIELD BACK THE BALANCE OF MY TIME.

                          Show Full Text
                        • 12:52:53 PM

                          THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

                          FOR WHAT PURPOSE DOES THE GENTLEMAN FROM TEXAS SEEK RECOGNITION?

                        • 12:52:55 PM

                          >>

                          PERMISSION TO ADDRESS THE HOUSE FOR ONE MINUTE AND REVISE AND EXTEND.

                        • 12:53:00 PM

                          THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

                          WITHOUT OBJECTION. THE GENTLEMAN IS RECOGNIZED FOR ONE MINUTE.

                        • 12:53:04 PM

                          MR. SMITH

                          THE LIBERAL MEDIA HELP ELECT A U.S. SENATOR FROM ALABAMA. THEIR ALLIANCE…

                          THE LIBERAL MEDIA HELP ELECT A U.S. SENATOR FROM ALABAMA. THEIR ALLIANCE WITH THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY IS NOW SO CLOSE, WE SHOULD CALL THEM MEDIACRATS. THEY GOT AN ASSIST FROM SOME REPUBLICANS AS WELL AS THE CANDIDATE HIMSELF. THE PRIMARY LESSON TO BE LEARNED FROM THE ELECTION IS THAT REPUBLICANS MUST CONFRONT MEDIA BIAS. THEY MUST CONSTANTLY POINT IT OUT AND REMIND THE AMERICAN PEOPLE OF ITS COULD ROSE I HAVE EFFECT ON OUR ELECTION PROCESS. REPUBLICANS SHOULD JOIN THE PRESIDENT IN EXPOSING FAKE NEWS. THE MEDIA SHOULD TRUST THE AMERICAN PEOPLE WITH THE FACTS, NOT TELL THEM WHAT TO THINK. BECAUSE THE MEDIA ARE SO BIASED, THE CREDIBILITY WITH THE AMERICAN PEOPLE IS AT AN ALL-TIME LOW. FOR THE SAKE OF OUR COUNTRY AND SAKE OF FAIR ELECTIONS, I HOPE THE MEDIA WILL RETURN TO THEIR PARAMOUNT RESPONSIBILITY PROVIDING THE AMERICAN PEOPLE WITH UNBIASED NEWS.

                          Show Full Text
                        • 12:54:07 PM

                          THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

                          FOR WHAT PURPOSE DOES THE GENTLEMAN FROM CALIFORNIA SEEK RECOGNITION?

                        • 12:54:11 PM

                          >>

                          PERMISSION TO ADDRESS THE HOUSE FOR ONE MINUTE AND REVISE AND EXTEND.

                        • 12:54:17 PM

                          THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

                          WITHOUT OBJECTION. THE GENTLEMAN IS RECOGNIZED FOR ONE MINUTE.

                        • 12:54:28 PM

                          >>

                          DONALD TRUMP CLAIMS HE HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH RUSSIA BUT WE HAVE SEEN…

                          DONALD TRUMP CLAIMS HE HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH RUSSIA BUT WE HAVE SEEN SECRET MEETINGS, BUSINESS AND FINANCIALENING TANGLEMENTS AND ELABORATE ATTEMPTS TO CONCEAL INFORMATION. IN ANY OTHER ERA THESE WOULD BE BOMBSHELL. BUT OUR MEDIA CYCLE BY TRUMP'S INFUSION OF DRAMA MAKES IT HARD TO CONNECT THE DOTS. THERE IS SO MUCH, IT MAKES YOUR HEAD SPIN. TODAY I'M BEGINNING A MOMENT OF TRUTH SERIES OF SPEECHES TO POINT OUT FACTS THAT SHOW AN ADMINISTRATION THAT IS COMPROMISED, THAT NOT ONLY COL LEWDED WITH RUSSIA AND KEEP US FROM KNOWING THE TRUTH. ONE OF THE SMOKING GUNS WHEN TRUMP'S ASSOCIATE WAS SEEKING FINANCING FROM A RUSSIAN BANK FACING AMERICAN SANCTIONS TO BUILD A TRUMP TOWER IN MOSCOW. THIS EMAIL FROM SAIDER TO TRUMP'S PERSONAL ATTORNEY. WE'LL GET DONALD ELECTED. THERE IS A LOT MORE TO COME, MR. SPEAKER. BUT FOR NOW, I YIELD BACK.

                          Show Full Text
                        • 12:55:42 PM

                          THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

                          IN PERSONALITIES TOWARDS THE PRESIDENT. FURTHER ONE-MINUTES?

                        • 12:55:54 PM

                          >>

                          PERMISSION TO ADDRESS THE HOUSE FOR ONE MINUTE.

                        • 12:55:58 PM

                          THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

                          WITHOUT OBJECTION. THE GENTLEWOMAN IS RECOGNIZED FOR ONE MINUTE.

                        • 12:56:05 PM

                          >>

                          MR. SPEAKER --

                        • 12:56:07 PM

                          MS. JACKSON LEE

                          OF THE SANDY HOOK ELEMENTARY SCHOOL SHOOTING WHICH TOOK THE LIBES OF 20…

                          OF THE SANDY HOOK ELEMENTARY SCHOOL SHOOTING WHICH TOOK THE LIBES OF 20 INNOCENT CHILDREN AND SIX BRAVE EDUCATORS. LAST NIGHT, I STOOD ON THE FLOOR OF THE HOUSE AND INDICATED HOW BREATHLESS I FELT WHEN THE NEWS CAME IN. ONE CHILD, TWO CHILDREN, THREE, FOUR, FIVE, SIX, SEVEN, EIGHT, NINE, 10. 11, 123, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18 AND 20 CHILDREN AND THE MOTHER OF PERPETRATOR. AND I RISE TODAY TO JOIN IN THE CALL FOR ACTS OF KINDNESS. TOMORROW I WILL BE GIVING OUT BOOKS AT THE AN A ELEMENTARY SCHOOL AND GIVING OUT SHOES. I HOPE WE UNDERSTAND THAT IT'S NOT ABOUT GUNS, PEOPLE KILL. GUNS KILL. I WOULD ASK THAT WE HAVE REAL GUN SAFETY LEGISLATION. AT THE SAME TIME, I HOPE AS WE LOOK TOWARD THE NEEDS OF OUR NATION, THE CHILDREN'S HEALTH INSURANCE PROGRAM AND THOSE WHO ARE SUFFERING FROM HURRICANES WILL BE PART OF OUR KINDNESS. BUT I TAKE A MOMENT FOR THESE CHILDREN. AMEN. I THANK YOU FOR ALLOWING ME TO HONOR THE SANDY HOOK CHILDREN AND THE BRAVE ADULTS THAT TRIED TO SAVE THEIR LIVES. MAY GOD BLESS THEM ALL. I YIELD BACK.

                          Show Full Text
                        • 12:57:47 PM

                          THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

                          ARE THERE ANY FURTHER ONE-MINUTE REQUESTS? UNDER THE SPEAKER'S ANNOYANCED…

                          ARE THERE ANY FURTHER ONE-MINUTE REQUESTS? UNDER THE SPEAKER'S ANNOYANCED POLICY OF JANUARY 3, 2017, THE GENTLEMAN FROM VIRGINIA, MR. GARRETT, IS RECOGNIZED FOR 60 MINUTES AS THE DESIGNEE OF THE MAJORITY LEADER. GARTH ZPWART 47 YEARS AGO --

                          Show Full Text
                      • 12:57:58 PM

                        SPECIAL ORDER SPEECHES

                        The House has concluded all anticipated legislative business and has proceeded to Special Order speeches.

                        • 12:58:18 PM

                          MR. GARRETT

                          47 YEARS AGO AUGUST 11, BABY BOY WAS BORN NAMED BRIAN TERRY. 18 YEARS…

                          47 YEARS AGO AUGUST 11, BABY BOY WAS BORN NAMED BRIAN TERRY. 18 YEARS AFTER THAT, BRIAN MADE A COMMITMENT TO SERVE HIS COUNTRY BY ENLISTING IN THE UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS WHERE HE SERVED THREE YEARS HONORABLY INCLUDING A TOUR OF DUTY IN HARM'S WAY IN IRAQ. DISCHARGED FROM THE MARINE CORPS HONORABLY IN 1994, PRY AND TERRY FOLLOWED HIS CALLING TO SERVE BY BECOMING A POLICE OFFICER. AND THEN MADE ANOTHER COMMITMENT AGAIN NOT TO SERVE OUR COMMUNITY BUT IN OUR NATION IN 2007 HE JOINED THE CUSTOMS AND BORDER PATROL. BUT THIS WASN'T GOOD ENOUGH AS HIS MOTHER SAID HE WAS A STRONG DEFENDER. HE JOINED THE ELITE TACTICAL TEAM. SEVEN YEARS AGO, HE WAS TASKED WITH PURSUING AND APPREHENDING A RIP CREW. THIS RIP CREW IS ALLEGED TO HAVE BEEN AFFILIATED WITH THE DRUG CARTELS AND WHAT THEY DID WAS EXPLOIT THOSE WHO TOOK ADVANTAGE OF THE UNWILLINGNESS OF THOSE IN LEADERSHIP IN THIS COUNTRY TO PERFORM THAT BASIC PRINCIPLED RESPONSIBILITY WHICH IS TO SECURE OUR BORDERS. THE RIP CREW WOULD ROB DRUG MULES AS THEY CARRIED DRUGS ACROSS THE BORDERS BUT THEY WOULD DETAIN AND SHAKE DOWN THOSE WHO SNUCK THROUGH OUR POUROUS BORDERS. THIS RIP CREW HAD WEAPONS AND USED THOSE WEAPONS TO ROB AND TERRORIZE AND EXPLOIT IN THE WORST POSSIBLE WAYS PEOPLE WHO WERE INVITED HERE. SEVEN YEARS AGO TODAY BRIAN TERRY AND THREE OF HIS COLLEAGUES SET OUT NOT JUST TO PROTECT OUR BORDER BUT TO PROTECT INNOCENT PEOPLE WHO CAME WITH THEIR ENTIRE LIFE SAVINGS BECAUSE WE CHOSE TO LEAVE THAT BORDER POUROUS. . . H.R. 4433 IS CALLED SCURING D.H.S. FIREARMS ACT OF 2017. WE LEARNED DURING TESTIMONY ON THIS BILL THAT IN A TWO-YEAR PERIOD, ROUGHLY 200, JUST OVER 2 HUB FIREARMS WERE STOLEN FROM PEOPLE WHO WORKED FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY. OR LOST. AT LEAST ONE PERSON WAS KILLED BY THESE FIREARMS. AND I WOULD CONCUR THAT THAT IS UNACCEPTABLE. I CERTAINLY SUPPORT THE BILL. BUT HAVING SERVED IN THE UNITED STATES ARMY AS A LEADER OF SOLDIERS ON DEPLOYMENT, ALL OF WHOM WERE ISSUED AT LEAST ONE WEAPON, I WONDER IF IT LITERALLY REQUIRES AN ACT OF CONGRESS TO SUGGEST THAT D.H.S. PROMULGATE REGULATIONS TO OVERSEE THE LOSS OR THEFT OF D.H.S.-SUPPLIED WEAPONS. YES. OVER 200 WEAPONS IS HORRIBLE. YES, ONE LIFE LOST IS HORRIBLE. BUT SHOULD THERE BE AN ACT OF CONGRESS? BECAUSE AS I RECALL, AS A LEADER IN THE ARMY WHILE DEPLOYED OVERSEAS, WE HAD PROTOCOL FOR DEALING WITH LOST WEAPONS, WITH LOST SENSE OF ITEM, WITH LOST THINGS. WE DIDN'T NEED AN ACT OF CONGRESS TO TELL US TO PROMULGATE IT. SO WHILE I SUPPORT THIS BILL, IT BEGAN TO MAKE ME WONDER, AND THEN THINK OF A BIBLE VERSE, MATTHEW. WHY DO YOU LOOK AT THE SPECK OF SAW DUST IN YOUR BROTHER'S EYE AND PAY NO ATTENTION TO THE PLANK IN YOUR OWN? SO, CERTAINLY IT'S UNACCEPTABLE THAT OVER 200 WEAPONS SHOULD BE LOST OR STOLEN FROM D.H.S. EMPLOYEES IN A PERIOD OF TWO YEARS. BUT IT IS QUITE LITERALLY 1/10 OF THE SCALE OF THE WEAPONRY THAT OUR GOVERNMENT INTENTIONALLY PUT INTO THE STREAM OF COMMERCE TO BE USED BY THOSE WHO WOULD VISIT HARM, NOT ONLY ON THEIR NEIGHBORS AND FAMILY MEMBERS SOUTH OF OUR BORDER, BUT RIGHT HERE ON OUR OWN SOIL. SO WEAPONS LIKE THIS, TO THE QUANTITY OF OVER 200, WERE LOST OR STOLEN FROM MEMBERS OF D.H.S.. MEANWHILE SEVEN YEARS AGO WEAPONS LIKE THIS WERE PUT INTO THE STREAM OF COMMERCE BY OUR VERY GOVERNMENT. WEAPONS LIKE THIS TOOK THE LIVES OF AT LEAST ONE PERSON. WEAPONS LIKE THIS PUT INTO THE STREAM OF COMMERCE BY OUR VERY GOVERNMENT HAVE TAKEN AT THE VERY LEAST 70 TIMES AS MANY LIVES. AND YESTERDAY THE COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY PROMULGATED A BILL, AN ACT OF CONGRESS, TO ADDRESS 200 AND SOME WEAPONS LIKE THIS THAT HAVE COST AT LEAST ONE HUMAN LIFE. AND SEVEN YEARS AFTER BRIAN TERRY SET OUT ON PATROL THAT FATEFUL NIGHT IN ARIZONA, DAYS BEFORE HE WAS TO FLY HOME TO MICHIGAN TO SEE HIS FAMILY FOR CHRISTMAS, NOBODY'S TALKING ABOUT THE WEAPONS LIKE THIS THAT OUR GOVERNMENT INTENTIONALLY PLACED INTO THE STREAM OF COMMERCE, WHERE WE KNEW TO A MET PHYSICAL CERTAINTY THEY WOULD GO TO THOSE WHO WOULD DO HARM TO THEIR NEIGHBORS AND THEIR FAMILIES AND AMERICANS. SEVEN YEARS ON WE'VE SEEN JUSTICE TO THE KILLERS OF BRIAN TERRY. THEY'VE BEEN ARRESTED. THE FIRST MAN ARRESTED FOR HAVING SHOT MR. TERRY IN THE BACK WITH A MILITARY-STYLE RIFLE, LEAVING HIM TO BLEED TO DEATH ON THE MEDICAL CHOPPER THAT FLEW HIM OUT IN AN EFFORT TO SAVE HIS LIFE, HAD, I THINK, IRONICALLY ALREADY BEEN DEPORTED FROM THIS COUNTRY SEVEN TIMES. THE NIGHT THAT BRIAN TERRY SET OUT TO PROTECT NOT ONLY THE BORDERS OF THIS NATION, BUT THE PEOPLE WHO SEEK TO ENTER IT, BECAUSE WE WILL NOT UPHOLD OUR RESPONSIBILITY, THE MAN WHO KILLED HIM WAS ABOUT ROBBING THE VERY PEOPLE WHO WERE COMING HERE BECAUSE WE ALLOWED IT BY NOT DOING OUR JOBS. AND HE'D ALREADY BEEN DEPORTED SEVEN TIMES. NOW, WE KNOW THAT CLOSE TO 70 PEOPLE HAVE DIED BECAUSE WE INTENTIONALLY AS A NATION PUT INTO THE STREAM OF COMMERCE MILITARY-STYLE WEAPONS. IN FACT, WE'VE LOST TRACK OF OVER 1,400 OF THE OVER 2,000 WEAPONS THAT THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION THOUGHT IT WOULD BE A GOOD IDEA TO INTENTIONALLY LET GO TO MEXICO. THE WEAPON PICTURED NEXT TO ME IS A BARRETT M-82.50 CALIBER ANTI-PERSONNEL AND MATERIAL RIFLE. THERE ARE MEMBERS OF THIS BODY WHO HAVE SPOKEN ON HOW THIS WEAPON SHOULD BE ILLEGAL. BECAUSE CONCEIVABLY IT CAN TAKE DOWN AN AIRPLANE. WHY DO I DIGRESS? BECAUSE THAT WEAPON WAS RECOVERED IN A HIDEOUT KNOWN TO BE USED BY THE MOST NOTORIOUS MURDERER IN NORTH AMERICA IN THE LAST 100 YEARS, EL CHAPO GUZMAN. THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT WATCHED WHILE A WEAPON THAT SOME MEMBERS OF THIS BODY WOULD SUGGEST CAN TAKE DOWN AN AIRPLANE WAS TRAFFICED TO A MAN WHO WAS TRAFFICED IN DEATH TO THE POINT WHERE THE NEXT SLIDE I SHOW WILL BLOW ANY THINKING PERSON'S MINDS. MANY, MANY OF THE 160,000, ROUGHLY, DEATHS OF CIVILIANS IN MEXICO CAN BE TRACED DIRECTLY BACK TO THIS MAN. AND WE KNOW BECAUSE IT WAS RECOVERED THAT AT LEAST ONE OF THE MILITARY-STYLE WEAPONS THAT HE RECEIVED CAME FROM US. SO SEVEN YEARS AGO TODAY AN AMERICAN HERO NAMED BRIAN TERRY, WHO HAD SERVED AS A LAW ENFORCEMENT PROFESSIONAL AND AS A MARINE IN IRAQ, AND ON THE ELITE BORDER TACTICAL SQUADRON, SET OUT TO PROTECT AMERICA. BUT TO ALSO PROTECT THOSE WHO SOUGHT TO ENTER IT, WHETHER LEGALLY OR ILLEGALLY. AND WHEN HE DID SO, HE DID SO UNDERSTANDING FULLY, AS THOSE WHO TAKE AN OATH TO DEFEND THIS NATION DO, THAT SOME THINGS IN THIS WORLD ARE WORTH STANDING AND FIGHTING AND DYING FOR. AND TRAGICALLY SEVEN YEARS AGO TONIGHT BRIAN TERRY MADE THAT SACRIFICE. AND I HAD NO INTENTION OF STANDING AND SPEAKING ON THIS TODAY UNTIL H.R. 4433, SECURING D.H.S. FIREARMS ACT OF 2017, CAME BEFORE THE HOMELAND SECURITY COMMITTEE YESTERDAY. BUT IT STRUCK ME AS IRONIC. NOT ONLY DID I SERVE IN UNIFORM AS A COMBAT ARMS OFFICER FOR NEARLY SIX YEARS, I SPENT JUST UNDER 10 YEARS AS A PROSECUTOR AND I HAVE A PASSION FOR A NUMBER OF THINGS. BUT FOREMOST AMONG THESE IS JUSTICE. AND SO WHILE IT GIVES MY HEART SOME CONDOLENCE, I CAN'T BEGIN TO IMAGINE THE FEELINGS ON THIS SEVENTH ANNIVERSARY OF THE FAMILY MEMBERS OF THIS AMERICAN HERO, KNOWING THAT WHILE THE PEOPLE WHO PULLED THE TRIGGER HAVE BEEN CONVICTED, THE WEAPONS THAT THEY USED WERE PROVIDED TO HIM BY THE VERY NATION PROVIDE -- PROVIDED TO THEM BY THE VERY NATION THAT HE DIED TO PROTECT. SO, MR. SPEAKER, WITH THAT I WOULD SUBMIT THIS. I HAVE FAITH THAT IN LIFE OR AFTER LIFE THERE WILL ALWAYS ULTIMATELY BE JUSTICE. BUT IN THE CASE OF THOSE WHO WITH INTENT PUT THE FIREARMS INTO THE HANDS OF THE INDIVIDUALS WHO TOOK THE LIFE OF THIS AMERICAN HERO, I'LL TELL YOU THIS, I HOPE THAT JUSTICE COMES IN THIS LIFE AND NOT THE NEXT. SO WHILE WE MOVE ABOUT OUR BUSINESS OF PROMULGATING LAWS TO DICTATE TO D.H.S. THAT THEY SHOULD HAVE A POLICY TO ADDRESS THE LOSS OF FIREARMS, I HOPE WE DON'T TAKE OUR EYE OFF THE BALL OF THE VERY FIREARMS THAT WE INTENTIONALLY TRAFFICKED. LIKE THE TWO THAT WERE RECOVERED FROM THE SCENE OF THE MURDER OF BRIAN TERRY AND THAT WE WILL CONTINUE UNTIL WE FIND IT TO SEEK JUSTICE FOR THIS MAN AND ACT IN A MANNER SUCH THAT THERE ARE NO MORE BRIAN TERRY TRAGEDIES GOING FORWARD. I YIELD BACK.

                          Show Full Text
                        • 01:10:14 PM

                          THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

                          THE GENTLEMAN YIELDS BACK THE BALANCE OF HIS TIME. UNDER THE SPEAKER'S…

                          THE GENTLEMAN YIELDS BACK THE BALANCE OF HIS TIME. UNDER THE SPEAKER'S ANNOUNCED POLICY OF JANUARY 3, 2017, THE GENTLEMAN FROM MARYLAND, MR. RASKIN, IS RECOGNIZED FOR 60 MINUTES AS THE DESIGNEE OF THE MINORITY LEADER.

                          Show Full Text
                        • 01:11:04 PM

                          MR. RASKIN

                          MR. SPEAKER, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I'M DELIGHTED TO BE HERE ON BEHALF OF…

                          MR. SPEAKER, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I'M DELIGHTED TO BE HERE ON BEHALF OF THE MINORITY. AND I'M HERE TO DISCUSS A VERY SERIOUS ISSUE, WHICH ARE THE MOUNTING THREATS AND CRITICISM OF ROBERT MUELLER'S INVESTIGATION INTO CRIMINALITY TAKING PLACE IN THE COURSE OF THE PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION, WITH INTERFERENCE BY THE RUSSIANS AND POSSIBLE COLLUSION WITH VARIOUS AMERICANS WORKING WITH HIM. BUT I WANT TO START BY PUTTING THIS INTO A GENERAL CONTEXT, MR. SPEAKER. TOM PAYNE SAID THAT IN THE MONARCHIES, THE KING IS LAW. BUT IN THE DEMOCRACIES, THE LAW IS KING. AND WE PLACE EVERYTHING ON THE RULE OF LAW HERE IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. IT'S HOW WE CONTROL THE PEOPLE WHO OCCUPY THE HIGHEST OFFICES OF GOVERNMENT. AND CONTROL VAST AMOUNTS OF RESOURCES THAT BELONG TO THE PEOPLE OF THE UNITED STATES. IN THE MONARCHIES, IN THE DICTATORSHIPS, THE PEOPLE HAVE NO CONTROL OVER THOSE WHO OCCUPY GOVERNMENT, BUT IN THE DEMOCRACIES, IN THE CONSTITUTIONAL SOCIETIES, WE EXERCISE CONTROL OVER THE PEOPLE WHO LEAD THE GOVERNMENT, TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY DON'T ABUSE THEIR POWER FOR IMPROPER PURPOSES, FOR PRIVATE GAIN, FOR THE ENRICHMENT OF PARTICULAR CLASSES OR FOR THE PER PET SITUATION OF THEIR OWN PLIT -- PER PET -- PERPETUATION OF THEIR OWN POLITICAL POWER. WHEN WE TOOK OFFICE AT THE BEGINNING OF THE YEAR, MR. SPEAKER, WE RECEIVED AN INTELLIGENCE COMMITTEE REPORT SIGNED BY 18 INTELLIGENCE AGENCIES. THE F.B.I. AND THE C.I.A. AND THE N.S.A. AND THE DEFENSE INTELLIGENCE AGENCY AND ON AND ON. AND THEY ALL TOLD US THE SAME THING. WHICH IS THAT VLADIMIR PUTIN HAD ATTEMPTED TO INTERFERE AND HAD INTERFERED IN THE AMERICAN ELECTION. THROUGH CYBERESPIONAGE AND CYBERSABOTAGE. IN AN EFFORT TO DETERMINE THE OUTCOME OF OUR ELECTION. THAT TOOK PLACE. WE KNEW THAT WAY BACK WHEN WE FIRST TOOK OFFICE. NOW, IN THE HOUSE COMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT AND GOVERNMENT REFORM, WHICH I SERVE ON, AND IN THE HOUSE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE, WHICH I SERVE ON, WE WERE TOLD, AND WE'VE BEEN TOLD FOR MONTHS, GOING ALL THE WAY BACK TO THE GOLF SWING OF THE YEAR, THAT WE DON'T NEED -- GOING BACK ALL THE WAY TO THE BEGINNING OF THE YEAR, THAT WE DON'T NEED TO INVESTIGATE THIS ASSAULT ON THE SOVEREIGNTY OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE IN OUR OWN ELECTION, BECAUSE THERE'S AN EXCELLENT LAWYER AND LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL IN CHARGE OF THE SPECIAL COUNSEL INVESTIGATION, ROBERT MUELLER. AND INDEED ROBERT MUELLER IS A MAN OF EXTRAORDINARY AND PERHAPS SINGULAR QUALIFICATION. HE'S A DECORATED WAR HERO FROM THE VIETNAM WAR. A U.S. ATTORNEY WHO HAD BEEN THE U.S. ATTORNEY FOR BOTH THE COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS AND THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA. A FORMER DIRECTOR OF THE F.B.I. . AND, YOU KNOW WHAT, HE'S A REGISTERED REPUBLICAN. AND HE WAS NAMED AS SPECIAL COUNSEL BY ANOTHER REGISTERED REPUBLICAN AND ANOTHER WIDELY HERALDED AND HIGHLY QUALIFIED LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL, ROD ROSENSTEIN, WHO HAD BEEN A CAREER ATTORNEY IN THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE AND THEN THE U.S. ATTORNEY, APPOINTED BY PRESIDENT BUSH IN THE GREAT STATE, MY HOME STATE, OF MARYLAND. HE'S PRESENTLY THE DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE UNITED STATES. APPOINTED BY ANOTHER REPUBLICAN, ATTORNEY GENERAL SESSIONS. SO ATTORNEY GENERAL SESSIONS APPOINTED ROD ROSENSTEIN, WHO IS THE DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL, A REPUBLICAN, AND HE APPOINTED ANOTHER REPUBLICAN. AND WIDELIED A MIRED AND HIGHLY QUALIFIED -- WIDELIED A MIRED AND HIGHLY QUALIFIED -- WIDELY ED A MIRED AND HIGHLY QUALIFIED -- WIDELY ADMIRED AND HIGHLY QUALIFIED OFFICIAL. WITH REPUBLICANS SAYING, NO, WE WON'T DO ANY INVESTIGATIONS OF OUR OWN, DESPITE PAST PRACTICE, WE HAVE TO ASK WHY SPECIAL COUNSEL ROBERT MUELLER THIS WEEK HAS SUDDENLY COME UNDER WITHERING FIRE BY OUR G.O.P. COLLEAGUES. IN THE MOST FEROCIOUS, ORGANIZED ATTACK ON A FEDERAL PROSECUTION AND PROSECUTOR I'VE EVER SEEN. . WELL, THE ANSWER, ALAS, IS OBVIOUS. THEY'RE ATTACKING SPECIAL COUNSEL ROBERT MUELLER AND HIS FINE TEAM OF LAWYERS AND INVESTIGATORS BECAUSE MUELLER AND HIS TEAM ARE DOING THEIR JOBS AND JUSTICE IS BEING DONE. THERE HAVE ALREADY BEEN TWO GUILTY PLEAS ARISING FROM THIS INVESTIGATION. ONE FROM PRESIDENT TRUMP'S FORMER NATIONAL SECURITY ADVISOR, GENERAL FLYNN, WHO PLED GUILTY TO LYING TO THE F.B.I. ABOUT TRUMP-RUSSIA. AND ANOTHER CRIMINAL CONFESSION AND GUILTY PLEA FROM FORMER FOREIGN POLICY ASSISTANT GEORGE PAPADOPOULOS, WHO ALSO TOOK FULL RESPONSIBILITY FOR HIS CRIMINAL CONDUCT. IN LYING ABOUT TRUMP-RUSSIA TO THE F.B.I. AND THERE HAVE BEEN SWEEPING CRIMINAL INDICTMENTS HANDED DOWN BY THE MUELLER TEAM, THE SPECIAL COUNSEL, AGAINST PAUL MANAFORT, TRUMP'S FORMER CAMPAIGN MANAGER AND HIS ASSOCIATE, RICK GATES. NOW FOR ALL WE KNOW THIS MIGHT BE THE END OF IT. THE SPECIAL COUNSEL ISN'T TALKING. HE'S NOT LEAKING. HE'S DOING HIS JOB. BUT IT'S ALSO POSSIBLE THAT THE INVESTIGATION IS JUST GETTING STARTED. AND THAT THEY ARE CLOSING IN ON EVEN HIGHER TARGETS. PERHAPS JARED KUSHNER, THE ALL-PURPOSE TRUMP AIDE AND PRESIDENT'S SON-IN-LAY, PERHAPS HE'S WITHIN THE SCOPES OF THIS INVESTIGATION. PERHAPS DONALD TRUMP JR. AND PERHAPS THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES HIMSELF. DONALD TRUMP. AND SO THE WHITE HOUSE HAS ISSUED ITS APPARENTLY DESPERATE AND CORNERED ANIMAL ORDERS. THE PRESIDENT CRIES KAY KAYE YOSS AND LETS SLIP THE DOGS OF WAR AGAINST SPECIAL COUNSEL MUELLER AND THE RULE OF LAW. THIS WEEK, TRUMP HAS CALLED THE MUELLER INVESTIGATION AN INVESTIGATION LED BY A REPUBLICAN WHO IS NAMED BY A -- WHO WAS NAMED BY A REPUBLICAN, WHO WAS NAMED BY A REPUBLICAN , HE CALLS THIS INVESTIGATION, QUOTE, THE SINGLE GREATEST WITCH HUNT OF A POLITICIAN IN AMERICAN HISTORY. AND I DON'T WANT TO HEAR FROM ANY OF MY COLLEAGUES, EITHER G.O.P. OR OTHER, WHO SAY, YOU CAN'T TAKE SERIOUSLY WHAT THE PRESIDENT SAYS BECAUSE HE'S DISCONNECTING FROM REALITY OR HE'S PARANOID OR HE'S DELUSIONAL UNLESS YOU'RE WILLING TO TRY TO ACTIVATE THE PROVISIONS OF THE 25TH AMENDMENT. WE MUST TAKE THE PRESIDENT'S WORD SERIOUSLY. IN THE MEANTIME OF COURSE OUR FRIENDS ACROSS THE AISLE, MR. SPEAKER, ARE GOING ALONG WITH EVERYTHING THE PRESIDENT SAYS AND EVERYTHING THAT HE DOES AND THEY ARE ENABLING HIS ATTEMPT TO DEFAME THE SPECIAL COUNSEL, MR. MUELLER AND ATTACK THE WORK OF THE F.B.I. THE PRESIDENT CALLS THE F.B.I. AN AGENCY IN TATTERS. AND AN ONSLAUGHT HAS FOLLOWED IN THE MEDIA ON FOX NEWS, A FULL-SCALE CAMPAIGN AGAINST THE F.B.I. HAS ARISEN WITH LOTS OF PEOPLE COMPARING IT TO THE K.G.B. -- THE F.B.I. TO THE K.G.B. WHICH IS AMUSING BECAUSE IF TRUE THEY WOULD LIKE THE F.B.I. DONALD TRUMP'S BEST BUDDY IN FOREIGN RELATIONS AND FOX NEWS' BELOVED KLEPTOCRAT AUTHORITARIAN DICTATOR ABROAD IS VLADIMIR PUTIN, THE FORMER CHIEF OF THE K.G.B. BUT THEY COMPARE OUR F.B.I., THE TINS OF THOUSANDS OF MEN AND WOMEN WHO HAVE GIVEN THEIR LIVES TO LAW ENFORCEMENT IN AMERICA, THEY COMPARE OUR F.B.I. TO THE K.G.B. NEWT GINGRICH CALLS MUELLER CORRUPT. NEWT GINGRICH WHO WAS OFFICIALLY DISCIPLINED AND REPRIMANDED RIGHT HERE, MR. SPEAKER, RIGHT WHERE WE STAND TODAY, BY THIS BODY IN A VOTE OF 395-28. HE WAS REPRIMANDED AND DISCIPLINED FOR VIOLATING THE RULES OF THIS BODY AND HE CALLS THE FORMER F.B.I. DIRECTOR, THE SPECIAL COUNSEL MUELLER, CORRUPT IN AN EFFORT TO UNDERMINE AN DISCREDIT THE SPECIAL COUNSEL INVESTIGATION. AND NOW THIS PROPAGANDA CAMPAIGN COMES TO THE OFFICIAL EXANLS OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. YESTERDAY, DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL ROD ROSENSTEIN APPEARED BEFORE THE HOUSE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE FOR AN OVERSIGHT HEARING. AND I WAS APPALLED AND I WAS AMAZED AT THE WAY OUR G.O.P. COLLEAGUES ATTACKED HIM WITH A SERIES OF COMPLETELY PHONY, OVERBLOWN, AND MISLEADING ACCUSATIONS. THEY ARE IN FULL SCALE ASSAULT MODE NOW. THEY ARE IN A FRENZIED WILD GOOSE CHASE TO FIND ANYTHING POSSIBLE TO DISCREDIT SPECIAL COUNSEL MUELLER AND HIS INVESTIGATORS AND HIS TEAM. GUESS WHAT? THEY FINALLY FOUND THEIR VILLAIN THIS WEEK, THEY FOUND THEIR VILLAIN AND POUNCED ON HIM. IT'S AN F.B.I. AGENT NAMED PETER STRZOK, WHO IS WORKING ON THE -- WHO WAS WORKING ON THE INVESTIGATION BUT WAS REMOVED THIS SUMMER WHEN IT WAS DISCOVERED HE SENT A BUNCH OF TEXT MESSAGES TO HIS APPARENT GIRLFRIEND CRITICIZING A NUMBER OF POLITICIANS, INCLUDING DONALD TRUMP, WHO HE HE CALLED AN IDIOT, MR. SPEAKER. I THINK IT WAS WATCHING ONE THOUGH PRESIDENTIAL DEBATES WHERE HE SENT A TEXT MESSAGE TO HIS GIRLFRIEND, WRITING O.M.G., HE'S AN IDIOT. THAT'S THE WAY I'M READING THE TEXTS THAT WERE REVEALED TO US YESTERDAY. NOW HE WAS PROBABLY ONE OF MILLIONS OF PEOPLE TO SEND THAT EXACT SAME TEXT ACROSS THE COUNTRY. WASN'T A VERY NICE THING TO SAY BUT HE SAID IT. HE ALSO CALLED BERNIE SANDERS, THE DEMOCRATIC CANDIDATE FOR PRESIDENT, THE VERMONT U.S. SENATOR, AN IDIOT HE CALLED TRUMP AND IDIOT, CALLED SANDERS AN IDIOT AND HAD EVEN MORE CHOICE AND UNSPEAKABLE WORDS FOR MY FRIEND, THE FORMER GOVERNOR OF MARYLAND, MARTIN O'MALLEY, WHICH I DON'T THINK I CAN REPEAT ON THE FLOOR, MR. SPEAKER. ALL RIGHT, MR. STRZOK WAS SPEAKING HIS MIND IN THESE PRIVATE TEXTS. BUT IT RAISED THE POTENTIALITY OF BIAS IN ONE OF THE AGENTS WORKING ON THE TEAM AND SO WHAT DID MR. MUELLER DO WHEN HE LEARNED OF IT? HE FIRED HIM. IMMEDIATELY. HE -- HE GOT HIM OFF THE INVESTIGATION, REMOVED FROM IF HIM THE INFORMATION AND PUT HIM INTO A DIFFERENT PART OF THE F.B.I. HE REMOVED HIM IMMEDIATELY. FROM THE INVESTIGATION. UNLIKE PRESIDENT TRUMP, FOR EXAMPLE, WHO TOOK 18 DAYS TO FIRE GENERAL FLYNN AFTER LEARNING THAT FLYNN WAS A SERIAL LIAR ABOUT HIS CONNECTIONS WITH RUSSIA. TOOK PRESIDENT TRUMP 18 DAYS. MR. MUELLER FIRED THE GUY IMMEDIATELY BECAUSE PEOPLE MAKE MISTAKES THEY DO THE WRONG THING AND MUELLER SAID, I DON'T WANT HIM ON MY TEAM. REMOVED HIM. THEY PUT HIM SOMEWHERE ELSE. NOW, THAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN THE END OF THE MATTER. RIGHT? SOUNDS LIKE THE END OF THE STORY. IT'S NOT A BIG DEAL. BUT, ON THE EVE OF OUR HEARING YESTERDAY, WE RECEIVED A DUMP OF HUNDREDS OF THESE PRIVATE TEXT MESSAGES BETWEEN MR. STRZOK AND HIS FRIEND, MS. PAIGE. AND THEY MAKE NO DOUBT FOR TITILLATE, FASCINATING, ENGROSSING READING AS THESE TWO PEOPLE MAKE THEIR OBSERVATIONS ABOUT THE PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN. IT'S LIKE ANNA KARENINA OR "HOUSE OF CARDS." IT'S THE KIND OF TRIVIAL GOSSIP PEOPLE GET INTO SOMETIMES IN THIS TOWN. I WAS AMAZED TO LEARN THAT THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE ITSELF, NOT MUELLER, NOT HIS TEAM, BUT THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, THE FORMAL PUBLIC AFFAIRS CHANNEL, HAD ACTUALLY ORCHESTRATED THIS DUMP OF TEXT MESSAGES THAT WERE REVEALED IN THE COURSE OF AN ONGOING DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE INVESTIGATION. INSPECTOR GENERAL INVESTIGATION. THEY TOOK THIS MATERIAL FROM THE MIDDLE OF AN INVESTIGATION, CALLED UP A WHOLE BUNCH OF REPORTERS AND BROUGHT THEM IN TO SHOW THEM THESE TEXTS. WHY? WELL, NOBODY COULD REALLY EXPLAIN ITISM ASKED MR. ROSENSTEIN YESTERDAY AND HE COULDN'T EXPLAIN WHAT REALLY HE SAID, IT HAD BEEN APPROVED. WAS THERE ANY PRECEDENT FOR IT? I SAID. WAS THERE PRECEDENT FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE REVEALING MATERIAL THAT TURNED UP IN THE MIDDLE OF AN ONGOING INVESTIGATION TO REPORTERS? HE COULDN'T NAME ANY. IT WASN'T EVEN IN A PRESS CONFERENCE. SO THAT TOOK PLACE, THAT STRIKES ME AS VERY ODD THAT THERE ARE PEOPLE IN THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE WHO APPARENTLY ARE COOPERATING WITH THIS EFFORT TO UNDERMINE THE INTEGRITY AND THE STRENGTH OF THIS SPECIAL COUNSEL INVESTIGATION. WELL, THE KEY THING TO UNDERSTAND IS THAT ALL OF THOSE TEXT MESSAGES ARE TOTALLY IRRELEVANT. THE GREAT TEXT MESSAGE LOVE STORY SAGA WHICH WAS DUMPED ON US IS AN IRRELEVANT DISTRACTION. MR. MUELLER GOT RID OF MR. STRZOK, REMOVED HIM FROM THE TEAM, END OF STORY. OF COURSE, F.B.I. AGENTS, PROSECUTORS, ARE ALLOWED TO HAVE A POLITICAL PARTY. MUELLER'S GOT ONE, IT'S REPUBLICAN. ROSENSTEIN GOT ONE, HE'S A REPUBLICAN. THAT'S FINE. YOU CAN BE A REPUBLICAN, YOU CAN BE DEMOCRAT. YOU'RE NOT ALLOWED TO HAVE YOUR POLITICAL IDEAS AFFECT YOUR WORK TO THE POINT THAT YOU'RE BIASED. SO I TAKE IT, MR. MUELLER FIGURED THAT THOSE TEXT MESSAGES SUGGESTED THE POSSIBILITY OF BIAS, NOT JUST AGAINST BERNIE SANDERS AND MARTIN O'MALLEY BUT ALSO AGAINST DONALD TRUMP AND SAID, WE'LL REMOVE HIM FROM THE TEAM, HE'S GONE. YESTERDAY, THAT'S ALL THE REPUBLICANS WANTED TO TALK ABOUT THIS GREAT TRUMPED UP FAKE TEXT MESSAGE SCANDAL. TOTALLY IRRELEVANT. THE ONLY ONE WHO, TO HIS CREDIT, TRIED TO MAKE IT RELEVANT WAS A REPUBLICAN COLLEAGUE WHO SAID, THIS IS FRUIT OF THE POISONOUS TREE. AND HE REPEATED IT NUMEROUS TIMES HE INTONED THE WORDS, FRUIT OF THE POISONOUS TREE. I'M A LAW PROFESSOR SO I KNOW WHAT FRUIT OF THE POISONOUS TREE MEANS. IT'S A FOURTH AMENDMENT DOCTRINE WHICH SAYS THAT IF YOU'VE GOT AN ILLEGAL SEARCH OR SEIZURE BY THE GOVERNMENT, YOU CANNOT USE EVIDENCE THAT IS OBTAINED BY VIRTUE OF AN ILLEGAL SEARCH OR AN ILLEGAL SEIZURE AGAINST SOMEONE IN COURT. AND IF THE GOVERNMENT TRIES TO USE IT, THEN THE SO-CALLED EXCLUSIONARY RULE IS ACTIVATED AND YOU EXCLUDE EVIDENCE THAT IS RERIVE -- DERIVED FROM AN ILLEGAL SEARCH OR SEIZURE. THERE'S NO ILLEGAL SEARCH OR SEIZURE OR ALLEGATION OF ILLEGAL SEARCH OR SEIZURE. ALL THEY'VE GOT IS TEXT MESSAGES BETWEEN TWO LOVEBIRDS. THAT'S ITISM ASKED MR. ROSENSTEIN YESTERDAY, I SAID, WAS THERE AN ILLEGAL SEARCH OR SEIZURE? IS THERE AN ALLEGATION OF ILLEGAL SEARCH OR SEIZURE? NO, NONE AT ALL. WHAT'S THE RELEVANCE OF THAT STUFF? NOTHING. THEY FOUND ONE F.B.I. AGENT WHO WAS REMOVED DURING THE SUMMERTIME FOR TRASHING A BUNCH OF POLITICIANS ON BOTH SIDES OF THE AISLE, THEY FIND THAT GUY THEY TALK ONLY ABOUT THE FACT THAT HE CALLED THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES AN IDIOT, WHICH WE MUST CONCEDE HARDLY MAKES HIM AN ORIGINAL CRITIC OF THE PRESIDENT, OK. THEY FIND THAT ONE GUY AND THEN SUDDENLY THEY WANT TO USE THAT TO CLAIM THAT BIAS INFECTS THE WHOLE OPERATION. THE WHOLE INVESTIGATION. WHY ARE THEY DOING THAT? WELL, LOOK. IF THEY WANT TO PUT UP A PROPAGANDA SMOKE SCREEN, THAT'S WITHIN THEIR FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHTS TO DO SO. WITHIN THEIR RIGHTS UNDER THE SPEECH AND DEBATE CLAUSE. THE PROBLEM IS, THERE IS MOUNTING FEAR AND ANXIETY THAT THIS IS TRYING TO SET THE STAGE FOR PRESIDENT TRUMP TO FIRE ROBERT MUELLER. PERHAPS THE MOST ADMIRED LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL IN THE COUNTRY, THEY ARE SETTING THE STAGE TO FIRE HIM WITH ALL THIS TRUMPED UP STUFF ABOUT A BUNCH OF TECHES BETWEEN SOME LOVEBIRDS. THAT'S IT. THAT'S ALL THEY'VE GOT. AFTER ALL THIS TIME THAT'S WHAT THEY'RE USING TO TRY TO DISCREDIT ROBERT MUELLER. AND HIS CHIEF. WHO AT THE TIME OF HIS APPOINTMENT THEY DESCRIBED AS UNIMPEACHABLE, BEYOND REPROACH, AND SO ON. BUT NOW THAT HE'S DOING HIS JOB AND IT LOOKS LIKE THE MOMENTUM OF THE INVESTIGATION IS LEADING TO THE VERY TOP OF THE U.S. GOVERNMENT, THEY MAY BE LOOKING FOR A REASON TO FIRE HIM. WELL, THIS IS AN EMERGENCY, A CONSTITUTIONAL EMERGENCY, IF THIS IS GOING TO HAPPEN. THIS IS WHY WE'RE BLOWING THE WHISTLE ON IT. I'M DELIGHTED TO BE JOINED BY A GREAT LEDGE LATOR, SOMEONE WHOSE CAREER IS WOVEN INTO THE FABRIC OF THE U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, THE MINORITY WHIP OF THIS BODY. I'M JUST DELIGHTED TO YIELD TIME NOW TO STENY HOYER OF MARYLAND.

                          Show Full Text
                        • 01:29:28 PM

                          MR. HOYER

                          I THANK THE GENTLEMAN FOR YIELDING, I THANK HIM FOR TAKING THIS TIME ON…

                          I THANK THE GENTLEMAN FOR YIELDING, I THANK HIM FOR TAKING THIS TIME ON THE SPECIAL ORDER BECAUSE AS AN ASIDE, I NEED TO APOLOGIZE TO HIM FOR MAKING HIM WAIT SO LONG FOR THIS SPECIAL ORDER. I ALSO WANT TO TELL THE AMERICAN PEOPLE, MR. SPEAKER, THAT THE GENTLEMAN WHO HAS TAKE THEN SPECIAL ORDER, WHO IS TAKING THIS SPECIALED ORER IS PROBABLY THE CONSTITUTIONAL EXPERT NOT ONLY IN THIS BODY BUT ONE OF THE CONSTITUTIONAL EXPERTS IN OUR COUNTRY. HE IS A GREAT LEGISLATOR HIMSELF, ALTHOUGH NEW TO THIS BODY, NOT NEW TO BEING A LEGISLATIVE LEADER AT ALL. A LEGISLATIVE LEADER IN OUR STATE FOR MANY YEARS. WONDERFUL TEACHER. AND SOMEBODY WHO HAS GREAT POLITICAL COURAGE AND IS WILLING TO STAND AND SAY THE EMPEROR HAS NO CLOTHES. IS WILLING TO CALL ATTENTION TO THE FACT THAT OUR DEMOCRACY IS AT RISK. THAT OUR DUE PROCESS IS AT RISK. . HE USED THE PHRASE TRUMPED-UP. WHAT AN INTERESTING PHRASE THAT IS THAT WE HAVE USED FOR MANY YEARS. I DON'T KNOW IT'S HAD AS MUCH RELEVANCE IN YEARS PAST AS IT NOW MAY HAVE. MR. SPEAKER, I THANK MY FRIEND, MR. RASKIN, FOR LEADING THIS SPECIAL ORDER. OUR SYSTEM OF GOVERNMENT, AS HE HAS POINTED OUT, IS BASED ON THE RULE OF LAW. WE ARE A GOVERNMENT OF LAWS, NOT OF MEN. WHAT THAT MEANS IS, IT IS NOT PERSONALITIES, NOT DICTATORS, NOT KINGS THAT RULE OUR LAND. IT IS THE LAW. THE LAW OF OUR CONSTITUTION, THE LAW OF OUR LEGISLATORS, AND THE COMMON LAW THAT WE PURSUE. AS INTERRUPTED BY OUR COURT SYSTEMS. ITS FOUNDATION IS THE CONSTITUTIONAL PRINCIPLE THAT ALL ARE EQUAL UNDER THE LAW. NO ONE IS EXEMPT. THE APPOINTMENT OF A SPECIAL PROSECUTOR EARLIER THIS YEAR TO LOOK INTO THE POSSIBILITY OF THE ADMINISTRATION OR TRUMP CAMPAIGN OFFICIALS COLLUDING WITH FOREIGN ADVERSARY OR OBSTRUCTING JUSTICE FALLS INTO A LONG TRADITION IN OUR COUNTRY OF USING INDEPENDENT COUNSEL TO INVESTIGATE THOSE IN THE MOST SENIOR OFFICES OF OUR GOVERNMENT. OUR FOUNDING FATHERS WOULD SAY THAT IS A CHECK AND BALANCE. THAT IS A PROTECTION AGAINST THE EWE SURPATION OF DEMOCRAT -- USURPATION OF DEMOCRAT SIFMENT THE CHOICE OF BOB MUELLER TO BE THAT INDEPENDENT INVESTIGATOR WAS AN EXTRAORDINARY WISE ONE -- DEMOCRACY. THE CHOICE OF BOB MUELLER TO BE THAT INDEPENDENT INVESTIGATOR WAS AN EXTRAORDINARY WISE ONE. PRECISELY BECAUSE MR. MUELLER IS SO WIDELY RESPECTED FOR HIS INDEPENDENCE AND HIS COMMITMENT TO THE LAW ABOVE ALL ELSE. AND PARENTHETICALLY, ALTHOUGH IT IS NOT NECESSARILY RELEVANT, HE'S A REPUBLICAN. HE IS NOT, HOWEVER, DRIVEN BY THE POLITICS OF LEFT OR RIGHT OR REPUBLICAN OR DEMOCRAT. HE IS A MAN OF THE LAW. A MAN WHO SEEKS THE TRUTH. A MAN WHO HAS DEDICATED HIS CAREER TO ASSURING THAT WE REMAIN A LAND OF LIBERTY UNDER LAW. WE HAVE ALREADY SEEN A DEMONSTRATION OF THAT COMMITMENT IN THE PROMPT FIRING OF A SUBORDINATE INVESTIGATOR FOR AN ACT THAT WAS NOT ILLEGAL, AS THE GENTLEMAN FROM MARYLAND, OUR CONSTITUTIONAL SCHOLAR, HAS POINTED OUT. BUT, HOWEVER, THREATENED TO IMPUGN THE OBJECTTIVITY OF THE INVESTIGATION. IN OTHER WORDS, HE REMOVED SOMEBODY WHO HE THOUGHT MIGHT UNDERMINE THE CREDIBILITY OF THIS INVESTIGATION. BECAUSE HE IS SO COMMITTED TO THIS INVESTIGATION BEING OBJECTIVE AND UNQUESTIONABLY FAIR. MR. MUELLER HAS MADE IT ABUNDANTLY CLEAR THAT HE WILL NOT TOLERATE ANY HINT OF BIAS IN THIS INVESTIGATION. SO FAR IT APPEARS THAT HIS INVESTIGATION IS BEARING FRUIT. HAVING UNCOVERED SERIOUS CRIMES AND SECURED THREE INDICTMENTS AS WELL AS GUILTY PLEAS FROM TWO KEY SUBJECTS. GUILTY PLEAS. THIS WAS NOT A QUESTION OF HAVING A TRIAL AND SOMEBODY CONVINCED 12 PEOPLE THAT HE WAS GUILTY. THIS WAS A CASE WHERE THE INDIVIDUAL SAID, I AM GUILTY. I DID WHAT WAS ALLEGED. I KNOW THAT IT IS ILLEGAL. AND I SHOULD BEAR THE CONSEQUENCES. THAT INCLUDED, OF COURSE, THE NATIONAL SECURITY ADVISOR WHO WAS NATIONAL SECURITY ADVISOR, I THINK, FOR 25 DAYS. OR CLOSE TO THAT NUMBER. MR. FLYNN. AS THE INVESTIGATION HAS ADVANCED, MR. SPEAKER, WE'VE SEEN TROUBLING STATEMENTS FROM THE PRESIDENT. AND HIS ADVISORS. SEEKING TO SOW UNCERTAINTY ABOUT THE LEGITIMACY OF THE SPECIAL COUNSEL'S ACTIVITIES AND UNDERMINE CONFIDENCE IN HIM. BUT IT'S NOT SO MUCH THE CONFIDENCE IN HIM THAT IS CRITICAL. IT'S CONFIDENCE IN THE LAW. IT'S CONFIDENCE IN THE PROCESS. IT'S CONFIDENCE THAT IN FACT WE ARE A NATION OF LAWS AND WHETHER WE ARE PRESIDENT OR PEASANT WE WILL BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE. IF IN FACT WE BREAK THE LAWS. WHAT IS BEING DONE TO UNDERMINE THIS PROCESS THREATENS THE INDEPENDENCE OF THE INVESTIGATION AND THOSE WHO ARE UNDERTAKING IT. IT IS DANGEROUS TO OUR DEMOCRACY. AND TO OUR FREEDOM. NOW IN RECENT DAYS WE'VE HEARD CALLS BY THE PRESIDENT AND HIS ALLIES TO LAUNCH A COUNTERINVESTIGATION OF THE SPECIAL PROSECUTOR'S INVESTIGATION. THOSE OF US WHO KNOW HISTORY KNOW THAT THAT IS SO OFTEN THE DEFENSE OF THOSE WHO SEEK AUTHORITARIAN POWER. OF THOSE WHO BELIEVE THEY ARE ABOVE THE LAW. OF THOSE WHO BELIEVE THEY CAN INTIMIDATE OTHERS SO THAT THEY WILL NEVER BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE FOR WRONGDOING. THIS PREPOSTEROUS SUGGESTION HAS BUT ONE PURPOSE. TO CAST A SHADOW OF DOUBT OVER THE FINDINGS OF MR. MUELLER'S INQUIRY BY ATTEMPTING TO FRAME IT IN A PARTISAN WAY. IN FACT, MR. MUELLER WAS APPOINTED BY A REPUBLICAN -APPOINTED DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL. IT IS TACTICS LIKE THIS ONE THAT WE SEE SO OFTEN OVERSEAS IN COUNTRIES RULED BY DICTATORS AND THOSE SEEKING TO BECOME DICTATORS. THIS WILLFUL EFFORT TO ERODE CONFIDENCE IN ANY INSTITUTION, THAT MUST BE SEEN AS IMPARTIAL, IS HARMFUL. BECAUSE IF NOBODY AND NOTHING IS IMPARTIAL, IF EVERYONE AND EVERYTHING IS TAINTED BY POLITICS AND INTEREST, THEN NO ONE, NO ONE CAN POSSESS THE MORAL AUTHORITY TO HOLD ACCOUNTABLE ONE WHO WISHES TO BE ENTIRELY UNACCOUNTABLE. THAT, MR. SPEAKER, IS THE REASON, I THINK, THAT THE PRESIDENT HAS ALSO ATTACKED THE FOURTH ESTATE, THE NEWSPAPERS, THE BROADCASTERS, PEOPLE WHOSE DUTY IT IS TO BRING FACTS TO THE PEOPLE. SO THAT THEY, THE PEOPLE, CAN MAKE A RATIONAL JUDGMENT IN A DEMOCRACY. FOR IT IS IN THEIR HANDS THAT THE POWER ULTIMATELY RESIDES. AND IF YOU UNDERMINE THOSE WHO GIVE THEM THE FACTS, THEN YOU UNDERMINE THEIR ABILITY TO MAKE DECISIONS. THIS ULTIMATELY IS WHAT THE SPECIAL PROSECUTOR'S WORK IS ALL ABOUT. ACCOUNTABILITY. ENSURING THAT EVERY PERSON IS HELD TO THE SAME HIGH STANDARD OF BEHAVIOR UNDER THE LAWS OF OUR NATION. SO, MR. SPEAKER, I URGE MY COLLEAGUES IN BOTH PARTIES, THIS IS NOT ABOUT PARTY, THIS IS ABOUT COUNTRY. THIS IS ABOUT PATRIOTISM. THIS IS ABOUT THE RULE OF LAW. IF WE LOSE THAT RESPECT FOR LAW, WE WILL LOSE OUR COUNTRY. IT WILL BE A DIFFERENT, LESSER COUNTRY. I URGE MY COLLEAGUES FROM BOTH PARTIES, FROM EVERY IDEOLOGICAL CORNER, LET US NOT FORGET THE MOST FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLE THAT BINDS US TOGETHER AS AMERICAN AND AS PUBLIC -- AMERICANS AND AS PUBLIC SERVANTS. THAT ALL ARE CREATED EQUAL. THAT ALL OF US, AND ALL AMERICANS, ARE EQUAL UNDER THE LAW. THAT DOESN'T MEAN WE'RE THE SAME. BUT IT MEANS IN THE EYES OF THE LAW WE ARE EQUAL AS WE STAND TO BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE ON TO BE HELD INNOCENT -- OR TO BE HELD INNOCENT OR NOT INVOLVED OR NOT OWING SOMEBODY ELSE FOR WRONGDOING. WE NEED TO UPHOLD BY OUR WORDS AND BY OUR DEEDS, THE SPECIAL PROSECUTOR'S WORK MUST CONTINUE UNIMPEDED AND IT MUST CONTINUE TO BE RESPECTED. YESTERDAY IN THE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE, THAT WAS NOT THE CASE. TO DEFEND THE INDEFENSIBLE UNDERMINES RESPECT FOR LAW. I WANT TO THANK MY FRIEND AGAIN , MR. RASKIN FROM MONTGOMERY COUNTY, MARYLAND, AS I SAID, A GREAT CONSTITUTIONAL SCHOLAR AND TEACHER. A GREAT LEGISLATOR. BUT MORE IMPORTANTLY THAN THAT, AN INDIVIDUAL WHO LOVES HIS COUNTRY. AND THROUGHOUT HIS LIFE HAS FOUGHT TO MAKE THE COUNTRY ALL THAT THE FOUNDING FATHERS MEANT IT TO BE. I THANK HIM FOR COMING TO THIS FLOOR AND FOR HIS EFFORTS TO ENSURE THAT MR. MUELLER'S INVESTIGATION CAN CONTINUE TO BE SEEN AS IMPARTIAL AND WITH ITS OBJECTIVE UNQUESTIONED. AND THAT IS ACCOUNTABILITY. ACCOUNTABILITY AND JUSTICE. EQUAL JUSTICE UNDER THE LAW. THAT IS OUR BEDROCK. THAT IS OUR TOUCH STONE. THAT IS OUR GUIDING STAR. THAT IS WHAT PROFESSOR RASKIN, CONGRESSMAN RASKIN, CITIZEN RASKIN IS TALKING ABOUT TODAY. AND WE ALL OUGHT TO THANK HIM FOR THAT. AND I YIELD BACK THE TIME TO MY FRIEND, JAMIE RASKIN OF MARYLAND.

                          Show Full Text
                        • 01:41:10 PM

                          M. RASKIN

                          MR. HOYER, THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR KIND WORDS AND THANK YOU FOR YOUR…

                          MR. HOYER, THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR KIND WORDS AND THANK YOU FOR YOUR PATRIOTISM AND THANK YOU FOR ALSO POINTING OUT THE CRITICAL IMPORTANCE OF CIVIC EQUALITY TO THIS DISCUSSION. BECAUSE CIVIC EQUALITY IMPLIES THAT NONE OF US IS ABOVE THE LAW. OF THE MANY DANGEROUS THINGS I'VE HEARD UTTERED OVER THE LAST COUPLE OF WEEKS WITH RESPECT TO THIS INVESTIGATION, PERHAPS NONE IS MORE SINISTER OR DISTURBING THAN THE SUGGESTION THAT THE PRESIDENT CANNOT BE GUILTY OF OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE BECAUSE THE PRESIDENT HIMSELF OVERSEES THE WHOLE GOVERNMENT. WELL, AT THAT POINT WE MAY AS WELL HANG IT ALL UP AND GO BACK TO MONARCHY. BECAUSE THE GOVERNING PRINCIPLE OF OUR CONSTITUTION IS WE HAVE NO KINGS HERE. WE HAVE NO KINGS HERE. SO, MR. HOYER, I WANTED TO THANK YOU FOR THAT. JAMES MADISON WROTE THAT THE VERY DEFINITION OF TYRANNY IS THE COLLAPSELE -- IS THE COLLAPSE OF ALL POWERS INTO ONE. WE'RE TRYING TO DEFEND THE SEPARATION OF POWERSANCE WE'RE TRYING TO DEFEND THE -- POWERS AND WE'RE TRYING TO DEFEND THE RULE OF LAW, AGAINST ALL OF IT BEING DROWNED IN A POLITICAL AGENDA. WE ARE JOINED NOW BY A VERY DISTINGUISHED COLLEAGUE, AND MY COLLEAGUE ON THE HOUSE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE, STEVE COHEN OF TENNESSEE, AND I WOULD LIKE TO YIELD TO HIM AT THIS POINT, MR. SPEAKER.

                          Show Full Text
                        • 01:42:30 PM

                          MR. COHEN

                        • 01:46:49 PM

                          POP -- MR. RASKIN

                          GEORGE PAPADOPOULOS.

                        • 01:46:56 PM

                          MR. COHEN

                          AND THEN A GUILTY PLEA FROM FLYNN. MULER IS DOING HIS JOB AND I THINK HE'S…

                          AND THEN A GUILTY PLEA FROM FLYNN. MULER IS DOING HIS JOB AND I THINK HE'S MAN OF THE YEAR. I THINK HE'LL BE MAN OF THE YEAR NEXT YEAR. HE'S THE ONE PERSON BETWEEN US AND A KLEPTOCRACY A GROUP OF OLIGARCHES, KLEPTOCR TAMBINGS S WHO ARE USING POSITIONS IN GOVERNMENT TO BUILD UP THEMSELVES AND THEIR WEALTH, AND THIS TAX BILL IS THE SAME THING. OLIGARCHES NO INHRTANCE TAX. THEY GET HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS, HUNDREDS OF MALLS OF -- OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS. AND THE PRESIDENT GOES AND SAYS TO A MIDDLE CLASS FAMILY EARNING $75,000, YOU'LL HAVE $2,000 YOU CAN SPEND ANY WAY YOU WANT OR YOU CAN EVEN SAVE IT. $2,000 IS TIP CHANGE AT ORANGE JULIUS TO THOSE PEOPLE. THE BIG MONEY, HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS, HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS, MILLIONS OF DOLLAR THE INHERITANCE TAX BEING REPEALED, THE A.M.T. BEING REPEALED AND OTHER CHANGES. THEN THEY SAID WE ONLY REDUCED THE TAX ON THE WEALTHIEST FROM 39% TO 37% BECAUSE THEY WEREN'T GOING TO GET TO DEDUCT AS MUCH OF THEIR STATE AND LOCAL TAXES, IT WAS GOING TO HURT THEM MORE. THERE ARE PEOPLE NOT IN THE TOP BRACKET WHO AREN'T GOING TO GET TO REDUCE THEIR STATE AND LOCAL TAXES AND THEY GAVE THEM NADA, GAVE IT ALL TO THE WEALTHIEST. THIS IS WHAT IT'S ALL ABOUT. THIS IS ABOUT THE WEALTHIEST PEOPLE TAKING THIS COUNTRY OVER IN AN OLIGARCHY. TRUMP IS REPRESENTATIVE OF THEM. IT'S ABOUT HIM. IT'S NOT ABOUT THE INSTITUTIONS, NOT ABOUT THE CONSTITUTION, IT'S NOT ABOUT PEOPLE, IT'S NOT ABOUT THE FIRST AMENDMENT. SO MANY PEOPLE WHO SUPPORT HIM ARE GOOD, HARDWORK, DECENT AMERICAN PEOPLE WHO DON'T WANT TO BE IN BED WITH RUSSIA, DON'T WANT TO GIVE UP OUR DEMOCRACY, DON'T WANT TO GIVE UP OUR FREE ELECTIONS TO HACKING AND TO INTERNET SOCIAL MEDIA GAMES. THAT'S WHAT WE'VE HAD. SO I THANK YOU FOR HAVING THIS SPECIAL ORDER. I HAVE A BILL I TOOK OVER WITH MR. CONYERS WORK MR. WALTERS JONES, A REPUBLICAN THAT SAYS YOU CAN'T FIRE MR. MUELLER WITHOUT CAUSE AND GIVES REDRESS IN COURT. SHEILA JACKSON LEE HAS ANOTHER. WE HAVE TO BE AWARE AND ALERT. IF THIS HAPPENS, THE PEOPLE HAVE TO LET THEIR REPRESENTATIVES KNOW AND PARTICULARLY THE REPUBLICAN REPRESENTATIVES KNOW, THEY WON'T STAND FOR IT, THEY WON'T LET ANOTHER SATURDAY NIGHT MISS CAR, BECAUSE ROSENSTEIN SAID MR. MUELLER HAS DONE NOTHING TO BE FIRED, PROBABLY WOULD NOT FIRE HIM. WHICH MEANS ROSENSTEIN WILL BE FIRED. AND THAT IS THE END OF THE RULE OF LAW AND THAT'S WHAT MAKES US DIFFERENT FROM OTHER COUNTRIES. MAKES US DIFFERENT FROM DICTATORS. AND AUTOCRATS. THANK YOU, MR. RASKIN.

                          Show Full Text
                        • 01:49:31 PM

                          MR. RASKIN

                          THANK YOU FOR YOUR LEADERSHIP, THANK YOU FOR INVOKING THE CRITICAL…

                          THANK YOU FOR YOUR LEADERSHIP, THANK YOU FOR INVOKING THE CRITICAL WATERGATE ANALOGY, THE SATURDAY NIGHT MISS CAR -- MASSACRE WITH THE FIRING OF ARCHIBALD COX AND OTHERS WHO REFUSED TO COVER UP FOR THE PRESIDENT'S CRIMES AND MISDEEDS. THANK YOU FOR YOUR LEGISLATION THAT WOULD TRY TO EMPOWER THE SPECIAL COUNSEL NOT TO BE FIRED WITHOUT A COURT'S SAY-SO, AT LEAST. SO TO BUILD ANOTHER CHECK AND BALANCE. THANK YOU ALSO FOR INVOKING WHAT'S ALSO TAKING PLACE IN WASHINGTON RIGHT NOW, THIS MASSIVE ASSAULT ON THE AMERICAN MIDDLE CLASS THROUGH THIS TAX -- SO-CALLED TAX CUT BILL WHICH TAX SCAM, WHICH WOULD RAISE TAXES FOR TENS OF MILLIONS OF AMERICANS WHILE TRANSMITTING BILLIONS OF DOLLARS UP THE INCOME AND WEALTH LADDER AND EVER SINCE WE'VE ARRIVED HERE, THE WHOLE GOVERNMENT HAS FELT LIKE A MONEY MAKING OPERATION FOR A PERSON A FAMILY A SMALL GROUP OF BILLIONAIRES IN THE CABINET A HANDFUL OF PEOPLE IN THE COUNTRY LIKE THE KOCH BROTHERS AND THE MERSERS. AND WE CANNOT ALLOW EITHER THIS ASSAULT ON THE BASIC MIDDLE CLASS ECONOMICS OF THE COUNTRY TO GO THROUGH, OR THIS ASSAULT ON THE CONSTITUTION AND THE RULE OF LAW WHICH WE REASONS SOD VIVIDLY YESTERDAY IN THE HOW JUDICIARY COMMITTEE. I WANT TO THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE AND BEING ONE OF THE FIRST TO BLOW THE WHISTLE ABOUT WHAT WAS TAKING PLACE HERE.

                          Show Full Text
                        • 01:51:00 PM

                          MR. COHEN

                          THANK YOU, SIR, AND CARRY ON.

                        • 01:51:03 PM

                          MR. RASKIN

                          WITH THAT, I WOULD JUST LIKE TO SEEK THE OPPORTUNITY FOR US TO REVISE AND…

                          WITH THAT, I WOULD JUST LIKE TO SEEK THE OPPORTUNITY FOR US TO REVISE AND EXTEND OVER THE NEXT SEVERAL DAYS, MR. SPEAKER AND I'M GOING TO YIELD FINALLY TO MY FRIEND MR. MCGOVERN FROM MASSACHUSETTS.

                          Show Full Text
                        • 01:51:24 PM

                          THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

                          THE GENTLEMAN YIELDS BACK. MEMBERS ARE REMINED TO REFRAIN FROM ENGAGING IN…

                          THE GENTLEMAN YIELDS BACK. MEMBERS ARE REMINED TO REFRAIN FROM ENGAGING IN PERSONALITIES TOWARD THE PRESIDENT AND MEMBERS OF THE SENATE WHETHER ORIGINATED AS THE MEMBER'S OWN WORDS OR BEING REITERATED FROM ANOTHER SOURCE. UNDER THE SPEAKER'S ANNOUNCED POLICY OF JANUARY 3, 2017, THE GENTLEMAN FROM MASSACHUSETTS, MR. MCGOVERN, IS RECOGNIZED FOR THE REMAINDER OF THE HOUR AS THE DESIGNEE OF THE MINORITY LEADER.

                          Show Full Text
                        • 01:51:50 PM

                          MR. MCGOVERN

                          MR. SPEAKER, THIS WEEK PEOPLE ALL AROUND THE WORLD ARE COMMEMORATING HUMAN…

                          MR. SPEAKER, THIS WEEK PEOPLE ALL AROUND THE WORLD ARE COMMEMORATING HUMAN RIGHTS DAY. THE ANNUAL CELEBRATION OF THE ADOPTION OF THE UNIVERSAL DECLARATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS. ARTICLE 13 OF THE DECLARATION AFFIRMS THAT EVERYONE HAS THE RIGHT TO LEAD ANY -- LEAVE ANY COUNTRY, INCLUDING HIS OWN, AND RETURN TO HIS COUNTRY. I HAVE THAT RIGHT AS A CITIZEN OF THE UNITED STATES I CAN LEAVE MY COUNTRY WHEREVER I CHOOSE AND I HAVE THE RIGHT TO RETURN WHENEVER I LIKE. FOR ME, THIS RIGHT IS NOT THEORETICAL. I EXERCISE IT EVERY TIME I TRAVEL ABROAD AND EVERY TIME I RETURN HOME. BUT MR. SPEAKER, HIS HOLINESS THE 14TH DA LAMBINGS -- DALAI LLAMA -- LAMA HAS NOT SEEN HIS HOME SINCE HE WAS FORCED INTO EXILE IN 1949. HE DESCRIBES HIMSELF AS A SIMPLE BUDDHIST MONK. HE WAS RECOGNIZED AS THE REINCARNATION OF THE PREVIOUS DALAI LAMA WHEN HE WAS 2 YEARS OLD AND HE DWAN HIS MONASTIC STUDIES WHEN HE WAS 6. WELL BEFORE HE BEGAN HIS STUDIES, HE WAS CALLED UPON TO -- FINISH HIS STUDY, HE WAS CALLED UPON TO ASSUME LEADERSHIP. FOR THE NEXT NINE YEARS HE WORKED TO PRESERVITY BET'S AUTONOMY AND CULTURE. BUT AFTER YEARS OF GROWING RESENTMENT AGAINST RESTRICTIONS IMPOSED BY THE CHINESE COMMUNISTS, A FULL-SCALE REVOLT BROKE OUT IN MARCH, 1959, AND THE DALAI LAMA WAS FORCED TO FLEE AS THE UPRISING WAS CRUSHED BY CHINESE TROOPS. ON MARCH 31, 1959, HE BEGAN A PERMANENT EXILE IN INDIA, SETTLING IN DARAM SALAT IN NORTHERN INDIA. SINCE THEN HE'S NOT RETURNED TOITY BET, OR MORE RACK RATLY, HE'S NEVER BEEN PERMITTED TO RETURN. HE HAS SPENT MORE THAN 60 YEARS IN EXILE. TODAY, THE DALAI LAMA IS 8 YEARS OLD A MAN RENOWNED ALL OVER THE WORLD FOR HIS COMMITMENT TO PEACE. HE'S CONSISTENTLY ADVOCATED FOR POLICIES OF NONVIOLENCE, EVEN IN THE FACE OF EXTREME AGGRESSION. IN 1989, HE WON THE NOBLE PEACE PRIZE IN RECOGNITION OF WHAT WAS THEN HIS NEARLY 3046 YEAR NONVIOLENT CAMPAIGN -- HIS NEARLY 30-YEAR NONVIOLENT CAMPAIGN TO END CHINA'S DOMINATION OF HIS HOMELAND. IN 1987, HE WAS AWARDED THE CONGRESSIONAL GOLD MEDAL AND THEN-PRESIDENT GEORGE BUSH CALLED HIM A MAN OF FAITH, SINCERITY AND PEACE. I HAVE LONG BELIEVED THE DALAI LAMA IS AN PARENT PART OF ACHIEVINGITY BET TAN PEACE. STHINS 1970'S, THE DALAI LAMA HAS BEEN LOOKING FOR A WAY TO RESOLVE THE SITUATION THEY HAVITY BET TAN PEOPLE THROUGH NEGOTIATION HE PROPOSED THE MIDDLE WAY APPROACH AS A PATH TOWARDITY BET TAN AUTONOMY WITHIN CHINA. HIS COMMITMENT TO NONVIOLENCE AND RECOGNITION AS THE SPIRITUAL LEADER OFITY BET TANS WORLDWIDE CONFERS ON HIM AN UNDENIABLE LEGITIMACY THAT WOULD BE OF GREAT BENEFIT WERE CHINA WILLING TO RESTART THE DIALOGUE THAT'S BEEN SUSPENDED SINCE 2010. BUT CHINA HAS NOT RECOGNIZED THIS OR TAKEN ADVANTAGE OF THIS OPPORTUNITY TO ACHEE A PEACEFUL SOLUTION. INSTEAD, CHINESE AUTHORITIES CONTINUE TO VIEW THE DALAI LAMA WITH SUSPICION, DISPARAGE HIM AND ACCUSE OF HIM OF FOMENTING SEPARATISM. THEY SEEM TO BELIEVE WITH HIS EVENTUAL INEVITABLE DEATH THEY WILL BE ASSURED OF CONSOLIDATING THEIR HOLD ONITY BET. I WOULD NOT BE SO SURE. TODAY AROUND THE WORLD WE ARE SEING THE CONSEQUENCES OF REPRESSION OF RELIGIOUS AND ETHNIC MINORITIES. FOR THE CHINESE, THERE'S STILL TIME TO RECOGNIZE THAT INCLUSION AND RESPECT FOR HUMAN RIGHTS OFITY BET TANS OFFERS THE BEST PATH TO SECURITY. SO TODAY, I CALL ON CHINA TO FOLLOW A DIFFERENT PATH. I CALL ON THE CHINESE AUTHORITIES TO AFFIRM THE RIGHT OF THE 14TH DALAI LAMA TO RETURN TO HIS HOMELAND, WHETHER TO VISIT OR TO STAY. I CALL ON THEM TO WELCOME HIM HOME, AFFORD HIM THE RESPECT HE DESERVES AS A MAN OF PEACE AND SIT DOWN WITH HIM TO RESOLVITY BET TAN GRIEVANCES TO PREVENT THE DEEPING OF TENSIONS AND ERUPTION OF CONFLICT. WERE CHINA TO TAKE SUCH A STEP, I BELIEVE THE INTERNATIONAL REACTION WOULD BE POSITIVE. I WOULD BE AMONG THE FIRST TO RECOGNIZE AND CONGRATULATE AN IMPORTANT GESTURE. WE NEED TO BE IN THE BUSINESS OF PREVENTING AND TRANSFORMING CONFLICTS. INSTEAD OF BEING FORCED TO RESPOND TO THEIR CONSEQUENCE AFTER THE FACT. SO I URGE MY COLLEAGUES TO JOIN ME IN CALLING ON THE CHINESE AUTHORITIES TO ALLOW THE DALAI LAMA TO RETURN TO HIS HOMELAND. THE CHINESE GOVERNMENT SHOULD ALLOW HIS HOLINESS THE DALAI LAMA, WHO IS REVERED ALL AROUND THE WORLD, THE ABILITY TO GO BACK TO HIS HOME. TO GO BACK TO WHERE HE WAS BORN. S THAT TIME FOR BOLD ACTION. I URGE MY COLLEAGUES TO SPEAK OUT ALONG WITH ME IN URGING THE CHINESE GOVERNMENT TO DO THE RIGHT THING. NOW IS THE TIME TO RAISE OUR VOICES, NOW BEFORE IT IS TOO LATE. WITH THAT, I YIELD BACK MY TIME.

                          Show Full Text
                        • 01:57:09 PM

                          THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

                          UNDER THE SPEAKER'S ANNOUNCED POLICY OF JANUARY 3, 2017, THE CHAIR…

                          UNDER THE SPEAKER'S ANNOUNCED POLICY OF JANUARY 3, 2017, THE CHAIR RECOGNIZES THE GENTLEMAN GENTLEMAN FROM GEORGIA, MR. LOUDERMILK FOR 30 MINUTES.

                          Show Full Text
                        • 01:57:26 PM

                          MR. LOUDERMILK

                          THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. I DON'T INTEND TO TAKE ALL 30 MINUTES BUT THE TIME…

                          THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. I DON'T INTEND TO TAKE ALL 30 MINUTES BUT THE TIME I D SPEND IS IMPORTANT BECAUSE I WANT TO HONOR AN IMPORTANT PERSON. FIRST LET ME WISH YOU A MERRY CHRISTMAS. AS WE GET INTO THE SEASONMARK OF US ARE THINKING ABOUT FAMILY AND FRIENDS AND SPENDING CHRISTMAS TIME AT HOME, WHICH I HOPE TO BE ABLE TO DO AS WELL. EVERY CHRISTMAS SEASON, MY THOUGHT GOES BACK ABOUT 73 YEARS AGO MY DAD WAS A MEDIC IN WORLD WAR II. AND ON DECEMBER 16, WHICH WILL BE JUST A FEW DAYS FROM NOW, WILL BE THE 73RD ANNIVERSARY OF ONE OF THE LARGEST, MOST SIGNIFICANT BATTLES OF WORLD WAR II. THE BATTLE OF THE BULGE. MY FATHER WAS A MEDIC IN THE BATTLE OF THE BULGE. I STILL REMEMBER THE STORY HE IS USED TO TELL OF THE COLD WEATHER AND THE SNOW AND HOW WHEN THE GERMANS BROKE THROUGH THE SEEING FRED LINE THEY DECIMATED AMERICAN FORCES. WE LOST THOUSANDS AND THOUSANDS OF TROOPS IN THOSE FEW DAYS. AND HOW THE SNOW WAS JUST SO HEAVY AND SO THICK THAT THEY -- MANY WERE TRAPPED IN THEIR FOX HOLES, UNABLE TO ESCAPE. MANY RETREATED BACK TO THEIR -- TO AREAS OF SAFETY AND THE LINES BEHIND. BUT I DON'T WANT TO TALK ABOUT MY DAD HERE TODAY. I WANT TO TALK ABOUT SOMEONE ELSE A DEAR FRIEND OF MINE, SOMEONE I GOT TO SERB IN THE GEORGIA LEGISLATURE WITH. ANOTHER YOUNG GEORGIAN FROM SPALDING COUNTY, WHO WAS A PILOT IN THE ARMY AIR CORPS. NOW, CAPTAIN JOHN YATES WAS NOT WHAT YOU MAY THINK OF, MOST PEOPLE THINK OF AN ARMY AIR CORPS PILOT FLYING A BMBING-29 OR B-25 MITCHELL. WHAT JOHN YATES FLEW WAS A SMALL SINGLE ENGINE PIPER CUB AIRCRAFT. HE WAS LIAISON PILOT. MOST PEOPLE AREN'T FAMILIAR WITH WHAT A LIAISON PILOT IS, BUT THEY PLAYED A CRUCIAL AND CRITICAL ROLE IN THE VICTORY IN EUROPE IN WORLD WAR II AND EVEN IN THE PACIFIC THEATER. YOU SEE THIS -- AS A PILOT I HAVE A LOT OF APPRECIATION FOR SOMEONE WHO WILL FLY A VERY SMALL PLANE, I MEAN, I'M A PRETTY TALL GUY, I DON'T FIT IN THE COCKPIT OF A PIPER CUB VERY WELL. THAT'S WHY I'VE NEVER ACTUALLY FLOWN ONE. BUT JOHN YATES WOULD CLIMB INTO THE COCKPIT OF THIS SMALL, SINGLE ENGINE AIRCRAFT, WHICH ARE STILL IN USE TODAYMARK OF THEM ARE USED IN THE BUSH AREAS OF ALASKA BECAUSE OF HOW LIGHTWEIGHT THEY ARE AND SMALL AND COMPACT, DON'T TAKE A WHOLE LOT OF RUNWAY HE WOULD CLIMB INTO THIS SMALL ALUMINUM AIRPLANE AND WOULD FLY JUST ABOVE THE FREE TOP -- TREE TOPS TO DRAW ENEMY FIRE HE FLEW A PLANE TO BE SHOT AT. NOW THIS WASN'T LIKE CLOSE AIR SUPPORT AIRPLANES WE HAVE TODAY THAT HAVE TITANIUM SHELLS THAT CAN ABSORB A LOT OF IMPACT. NO, THIS WAS JUST A SMALL PLANE WITH AN ALUMINUM SKIN AROUND THE FUSELAGE. BUT WHAT HIS PURPOSE WAS, WAS TO FLY CLOSE TO THE ENEMY, TO TRY TO SPOT THE ENEMY, AND CAUSE THE ENEMY TO FIRE AT HIM, SO OUR ARTILLERY AND OUR OTHER AIRCRAFT WOULD ACTUALLY KNOW WHERE THE ENEMY FORCES WERE AND WHERE THEIR HEAVY ARTILLERY WAS. IT'S AN INCREDIBLE, INCREDIBLE JOB FOR SOMEONE TO DO, ESPECIALLY A YOUNG PERSON. MAYBE IN HIS 20'S. AS HE WAS SERVING IN WORLD WAR II. NOW, AFTER 60 YEARS OF -- FROM THE TIME THAT HE FLEW THOSE PIPER CUB AIRCRAFT I HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO SERVE WITH JOHN YATES IN THE GEORGIA LEGISLATURE. IT WAS ONE THING I APPRECIATED ABOUT JOHN, AS WE FIND FROM A LOT OF VETERANS, AS A VETERAN MYSELF I KNOW THAT SAME FEELING AS YOU -- ONCE YOU SERVE YOU ALWAYS HAVE THIS DESIRE TO SERVE IN ANOTHER CAPACITY. IN 1989, JOHN WAS ELECTED TO THE GEORGIA HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. I CAME SEVERAL YEARS LATER TO SERVE WITH HIM, BUT JOHN CONTINUED HIS FIGHT FOR HIS FELLOW SERVICEMEN, FOR HIS COUNTRY, AND THE GEORGIA LEGISLATURE, AS HE WAS CHAIRMAN OF THE VETERANS' COMMITTEE AND WAS ALWAYS ON THE FRONT LINES OF FIGHTING FOR VETERANS' CARE, FOR VETERANS AND TO ENSURE THE GOVERNMENT PROVIDED TO VETERANS THE CARE THAT THEY NEEDED AND THE SERVICES THAT THEY DESERVED. HE UNDERSTOOD THE MEANING OF PATRIOTISM. HE LIVED AS A PATRIOT, AND EVERYTHING HE DID PORTRAYED THE IDEA OF PATRIOTISM. ONE THING I LIKED ABOUT JOHN YATES WAS ONE OF HIS FAVORITE QUOTES WAS FROM WINSTON CHURCHILL AND THAT QUOTE WAS, NEVER GIVE UP, NEVER GIVE UP, NEVER GIVE UP. THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE CAN TAKE HOLD OF OURSELVES TODAY, ESPECIALLY AS AMERICANS. WE HAVE A HISTORY OF NEVER GIVING UP, OF FORTITUDE, THE NOT JUST TAKING DEFEAT AND RUNNING AWAY BUT TAKING DEFEAT AND TURNING IT INTO A VICTORY. JOHN YATES NEVER QUIT SERVING. ALL HE LOOKED FOR WAS THE ABILITY TO SERVE IN THE NEXT MISSION HE WAS CALLED FOR. AND ON DECEMBER 11 THIS YEAR, JOHN YATES WENT ON TO HIS NEXT MISSION IN HEAVEN. WE'RE GOING TO MISS JOHN YATES. THE STATE OF GEORGIA IS GOING TO MISS JOHN YATES, BUT I STAND HERE TODAY, MR. SPEAKER, TO HONOR ONE OF THOSE TRUE AMERICAN PATRIOTS WHO STOOD IN THE FACE OF BATTLE AND FACED THE ENEMY FACE TO FACE, AND WHEN HE CAME HOME HE FOLLOWED THAT DESIRE TO CONTINUE TO SERVE AND HE SERVED UNTIL HE PASSED AWAY JUST A FEW DAYS AGO. MR. SPEAKER, I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO JUST TAKE A MOMENT AND RECOGNIZE ANOTHER ANNIVERSARY. SIX MONTHS AGO TODAY ON A BASEBALL FIELD JUST A FEW MILES FROM HERE, I AND SEVERAL OF MY COLLEAGUES FOUND OURSELVES IN A COMBAT ZONE OF OUR OWN. DOESN'T SEEM LIKE IT'S BEEN SIX WHOLE MONTHS SINCE A CRAZED GUN MAN WALKED ONTO OUR FIELD AND STARTED SHOOTING AT US, BUT THE REASON I WANT TO BRING THAT UP TODAY IS BECAUSE EVERY PERSON ON THAT FIELD THAT DAY THAT WAS SHOT AT IS STILL IN THIS HOUSE TODAY AND STILL WALKING AROUND IN WASHINGTON, D.C. BY THE GRACE OF GOD, WE WERE PROTECTED DURING THAT TIME, AND I JUST WANT TO THANK EVERYONE WHOSE PRAYERS AND SUPPORT AND THOSE WHO RESPONDED TO THAT EVENT TO COME OUT AND SAVE THE LIVES OF MANY OF US. STEVE SCALISE, THE WHIP, THAT WE SERVE WITH HERE. MATT MICA,, ONE OF OUR STAFF MEMBERS. ZACH BARTH. AND CAPITOL POLICE CRYSTAL GRINER ALL WERE WOUNDED DURING THAT BALLOT. AND IT REALLY WAS A BATTLE. BUT I ALSO WANT TO HIGHLIGHT SOME OF THOSE THAT DIDN'T LEAVE THE FIELD THAT DAY, WHO STAYED AND HELP OTHERS. PEOPLE LIKE MY GOOD FRIEND FROM MISSISSIPPI, CONGRESSMAN TRENT KELLY, AN ARMY RESERVIST WHO WHEN HE IDENTIFIED THE SHOOTER HE DIDN'T PANIC AND LED MANY TO SAFETY. REPRESENTATIVE MISSOURI BROOKS WHO STAYED AND HELPED TURN GET ZACH BARTH WHO HAD BEEN SHOT IN THE CALF. BRAD WENSTRUP WHO IS ALSO A COLONEL IN THE ARMY RESERVE SERVES, A COMBAT DOCTOR, WHO WAS OUT ON THE EDGE OF THE FIELD AND COULD HAVE EASILY RAN AWAY BUT STAYED AND WAS ONE OF THE FIRST TO BE ABLE TO RUN OUT AND GIVE AID TO STEVE SCALISE OUT ON THE FIELD AS HE LAID NEAR SECOND BASE. RETIRED LIEUTENANT GENERAL JACK BERGMAN. GENERAL BERGMAN WAS ABLE TO ACTUALLY LEAD SEVERAL OF OUR PLAYERS AND STAFF MEMBERS TO SAFETY INSIDE OF THE DUGOUT AWAY FROM THE GUNFIRE. AND ALSO FOR BRIAN KELLY, CIVILIAN STAFF MEMBER ON THE TEAM WHO STAYED WITH ME THROUGHOUT THE GUNFIRE AS WE TRIED TO LEND AID TO MATT WHO WAS LAYING NEXT TO THE CAPITOL POLICE S.U.V. THROUGHOUT THE ENTIRE INCIDENT. AND FINALLY, AS MY THANKS GOES OUT TO SPECIAL AGENT DAVID BAILEY WHO I PERSONALLY WATCHED ON NUMEROUS OCCASIONS PUT HIS OWN LIFE IN DANGER AS HE WOULD MOVE OUT INTO THE LINE OF FIRE TO DRAW FIRE AWAY FROM MYSELF AND BRIAN KELLY BECAUSE HE SAW WHENEVER THE SHOOTER WAS NOT SHOOTING AT THE CAPITOL POLICE HE WAS SHOOTING AT US AND HE WOULD PURPOSEFULLY MOVE HIMSELF IN THE LINE OF FIRE AND MIR ACKLEY PROTECT -- MIRACULOUSLY PROTECTED. AND SO THE ALEXANDRIA POLICE DEPARTMENT WHO CAME TO OUR AID AND EVENTUALLY TOOK DOWN THE SHOOTER. YOU KNOW, MOMENTS LIKE THIS ARE SURREAL TO ME AND TO OTHERS AND THEY ARE IMPORTANT THAT WE GO BACK AND WE REFLECT AND WE REMEMBER THESE MOMENTS BECAUSE THE ONLY WAY THAT WE CAN CORRECT MISTAKES FROM OUR PAST IS IF WE GO BACK AND WE RELIVE THEM AND WE LOOK AT WHAT CAUSED THIS. AND AS WE STAND HERE TODAY, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I SEE THAT WE NEED IN AMERICA THAT WE HAVE LOST IS THE IDEA OF CIVILITY. WE HEARD HERE ON THE FLOOR TODAY DIFFERING OPINIONS REGARDING POLICY, IDEAS OF WHAT IS GOOD FOR THIS COUNTRY, WHAT IS RIGHT FOR THIS COUNTRY, AND THAT'S PART OF THE STRENGTH OF THIS COUNTRY. THAT IS THE FREEDOM THAT WE HAVE IS TO BRING DIFFERENT IDEAS. THE WHOLE IDEA OF THIS CHAMBER IS TO BRING DIFFERENT IDEAS AND DIFFERENT POLICY OPINIONS TO THE FLOOR AND DEBATE. AND THOSE THAT GET THE MAJORITY OF IDEAS, PEOPLE ON THEIR SIDE OF THE IDEAS, THEN WE MOVE FORWARD WITH THOSE. BUT AT SOME POINT IN THE PAST WE HAVE TRANSITIONED BEYOND JUST ARGUING OVER IDEAS, AND WE BRING RHETORIC THAT'S DISTASTEFUL. WE ATTACK THE PERSON, THEIR FAMILIES. I JUST BELIEVE THAT WE CAN DO A WHOLE LOT BETTER IN THIS NATION IF WE ONCE AGAIN FIND THE ABILITY TO AGREE TO DISAGREE BUT RESPECT THE RIGHTS AND THE FREEDOM AND THE LIBERTY OF THE OTHER PERSON TO HAVE THEIR OPINION. IF WE CAN DO THAT THEN WE CAN ENGAGE IN DISCOURSE AND WE WILL LESSEN THE AMOUNT OF VIOLENCE THAT WE SEE THAT ARE DRIVEN BY POLITICAL RHETORIC. THAT WILL BE THE MESSAGE THAT I WOULD PASS OFF TO AMERICA ON THE ANNIVERSARY OF THE SHOOTING, BECAUSE IT'S -- THAT'S THE IDEA, THAT PEOPLE LIKE JOHN YATES LIVED THEIR LIVES FOR, THAT FOUGHT THE BATTLES THEY FOUGHT FOR WAS FOR THE FREEDOM WE HAVE IN THIS NATION TO CONTINUE TO EXIST. I BELIEVE AMERICA'S GREATEST DAYS ARE AHEAD OF US, BUT WE GOT A LITTLE WORK TO DO TO ACTUALLY GRASP HOLD OF THIS. MR. SPEAKER, I THANK YOU FOR THE TIME, THANK YOU FOR ALLOWING ME TO HONOR THE MEMORY OF MY GOOD FRIEND AND COLLEAGUE, JOHN YATES, AND I YIELD BACK THE BALANCE OF MY TIME.

                          Show Full Text
                        • 02:09:32 PM

                          THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

                          THE GENTLEMAN YIELDS BACK. UNDER THE SPEAKER'S ANNOUNCED POLICY OF JANUARY…

                          THE GENTLEMAN YIELDS BACK. UNDER THE SPEAKER'S ANNOUNCED POLICY OF JANUARY 3, 2017, THE CHAIR RECOGNIZES THE GENTLEMAN FROM TEXAS, MR. GOHMERT, FOR 30 MINUTES.

                          Show Full Text
                        • 02:09:54 PM

                          MR. GOHMERT

                          THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. MY COLLEAGUES ACROSS THE AISLE DISCUSSING ISSUE OF…

                          THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. MY COLLEAGUES ACROSS THE AISLE DISCUSSING ISSUE OF SPECIAL COUNSEL MUELLER AND SINCE THERE'S ONE OR TWO POSSIBILITIES ABOUT SOME OF THE THINGS THEY SAID REGARDING REPUBLICANS AND ESPECIALLY ON THE COMMITTEE EITHER AS HIS MEMORY IS TERRIBLE OR HE'S FALSELY INTENTIONALLY MISREPRESENTING THINGS. I AM NOT SAYING THAT'S THE CASE. I'M SAYING IT'S ONE OR THE OTHER AND I WILL GET TO THAT MOMENTARILY. THIS HEARING WE HAD THIS WEEK IN JUDICIARY WITH DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL ROD ROSENSTEIN DEEPLY, DEEPLY TROUBLING TO THOSE WHO WANT THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE TO BE ABOUT JUSTICE. THOSE WHO WANT TO SEE THE F.B.I. BE THAT GREAT ARBITER, THAT GREAT ENTITY THAT WILL ASSURE THAT JUSTICE IS DONE. WE NEED AN ENTITY LIKE THAT. THE A.T.F., THEIR REPUTATION WAS SORELY SOILED BACK DURING THE ATTACK BY THE A.T.F. ON WACO, THE FACILITY WHERE SOME FOLKS THAT HAD BEEN SUCKED IN TO BASICALLY A CULT, IT DIDN'T HAVE TO HAPPEN, AND AS WE FOUND OUT, LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT SAID WE KNEW THAT DAVE OCCUR HE SHALL WENT TO SAM -- KURESH WENT TO SAM'S WHOLESALE IN BELL IMMEDIATE, I THINK TUESDAY, AND IF THE A.T.F. TOLD US THEY WANTED TO ARREST HIM, WE COULD HELP THEM ARRANGE, AS HE WALKED OUT OF SAM'S WITH GROCERY SACKS IN HIS ARMS AND THERE WOULD HAVE BEEN NO INCIDENT. NO LIVES WOULD HAVE BEEN LOST. NO CHILDREN BURNED UP IN A FIRE. NO PEOPLE KILLED SO UNNECESSARILY. BUT THE A.T.F. WANTED TO MAKE A POINT AND WANTED TO HAVE A BIG SHOW AND ACTUALLY THERE WERE CONSTITUTIONAL ISSUES THERE. I READ IN THE PAPER THAT THE GENTLEMAN THAT SERVED WITH ME AT FORT BENING, GEORGIA, DURING MY TIME IN THE ARMY HAD ADVISED THE POST COMMANDER OUT AT FORT BLISS THAT HE SHOULD NOT ALLOW THE U.S. ARMY TANKS OR EQUIPMENT TO BE USED IN VIOLATION UNLESS HE HAD A DIRECT ORDER FROM THE PRESIDENT HIMSELF AND AS WE FOUND OUT AFTER THE FACT, THE PRESIDENT MADE CLEAR THAT OH, THAT WAS RENO'S DEAL. YOU HAVE TO TALK TO HER ABOUT THAT. SO CLEARLY HE DID NOT ORDER U.S. MILITARY TO USE EQUIPMENT AND ALLOW THEIR EQUIPMENT TO BE USED AGAINST CIVILIAN AMERICAN CITIZENS. SO THERE WERE ALL KINDS OF TERRIBLE THINGS THAT CAME OUT AND IT REALLY MADE THE A.T.F. LOOK BAD. AND I WAS A FAN OF THE A.T.F., THE FEDERAL A.T.F. THEY KNEW THEM TO HAVE DONE SOME GREAT THINGS AND I HAD SOME GREAT DEAR FRIENDS AND STILL DO HAVE SOME VERY DEAR GREAT FRIENDS THAT ARE IN THE A.T.F., BUT THE POINT IS SUCH HORRENDOUS JUDGMENT IN THE A.T.F. SETTING UP WHAT THEY KNEW OR SHOULD HAVE KNOWN WOULD PROBABLY RESULT IN LOSSES OF LIVES, INCLUDING SEVERE INJURIES TO A.T.F. THEMSELVES. I DON'T THINK THEY LOST ANYBODY, BUT THEY CERTAINLY WERE SEVERELY WOUNDED AND TREATED THERE IN WACO, BUT THAT KIND OF OUTRAGEOUS JUDGMENT THAT PUTS POLITICAL AND NEWS INTERESTS AHEAD OF JUST DOING THE JOB AND SEEING JUSTICE DONE ENDS UP BEING SUCH A TERRIBLE BLOT ON THE REPUTATION OF ANY ENTITY THAT IT'S HARD TO WORK BACK FROM THAT. I STILL HEAR PEOPLE THAT REFER TO THAT INCIDENT NEARLY 25 YEARS AGO AND STILL IT'S SUCH A BLOT ON THE A.T.F. THAT IT'S HARD FOR PEOPLE TO CONSIDER THE A.T.F. WITHOUT THINKING HOW TERRIBLY -- JUST INAPPROPRIATE THE A.T.F. ACTED AT TIMES. . AND CAUSED PEOPLE TO WONDER, WAS THAT THE GENERAL RULE OR WAS THAT THE EXCEPTION AND PEOPLE AFTER SOME OTHER EPISODES THINK IT'S THE RULE WITH THE A.T.F., SOME SAY GET RID OF IT. WHAT'S GONE ON NOW IS CURRENTLY GOING ON NOW, WITH THE DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL TAKING ALL THREE POSITIONS THAT HE SEES NO EVIL , HE HEARS NO EVIL , HE DOESN'T KNOW OF ANY EVIL GOING ON HE THINKS EVERYTHING, LIKE THE PET SAID, GOD'S IN HIS HEAVEN AND ALL IS RIGHT WITH THE WORLD. I BELIEVE THE AUTHOR HAD A LITTLE GIRL SAYING THAT. BUT IT'S NOT RIGHT WITH THE WORLD. TERRIBLY WRONG. AND AMERICA AND THE WORLD SIT IN A POSITION WHERE POTENTIALLY WESTERN CIVILIZATION WHERE THE MOST INCREDIBLE, AMAZING STRIDES IN HEALTH CARE IN ENERGY, AND ALL KINDS OF AREAS OF LIFE ON THIS EARTH HAVE BEEN MADE BETTER EXPONENTIALLY. THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA IS AT THE VERY HEART OF THOSE GREAT DEVELOPMENTS. A MAJORITY IN THE UNITED STATES THROUGHOUT OUR HISTORY WOULD ALWAYS SAY, WE CALL THOSE BLESSINGS FROM GOD. NOW, MAYBE IT IS, MAYBE IT ISN'T, A MAJORITY, BUT WE ARE EVER GETTING CLOSER TO A POSITION WHERE THIS GRAND EXPERIMENT IN SELF-JUDGMENT IS POTENTIALLY ON THE VERGE OF BEING LOST. HISTORY IS NOT BEING TAUGHT AS ZELLOUSLY AS IT ONCE WAS. PLACES LIKE HILLDALE COLLEGE OR LIBERTY. THERE ARE SOME PLACES WHERE IT IS BEING TAUGHT. I HAD FANTASTIC HISTORY TEACHERS, WHICH IS WHAT I MAJORED IN AT TEXAS A&M, BECAUSE I KNEW I WAS GOING TO DO FOUR YEARS IN THE ARMY AT LEAST AND IF WE WERE AT WAR WHEN MY FOUR YEARS WERE UP, I WOULD HAVE CONTINUED TO SERVE. BUT OUR STUDENTS DON'T KNOW HISTORY ANYMORE. WHY? BECAUSE PRESIDENT CARTER DECIDED THAT THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT INTERVENTION INTO EDUCATION, EVEN THOUGH IT'S NOT AN ENUMERATED POWER UNDER THE CONSTITUTION AND IT IS THEREFORE A POWER THAT IS RESERVED TO THE STATES AND THE PEOPLE AND NOT THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT, WELL WE'VE BEEN ACTING EXTRA CONSTITUTIONALLY, THAT MEANS OUTSIDE THE INSTITUTION, FOR QUITE SOME TIME, GOING BACK TO THE LATE 1970'S UNDER PRESIDENT CARTER. AND OUR STUDENTS HAVE SUFFERED AS A RESULT. AND THEY DON'T KNOW HISTORY. AND SOMEONE HAD ADVISED ME THAT EVEN THOUGH HISTORY IS NOT AN IMPORTANT PART OF THE FEDERALLY MANDATED TEST, THERE ARE THINGS THAT IN DIFFERENT SUBJECTS ARE MANDATED BY THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. HERE IS AN ELEMENT THAT STUDENTS SHOULD KNOW ABOUT THE SUBJECT. I WAS ADVISED THAT THE ONE AREA THAT FEDERAL -- THE FEDERALLY MANDATED TEST, THE OBVIOUSLY AREA HISTORICALLY THAT STUDENTS WERE REQUIRED TO KNOW IS THAT WHEN THE UNITED STATES DROPPED TWO ATOMIC BOMBS, ONE ON HIGH ROSHE MA AND ONE ON -- ON HIROSHIMA AND ONE OF NAGASAKI, IT RAISED SERIOUS QUESTIONS ABOUT THE UNITED STATES' MORALITY WHICH IS ABSOLUTELY FICTITIOUS, UNLESS THE IGNORANCE OF THE AUTHORS REQUIRING SUCH A THING DID NOT ALLOW THEM TO KNOW THE TRUTH. THE TRUTH BEING THAT TRUMAN WAS ADVISED THAT BECAUSE THE EMPEROR OF JAPAN HAD ORDERED THE JAPANESE PEOPLE TO FIGHT FOR THEIR HOMES TO THE DEATH, THEN THE ALLIED FORCES WOULD HAVE TO LAND IN JAPAN, THEY WOULD HAVE HAD TO MOVE ACROSS THE COUNTRY AND IT WAS CONSIDERED A VERY FAIR AND POSSIBLY QUITE CONSERVATIVE ESTIMATE THAT THERE WOULD BE 10 MILLION PEOPLE LOSE THEIR LIVES IF ALLIED FORCES HAD TO LAND AND WERE FIGHTING THE JAPANESE PEOPLE HOME TO HOME TO HOME. SO THE MORALITY OF THE ISSUE IS, WOULD WE MORALLY BE BETTER OFF IN THIS ABSOLUTE WAR THAT THE JAPANESE STARTED AGAINST THE UNITED STATES, WOULD WE BE BETTER OFF LOSING THE HORRIBLE TRAGEDY OF 300,000 OR SO LIVES, OR WOULD WE BE BETTER OFF HAVING FIVE OR SO MILLION JAPANESE PEOPLE KILLED AND FIVE OR SO MILLION ALLIED FORCES BEING LOST? AND THE MORALLY CORRECT DECISION THAT A DEMOCRAT, A MAN THAT APPARENTLY REALLY WRESTLED WITH THE ISSUE FROM A MORAL STANDPOINT, HE DECIDED TO PUT THE AMERICAN BOMBERS AT RISK, THOSE FLYING THE PLANES AND TAKING THE ATOMIC BOMBS, AND TO PUT 200,000 OR 300,000 OR SO PEOPLE AT RISK IN AN EFFORT TO AVOID LOSING FIVE MILLION OR SO JAPANESE AND AN EQUAL NUMBER OF MORE OF THE ALLIED FORCES. I THINK HE MADE THE CORRECT MORAL DECISION. SO THAT DOESN'T RAISE MORAL ISSUES ABOUT THE UNITED STATES, IT RAISES IGNORANCE ISSUES ABOUT THE FEDERALLY MANDATED TEST. WE WOULD BE SO MUCH BETTER OFF IF WE GOT BACK TO ALLOWING LOCAL SCHOOL BOARDS TO DECIDE AND STATES TO DECIDE, AS THEY HAD BEEN FOR MANY DECADES, DECIDING WHAT THEIR STUDENTS SHOULD LEARN. THAT WAS THE BEAUTY OF A FEDERALIST SITUATION WHERE STATES WOULD HAVE SO MUCH POWER. BUT AS IS OFTEN THE CASE WHEN THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT TAKES OVER AN AREA LIKE EDUCATION, THEN IT GETS WORSE. AND I WAS ON THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE TEXAS A&M FORMER STUDENT ASSOCIATION AND I CAN RECALL THE PRESIDENT ADVISING US THAT THE S.A.T., OFFICIAL S.A.T. HAD TO CHANGE THE SCORING SYSTEM FOR THE S.A.T. BECAUSE STUDENTS ACROSS THE BOARD WERE DOING SO MUCH WORSE THAN THEY DID WHEN CLASSES AROUND MY ERA IN THE 1970'S HAD DONE. THAT WE HAD DONE OVERALL SO MUCH BETTER THAN THE STUDENTS THAT CAME THROUGH AFTER THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT TOOK OVER EDUCATION. AND SO I DON'T KNOW IF IT WAS ACCURATE BUT I HAD EDUCATORS BACK AT THE TIME SAY THERE'S A FORMULA SO IT'S HARD TO SAY BUT SAY IF YOU SCORED, SAY, 1400 OUT OF 1600 ON THE S.A.T. IN THE 1970'S, THEN UNDER THE NEW SCORING SYSTEM IT WOULD PROBABLY BE SCORED CLOSER TO 1600, 1500 TO 1600, MAYBE A COUPLE HUNDRED POINTS THEY HAD TO ADD TO THE SYSTEM -- THEY HAD TO ADD TO THE SYSTEM BECAUSE AFTER WE HAD A FEDERAL DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, THEN, YOU KNOW, STUDENTS STARTED DOING WORSE AND SO THE TO THE KEEP IT FROM LOOKING LIKE THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION HERE IN WASHINGTON MADE EDUCATION AS POOR AS IT HELPED TO DO, WE HAD TO RAISE THE S.A.T. SCORES BASICALLY ON AN ARBITRARY BASIS. WE KNOW THAT THE STUDENTS COMING THROUGH IN THE 1980'S, 1990'S, AND THEN THIS NEW MILLENNIUM, THEY HAD THE POTENTIAL TO DO BETTER THAN WE EVER DID BUT BECAUSE THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT GOT INVOLVED, I DON'T THINK IT'S JUST A GREAT IRONY THAT A -- WHEN THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT TOOK OVER EDUCATION UNDER PRESIDENT CARTER, THAT WOW, IRONICALLY, ISN'T IT AMAZING, AT THE SAME TIME STUDENTS WERE DOING WORSE AND WORSE. SO THAT'S WHAT OFTEN HAPPENS WHEN THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT GETS INVOLVED AND WE SAW THAT WITH WACO. IF THEY HAD GOTTEN THE HELP OF THE LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT, THERE WOULD HAVE BEEN NO LOSS OF LIFE IN ALL REALITY. BUT THE A.T.F. WAS GOING TO BUST IN AND MAKE A BIG SHOW OUT OF IT. AND IT COST AN AWFUL LOT OF LIVES. WELL, YOU'D LIKE TO THINK THAT WHEN THE F.B.I. COMES IN YOU DON'T HAVE TO WORRY. THEY'RE GOING TO DO THE RIGHT THING. AND I KNOW SO MANY INCREDIBLE, OUTSTANDING F.B.I. AGENTS. BUT FOR MR. COHEN TO CONTINUE TO SAY EVEN AFTER HE'S BEEN ADVISED AND REMINDED THAT I HAVE BEEN RAISING CAIN ABOUT ROBERT MUELLER FOR OVER A DECADE, I GUESS, HE CAME IN, SWORN IN IN JANUARY OF 2007 AS I UNDERSTAND IT, AND INITIALLY WHEN I QUESTIONED ROBERT MUELLER AS F.B.I. DIRECTOR, WHEN I FIRST GOT TO CONGRESS, I WAS CARRYING THAT IMAGE OF THE GREAT F.B.I., THE IMAGE THAT SO MANY OF THE AGENTS STILL CARRY. THOUSANDS OF THEM STILL CARRY. BUT WITH MORE AND MORE DIFFICULTY BECAUSE OF THE CESSPOOLS THAT HAVE DEVELOPED HERE IN WASHINGTON. AND THE WAY IN WHICH IT HAD BEEN USED AS WE SAW WITH THE I.R.S. DURING THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION, WEAPONIZED AND USED AS A POLITICAL INSTRUMENT. NOW, HOW DO WE KNOW THAT? WELL, WE DIDN'T KNOW NEAR AS MUCH AS WE CONTINUE TO FIND OUT, BUT ROBERT MUELLER RAN OFF THOUSANDS OF YEARS OF EXPERIENCE AND I CONTEND IT WAS BECAUSE HE WANTED NOTHING BUT YES PEOPLE. HE DIDN'T WANT THE EXPERIENCED PEOPLE AROUND THE COUNTRY THAT MIGHT TRY TO POINT OUT TO THE DIRECTOR WHEN HE MADE ONE OF HIS MANY MISTAKES, AS F.B.I. DIRECTOR OR CHOSE SOFTWARE PROGRAMS, CHOSE LAW ENFORCEMENT PROGRAMS, THAT CREATED PROBLEMS. BECAUSE THEY HAD MORE EXPERIENCE THAN HE DID. HE DID NOT REALLY WANT PEOPLE AROUND THE COUNTRY TO HAVE MORE EXPERIENCE THAN HE DID BECAUSE THEY MIGHT QUESTION SOMETHING THAT HE ORDERED INAPPROPRIATELY AND HE JUST WANTED PEOPLE TO SALUTE HIM, ABSOLUTE THE FLAG, FIGURATIVELY SPEAKING, AND DRIVE FORWARD. THAT MEANS WHEN MUELLER WANTED SOMEBODY TO BUST DOWN THE DOOR IN THE MIDDLE OF THE NIGHT EVEN THOUGH THERE WAS NO THREAT OF THE INDIVIDUAL FLEEING, NO THREAT OF THE INDIVIDUAL HIDING EVIDENCE, IT'S DONE AS WE ARE NOW SEEING THE MUELLER SPECIAL COUNSEL GROUP, TEAM, SWAT UNIT, UNOFFICIAL SWAT, OF COURSE, BUT WE'RE SEEING THEM USE THESE TYPE OF TACTICS. NOW I DON'T KNOW, REALLY KNOW PAUL MANAFORT, DOESN'T SEEM LIKE A FELLOW I WOULD ENJOY GETTING ALONG WITH. NONETHELESS, IT CERTAINLY APPEARED HE WAS VERY MATERIALLY MISTREATED BECAUSE MUELLER WANTED TO MAKE SURE HE GOT HIS POINT. THEY KNOCKED DOWN THE DOOR OR AT LEAST WENT IN IN THE MIDDLE OF THE NIGHT, HOWEVER THEY GOT IN, AND YOU KNOW, WE'VE HEARD THIS BEFORE. THIS HEAVY HANDED FEDERAL GOVERNMENT, AND THERE WAS NO REASON FOR THAT OTHER THAN BULLYING, MEAN, FEDERAL AGENTS AT THE TOP, WANTING TO BULLY PEOPLE AROUND. WE SAW THAT KIND OF CONDUCT WITH MIKE FLYNN AS HE WAS SET UP. HE HAD BEEN AS PART OF THE TRANSITION TEAM TALKING TO PEOPLE AT THE F.B.I. ABOUT DIFFERENT ISSUES. AND NOW WE KNOW STRZOK WAS PART OF THAT, THIS MAN THAT ABSOLUTELY LOATHED THE PRESIDENT -ELECT TRUMP. HE LOATHED EVERYTHING ABOUT TRUMP AND THOSE HE WAS GOING TO BE BRINGING INTO OFFICE. WE DIDN'T KNOW HOW BADLY THEY DESPICED OR LOATHED THE PRESIDENT AND REPUBLICANS SUPPORTING HIM UNTIL WE GOT MORE INFORMATION. BUT THESE KIND OF THINGS ARE THINGS THAT ROBERT MUELLER SHOULD HAVE KNOWN. HE SHOULD HAVE KNOWN THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE'S REPUTATION AND HOPE FOR BEING CONSIDERED RIGHTEOUS WAS ALL RIDING ON HIM. AND WHAT HE DID. AND YET HE RODE IN WITH HIS BLACK HAT, FIGURATIVELY, FOR THOSE IN THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA THAT DON'T UNDERSTAND THOSE TYPE OF REFERENCES. AND HE BEGAN TO OVERREACH AND WE HEARD FROM THE GUY THAT APPOINTED MUELLER YESTERDAY, ROD ROSENSTEIN, THAT, GEE, YEAH, REALLY, TO HAVE A SPECIAL COUNSEL YOU HAVE TO BELIEVE BASICALLY THAT A CRIME WAS COMMITTED. SO IT WOULD SEEM TO REASON THAT MUELLER WAS APPOINTED TO INVESTIGATE SOMETHING THEY HAD REASONABLY POSSIBLY A CRIME HAD BEEN COMMITTED. AND YET BECAUSE OF WHETHER IT'S INCOMPETENCE OR ZEAL WANTING MUELLER TO GO ON A WITCH-HUNT TO JUST KEEP SEARCHING UNTIL YOU FIND SOMETHING EVEN IF IT'S A POOR GUY LIKE SCOOTER LIBBY WHO DEVOTED HIS LIFE TO HELPING OUR COUNTRY, WE NEED SOMEBODY'S SCALP AND IT DOESN'T LOOK LIKE THAT DONALD J. TRUMP WAS COLLUDING WITH THE RUSSIANS SO WE GOT TO HAVE SOMEBODY'S SCALP. LET'S INTIMIDATE SOME PEOPLE. LET'S BULLY OUR WAY INTO HOMES IN THE MIDDLE OF THE NIGHT. LET'S DO WHATEVER WE GOT TO DO. MANY ARE SAYING MICHAEL FLYNN DIDN'T LIE. TO BE A LIE YOU HAVE TO INTENTIONALLY -- HAVE INTENT TO DECEIVE BUT WHETHER THEY'RE RIGHT OR WRONG ABOUT THAT, WORD IS HE WAS BANKRUPTED BY AN OVERZEALOUS BULLY. I MEAN, ALL MY FRIENDS ON THE LEFT TALKING ABOUT BULLYING. I WAS SMALL FOR MY AGE AND IN MY CLASS I WAS BULLIED. HAD BLACK EYE. BLOODY NOSE. HAD A FIFTH GRADE TEACHER AFTER A BIG BULLY TOOK MY FOOTBALL AND I TRIED TO GET IT BACK AND ENDED UP BLOODY NOSE, BLACK EYE. OUR TEACHER LOVED THE BULLY BACK THEN AND PULLED ME IN FRONT OF THE CLASS WHILE I WAS TRYING TO GET MY NOSE TO STOP BLEEDING AND TOLD THE CLASS, THIS IS WHAT HAPPENS WHEN LITTLE BOYS TRY TO PLAY WITH THE BIG BOYS. BUT I KNOW SOMETHING ABOUT BEING BULLIED. AND I RECOGNIZE IT IN A GOVERNMENT GROUP WHEN I SEE IT AND THE MUELLER TEAM HAS BEEN BULLIES BUT THAT'S WHAT MUELLER WANTED. WHY DO YOU THINK HE WENT AND HIRED WEISSMANN WHO DESTROYED THOUSANDS AND THOUSANDS OF EMPLOYEE'S LIVES TO WORK FOR ARTHUR ANDERSON IN A JOIST AT WINDMILLS THAT COST THESE PEOPLE THEIR LIVELIHOODS, CAUSED MORE PAIN AND SUFFERING IMAGINABLE FAR WHAT THE SUPREME COURT SAID 9-0 YOU'RE A FOOL? THIS WAS NOT A CRIME. YOU MADE THIS UP. AND THAT'S WHO MUELLER WANTED ON HIS TEAM. THIS IS THE SAME ROBERT MUELLER I HAVE BEEN POINTING OUT FOR YEARS THAT HAS BEEN GROSSLY UNFAIR AND RUNNING OFF THE THOUSANDS OF YEARS OF EXPERIENCE THAT HE DID SO HE COULD HAVE GREAT PEOPLE, WONDERFUL PEOPLE BUT KNEW AND THEY NOT ONLY WERE -- BUT NEW AND NOT ONLY WERE THEY NEW AND YOUNG BUT HE WAS ELIMINATING THE OLDER FOLKS THAT HAD THE EXPERIENCE THAT COULD BRING THEM ALONG BECAUSE MUELLER WANTED HEM CREATED -- THEM CREATED IN HIS IMAGE AND GET RID OF WISDOM THROUGH THE AGES. AND I AM SURE THERE WERE A BUNCH OF PEOPLE THAT NEEDED TO GO BUT YOU DON'T DESTROY AN ENTIRE ENTITY LIKE THE FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION JUST BECAUSE YOU WANT A BUNCH OF YES MEN AND THAT'S WHAT BOB MUELLER DID. THAT MAN SHOULD NEVER HAVE BEEN ANYWHERE CLOSE TO BEING A SPECIAL COUNSEL. HE COULDN'T STAND TRUMP, AND AS THE WASHINGTONIAN MAGAZINE WAS GLORIFYING CHAMES COMEY, I BELIEVE IT WAS -- JAMES COMEY, I BELIEVE IT WAS 2013 ISSUE WHERE THEY SAID BASICALLY, IN ESSENCE, IF THE WORLD WERE BURNING DOWN, YOU KNOW, JAMES COMEY KNEW THAT THE ONE PERSON THAT WOULD BE STANDING THERE WITH HIM WOULD BE BOB MUELLER. AND COMEY IS THE VERY GUY THAT ADMITTED LEAKING EVIDENCE OR LEAKING INFORMATION OUT IN ORDER TO TRY TO GET A SPECIAL COUNSEL APPOINTED. AS I COVERED WITH MR. ROSENSTEIN YESTERDAY, THIS IS PART OF AN F.B.I. TYPICAL EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT. EVERYBODY IS SUPPOSED TO SIGN THIS THING. ALL INFORMATION ACQUIRED BY ME IN CONNECTION WITH MY OFFICIAL DUTIES WITH THE F.B.I. AND ALL MATERIAL WHICH I HAVE ACCESS REMAIN THE PROPERTY OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. I WILL SURRENDER UPON DEMAND BY THE F.B.I. OR UPON THE SEPARATION FROM THE F.B.I. ALL MATERIALS CONTAINING F.B.I. INFORMATION IN MY POSSESSION. SO IF A MAN LIKE COMEY GOES TO A MEETING IN HIS OFFICIAL CAPACITY OF F.B.I. DIRECTOR WITH THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES AND HE COMES OUT OF THERE AND HE TYPES UP A MEMO , EVEN THOUGH IT APPEARS IT WAS A PRETTY LESS THAN UNBIASED MEMO TRYING TO MAKE PRESIDENT TRUMP LOOK BAD, SO HE COMMEMORATES IT WITH A MEMO. WELL, THAT MEMO, AS I DISCUSSED WITH MR. ROSEN STEIN -- ROSENSTEIN YESTERDAY, THAT IS PROBABLY GOVERNMENT PROPERTY. THAT'S GOVERNMENT INFORMATION, GOVERNMENT PROPERTY, AND THE QUESTION IS, DID HE COMMIT A CRIME WHEN HE LEAKED THAT INFORMATION? AND THERE'S A DECENT CHANCE YES. SO WHERE'S THE F.B.I. IN ITS INVESTIGATION INTO JAMES COMEY'S POTENTIAL, AND WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE RECORD AND YOU GO BACK, OH, NOW WE KNOW FROM THAT ONE INCIDENT THIS IS THE PERSON TO WHOM HE LEAKED AND THAT GOT TO "THE NEW YORK TIMES," OH, HERE'S ANOTHER MEETING WHERE HE WAS THE PRINCIPAL CHARACTER THERE, THE MOST LIKELY PERSON TO HAVE LEAKED, WELL, LO AND BEHOLD, HIS SAME CONDUIT FOR LEAKING INFORMATION THAT HE'S ADMITTED TO ENDS UP BEING IN PLACE IN THIS STORY. THERE MAY BE AT LEAST SIX OTHER PLACES WHERE HE'S LEAKED INFORMATION AND SOME OF THEM MAY BE CRIMES, BUT BECAUSE THE SPECIAL COUNSEL WAS ALL ABOUT TRYING TO STRIP THE WINNER OF A PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION, THAT'S -- WE'RE NOT GOING AFTER COMEY. WE'RE NOT GOING AFTER ANY OF THESE OTHER PEOPLE. THEY'RE TRYING TO FIND SOMETHING AS WE NOW KNOW FROM THE TEXT MESSAGES OF F.B.I. AGENT STRZOK, THEY WANTED AN INSURANCE POLICY SO THAT IN CASE TRUMP WON, THEY COULD STILL GET RID OF HIM. OF COURSE, STRZOK BELIEVED THAT NO ONE IN THIS COUNTRY SHOULD VOTE, NOT A SINGLE PERSON, NOT EVEN DONALD TRUMP'S FAMILY SHOULD VOTE FOR HIM. IT OUGHT TO BE 100 MILLION-0. BUT, MR. SPEAKER, IT IS SO CLEAR THAT IN MY DAYS OF TRYING CASES IN FEDERAL COURT, STATE COURT WHERE YOU'RE ASKING QUESTIONS OF A JURY PANEL TO SEE WHO WOULD BE FAIR ENOUGH TO SIT ON A JURY, WE CAN SEE THAT THESE PEOPLE THAT WERE WORKING AND HAVE BEEN AND SOME STILL ARE FOR THE F.B.I., FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, THEY HAVE NO BUSINESS GETTING CLOSE TO THIS INVESTIGATION UNLESS THEY ARE A TARGET OF INVESTIGATION. ANDREW WEISSMANN SHOULD NEVER HAVE BEEN PART OF THE SPECIAL COUNSEL TEAM. PETER STRZOK, THIS IS ONLY SOME OF THE TEXT MESSAGES HE SENT, BUT HE SAYS -- HE ASKED ME WHO I'D VOTE FOR. I GUESS KASICH. IT GOES ON. GOD, TRUMP IS A LOATHESOME HUMAN. MAY HE WIN. GOOD FOR HILLARY. WOULD HE BE WORSE PRESIDENT, CRUZ. TRUMP, YES, I THINK SO. THIS IS AN EXCHANGE BETWEEN PETER STRZOK, P.S. IN THIS -- AND HIS MISTRESS, LISA PAIGE, WHO'S ALSO WORKING FOR THE F.B.I. I MEAN, THESE PEOPLE HAVE DONE IRREPARABLE DAMAGE TO THE F.B.I. BUT WORSE THAN THAT, THEY HAVE MADE A MOCKERY OF JUSTICE IN THE UNITED STATES. AND WHAT REALLY GETS ME, I KNOW HOW UPSET I WAS IN THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION WHEN I SAW SOMEBODY DOING WRONG. I DIDN'T CARE IF HE WAS APPOINTED BY A REPUBLICAN OR DEMOCRAT. I DIDN'T CARE THAT PRESIDENT BUSH HAD APPOINTED A MAN OR WOMAN TO A POSITION. WHAT I CARED ABOUT IS THEM BEING RIGHTEOUS AND DOING THE RIGHT THING. AND NOW WHERE IS MY DEMOCRAT FRIEND WHO WILL STAND UP AND SAY THIS ISN'T RIGHT? WE KNOW ALAN DERSHOWITZ, GREAT DEMOCRAT, HE'S DONE IT. WHO WOULD PICK UP THE PHONE AND SAY THIS IS AN OUTRAGE? WHAT HAS HAPPENED UNDER THIS ATTORNEY GENERAL SHOULD NEVER HAVE HAPPENED. HE'S GOT TO GO. WHERE IS THE DEMOCRAT THAT HAS A SENSE OF MORAL OUTRAGE WHEN THE JUSTICE SYSTEM IS JUST SHAKEN TO ITS CORE BY PEOPLE THAT WANT TO TAKE OUT A PRESIDENT BECAUSE THEY DIDN'T SUPPORT HIM, THEY DIDN'T WANT HIM TO BE THERE, THEY DIDN'T THINK ANY AMERICAN SHOULD VOTE FOR HIM, AND THEY'RE DESTROYING OUR SENSE OF JUSTICE AND OUR JUSTICE SYSTEM? IT'S TIME FOR AMERICANS TO WAKE UP. IT'S TIME TO CLEAN HOUSE, GET RID OF MUELLER, GET SOME FAIR PEOPLE IN THERE TO INVESTIGATE AND WITH THAT I YIELD BACK.

                          Show Full Text
                        • 02:41:29 PM

                          THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

                          THE GENTLEMAN'S TIME HAS EXPIRED. REMARKS ON DEBATE IN THE HOUSE MAY NOT…

                          THE GENTLEMAN'S TIME HAS EXPIRED. REMARKS ON DEBATE IN THE HOUSE MAY NOT BE -- EXCUSE ME -- REREMARKS IN DEBATE IN THE HOUSE MAY NOT ENGAGE IN PERSONALITIES TO PRESIDENTS WHETHER ORIGINAL RATED FROM THE MEMBER'S OWN WORDS OR BEING REITERATED BY ANOTHER SOURCE. FOR WHAT PURPOSE DOES THE GENTLEMAN FROM TEXAS SEEK RECOGNITION?

                          Show Full Text
                        • 02:41:44 PM

                          Mr. Gohmert moved that the House do now adjourn.

                          • 02:41:49 PM

                            MR. GOHMERT

                            I MOVE WE DO NOW HEREBY ADJOURN.

                          • 02:41:51 PM

                            THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

                            HEREBY ADJOURN.

                      • 02:41:54 PM

                        On motion to adjourn Agreed to by voice vote.

                        • 02:41:55 PM

                          Adjourned

                          The House adjourned pursuant to a previous special order. The next meeting is scheduled for 5:30 p.m. on December 15, 2017.

                          • 09:00:13 AM

                            THE SPEAKER

                            THE HOUSE WILL BE IN ORDER. THE PRAYER WILL BE OFFERED BY OUR CHAPLAIN,…

                            THE HOUSE WILL BE IN ORDER. THE PRAYER WILL BE OFFERED BY OUR CHAPLAIN, FATHER CONROY.

                            Show Full Text
                          • 09:01:00 AM

                            THE SPEAKER

                            THE CHAIR HAS EXAMINED THE JOURNAL OF THE LAST DAY'S PROCEEDINGS AND…

                            THE CHAIR HAS EXAMINED THE JOURNAL OF THE LAST DAY'S PROCEEDINGS AND ANNOUNCES TO THE HOUSE HIS APPROVAL THEREOF. PURSUANT TO CLAUSE 1 OF RULE 1, THE JOURNAL STANDS APPROVED. THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE WILL BE LED BY THE GENTLEMAN FROM NEW JERSEY, MR. LANCE.

                            Show Full Text
                          • 09:01:15 AM

                            MR. LANCE

                            I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND TO THE…

                            I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS, ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL.

                            Show Full Text
                          • 09:01:28 AM

                            THE SPEAKER

                            THE CHAIR WILL ENTERTAIN UP TO FIVE REQUESTS FOR ONE-MINUTE SPEECHES ON…

                            THE CHAIR WILL ENTERTAIN UP TO FIVE REQUESTS FOR ONE-MINUTE SPEECHES ON EACH SIDE OF THE AISLE. I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS, ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL. FOR WHAT PURPOSE DOES THE GENTLEMAN FROM NEW JERSEY SEEK RECOGNITION? WITHOUT OBJECTION, THE GENTLEMAN IS RECOGNIZED.

                            Show Full Text
                          • 09:01:41 AM

                            MR. LANCE

                            THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. I RISE TODAY TO CONGRATULATE THREE STATE HIGH…

                            THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. I RISE TODAY TO CONGRATULATE THREE STATE HIGH SCHOOL FOOTBALL CHAMPIONS IN NEW JERSEY'S SEVENTH CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT. WESTFIELD HIGH SCHOOL, NORTH HUNTERTON HIGH SCHOOL, AND SUMMERVILLE HIGH SCHOOL. WESTFIELD HIGH SCHOOL FINISHED ITS YEAR WITH ITS THIRD CONSECUTIVE STATE CHAMPIONSHIP AND WITH ITS 37 CONSECUTIVE GAME WINNING STREAK INTACT. THE NORTH HUNTERTON LIONS WON THEIR DIVISION. AND SUMMERVILLE HIGH SCHOOL FINISHED AS STATE FOOTBALL CHAMPIONS WITH AWARD WINNING COACH JEFF AT THE HELM. I CONGRATULATE THE COMMUNITIES AND FAMILIES SUPPORTING STUDENT ATHLETES. I ALSO CONGRATULATE ALL OF THE FACULTY AND COACHES WHO DEVOTE THEMSELVES IN CULTIVATING AND NURTURING THE TALENT OF THESE ATHLETES. EACH OF THESE PUBLIC SCHOOLS IN ADDITION TO ATHLETIC ACHIEVEMENT HAS ALSO BEEN RECOGNIZED FOR ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT. REGULARLY ACROSS THE NATION. HIGHLIGHTING THAT NEW JERSEY'S REPUTATION AS HAVING AMONG THE BEST PUBLIC SCHOOLS IN THE NATION CONTINUES. MR. SPEAKER, I YIELD BACK THE BALANCE OF MY TIME.

                            Show Full Text
                          • 09:02:47 AM

                            THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

                            FOR WHAT PURPOSE DOES THE GENTLEMAN FROM MICHIGAN SEEK RECOGNITION?

                          • 09:02:51 AM

                            MR. KILDEE

                            MR. SPEAKER, I SEEK UNANIMOUS CONSENT TO ADDRESS THE HOUSE FOR ONE MINUTE.

                          • 09:03:01 AM

                            TEMPORE WITHOUT

                            WITHOUT OBJECTION. THE GENTLEMAN FROM MICHIGAN IS RECOGNIZED FOR ONE…

                            WITHOUT OBJECTION. THE GENTLEMAN FROM MICHIGAN IS RECOGNIZED FOR ONE MINUTE.

                            Show Full Text
                          • 09:03:03 AM

                            MR. KILDEE

                            THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. TO ADDRESS THE HOUSE FOR ONE MINUTE.

                          • 09:03:06 AM

                            TEMPORE AS

                            AS REPUBLICANS CONTINUE TO RUSH THEIR TAX PLAN THROUGH BOTH HOUSES OF…

                            AS REPUBLICANS CONTINUE TO RUSH THEIR TAX PLAN THROUGH BOTH HOUSES OF CONGRESS, THEY LEAVE BEHIND TENS OF MILLIONS OF AMERICANS FUNDED BY DEFICIT EXPLODING TAKES TO THE -- TAX BREAKS TO THE ABSOLUTE WEALTHIEST. THEY ARE ALSO LEAVING BEHIND SOME REALLY IMPORTANT AMERICANS, OUR NATIVE AMERICAN BROTHERS AND SISTERS. FOR YEARS ISSUES OF TAXATION AND HOW FEDERAL TAX POLICY IMPACTS TRIBAL GOVERNMENTS HAS BEEN THE SUBJECT OF DISCUSSION. AND FOR THOSE YEARS THAT WE HAVE TALKED ABOUT THE NEED FOR TAX REFORM, THERE HAVE BEEN CONTINUOUS PROMISES MADE TO TRIBAL GOVERNMENTS THAT WE WILL DEAL WITH THESE INEQUITIES, THESE ISSUES OF DOUBLE TAXATION IN TRIBES. FOR EXAMPLE, THE ABILITY OF A TRIBAL MEMBER WHO GETS AN ADOPTION THROUGH A TRIBAL COURT, THEY DON'T QUALIFY FOR AN ADOPTION TAX CREDIT. THAT'S ONE EXAMPLE OF THE MANY WAYS THAT FEDERAL TAX POLICY DOES NOT ANTICIPATE OR RECOGNIZE TRIBAL GOVERNMENTS. BUT THEY HAVE BEEN LEFT BEHIND AGAIN. THIS BILL SHOULD BE WRITTEN IN WAY THAT ACTUALLY ADDRESSES THE REAL PROBLEMS IN THE TAX CODE. IT DOES NOT. I YIELD BACK.

                            Show Full Text
                          • 09:04:16 AM

                            THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

                            FOR WHAT PURPOSE DOES THE GENTLEMAN FROM CALIFORNIA SEEK RECOGNITION

                          • 09:04:21 AM

                            >>

                            UNANIMOUS CONSENT TO ADDRESS THE HOUSE FOR ONE MINUTE.

                          • 09:04:24 AM

                            TEMPORE WITHOUT

                            WITHOUT OBJECTION, THE GENTLEMAN FROM CALIFORNIA IS RECOGNIZED FOR ONE…

                            WITHOUT OBJECTION, THE GENTLEMAN FROM CALIFORNIA IS RECOGNIZED FOR ONE MINUTE

                            Show Full Text
                          • 09:04:26 AM

                            >>

                            THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. TODAY I WISH TO COMMEMORATE THE BILL OF RIGHTS DAY.

                          • 09:04:39 AM

                            MR. LAMALFA

                            INITIALLY THIS WAS PASSED BY CONGRESS IN 1941 AS A JOINT RESOLUTION,…

                            INITIALLY THIS WAS PASSED BY CONGRESS IN 1941 AS A JOINT RESOLUTION, SIGNED BY FRANKLIN DELANO OF ROOSEVELT ON NOVEMBER 27, 1941. WHERE IN HIS WORDS HE SAYS DO HEREBY DESIGNATE DECEMBER 15, 1941 BILL OF RIGHTS DAY. I CALL UPON THE OFFICIALS OF THE GOVERNMENT, UPON THE PEOPLE OF THE UNITED STATES TO 1941. WHERE IN HIS OBSERVE THE DAY BY DISPLAYING THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES ON PUBLIC BUILDINGS AND BY MEETING TOGETHER FOR SUCH PRAYERS AND CEREMONIES AS MAY SEEM TO THEM APPROPRIATE. IT WAS FIRST INTRODUCED BY JAMES MADISON WHO LATER BECAME THE FOURTH PRESIDENT. INITIALLY 12 AMENDMENTS WERE PROPOSED. TWO WERE NOT RATIFIED. ONE DID BECOME RATIFIED LATER ON. THERE WERE 14 ORIGINAL COPIES PRODUCED OF THE BILL OF RIGHTS AT THE TIME. ONE EACH FOR THE 13 STATES AND ONE FOR THE NATIONAL ARCHIVES. 12 OF THEM SURVIVE TODAY. WHEN FRANKLIN DELANO ROOSEVELT SIGNED THAT PROCLAMATION ON NOVEMBER 27, 1941, HE HAD NO IDEA WHAT WAS COMING JUST NINE DAYS LATER. INDEED, HIS WORDS IN THE LETTER AT THE TIME, THOSE WHO HAVE LONG ENJOYED SUCH PRIVILEGES AS WE ENJOY, FORGET IN TIME THAT MEN HAVE DIED TO WIN THEM. THEY COME IN TIME TO TAKE THESE RIGHTS FOR GRANTED AND ASSUME THE PROTECTIONS ASSURED. WE HOWEVER NOW SEEN THESE PRIVILEGES LOST ON ANOTHER CONTINENTS IN OTHER COUNTRIES. INDEED. PRESCIENT WORDS FOR THE TIME. I YIELD BACK.

                            Show Full Text
                          • 09:06:07 AM

                            THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

                            FOR WHAT PURPOSE DOES THE GENTLEMAN FROM CALIFORNIA SEEK RECOGNITION?…

                            FOR WHAT PURPOSE DOES THE GENTLEMAN FROM CALIFORNIA SEEK RECOGNITION? WITHOUT OBJECTION, THE GENTLEMAN FROM CALIFORNIA IS RECOGNIZED FOR ONE MINUTE. BACK.

                            Show Full Text
                          • 09:06:14 AM

                            >>

                          • 09:06:52 AM

                            MR. PANETTA

                            THE GOVERNOR CALLS THIS A NEW NORMAL. WE SHOULD CALL IT UNACCEPTABLE AND…

                            THE GOVERNOR CALLS THIS A NEW NORMAL. WE SHOULD CALL IT UNACCEPTABLE AND MUST DO SOMETHING. WE MUST FULLY WE WATCH FIRES BURN IN THE HILLS FROM LOS ANGELES TO SANTA BARBARA, FUND THE COST OF FIRE SUPPRESSION. AND INCLUDE FIRE RELIEF IN THIS YEAR'S DISASTER PACKAGE AND THINK OUTSIDE THE BOX WHEN IT COMES TO FIRE PREVENTION AND FOCUS OUR EFFORTS TO BETTER MANAGE OUR FORCE IN THE FUTURE. THANK YOU, I YIELD BACK.

                            Show Full Text
                          • 09:07:06 AM

                            THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

                            FOR WHAT PURPOSE DOES THE GENTLEMAN FROM TEXAS SEEK RECOGNITION?

                          • 09:07:09 AM

                            >>

                            I REQUEST UNANIMOUS CONSENT TO ADDRESS THE HOUSE FOR ONE MINUTE.

                          • 09:07:13 AM

                            TEMPORE WITHOUT

                            WITHOUT OBJECTION, THE GENTLEMAN FROM TEXAS IS RECOGNIZED FOR ONE MINUTE.

                          • 09:07:20 AM

                            >>

                            MR. SPEAKER, MILLIONS OF AMERICAN TRUCK DRIVERS HELPED ELECT PRESIDENT…

                            MR. SPEAKER, MILLIONS OF AMERICAN TRUCK DRIVERS HELPED ELECT PRESIDENT TRUMP LAST NOVEMBER AND I'M CALLING ON HIM TO STEP IN AND GIVE THEM A HAND. PRESIDENT OBAMA LEFT OFFICE BACK IN JANUARY, BUT A $2 BILLION REGULATION THAT HE WROTE IN 2015 TO REQUIRE ELECTRONIC TRACKING DEVICES TO BE PUT IN EVERY TRUCK IN AMERICA IS STILL SCHEDULED TO GO INTO EFFECT THIS MONDAY.

                            Show Full Text
                          • 09:07:45 AM

                            MR. BABIN

                            YES, AN OBAMA REGULATION THAT SHAMEFULLY SEEMS TO REMAIN ON THE BOOKS IS…

                            YES, AN OBAMA REGULATION THAT SHAMEFULLY SEEMS TO REMAIN ON THE BOOKS IS GOING INTO EFFECT THIS MONDAY UNDER A REPUBLICAN CONGRESS AND WHITE HOUSE. THE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION CAN GIVE A 90-DAY WAIVER FOR ALL TRUCKERS FROM THIS MANDATE GIVING SEVERAL WAIVERS FOR SPECIFIC INDUSTRIES, INCLUDING ONE JUST THIS WEEK. INSTEAD OF OFFERING FAIRNESS AND RELIEF, THEY ARE PICKING WIN EARNS LOSERS. MILLIONS OF AMERICAN TRUCKERS ARE PLEADING 24/7 FOR RELIEF FROM THIS MANDATE USING THE HASH TAG ELD OR ME. IT HAS FALLEN ON DEAF HERE'S IN THE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION. MR. PRESIDENT, YOU CALL THE SHOTS IN YOUR ADMINISTRATION. PLEASE ISSUE AN EXECUTIVE ORDER TODAY AND INSTRUCT THE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION TO GIVE ALL TRUCKERS RELIEF FROM THIS MANDATE FOR THREE MONTHS. DON'T IMPLEMENT THIS COLOSSAL OBAMA MANDATE A WEEK BEFORE CHRISTMAS. THANK YOU. I YIELD BACK.

                            Show Full Text
                          • 09:08:44 AM

                            TEMPORE MEMBERS

                            MEMBERS ARE ADVISED TO DIRECT THEIR COMMENTS TO THE CHAIR. FOR WHAT…

                            MEMBERS ARE ADVISED TO DIRECT THEIR COMMENTS TO THE CHAIR. FOR WHAT PURPOSE DOES THE GENTLEMAN FROM ILLINOIS SEEK RECOGNITION?

                            Show Full Text
                          • 09:08:50 AM

                            >>

                            I ASK UNANIMOUS CONSENT TO ADDRESS THE HOUSE FOR ONE MINUTE. REVISE AND…

                            I ASK UNANIMOUS CONSENT TO ADDRESS THE HOUSE FOR ONE MINUTE. REVISE AND EXTEND. THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE: WITHOUT OBJECTION, THE GENTLEMAN FROM ILLINOIS IS RECOGNIZED FOR ONE MINUTE.

                            Show Full Text
                          • 09:08:55 AM

                            TEMPORE W

                            WITHOUT OBJECTION, THE GENTLEMAN FROM ILLINOIS IS RECOGNIZED FOR ONE…

                            WITHOUT OBJECTION, THE GENTLEMAN FROM ILLINOIS IS RECOGNIZED FOR ONE MINUTE.

                            Show Full Text
                          • 09:08:59 AM

                            >>

                            MR. SPEAKER, ON THIS DAY IN 2012 WE WATCHED TOGETHER IN HORROR AS NEWS…

                            MR. SPEAKER, ON THIS DAY IN 2012 WE WATCHED TOGETHER IN HORROR AS NEWS BROKE OF A SHOOTING IN NEWTOWN, CONNECTICUT. 20 INNOCENT CHILDREN AND SIX BRAVE EDUCATORS WERE GUNNED DOWN AT SANDY HOOK. IN THE FIVE YEARS SINCE THIS HOUSE HAS PAUSED 40 TIMES IN SILENCE TO RECOGNIZE THE VICTIMS OF MASS SHOOTINGS. THE NAMES A SINCE THIS HOUSE HAS FAMILIAR, LAS VEGAS, SUTHERLAND SPRINGS. SINCE NEWTOWN THERE HAVE BEEN MORE THAN 1,700 MASS SHOOTINGS, NEARLY ONE EVERY SINGLE DAY.

                            Show Full Text
                          • 09:09:36 AM

                            MR. SCHNEIDER

                            THAT WOULD IMPROVE SAFETY FOR ALL OF OUR COMMUNITIES. I YIELD BACK.

                          • 09:10:24 AM

                            THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

                            FOR WHAT PURPOSE DOES THE GENTLEMAN FROM UTAH SEEK RECOGNITION?

                          • 09:10:30 AM

                            E WITHOUT

                            WITHOUT OBJECTION, THE GENTLEMAN FROM UTAH IS RECOGNIZED FOR ONE MINUTE.

                          • 09:10:32 AM

                            >>

                            MR. SPEAKER, WOULD IMPROVE SAFETY FOR ALL THE HOUSE IS IN THE MIDST OF…

                            MR. SPEAKER, WOULD IMPROVE SAFETY FOR ALL THE HOUSE IS IN THE MIDST OF HISTORIC TAX REFORM. NOW THAT THE HOUSE AND SENATE HAVE ALMOST REACHED AGREEMENT, I WOULD LIKE TO TAKE A MOMENT TO EXPRESS A FEW IDEALS THAT I HOPE WILL BE GUIDING PRINCIPLES AS WE COMPLETE THIS PROCESS. THE FINAL TAX BILL SHOULD CUT TAX FORCE ALL AMERICANS WHILE ALSO RETAINING IMPORTANT INCENTIVES MAKING HOMEOWNERSHIP, RAISING A FAMILY, AND OBTAINING HIGHER EDUCATION POSSIBLE. ADDITIONALLY THE BILL SHOULD CONTINUE TO UPHOLD AMERICAN VALUES BY ENCOURAGING OUR PEOPLE TO BE GENEROUS AND CHARITABLE. THE LOWERING OF OUR CORPORATE TAX RATE IS CRITICAL. AS A FORMER BUSINESS OWNER I KNOW FIRSTHAND THE DIFFICULTY OF THE TAX BURDEN. MOST OF OUR CORPORATE TAX RATE IS CRITICAL. AS A FORMER BUSINESS OWNER I KNOW FIRSTHAND THE DIFFICULTY OF THE TAX BURDEN. MOST IMPORTANTLY, THE BILL MUST HELP WORKING AMERICAN FAMILIES KEEP MORE OF THEIR HARD-EARNED MONEY.

                            Show Full Text
                          • 09:11:28 AM

                            MR. CURTIS

                            I AM CONFIDENT THAT CONGRESS WILL DELIVER ON ITS PROMISE TO SIMPLIFY THE…

                            I AM CONFIDENT THAT CONGRESS WILL DELIVER ON ITS PROMISE TO SIMPLIFY THE TAX CODE AND TO CUT TAXES TO ALL AMERICANS. I KNOW THAT THIS HISTORIC LEGISLATION WILL SPUR ECONOMIC GROWTH AND PROSPERITY. WITH THAT, MR. SPEAKER, I YIELD MY TIME. THANK YOU.

                            Show Full Text
                          • 09:11:36 AM

                            THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

                            FOR WHAT PURPOSE DOES THE GENTLEMAN FROM OREGON SEEK RECOGNITION?

                          • 09:11:39 AM

                            >>

                            TO ADDRESS THE HOUSE FOR ONE MINUTE. REVISE AND EXTEND.

                          • 09:11:41 AM

                            THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

                            DOES THE GENTLEMAN SEEK UNANIMOUS CONSENT?

                          • 09:11:43 AM

                            >>

                            YES, SIR.

                          • 09:11:44 AM

                            THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

                            THE GENTLEMAN IS RECOGNIZED FOR ONE MINUTE.

                          • 09:11:46 AM

                            >>

                            SCHRADER: HOW DO YOU MAKE A BAD INEQUITABLE TAX BILL BETTER? FOR MY…

                            SCHRADER: HOW DO YOU MAKE A BAD INEQUITABLE TAX BILL BETTER? FOR MY REPUBLICAN COLLEAGUES THAT MEANS CUTTING TAX RATES FOR THE WEALTHY EVEN MORE THAN THE ORIGINAL BILLS WE HEARD OVER THE LAST COUPLE DAYS. WHERE'S THE FAIRNESS FOR AVERAGE HARDWORKING AMERICANS? MEDICAL EXPENSES ARE NO LONGER DEDUCTIBLE. STUDENT LOAN AND TUITION WAIVERS ARE NO LONGER DEDUCTIBLE. INTEREST IS NOT DEDUCTIBLE FOR FAMILIES BUT FOR BUSINESS. EMPLOYEE BUSINESS DEDUCTIONS GO AWAY. MORTGAGE INTEREST DEDUCTION IS REDUCED. STATE AND LOCAL TAXES ARE NOW FULLY DEDUCTIBLE. SMALL BUSINESSES DON'T GET THE SAME TAX CUTS THAT BIG BUSINESSES DO. NO HELP FOR CAPITAL GAINS. NO HELP FOR DIVIDENDS. ADVERTISING, ENTERTAINMENT, OTHER BUSINESS EXPENSES NO LONGER DEDUCTIBLE. RENEWABLE ENERGY TAX CREDITS GO AWAY. PRIVATE ACTIVITY TO HELP VETERANS AND OTHERS ARE ALSO GONE. WORST OF ALL, INDIVIDUAL TAX CUTS FLIP BACK AND RESCINDED IN A FEW YEARS WHILE CORPORATIONS GO ON FOREVER. WHERE'S THE FAIRNESS FOR SENIORS, FOR OUR YOUTH, FOR OUR FAMILIES, AND FOR SMALL BUSINESSES? NOT IN THIS PARTISAN TAX BILL. I YIELD BACK.

                            Show Full Text
                          • 09:12:47 AM

                            THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

                            FOR WHAT PURPOSE DOES THE GENTLELADY FROM MISSOURI SEEK RECOGNITION?

                          • 09:12:51 AM

                            >>

                            I ASK UNANIMOUS CONSENT TO ADDRESS THE HOUSE FOR ONE MINUTE.

                          • 09:12:55 AM

                            TEMPORE WITHOUT

                            WITHOUT OBJECTION, THE GENTLELADY FROM MISSOURI IS RECOGNIZED.

                          • 09:12:57 AM

                            >>

                            THANK YOU. MR. SPEAKER, I RISE TODAY TO CONGRATULATE THE UNIVERSITY OF…

                            THANK YOU. MR. SPEAKER, I RISE TODAY TO CONGRATULATE THE UNIVERSITY OF CENTRAL MISSOURI WOMEN'S SOCCER TEAM ON WINNING THE NCAA DIVISION 2 NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIP. THIS IS THE FIRST NCAA WOMEN'S SOCCER NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIP IN PROGRAM HISTORY.

                            Show Full Text
                          • 09:13:14 AM

                            MRS. HARTZLER

                            THE SEASON WITH A PERFECT RECORD OF 26-0. MAKING THEM ONLY THE THIRD…

                            THE SEASON WITH A PERFECT RECORD OF 26-0. MAKING THEM ONLY THE THIRD WOMEN'S DIVISION 2 NATIONAL CHAMPION TO FINISH A SEASON WITH A PERFECT RECORD. THE TEAM'S 26 WINS SET A NEW SINGLE SEASON NCAA DIVISION 2 WOMEN'S RECORD. IN ADDITION TO WINNING THE NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIP, THEY HAD FIVE ATHLETES JOIN THE DIVISION 2 CONFERENCE COMMISSIONERS ASSOCIATION ALL-AMERICAN TEAM. THE TEAM'S OUTSTANDING ACCOMPLISHMENTS MARK A GREAT MILESTONE FOR THE UNIVERSITY OF CENTRAL MISSOURI'S ATHLETICS DEPARTMENT AND ITS HEAD COACH OF 11 YEARS. PLEASE JOIN ME IN CONGRATULATING THE CENTRAL MISSOURI GENNIES ON THIS ACHIEVEMENT. I YIELD BACK.

                            Show Full Text
                          • 09:14:02 AM

                            THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

                            FOR WHAT PURPOSE DOES THE GENTLEMAN FROM VIRGINIA SEEK RECOGNITION?…

                            FOR WHAT PURPOSE DOES THE GENTLEMAN FROM VIRGINIA SEEK RECOGNITION? WITHOUT OBJECTION, THE GENTLEMAN FROM VIRGINIA IS RECOGNIZED FOR ONE MINUTE.

                            Show Full Text
                          • 09:14:11 AM

                            >>

                            THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. MR. SPEAKER, I STAND HERE TODAY ON THE ANNIVERSARY…

                            THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. MR. SPEAKER, I STAND HERE TODAY ON THE ANNIVERSARY OF THE TRAGIC SHOOTING AT SANDY HOOK ELEMENTARY SCHOOL.

                            Show Full Text
                          • 09:14:20 AM

                            MR. MCEACHIN

                            ON DECEMBER 14, 2012, NEWTOWN, CONNECTICUT LOST 20 INNOCENT CHILDREN. MOST…

                            ON DECEMBER 14, 2012, NEWTOWN, CONNECTICUT LOST 20 INNOCENT CHILDREN. MOST 6 YEARS OLD, TO GUN VIOLENCE. WE ALSO LOST SIX BRAVE TEACHERS AND TAFF WHO DID EVERYTHING POSSIBLE TO PROTECT THE STUDENTS IN THEIR CARE. AS A FATHER I CANNOT IMAGINE ANYTHING MORE PAINFUL AS THE LOSS OF A CHILD. AS AN AMERICAN I STRUGGLE TO IMAGINE THE MORE HORRIFIC TRAGEDY THAN THAT WHICH HAPPENED IN NEWTOWN. MR. SPEAKER, MANY OF US THOUGHT THIS TRAGEDY WOULD FINALLY MOVE THE NEEDLE ONPOLICY. THAT DID NOT HAPPEN. JUST LAST WEEK THE HOUSE PASSED MAJOR LEGISLATION LOOSENING GUN SAFETY LAWS. I WANT TO REMIND MY COLLEAGUES AND THE MAJORITY THAT IT IS NOT TOO LATE TO ACT. WE CANNOT BRING BACK THOSE THAT WE HAVE LOST, BUT WE CAN AND MUST ENSURE THAT MORE FAMILIES DO NOT FACE THE PAIN THAT NEWTOWN FAMILIES FACED. I URGE MY COLLEAGUES AND THE MAJORITY TO JOIN THIS SIDE OF THE AISLE IN SUPPORTING COMMONSENSE GUN SAFETY REFORM. THOUGHTS AND PRAYERS ARE NOT ENOUGH. HELP US TO END THIS SCOURGE. THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. I YIELD BACK. .

                            Show Full Text
                          • 09:15:33 AM

                            THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

                            FOR WHAT PURPOSE DOES THE GENTLEMAN FROM TEXAS SEEK RECOGNITION?

                          • 09:15:37 AM

                            MR. HENSARLING

                            MR. SPEAKER, PURSUANT TO HOUSE RESOLUTION 657, I CALL UP H.R. 2396 AND ASK…

                            MR. SPEAKER, PURSUANT TO HOUSE RESOLUTION 657, I CALL UP H.R. 2396 AND ASK FOR ITS IMMEDIATE CONSIDERATION IN THE HOUSE.

                            Show Full Text
                          • 09:15:45 AM

                            THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

                            THE CLERK WILL REPORT THE TITLE OF THE BILL.

                          • 09:15:47 AM

                            THE CLERK

                            UNION CALENDAR NUMBER 321, H.R. 2396, A BILL TO AMEND THE…

                            UNION CALENDAR NUMBER 321, H.R. 2396, A BILL TO AMEND THE GRAMM-LEACH-BLILEY ACT TO UPDATE THE EXCEPTION FOR CERTAIN ANNUAL NOTICES PROVIDED BY FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS.

                            Show Full Text
                          • 09:16:01 AM

                            TEMPORE PURSUANT

                            PURSUANT TO HOUSE RESOLUTION 657, THE AMENDMENT IN THE NATURE OF A…

                            PURSUANT TO HOUSE RESOLUTION 657, THE AMENDMENT IN THE NATURE OF A SUBSTITUTE RECOMMENDED BY THE COMMITTEE ON FINANCIAL SERVICES PRINTED IN THE BILL IS ADOPTED, AND THE BILL, AS AMENDED, IS CONSIDERED AS READ. THE BILL, AS AMENDED, SHALL BE DEBATABLE FOR ONE HOUR EQUALLY DIVIDED AND CONTROLLED BY THE CHAIR AND RANKING MINORITY MEMBER OF THE COMMITTEE ON FINANCIAL SERVICES. AFTER ONE HOUR OF DEBATE ON THE BILL, AS AMENDED, IT SHALL BE IN ORDER TO CONSIDER THE FURTHER AMENDMENT PRINTED IN HOUSE REPORT 115-462 IF OFFERED BY THE MEMBER DESIGNATED IN THE REPORT WHICH SHALL BE CONSIDERED AS READ, SHALL BE SEPARATELY DEBATABLE FOR THE TIME SPECIFIED IN THE REPORT EQUALLY DIVIDED AND CONTROLLED BY THE PROPONENT AND AN OPPONENT, SHALL NOT BE SUBJECT TO A DEMAND FOR DIVISION OF THE QUESTION. THE GENTLEMAN FROM TEXAS, MR. HENSARLING, AND THE GENTLEWOMAN FROM CALIFORNIA, MS. WATERS, EACH WILL CONTROL 30 MINUTES. THE CHAIR RECOGNIZES THE GENTLEMAN FROM TEXAS.

                            Show Full Text
                          • 09:16:51 AM

                            MR. HENSARLING

                            MR. SPEAKER, I ASK UNANIMOUS CONSENT THAT ALL MEMBERS MAY HAVE FIVE…

                            MR. SPEAKER, I ASK UNANIMOUS CONSENT THAT ALL MEMBERS MAY HAVE FIVE LEGISLATIVE DAYS TO REVISE AND EXTEND THEIR REMARKS AND SUBMIT EXTRANEOUS MATERIALS ON THE BILL UNDER CONSIDERATION.

                            Show Full Text
                          • 09:17:01 AM

                            TEMPORE WITH

                            WITHOUT OBJECTION.

                          • 09:17:02 AM

                            MR. HENSARLING

                            MR. SPEAKER, I YIELD MYSELF SUCH TIME AS I MAY CONSUME.

                          • 09:17:05 AM

                            THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

                            THE GENTLEMAN IS RECOGNIZED.

                          • 09:17:07 AM

                            MR. HENSARLING

                            MR. SPEAKER, I RISE TODAY IN SUPPORT OF H.R. 2396, THE PRIVACY…

                            MR. SPEAKER, I RISE TODAY IN SUPPORT OF H.R. 2396, THE PRIVACY NOTIFICATION TECHNICAL CLARIFICATION ACT, WHICH IS AN IMPORTANT BILL CO-SPONSORED BY A BIPARTISAN GROUP OF MEMBERS OF THE HOUSE AND A BILL THAT WAS APPROVED BY THE FINANCIAL SERVICES COMMITTEE WITH A STRONG BIPARTISAN VOTE OF 2-1, QUITE LITERALLY, 40-20. THIS BILL BUILDS UPON AN IMPORTANT -- UPON AN ISSUE THAT HAS A LONG TRACK RECORD OF STRONG BIPARTISAN SUPPORT IN CONGRESS. I WANT TO THANK CONGRESSMAN TROTT, A MEMBER OF THE FINANCIAL SERVICES COMMITTEE, FOR INTRODUCING THIS LEGISLATION, AND FOR LEADING CONGRESSIONAL EFFORTS TO MODERNIZE THE PRIVACY NOTIFICATION PROCESS FOR CONSUMERS AND TO PROVIDE REGULATORY RELIEF FOR OUR STRUGGLING FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS. THERE ARE -- THERE IS A SERIOUS ISSUE, MR. SPEAKER, WITH THE SHEER VOLUME, COMPLEX, WEIGHT LOAD AND COST OF THE REGULATORY BURDEN UPON PARTICULARLY OUR STRUGGLING COMMUNITY FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS, OUR COMMUNITY BANKS, AND CREDIT UNIONS. IT'S NO ONE SPECIFIC REGULATION , BUT THE TOTALITY, THE COMBINATION OF THEM ALL ARE CAUSING US TO LOSE A COMMUNITY BANK OR CREDIT UNION A DAY IN AMERICA, AND AS WE LOSE THEM, OUR CONSTITUENTS LOSE THEIR OPPORTUNITY FOR CREDIT OPPORTUNITIES TO SHARE IN THEIR VERSION OF THE AMERICAN DREAM. IT MAKES IT MORE COSTLY, MORE DIFFICULT FOR THEM TO FINANCE SOMEBODY TO GO TO COLLEGE, FOR THEM TO PERHAPS BUY AN AUTO TO GET THEM TO WORK, OR PERHAPS CAPITALIZE THEIR OWN SMALL BUSINESS. AND SO WE FREQUENTLY HEAR FROM OUR COMMUNITY FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS. YOU KNOW, I HEARD FROM A BANKER, A COMMUNITY BANKER FROM NEBRASKA NOT LONG AGO WHO EXPLAINED, QUOTE, I HAVE EXPLAINED ABOUT HOW THINGS HAVE CHANGED SINCE I STARTED IN BANKING 10 YEARS AGO. EFFORTS FOR OUR GOVERNMENT TO MAKE THINGS FAIRER, EASIER FOR CONSUMERS, IT HAS BECOME INCREASINGLY MORE DIFFICULT FOR PEOPLE TO OBTAIN FAVORABLE LOAN TERMS AND NOT TO MENTION OBTAIN LOANS IN A TIMELY MANNER. I HEARD FROM A BANKER IN ALABAMA ABOUT REAL ESTATE REGULATIONS THAT SAID THEY WERE INTENDED TO HELP CUSTOMERS BUT IT'S ACTUALLY HURTING THEM AS WAIT TIMES INCREASE AND BANKS ARE NO LONGER OFFERING CERTAIN PRODUCTS, NOT ALL OF THESE PEOPLE CAN BE PROTECTED FROM THEMSELVES NO MATTER HOW MANY RULES AND REGS THE BANKS FOLLOW TO PROTECT THEM. I HEARD FROM A BANKER IN UTAH, COMMUNITY BANKER IN UTAH WHO SAID, I'VE BEEN IN BANKING FOR 29 YEARS AND AT TIME THE REGULATORY BURDEN HAS INCREASED DRAMATICALLY. THE ABILITY TO HELP CUSTOMERS AND SMALL BUSINESSES SUCCEED IN RURAL AMERICA HAS BEEN GREATLY HAMPERED BY REGULATION INTENDED TO PROTECT THE CUSTOMER FROM WALL STREET BANKS, BUT IN THE PROCESS SMALLER COMMUNITY BANKS, SUCH AS MINE, HAVE BEEN CAUGHT IN THE FRAY OR BROAD BRUSH OF REGULATIONS. BANKER IN OKLAHOMA SAID, BECAUSE OF DODD-FRANK REGULATIONS, QUOTE, WE NO LONGER OFFER PURCHASE HOUSE LOANS. AND THE LES GOES ON AND ON -- AND THE LIST GOES ON AND ON AND ON. AND SO THIS IS ONE REGULATION, ONE REGULATION THAT SIMPLY SAYS UNDER THE GRAMM-LEACH-BLILEY ACT THAT IF A FINANCIAL INSTITUTION DOESN'T CHANGE THEIR PRIVACY NOTIFICATION THEY DON'T HAVE TO SEND OUT A PIECE OF PAPER ANNUALLY. A PIECE OF PAPER LIKE THIS THAT 99% OF THE TIME CUSTOMERS THROW AWAY AND DON'T READ IN THE FIRST PLACE. AND DON'T TAKE MY WORD FOR IT, PROFESSOR ADAM LEVINTON WHO IS A FREQUENT DEMOCRAT, DEMOCRAT WITNESS BEFORE THE HOUSE FINANCIAL SERVICES COMMITTEE, TESTIFIED BEFORE OUR COMMITTEE, QUOTE, ONE THING I THINK SHOULD GO THE WAY OF THE DOO-DOO BIRD ARE THE GRAMM-LEACH-BLILEY PRIVACY NOTICES. NOBODY READS THEM. THAT'S A DEMOCRAT WITNESS, MR. SPEAKER. IT'S NOT THE REPUBLICAN. IT'S A DEMOCRAT WITNESS. GOES ON TOWAY SAY, NO ONE SHOULD, EVEN THE LARGE BANKS, SHOULD BE SPENDING MONEY ON GIVING THESE NOTICES. THAT'S NOT WHAT THIS BILL DOES. IT JUST SIMPLY SAYS IF A FINANCIAL INSTITUTION DOES NOT, DOES NOT CHANGE THEIR PRIVACY NOTIFICATION, THEY DON'T HAVE TO SEND OUT A PAPER NOTIFICATION THAT CREATES MORE COST, THAT GETS PASSED ONTO THE CUSTOMER THAT NOBODY READS IN THE FIRST PLACE. NUMBER ONE, IT'S IMPORTANT REGULATORY RELIEF FOR OUR FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS, BUT IT'S ALSO IMPORTANT WHEN WE THINK IN TERMS OF THE SHEER VOLUME OF FINANCIAL DISCLOSURES THAT OUR CONSTITUENTS RECEIVE. AND THIS GOES BACK TO THE FACT, MR. SPEAKER, THAT IF YOU DISCLOSE EVERYTHING, YOU EFFECTIVELY DISCLOSE NOTHING BECAUSE YOU OVERWHELM THE CUSTOMER. AND SO WE MUST VIGILANTLY ENSURE THAT OUR CONSTITUENTS ARE RECEIVING EFFECTIVE DISCLOSURE, NOT JUST VOLUME MUSS DISCLOSURE, -- VOLUMIOUS DISCLOSURE, WRITTEN IN CLEAR, UNDERSTANDABLE, LANGUAGE. NOT VOW LUMINOUS DISCLOSURE WRITTEN IN LEAGUIES AND FINE PRINT. THAT DOESN'T DO -- THAT DOESN'T DO ANYBODY ANY GOOD. I WANT TO THANK THE GENTLEMAN FOR HIS BIPARTISAN SUPPORT BECAUSE IT IS A SIMPLE, TECHNICAL CORRECTION TO CLARIFY THAT CUSTOMERS HAVE TO BE MAILED PHYSICALLY -- PHYSICALLY MAILED AN ANNUAL PRIVACY NOTICE ONLY IF THE PRIVACY CHANGED FROM THE PREVIOUS YEAR. IMPORTANTLY, THIS BILL WAS CAREFULLY CRAFTED TO MAINTAIN AND RETAIN CURRENT PRIVACY AND OPT OUT POLICY AND DOES NOT, DOES NOT EXEMPT ANY FINANCIAL SERVICES PROVIDER FROM AN INITIAL PRIVACY NOTICE, NOR DOES IT ALLOW ANY LOOPHOLES FOR AN INSTITUTION TO AVOID ISSUING AN UPDATED NOTICE. IN FACT, THIS LEGISLATION, MR. SPEAKER, DOES NOT CHANGE PRIVACY PROVISIONS AT ALL. JUST HOW THEY'RE DELIVERED. LET ME REPEAT. THE LEGISLATION DOES NOT CHANGE PRIVACY PROVISIONS AT ALL. JUST HOW THEY ARE DELIVERED. AGAIN, MR. TROTT'S BILL HAS STRONG BIPARTISAN SUPPORT, PROVIDES A SIMPLE AND FLEXIBLE APPROACH THAT MODERNIZES PRIVACY NOTIFICATION TO THE BENEFIT OF OUR CUSTOMERS AND TO THE BENEFIT OF OUR FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS. I URGE ADOPTION OF THE MEASURE AND URGE EVERY MEMBER TO VOTE FOR IT AND I RESERVE THE BALANCE OF MY TIME.

                            Show Full Text
                          • 09:24:09 AM

                            THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

                            THE GENTLEMAN'S TIME IS RESERVED. THE GENTLEWOMAN FROM CALIFORNIA.

                          • 09:24:12 AM

                            MS. WATERS

                            THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I YIELD MYSELF SUCH TIME AS I MAY CONSUME.

                          • 09:24:18 AM

                            THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

                            THE GENTLEWOMAN IS RECOGNIZED.

                          • 09:24:20 AM

                            MS. WATERS

                            THANK YOU. I RISE TO SPEAK IN OPPOSITION TO H.R. 2396, THE PRIVACY…

                            THANK YOU. I RISE TO SPEAK IN OPPOSITION TO H.R. 2396, THE PRIVACY NOTIFICATION TECHNICAL CLARIFICATION ACT. CONTRARY TO THE BILL TITLE, THIS BILL IS FAR FROM A TECHNICAL CLARIFICATION, SO I WANT TO BE VERY CLEAR WHAT THIS BILL WOULD ACTUALLY DO. H.R. 2396 WOULD REDUCE THE MEANINGFUL AND CLEAR DISCLOSURES THAT FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS MUST CURRENTLY PROVIDE TO THEIR CUSTOMERS EVERY YEAR. EVEN IF THOSE COMPANIES SHARE THEIR CUSTOMERS' NONPUBLIC PERSONAL INFORMATION BROADLY WITH NONAFFILIATED THIRD-PARTY COMPANIES. UNLIKE OTHER PRIVACY BILLS CONGRESS HAS CONSIDERED, THIS BILL COMES WITH NO GUARDRAILS WHATSOEVER TO DISCOURAGE THE COMPANY FROM BROADLY SHARING CONSUMERS' SENSITIVE PERSONAL INFORMATION. WHILE THE BILL PROVIDES SEVERAL ALTERNATIVE MECHANISMS TO DELIVER PRIVACY REMINDERS, ONE OPTION WOULD RESULT IN THE CUSTOMER RECEIVING NO WRITTEN DISCLOSURE AT ALL. THE CURRENT ANNUAL PRIVACY NOTICES SERVE AS A REMINDER, DESCRIBING A CUSTOMER'S RIGHT TO RESTRICT THE SHARING OF THEIR NONPUBLIC PERSONAL INFORMATION TO NONAFFILIATED THIRD PARTIES AND INFORMATION ABOUT HOW TO EXERCISE THIS RIGHT IF THEY SO CHOOSE. THIS PRIVACY RIGHT WAS CREATED IN THE GRAMM-LEACH-BLILEY ACT, WHICH WAS SIGNED INTO LAW IN 1999. I SERVED ON THE CONFERENCE COMMITTEE, SO I KNOW FIRSTHAND THAT THE INITIAL AND ANNUAL PRIVACY NOTICES IN THE GRAMM-LEACH-BLILEY ACT WERE ENACTED PARTLY IN RESPONSE TO PUBLIC CONCERNS ABOUT THE SALE OF PERSONAL DATA FOR MARKETING PURPOSES THAT WERE HIGHLIGHTED IN A NUMBER OF LEGAL ACTIONS BROUGHT BY STATE ATTORNEYS GENERAL AT THE TIME. IN 1999, FOR EXAMPLE, THERE WAS A SETTLEMENT BETWEEN THE MINNESOTA ATTORNEY GENERAL AND U.S. BANK RESOLVING ALLEGATIONS THAT THE BANK MISREPRESENTED ITS PRACTICE OF SELLING HIGHLY PERSONAL AND CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION ABOUT ITS CUSTOMERS TO TELEMARKETERS. THESE CONCERNS ARE JUST AS RELEVANT TODAY. IN FACT, I FIND THE TIMING OF THE CONSIDERATION OF THIS BILL VERY TROUBLING AS IT IS BEING BROUGHT TO THE FLOOR JUST MONTHS AFTER THE MASSIVE EQUIFAX DATA BREACH. IN THE EQUIFAX BREACH, 145.5 MILLION AMERICANS HAD THEIR SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS, DATES OF BIRTH, AND OTHER SENSITIVE FINANCIAL AND PERSONALLY IDENTIFIABLE INFORMATION EXPOSED TO THIEVES. EQUIFAX IS NOT THE ONLY MAJOR CREDIT BUREAU TO EXPERIENCE LARGE DATA BREACH. ABOUT TWO YEARS AGO, EXPERIAN, ONE OF THE OTHER THREE MAJOR CREDIT BUREAUS IN THIS COUNTRY, HAD A BREACH THAT EXPOSED MILLIONS OF T-MOBILE CUSTOMERS' INFORMATION. THESE BREACHES ARE ON TOP OF A LONG LIST OF OTHER BREACHES WE HAVE SEEN AT OTHER COMPANIES WHERE SENSITIVE CUSTOMER INFORMATION WAS COMPROMISED. CONSUMERS HAVE CALLED ON THEIR REPRESENTATIVES IN CONGRESS TO ENACT TOUGHER LAWS THAT WOULD STRENGTHEN THEIR CONTROL OVER THEIR PERSONAL INFORMATION, NOT WEAKEN IT. CONSUMERS ARE INCREASINGLY WEARY ABOUT THE UNFETTERED SHARING OF THEIR PERSONAL INFORMATION BY FINANCIAL FIRMS TO NONAFFILIATED THIRD PARTIES THAT CAN RESULT IN CONSUMER PROFILING, FRAUD, AGGRESSIVE TARGET MARKETING, AND IDENTITY THEFT. UNFORTUNATELY, THIS BILL GOES IN THE OPPOSITE DIRECTION. INSTEAD OF WORKING TO STRENGTHEN CONSUMERS' PRIVACY PROTECTIONS, H.R. 2396 WOULD EASE OBLIGATIONS ON FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS TO PROVIDE NOTICES TO THEIR CUSTOMERS DESCRIBING THEIR PRIVACY PRACTICES AND POLICIES, AND IMPORTANTLY, FULLY EXPLAINING TO THESE CUSTOMERS THEIR RIGHT TO RESTRICT THE SHARING OF THEIR INFORMATION TO NONAFFILIATED THIRD PARTIES. THIS IS COMMONLY REFERRED TO AS THE CONSUMER'S RIGHT TO OPT OUT OF HAVING A FINANCIAL INSTITUTION SHARE THEIR INFORMATION TO COMPANIES THAT ARE OUTSIDE OF THEIR COMMON CORPORATE STRUCTURE OR ORGANIZATION. THESE NONAFFILIATED THIRD-PARTY COMPANIES ARE GENERALLY NOT ONES THAT THE CONSUMERS HAVE AN EXISTING RELATIONSHIP WITH. MEANING THEY HAVE NOT RECEIVED A PRODUCT OR SERVICE FROM THE COMPANY IN THE PAST. NOW THE PROPONENTS OF H.R. 2396 MAY SAY THE BILL HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH EQUIFAX OR THAT EQUIFAX WOULD NOT BE COVERED. IF THE AMENDMENT BEING OFFERED LATER TODAY IS AGREED TO. BUT THE BILL WOULD ROLL BACK PRIVACY NOTICE REQUIREMENTS FOR MANY FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS THAT ENGAGE IN VEHICLE FINANCING, INCLUDING MEGABANKS LIKE WELLS FARGO, EVEN IF THEY BROADLY SHARE THEIR CUSTOMERS' NONPUBLIC PERSONAL INFORMATION WITH OTHER COMPANIES. SO LET'S DISCUSS WELLS FARGO AND THEIR AUTO LENDING PRACTICES AND THEIR WORK WITH NONAFFILIATED THIRD PARTIES. EARLIER THIS YEAR, THE DEMOCRATIC STAFF OF THE FINANCIAL SERVICES COMMITTEE PRODUCED A REPORT ON WELLS FARGO'S EGREGIOUS MISCONDUCT WHICH HAS RESULTED IN EXTENSIVE CONSUMER HARM. FOR EXAMPLE, WELLS FARGO CHARGED OVER 570,000 CONSUMERS FOR AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE POLICIES THEY DID NOT NEED, WHICH RESULTED IN AT LEAST 20,000 CUSTOMERS, INCLUDING ACTIVE DUTY SERVICE MEMBERS, HAVING THEIR VEHICLES INAPPROPRIATELY REPOSSESSED. THESE AUTO INSURANCE POLICIES WERE PROVIDED THROUGH A NONAFFILIATED THIRD PARTY COMPANY CALLED NATIONAL GENERAL. THE BANK HAS ALSO DEMONSTRATED A CLEAR PATTERN OF MISUSING MILLIONS OF THEIR CUSTOMERS' INFORMATION TO OPEN ACCOUNTS IN THEIR NAME WITHOUT THEIR PERMISSION. SO WHY SHOULD CONGRESS CONSIDER RELAXING THE PRIVACY REQUIREMENTS FOR RECIDIVIST BANK LIKE WELLS FARGO? LET ME ALSO ADDRESS ARGUMENTS THAT CUSTOMERS DON'T READ THESE NOTICES ANYWAY. AS WE HAVE DISCUSSED, I THINK CUSTOMERS ARE PAYING CLOSER ATTENTION NOW AFTER THE EQUIFAX INCIDENT. POSING A LINCOLN THEIR WEBSITE ISN'T SO BAD AND THE CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION BUREAU ALLOWED FOR IT, BUT IN THE CONSUMER BUREAU, PROVIDED AN ALTERNATIVE TO THE ANNUAL PRIVACY NOTICES FOR COMPANIES THAT DO NOT SHARE DATA IN WAYS THAT TRIGGER CONSUMERS OPT OUT RIGHTS UNDER THE LAW. . OVER THE LAST DECADE CONGRESS HAS HEARD REPEATEDLY FROM BANKS AND CREDIT UNIONS THAT IF A COMPANY DOES NOT SHARE PERSONAL INFORMATION WITH AN UNAFFILIATED THIRD PARTY THAT ALLOWS CONSUMERS TO OPT OUT FROM HAVING IT SHARED, AND IF THEY DO NOT CHANGE THEIR PRIVACY POLICIES, THEY SHOULD BE EXEMPT FROM THE ANNUAL NOTICE REQUIREMENTS. IN BOTH INSTANCES THE CUSTOMER DOES NOT HAVE THE ABILITY TO OPT OUT OF HAVING THE INFORMATION SHARED. AFTER SEVERAL YEARS OF RESEARCH AND DEBATE, WE MADE THAT TARGETED CHANGE IN THE LAST CONGRESS. SINCE THEN OTHER COMPANIES SPECIFICALLY CAPTIVE AUTO FINANCE COMPANIES, HAVE MADE THE CASE. THEY SHOULD HAVE MORE FLEXIBILITY, SATISFYING THE ANNUAL NOTICE REQUIREMENT BECAUSE THEY HAVE A UNIQUE AND CLOSE RELATIONSHIP WITH AUTOMOBILE DEALERS THEY WORK WITH. THAT STILL REQUIRES THEM TO SEND THE ANNUAL NOTICE. THIS UNAFFILIATED THIRD PARTY RELATIONSHIP TRIGGERS CONSUMERS' RIGHT UNDER THE LAW TO OPT OUT AND NOT HAVE THEIR INFORMATION SHARED. I OFFERED AN AMENDMENT IN COMMITTEE THAT WOULD HAVE GRANTED THIS TARGETED RELIEF, BUT IT WAS REJECTED. SO WHILE I APPRECIATE THAT H.R. 2396 PROVIDES FLEXIBILITY TO CAPTIVE AND AUTO FINANCE COMPANY, THE BILL IS NOT LIMITED TO THEM AND GOES MUCH, MUCH FURTHER. MR. CHAIRMAN, OVER 30 CONSUMER COMMUNITY, PRIFECY, AND CIVIL RIGHTS GROUPS HAVE PUBLICLY OPPOSED THIS BILL, INCLUDING U.S. HERG AND SO DO I. THIS IS AN AREA WHERE MORE STUDY IS NEEDED BEFORE POLICYMAKERS CRAFT SWEEPING CHANGES. THE BOTTOM LINE IS I BELIEVE WE SHOULD NOT OPEN THE DOOR TOO WIDELY AT THIS TIME TO GIVE THE SAME DEGREE OF FLEXIBILITY TO ALL AND EVERY FINANCIAL INSTITUTION. INCLUDING RESID VIST BANKS LIKE WELLS FARGO -- RECIDIVIST BANKS LIKE WELLS FARGO. THERE SHOULD BE MORE NOT LESS PRIVACY PROTECTIONS AND CONSUMER CONTROL RELATING TO PERSONAL INFORMATION FOLLOWING THE MASS NIFF DATA BREACH AT EQUIFAX THIS YEAR. FOR ALL THESE REASONS I URGE OPPOSITION TO H.R. 2396. I RESERVE THE BALANCE OF MY TIME.

                            Show Full Text
                          • 09:34:02 AM

                            TEMPORE EQUIFAX

                            EQUIFAX THIS YEAR. FOR ALL THESE THE GENTLELADY'S TIME IS RESERVED. THE…

                            EQUIFAX THIS YEAR. FOR ALL THESE THE GENTLELADY'S TIME IS RESERVED. THE GENTLEMAN FROM TEXAS.

                            Show Full Text
                          • 09:34:26 AM

                            MR. HENSARLING

                            I YIELD MYSELF 30 SECONDS TO SAY I KWLINSED VERY CAREFULLY. IT WAS A THE…

                            I YIELD MYSELF 30 SECONDS TO SAY I KWLINSED VERY CAREFULLY. IT WAS A THE GENTLELADY'S TIME IS RESERVED. THE GENTLEMAN FROM TEXAS.

                            Show Full Text
                          • 09:34:31 AM

                            MR. HENSARLING

                            I YIELD MYSELF 30 SECONDS TO SAY I KWLINSED VERY CAREFULLY. IT WAS A…

                            I YIELD MYSELF 30 SECONDS TO SAY I KWLINSED VERY CAREFULLY. IT WAS A FASCINATING SPEECH FROM THE RANKING MEMBER. TOO BAD IT HAS ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO WITH THE BILL THAT IS BEFORE US. SHE WAS SPEAKING OF PRIVACY POLICIES. THE BILL HAS TO DO WITH NOTIFICATION. NOTIFICATION. BUT I DO AGREE WITH THE RANKING MEMBER THAT WE DO NEED MORE EFFECTIVE DISCLOSURE AND IN H.R. 2396 WE REQUIRE FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS TO MAKE THEIR CURRENT POLICIES AVAILABLE ON ITS WEBSITE AT ALL TIMES. THAT ACTUALLY IMPROVES DISCLOSURE. THE ONLY PEOPLE WHO CAN BE MORE THE STATUS QUO ARE THOSE WHO OWN PAPER MILLS. SO WE CAN WASTE MORE PAPER. MR. SPEAKER, I'M NOW PLEASED TO YIELD FIVE MINUTES TO THE GENTLEMAN FROM MICHIGAN, THE SPONSOR OF THE LEGISLATION, AND AN OUTSTANDING HARDWORKING MEMBER OF THE FINANCIAL SERVICES COMMITTEE, MR. TROTT.

                            Show Full Text
                          • 09:35:01 AM

                            EMPORE GENTLEMAN

                            GENTLEMAN FROM MICHIGAN IS RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.

                          • 09:35:03 AM

                            MR. TROTT

                            THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. I'D ALSO LIKE TO THANK THE GENTLEMAN FROM TEXAS,…

                            THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. I'D ALSO LIKE TO THANK THE GENTLEMAN FROM TEXAS, THE CHAIRMAN OF OUR COMMITTEE, FOR YIELDING TIME AND FOR BRINGING THIS BILL TO THE FLOOR. I RISE IN SUPPORT OF H.R. 2396, THE PRIVACY NOTIFICATION TECHNICAL CORRECTION ACT. I WOULD LIKE TO THANK MY GOOD FRIEND, THANK THE GENTLEMAN FROM TEXAS, THE CHAIRMAN OF OUR COMMITTEE, FOR YIELDING TIME AND FOR BRINGING THIS BILL TO THE FLOOR. MR. CLAY, FOR HIS LEADERSHIP ON THIS BILL. IT'S BEEN A PLEASURE TO WORK ACROSS THE AISLE ON THIS COMMONSENSE MEASURE WITH SOMEONE FOR WHOM I HAVE SUCH GREAT RESPECT. THIS BILL MAKES A SIMPLE TECHNICAL CORRECTION TO FEDERAL LAW. UNDER THE LEGISLATION, FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS ARE NO LONGER REQUIRED TO MAIL DUPE CANIVE -- DUPE CANIVE AND CONFUSING PRIVACY NOTIFICATIONS EVERY YEAR WHEN NO CHANGES HAVE BEEN MADE. PRIVACY INFORMATION MUST BE MADE AVAILABLE ON THE COMPANY WEBSITE AND FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS MUST SEND PAPER COPIES TO CONSIRMSE UPON REQUEST. UNDER THE LEGISLATION, COMPANIES ARE REQUIRED TO PROVIDE A TOLL FREE NUMBER SO CUSTOMERS CAN REQUEST THE POLICY AT ANY TIME. ADDITIONALLY, CONSUMERS WILL BE REMINDED OF THEIR RIGHT TO OPT OUT OF INFORMATION SHARING WHEN THEY RECEIVE THEIR BILLS. IF YOU'RE LIKE ME YOU THROW AWAY THESE DOCUMENTS. THEY ARE CONFUSING, DENSE, FULL OF FINE PRINT LEGALESE. I CAN OF INFORMATION SHARING HAS CHANGED AND I'M A LAWYER. THIS LEGISLATION WILL ENSURE NEVER TELL IF ANYTHING THAT CONSUMERS ARE ALERTED OF CHANGES AND WILL NO LONGER BE INUNDATED WITH JUNK MAIL. THIS MEASURE WILL ALSO HELP COMPANIES PROVIDE BETTER SERVICE TO THEIR CUSTOMERS. SOME COMPANIES SPEND OVER $2 MILLION ANNUALLY ON THESE MAILINGS. MONEY THAT COULD BE PUT TO BETTER USE MAKING CURRENT LOANS OR PERHAPS WILL ALSO HELP COMPANIES PROVIDE BETTER SERVICE TO THEIR CUSTOMERS. SOME COMPANIES SPEND OVER LOWERING THE COST OF THEIR PRODUCT. DURING A RECENT HEARING ON THIS BILL A COMMUNITY BANKER TOLD US ABOUT A SIMILAR PROVISION THAT PASSED FOR BANKS LAST YEAR. HE SPOKE ABOUT HOW POSITIVE IT HAD BEEN FOR HIS COMMUNITY AND HIS CUSTOMERS. HE TOOK THE MONEY HE WOULD HAVE SPENT ON POSEAGE AND PAPER AND -- POSTAGE AND PAPER AND GIVE IT BACK TO THE COMMUNITY IN TERMS OF MORE LOANS. THIS HELPED PEOPLE START NEW BUSINESS, CREATE MORE JOBS, AND RESULTED IN A FEW MORTGAGES BEING MADE TO PURCHASE NEW HOMES. LOWERING THE COST OF THEIR PRODUCT. I BELIEVE EVERY MEMBER SHOULD SUPPORT GETTING RID OF OUTDATED, UNNECESSARY REGULATIONS. THIS BILL WILL ALLOW THOSE WHO LEND MONEY WHEN WE BUY A NEW CAR TO REALIZE THE SAME SAVINGS AND EFFICIENCIES AS BANKS. NOT ONLY WILL THIS LEGISLATION REDUCE UNNECESSARY COSTS, IT WILL IMPROVE TRANSPARENCY AND ACCOUNTABILITY AND ENSURE INDIVIDUALS BETTER UNDERSTAND WHEN A COMPANY HAS ACTUALLY CHANGED ITS PRIVACY POLICY. A FEW MINUTES AGO THE RANKING MEMBER SPOKE IN OPPOSITION TO THIS BILL. I'M NOT SURE WHEN BILL SHE READ BUT IT WAS NOT 2396. THE BILL IN NO WAY PUTS CONSUMERS' PRIVACY INFORMATION AT RISK. IT IN NO WAY DENIES CONSUMERS IMPORTANT PRIVACY PROTECTIONS. IT IN NO WAY HAS ANYTHING TO DO WITH EQUIFAX. HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH WELLS FARGO. HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH SERVICE MEMBERS HAVING THEIR CARS IMPROPERLY REPOSSESSED. HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH CONSUMER PROFILING. HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH FRAUD. AND SHE DIDN'T BRING IT UP, HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE PRESIDENT'S TAX RETURNS. THIS BILL SHOULD HAVE BEEN ON THE SUSPENSION CALENDAR. THERE ARE ONLY TWO GROUPS THAT CAN OPPOSE THIS GROUP. THE UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE BECAUSE IT'S GOING TO MEAN LESS BUSINESS FOR THEFMENT AND AS THE CHAIRMAN MENTIONED, PAPER MILLS. SHE DIDN'T-D, THE RANKING MEMBER, OFFER AN AMENDMENT, THE AMENDMENT WAS SO CONVOLUTED IF I WAS BANK OR FINANCIAL INSTITUTION OR A CAR LENDER, I WOULD PREFER TO DO THE MAILINGS BECAUSE THE AMENDMENT AT THE END OF THE DAY WAS REALLY JUST A HAVEN FOR CLASS ACTION LAWYERS TO FILE FRIVOLOUS LAWSUITS WHEN SOMEONE DIDN'T PUT SOMETHING ON THEIR WEBSITE EXACTLY AS OUTLINED IN THE AMENDMENT. THIS IS A PRO-CONSUMER PIECE OF LEGISLATION. I HAVE LETTERS FROM -- THAT I'D LIKE TO INCLUDE WITH MY COMMENTS FROM THE AMERICAN FINANCIAL SERVICES ASSOCIATION, THE NATIONAL BANKERS ASSOCIATION, THE AMERICAN BANKERS ASSOCIATION, THE CONSUMER BANKERS ASSOCIATION, THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF MINORITY AUTOMOTIVE DEALERS, AND LETTERS SIGNED BY FORD MOTOR CREDIT, TOYOTA FINANCIAL SERVICE, EBB AND V.W. -- AND V.W. CREDIT. IT WILL LOWER THE COST FOR THESE COMPANIES WHICH WILL HELP CONSUMERS OBTAIN MORE LOANS. THIS IS A BIPARTISAN, COMMONSENSE PIECE OF LEGISLATION WHICH TRUE COMMUNITY BENEFITS. I URGE ALL MEMBERS TO SUPPORT H.R. 2396. MR. SPEAKER, I YIELD BACK THE BALANCE OF MY TIME.

                            Show Full Text
                          • 09:39:44 AM

                            TEMPORE THE

                          • 09:39:45 AM

                            TEMPORE WITHOUT

                            WITHOUT OBJECTION, THE LETTERS ARE INCLUDED AS A MATTER OF THE RECORD. THE…

                            WITHOUT OBJECTION, THE LETTERS ARE INCLUDED AS A MATTER OF THE RECORD. THE GENTLEWOMAN FROM CALIFORNIA.

                            Show Full Text
                          • 09:39:48 AM

                            MS. WATERS

                            THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I YIELD THREE MINUTES TO THE GENTLELADY FROM NEW…

                            THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I YIELD THREE MINUTES TO THE GENTLELADY FROM NEW YORK, A SENIOR MEMBER OF THE FINANCIAL SERVICES COMMITTEE, AND THE RANKING MEMBER OF THE SMALL BUSINESS COMMITTEE, MS. VELAZQUEZ.

                            Show Full Text
                          • 09:39:55 AM

                            THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

                            THE GENTLEWOMAN FROM NEW YORK IS RECOGNIZED FOR THREE V.W. CREDIT. IT WILL…

                            THE GENTLEWOMAN FROM NEW YORK IS RECOGNIZED FOR THREE V.W. CREDIT. IT WILL LOWER THE COST FOR THESE COMPANIES WHICH WILL HELP CONSUMERS OBTAIN MORE LOANS. MINUTES.

                            Show Full Text
                          • 09:40:01 AM

                            MS. VELAZQUEZ

                            THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. LET ME TAKE THIS OPPORTUNITY TO THANK RANKING…

                            THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. LET ME TAKE THIS OPPORTUNITY TO THANK RANKING MEMBER WATERS FOR HER EXTRAORDINARY LEADERSHIP ON THIS ISSUE. I RISE IN OPPOSITION TO H.R. 2396, THE PRIVACY NOTIFICATION TECHNICAL CLARIFICATION ACT. THIS BILL CLAIMS TO AMEND THE GRAHAM-LEECH-BLILEY ACT TO EXEMPT VEHICLE FINANCE COMPANIES FROM PROVIDING CUSTOMERS WITH PRIVACY STATEMENTS. IF A COMPANY HASN'T RECENTLY CHANGED ITS POLICIES AND PRACTICES AND THE COMPANY MAKES ITS POLICY AVAILABLE ONLINE. BUT THIS BILL GOES FAR BEYOND PROVIDING A SMALL EXEMPTION AND TAYLORED -- TAILORED FLEXIBILITY TO VEHICLE FINANCE COMPANIES AS THE PROPONENTS OF THIS BILL WILL HAVE YOU BELIEVE. AND SOMETHING I'M REALLY READY TO SUPPORT. THIS BILL WILL EXEMPT ONLINE. BUT THIS BILL GOES FAR ALL FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS FROM PROVIDING CUSTOMERS WITH PRIVACY NOTICES. AS CURRENTLY DRAFTED UNDER THE BILL, FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS SUCH AS PAYDAY LERNSD, CHECK CASH SERVICE, AND LARGE INSTITUTIONS LIKE WELLS FARGO, ARE EXEMPTED FROM PROVIDING ANNUAL PRIVACY NOTICES AND ARE CONSTRAINED ON WHO THEY CAN SHARE AND ARE CONSTRAINED ON WHO THEY CAN SHARE THEIR CUSTOMERS' PERSONAL INFORMATION -- UNCONSTRAINED WITH WHO THEY CAN SHARE THEIR CUSTOMER'S PERSONAL INFORMATION WITH. THIS GOES FAR BEYOND THE ORIGINAL INTENT OF THE BILL. AS WE HAVE SEEN IN THE GROWING NUMBER OF DATA BREACHES AT COMPANIES LIKE EQUIFAX, THE PROTECTION OF CUSTOMERS' PERSONAL INFORMATION IS SOMETHING CONGRESS MUST CONSIDER CAREFULLY. WHILE I CONTINUE TO THINK THAT IT MAKES SENSE FOR AUTO FINANCE COMPANY TO HAVE SOME DEGREE OF FLEXIBILITY TO THE EXTEND THEY ONLY SHARE CUSTOMER PERSONAL INFORMATION WITH THE DEALERSHIP, THIS LEGISLATION IS FAR TOO BROAD. TO THAT END, I WILL ASK MY COLLEAGUES TO OPPOSE THIS MEASURE. I THANK THE GENTLELADY FROM CALIFORNIA. I YIELD BACK.

                            Show Full Text
                          • 09:42:15 AM

                            THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

                            THE GENTLEMAN FROM TEXAS.

                          • 09:42:17 AM

                            MR. HENSARLING

                            MR. SPEAKER, AT THIS TIME I AM VERY PLEASED TO YIELD FIVE MINUTES TO THE…

                            MR. SPEAKER, AT THIS TIME I AM VERY PLEASED TO YIELD FIVE MINUTES TO THE GENTLEMAN FROM MISSOURI, MR. LUETKEMEYER, THE CHAIRMAN OF THE FINANCIAL SERVICES SUBCOMMITTEE ON FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS AND CONSUMER CREDIT.

                            Show Full Text
                          • 09:42:32 AM

                            THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

                            THE GENTLEMAN FROM MISSOURI IS RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.

                          • 09:42:34 AM

                            MR. LUETKEMEYER

                            THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. I WANT TO START BY THANKING THE GENTLEMAN FROM…

                            THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. I WANT TO START BY THANKING THE GENTLEMAN FROM MICHIGAN FOR HIS DILIGENT WORK ON THIS ISSUE AND ALL THE LEADERSHIP OUR CHAIRMAN, CHAIRMAN HENSARLING FROM TEXAS, HAS GIVEN US THROUGHOUT THE YEARS ON THIS PARTICULAR ISSUE AS WELL LAST YEAR WHEN I CARRIED THE BILL ALSO. SEVERAL YEARS AGO THE GENTLEMAN FROM CALIFORNIA, MR. SHERRMAN, AND I INTRODUCED BIPARTISAN LEGISLATION TO REQUIRE DEPOSITORY INSTITUTIONS TO PROVIDE PRIVACY INFORMATION TO THEIR CUSTOMERS ONLY IF THEY HAD CHANGED ANY POLICY OR PRACTICE RELATED TO THAT CUSTOMER'S PRIVACY. THAT BILL WAS ULTIMATELY SIGNED INTO LAW BY PRESIDENT OBAMA. IT HAS ELIMINATED MILLIONS OF CONFUSED MAILINGS THAT COSTS MILLIONS TO PRODUCE EACH YEAR. OUR LEGISLATION PROVIDED RELIEF TO BANKS AND CREDIT UNIONS, IT DID NOT EXTEND RELIEF TO OTHER COMPANIES. NAMELY CAPTIVE FINANCE COMPANIES TO OPERATE IN A MANNER LARGELY SIMILAR TO DEPOSITORY INSTITUTIONS. SAFEGUARDS FEATURED IN OUR BILL FROM THE 114TH CONGRESS AND CODIFIED INTO LAW ARE INCLUDED IN MR. TROTT'S BILL. MR. LEAF WILL NOT BE GRANTED TO A COMPANY -- RELIEF WILL NOT BE GRANTED TO A COMPANY--ALSO THERE IS A REQUIREMENT THE PRIVACY NOTICE MUST BE MADE TO CONSUMERS IN A VARIETY OF WAYS. THE CONSUMERS WILL CONTINUE TO HAVE ACCESS TO PRIVACY NOTICES TO ONLINE RESOURCES AND BILLING STATEMENTS. REQUIREMENTS FOR FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS TO RELEASE ANNUAL PRIVACY NOTICES TO CUSTOMERS EVEN WHEN NO CHANGES HAVE BEEN MADE ARE BOTH REDUNDANT AND A WASTE OF RESOURCES. WITH PASSAGE OF THIS BILL, INFORMATION INCLUDED IN THESE MAILINGS WOULD LIKELY BE MORE SIGNIFICANT TO THE CONSUMER BECAUSE THEY WOULD ONLY COME AFTER A CHANGE IN PRIVACY POLICY. MR. SPEAKER, THIS IS ABOUT ACCOUNTABILITY OR THE INSTITUTION TO THEIR CUSTOMER FOR HOLDING THAT INFORMATION. IT'S ABOUT ACCESS FOR THE CUSTOMER TO THEIR PRIVACY INFORMATION -- OWN INFORMATION WITH REGARDS TO PRIVACY OF IT. AND WHILE THE -- A GOOD EXAMPLE AS POINTED OUT BY THE RANKING MEMBER WAS EQUIFAX. LET'S STOP AND TALK ABOUT EQUIFAX FOR A SECOND. WHAT HAPPENED? THEY HAD THE LARGEST BREACH IN HISTORY, 150 MILLION PEOPLE. MR. SPEAKER, THERE'S PROBABLY YOU AND I AND EVERYBODY IN THIS ROOM AND 12 PEOPLE WATCH RIGHT NOW AFFECTED BY THIS. BUT I GUARANTEE YOU THAT YOU AND I ALL THE PEOPLE IN THIS ROOM, NOBODY KEPT THEIR PRIVACY NOTICES SENT OUT LAST YEAR D. WE? THEY ARE ALL IN FILE PRIVACY INFORMATION -- OWN INFORMATION WITH REGARDS TO PRIVACY OF IT. AND 13, LONG FORGOTTEN ABOUT. AND THE INFORMATION IN THOSE NOTICES IS FORGOTTEN ABOUT AND NOT PROBABLY READ TO BEGIN WITH. IT'S IMPORTANT THE GENTLEMAN'S BILL HERE AS IN HERE THAT THE PRIVACY NOTICE CAN BE ACCESSED ONLINE. . THEY COULD CHECK FOR THE PRIVACY POLICIES OF EQUIFAX AND SEE WHAT THE POLICIES WERE AND WHETHER THEY WERE ADHERED TO BY THE COMPANY ITSELF IN NOTIFYING THEM AND TAKING CARE OF THEIR CONCERNS AND REIMBURSING THEM, WHATEVER WAS IN THE NOTICE WAS IN THAT ONLINE NOTICE AS WELL. SO IT PROVIDED THAT ACCESS WHICH IS NOT GOING TO HAVE -- CONSUMERS NOT GOING TO HAVE IN A PIECE OF PAPER THAT'S PROBABLY GOING TO GET FILED. I WILL TELL YOU WHEN I GOT HOME LAST WEEKEND, GOT HOME, SAID I AM NOT GOING TO READ THIS, THREW IT AWAY. THIS IS A WASTE OF TIME AND RESOURCES. AND IN THIS SITUATION WITH THE EQUIFAX BREACH, THIS BILL POINTS OUT THE GREAT THINGS THAT CAN HAPPEN IF YOU ENACT THIS LEGISLATION ALLOWING CONSUMERS HAVE ACCESS 24/7 THROUGH THE NOTIFICATIONS AND PRIVACY POLICIES. ONCE AGAIN, I WANT TO THANK THE GENTLEMAN FROM MICHIGAN FOR PICKING UP THE MANTLE ON THIS ISSUE, ASK MY COLLEAGUES TO JOIN ME IN SUPPORTING H.R. 2396. I YIELD BACK.

                            Show Full Text
                          • 09:46:29 AM

                            THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

                            THE GENTLEWOMAN FROM CALIFORNIA.

                          • 09:46:31 AM

                            MS. WATERS

                            THANK YOU. MR. SPEAKER AND MEMBERS, I HEARD MORE THAN ONCE MEMBERS…

                            THANK YOU. MR. SPEAKER AND MEMBERS, I HEARD MORE THAN ONCE MEMBERS SPEAKING FOR CONSUMERS ARE SAYING, THESE PRIVACY NOTICES ARE NOT THAT IMPORTANT. NOBODY READS THEM. THEY THROW THEM IN THE WASTE BASKET. WELL, I DON'T KNOW HOW MEMBERS WOULD KNOW THAT, AND I DON'T THINK WE SHOULD BE SATISFIED THAT CONSUMERS ARE BEING REPRESENTED THAT WAY WITH INDICATIONS THAT THEY DON'T REALLY CARE ABOUT THESE NOTICES AND THE OPPORTUNITY TO OPT OUT SO THAT THEIR INFORMATION WON'T BE SHARED. BUT LET ME TELL YOU WHAT CONSUMERS ARE SAYING TO US. I HAVE HERE LETTERS THAT HAVE BEEN SENT BY CONSUMER ORGANIZATIONS THAT REALLY DO CARE ABOUT WHAT IS HAPPENING WITH THIS BILL TODAY. AND I'D LIKE TO SHARE THAT INFORMATION WITH YOU. LET ME JUST TELL YOU WHO THESE CONSUMER ORGANIZATIONS ARE AND WHO THEY REPRESENT. AMERICANS FOR FINANCIAL REFORM. AMERICANS FOR FINANCIAL REFORM IS A NONPARTISAN AND NONPROFIT COALITION OF MORE THAN 200 CIVIL RIGHTS, CONSUMER, LABOR, BUSINESS, INVESTOR, FAITH-BASED, AND CIVIC AND COMMUNITY GROUPS FORMED IN THE WAKE OF THE 2008 CRISIS WORKING TO LAY THE FOUNDATION FOR A STRONG, STABLE, AND ETHICAL FINANCIAL SYSTEM, ONE THAT SERVES THE ECONOMY AND THE NATION AS A WHOLE. AND THEN THERE'S L.I. -- ALLIED PROGRESS. IT'S A CONSUMER WATCHDOG ORGANIZATION THAT USES HARD-HITTING RESEARCH TO STAND UP TO WALL STREET AND POWERFUL SPECIAL INTERESTS AND HOLD THEIR ALLIES IN CONGRESS AND THE WHITE HOUSE ACCOUNTABLE. AND THEN THERE'S CENTER FOR DIGITAL DEMOCRACY. THE CENTER FOR DIGITAL DEMOCRACY IS RECOGNIZED AS ONE OF THE LEADING CONSUMER PROTECTION AND PRIVACY ORGANIZATIONS IN THE UNITED STATES, AND SINCE ITS FOUNDING IN 2001 AND PRIOR TO THAT THROUGH ITS PREDECESSOR ORGANIZATION, THE CENTER FOR MEDIA EDUCATION, C.D.D. HAS BEEN AT THE FOREFRONT OF RESEARCH, PUBLIC EDUCATION, ANDED A VOW CASEY PROTECTING CONSUMERS -- AND ADVOCACY PROTECTING CONSUMERS IN THE DIGITAL AGE. AND THEN THERE'S CONSUMER ACTION. THROUGH MULTILINGUAL EDUCATION MATERIALS, COMMUNITY OUTREACH, AND ISSUE FOCUSED ADVOCACY, CONSUMER ACTION EMPOWERS UNDERREPRESENTED CONSUMERS NATIONWIDE TO ASSERT THEIR RIGHTS IN THE MARKETPLACE AND FINANCIALLY PROSPER. THERE'S CONSUMER FEDERATION OF AMERICA. THE CONSUMER FEDERATION OF AMERICA IS AN ASSOCIATION OF NONPROFIT CONSUMER ORGANIZATIONS THAT WAS ESTABLISHED WAY BACK IN 1968 TO ADVANCE THE CONSUMER INTERESTS THROUGH RESEARCH, ADVOCACY AND EDUCATION. TODAY, NEARLY 300 OF THESE GROUPS PARTICIPATE IN THE FEDERATION AND GOVERN IT THROUGH THEIR REPRESENTATIVES ON THE ORGANIZATION'S BOARD OF DIRECTORS. C.F.A. IS A RESEARCH, ADVOCACY, EDUCATION, AND SERVICE ORGANIZATION. AND THEN THERE'S CONSUMER WATCHDOG. CONSUMER WATCHDOG IS A NONPROFIT ORGANIZATION DEDICATED TO PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE VOICE FOR TAXPAYERS AND CONSUMERS IN AN ERA WHEN SPECIAL INTERESTS DOMINATE PUBLIC DISCOURSE, GOVERNMENT AND POLITICS, AND THEY DESCRIBE THEMSELVES AS DEPLOYING AN IN-HOUSE TEAM OF PUBLIC INTEREST LAWYERS, POLICY EXPERTS, STRATEGISTS, AND GRASSROOTS ACTIVISTS TO EXPOSE, CONFRONT, AND CHANGE CORPORATE AND POLITICAL INJUSTICE IN EVERY WAY EVERY DAY, SAVING AMERICANS BILLIONS OF DOLLARS AND IMPROVING COUNTLESS LIVES. FOR DECADES, CONSUMER WATCHDOG HAS BEEN THE NATION'S MOST AGGRESSIVE CONSUMER ADVOCATE, TAKING ON POLITICIANS OF BOTH PARTIES AND THE SPECIAL INTERESTS THAT FUND THEM. AND THEN THERE'S THE NATIONAL COALITION OF CONSUMER ADVOCATES. THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF CONSUMER ADVOCATES IS A NONPROFIT ASSOCIATION OF MORE THAN 1,500 ATTORNEYS AND CONSUMER ADVOCATES COMMITTED TO REPRESENTING CONSUMERS' INTERESTS. OUR MEMBERS, THEY SAY, ARE PRIVATE AND PUBLIC SECTOR ATTORNEYS, LEGAL SERVICES ATTORNEYS, LAW PROFESSORS AND LAW STUDENTS WHOSE PRIMARY FOCUS IS THE PROTECTION AND REPRESENTATION OF CONSUMERS. THEY HAVE REPRESENTED HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF CONSUMERS VICTIMIZED BY FRAUDULENT, ABUSIVE, AND PREDATORY BUSINESS PRACTICES. AS THE NATIONAL ORGANIZATION FULLY COMMITTED TO PROMOTING JUSTICE FOR CONSUMERS, THEIR MEMBERS AND THEIR CLIENTS ARE ACTIVELY ENGAGED IN PROMOTING A FAIR AND OPEN MARKETPLACE THAT FORCEFULLY PROTECTS THE RIGHTS OF CONSUMERS, PARTICULARLY THOSE OF MODEST MEANS. THEY ALSO HAVE A CHARITABLE AND EDUCATIONAL FUND INCORPORATED UNDER 501-C-3. THERE'S ANOTHER VERY PROMINENT CONSUMER ORGANIZATION, THE NATIONAL CONSUMER LAW CENTER, WORKING ON BEHALF OF LOW-INCOME CLIENTS. SINCE 1969, THE NONPROFIT NATIONAL CONSUMER LAW CENTER HAS USED ITS EXPERTISE IN CONSUMER LAW AND ENERGY POLICY TO WORK FOR CONSUMER JUSTICE AND ECONOMIC SECURITY FOR LOW-INCOME AND OTHER DISADVANTAGED PEOPLE, INCLUDING OLDER ADULTS IN THE UNITED STATES. THIS ORGANIZATION'S EXPERTISE INCLUDES POLICY ANALYSIS ANDED A VOW CASE -- AND ADVOCACY, CONSUMER LAW, LITIGATION, EXPERT WITNESS SERVICES, AND TRAINING AND ADVICE FOR ADVOCATES. THIS ORGANIZATION WORKS WITH NONPROFITS AND LEGAL SERVICES ORGANIZATIONS, PRIVATE ATTORNEYS, POLICYMAKERS AND FEDERAL, STATE GOVERNMENTS AND COURTS ACROSS THE NATION TO STOP EXEMPLOY TATIVE PRACTICES, -- EXPLOITED PRACTICES. AND THEN THERE'S PRIVACY TIMES. PRIVACY TIMES IS THE LEADING SUBSCRIPTION ONLY NEWSLETTER COVERING PRIVACY AND FREEDOM OF INFORMATION LAW AND POLICY. IT IS READ LARGELY BY ATTORNEYS AND PROFESSIONALS WHO MAY STAY ABREAST OF THE LEGISLATION, LITIGATION, AND THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH ACTIVITIES AS WELL AS CONSUMER NEWS, TECHNOLOGY TRENDS, AND BUSINESS DEVELOPMENTS. SINCE 1981, PRIVACY TIMES HAS PROVIDED ITS READERS WITH ACCURATE REPORTING, OBJECTIVE ANALYSIS, AND THOUGHTFUL INSIGHT INTO THE EVENTS THAT SHAPE THE ONGOING DEBATE OVER PRIVACY AND FREEDOM OF INFORMATION. AND THEN THERE'S THE PRIVATE RIGHTS CLEARING -- PRIVACY RIGHTS CLEARING-HOUSE. PRIVACY RIGHTS CLEARING-HOUSE, AN ADVOCACY ORGANIZATION, LOCATED IN SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA, THE MISSION IS TO ENGAGE, EDUCATE, AND EMPOWER CONSUMERS TO PROTECT THEIR PRIVACY. THEY ENGAGE IN OUTREACH, PROVIDE EDUCATIONAL MATERIALS, AND SERVICES TO INDIVIDUALS NATIONWIDE AND HAVE AN ACTIVE MEDIA PRESENCE. THE P.R.C. USES THE INFORMATION WE LEARN DIRECTLY, THEY SAY, FROM CONSUMERS TO FORM THE BASIS OF THEIR ADVOCACY WORK. AND THEN THERE'S PUBLIC CITIZEN. PUBLIC CITIZEN HAS A TEAM OF RESEARCHERS. THEY UNCOVER THE FACTS. THEIR STAFF BRINGS THEIR FINDINGS TO THE PUBLIC. THEY BRING THE VOICE OF THE PUBLIC TO THE HALLS OF POWER ON BEHALF OF CONSUMERS. AND THEN THERE'S PUBLIC KNOWLEDGE. PUBLIC KNOWLEDGE PROMOTES FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION AND OPEN INTERNET AND ACCESS TO AFFORDABLE COMMUNITYCATIONS TOOLS AND CREATIVE WORKS. THEY WORK TO SHAPE POLICY ON BEHALF OF THE PUBLIC INTEREST. AND THEN THERE'S REINVESTMENT PARTNERS. REINVESTMENT PARTNERS' MISSION IS TO ADVOCATE FOR ECONOMIC JUSTICE AND OPPORTUNITY. THEY DO THIS BY PROVIDING DIRECT SERVICES TO PEOPLE, REVITALIZING PLACES AND ADVOCATING FOR JUST POLICIES. FOUNDED AS A PROJECT OF LEGAL SERVICES IN 1986 AS THE COMMUNITY REINVESTMENT ASSOCIATION OF NORTH CAROLINA, THE AGENCY HAS WORKED TO ENSURE FAIR LENDING TO UNDERSERVED COMMUNITIES IN ORDER TO BUILD AND PROTECT WEALTH. IN 2012, THEY CHANGED THEIR NAME TO RECOGNIZE THE EXPANDED DIVERSITY OF THEIR PROGRAMS AND THEIR LOCAL AND STATE AND NATIONAL OUTREACH. AND THEN THERE'S U.S. PURGE. U.S. PURGE IS AN ADVOCATE FOR THE PUBLIC INTEREST, WORKING TO WIN CONCRETE RESULTS ON REAL PROBLEMS THAT AFFECT MILLIONS OF LIVES AND STANDING UP FOR THE PUBLIC AGAINST POWERFUL INTERESTS WHEN THEY PUSH AWAY. THEY SAY, AND I QUOTE, THE PROBLEMS WE FACE DON'T CARE IF YOU'RE LIBERAL OR CONSERVATIVE, IF YOU LIVE IN A RED OR BLUE STATE. THEY AFFECT EACH AND EVERY ONE OF US. THAT'S WHY FOR DECADES THEY HAVE TAKEN A NONPARTISAN, FACT-DRIVEN, RESULTS-ORIENTED APPROACH TO THEIR WORK. AND SO, MR. SPEAKER AND MEMBERS, I DO NOT LIKE HEARING THAT OUR CONSUMERS DON'T CARE, THAT THEY DON'T NEED A YEARLY NOTIFICATION ABOUT THEIR PRIVACY RIGHTS, THAT THEY SIMPLY THROW THIS INFORMATION THAT DESCRIBES THEIR RIGHTS INTO THE WASTE BASKET. AND I'M SO PLEASED THAT OVER THE YEARS AND THROUGH THE HISTORY OF THIS NATION TOO MANY CONSUMERS HAVE BEEN IGNORED, TAKEN ADVANTAGE OF, THAT KNOW WHAT THEIR RIGHTS WERE AND ALL OF THESE ORGANIZATIONS THAT I HAVE TAKEN TIME TO SHARE WITH YOU TODAY WORK ON BEHALF OF CONSUMERS. AND THEY WORK, NOT ONLY IN ORGANIZING AND EDUCATING, BUT THEY SEND THIS INFORMATION TO THEIR MEMBERS OF CONGRESS, ALL OF THESE ORGANIZATIONS HAVE SENT IN THIS INFORMATION, NOT ONLY ABOUT THEIR BACKGROUND BUT ABOUT THIS BILL. AND SO I RESERVE THE BALANCE OF MY TIME.

                            Show Full Text
                          • 09:58:53 AM

                            THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

                            THE LADY'S TIME IS RESERVED. THE GENTLEMAN FROM TEXAS.

                          • 09:58:58 AM

                            MR. HENSARLING

                            THAT SCHOOLCHILDREN FROM AROUND THE NATION HAVE BEEN LISTENING TO THIS…

                            THAT SCHOOLCHILDREN FROM AROUND THE NATION HAVE BEEN LISTENING TO THIS DEBATE BECAUSE THEY WOULD BE EDUCATED ON THE HOUSE VERSION OF THE FILIBUSTER. I THOUGHT THAT THE RANKING MEMBER WAS GOING TO BREAK OUT THE WASHINGTON, D.C., PHONE BOOK AND BEGIN TO READ FROM IT. IT WAS A FASCINATING DISCUSSION OF A LITANY OF WASHINGTON-BASED SPECIAL INTEREST GROUPS I KNOW APPRECIATED THE SHOUTOUT, I KNOW HELPS THEM IN THEIR FUNDRAISING EFFORTS BUT HAS ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO WITH THE BILL THAT WE ARE DEBATING. NOTHING TO DO WITH THE BILL THAT WE ARE DEBATING. SO THE RANKING MEMBER SAID HOW IMPORTANT IT IS THAT CONSUMERS RECEIVE AN ANNUAL, AN ANNUAL NOTICE OF THE PRIVACY POLICIES OF FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS. WELL, UNDER THIS BILL, H.R. 2396, THEY DON'T GET IT ANNUALLY, THEY GET IT MONTHLY. THEY GET IT WEEKLY. THEY GET IT DAILY. THEY GET IT HOURLY. I YIELD MYSELF ANOTHER MINUTE. IN FACT, UNDER H.R. 2396, THE PRIVACY NOTIFICATION MUST BE CONTINUOUS, CONTINUOUS. IT HAS TO BE PUT ON THE WEBSITE. THIS HELPS THE CONSUMER. THE CONSUMER HAS ACCESS 24/7 TO THE PRIVACY NOTIFICATION UNDER THE GENTLEMAN FROM MICHIGAN'S BILL AS OPPOSED TO THE STATUS QUO BEING DEFENDED BY MY FRIENDS ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE AISLE WHO SAYS ONCE A YEAR, ONCE A YEAR YOU OUGHT TO GET A PIECE OF PAPER THAT'S PROBABLY GOING TO END UP IN THE ROUND FILE ANYWAY. AGAIN, MR. SPEAKER, THIS DEBATE HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE PRIVACY POLICIES OF FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS. IT HAS EVERYTHING TO DO WITH THE NOTIFICATION OF SUCH POLICIES. . WHAT WE PROVIDE FOR IS THE CONTINUOUS NOTIFICATION. AND SHOULD THAT POLICY CHANGE, THEN AND ONLY THEN DOES THAT NECESSITATE THE KILLING OF TREES. MR. SPEAKER, I AM NOW PLEASED TO YIELD FIVE MINUTES TO THE GENTLEMAN FROM GEORGIA, AN OUTSTANDING MEMBER OF THE FINANCIAL SERVICES COMMITTEE, MR. LOUDERMILK.

                            Show Full Text
                          • 10:01:21 AM

                            THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

                            THE GENTLEMAN FROM GEORGIA IS RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.

                          • 10:01:24 AM

                            MR. LOUDERMILK

                            THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. I THANK THE GENTLEMAN FROM TEXAS FOR YIELDING TIME…

                            THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. I THANK THE GENTLEMAN FROM TEXAS FOR YIELDING TIME THAT I CAN SPEAK NOT JUST SUPPORT OF THIS LEGISLATION BUT IN STRONG SUPPORT OF LEGISLATION BY MY COLLEAGUE AND FRIEND FROM MICHIGAN, MR. TROTT. SHORT TIME I HAVE BEEN IN CONGRESS, ONE THING I HAVE COME TO REALIZE, THERE ARE SOME PEOPLE IN THIS CHAMBER THAT NEVER MET A REGULATION IT DIDN'T LIKE. REGARDLESS HOW EFFECTIVE, INEFFECTIVE, OR MISGUIDED THAT REGULATION IS OR HOW OUTDATED IT IS, THEY ALWAYS WANT TO HOLD ON TO A PIECE OF GOVERNMENT REGULATION. I DO APPRECIATE THE RANKING MEMBER FOR GOING THROUGH THE LITANY OF MISSION STATEMENTS OF SPECIAL INTEREST GROUPS HERE IN WASHINGTON, D.C. BUT THIS IS PRECISELY WHAT THE AMERICAN PEOPLE ARE TIRED OF. THEY ARE TIRED OF WASHINGTON, D.C. SWAMP. THEY ARE TIRED OF THE SPECIAL INTEREST. AND THEY WANT LEGISLATION THAT AFFECTS THEM PERSONALLY. THIS PIECE OF LEGISLATION WILL AFFECT MILLIONS OF AMERICANS DIRECTLY. I'M NOT JUST SPEAKING TODAY FROM PREPARED REMARKS WHICH I HAVE, BUT I'M SPEAKING FROM SOMEONE WITH EXPERIENCE IN THIS AREA. I SPENT 30 YEARS, MR. SPEAKER, IN THE I.T. SERVICES BUSINESS. 10 OF THOSE YEARS I SPENT PROTECTING SOME OF OUR NATION'S SECRETS. THROUGH MILITARY INTELLIGENCE AND THEN WORKING IN THE DEFENSE INDUSTRY. 20 OF THOSE YEARS I HAD MY OWN BUSINESS AND WE WERE RESPONSIBLE FOR PROTECTING THE SENSITIVE INFORMATION OF BUSINESSES AND THEIR CUSTOMERS. SO I AM WELL VERSED IN THE IDEA OF PROTECTION AND AS A CONSTITUTIONAL CONSERVATIVE, I'M VERY SENSITIVE TO PRIVACY PROTECTION. THIS PIECE OF LEGISLATION IS COMMONSENSE LEGISLATION. THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT THE AMERICAN PEOPLE WANT US TO PASS. I CAN GIVE YOU SOME GREAT EXAMPLES OF WHY. BECAUSE ONE OF THE ASPECTS OF SECURITY, ESPECIALLY DATA SECURITY, IS BEING CONTINUOUSLY -- CONTINUE YOWLLY AWARE OF THE -- CONTINUALLY AWARE OF THE THREAT. I WAS STILL IN MY I.T. BUSINESS WHEN THE ORIGINAL LEGISLATION WAS PASSED AND ALL OF A SUDDEN I'M RECEIVING A PRIVACY NOTICE OF WHAT MY RIGHTS ARE AND UNLIKE MOST AMERICANS, I PROBABLY -- I SAT DOWN AND ACTUALLY READ ALL OF IT. WHERE THE CONFUSION CAME IN IS WHEN A YEAR LATER I RECEIVE ANOTHER ONE AND THEN I RECEIVE ANOTHER ONE AND I'M LITERALLY COMPARING THE TWO TO SEE WHAT'S CHANGED AND I FIND OUT THAT NOTHING HAS CHANGED. WHAT WAS THE REACTION AFTER THAT? EVERY TIME I GET A NOTICE, A BIG ENVELOPE INSTEAD OF A BANK STATEMENT, I WOULD JUST TAKE IT AND THROW IT IN THE TRASH, NOT KNOWING IF SOMETHING HAS ACTUALLY CHANGED, WHICH WOULD BE IMPORTANT. MR. LUETKEMEYER, ANOTHER COLLEAGUE OF MY MINE, PASSED A BILL TWO YEARS AGO TO PROVIDE CORRECTION TO THAT PROBLEM. ALL MR. TROTT'S BILL IS DOING NOW IS EXPANDING THAT TO OTHER INDUSTRIES. THIS IS A CONSUMER PROTECTION BILL BECAUSE NOW IF SOMEONE IN THOSE INDUSTRIES, THERE IS A CHANGE, THEY RECEIVE A NOTICE, THEY KNOW THAT THERE'S BECAUSE NOW IF SOMEONE IN BEEN A CHANGE. BUT AS THE CHAIRMAN HAS POINTED OUT TIME AND TIME AGAIN, THIS IS ACTUALLY GOING TO GIVE MORE IMMEDIATE ACCESS TO KNOW WHAT THE PRIVACY POLICY IS OF FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS TO IDENTIFY IF THERE HAS BEEN ANY CHANGES BECAUSE THEY CAN GO ONLINE TO SEE IT. I MEAN, YOU CAN GET THAT STAINS -- INSTANTANEOUS WITH THESE DEVICES THAT ALMOST EVERYONE CARRIES TO BRING US INTO THE CURRENT CENTURY ANTI-TECHNOLOGY THAT WE HAVE. SO I -- AND THE TECHNOLOGY THAT WE HAVE. I COMMEND MY COLLEAGUE ON ACTUALLY BRINGING COMMONSENSE LEGISLATION. THE TYPE OF LEGISLATION THAT AMERICANS WANT, THAT CONSUMERS WANT. THEY WANT TO KNOW WHAT THEIR RIGHTS ARE BUT THEY DON'T WANT TO BE INUNDATED WITH USELESS INFORMATION CONTINUALLY OVER AND OVER AGAIN BECAUSE THEN THEY WOULD ACTUALLY NOT BE AWARE OF WHAT THEIR RIGHTS ARE AND WHAT HAS CHANGED. THIS IS ESPECIALLY BENEFICIAL TO GEORGIA BECAUSE GEORGIA HAS BECOME AN AUTO MANUFACTURING HUB. AS WE CONTINUE TO GROW THIS ECONOMY AND MORE PEOPLE -- I BELIEVE IN THE NEXT FEW DAYS WHEN WE PASS THIS TAX BILL, YOU'RE GOING TO SEE A RISE IN PEOPLE BUYING AUTOMOBILES. WHY? BECAUSE THEY ARE GOING TO HAVE MORE MONEY IN THEIR BACK POCKET, SPEND MORE MONEY, AND TAKE OUT MORE LOANS. WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY KNOW IMMEDIATELY WHAT THEIR PRIVACY RIGHTS ARE. AND THIS BILL WILL MAKE IT TO WHERE THOSE WILL BE AVAILABLE ONLINE. THIS SIMPLY MAKES IT -- IT RIGHT SIZES GOVERNMENT BY MAKING GOVERNMENT SMARTER, MORE EFFECTIVE, AND ACTUALLY THAT THE REGULATION IS TAILORED TOWARD THE CONSUMER NOT THE SPECIAL INTEREST GROUPS AND THE TRIAL LAWYERS IN WASHINGTON, D.C. WITH THAT, MR. SPEAKER, I STRONGLY SUPPORT THIS LEGISLATION. I URGE MY COLLEAGUES TO JOIN ME IN A FAVORABLE VOTE FOR THIS. WITH THAT I YIELD BACK.

                            Show Full Text
                          • 10:06:19 AM

                            THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

                            THE GENTLEWOMAN FROM CALIFORNIA WITH 5 1/2 MINUTES REMAINING.

                          • 10:06:24 AM

                            MS. WATERS

                            THANK YOU VERY MUCH . MR. SPEAKER AND MEMBERS, AGAIN IT IS INTERESTING HOW…

                            THANK YOU VERY MUCH . MR. SPEAKER AND MEMBERS, AGAIN IT IS INTERESTING HOW MY COLLEAGUES ON THE OPPOSITE SIDE OF THE AISLE DESCRIBE THEIR CONSUMERS. THESE ARE PEOPLE, THEY SAY, THAT DON'T WANT TO BE INUNDATED WITH USELESS INFORMATION. THEY ARE SAYING THAT THE PRIVACY INFORMATION IS OF NO USE. IT IS INTERESTING THAT MR. LOUDERMILK SAID, HE READ HIS PRIVACY NOTICE, UNLIKE MOST OF THE AMERICANS WHO DON'T READ THEIR PRIVACY NOTICE. I THINK THAT'S VERY INTERESTING. TO DESCRIBE HIMSELF AS SOMEONE WHO READ HIS PRIVACY NOTICE BUT ABLE TO SPEAK FOR ALL OTHER IT IS INTERESTING AMERICANS WHO DON'T READ THEIR PRIVACY NOTICE. WHAT'S VERY INTERESTING ALSO ABOUT HIS COMMENTS IS HE REFERS TO THE CONSUMER GROUPS AS SPECIAL INTERESTS. WHILE HE'S REPRESENTING THE BANKS. AND THE FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS. THE REAL SPECIAL INTERESTS. WHY IS IT REPRESENTATIVES WHO COME TO THIS CONGRESS TO REPRESENT PEOPLE WHO WILL VOTE FOR THEM SOMEHOW SEE THEIR RESPONSIBILITY TO PROTECT THE REAL SPECIAL INTERESTS SUCH AS THE FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS WHO HAVE LOBBYISTS RUNNING UP AND DOWN THESE HALLS EVERY DAY WHO MAKE CONTRIBUTIONS TO CONGRESS, RATHER THAN CONSUMERS REPRESENTED BY THE KINDS OF GROUPS I HAVE TAKEN TIME TO DESCRIBE HERE THIS MORNING BECAUSE THESE INDIVIDUALS AND THE AVERAGE CITIZEN DOES NOT HAVE PAID LOBBYISTS FROM FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS AND BANKS REPRESENTING THEM HERE. AND SO IT IS ALSO INTERESTING THAT MR. LOUDERMILK TALKED ABOUT HOW MANY OF THESE CONSUMERS ARE GOING TO BE BUYING AUTOMOBILES. BECAUSE OF THE TAX FRAUD BILL THAT HE IS REFERRING TO THAT'S BEEN ADVANCED BY THE OPPOSITE SIDE OF THE AISLE. THE ONLY THING THAT BILL IS GOING TO DO FOR CONSUMERS, WHICH WILL HURT OUR ECONOMY, IS CREATE A $1.5 TRILLION DEBT. WELL, HE SAID, THAT CONSUMERS WERE GOING TO BE BUYING MORE CARS. YEAH, THE WEALTH THEY WILL BE. THE ONES WHO ARE GIVEN THE BREAKS IN THIS TAX BILL. THE WEALTHY MAY BE BUYING MORE AUTOMOBILES. BUT THE VERY PEOPLE REPRESENTED BY THESE CONSUMERS THAT I HAVE SHARED THE INFORMATION ON THIS MORNING, THEY WON'T BE ABLE TO BUY AUTOMOBILES BECAUSE THEY ARE GOING TO BE HARMED. IT IS ONLY THE WEALTHY. ONLY THOSE WHO ARE MAKING EXTRAORDINARY AMOUNTS OF MONEY AND CORPORATIONS THAT ARE GOING TO BENEFIT FROM THE TAX BILL. I DON'T EVEN KNOW HOW I -- WHY HE TALKED ABOUT IT IN THE SAME BREATH THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT OUR CONSUMERS THAN ABLE TO BE RESPECTED WITH PRIVACY INFORMATION THAT THEY WOULD GET BECAUSE WE HAVE LAWS THAT GIVE THEM THE RIGHT TO HAVE THIS INFORMATION. AND SO WITH THAT I WILL RESERVE THE BALANCE OF MY TIME.

                            Show Full Text
                          • 10:09:48 AM

                            THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

                            THE GENTLEMAN FROM TEXAS WITH SEVEN MINUTES REMAINING.

                          • 10:09:53 AM

                            MR. HENSARLING

                            MR. SPEAKER, I ONCE AGAIN AM HAPPY TO YIELD TO THE GENTLEMAN FROM…

                            MR. SPEAKER, I ONCE AGAIN AM HAPPY TO YIELD TO THE GENTLEMAN FROM MICHIGAN, MR. TROTT, THE SPONSOR OF THIS LEGISLATION, THREE MINUTES.

                            Show Full Text
                          • 10:10:04 AM

                            THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

                            THE GENTLEMAN FROM MICHIGAN IS RECOGNIZED FOR THREE MINUTES.

                          • 10:10:06 AM

                            MR. TROTT

                            I THANK MY FRIEND AND CHAIRMAN FROM TEXAS FOR YIELDING TIME. MR. SPEAKER,…

                            I THANK MY FRIEND AND CHAIRMAN FROM TEXAS FOR YIELDING TIME. MR. SPEAKER, WE'RE HAVING AN ARGUMENT HERE ABOUT A BILL THAT HAS STRONG BIPARTISAN SUPPORT. WHEN YOU BOIL IT ALL DOWN, THE ARGUMENT IS PRETTY SIMPLE. AND THE QUESTION FOR US TO CONSIDER THIS MORNING, AND I WOULD SUBMIT WE HAVE MORE IMPORTANT THINGS TO WORK ON THAN THIS QUESTION, BUT THAT'S WHAT WE'RE DEBATING THIS MORNING. SO LET'S CONSIDER IT. THE QUESTION WE'RE ARGUING ABOUT IS DO CONSUMERS WHEN THEY GET THEIR MAIL AND THEY FIND AN ENVELOPE FILLED WITH 30 PAGES OF SMALL PRINT, LEGALESE, BOILERPLATE LANGUAGE, DO THEY OPEN UP THAT ENVELOPE AND POUR THEMSELVES A CUP OF COULD HAVEINE SETTLE IN, WE HAVE NINE INCHES OF SNOW TODAY BACK IN MICHIGAN, THEY SETTLE IN NEXT TO THE FIRE AND SPEND THE NEXT TWO HOURS READING THAT PRIVACY NOTICE. THAT'S THE QUESTION. THE RANKING MEMBER HAS BEEN QUITE CRITICAL OF THE SPEECHES THAT HAVE BEEN GIVEN THIS MORNING SUBMITTING THAT PEOPLE DO READ THESE NOTICES. WHO ARE WE TO JUDGE WHETHER PEOPLE READ THESE NOTICES. WE'RE NOT MAKING JUDGMENT, WE'RE JUST SUBMITTING ON A COMMONSENSE BASIS AN ARGUMENT THAT PEOPLE DON'T READ THESE NOTICES. PEOPLE THROW THESE NOTICES AWAY. AND THAT LOGIC AND COMMON SENSE WOULD PARTICULAR DATE IF THE PRIVACY NOTICE CHANGES -- DICTATE IF THE PRIVACY NOTICE CHANGES AND A NEW ONE REALIZES, AND THE CONSUMER REALIZES I GOT A NOTICE BECAUSE THE POLICY CHANGED, I BETTER REID THIS. IF THERE IS EVER A TIME THEY WILL READ IT, THEY WILL READ T IF THE RANKING MEMBER IS CORRECT IN HER AAL SINCE MILLIONS OF CONSUMERS ARE WAITING BY THE MAILBOX EACH AND EVERY DAY SO THEY CAN STUDY, DISSECT, COMPARE AND CONTRAST THESE PRIVACY NOTICES, THEN SHE'S CORRECT. THIS BILL WOULD ADD AN EXTRA STEP BECAUSE INSTEAD OF GOING TO THE MAILBOX THEY HAVE TO CLICK ON THE WEBSITE OR PERHAPS CALL A TOLL FREE NUMBER AND HAVE THE DOCUMENT MAILED TO THEM. IF THAT BURDEN IS MORE IMPORTANT BECAUSE PEOPLE THE MAILBOX EACH AND ARE READING THESE NOTICES, THEN HER ARGUMENTS ARE COMPELLING. JUST LET'S EXAM ALL THOSE GROUPS SHE SPENT -- EXAMINE ALL THOSE GROUPS SHE SPENT SO MUCH TIME TELLING US ABOUT THIS MORNING. ALL THOSE GROUPS ARE INTERESTED IN ONE THING. THEY ARE INTERESTED IN MAKING SURE THE LAWS ARE AS COMPLICATED AND CONVOLUTED AS POSSIBLE BECAUSE ALL THOSE GROUPS, INCLUDING THE RANKING MEMBER, BELIEVE, INCORRECTLY, ALL BUSINESS IS BAD, ALL BANKS ARE BAD. WE HAVE TO MAKE IT AS CONVOLUTED AND COMPLICATED AS POSSIBLE SO THAT CLASS ACTION LAWYERS CAN FIND REASON TO FILE FRIVOLOUS LAWSUITS TO SUE THEM BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT CONSUMERS NEED. THAT'S ILLOGICAL. BECAUSE WHEN THESE CLASS ACTION LAWSUITS AND ALL THESE CONVOLUTED REGULATIONS GET PLACED ON THE BOOKS AND THE BANKS HAVE TO HIRE HUNDREDS OF LAWYERS TO DEAL WITH COMPLIANCE, WHO DO YOU THINK PAYS FOR THAT? THE CONSUMER PAYS FOR IT. SO THIS BILL SAVES A LITTLE MONEY, SAVES A FEW TREES, MAYBE WE'LL HAVE A FEW MORE FORESTS FOR OUR GRANDCHILDREN. IT'S A SIMPLE BILL. AND I FEEL BAD FOR SOME OF THE DEMOCRATS, THE 20 IN OUR COMMITTEE -- THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. I FEEL BAD FOR ALL THOSE DEMOCRATS THAT SUPPORT THIS BILL BECAUSE APPARENTLY THEY ARE AGAINST CONSUMERS, TOO. THIS BILL HAS GOT NOTHING TO DO WITH ANY OF THE ARGUMENTS THAT THE RANKING MEMBER HAS PROFFERED THIS MORNING. I ASK FOR STRONG SUPPORT FOR H.R. 2396. I YIELD BACK.

                            Show Full Text
                          • 10:13:45 AM

                            THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

                            THE GENTLEWOMAN FROM CALIFORNIA.

                          • 10:13:48 AM

                            MS. WATERS

                            THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MR. SPEAKER AND MEMBERS, I HAVE NO OTHER MEMBERS. SO…

                            THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MR. SPEAKER AND MEMBERS, I HAVE NO OTHER MEMBERS. SO I WILL CLOSE. WILL I TAKE THIS TIME TO CLOSE. -- I WILL TAKE THIS TIME TO CLOSE. IT IS VERY SIMPLE, THE CONSUMER GROUPS THAT I TOOK TIME TO HELP PEOPLE TO UNDERSTAND WHO THEY ARE AND WHAT THEY DO REPRESENTING THE CONSUMERS ARE THE FOLKS WHO ARE CONCERNED ABOUT PEOPLE KNOWING THEIR RIGHTS. THIS IS WHAT THEY WORK AT DOING. THOSE OF US WHO ALIGN OURSELVES WITH CONSUMER GROUPS CARE ABOUT THE AVERAGE CITIZEN. WE CARE THAT THE AVERAGE CITIZEN GETS THE KIND OF INFORMATION THAT'S GOING TO MAKE THEIR LIVES MUCH EASIER. THE PEOPLE ON THE OPPOSITE SIDE OF THE AISLE REPRESENT BANKS AND FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS. WE'RE NOT OPPOSED TO BUSINESS AND WE WORK WITH BUSINESSES IN VARIOUS WAYS. WE'RE OPPOSED TO RIP-OFFS. WE'RE OPPOSED TO FRAUD. WE'RE OPPOSED TO DENYING CONSUMERS THE OPPORTUNITY TO KNOW THEIR RIGHTS, BUT FOR THOSE MEMBERS OF CONGRESS WHO COME HERE AND BASICALLY MIMIC AND MOCK THE CONSUMERS BY TALKING ABOUT THOSE CONSUMERS WHO WAIT BY THEIR MAILBOXES FOR PRIVACY INFORMATION, CERTAINLY ARE NOT REPRESENTING THE CITIZENS OF THEIR DISTRICT. AND I CAN TELL YOU THIS, WHEN YOU TAKE A LOOK AT WHO THE REAL SPECIAL INTERESTS ARE AND WHO ARE REPRESENTING THE INTERESTS OF THE SPECIAL INTERESTS, WHO IN THIS HOUSE STANDS UP FOR BANKS, FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS AND WALL STREET AND HEDGE FUNDS , YOU LOOK AT THE OPPOSITE SIDE OF THE AISLE TIME AND TIME AGAIN AND YOU WILL FIND THEM PUTTING ALL OF THEIR TIME AND THEIR EFFORT INTO REPRESENTING THOSE SPECIAL INTERESTS. . AND FOR THOSE OF US THAT STAND ON THE SIDE OF AVERAGE CITIZENS, YES, WE ALIGN OURSELVES WITH CONSUMER GROUPS. NO, WE DON'T DISMISS THEM AS UNNECESSARY PEOPLE JUST MESSING AROUND IN THE BUSINESS OF BIG BUSINESS. THESE ARE THE REPRESENTATIVES, AGAIN, OF PEOPLE WHO DON'T HAVE FANCY LOBBYISTS WALKING THESE HALLS AND FOLLOWING THE MEMBERS OF CONGRESS GETTING INTO THEIR EAR AND INFLUENCING THEM. AND SO I STAND TODAY WITH OUR CONSUMERS. I APPLAUD ALL OF OUR CONSUMER GROUPS, AND I STAND ON THE SIDE OF OUR CONSUMERS BEING ABLE TO KNOW THEIR RIGHTS AND ALL OF THE WORK THAT WENT INTO PROVIDING THIS OPPORTUNITY IN LAW, I STAND WITH THEM, AND I RESIST ANY EFFORT BY THE OPPOSITE SIDE OF THE AISLE TO DENY THE RIGHT OF OUR CITIZENS TO BE NOTIFIED ABOUT THEIR RIGHTS AND THEIR ABILITY TO OPT OUT IF THEY DO NOT WANT THEIR INFORMATION SHARED WITH THESE UNAFFILIATED GROUPS. AND SO I'M VERY PROUD. I KNOW THAT WE'RE DOING WHAT OUR CITIZENS WANT US TO DO, WHY THEY SEND US TO THIS CONGRESS, AND I SAY TO THE OPPOSITE SIDE OF THE AISLE --

                            Show Full Text
                          • 10:17:28 AM

                            THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

                            THE GENTLELADY'S TIME HAS EXPIRED. THE GENTLELADY'S TIME HAS EXPIRED.

                          • 10:17:32 AM

                            MS. WATERS

                            MORE RESPECT TO OUR --

                          • 10:17:35 AM

                            THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

                            3 1/2 MINUTES REMAINING.

                          • 10:17:37 AM

                            MR. HENSARLING

                            THANK YOU, I YIELD MYSELF THE BALANCE OF THE TIME.

                          • 10:17:39 AM

                            THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

                            THE GENTLEMAN IS RECOGNIZED.

                          • 10:17:41 AM

                            MR. HENSARLING

                            MR. SPEAKER, THERE HAVE BEEN SEVERAL SURREAL MOMENTS ON THE HOUSE FLOOR…

                            MR. SPEAKER, THERE HAVE BEEN SEVERAL SURREAL MOMENTS ON THE HOUSE FLOOR THIS WEEK, AND TODAY CERTAINLY IS ONE MORE OF THEM. THE DEBATE TODAY IS NOT BETWEEN REGULATION AND DEREGULATION BUT MANY RESPECTS THE DEBATE IS BETWEEN SMART REGULATION AND DUMB REGULATION. AND WHAT WE HAVE TODAY IS A DUMB REGULATION THAT FORCES A NUMBER OF FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS ANNUALLY TO SEND OUT A PAPER NOTIFICATION EVEN IF THEY DON'T CHANGE THEIR PRIVACY POLICY. CUT DOWN TREES, ENGAGE AN EXPENSE AND BY THE WAY, THE EXPENSE, I GUESS, DOESN'T COME OUT OF EXECUTIVE BONUSES BUT COMES OUT OF THE CREDIT AVAILABILITY AND THE CREDIT COST OF THE CUSTOMER. IT GETS PASSED ON TO THE CONSUMER. AND THE DEBATE WE'RE HAVING, AND I ENCOURAGE MY COLLEAGUES ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE AISLE, IF IN DOUBT, READ THE BILL. IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE, GUESS WHAT, MR. SPEAKER, IT'S A TWO-PAGE BILL. IT REALLY DOESN'T TAKE THAT LONG TO READ. AND IF YOU READ IT, WHAT YOU'LL FIND OUT IS THAT THIS IS A BILL THAT IS PRO-CONSUMER BECAUSE WE GO FROM A NOTIFICATION THAT HAPPENS ONCE A YEAR TO A CONTINUOUS NOTIFICATION. WE IMPROVE THE CONSUMER NOTIFICATION BY ENSURING THAT IT IS CONSISTENTLY ON THE WEBSITE OF THE FINANCIAL INSTITUTION. AND WHAT WE HEAR FROM THE RANKING MEMBER IS, NO. I WANT TO STAY IN THE 20TH CENTURY. GRAMM-LEACH-BLILEY IS A LAW FROM THE 20TH CENTURY. MR. SPEAKER, WE'RE IN THE 21ST CENTURY. WHY DON'T WE ENSURE THAT THE PRIVACY NOTIFICATION FOR THE CONSUMER IS ACTUALLY ON THE WEBSITE? THIS IS WHAT IS TRULY PRO-CONSUMER, NOT FORCING PEOPLE TO GO AND SUBSIDIZE THE PAPER MILLS AND THE U.S. POSTAL SERVICE BY SENDING OUT A NOTIFICATION ON PAPER THAT DOESN'T CHANGE ANYTHING AND MERELY CONFUSES CONSUMERS. IF YOU'RE REALLY PRO-CONSUMER, THEN TRY TO RESPECT THEIR MARKET AND TRY NOT TO PASS ADDITIONAL COSTS ONTO THEM. AGAIN, RAILROAD REGARDLESS WHAT YOU HEARD ON THE OTHER -- AGAIN, REGARDLESS WHAT YOU HEARD ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE AISLE, IT IS 21ST CENTURY, NOT 20TH CENTURY. IT'S PRO-CONSUMER REGARDLESS WHAT THE SPECIAL INTERESTS AND WASHINGTON, D.C.-BASED LOBBYISTS CITED. THE GENTLEMAN FROM MICHIGAN BRINGS US PRO-CONSUMER LEGISLATION. THE PRIVACY NOTIFICATION TECHNICAL CLARIFICATION ACT. AND I'M KIND OF EMBARRASSED WE'RE HAVING TO SPEND THIS MUCH TIME DEBATING SOMETHING THAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN ON OUR EXPEDITED SUSPENSION CALENDAR. I MEAN, IT'S ALMOST LIKE THERE IS A KNEE JERK REACTION ANYTIME WE ATTEMPT TO MODIFY ANY GOVERNMENT REGULATION. THIS IS PRO-CONSUMER. FRANKLY, IT'S PRO-ENVIRONMENT. EVERY MEMBER OF THE HOUSE SHOULD EMBRACE H.R. 2396. I'M SORRY WE'VE HAD TO TAKE SO MUCH TIME FOR IT. THERE ARE THOUSANDS OF REGULATIONS THAT HURT OUR FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS, THAT HURT OUR CONSUMERS. WE'RE TRYING TO GET RID OF EVERY DUMB ONE ONE AT A TIME. THIS SHOULD -- AGAIN, THIS SHOULD BE PASSING UNANIMOUSLY. I DON'T UNDERSTAND IT, BUT I'M GLAD THE AMERICAN PEOPLE COULD SEE THIS DEBATE FOR WHAT IT IS. AGAIN, LET'S BE PRO-CONSUMER. LET'S BE PRO-COMMUNITY FINANCIAL INSTITUTION. LET'S BE PRO-ENVIRONMENT. LET'S ENACT 2396, AND I YIELD BACK THE BALANCE OF MY TIME.

                            Show Full Text
                          • 10:21:38 AM

                            THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

                            ALL TIME FOR DEBATE ON THE BILL HAS EXPIRED. FOR WHAT PURPOSE DOES THE…

                            ALL TIME FOR DEBATE ON THE BILL HAS EXPIRED. FOR WHAT PURPOSE DOES THE GENTLEMAN FROM MISSOURI SEEK RECOGNITION?

                            Show Full Text
                          • 10:21:44 AM

                            MR. CLAY

                            MR. SPEAKER, I MOVE FOR THE ADOPTION OF THE AMENDMENT -- I HAVE AN…

                            MR. SPEAKER, I MOVE FOR THE ADOPTION OF THE AMENDMENT -- I HAVE AN AMENDMENT.

                            Show Full Text
                          • 10:21:49 AM

                            THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

                            THE CLERK WILL DESIGNATE THE AMENDMENT.

                          • 10:21:51 AM

                            THE CLERK

                            AMENDMENT NUMBER 1 PRINTED IN HOUSE REPORT 115-462 OFFERED BY MR. CLAY OF…

                            AMENDMENT NUMBER 1 PRINTED IN HOUSE REPORT 115-462 OFFERED BY MR. CLAY OF MISSOURI.

                            Show Full Text
                          • 10:21:58 AM

                            TEMPORE PURSUANT

                            PURSUANT TO HOUSE RESOLUTION 657, THE GENTLEMAN FROM MISSOURI, MR. CLAY,…

                            PURSUANT TO HOUSE RESOLUTION 657, THE GENTLEMAN FROM MISSOURI, MR. CLAY, AND A MEMBER OPPOSED, EACH WILL CONTROL FIVE MINUTES. THE CHAIR RECOGNIZES THE GENTLEMAN FROM MISSOURI.

                            Show Full Text
                          • 10:22:06 AM

                            MR. CLAY

                            THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. THE AMENDMENT OFFERED MAKES IMPORTANT CHANGES TO…

                            THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. THE AMENDMENT OFFERED MAKES IMPORTANT CHANGES TO OUR BILL, H.R. 2396, WHICH IS A STRAIGHTFORWARD, COMMONSENSE MEASURE THAT SEEKS TO STREAMLINE THE PRIVACY INFORMATION CONSUMERS GET FROM FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS AND MAKES THE INFORMATION AVAILABLE MUCH MORE FREQUENTLY VIA ELECTRONIC DELIVERY. WE HAVE BEEN WORKING ON THIS WHAT I CONSIDER A SIMPLE BUT NECESSARY FIX TO A 20-YEAR-OLD LAW. THROUGHOUT THIS YEAR, AND I BELIEVE THE AMENDMENT WE PRESENT FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION WILL UNDOUBTEDLY BENEFIT CONSUMERS. WE HAVE WORKED WITH OUR COLLEAGUES ON THE FINANCIAL SERVICES COMMITTEE TO MODIFY AND STRENGTHEN THE UNDERLYING BILL, AND I APPRECIATE EVERYONE'S EFFORTS. I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO THANK THE COMMITTEE'S RANKING MEMBER, MS. WATERS, FOR HER AND HER STAFF'S EFFORTS TO IMPROVE OUR BILL. I CONSIDER THIS AMENDMENT TO BE AN EFFORT TO IMPROVE ON THE UNDERLYING LEGISLATION. AND WHILE MS. WATERS STILL HAS SOME OUTSTANDING CONCERNS, I DO APPRECIATE HER WORKING WITH US. THE AMENDMENT CLARIFIES THE PROCESS BY WHICH CONSUMERS CAN OPT OUT OF HAVING THEIR INFORMATION SHARED WITH UNAFFILIATED THIRD PARTIES. IT LIMITS THE APPLICATION OF THE ALTERNATIVE DELIVERY MECHANISM TO VEHICLE FINANCIAL COMPANIES. IT'S SIMPLY WHAT THE AMENDMENT DOES. RATHER THAN ALL FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS AS DEFINED UNDER GRAMM-LEACH-BLILEY AND OTHER TECHNICAL AND CONFORMING CHANGES. AND WE BELIEVE THESE CHANGES MAKE OUR BILL STRONGER, AND WE URGE THE ADOPTION OF THE AMENDMENT. MR. SPEAKER, I RESERVE MY TIME.

                            Show Full Text
                          • 10:24:45 AM

                            THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

                            THE GENTLEMAN RESERVES HIS TIME. FOR WHAT PURPOSE DOES THE GENTLELADY FROM…

                            THE GENTLEMAN RESERVES HIS TIME. FOR WHAT PURPOSE DOES THE GENTLELADY FROM CALIFORNIA SEEK RECOGNITION?

                            Show Full Text
                          • 10:24:51 AM

                            MS. WATERS

                            I RISE TO CLAIM TIME IN OPPOSITION TO THE AMENDMENT.

                          • 10:24:54 AM

                            THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

                            THE GENTLELADY IS RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.

                          • 10:24:56 AM

                            MS. WATERS

                            THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I APPRECIATE MR. CLAY'S EFFORT TO MAKE THE BILL…

                            THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I APPRECIATE MR. CLAY'S EFFORT TO MAKE THE BILL BETTER, AND HE'S ABSOLUTELY CORRECT. WE'VE BEEN ATTEMPTING TO WORK TOGETHER TO SEE IF THERE WAS SOME WAY THAT WE COULD DEAL WITH THE ISSUE AT HAND AND ABSOLUTELY ENSURE THAT OUR CONSUMERS NOT ONLY HAVE A RIGHT TO INFORMATION THAT EXPLAINS TO THEM WHAT THEIR RIGHTS ARE AND HOW THEY CAN OPT OUT WHEN THEIR INFORMATION IS BEING SOLD, REALLY, TO UNAFFILIATED ORGANIZATIONS. AND JUST IN CASE PEOPLE ARE NOT FOLLOWING EXACTLY WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT WHEN WE TALK ABOUT OPT OUT RIGHTS, LET ME DRAW YOUR ATTENTION TO THE FACT THAT YOU OFTENTIMES ARE RECEIVING LOADS OF MAIL IN YOUR MAILBOX FROM EVERYTHING FROM SOMEBODY SELLING PET FOOD TO CLOTHING TO SERVICES TO ALL KINDS OF PRODUCTS AND YOU DON'T KNOW WHY THEY'RE SENDING YOU ALL THIS JUNK. THEY'RE SENDING YOU THIS JUNK BECAUSE SOMEBODY SOLD YOUR INFORMATION TO ALL OF THESE ORGANIZATIONS BECAUSE YOU DIDN'T KNOW THAT YOU HAD NOT OPTED OUT, YOU DIDN'T MAYBE KNOW WHAT YOUR RIGHTS ARE. BUT THE CITIZENS HAVE A RIGHT TO HAVE THAT INFORMATION AND THEY HAVE A RIGHT TO BE RESPECTED AND NOT THOUGHT TO BE SIMPLY THROWING IT INTO THE WASTE BASKETS, AND IT DOESN'T MATTER WHETHER IT'S FOR ALL BUSINESSES IN THE UNITED STATES OR JUST FOR AUTOMOBILE DEALERS. IT IS ABOUT EVERY CITIZEN HAVING THE RIGHT TO HAVE THEIR PRIVACY PROTECTED AND NOT HAVING PEOPLE SELL THEIR INFORMATION TO UNAFFILIATED ORGANIZATIONS THAT WILL CAUSE THEM TO BE PRESSURED OR SOLICITED OVER AND OVER AGAIN AND THEIR MAILBOXES FILLED WITH INFORMATION BECAUSE THEIR PRIVACY INFORMATION HAS BEEN SOLD TO ONE OF THESE UNAFFILIATED ORGANIZATIONS. SO I THINK THAT MR. CLAY IS ATTEMPTING TO STREAMLINE THE BILL, AND I APPRECIATE THE EFFORTS THAT HE'S PUT INTO ATTEMPTING TO DO THIS, BUT THIS DOES NOT CORRECT THE PROBLEM. THIS UNDERMINES THE EFFORTS FOR ALL OF THESE CONSUMER GROUPS WHO WORKED FOR YEARS TO GET THESE NOTICES SENT TO OUR CONSUMERS. DESPITE THE FACT THAT WE HAVE TRIED AND WE HAVE WORKED AND WE HAVE LISTENED TO EACH OTHER, I WOULD ASK FOR A NO VOTE ON THE AMENDMENT. I YIELD BACK THE BALANCE OF MY TIME.

                            Show Full Text
                          • 10:28:17 AM

                            THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

                            THE GENTLELADY YIELDS BACK HIS TIME. THE GENTLEMAN FROM MISSOURI TO CLOSE.

                          • 10:28:21 AM

                            MR. CLAY

                            YEAH, MR. SPEAKER, JUST IN CLOSING, LET ME OFFER SOME CLARIFICATION. IN…

                            YEAH, MR. SPEAKER, JUST IN CLOSING, LET ME OFFER SOME CLARIFICATION. IN THE FALL OF 2014, THE CFPB FINALIZED A RULE ALLOWING FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS TO POST THEIR ANNUAL PRIVACY NOTICES ONLINE INSTEAD OF DELIVERING THEM INDIVIDUALLY IF THEY MET A SERIES OF CONDITIONS, INCLUDING NOT SHARING THE CUSTOMER'S NONPUBLIC INFORMATION WITH UNAFFILIATED THIRD PARTIES. IN DECEMBER OF 2015, CONGRESS WENT FURTHER BY ENACTING AN OUTRIGHT EXEMPTION FROM THE MAILING REQUIREMENT FOR FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS THAT, ONE, DO NOT SHARE NONPUBLIC PERSONAL INFORMATION ABOUT CONSUMERS WITH UNAFFILIATED THIRD PARTIES AND, TWO, HAVE NOT CHANGED ITS DISCLOSURE POLICY AND PRACTICES SINCE THE MOST RECENT DISCLOSURE WAS SENT TO CONSUMERS. INSTITUTIONS THAT PROVIDE FINANCING FOR VEHICLE PURCHASES OR LEASES DO NOT MEET THE CRITERIA SET FORTH BY CONGRESS AND ARE THEREFORE REQUIRED TO CONTINUE ISSUING PAPER BRIFE IS I NOTICES TO CONSUME -- PRIVACY NOTICES TO CONSUMERS. MR. SPEAKER, THIS AMENDMENT HELPS TO IMPROVE THIS BILL. IT MODERNIZES THIS REQUIREMENT, AND I JUST URGE THE BODY TO ADOPT THE AMENDMENT AND I YIELD BACK THE BALANCE OF MY TIME.

                            Show Full Text
                          • 10:30:06 AM

                            TEMPORE PURSUANT

                            PURSUANT TO THE RULE, THE PREVIOUS QUESTION IS ORDERED ON THE AMENDMENT…

                            PURSUANT TO THE RULE, THE PREVIOUS QUESTION IS ORDERED ON THE AMENDMENT OFFERED BY THE GENTLEMAN FROM MISSOURI, MR. CLAY. THE QUESTION IS ON THE AMENDMENT OFFERED BY THE GENTLEMAN FROM MISSOURI. THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. THOSE OPPOSED, NO. IN THE OPINION OF THE CHAIR, THE AYES HAVE IT. THE AMENDMENT IS AGREED TO. THE QUESTION IS ON ENGROSSMENT AND THIRD READING OF THE BILL. THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. THOSE OPPOSED, NO. THE AYES HAVE IT. THIRD READING.

                            Show Full Text
                          • 10:30:25 AM

                            THE CLERK

                            A BILL TO AMEND THE GRAMM-LEACH-BLILEY ACT TO UPDATE THE EXCEPTION FOR…

                            A BILL TO AMEND THE GRAMM-LEACH-BLILEY ACT TO UPDATE THE EXCEPTION FOR CERTAIN ANNUAL NOTICES PROVIDED BY FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS.

                            Show Full Text
                          • 10:30:32 AM

                            THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

                            FOR WHAT PURPOSE DOES THE GENTLEWOMAN FROM CALIFORNIA SEEK RECOGNITION?

                          • 10:30:37 AM

                            MS. WATERS

                            I HAVE A MOTION TO RECOMMIT AT THE DESK.

                          • 10:30:39 AM

                            THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

                            IS THE GENTLEWOMAN'S TIME HAS EXPIRED OPPOSED TO THE BILL -- IS THE…

                            IS THE GENTLEWOMAN'S TIME HAS EXPIRED OPPOSED TO THE BILL -- IS THE GENTLEWOMAN OPPOSED TO THE BILL?

                            Show Full Text
                          • 10:30:46 AM

                            THE CLERK

                            MS. MAXINE WATERS OF CALIFORNIA MOVES TO RECOMMIT THE BILL TO THE…

                            MS. MAXINE WATERS OF CALIFORNIA MOVES TO RECOMMIT THE BILL TO THE COMMITTEE ON FINANCIAL SERVICES WITH INSTRUCTIONS TO REPORT THE SAME BACK TO THE HOUSE FORTHWITH WITH THE FOLLOWING AMENDMENT -- IN SUBSECTION G-3 OF THE MATTER PROPOSED TO BE INSERTED BY SECTION 2 OF THE BILL, INSERT AFTER SUBPARAGRAPH 2 THE FOLLOWING FLUSH LEFT TEXT, FOR PURPOSES OF THIS SUBSECTION, THE TERM VEHICLE COMPANY DOES NOT INCLUDE A FINANCIAL INSTITUTION THAT IS ENGAGING OR HAS ENGAGED IN A PATTERN OR PRACTICE OF UNSAFE OR UNSOUND BANKING PRACTICES AND OTHER VIOLATIONS RELATED TO CONSUMER HARM. ADD AT THE END THE FOLLOWING -- FOUR, ADDITIONAL DEFINITIONS --

                            Show Full Text
                          • 10:31:27 AM

                            MS. WATERS

                            I ASK UNANIMOUS CONSENT TO DISPENSE WITH THE READING?

                          • 10:31:29 AM

                            THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

                            IS THERE OBJECTION? WITHOUT OBJECTION, THE READING IS DISPENSED WITH.…

                            IS THERE OBJECTION? WITHOUT OBJECTION, THE READING IS DISPENSED WITH. PURSUANT TO THE RULE, THE GENTLEWOMAN FROM CALIFORNIA IS RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES IN SUPPORT OF HER MOTION. .

                            Show Full Text
                          • 10:31:41 AM

                            MS. WATERS

                            FOR WHAT PURPOSE DOES THE GENTLEMAN FROM TEXAS SEEK RECOGNITION?

                          • 10:34:09 AM

                            THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

                            FOR WHAT PURPOSE DOES THE GENTLEMAN FROM TEXAS SEEK RECOGNITION?

                          • 10:34:12 AM

                            MR. HENSARLING

                            I CLAIM TIME IN OPPOSITION.

                          • 10:34:13 AM

                            THE SPEAKE PRO TEMPORE

                            THE GENTLEMAN IS RECOGNIZED FOR FIVE MINUTES.

                          • 10:34:15 AM

                            MR. HENSARLING

                            MR. SPEAKER, AGAIN, I WOULD ENCOURAGE THE RANKING MEMBER AND ALL MEMBERS…

                            MR. SPEAKER, AGAIN, I WOULD ENCOURAGE THE RANKING MEMBER AND ALL MEMBERS ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE AISLE TO READ THE UNDERLYING BILL. IT IS TWO PAGES LONG. IT HAS NOW BEEN AMENDED BY PERHAPS A ONE-PAGE AMENDMENT. THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH WELLS FARGO. IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH EQUIFAX. IT IS LIMITED TO THE ANNUAL PAPER NOTIFICATION FROM AUTO FINANCE COMPANIES, PURE AND SIMPLE. AGAIN, FOR THOSE WHO LISTENED TO THE EARLIER DEBATE, THE QUESTION IS, WHETHER OR NOT THESE AUTO FINANCE COMPANIES ARE GOING TO BE FORCED TO SPEND MONEY THAT COMES OUT OF THEIR CUSTOMERS' POCKETS TO SEND OUT A PAPER NOTIFICATION, PRIVACY POLICIES, EVEN WHEN THE POLICY DOESN'T CHANGE. OR WHETHER OR NOT WE SHOULD MODERNIZE INTO THE 21ST CENTURY AND ENSURE THERE IS CONTINUOUS NOTIFICATION ON A WEBSITE AND A PAPER NOTIFICATION ONLY GOES OUT UPON A CHANGE, AN ACTUAL CHANGE. SO WHAT THE RANKING MEMBER IS DOING WITH THE MOTION TO RECOMMIT IS ONCE AGAIN EMPOWERING THE UNCONSTITUTIONAL AND UNACCOUNTABLE CFPB TO ENGAGE IN EVEN MORE ACTIVITIES THAT HARM CONSUMERS. IT OUGHT TO BE REJECTED AND WE OUGHT TO ENSURE THAT WE ADOPT H.R. 2396 AND SIMPLIFY AND MODERNIZE ONE REGULATION THAT IS HARMING CONSUMERS AND HARMING FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS. I URGE REJECTION OF THE MOTION TO RECOMMIT AND I YIELD BACK THE BALANCE OF MY TIME.

                            Show Full Text
                          • 10:35:52 AM

                            ORE WITHOUT

                            WITHOUT OBJECTION, THE PREVIOUS QUESTION IS ORDERED ON THE MOTION TO…

                            WITHOUT OBJECTION, THE PREVIOUS QUESTION IS ORDERED ON THE MOTION TO RECOMMIT. THE QUESTION IS ON THE MOTION. SO MANY AS ARE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. THOSE OPPOSED, NO. IN THE OPINION OF THE CHAIR, THE NOES HAVE IT. THE GENTLELADY FROM CALIFORNIA.

                            Show Full Text
                          • 10:36:03 AM

                            MS. WATERS

                            I ASK FOR THE YEAS AND NAYS.

                          • 10:36:05 AM

                            THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

                            THE YEAS AND NAYS ARE REQUESTED. THOSE FAVORING A VOTE BY THE YEAS AND…

                            THE YEAS AND NAYS ARE REQUESTED. THOSE FAVORING A VOTE BY THE YEAS AND NAYS WILL RISE. A SUFFICIENT NUMBER HAVING ARISEN, THE YEAS AND NAYS ARE ORDERED. MEMBERS WILL RECORD THEIR VOTES BY ELECTRONIC DEVICE. PURSUANT TO CLAUSE 8 AND CLAUSE 9 OF RULE 20, THIS 15-MINUTE VOTE ON THE MOTION TO RECOMMIT WILL BE FOLLOWED BY FIVE-MINUTE VOTES ON PASSAGE OF H.R. 2396, IF ORDERED. THE MOTION TO RECOMMIT ON H.R. 4324. AND PASSAGE OF H.R. 4324, IF ORDERED. THIS IS A 15-MINUTE VOTE. [CAPTIONING MADE POSSIBLE BY THE NATIONAL CAPTIONING INSTITUTE, INC., IN COOPERATION WITH THE UNITED STATES HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. ANY USE OF THE CLOSED-CAPTIONED COVERAGE OF THE HOUSE PROCEEDINGS FOR POLITICAL OR COMMERCIAL PURPOSES IS EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED BY THE U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.]

                            Show Full Text
                          • 11:02:45 AM

                            THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

                            ON THIS VOTE THE YEAS ARE 185. THE NAYS ARE 235. THE MOTION IS NOT…

                            ON THIS VOTE THE YEAS ARE 185. THE NAYS ARE 235. THE MOTION IS NOT ADOPTED. THE QUESTION IS ON PASSAGE OF THE BILL. SO MANY AS ARE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. THOSE OPPOSED, NO. IN THE OPINION OF THE CHAIR, THE AYES HAVE IT MS. WATERS:

                            Show Full Text
                          • 11:03:05 AM

                            WATERS MR.

                            WATERS:

                          • 11:03:06 AM

                            THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

                            THE YEAS AND NAYS ARE REQUESTED. THOSE FAVORING A VOTE BY THE YEAS AND…

                            THE YEAS AND NAYS ARE REQUESTED. THOSE FAVORING A VOTE BY THE YEAS AND NAYS WILL RISE. A SUFFICIENT NUMBER HAVING ARISEN, THE YEAS AND NAYS ARE ORDERED. MEMBERS WILL RECORD THEIR VOTES BY ELECTRONIC DEVICE. THIS IS A FIVE-MINUTE VOTE. FIVE MINUTES. [CAPTIONING MADE POSSIBLE BY THE NATIONAL CAPTIONING INSTITUTE, INC., IN COOPERATION WITH THE UNITED STATES HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. ANY USE OF THE CLOSED-CAPTIONED COVERAGE OF THE HOUSE PROCEEDINGS FOR POLITICAL OR COMMERCIAL PURPOSES IS EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED BY THE U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.]

                            Show Full Text
                          • 11:09:24 AM

                            THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

                            ON THIS VOTE THE YEAS ARE 275.

                          • 11:10:15 AM

                            THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

                            ON THIS VOTE THE YEAS ARE 275. THE NAYS ARE 146. THE BILL IS PASSED.…

                            ON THIS VOTE THE YEAS ARE 275. THE NAYS ARE 146. THE BILL IS PASSED. WITHOUT OBJECTION THE MOTION TO RECONSIDER IS LAID UPON THE TABLE. THE UNFINISHED BUSINESS IS THE QUESTION ON AGREEING TO THE MOTION TO RECOMMIT ON H.R. 4324 OFFERED BY THE GENTLEMAN FROM CALIFORNIA, MR. SWALWELL, ON WHICH THE YEAS AND NAYS WERE ORDERED. THE THE CLERK WILL DESIGNATE THE MOTION.

                            Show Full Text
                          • 11:10:37 AM

                            THE CLERK

                            MOTION TO RECOMMIT ON H.R. 4324, OFFERED BY MR. SWALWELL OF CALIFORNIA.

                          • 11:10:41 AM

                            THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

                            THE QUESTION IS ON AGREEING TO THE MOTION TO RECOMMIT. MEMBERS WILL RECORD…

                            THE QUESTION IS ON AGREEING TO THE MOTION TO RECOMMIT. MEMBERS WILL RECORD THEIR VOTES BY ELECTRONIC DEVICE. THIS IS A FIVE-MINUTE VOTE. [CAPTIONING MADE POSSIBLE BY THE NATIONAL CAPTIONING INSTITUTE, INC., IN COOPERATION WITH THE UNITED STATES HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. ANY USE OF THE CLOSED-CAPTIONED COVERAGE OF THE HOUSE PROCEEDINGS FOR POLITICAL OR COMMERCIAL PURPOSES IS EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED BY THE U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.]

                            Show Full Text
                          • 11:16:47 AM

                            THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

                            ON THIS VOTE, THE YEAS ARE 188, THE NAYS ARE 233. THE MOTION IS NOT…

                            ON THIS VOTE, THE YEAS ARE 188, THE NAYS ARE 233. THE MOTION IS NOT ADOPTED. THE QUESTION IS ON PASSAGE OF THE BILL. THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. THOSE OPPOSED, NO. THE AYES HAVE IT. THE GENTLEMAN FROM TEXAS.

                            Show Full Text
                          • 11:17:03 AM

                            MR. HENSARLING

                            I REQUEST THE YEAS AND NAYS.

                          • 11:17:06 AM

                            THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

                            THE YEAS AND NAYS ARE REQUESTED. THOSE FAVORING A VOTE BY THE YEAS AND…

                            THE YEAS AND NAYS ARE REQUESTED. THOSE FAVORING A VOTE BY THE YEAS AND NAYS WILL RISE. YEAS AND NAYS ARE ORDERED. MEMBERS WILL RECORD THEIR VOTES BY ELECTRONIC DEVICE. THIS IS A FIVE-MINUTE VOTE. [CAPTIONING MADE POSSIBLE BY THE NATIONAL CAPTIONING INSTITUTE, INC., IN COOPERATION WITH THE UNITED STATES HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. ANY USE OF THE CLOSED-CAPTIONED COVERAGE OF THE HOUSE PROCEEDINGS FOR POLITICAL OR COMMERCIAL PURPOSES IS EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED BY THE U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.]

                            Show Full Text
                          • 11:27:51 AM

                            THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

                            THE YEAS ARE 252 AND THE NAYS ARE 167. THE BILL IS PASSED AND WITHOUT…

                            THE YEAS ARE 252 AND THE NAYS ARE 167. THE BILL IS PASSED AND WITHOUT OBJECTION IS LAID ON THE TABLE.

                            Show Full Text
                          • 11:28:08 AM

                            >>

                            AS A PRIMARY SPONSOR OF H.R. 3771, A BILL SPONSORED BY REPRESENTATIVE…

                            AS A PRIMARY SPONSOR OF H.R. 3771, A BILL SPONSORED BY REPRESENTATIVE CONYERS AND REQUESTING REPRINTINGS AND WHATEVER OTHER PURPOSES ARE APPROPRIATE.

                            Show Full Text
                          • 11:28:29 AM

                            THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

                            WITHOUT OBJECTION. FOR WHAT PURPOSE DOES THE GENTLEMAN FROM TEXAS RISE?

                          • 11:28:33 AM

                            >>

                            I ASK UNANIMOUS CONSENT THAT IN THE ENGROSSMENT OF H.R. 4324 THE CLERK…

                            I ASK UNANIMOUS CONSENT THAT IN THE ENGROSSMENT OF H.R. 4324 THE CLERK INSERT THE WORD AND OF THE SEMI-COLON IN SECTION 2-3-1 OF THE BILL. WITHOUT OBJECTION.

                            Show Full Text
                          • 11:28:50 AM

                            THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

                            THE GENTLEMAN FROM TEXAS.

                          • 11:28:53 AM

                            MR. WILLIAMS

                            3396 THE CLERK MAKE THE CORRECTION I PLACED AT THE DESK.

                          • 11:29:02 AM

                            THE CLERK

                            AMENDMENT NUMBER ONE INSTRUCTION RELATING TO PAGE 4 LINE 21 IS MODIFIED TO…

                            AMENDMENT NUMBER ONE INSTRUCTION RELATING TO PAGE 4 LINE 21 IS MODIFIED TO READ AS FOLLOWS. PAGE FOUR LINE 21, STRIKE FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS AND INSERT VEHICLE FINANCIAL COMPANIES.

                            Show Full Text
                          • 11:29:17 AM

                            THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

                            WITHOUT OBJECTION, SO ORDERED. PURSUANT TO CLAUSE 8 OF RULE 20 THE…

                            WITHOUT OBJECTION, SO ORDERED. PURSUANT TO CLAUSE 8 OF RULE 20 THE UNFINISHED BIGGS IS QUESTION ON SUSPENDING THE BILL 4042.

                            Show Full Text
                          • 11:29:30 AM

                            THE CLERK

                            H.R. 4042 A BILL TO DESIGNATE THE FACILITY OF THE UNITED STATES POSTAL…

                            H.R. 4042 A BILL TO DESIGNATE THE FACILITY OF THE UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE OAK STREET OF THE BORINQUENEERS POST OFFICE BUILDING

                            Show Full Text
                          • 11:29:45 AM

                            THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

                            THE QUESTION IS WILL THE HOUSE PASS THE BILL? THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.…

                            THE QUESTION IS WILL THE HOUSE PASS THE BILL? THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. THOSE OPPOSED, NO. IN THE OPINION OF THE CHAIR, 2/3 BEING IN THE AFFIRMATIVE, THE RULES ARE SUSPENDED AND BILL IS PASSED AND THE MOTION TO RECONSIDER IS LAID ON THE TABLE. FOR WHAT PURPOSE DOES THE GENTLEMAN FROM MONTANA SEEK RECOGNITION?

                            Show Full Text
                          • 11:30:05 AM

                            MR. GIANFORTE

                            I ASK UNANIMOUS CONSENT THAT THE TEXT OF H.R. 2815 AS PROPOSED BE PASSED…

                            I ASK UNANIMOUS CONSENT THAT THE TEXT OF H.R. 2815 AS PROPOSED BE PASSED UNDER SUSPENSION OF THE RULES, BE MODIFIED BY THE AMENDMENT I PLACED AT THE DESK.

                            Show Full Text
                          • 11:30:15 AM

                            THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

                            THE CLERK WILL REPORT THE AMENDMENT.

                          • 11:30:17 AM

                            THE CLERK

                            AMENDMENT OFFERED BY THE GENTLEMAN FROM DRK

                          • 11:30:21 AM

                            MR. GIANFORTE

                            I ASK UNANIMOUS CONSENT TO DISPENSE WITH THE READING

                          • 11:30:27 AM

                            THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

                            IS THERE AN OBJECTION TO THE REQUEST OF THE THE GENTLEMAN FROM MONTANA.…

                            IS THERE AN OBJECTION TO THE REQUEST OF THE THE GENTLEMAN FROM MONTANA. WITHOUT OBJECTION, THE MODIFICATION IS AGREED TO. PURSUANT TO CLAUSE 8, RULE 20 THE UNFINISHED IS PASSING H.R. 2815 AS AMENDED.

                            Show Full Text
                          • 11:30:42 AM

                            THE CLERK

                            H.R. 2815 A BILL TO DESIGNATE THE FACILITY OF THE UNITED STATES POSTAL…

                            H.R. 2815 A BILL TO DESIGNATE THE FACILITY OF THE UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE LOCATED AT 30 EASTSOMER STREET IN RARITAN, NEW JERSEY AS THE JOHN BASILONE POST OFFICE. THOSE IN FAVOR WILL SAY EYE. THOSE OPPOSED, NO. IN THE OPINION OF THE CHAIR, 2/3 BEING IN THE AFFIRMATIVE, THE BILL IS PASSED AND WITHOUT OBJECTION, THE MOTION TO CONSIDER IS AMENDED.

                            Show Full Text
                          • 11:31:15 AM

                            THE CLERK

                            A BILL TO AMEND 30 EAST SOMERSET AS THE GUNNER SERGEANT JOHN BASILONE POST…

                            A BILL TO AMEND 30 EAST SOMERSET AS THE GUNNER SERGEANT JOHN BASILONE POST OFFICE. .

                            Show Full Text
                          • 11:31:32 AM

                            MR. HOYER

                            I ASK TO SPEAK OUT OF ORDER FOR ONE MINUTE FOR THE PURPOSE OF ACQUIRING OF…

                            I ASK TO SPEAK OUT OF ORDER FOR ONE MINUTE FOR THE PURPOSE OF ACQUIRING OF THE MAJORITY LEADER OF THE SCHEDULE FOR THE WEEK TO COME. THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MR. SPEAKER. I NOW YIELD TO MY FRIEND, THE MAJORITY LEADER FROM CALIFORNIA, MR. MCCARTY.

                            Show Full Text
                          • 11:31:44 AM

                            THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

                            THE GENTLEMAN IS RECOGNIZED.

                          • 11:31:46 AM

                            MR. MCCARTHY

                            I THANK THE GENTLEMAN FOR YIELDING. I ASK UNANIMOUS CONSENT TO REVISE AND…

                            I THANK THE GENTLEMAN FOR YIELDING. I ASK UNANIMOUS CONSENT TO REVISE AND EXTEND MY REMARKS.

                            Show Full Text
                          • 11:31:51 AM

                            MR. HOYER

                            MR. SPEAKER, THE HOUSE IS NOT IN ORDER.

                          • 11:31:57 AM

                            THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

                            THE GENTLEMAN IS CORRECT. THE HOUSE WILL BE IN ORDER. PLEASE TAKE YOUR…

                            THE GENTLEMAN IS CORRECT. THE HOUSE WILL BE IN ORDER. PLEASE TAKE YOUR CONVERSATIONS OFF THE FLOOR. THE GENTLEMAN IS RECOGNIZED.

                            Show Full Text
                          • 11:32:07 AM

                            MR. MCCARTHY

                            ON MONDAY, THE HOUSE WILL MEET AT NOON FOR MORNING HOUR AND 2:00 P.M. FOR…

                            ON MONDAY, THE HOUSE WILL MEET AT NOON FOR MORNING HOUR AND 2:00 P.M. FOR LEGISLATIVE BUSINESS. VOTES WILL BE POSTPONED UNTIL 6:30 P.M. ON TUESDAY AND THE BALANCE OF THE WEEK THE HOUSE WILL MEET AS EARLY AS 10:00 A.M. FOR LEGISLATIVE BUSINESS. MR. SPEAKER, THE HOUSE WILL CONSIDER A NUMBER OF SUSPENSIONS NEXT WEEK, COMPLETE LIST OF WHICH COMPLETE LIST OF WHICH WILL BE ANNOUNCED BY CLOSE OF BUSINESS TOMORROW. THIS LIST WILL INCLUDE SEVERAL BILLS FROM THE SCIENCE COMMITTEE THAT ARE PART OF THE HOUSE INNOVATION INITIATIVE. THESE BILLS SUPPORT AMERICANS PURSUING CAREERS IN SCIENCE, TECHNOLOGY, ENGINEERING, AND MATH WITH A FOCUS COMMITTEE THAT ARE PART OF THE HOUSE INNOVATION ON VETERANS AND INDIVIDUALS HISTORICALLY UNDERREPRESENTED IN THOSE FIELDS. MR. SPEAKER, MY FRIEND AND I RECENTLY CO-HOSTED THE THIRD CONGRESSIONAL HACK-A-THON. I THINK HE AND I WOULD AGREE THAT STEM EDUCATION IS AN ISSUE OF NATIONAL COMPETITIVENESS AND I LOOK FORWARD TO THE HOUSE PASSING THESE BILLS NEXT WEEK. IN ADDITION, THE HOUSE WILL CONSIDER TWO MEASURES FROM THE FINANCIAL SERVICES COMMITTEE. FIRST, H.R. 4015, THE CORPORATE GOVERNANCE REFORM AND TRANSPARENCY ACT SPONSORED BY REPRESENTATIVE SEAN DUFFY. THIS BILL LIM PROVE THE QUALITY OF PROXY RESEARCH WHILE INCREASING TRANSPARENCY FOR PUBLIC COMPANIES AND THEIR INVESTORS. SECOND, H.R. 3312, SYSTEMIC RISK IMPROVEMENT ACT, SPONSORED BY MR. LUETKEMEYER, THIS REPLACES IT WITH A PROCESS THAT ANALYZES EACH INSTITUTION WITH INDIVIDUAL RISK FACTORS. THE HOUSE WILL ALSO CONSIDER THE CONFERENCE REPORT TO ACCOMPANY H.R. 1, THE TAX CUTS AND JOBS ACT SPONSORED BY REPRESENTATIVE KEVIN BRADY. THIS HISTORIC LEGISLATION WILL CAP OFF A 31-YEAR JOURNEY TO REFORM AMERICA'S BROKEN TAX CODE. WE WILL DOUBLE THE STANDARD DEDUCTION MAKING THE FIRST $12,000 OF INCOME FOR AN INDIVIDUAL AND $24,000 FOR A FAMILY TAX FREE. WE WILL INCREASE THE CHILD TAX CREDIT BECAUSE INVESTING IN FAMILIES IS AMONG THE MOST IMPORTANT INVESTMENTS WE MAKE. WE'LL REDUCE THE TAX RATE ON SMALL BUSINESSES TO THE LOWEST RATES THAT HAVE SEEN IN 40 YEARS. AND WE DO ALL THIS WHILE SIMPLY FILING THE TAX CODE SO AMERICANS CAN FILE IN MINUTES ON A FORM THE SIZE OF A POSTCARD. REPUBLICANS HAVE CHAMPIONED CUTTING TAXES AND GROWING OUR ECONOMY FOR YEARS AND I AM EXCITED TO DELIVER THIS IMPORTANT PROMISE. FINALLY, MR. SPEAKER, ADDITIONAL LEGISLATIVE ITEMS ARE EXPECTED, INCLUDING LEGISLATION RELATED TO GOVERNMENT FUNDING AND A NUMBER OF OTHER END OF THE YEAR PRIORITIES. I WILL BE SURE TO INFORM ALL MEMBERS IF ADDITIONAL ITEMS ARE ADDED TO OUR SCHEDULE. WITH THAT, I THANK MY FRIEND AND YIELD BACK TO HIM.

                            Show Full Text
                          • 11:35:02 AM

                            MR. HOYER

                            I THANK THE GENTLEMAN FOR THAT INFORMATION. FIRST OF ALL, MR. SPEAKER, I…

                            I THANK THE GENTLEMAN FOR THAT INFORMATION. FIRST OF ALL, MR. SPEAKER, I WANT TO SAY THAT THE MAKE THE ACTIONS OF THIS BODY ACCESSIBLE TO THE GENERAL PUBLIC AS THEY HAPPEN. I WANT TO THANK THE MAJORITY LEADER FOR CONTINUING TO CO-SPONSOR THIS EFFORT WITH ME AND TO BE A LEADER ON THIS EFFORT. WE JUST HAD THE PRESIDENT SIGN, I THINK YESTERDAY, MAY HAVE BEEN THE DAY BEFORE, A PIECE OF LEGISLATION WHICH WILL TRY TO MAKE THE GOVERNMENT MORE FASSEL IN BRINGING IT'S TECHNOLOGY UP TO DATE SO IT CAN OPERATE MORE EFFICIENTLY AND EFFECTIVELY. I THANK THE MAJORITY LEADER FOR WORKING TOGETHER IN A POSITIVE WAY TO MAKE THIS INSTITUTION WORK BET EARN MAKE IT MORE ACCESSIBLE AND BETTER KNOWN TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. I THANK ALSO FOR THE SCHEDULE THAT HE HAS PUT FORWARD. MR. SPEAKER, THE MAJORITY LEADER MENTIONED A NUMBER OF THINGS THAT -- TAX BILL THAT WILL BE COMING BEFORE US WILL DO. I DON'T BELIEVE THAT THE CONFERENCE REPORT IS AVAILABLE FOR REVIEW AT THIS POINT IN TIME. CAN THE MAJORITY LEADER PERHAPS ENLIGHTEN ME AS TO WHETHER OR NOT THE CONFERENCE REPORT IS AVAILABLE NOW TO BE REVIEWED, OR IF NOT, WHEN IT WILL BE AVAILABLE? I YIELD TO MY FRIEND.

                            Show Full Text
                          • 11:37:01 AM

                            MR. MCCARTHY

                            I THANK MY FRIEND FOR YIELDING. I EXPECT THE REPORT TO BE FILED AND ONLINE…

                            I THANK MY FRIEND FOR YIELDING. I EXPECT THE REPORT TO BE FILED AND ONLINE TOMORROW. AS YOU KNOW YOU GOT TO GO THROUGH AND MAKE SURE FROM A JOINT TAX FILLING IN THE DOLLAR FIGURES AND ALL ANTICIPATION IT WILL BE ON LINE TOMORROW FOR ALL AMERICA TO READ.

                            Show Full Text
                          • 11:37:22 AM

                            MR. HOYER

                            IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT THAT WILL BE ON THE FLOOR AS EARLY AS TUESDAY…

                            IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT THAT WILL BE ON THE FLOOR AS EARLY AS TUESDAY OF NEXT WEEK? IS THAT ACCURATE? I YIELD TO MY FRIEND.

                            Show Full Text
                          • 11:37:31 AM

                            MR. MCCARTHY

                            THAT IS ACCURATE.

                          • 11:37:35 AM

                            MR. HOYER

                            MR. SPEAKER, I WOULD SIMPLY OBSERVE THAT WHAT THE MAJORITY LEADER DID NOT…

                            MR. SPEAKER, I WOULD SIMPLY OBSERVE THAT WHAT THE MAJORITY LEADER DID NOT MENTION , AND AGAIN I HAVE NOT SEEN THE CONFERENCE REPORT SENATE BILL AND THE HOUSE BILLS THAT WERE PASSED BY BOTH BODIES, IT WILL INCREASE THE DEBT OF OUR COUNTRY BY SOME $1.5 TRILLION. AND A MINIMUM OF $1 TRILLION. IT WILL RAISE TAXES ON SOME 78 MILLION AMERICANS. BETWEEN $50,000 OF FAMILY INCOME AND $150,000 OF INCOME. I AM ASSUMING THAT THE ELIMINATION OF THE MANDATE IS STILL IN THE CONFERENCE REPORT. I'M NOT SURE BUT THE INFORMATION I HAVE IS THAT IT'S STILL IN THE REPORT. THAT, MR. SPEAKER, WILL COST 13 MILLION PEOPLE TO BE UNINSURED. AS A RESULT. I HAVE INFORMATION, MR. SPEAKER, THAT WHAT THE CONFERENCE REPORT DOES IS REDUCES TAXES ON SOME OF THE WEALTHIEST PEOPLE IN AMERICA. I'M NOT SURE HOW THEY OFFSET THAT. MAYBE WITH THAT. MAYBE WITH A MANDATE. MAYBE WITH SOMETHING ELSE. BUT 62% OF THE BILL'S RESOURCES GO TO THE TOP 1% IN AMERICA. MR. SPEAKER, -- THE SPEAKER, SPEAKER RYAN, SPOKE ABOUT ON THIS FLOOR THE AVERAGE FAMILY MAKING $59,000 A YEAR. HE MENTIONED THAT THAT FAMILY WILL GET UNDER THE HOUSE BILL, AGAIN I HAVEN'T SEEN THE CONFERENCE REPORT, GET FAMILY MAKING $1,182 PER YEAR IN A TAX CUT. WHAT THE SPEAKER DID NOT MENTION IS THAT THE FAMILY IN THE TOP 1% WILL GET A TAX CUT OF $1,198 PER WEEK. PER WEEK, MR. SPEAKER. IN OTHER WORDS, 52 TIMES WHAT THE STRUGGLING AMERICAN WILL GET. WHAT THE AMERICAN THAT SPEAKER RYAN SAID MAY NOT BE ABLE TO COME UP WITH $500 IF THEY HAVE A CRISIS WITH A REFRIGERATOR OR THEIR HEATING UNIT, SOMETHING OF THAT NATURE, OR THEIR CAR BREAKS DOWN. MR. SPEAKER, WE ON THIS SIDE OF THE AISLE DO NOT BELIEVE THAT THIS BILL ADDRESSES RELIEF FOR THE STRUGGLING WORKING MEN AND WOMEN OF THIS COUNTRY. MR. SPEAKER, IT'S CLEAR IN ALL OF THE POLLING THAT THE AVERAGE WORKING AMERICAN SHARES THAT VIEW. THEY BELIEVE CORRECTLY THAT THIS IS A TAX CUT FOR THE RICH AND A FEW SPRINKLES ALL OF THE POLLING THAT THE AVERAGE WORKING AMERICAN SHARES THAT VIEW. TO THE MIDDLE CLASS. I'M SURE THE LEADER WILL HAVE SOMETHING TO SAY ON THAT. IN ADDITION, MR. SPEAKER, IT IS IRONIC THAT WHAT WILL HAPPEN IN THIS TAX BILL IS WE WILL PHASE OUT -- AGAIN, TO THE MIDDLE CLASS. I HAVE NOT SEEN THE CONFERENCE REPORT SO I DON'T KNOW EXACTLY WHETHER THAT'S TRUE OR NOT, BUT IN BOTH THE HOUSE AND SENATE BILLS, WE PHASED OUT -- WE DIDN'T PHASE OUT, PROPOSED TO BE PHASED OUT, THE BENEFITS TO THOSE MIDDLE INCOME, HARDWORKING AMERICANS WILL SEE THEIR BENEFITS PHASED OUT. THAT WILL NOT BE TRUE OF CORPORATIONS AND WILL NOT BE TRUE OF THE WEALTHIEST IN OUR COUNTRY. SO IT'S TROUBLING, MR. SPEAKER, THAT A BILL OF THIS MAGNITUDE IS BEING RUSHED TO JUDGMENT. IN 1986, THE GENTLEMAN IN MAKING HIS ANNOUNCEMENT SAID WE HAVE BEEN WORKING ON THIS FOR 31 YEARS. I PRESUME HE WAS TALKING ABOUT FROM 1986 TO 2017. WHAT HE DID NOT SAY, 31 YEARS. MR. SPEAKER, IS IN 1986 WE HAD 30 DAYS OF PUBLIC HEARINGS ON A BILL. 30 DAYS OF PUBLIC HEARINGS. WHAT HE DID NOT SAY IS THAT WE HAD 450 WITNESSES DURING THOSE PUBLIC HEARINGS TESTIFYING ABOUT THE TAXES. WHAT HE DID NOT SAY IS THAT THERE WERE NEARLY FOUR MONTHS OF HEARINGS ON THE 1986 REFORM BILL. AND WHAT HE DID NOT SAY IS THAT THE WAYS AND MEANS COMMITTEE CONDUCTED 26 DAYS OF MARKUP. THIS BILL HAS RECEIVED LESS THAN SEVEN DAYS OF MARKUP IN BOTH BODIES AND IN THE CONFERENCE. THIS IS BEING RUSHED TO JUDGMENT AND THE AMERICAN PEOPLE BY SUBSTANTIAL NUMBERS BELIEVE THIS BILL IS NOT GOOD FOR THEM. MR. COLLINS SAID THAT HE TALKED TO A DONOR AND THE DONOR SAID DON'T CALL ME AGAIN IF YOU DON'T PASS THIS TAX BILL. I GET THAT. I DON'T KNOW WHO THE DONOR WAS, I DON'T KNOW HOW RICH THE DONOR WAS. OBVIOUSLY THE DONOR THOUGHT HE HAD A REAL STAKE, OR SHE, IN THIS TAX BILL. WE REGRET THAT WE ARE NOT DOING AS WE DID IN 1986, BECAUSE WHAT THE MAJORITY LEADER DID NOT MENTION EITHER WAS THAT THE 1986 BILL WAS A BIPARTISAN BILL. WITH PRESIDENT REAGAN AND PRESIDENT O'NEILL SUPPORTING IT, WITH CHAIRMAN ROSTENKOWSKI, A DEMOCRATIC CHAIR OF THE HOUSE WAYS AND MEANS COMMITTEE, AND A REPUBLICAN CHAIR OF THE SENATE FINANCE COMMITTEE, BOB PACKWOOD FROM OREGON, SUPPORTING THE BILL. IT WAS A BIPARTISAN BILL. AND WHAT THE MAJORITY LEADER DID NOT MENTION IS THE 1986 BILL DID NOT ADD A SINGLE CENT TO THE DEFICIT. IT WAS IT WAS PAID FOR. MR. SPEAKER, THIS BILL IS A MUCH LESSER PRODUCT THAN IT COULD HAVE BEEN. WE ON THIS SIDE OF THE AISLE, MR. SPEAKER, THINK WE NEED TAX REFORM. WE'RE PREPARED TO SUPPORT TAX REFORM. WE BELIEVE WE NEED TO BRING DOWN THE CORPORATE RATE. WE BELIEVE WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT SMALL BUSINESSES CAN GROW AND PROSPER AND GROW INTO LARGE BUSINESSES. WHAT WE DON'T BELIEVE IN, MR. SPEAKER, IS SIMPLY HAVING A BILL THAT ADVANTAGES THE BEST OFF IN OUR COUNTRY AND SAYS THAT THE ADVANTAGES WE GIVE TO THE MIDDLE CLASS WILL BE PHASED OUT IN A LITTLE BIT, ABOUT FIVE YEARS. SO, MR. SPEAKER, WE WILL, ACCORDING TO THE MAJORITY LEADER, CONSIDER THIS BILL NEXT WEEK. IT WILL NOT BE BIPARTISAN. AND THAT'S A SHAME. IT WILL NOT BE POSITIVE FOR THE COUNTRY BECAUSE IT WILL PUT US EVEN MORE DEEPLY INTO DEBT. AND THE PEOPLE WILL PAY THAT BILL -- WHO PAY THAT BILL ULTIMATELY WILL BE OUR CHILDREN. ON BOTH SIDES OF THE AISLE, WE DON'T HAVE A LOT OF MEMBERS ON THE FLOOR, BUT I SAY TO EVERY MEMBER ON THE FLOOR, EVERY MEMBER ON THIS FLOOR, I'M SURE AT SOME POINT IN TIME YOU HAVE GIVEN A SPEECH SOMEWHERE THAT SAID, WE CARE ABOUT THE DEBT. WE'RE GOING TO BRING DOWN THE DEBT. THIS BILL DOES NOT THIS BILL DOES NOT DO IT. AND ANYBODY WHO BELIEVES THAT THIS BILL IS GOING TO PAY FOR ITSELF THROUGH DYNAMIC SCORING AND ECONOMIC GROWTH IS KIDDING THEMSELVES A RATIONALIZATION TO VOTE FOR A VOTE THAT IS POLITICAL, NOT POLICY. BECAUSE MY REPUBLICAN COLLEAGUES, MR. SPEAKER, BELIEVE IF THEY DON'T PASS THIS BILL, THEY WILL LOSE THE NEXT ELECTION. I HAVE HEARD THAT ARGUMENT OVER AND OVER AND OVER AGAIN. THAT IS NOT A REASON TO VOTE FOR THIS BILL. IT IS A REASON TO SAY, LET'S GO BACK TO THE TABLE. LET'S INCLUDE MR. NEAL IN THE CONSIDERATION, THE RANKING MEMBER. LET'S INCLUDE MR. WYDEN, THE RANKING MEMBER MEMBER OF THE SENATE FINANCE COMMITTEE AND LET'S INCLUDE MR. MCCARTHY AND MYSELF TO SEE IF WE CAN REACH A BIPARTISAN BIPARTISAN, CONSTRUCTIVE PIECE OF LEGISLATION WILL ENJOY THE SUPPORT OF A WIDE RANGE OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE AND THEIR REPRESENTATIVES. NOW, MR. SPEAKER, WE HAD AN ELECTION YESTERDAY IN ALABAMA. MR. JONES WON THAT ELECTION. MR. STRANGE, THE INCUMBENT REPUBLICAN REPRESENTING ALABAMA RIGHT NOW LOST IN THE PRIMARY. HE HAS NO MANDATE. WHY RUSH THIS BILL THROUGH? THIS BILL, IF IT WAS PASSED ON DECEMBER 31 OF NEXT YEAR WOULD AFFECT THE 2018 TAXES THAT WOULD BE FILED IN APRIL OF 2019. THE NEED TO RUSH THIS BILL, MR. SPEAKER, SEEMS TO BE AND THE REASON FOR HAVING NO HEARINGS, THE REASON FOR HAVING NO WITNESSES IS BECAUSE THIS BILL ON ITS MERIT CANNOT SUSTAIN ITSELF. NOW LET ME READ YOU A QUOTE, MR. SPEAKER. I THINK THE MESSAGE OF THE MOMENT IS THAT THE AMERICAN PEOPLE ALL ACROSS THE COUNTRY ARE ASKING US EVEN IN THE MOST LIBERAL STATE, MASSACHUSETTS, TO STOP THIS HEALTH CARE BILL. I THINK THAT MEANS THERE WILL BE MORE HEALTH CARE VOTES IN THE SENATE PRIOR TO THE SWEARING IN OF SCOTT BROWN, WHENEVER THAT MAY BE. THAT STATEMENT WAS MADE ON JANUARY 20, 2010, BY THE PRESIDENT MAJORITY LEADER, WHO WAS THEN, OF COURSE, THE MINORITY LEADER. AND HIS PROPOSITION WAS, YOU OUGHT TO WAIT UNTIL SCOTT BROWN IS HERE SO THAT MASSACHUSETTS CAN HAVE ITS VOTE COUNTED. BUT HINT CRITICALLY, HE HAS CHANGED HIS TUNE TODAY. WHEN ALABAMA, A VERY CONSERVATIVE STATE, THE OPPOSITE OF MASSACHUSETTS, HAS VOTED TO ELECT DOUG JONES TO THE SENATE. AND I DON'T HEAR MR. MCCONNELL OR ANYBODY ELSE SAYING LET'S WAY FOR THE DULY ELECTED MEMBER OF THE UNITED STATES SENATOR FROM ALABAMA SO HE CAN VOTE ON THIS BILL AND NEGATIVE CONSEQUENCES TO OUR COUNTRY. MR. SPEAKER, I'M SURE THE MAJORITY LEADER MIGHT HAVE SOME COMMENTS HE WANTS TO MAKE. AND THEREFORE, I YIELD TO MY FRIEND, MR. MCCARTHY.

                            Show Full Text
                          • 11:49:54 AM

                            MR. MCCARTHY

                            I THANK THE GENTLEMAN FOR YIELDING. I TOOK NOTE THERE ARE A LOT OF THINGS…

                            I THANK THE GENTLEMAN FOR YIELDING. I TOOK NOTE THERE ARE A LOT OF THINGS SAID. LET ME MAKE SURE TO GET THROUGH ALL OF THEM. YOU FIRST MENTIONED MANY TIMES THAT I DID NOT MENTION AND I WAS ASKED THE QUESTION WHEN WE WOULD VOTE ON THE TAX BILL. I ANSWERED THE QUESTION. I SAID YES, WE'LL VOTE ON IT TUESDAY. YOU SAID YOU HEARD IT COULD BE TUESDAY AND I WASN'T ASKED OTHER QUESTIONS. BUT NOW THAT WE HAVE, LET'S WALK THROUGH THIS. ONE OF YOUR FIRST ARGUMENTS WAS DEBT. DO YOU REALIZE IN THIS PRO-GROWTH TAX CUTTING TAX BILL, IT PAYS FOR ALL OF IT. WHAT IS INTERESTING, DON'T TAKE MY WORD FOR IT. WHAT HAPPENS EVERY DAY TO THE MARKET WHEN THEY REALIZE CONGRESS IS ONE DAY CLOSER TO PASSING THE TAX BILL. EVERYONE WITH A 401-K GETS A INCREASE. AND THE MOVEMENT IS PASSING THE TAX BILL. AND THAT'S FOR ALL AMERICANS INVESTED. EVERYBODY'S RETIREMENT IS GETTING A LITTLE BETTER BECAUSE OF IT. NOW WHAT ABOUT ON THE JOBS' PROSPECTIVE. BROADCOMM WAS CREATED IN AMERICA BUT LEFT AMERICA, ON THE DAY OF THE ANNOUNCEMENT SAID WE'RE COMING BACK. NOT JUST THAT WE ARE BRINGING SO MANY JOBS BACK, WE ARE GOING TO SPEND $3 BILLION A YEAR IN R&D AND $6 BILLION IN MANUFACTURING. AND THAT'S $20 BILLION A YEAR IN REVENUE FOR THAT COMPANY THAT IS GOING TO PAY TAXES IN REVENUE. THAT'S A BIG COMPANY. YOU KNOW WHAT I JUST READ THE OTHER DAY? COMPANY ANNOUNCING THEY ARE GOING TO SYRACUSE, NEW YORK, BASED UPON OUR TAX BILL. YES, THINGS ARE CHANGING THINGS IN AMERICA. PEOPLE ARE EXCITED, BUT NOT JUST THOSE WHO ARE GOING TO HIRE THESE THOUSANDS OF AMERICANS TO WORK, I WANT TO MAKE SURE IT HAPPENS IN MARYLAND AS WELL. SO I WANTED TO LOOK AT YOUR DISTRICT. SO HERE WE GO. MY GOOD FRIEND REPRESENTS MARYLAND'S 5TH AND DONE IT FOR QUITE SOME TIME. CURRENTLY YOU HAVE 47% OF FILERS IN MARYLAND 5 THAT TAKE THE STANDARD DID HE DEDUCTION. SO THEY WILL BE BETTER OFF BECAUSE THEY WILL GET A DOUBLING THE PRESIDENT SIGNS IT. ANOTHER 11% HAVE ITEMIZED DEDUCTIONS THAT ARE LESS THAN OUR NEW HIGHER STANDARD DEDUCTION. THEY WILL SAVE. NOT ONLY SAVE MONEY BUT SAVE TIME. INSTEAD OF SPENDING WEEKS OF TRYING TO FILL OUT A TAX CODE -- YOU KNOW WHEN THEY FILL IT OUT, THEY WILL GET MONEY. THEY DON'T HAVE TO WAIT UNTIL APRIL 15 NOT ONLY IN YOUR DISTRICT BUT ACROSS THIS COUNTRY. CHECK YOUR CHECK COME FEBRUARY. YOU KNOW WHAT WILL BE IN THAT CHECK? MORE MONEY. BECAUSE THE STANDARD DEDUCTION GOES UP. SO THAT'S 58% OF MY FRIEND'S DISTRICT IS BETTER OFF THAN DAY ONE. BUT FROM WHAT YOU TELL ME, YOU DON'T THINK THAT'S GOOD ENOUGH TO VOTE FOR. A MAJORITY OF YOUR DISTRICT IS BETTER OFF ON DAY ONE. THAT'S NOT EVEN TALKING ABOUT THE SMALL BUSINESSES. THE SMALL BUSINESSES IN YOUR DISTRICT, THOSE THAT ARE EARNING $400,000, THEY ARE GOING TO SAVE $19,000. I'M NOT SURE -- I KNOW WE ARE DEAR FRIENDS BUT I'M NOT SURE YOU OWNED A BUSINESS. WHEN I WAS 20, I STARTED MY FIRST BUSINESS. THERE ARE THREE LESSONS I LEARNED, I WAS THE FIRST ONE TO WORK AND LAST ONE TO LEAVE AND LAST ONE TO BE PAID. THIS IS GOING TO CREATE NOR ENTREPRENEURSHIP, MORE OPPORTUNITY AND MORE PEOPLE ARE GOING TO BE HIRED. NOW, I KNOW YOU ARE WORRIED ABOUT THE DEBT, BUT IT JUST STRIKES ME. THIS YEAR, YOU VOTED FOR A BUDGET, JUST A COUPLE OF MONTHS AGO AND I'M NOT GOING TO GO BACK TO ANOTHER CONGRESS THAT INCREASED THE DEFICIT BY $6.8 TRILLION. ONLY WORRIED ABOUT DEBT AT CERTAIN TIMES? THIS BILL IS GOING TO GROW THE ECONOMY HAS WE HAVE WATCHED QUARTER AFTER QUARTER AFTER QUARTER IN THE NEW ADMINISTRATION. I HAVE TO MAKE SURE I GET ALL OF IT. YOU TALK ABOUT HEARINGS. WE HAD 59 PUBLIC HEARINGS. WE PRINTED IT OUT ABOUT WHAT WE WOULD DO ON TAX. LET'S GET TO THE CORE. LET'S SAY TO ALL AMERICANS, DOESN'T MATTER WHERE YOU LIVE WHETHER YOU SIT ON THIS SIDE OF THE AISLE, OR THAT SIDE OF THE AISLE, DEMOCRAT, REPUBLICAN, YOU ARE AN AMERICAN FIRST. LET'S TAKE THE AVERAGE FAMILY. THE AVERAGE FAMILY OF FOUR MAKING $5 -- $55,000. YOU KNOW HOW MUCH TAX THEY ARE GOING TO PAY? ZERO. ZERO. BUT THAT STILL ISN'T GOOD ENOUGH FOR YOU. IT'S VERY INTERESTING IN MY SOCIAL SCIENCE STUDY OF WHAT THE PARTY ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE AISLE USED TO SAY THEY WERE FOR. I BELIEVE IN THE DAY IF YOU WOULD HAVE STOOD UP HERE AND SAID I HAVE A TAX BILL TO MAKE SURE THE FAMILY OF FOUR MAKING $55,000 IS GOING TO PAY ZERO, THEY WOULD BE EXCITED. YOU TALK TO ME ABOUT BIPARTISANSHIP. THAT'S A QUESTION FOR YOU. BIPARTISANSHIP, BIPARTISANSHIP WHEN WE REACH OUT TO YOU ABOUT CHIP, A PLACE NOT TO PLAY POLITICS, WE EVEN STOPPED A HEARING AND A MARKUP THAT WE HAD SCHEDULED WELL IN THE FUTURE BECAUSE YOU CAME TO US, YOUR SIDE OF THE AISLE, AND ASKED US TO BECAUSE YOU THOUGHT YOU COULD COME TO AN AGREEMENT AND TOLD BY YOUR LEADERSHIP THAT NO, NOBODY COULD VOTE FOR IT. WE PUT A BILL THAT PUT THINGS IN THE BILL THAT WE THOUGHT YOU WOULD EVEN WANT. BUT NO, YOU STILL VOTED NO. HOW MANY TIMES HAVE YOU TOLD ME ON THIS FLOOR, MAYBE IT WAS A FEW MONTHS AGO -- AND I'LL QUOTE YOU IF I MAY -- ABOUT GOVERNMENT FUNDING. BECAUSE I WAS CONCERNED, BECAUSE I HAD READ SOME ARTICLES IN THE "NEW YORK TIMES" THAT SUGGESTED AS THE MINORITY PARTY SHOWING RESISTANCE IN THE ERA OF PRESIDENT TRUMP, THE DEMOCRATS ARE WILLING TO LET THE LIGHTS OF GOVERNMENT GO DARK. I WANTED TO KNOW IF THAT WAS TRUE OR FALSE. YOU SAID TO ME, WHEN I ASKED MY FRIEND WHETHER THAT RUMOR WAS TRUE, YOU SAID NOBODY IS WANTING TO SHUT THE GOVERNMENT DOWN. WE DON'T WANT TO SHUT THE GOVERNMENT DOWN. YOU CONTINUED TO SAY, I ASSURE IT IS NEITHER OUR INTENT OR DESIRE. MATTER OF FACT WE WANT TO WORK QUICKLY TO AVOID THAT HAPPENING. THAT'S NOT GOOD OBVIOUSLY FOR THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. IT'S NOT GOOD FOR MANAGERS TRYING TO PLAN ON HOW TO DELIVER SERVICES AND IT'S CERTAINLY NOT GOOD FOR OUR FEDERAL EMPLOYEES. SO I WANT TO WORK WITH YOU TO MAKE SURE THAT DOESN'T HAPPEN. MR. SPEAKER, THAT WAS IN MARCH, JUST NINE MONTHS AGO. AND I WONDER WHAT CHANGED IN THOSE NINE MONTHS BECAUSE JUST LAST WEEK, AND I TELL MY FRIEND THERE WAS NO PARTISANSHIP INPUTTING A CONTINUING RESOLUTION ON THE FLOOR FOR TWO WEEKS. THERE WAS NO POISON PILL ON THIS SIDE OF THE AISLE. IT WAS A CLEAN ONE. AND I WATCHED SITTING AT THIS DESK WHERE THE VOTE WAS GOING AND I WATCHED THE OTHER SIDE. I WATCHED PEOPLE NOT THAT THEY JUST VOTED NO, THEY WERE WHIPPED INTO THE POSITION TO VOTE NO. I WATCHED THE TALLY. AND ONCE THE TALLY GOT PASSED THE MAGIC NUMBER OF 218, HE PUT HIS THUMB UP BECAUSE HE GAVE THE OK IN HIS CONFERENCE THAT WERE TOLD NOT TO VOTE UNTIL IT PASSED. I JUST WONDER WHAT HAPPENED TO BIPARTISANSHIP ON SOMETHING THAT IS SO BIPARTISAN. I KNOW THAT THOUSANDS OF FEDERAL EMPLOYEES YOU HAVE IN YOUR DISTRICT. BUT THAT IS JUST -- I LISTENED, MR. SPEAKER, TO THE LEADER OF THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY ON THE OTHER SIDE, YOU SAID JUST TWO DAYS PRIOR, THE ONLY PERSON TALKING ABOUT THE SHUTDOWN IS PRESIDENT TRUMP. THE ONLY PERSON TAKING ACTION AND WHIPPING TO GET TO A SHUTDOWN WAS ON THIS FLOOR. WE HAVE HAD OPEN HEARINGS, REPUBLICAN AND DEMOCRAT. WE HAD AN OPEN, BIPARTISAN, BICAMERAL CONFERENCE. THEY HAVE WALKED THROUGH AN ENTIRE BILL. WE'VE MADE SURE THE AMERICANS ARE GOING TO GET A TAX CUT AND JOBS ARE GOING TO BE CREATED. IT IS ALREADY HAPPENING BEFORE THE BILL IS EVEN SIGNED. I'M NOT SURE IF I DIDN'T MENTION SOMETHING ELSE. BECAUSE YOU TRY TO CORRECT IF SOMETHING WAS NOT MENTIONED, BUT I WANTED TO MAKE SURE I ANSWERED ALL THOSE QUESTIONS FOR YOU, BECAUSE I KNOW NOT JUST IN YOUR DISTRICT, THAT EVERY FAMILY OF FOUR MAKING $55,000 WILL PAY NOTHING, ALL OF THE SMALL BUSINESSES THAT ARE GOING TO HIRE NEW PEOPLE. AND I DIFFER FROM YOU. MAYBE YOU WHIPPED STRONGLY DEPENS LIKE YOU WHIPPED STRONGLY AGAINST THE C.R. IN KEEPING GOVERNMENT OPEN, BUT WHEN I LOOK AT THAT TALLY ON THE TAX BILL, THERE WILL BE SOME ON YOUR SIDE. WHY DO I THINK SO? THEY TOLD ME SO. THE ONLY DIFFERENCE AT THE END IF THEY DON'T AND KEEP THE STRONG ARM AND RELEASING THE THUMB UP ONCE IT PASSES AND PUT IT DOWN, THAT'S THE ONLY REASON WE WON'T HAVE BIPARTISANSHIP ON THE FLOOR. BUT I BELIEVE IN AMERICA AND I BELIEVE IN THE INDIVIDUALS WHO FIGHT SO STRONGLY TO GET HERE TO REPRESENT THEIR CONSTITUENTS THAT THEY KNOW THE NEW JOBS IN THEIR DISTRICT AND KNOW HOW MUCH THOSE FAMILIES WILL SAVE AND WILL NOT POLITICS GET THE BEST OF THEM. THEY WILL GO AGAINST THE TIED TO STOP, BUT THEY BELIEVE IT WILL EVEN BE BETTER. SO I LOOK FORWARD TO THAT DAY. I LOOK FORWARD YOU COMING BACK TO THE QUOTE YOU TOLD ME NINE MONTHS AGO, BECAUSE YOU KNOW WHAT? IT IS CLOSE TO CHRISTMAS. WE HAVE MILITARY MEN AND WOMEN DEFENDING US. YOU TALKED ABOUT THAT BILL THE PRESIDENT RECENTLY SIGNED THAT YES YOU WORKED WITH ME THAT IS GOING TO MAKE GOVERNMENT MORE EFFECTIVE, EFFICIENT AND ACCOUNTABLE AND ALSO HAD A PAY RAISE FOR OUR MEN AND WOMEN. WHEN YOU VOTED THEM, YOU TOLD THEM YOU WEREN'T GETTING THEIR RAISE. WORST, YOU EVEN WENT FURTHER, YOU QUESTIONED WHETHER THEY HAVE THE FUNDS TO CONTINUE TO BATTLE. WE HAVE BEEN THROUGH SHUTDOWNS AND NOBODY WINS. I BELIEVE YOU WHAT YOU TOLD ME NINE MONTHS AGO. I WANT YOU TO COME BACK. I YIELD BACK. .

                            Show Full Text
                          • 12:01:31 PM

                            MR. HOYER

                            I THANK THE GENTLEMAN FOR HIS COMMENTS. HE MADE A NUMBER OF POINTS. FIRST…

                            I THANK THE GENTLEMAN FOR HIS COMMENTS. HE MADE A NUMBER OF POINTS. FIRST GENERALLY, I'VE BEEN HERE LONG ENOUGH TO HAVE HEARD THE DEBATE IN THE 1981 BILL. THE SO-CALLED SUPPLY SIDE, JACK KEMP, GEORGE BUSH, VICE PRESIDENT BUSH REFERRED TO AS VOODOO ECONOMICS. IN POINT OF FACT, AS THE GENTLEMAN KNOWS, BUT A I'M SURE HE KNOWS THE RECORD -- BECAUSE I'M SURE HE KNOLLS THE RECORD, WE INCREASED THE DEBT UNDER RONALD REAGAN -- KNOWS THE RECORD, WE INCREASED THE DEBT UNDER RONALD REAGAN 189%. LARGER THAN ANY OTHER PRESIDENT WITH WHOM I'VE SERVED OVER THE LAST 37 YEARS. 189%. STOCKMAN SAID THAT WE KNEW IT WASN'T GOING TO BALANCE THE BUDGET. WE JUST SAID THAT FOR POLITICAL PURPOSES. STOCKMAN SAID THAT. HE WAS DIRECTOR FOR THE O.M.B. UNDER RONALD REAGAN. THEN IN 2001 AND 2003 WE HAD TAX CUTS. WE HEARD THE SAME ARGUMENTS. HOW IT'S GOING TO GROW ROBUSTLY THE ECONOMY. AND IT BROUGHT IN THE DEEPEST RECESSION ANYBODY IN THIS CHAMBER, OTHER THAN PERHAPS SAM JOHNSON, WHO I THINK IS PROBABLY OUR OLDEST MEMBER, BECAUSE THE REST OF US DIDN'T EXPERIENCE THE DEPRESSION, IT USHERED IN NOT THE BIGGEST GROWTH RATE IN AMERICA, BUT THE LEAST JOB-PRODUCING EIGHT YEARS OF ANY AMERICAN PRESIDENT THAT I'VE SERVED WITH. AND THE DEEPEST RECESSION THAT ANYBODY IN THIS BODY HAS EXPERIENCED. AND A HEMORRHAGING OF JOBS. AND IN FACT, THE STOCK MARKET, AS THE GENTLEMAN REFERS TO, HAD A 25% DECLINE IN VALUE OVER THE EIGHT YEARS OF THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION. WITH TWO TAX CUTS. WHERE EXACTLY THE SAME ARGUMENT FOR GROWTH WAS MADE. AND IT DIDN'T HAPPEN. ON THE OTHER HAND, I WAS HERE IN 1993 WHEN WE RAISED TAXES. NOT MUCH. BUT A LITTLE BIT. PARTICULARLY FOR INFRASTRUCTURE. AND THE PREDICTION, MR. LEADER, ON YOUR SIDE OF THE AISLE, WE WOULD TANK AS AN ECONOMY. WE WOULD HAVE A TERRIBLE RECESSION. EXACTLY THE OPPOSITE HAPPENED. YOU WERE DEAD -- NOT YOU PERSONALLY, BUT THE -- THOSE WHO MADE THAT REPRESENTATION WERE 180 DEGREES WRONG. FIRST OF ALL, WE BALANCED THE BUDGET FOUR YEARS IN A ROW. NOBODY HAS DONE THAT OTHER THAN PRESIDENT CLINTON. YOU CAN SAY YOU WERE IN CHARGE OF THE CONGRESS. YOU WERE. AND I WILL RESPOND TO YOU, WHY COULDN'T YOU DO IT UNDER GEORGE WUSH BUSH? WHEN YOU HAD -- GEORGE BUSH? WHEN YOU HAD EVERYTHING? THERE'S NO ANSWER TO THAT. SO IN TERMS OF THE EXPERIENCE THAT WE'VE HAD, WHEN WE HAD TAX CUTS, THE DEBT DID IN FACT EXPLODE. 189% INCREASE IN THE NATIONAL DEBT. THAT WAS APPROXIMATELY 2 1/2 TIMES THE INCREASE UNDER OBAMA AND THE INCREASE UNDER GEORGE BUSH. BUT WE CONTINUED -- CONTINUE TO ARGUE THIS IS GOING TO BE GREATH FOR GROWTH. NO REPUTABLE -- GREAT FOR GROWTH. NO REPUTABLE ECONOMIST AGREES WITH THAT PROPOSITION. WELL, YOU READ THEM OUT TO ME, I'LL BE GLAD TO HEAR THEM. THE STOCK MARKET INCREASED UNDER THIS PRESIDENT, IT'S GOING UP. IT WENT UP 300% UNDER BARACK OBAMA. 300%. 300%. FROM 6,500 TO OVER 18,000. HE HAD THE LARGEST JOB PRODUCTION. AND I TOLD MY FRIEND, IN THE LAST -- 2016, AS OPPOSED TO 2017, THERE WERE 279,000 MORE JOBS CREATED IN 2016 UNDER BARACK OBAMA THAN HAVE BEEN CREATED UNDER THIS PRESIDENT. 279,000 MORE. THAT'S NOT A GREAT DEAL. BUT IN TERMS OF GROWTH, THERE WAS MORE GROWTH OF JOBS IN 2016 WHEN OBAMA WAS PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES THAN HAS OCCURRED UNDER DONALD TRUMP. CHECK THE RECORDS. I'M SURE YOU'LL REVIEW MY -- LET'S SEE IF HOYER'S JUST GIVING US SOME MALARKEY. THE GENTLEMAN TALKS ABOUT THIS GREAT TAX BENEFIT. WHAT HE DIDN'T MENTION, AND WHAT I WAS REFERRING TO BY THE WAY, WAS WHEN YOU WERE GIVING THE SCHEDULE. NOT IN RESPONSE TO THE QUESTION. BUT THAT ASIDE, DOESN'T MENTION THE STATE AND LOCAL TAX. I'M NOT SURE EXACTLY WHAT'S HAPPENED TO STATE AND LOCAL TAXES. BUT IN MY STATE IT WILL HAVE A VERY SUBSTANTIAL NEGATIVE EFFECT. WHY? BECAUSE WE HAVE A SIGNIFICANT INCOME TAX. WHY? BECAUSE WE THINK THAT'S A PROGRESSIVE TAX. AND PUTS THE BURDEN ON THOSE WHO HAVE MORE. YOU MAY DISAGREE WITH THAT. HAVE A FLAT TAX, NO MATTER WHAT YOU HAVE. PAY THE SAME THING. I'M NOT SURE EXACTLY WHAT YOU'VE DONE -- SHUTDOWN, YOU TALK ABOUT. YOU HAD 90 PEOPLE VOTE AGAINST A C.R. THAT YOU RECOMMENDED THEY VOTE FOR IN SEPTEMBER, WHICH WAS A CLEAN C.R. YOU WOULD NOT HAVE PASSED THAT C.R., YOU WOULD HAVE SHUT DOWN GOVERNMENT. YOU'RE RESPONSIBLE FOR KEEPING GOVERNMENT OPEN. YOU BEING YOUR PARTY. YOU'RE IN THE MAJORITY. THE ONLY REASON THAT C.R. PASSED WAS BECAUSE WE VOTED FOR IT. YOU HAD 906 YOUR PEOPLE VOTE AGAINST IT. 9 -- 90 OF YOUR PEOPLE VOTE AGAINST IT. 90. WHO APPARENTLY DIDN'T WANT TO PAY THE MILITARY. DIDN'T WANT TO PROTECT THEM OVERSEAS. THAT PROPOSITION, LIKE THEY SAY , WON'T HUNT. BECAUSE THE CHAIRMAN OF THE ARMED SERVICES COMMITTEE VOTED AGAINST THAT C.R. WHY? BECAUSE HE THOUGHT IT WAS HARMFUL TO THE NATIONAL SECURITY OF OUR COUNTRY. SECRETARY MATTIS BELIEVES THE C.R. IS DAMAGING. SO DON'T -- IT IS INAPPROPRIATE IN MY VIEW WHEN WE DO SOMETHING AND SAYS WE DON'T LIKE THIS BILL. AND THE ONLY PARTY WITH WHOM I'VE SERVED, WHO IS CONSCIOUSLY, PURPOSEFULLY SHUT DOWN -- WHO HAS CONSCIOUSLY, PURPOSEFULLY SHUT DOWN THE GOVERNMENT, I TELL MY FRIEND, MR. SPEAKER, IS THE REPUBLICAN PARTY. THEY DID IT IN 1995 UNDER NEWT GINGRICH. AND THEY DID IT LAST YEAR WITH MR. CRUZ COMING OVER HERE AND SAYING SHUT DOWN THE GOVERNMENT UNLESS THEY REPEAL THE A.C.A. SHUT IT DOWN. CONSCIOUSLY. WE HAVE NEVER DONE THAT. HAVE WE HAD TO SHUT DOWN BECAUSE WE COULDN'T GET AGREEMENT? WE'VE DONE THAT FOR A FEW DAYS. BUT FOR 16 DAYS, YOU CUT IT DOWN CONSCIOUSLY. AND WHEN YOU VOTED TO OPEN UP THE GOVERNMENT, GUESS WHO VOTED AGAINST IT? MR. MULVANEY, THE DIRECTOR OF THE O.M.B. HE VOTED AGAINST OPENING UP GOVERNMENT. I GUESS HE WAS AGAINST THE ARMED FORCES. I GUESS HE WAS AGAINST DEFENDING OUR COUNTRY. THAT'S YOUR PROPOSITION. SCHIP. YOU'RE RIGHT. YOU WAITED. WE DIDN'T GET AN AGREEMENT. BUT WE WAITED LONG AFTER 9:30 WHEN THE GENTLEMAN SAYS HE'S VERY CONCERNED ABOUT FUNDING IT. THE AUTHORIZATION EXPIRED. YOU PASSED ULTIMATELY A BILL THAT WE DIDN'T VOTE FOR. YOU PASSED IT ON YOUR OWN. IF YOU REALLY WERE THAT CONCERNED, YOU WOULD HAVE PASSED IT BEFORE THE BILL AUTHORIZATION EXPIRED, SEPTEMBER 30. WE PASSED IT SOME WEEKS LATER. AND WE PASSED IT WITH A PIECE OF FUNDING IN THERE THAT'S GOING TO UNDERMINE, FOR INSTANCE, THIS IS ONE EXAMPLE, VACCINATION FOR CHILDREN. BECAUSE YOU FUNDED IT IN PART BY REDUCING SUBSTANTIALLY THE PREVENTION FUND, WHICH SEEKS TO PREVENT ILLNESS. ON BIPARTISANSHIP. VERY FRANKLY, WE HAD A TWO-WEEK C.R. THE ONLY THING YOU'VE WORKED ON FROM OUR PERSPECTIVE IS THE TAX BILL. AND YOU DID NOT INCLUDE US IN THOSE DISCUSSIONS. YOU HAD CLOSED HEARINGS. WE HAD A CONFERENCE HEARING YESTERDAY. MR. NEAL TRIED TO MOVE AN AMENDMENT OUT OF ORDER. WASN'T ACCEPTED. IT WAS A DONE DEAL. DONE DEAL IN SECRET. I TOLD MY FRIEND, I RE-READ A LITTLE BIT OF "YOUNG GUNS REQUEST "-- "YOUNG GUNS" LAST NIGHT. TALK ABOUT TRANSPARENCY, TALK ABOUT OPENNESS. TALK ABOUT DOING THINGS ONE AT A TIME. NOT PACKAGING A LOT OF BILLS. THE REASON WE ALL HATE C.R. SEAS BECAUSE NOBODY KNOWS WHAT'S IN A C. -- C.R.'S IS BECAUSE NOBODY KNOWS WHAT'S IN A C.R. AND THIS C.R. IS LOADED DOWN WITH NUMEROUS, AND WE'RE TALKING ABOUT TAX BILL, BUT THE C.R. THAT THE GENTLEMAN TALKED ABOUT IS FIVE OR SIX MAJOR PIECES OF LEGISLATION PUT IN ONE PACKAGE. TAKE IT OR LEAVE IT. THAT'S NOT THE WAY TO RUN THIS ORGANIZATION. AND THAT'S WHAT YOU GUYS SAID IN "YOUNG GUNS" AND I AGREE WITH YOU. BUT IT'S NOT WHAT YOU'VE DONE. IT'S WHAT YOU SAID. BUT IT'S NOT WHAT YOU'VE DONE. LET ME JUST CLOSE ON THIS SIDE, AND FRANKLY I WAS GOING TO TALK ABOUT THE CRRMENT R., BUT I'M TALKING -- C.R., BUT I'M TALKING ABOUT IT NOW. WE DON'T HAVE A BUDGET CAPS DEAL. TODAY'S THE 12TH. 13TH. 14TH. SO WE ARE ESSENTIALLY 15 DAYS, 17 DAYS FROM THE END OF THE YEAR. WE DON'T HAVE A CAPS DEAL. WE DON'T HAVE A DISASTER SUPPLEMENTAL. FOR TEXAS, FLORIDA, PUERTO RICO AND THE VIRGIN ISLANDS. THAT'S PROPOSED TO BE IN THIS C.R., AS I UNDERSTAND IT. AND THE FIRES IN CALIFORNIA. THE GENTLEMAN'S ABSOLUTELY CORRECT. WE'RE GOING TO SUPPORT HELPING THE FOLKS OF CALIFORNIA WHO HAVE BEEN DEVASTATED BY THESE FIRES. THE GENTLEMAN'S ABSOLUTELY CORRECT. WE DON'T HAVE ANY ON -- ANYTHING ON DREAMERS. WE THINK THAT'S CRITICALLY IMPORTANT. I SAID TO THE MAJORITY LEADER, FOUR MONTHS AGO, THAT WE FELT THIS WAS CRITICALLY IMPORTANT AND WE NEEDED TO GET THIS DONE. I THINK, AS I'VE SAID TO THE GENTLEMAN, WE HAVE OVER 300 VOTES ON THIS FLOOR FOR A BILL TO GET THIS DONE. THE ALEXANDER MURRAY, I DON'T THINK -- I DON'T KNOW, I HAVEN'T SEEN THE CONFERENCE REPORT. BUT ALEXANDER MURRAY, WHICH TRIES TO STABILIZE THE AVAILABILITY OF HEALTH CARE AT A REASONABLE PRICE TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE, I DON'T THINK THAT'S IN THE TAX BILL, AS I UNDERSTAND IT. V.A. CHOICE FUNDING I THINK IS IN THE C.R. I HAVEN'T SEEN EXACTLY WHAT IT SAYS. OPIOIDS FUNDING, I HAVE A THING IN MY DISTRICT, IN EVERY DISTRICT IN AMERICA OPIOIDS IS A CRITICAL CRISIS. THERE'S NO FUNDING IN C.R. AS I UNDERSTAND FOR THAT. A FIRE GRANTS PROGRAM FOR OUR EMERGENCY RESPONDERS. NO MONEY FOR THAT. PERKINS LOANS, NOTHING FOR THAT. THE DEBT LIMIT IS GOING TO COME LATER. NATIONAL FLOOD INSURANCE PROGRAM, NOTHING FOR THAT, AS I UNDERSTAND IT. MEDICARE AND OTHER HEALTH EXTENDERS. 702 OF FISA, TO KEEP AMERICA SECURE AND STRONG AND SAFE. AS I UNDERSTAND IT NONE OF THAT'S BEING DEALT WITH. SO THE REASON WE VOTED AGAINST THE LAST C.R. IS BECAUSE WE'RE TIRED OF KICKING THINGS DOWN THE ROAD. WE'RE TIRED OF KICKING THE CAN DOWN THE ROAD. WE WANT TO GET TO AGREEMENT ON A BIPARTISAN BASIS TO PASS LEGISLATION THAT'S POSITIVE FOR OUR COUNTRY. AND THAT'S WHY WE MAY VOTE AGAINST THIS NEXT C.R. BECAUSE WE OUGHT TO STOP JUST KICKING THE CAN DOWN THE ROAD. AND WE'RE GOING TO KICK THE CAN, AS I UNDERSTAND IT, DOWN THE ROAD AT SOME POINT IN TIME UNTIL JANUARY 19 IS THE DISCUSSION. MR. LEADER, MR. SPEAKER, WE'RE PREPARED TO SIT DOWN AND TRY TO REACH AGREEMENT ON THESE ISSUES THAT HAVE GOT TO BE REACHED. AND IF WE DON'T REACH THEM, AMERICA WILL BE LESS SAFE. LESS SECURE. LESS HEALTHY. AS AN ECONOMY, AND LESS HEALTHY LITERALLY IN TERMS OF MAKING SURE THAT THE HEALTH CARE AVAILABLE TO AMERICA IS ON A STABLE PATH. SO, MR. SPEAKER, I WILL YIELD TO THE MAJORITY LEADER AND THEN MAKE A FEW COMMENTS AND THEN WE'LL CLOSE. I YIELD TO MY FRIEND.

                            Show Full Text
                          • 12:14:28 PM

                            MR. MCCARTHY

                            I THANK THE GENTLEMAN. I DO LOOK FORWARD TO THESE COLLOQUIES. I FIRST WANT…

                            I THANK THE GENTLEMAN. I DO LOOK FORWARD TO THESE COLLOQUIES. I FIRST WANT TO MAKE SURE HISTORY HAS IT RIGHT. 137 ECONOMISTS SENT A LETTER TO CONGRESS SUPPORTING OUR TAX REFORM EFFORT AND SAYING IT WILL ACCELERATE GROWTH. I DON'T KNOW IF YOU DISEASE LIKE THESE 137. BUT THESE ARE -- DISLIKE THESE 137. BUT THESE ARE ECONOMISTS. I DON'T JUDGE THE DIFFERENCE. HISTORY SAYS PRESIDENT OBAMA ADDED MORE THAN $8 TRILLION TO THE NATIONAL DEBT. NOW, HOW DOES THAT MEASURE AGAINST ALL THE OTHERS? WELL, THAT'S MORE THAN 43 PRIOR PRESIDENTS COMBINED. THAT'S WHAT HISTORY SHOWS. MY FRIEND IS CORRECT, HE'S BEEN HERE MUCH LONGER THAN I HAVE. . YOU ACTUALLY HAD THE MAJORITY IN 40 YEARS. YOU DIDN'T BALANCE THE BUDGET. THERE WAS A COMMON DENOMINATOR. HAD TO FIGHT FOR IT TO GET THERE. YOU RAISED SOME OTHER ISSUES. YOU BROUGHT AN ISSUE UP FOR A NUMBER OF DAYS. I DON'T THINK WE SHOULD WASTE ANY TIME. YOU BROUGHT AN ISSUE UP OF WE DON'T HAVE AR CAP AGREEMENT TO BE ABLE TO WORK FORWARD. WASN'T YOU, BUT IT WAS YOUR LEADER ON THE OTHER SIDE WHO DECIDED NOT TO GO TO A MEETING AT THE WHITE HOUSE. YOU SAID WE SHOULD NOT WASTE OUR TIME ON THE FLOOR. WASN'T THIS SIDE, BUT WE DID TAKE UP TIME ON THIS FLOOR TO IMPEACH THE PRESIDENT. WE TOOK THAT TIME UP ON THE FLOOR. WE DIDN'T TAKE TIME UP FOR CHIP AND THE OTHERS. I DO REMEMBER THE QUOTE FROM MY FRIEND. WE DIFFER SOMETIMES FILL COULD HAVICALLY. -- PHILOSOPHICALLY. I ADMIRE PRINCIPLE. I WATCH YOU AND WHAT YOU HAVE STOOD FOR YEARS AND MAYBE YOUR PARTY HAS A DIFFERENT POSITION. YOU DON'T HIDE FROM IT. AND YOU VOTE THAT WAY. AND YOU WILL STAND AND OPPOSE ME BECAUSE OF WHAT YOU SAID IN THE PAST AND WHAT YOU SAID YOU WOULD DO. BUT THIS IS NOT SOMETHING NEW. YOU HAVE ALWAYS SAID FUNDING OUR GOVERNMENT IS NOT A GAME. WHEN ONE SIDE WINS AND THE OTHER SIDE LOSES, SHUTDOWN IS NOT A POLITICAL FOOTBALL TO BE TOSSED AROUND SO CASUALLY. I WAS PERSONALLY SHOCKED LAST WEEK. I WONDERED WHAT WOULD HAVE HAPPENED AS I WATCHED YOUR OPERATION WHIP PEOPLE TO A NO. AS WE WATCHED THE TIME CLICK, AS YOU WATCHED, YOU HELD THOSE WHO STOOD BY THE VOTING BOOTH WHO WANTED TO VOTE YES, BUT COULD NOT. HAD WE NOT GOTTEN ENOUGH VOTES TO KEEP GOVERNMENT OPEN, WHICH YOUR SIDE OF THE AISLE APPLAUDED, WHAT YOUR SIDE OF THE AISLE THOUGHT THEY WON. THERE WERE 90 MEMBERS ON THIS SIDE OF THE AISLE THAT DIDN'T VOTE FOR A C.R., BUT YOU, LIKE MYSELF, UNDERSTAND A C.R. IS USUALLY THE RESPONSIBILITY OF BOTH, BECAUSE IT'S BIPARTISAN. NO ONE IS GETTING ANYTHING AND NO ONE WANTS AN END TO THAT POSITION. WE DON'T WANT TO BE IN A C.R. THAT'S WHY WE CAME SO MANY TIMES TO YOU IN THE PAST WHEN IT COMES TO CHIP. I UNDERSTAND SOMETIMES PEOPLE CAN USE IT FOR POLITICS AND MAYBE PUSH IT TO THE END AND GET AN ADVANTAGE ON SOMETHING ELSE. WE WANTED AN AGREEMENT AND THAT'S WHY STAFF OF THE FOUR LEADERS HAVE BEEN MEETING. WHAT DO THEY DO NEXT? LET'S GO TO THE WHITE HOUSE BECAUSE THE WHITE HOUSE HAS BEEN IN THOSE MEETINGS AT THE SAME TIME BECAUSE THE PRESIDENT HAS TO SIGN THE BILL, THE SENATE, THE HOUSE AND LEADERS ON BOTH SIDES. BUT WHEN THAT MEETING CAME JUST A FEW SHORT WEEKS AGO, WOULDN'T SHOW UP. AND I TAKE YOU AT YOUR WORD THAT YOU ARE WILLING TO SIT DOWN. THE REST OF YOUR LEADERSHIP HAS TO BE WILLING TO SIT DOWN, TOO. BUT THIS IDEA THAT WE WANT TO HOLD GOVERNMENT HOSTAGE, SO MANY TIMES I HAVE HEARD YOU IN THE PAST SAY THAT WAS WRONG. YOU ASK ABOUT THE THINGS THAT HAVEN'T BEEN DONE. THE THING I LOVE THE MOST, I BELIEVE -- YOU HAVE TO BE HONEST. AND I'LL SHARE THEM WITH YOU, BECAUSE I WANT US TO BE JUDGED. I WANT US TO KNOW WHERE WE ARE AND NOT WHERE WE SAID WE ARE GOING TO BE, WE SHOULD WORK HARDER. I TOOK THE FIRST CONGRESS OF EVERY NEW CONGRESS. WHEN YOU READ THE "YOUNG GUNS" BOOK AND I DON'T WANT TO CAUSE ANY ETHIC ISSUES AND I DON'T GET ANY MONEY, I GIVE IT TO THE VETERANS -- I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S IN PRINT. BUT I WANT THE BILLS TO COME THROUGH COMMITTEE. THAT'S WHERE THE OPEN PUBLIC PROCESS IS AND THAT'S WHERE AMENDMENTS ARE WON OR LOST. MORE BILLS IN THE FIRST CONGRESS SINCE H.W. BUSH, HAVE GONE THROUGH COMMITTEE. LET'S MEASURE HOW MANY BILLS HAVE GOTTEN OFF THIS FLOOR. DO YOU REALIZE MORE BILLS HAVE BEEN PASSED OUT OF THIS CONGRESS THAN ANY CONGRESS IN THE FIRST TERM OF A PRESIDENT IN MODERN HISTORY BACK TO H.W. BUSH? AND WE DID IT BY GOING THROUGH A TRANSPARENT, OPEN PROCESS, EXACTLY WHAT WE PLEDGED WE WOULD DO IN THAT BOOK. SO YES, I'M GLAD YOU READ IT AND I'M GLAD YOU TOOK THE WORDS AND I WOULD LOVE TO SHOW YOU THE GRAPHS. LET'S WALK BACK TO THIS. GOVERNMENT FUNDING IS IMPORTANT. AND LET'S TALK ABOUT IT. HERE ARE THE FACTS. BY MID-JULY ALL 12 APPROPRIATION BILLS PASSED BOTH SUBCOMMITTEE AND FULL QUESTION. THAT WAS JULY. ON JULY 27TH, WE PASSED THE FOUR APPROPRIATION BILLS OFF THE HOUSE FLOOR, WHICH PROVIDED FOR CRITICAL NATIONAL SECURITY. NOW MY FRIEND AND NEARLY ALL THE DEMOCRATS, THEY VOTED NO. ON SEPTEMBER 14, WE PASSED THE REMAINING EIGHT APPROPRIATION BILLS OFF THIS FLOOR. NOW MY FRIEND AND NEARLY ALL THE DEMOCRATS VOTED NO. BUT THE MOST DISAPPOINTING VOTE AS I MENTIONED WAS LAST WEEK ON DECEMBER 7, TO FUND THE GOVERNMENT. MY FRIEND AND DEMOCRATS ALL VOTED NO. WHEN I WAS YOUNG AND I DIDN'T ALWAYS GET MY WAY, I WOULD GO TO MY PARENTS AND I WOULD COMPLAIN. BUT IT'S REALLY ODD THAT WE GOT TO THIS FLOOR IN A DIFFERENT NATURE THAT SOMEONE WOULD COMPLAIN ABOUT SOMETHING NOT GETTING DONE AND NEVER VOTING FOR ANYTHING. I LIKE MY FRIEND. I WANT MY FRIEND WHO FOR DECADES HAS TALKED ABOUT NOT TO PLAY GAMES WITH THE FUNDING OF GOVERNMENT. I DON'T KNOW WHERE YOU HAVE GONE, BUT I WANT YOU TO COME BACK. I THINK AMERICA NEEDS YOU BACK. THAT LEADERSHIP WILL BE IMPORTANT FOR BOTH SIDES. AND I WOULD TELL YOU, I WOULD HAVE BEEN DISAPPOINTED IN YOU IF I WATCHED YOU APPLAUD IF YOU WERE SUCCESSFUL IN SHUTTING DOWN GOVERNMENT, BECAUSE I KNOW THAT'S NOT THE MAN YOU ARE. I KNOW THAT'S NOT THE PERSON AND PRINCIPLES FOR WHAT YOU STAND FOR. AND YOU KNOW WHAT? ALL THOSE VOTES YOU GO BACK AND SAID THIS SIDE OF THE AISLE DIDN'T VOTE FOR, I STOOD AND VOTED FOR THOSE, BECAUSE LEADERSHIP IS DIFFERENT. WE DO TAKE VOTES THAT ARE TOUGHER THAN OTHERS. WE DO HAVE TO PUT POLITICS ASIDE. WE DO HAVE TO LOOK OUT FOR THE BEST OF THIS COUNTRY. IT MAY NOT BE THE MOOD OF THE POLITICS ON TV THAT MAYBE WANTS TO FIGHT MORE OR THROW ANOTHER MOTION ON THE FLOOR TO IMPEACH, BUT THERE IS A TIME THAT WE SHOULD RISE ABOVE. AND I THINK GOING INTO THE END OF THIS YEAR, WE SHOULD THINK ANEW AND ACT ANEW. I THINK AMERICA SHOULD NOT SEE A CHRISTMAS BECAUSE ONE SIDE OF THE AISLE WANTED TO SHUT IT DOWN. NOT FOR ANY OTHER REASON THEY VOTED NO ON ALL THE BILLS THAT WOULD HAVE KEPT IT OPEN. YOU HAD A CAUSE, YOU HAD A DESIRE AND IF YOU HAD A BIG DESIRE, YOU WOULD HAVE SHOWN UP TO THE MEETING TO ACTUALLY GET THE ANSWER. WE COULD HAVE A CAP DEAL. WE COULD BE DONE WITH IT. WE COULD MAKE SURE OUR MEN AND WOMEN GET THE RAISE THEY DESERVE AND WE COULD MAKE SURE THAT THOSE IN THEATER HAVE EVERY OPPORTUNITY TO BE ABLE TO CARRY OUT THEIR MISSION THAT WE ASKED THEM TO DO AND IN THE SAFEST MANNER POSSIBLE. THAT'S WHAT I WANT TO SEE. I YIELD BACK.

                            Show Full Text
                          • 12:24:07 PM

                            MR. HOYER

                            COME BACK, SHANE. MANY OF YOU AREN'T OLD ENOUGH TO REMEMBER THAT WONDERFUL…

                            COME BACK, SHANE. MANY OF YOU AREN'T OLD ENOUGH TO REMEMBER THAT WONDERFUL MONEY AS SHANE RODE OFF AND THE LITTLE BOY, COME BACK, SHANE. I HAVEN'T GONE ANYWHERE. DEMOCRATS HAVE NO ABILITY TO SHUT DOWN THE GOVERNMENT ON THE FLOOR OF THIS HOUSE. HEAR ME. WE DON'T HAVE THE VOTES TO SHUT DOWN GOVERNMENT. AND WE DON'T WANT TO SHUT DOWN GOVERNMENT. AND MAYBE THE LEADER ALSO WANTS THOSE 90 OF HIS -- HE'S NOT OUR LEADER, HE'S THE LEADER OF THE MA THE GENTLEMAN RESERVES THE BALANCE OF HIS TIME. PARTY AND 90 OF HIS PEOPLE DID NOT FOLLOW HIM. I PRESUME HE MUST BE MUCH MORE CONCERNED ABOUT THAT, WITH ALL DUE RESPECT, HE'S MY FRIEND, BUT NOT MY LEADER. AND WE VOTED TO GIVE 90 DAYS AND NOTHING WAS ACCOMPLISHED IN THAT 90 DAYS OTHER THAN WORK ON A TAX BILL THAT WE THINK IS A DISASTER FOR THIS COUNTRY. NOTHING. AND HE TALKS ABOUT PASSING THESE APPROPRIATION BILLS. WE KNEW THEY WOULDN'T PASS THE SENATE. AND WE TOLD HIM SO. AND WE SAID LET'S DO IT ON A BIPARTISAN BASIS. BUT NO, AND BY THE WAY, MR. SPEAKER, IT WAS THE LEAST REGULAR ORDER PRIOR TO AN OMNIBUS ON DEALING WITH APPROPRIATION BILLS THAN I HAVE EVER SEEN. THEY PACKAGED FOUR OR FIVE, AND THEN THE BALANCE OF EIGHT. WE DIDN'T CONSIDER THEM INDIVIDUALLY. WE DIDN'T HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO CONSIDER THOUGHTFULLY. NO, IT WAS ONE BIG PACKAGE. I SAID I READ THAT BOOK. IT WAS ANYTHING BUT REGULAR ORDER. BY THE WAY, MR. SPEAKER, THE MAJORITY PARTY THAT PASSED THEM IS THE MAJORITY IN THE UNITED STATES SENATE, AND NOT A SINGLE ONE OF THOSE BILLS, NOT A SINGLE ONE HAS PASSED OUT OF THE HOUSE -- EXCUSE ME, THE SENATE. NOT A SINGLE ONE HAS GONE TO THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES. NOT ONE. AND THE REPUBLICANS ARE IN CHARGE OF THE HOUSE AND THE SENATE. NOT A SINGLE BILL HAS GONE TO THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES. AND HARRY REED IS NOT THERE. NOW WHAT IT WOULD HAVE TAKEN TO PASS SOME OF THOSE APPROPRIATION BILLS IN THE SENATE IS SOME COMPROMISE. AND THAT DIDN'T HAPPEN. SO DON'T RING YOUR HANDS ABOUT HOW BAD IT IS THAT WE HAVEN'T HAD BIPARTISANSHIP ON THE APPROPRIATION BILLS. WE HAVEN'T. OR BIPARTISANSHIP ON THE C.R. WHEN YOU LOSE 90 OF YOUR PEOPLE. 90 REPUBLICANS VOTED AGAINST A SIMPLE C.R. YOU SAID SIMPLE C.R., NOTHING TO BE BIPARTISAN. 90 OF YOUR PEOPLE VOTED NO. I YIELD TO MY FRIEND.

                            Show Full Text
                          • 12:27:32 PM

                            MR. MCCARTHY

                            LET'S MAKE SURE WE ARE GROWING APPLES TO APPLES. THAT HAD A DEBT CEILING…

                            LET'S MAKE SURE WE ARE GROWING APPLES TO APPLES. THAT HAD A DEBT CEILING IN IT.

                            Show Full Text
                          • 12:27:41 PM

                            MR. HOYER

                            RECLAIMING MY TIME, DOES THAT MEAN 90 OF YOUR PEOPLE DID NOT WANT TO PAY…

                            RECLAIMING MY TIME, DOES THAT MEAN 90 OF YOUR PEOPLE DID NOT WANT TO PAY THE BILLS OF THE UNITED STATES AND DEFAULT ON OUR DEBT? AND I YIELD TO MY FRIEND.

                            Show Full Text
                          • 12:27:53 PM

                            MR. MCCARTHY

                            I THANK MY FRIEND FOR YIELDING. IF YOU ARE GOING TO COMPARE A C.R. THAT IS…

                            I THANK MY FRIEND FOR YIELDING. IF YOU ARE GOING TO COMPARE A C.R. THAT IS SIMPLE, IT'S NOT SIMPLE. IF YOU COMPARE IT TO THE C.R. YOU VOTED AGAINST THAT HAD NO DEBT CEILING ON IT. YOU EXPLAINED TO ME HOW MANY C.R.'S YOU VOTED IN THE PAST, HOW DEMOCRATS CAME OVER WITH REPUBLICANS, BECAUSE YOU KNOW WHAT? YOU AND I BOTH KNOW THAT'S HOW IT WORKS. BECAUSE A C.R. IS NOT AN ADVANTAGE FOR ONE OR THE OTHER. AND THIS IS WHAT I'M MOST UPSET WITH. OUR FOUNDING FATHERS CREATED A BODY THAT COULD HAVE COMPROMISE. BUT FOR SOME REASON IN TODAY'S SOCIETY, IT'S NOT JUST THAT YOU WANT ONE SIDE TO WIN, YOU WANT TO CRUSH THE OTHER SIDE. THAT'S ACTUALLY HURTING THE AMERICAN PUBLIC. SO IN A SITUATION THAT WE KNOW OF A CONTINUING RESOLUTION IS GOING TO BE SHORT-TERM, TWO WEEKS, YEAH, I WOULD EXPECT HALF OF THE VOTES TO COME FROM OUR SIDE AND HALF THE VOTES COME FROM OURS. THAT IS WHAT HAS HAPPENED IN THE PAST. I'M WONDERING WHERE THAT WENT.

                            Show Full Text
                          • 12:29:00 PM

                            MR. HOYER

                            RECLAIMING MY TIME. MR. LEADER, LET ME SAY TO YOU VERY RESPECTFULLY, DO…

                            RECLAIMING MY TIME. MR. LEADER, LET ME SAY TO YOU VERY RESPECTFULLY, DO NOT EXPECT COOPERATION FROM OUR SIDE IF WE DON'T GET COOPERATION FROM YOUR SIDE, IF WE DON'T GET SOME INCLUSION IN MAKING DECISIONS. WE ARE 194 MEMBERS OF THIS BODY. FROM TIME TO TIME, YOU AND I DO WORK TOGETHER AND WHEN WE WORK TOGETHER, WE GET MAJORITIES, WE PASS PIECES OF LEGISLATION. YOU HAVE NOT PASSED A SINGLE CONTROVERSIAL FISCAL BILL ON THIS BILL ON THIS FLOOR WITHOUT OUR SUBSTANTIAL HELP UNTIL LAST WEEK. YOU GOT 220 OR 230 ON THAT LAST BILL. BUT LET ME TELL YOU, THE REASON WE VOTED AGAINST IT BECAUSE WE KNEW WHAT WAS GOING TO HAPPEN, NOTHING. THERE WOULD BE NO AGREEMENT ON CHIP. THERE IS NO AGREEMENT ON CHIP. THERE WILL BE NO AGREEMENT ON FISA. THERE HAS BEEN NO AGREEMENT ON FACEA. THERE WOULD BE NO AGREEMENT ON FLOOD CONTROL. THERE HAS BEEN NO AGREEMENT ON FLOOD CONTROL. SO WE KNEW THAT WE WERE NOT GOING TO GET ANY BIPARTISAN BUY-IN SO ALL WE WERE DOING IS DELAYING THE INEVITABLE. YOU REMEMBER THE HOMELAND SECURITY BILL. . YOU SAID WE'RE GOING TO MEET TOMORROW AND WE REACHED AN AGREEMENT AND WE PASSED IT. VERY FRANKLY, YOU HAVE NEVER HEARD US SAY THAT AS A POLICY, IN ORDER TO GET THE A.C.A. REPEALED OR GINGRICH WANTED TO GET SOME FISCAL THING DONE, THAT WE WOULD SHUT DOWN THE GOVERNMENT, THREE TIMES YOU SHUT IT DOWN IN 1995 AND 1996, THREE TIMES. INTENTIONALLY. THAT WAS YOUR POLICY. AND, YES, IF YOU'RE GOING TO TAKE THE GOVERNMENT HOSTAGE AND FORCE US TO DO SOMETHING THAT WE THINK IS INIMICAL TO THE BEST INTEREST OF THIS COUNTRY, YES, MR. LEADER, YOU WILL LEAVE US WITH NO OTHER OPTION. TO PRETEND THAT WE'RE KEEPING GOVERNMENT MOVING, BUT NOT GETTING ANY AGREEMENT. I TALKED TO YOU VERY SINCERELY FOUR MONTHS AGO ABOUT ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE WANTED TO GET DONE BEFORE THE END OF THIS YEAR, WERE DREAMERS. PROTECTED. WHO ARE NOW VULNERABLE AND VERY SCARED. THAT THEY'RE GOING TO BE SENT BACK TO SOMEPLACE THEY DO NOT KNOW. HAVE NOT LIVED IN. BROUGHT HERE AS CHILDREN THROUGH NO FAULT OF THEIR OWN. GONE TO ELEMENTARY SCHOOL. JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL. HIGH SCHOOL. COLLEGE. SERVED IN THE MILITARY. WORKING AT JOBS. BEEN VETTED TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY HAVEN'T DONE ANYTHING WRONG. THEY'RE AFRAID OF BEING SENT BACK HOME. NOT BACK HOME. EXCUSE ME. I SAY THAT. THAT'S NOT THEIR HOME. THIS IS THEIR HOME. AND NOTHING'S BEEN DONE ON THAT. I KNOW YOU HAVE A TASK FORCE, TALKED ABOUT IT. BUT WE HAVEN'T DONE ANYTHING. THERE'S NO REASON WHY WE CAN'T. I THINK WE HAVE 300 VOTES ON THIS FLOOR TO GET THAT DONE.

                            Show Full Text
                          • 12:31:58 PM

                            MR. MCCARTHY

                            MAY I RESPOND?

                          • 12:32:00 PM

                            MR. HOYER

                            I YIELD TO MY FRIEND.

                          • 12:32:02 PM

                            MR. MCCARTHY

                            THE GENTLEMAN IS CORRECT. THERE ARE MANY TIMES WE'VE WORKED TOGETHER. FROM…

                            THE GENTLEMAN IS CORRECT. THERE ARE MANY TIMES WE'VE WORKED TOGETHER. FROM SANCTION FROM HOMELAND FROM OTHERS. WE -- FROM SANCTION, FROM HOMELAND, FROM OTHERS. WE WORK VERY WELL TOGETHER. BUT THE GENTLEMAN KNOWS, I CAME TO YOU ABOUT CHIP. WHEN THE COMMITTEE WAS DIRECTED ON YOUR SIDE OF THE AISLE NOT TO DO ANYTHING WITH THE MAJORITY PARTY. SO I CAME TO YOU. BECAUSE OF OUR HISTORY.

                            Show Full Text
                          • 12:32:30 PM

                            MR. HOYER

                            I DON'T KNOW WHO THE GENTLEMAN IS RELYING ON FOR THAT INFORMATION BUT I'LL…

                            I DON'T KNOW WHO THE GENTLEMAN IS RELYING ON FOR THAT INFORMATION BUT I'LL TELL YOU, I'VE TALKED TO MR. PALLONE. THAT IS NOT CORRECT. I DON'T KNOW WHO YOU THINK DIRECTED HIM NOT TO REACH AN AGREEMENT, BUT I WILL TELL YOU, AFTER YOU MADE THAT ASSERTION, I THINK LAST WEEK OR THE WEEK BEFORE, I WENT TO MR. PALLONE, I ASKED HIM THAT. HE SAID ABSOLUTELY NOT. I YIELD BACK.

                            Show Full Text
                          • 12:32:50 PM

                            MR. MCCARTHY

                            WELL --

                          • 12:32:53 PM

                            MR. HOYER

                            I YIELD TO MY FRIEND.

                          • 12:32:55 PM

                            MR. MCCARTHY

                            I CAME TO YOU. IT WAS UNDER MY IMPRESSION THAT A MEMBER CAME TO ME AND…

                            I CAME TO YOU. IT WAS UNDER MY IMPRESSION THAT A MEMBER CAME TO ME AND SAID THAT. MAYBE THAT'S NOT TRUE. BUT I SAID, YOU KNOW WHAT, LET'S GET TOGETHER AND LET'S WORK THIS OUT. I DON'T WANT TO MAKE CHIP PARTISAN IN ANY SHAPE OR FORM. AND WE MET AND WE TRIED TO WORK AND YOU CAME BACK TO ME AND SAID, YOU GOT TO GO IT ALONE. I SAID, THAT'S NOT HOW I WANT TO DO IT. SO WHAT WE DID WAS WE TOOK EVERYTHING WE HEARD FROM THE HEARINGS, I EVEN IN GOOD FAITH, THE CHAIRMAN OF THAT COMMITTEE, GREG WALDEN, STOPPED A MARKUP. IN THE HOPES, BECAUSE YOU REQUESTED, NOT YOU, BUT YOUR RANKING MEMBER, THAT THEY WEREN'T PREPARED, THAT THEY WANTED MORE TIME. SO WE WANT TO DO EVERYTHING IN OUR POWER. BUT AT THE END OF THE DAY YOU COULDN'T BE THERE. AND TWICE YOUR SIDE OF THE AISLE AND YOURSELF VOTED AGAINST CHIP. YOU CAN'T ARGUE AGAINST IT NOW. YOU VOTED AGAINST IT. AND WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT APPROPRIATIONS, I'M VERY PROUD WHAT HAVE WE DID ON APPROPRIATIONS. WE HAVEN'T BEEN ABLE TO DO THAT IN QUITE SOME TIME. BUT THERE WERE IN THOSE FIRST FOUR BILLS, EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THOSE 12 BILLS WENT THROUGH SUBCOMMITTEE AND FULL COMMITTEE. THERE WAS 126 AMENDMENTS IN THE FIRST FOUR. THERE WERE 342.

                            Show Full Text
                          • 12:34:09 PM

                            MR. HOYER

                            LET ME RECLAIM MY TIME AND THEN YIELD BACK TO YOU. IS THE GENTLEMAN PROUD…

                            LET ME RECLAIM MY TIME AND THEN YIELD BACK TO YOU. IS THE GENTLEMAN PROUD THAT YOU CONTROL THE HOUSE, YOU CONTROL THE SENATE, AND YOU HAVEN'T SENT A SINGLE APPROPRIATION BILL TO THE PRESIDENT? I YIELD.

                            Show Full Text
                          • 12:34:20 PM

                            MR. MCCARTHY

                            I THANK THE GENTLEMAN.

                          • 12:34:22 PM

                            MR. HOYER

                            NOT A SINGLE ONE. NOT ONE.

                          • 12:34:23 PM

                            MR. MCCARTHY

                            THAT'S WHY I WANT YOU TO JOIN WITH ME AND GET THE SENATE TO MOVE. AS THE…

                            THAT'S WHY I WANT YOU TO JOIN WITH ME AND GET THE SENATE TO MOVE. AS THE GENTLEMAN KNOWS, YOU DON'T CONTROL THE SENATE WHEN YOU HAVE 51 OR 52 MEMBERS. BECAUSE YOU KNOW WHAT HAPPENS? IT TAKES 60. I DON'T FIRMLY BELIEVE IN THAT. BUT THAT'S THE WAY THEY PLAY IT OVER IN THE SENATE. THAT IS WHY WHEN YOU DON'T HAVE A CAP AGREEMENT, THAT YOU NEED ALL FOUR LEADERS TO GO TO THE WHITE HOUSE, BUT WHEN THE TWO WON'T SHOW UP, THE BEST THING TO DO IS DON'T SHOW UP AND DON'T COMPLAIN. I DON'T HAVE AN AGREEMENT. THE BEST WAY TO COMPLAIN IS, GET ALL 12 VOTES, ALL 12 BILLS OFF THIS FLOOR, WITH THE SIMPLE MAJORITY. IF THAT'S GOOD ENOUGH FOR AMERICA INSIDE CONGRESS, IT SHOULD BE GOOD ENOUGH ON THE SENATE SIDE.

                            Show Full Text
                          • 12:35:03 PM

                            MR. HOYER

                            RECLAIMING MY TIME.

                          • 12:35:05 PM

                            MR. MCCARTHY

                            UNFORTUNATELY THAT'S NOT THE CASE. YOUR SIDE IS ABLE TO HOLD IT UP AND I'M…

                            UNFORTUNATELY THAT'S NOT THE CASE. YOUR SIDE IS ABLE TO HOLD IT UP AND I'M ASHAMED OF THAT AS WELL.

                            Show Full Text
                          • 12:35:10 PM

                            MR. HOYER

                            RECLAIMING MY TIME. WHAT IT WOULD HAVE MEANT, YOU WOULD HAVE HAD A…

                            RECLAIMING MY TIME. WHAT IT WOULD HAVE MEANT, YOU WOULD HAVE HAD A COMPROMISE. THAT'S WHY THE SENATE HAS THAT 60-VOTE RULE. I'M NOT CRAZY ABOUT IT MYSELF. BUT THAT'S WHY THEY HAVE THE 60-VOTE RULE. AND THEY THINK IT'S GOOD. BECAUSE THAT'S WHY THEY'VE KEPT IT. THEY THINK IT'S GOOD BECAUSE IT REQUIRES COMPROMISE. IT REQUIRES AGREEMENT. IT REQUIRES MOVING AHEAD ON A PIECE OF LEGISLATION. AND I WILL TELL YOU, I SERVED ON THE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE FOR 23 YEARS AND WE REACHED AGREEMENT BETWEEN REPUBLICANS AND DEMOCRATS ON ALMOST EVERY BILL. AND WHEN WE HAD THE BILLS, THEY WEREN'T PARTISAN BILLS. AND THEY GOT A LOT OF REPUBLICAN VOTES. ALMOST ALWAYS. WHEN WE WERE IN CHARGE. NOT ALL THE TIME. ALMOST ALWAYS. AND IF YOU ARE A PARTY ENOUGH COMPROMISE, YOU CAN'T MOVE THINGS IN THE UNITED STATES SENATE. I GET THAT. BUT THAT'S THE REASON. THAT'S THE REASON. BECAUSE YOU COULDN'T REACH COMPROMISE. NOW, VERY FRANKLY, A LOT OF THE BILLS HAVE COME OUT OF COMMITTEE. YOU KNOW WHY THEY CAME OUT OF COMMITTEE? BECAUSE THEY WERE BIPARTISAN. BUT THEY HAVEN'T BEEN BROUGHT TO THE FLOOR BY MR. MCCONNELL AND THEY HAVEN'T BEEN SENT TO THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES. SO, CROCODILE TEARS. AND YES, YOU PASSED THOSE 12 BILLS. JUST LIKE YOU CAN PASS THE C.R.'S. ON YOUR OWN. WITHOUT ANY HELP FROM US. AND IF THE GOVERNMENT SCHUTZ DOWN, IT IS BECAUSE YOU CAN'T GET -- SHUTS DOWN, IT IS BECAUSE YOU CAN'T GET THE MAJORITY OF YOUR PARTY TO PASS BILLS. YOU'RE IN CHARGE.

                            Show Full Text
                          • 12:36:42 PM

                            MR. MCCARTHY

                            I ASK THE GENTLEMAN TO YIELD.

                          • 12:36:44 PM

                            MR. HOYER

                            I STILL HAVE THE TIME. I'M GOING TO YIELD TO YOU. THERE IS NO DOUBT WHEN…

                            I STILL HAVE THE TIME. I'M GOING TO YIELD TO YOU. THERE IS NO DOUBT WHEN WE WERE IN CHARGE AND YOU DIDN'T SUPPORT US, WE PASSED EVERY PIECE OF LEGISLATION WE WANTED TO PASS ON THIS FLOOR WITH 218 DEMOCRATS. WE WERE UNITED AS A PARTY. WE LOST SOME. BUT NEVER ENOUGH TO MAKE IT THAT WE DIDN'T GET 218. YOU LOST 90. YOU COULD SAY IT WAS ON THE DEBT. YOU COULD SAY IT WAS ON NATIONAL SECURITY. YOU CAN SAY WHATEVER YOU WANT ON IT. YOU BROUGHT A BILL TO THE FLOOR AND 90 OF YOUR PEOPLE VOTED AGAINST IT. TO KEEP GOVERNMENT OPEN, TO KEEP GOVERNMENT OPERATING. AND VERY FRANKLY WE VOTED WITH YOU SO THAT WE COULD GET SOME WORK DONE. AND WE HAVEN'T GOTTEN WORK DONE. THAT'S WHAT FRUSTRATES US. THAT'S WHAT FRUSTRATES THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. AND I WILL TELL MY FRIEND, AT THE END OF THE DAY, AFTER THIS CONGRESS IS GONE, HISTORIANS ARE NOT GOING TO BE KIND. NOTWITHSTANDING THE FACT YOU SAY YOU PASSED SO MANY BILLS. YOU PASSED SO MANY BILLS ON A PARTISAN BASIS AND YOU USED ESSENTIALLY THE 51 VOTES BECAUSE YOU DIDN'T WANT TO COMPROMISE. WE GET IT. YOU DON'T WANT TO COMPROMISE. YOU DON'T WANT TO WORK WITH US. YOU DIDN'T HAVE ANY HEARINGS ON THIS TAX BILL. YOU DIDN'T -- WE WERE NOT INCLUDED IN ANY PHASE OF THE MARKING UP AND FASHIONING OF THIS TAX BILL. I'M ABOUT READY TO YIELD BACK THE BALANCE OF MY TIME. I'M SURE EVERYBODY WHO WANTS TO GIVE A ONE-MINUTE OR A SPECIAL ORDER IS VERY HAPPY TO HEAR THAT. BUT I'LL YIELD TO MY FRIEND.

                            Show Full Text
                          • 12:38:11 PM

                            MR. MCCARTHY

                            THANK YOU. THE GENTLEMAN IS CORRECT ABOUT COMPROMISE. BUT THERE IS A REAL…

                            THANK YOU. THE GENTLEMAN IS CORRECT ABOUT COMPROMISE. BUT THERE IS A REAL BIG DIFFERENCE BETWEEN COMPROMISE AND OBSTRUCTION.

                            Show Full Text
                          • 12:38:20 PM

                            MR. HOYER

                            AND WHAT?

                          • 12:38:22 PM

                            MR. MCCARTHY

                            TO OBSTRUCT. WHEN YOU TALKED ABOUT THE SENATE. IT TAKES 60 VOTES TO EVEN…

                            TO OBSTRUCT. WHEN YOU TALKED ABOUT THE SENATE. IT TAKES 60 VOTES TO EVEN GET ONTO A BILL. I KNOW AS WELL AS MY FRIEND THAT YOU CAN UTILIZE THE SENATE AND THE LEADERSHIP IN THE HOUSE TO STOP SOMETHING IF YOU WANT TO. AND I WILL TELL MY FRIEND THAT I AM DISAPPOINTED. WHAT WILL YOU SAY TO THE 62,000 ? WHAT WILL YOU SAY TO THE 62,000 FEDERAL EMPLOYEES WHO LIVE IN YOUR DISTRICT? WHAT WILL YOU SAY TO THEM THAT EVERY QUOTE YOU MADE IN THE PAST, THAT YOU SHOULD NOT PLAY GAMES WITH FUNDING AND SHUTTING DOWN THE GOVERNMENT, YOU MAY THINK YOU CAN MAKE THAT STATEMENT HERE, YOUR LEADER MAY THINK THAT SHE CAN SAY THAT ONLY THE PRESIDENT WAS TALKING ABOUT A SHUTDOWN. THE PRESIDENT WHIPPED ONE -- WHIPPED A VOTE TO STAY OPEN. HISTORY WON'T BE KIND. YES, WE WILL COME TO A CONCLUSION NEXT WEEK.

                            Show Full Text
                          • 12:39:23 PM

                            MR. HOYER

                            WILL THE GENTLEMAN YIELD?

                          • 12:39:25 PM

                            MR. MCCARTHY

                            EVERY TIME YOU ASK ABOUT A VOTE --

                          • 12:39:27 PM

                            MR. HOYER

                            WILL THE GENTLEMAN YIELD? RECLAIMING MY TIME. DOES THE GENTLEMAN REMEMBER…

                            WILL THE GENTLEMAN YIELD? RECLAIMING MY TIME. DOES THE GENTLEMAN REMEMBER PRESIDENT TRUMP SAYING A GOOD SHUTDOWN WILL BE GOOD FOR GOVERNMENT? DID YOU REMEMBER HIM SAYING THAT? WHEN YOU TELL ME ABOUT HOW HE'S BEEN DOWN HERE LOBBYING -- HE SAID, QUOTE, A GOOD SHUTDOWN MAY BE GOOD FOR GOVERNMENT. I DWREELED MY FRIEND.

                            Show Full Text
                          • 12:39:48 PM

                            MR. MCCARTHY

                            I THANK MY FRIEND FOR YIELDING. I UNDERSTAND WHAT HIS WORDS SAID. I ALSO…

                            I THANK MY FRIEND FOR YIELDING. I UNDERSTAND WHAT HIS WORDS SAID. I ALSO WATCHED HIS ACTIONS. I ALSO WATCHED WHAT HE DID LAST WEEK. TO GET MEMBERS TO VOTE TO KEEP IT OPEN BECAUSE YOU KNOW WHAT? THINGS DID CHANGE. THERE WAS NOT COMPROMISE. EVEN THOUGH THE BILL WAS A COMPROMISE. BECAUSE THERE WAS NO POISON PILL IN IT. MAYBE WE LOOK BACK, IF WE'RE GOING CARRY EVERYTHING OURSELVES, MAYBE WE SHOULD PUT SOMETHING IN. BUT IT WAS A COMPROMISE. BUT UNFORTUNATELY IT CHANGED OR THE -- ON THE OTHER SIDE. HE DECIDED -- YOU DECIDED NOW IS THE TIME TO SHUT THE GOVERNMENT DOWN. TRY TO MAKE BLAME TO SOMEBODY ELSE. THE AMERICAN PEOPLE WILL SEE THROUGH THAT. AND I WILL GUARANTEE THAT YOU 62,000 PEOPLE WHO WORK FOR THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT IN THE MARYLAND FIFTH DISTRICT WILL NOT TAKE AS AN ANSWER. -- TAKE THAT AS AN ANSWER. I YIELD BACK.

                            Show Full Text
                          • 12:40:38 PM

                            MR. HOYER

                            I THANK THE GENTLEMAN FOR YIELDING. MR. SPEAKER, I WOULD AGAIN REITERATE…

                            I THANK THE GENTLEMAN FOR YIELDING. MR. SPEAKER, I WOULD AGAIN REITERATE THE MAJORITY PARTY CAN DO WHATEVER IT WANTS ON THIS FLOOR. IT COULD HAVE KEPT GOVERNMENT OPEN, IT COULD HAVE KEPT POLICIES MOVING WITH ITS VOTES. TIME AFTER TIME AFTER TIME ON CRITICAL ISSUES CONFRONTING THIS COUNTRY, THEY COULDN'T COME UP WITH A MAJORITY. AS A MATTER OF FACT, ON ONE OCCASION MR. MCCARTHY WAS THE WHIP, MR. CANTOR WAS THE MAJORITY LEADER, MR. BOEHNER WAS THE SPEAKER. AND THEY OFFERED A BILL TO KEEP GOVERNMENT MOVING. THEY ONLY GOT 84 OF THEIR COLLEAGUES, APPROXIMATELY 1/3, 1/3 OF THEIR COLLEAGUES ON THEIR SIDE OF THE AISLE TO VOTE WITH THEM. I DON'T WANT TO HEAR ABOUT US SHUTTING DOWN GOVERNMENT. WE CAN'T SHUT DOWN GOVERNMENT. THEY'RE IN CHARGE. THE MAJORITY HAS THE VOTES. YOU CAN DO WHATEVER YOU WANT. WE GET IT. WE MAY NOT LIKE IT ANY MORE THAN YOU LIKED IT. BUT WE GET IT. BUT WE VOTED ON THE HOPE THAT WE WOULD GET SOME WORK DONE. WE HAVEN'T MOVED ANYPLACE EXCEPT ON THE TAX BILL. WHICH WE THINK IS BAD FOR THIS COUNTRY. IN THE LAST 90 DAYS SINCE WE PASSED -- AND WE PASSED, IT WOULD NOT HAVE PASSED WITHOUT US, THAT C.R. AND, YES, WE WILL NOT BE HELDS WHO TAFPBLGT AND, YES, WE WILL OPPOSE -- -- HOSTAGE. AND, YES, WE WILL OPPOSE WHAT WE THINK IS A VERY, VERY BAD TAX BILL AND WE THINK IS AN EFFORT TO AVOID GETTING THE WORK OF THIS HOUSE DONE. AND YIELD BACK THE BALANCE OF MY TIME.

                            Show Full Text
                          • 12:42:24 PM

                            THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

                            THE CHAIR WOULD REMIND MEMBERS TO DIRECT THEIR REMARKS TO THE CHAIR. FOR…

                            THE CHAIR WOULD REMIND MEMBERS TO DIRECT THEIR REMARKS TO THE CHAIR. FOR WHAT PURPOSE DOES THE GENTLEMAN FROM CALIFORNIA, MR. MCCARTHY, SEEK RECOGNITION?

                            Show Full Text
                          • 12:42:32 PM

                            MR. MCCARTHY

                            MR. SPEAKER, I ASK UNANIMOUS CONSENT THAT WHEN THE HOUSE ADJOURNS TODAY IT…

                            MR. SPEAKER, I ASK UNANIMOUS CONSENT THAT WHEN THE HOUSE ADJOURNS TODAY IT ADJOURN TO MEET AT 5:30 P.M. TOMORROW. AND FURTHER, WHEN THE HOUSE ADJOURNS ON THAT DAY, IT ADJOURN TO MEET ON MONDAY, DECEMBER 18, 2017, WHEN IT SHALL CONVENE AT NOON FOR MORNING HOUR DEBATE AND 2:00 P.M. FOR LEGISLATIVE BUSINESS.

                            Show Full Text
                          • 12:42:50 PM

                            TEMPORE WITHOUT

                            WITHOUT OBJECTION, SO ORDERED. THE CHAIR WILL NOW ENTERTAIN REQUESTS FOR…

                            WITHOUT OBJECTION, SO ORDERED. THE CHAIR WILL NOW ENTERTAIN REQUESTS FOR ONE-MINUTE SPEECHES. FOR WHAT PURPOSE DOES THE GENTLEMAN FROM MONTANA SEEK RECOGNITION? WITHOUT OBJECTION, THE GENTLEMAN IS RECOGNIZED FOR ONE MINUTE.

                            Show Full Text
                          • 12:43:16 PM

                            MR. GIANFORTE

                            MR. SPEAKER, AMERICA LOST A HERO THIS WEEK AND I LOST A FRIEND. TIM FRABLE…

                            MR. SPEAKER, AMERICA LOST A HERO THIS WEEK AND I LOST A FRIEND. TIM FRABLE TRAINED AT MALSTROM AIR FORCE BASE IN MONTANA AND FLEW MISSIONS IN A P-51 OVER JAPAN DURING WORLD WAR II. DURING ONE MISSION, HE HAD TO DITCH IN THE PACIFIC AND HE AND A WINGMATE FLOATED FOR DAYS BEFORE BEING RESCUED. TIM WAS MY SCIENCE TEACHER IN JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL. HE TOLD HIS OCEAN RESCUE STORY IN A FIVE -- IN FIVE-MINUTE INSTALLMENTS AT THE END OF CLASS EACH DAY. BECAUSE OF HIS STORY TELLING, NO ONE MISSED CLASS. TIM LOVED MONTANA. IN 1976 HE BROUGHT ME AND 17 OTHER CLASSMATES FROM PENNSYLVANIA TO RED LODGE, TO HIKE IN THE BACK COUNTRY. WE HIKED BLACK CANYON LAKE, GRASSHOPPER GLACIER, FROZE TO DEATH PLATEAU, AND ANOTHER PLATEAU. TIM HAD TREMENDOUS IMPACT ON MANY LIVES IN HIS 93 YEARS. INCLUDING MY OWN. I'LL ALWAYS BE GRATEFUL FOR HIS SERVICE TO OUR COUNTRY AND FOR HIS DEDICATION AS A TEACHER. I WILL MISS MY FRIEND, TIM FRABLE. THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. WITH THAT, I YIELD BACK.

                            Show Full Text
                          • 12:44:36 PM

                            THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

                            FOR WHAT PURPOSE DOES THE GENTLEWOMAN FROM CALIFORNIA SEEK RECOGNITION?…

                            FOR WHAT PURPOSE DOES THE GENTLEWOMAN FROM CALIFORNIA SEEK RECOGNITION? WITHOUT OBJECTION, THE GENTLEWOMAN IS RECOGNIZED.

                            Show Full Text
                          • 12:44:46 PM

                            MS. PELOSI

                            THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. MR. SPEAKER, IT IS WITH PROFOUND SORROW THAT I…

                            THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. MR. SPEAKER, IT IS WITH PROFOUND SORROW THAT I RISE TO PAY TRIBUTE TO A DEAR FRIEND AND AN EXTRAORDINARY LEADER, MAYOR ED LEE, MAYOR OF SAN FRANCISCO. ALL WHO KNEW MAYOR LEE UNDERSTOOD HIM TO BE A TRUE GENTLEMAN OF GREAT WARMTH, POSITIVITY AND KINDNESS. HIS PASSING IS NOT ONLY A TRAGIC LOSS, OFFICIAL LOSS, FOR OUR CITY, BUT ALSO AN IMMENSE PERSONAL LOSS FOR ALL WHO WERE FORTUNATE ENOUGH TO CALL HIM FRIEND. MAYOR LEE'S FIRST PRIORITY WAS ALWAYS THE PEOPLE. LEE'S STRONG MORALE COMPASS WAS ROOTED IN HIS IDENTITY AS A HARDWORKING SON OF AN IMMIGRANT FAMILY OF MODEST MEANS AND WAS GUIDED BY HIS YEARS AS A COMMUNITY ORGANIZER AND CIVIL RIGHTS LAWYER. ED LEE FUNDAMENTALLY UNDERSTOOD THE STRENGTH OF A COMMUNITY IS MEASURED BY ITS SUCCESS IN MEETING THE NEEDS OF ALL OF ITS PEOPLE. HE KNEW THE RHYTHMS AND WORKINGS OF SAN FRANCISCO AT THE MOST GRAND LAR LEVEL AND DEDICATED DECADES TO IMPROVING THE LIVES OF SAN FRANCISCO. AS MAYOR LEE SERVED WITH EXCEPTIONAL DIGNITY AND GREAT EFFECTIVENESS, HIS LEADERSHIP HELPED DRIVE THE CITY INTO A STRONG ECONOMIC EXPANSION. HIS FIRM COMMITMENT TO EQUALITY MADE PROGRESS FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND A LIVING WAGE FOR ALL. HIS UNWAVERING BELIEF IN JUSTICE HELPED COMBAT HOMELESSNESS IN SAN FRANCISCO, PARTICULARLY FOR OUR VETERANS. AND HIS BOLD HOPEFUL VISION FOR THE FUTURE FURTHER SECURED SAN FRANCISCO'S ROLE AS A MODEL CITY FOR THE NATION. MAYOR HE HAS A LEGACY THAT SAN FRANCISCO WILL ENY. THE PEOPLE WILL TELL OF HIS WISDOM AND THE CONGREGATION WILL SING HIS PRAISE. HE NEVER HAD AN UNKIND WORD FOR ANYONE AND NO ONE EVER HAD AN UNKIND WORD FOR HIM. WE THINK OF THE PERSON THAT ED LEE WAS AND WE SMILE. HE TOOK GREAT PRIDE SERVING AS THE FIRST AMERICAN-ASIAN MAYOR. THE CITY OWES A DEBT OF GRATITUDE TO HIS WIFE AND HIS TWO DAUGHTERS FOR SHARING THIS EXCEPTIONAL PERSON WITH US. MAY DEEPEST LOVE AND PRAYERS ARE WITH HIS FAMILY AND SO MANY PEOPLE THROUGHOUT THE WORLD MOURN WITH THEM AND CONTINUE TO BE INSPIRED BY HIM. AND I'M PLEASED IN OUR CONGRESSIONAL RECORD STATEMENT WE ARE JOINED BY SO MANY MEMBERS OF CONGRESS FROM THE CALIFORNIA DELEGATION AND FROM THE ASIAN-PACIFIC CAUCUS AS WELL. I THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER.

                            Show Full Text
                          • 12:47:26 PM

                            THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPOR

                            FOR WHAT PURPOSE DOES THE GENTLEMAN FROM FLORIDA SEEK RECOGNITION?

                          • 12:47:30 PM

                            >>

                            PERMISSION TO ADDRESS THE HOUSE FOR ONE MINUTE AND REVISE AND EXTEND MY…

                            PERMISSION TO ADDRESS THE HOUSE FOR ONE MINUTE AND REVISE AND EXTEND MY REMARKS.

                            Show Full Text
                          • 12:47:36 PM

                            THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

                            WITHOUT OBJECTION.

                          • 12:47:37 PM

                            >>

                            WITHOUT OBJECTION.

                          • 12:48:35 PM

                            THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

                            FOR WHAT PURPOSE DOES THE GENTLEMAN FROM NEW JERSEY SEEK RECOGNITION?

                          • 12:48:38 PM

                            >>

                            ASK UNANIMOUS CONSENT TO ADDRESS THE HOUSE FOR ONE MINUTE AND REVISE AND…

                            ASK UNANIMOUS CONSENT TO ADDRESS THE HOUSE FOR ONE MINUTE AND REVISE AND EXTEND.

                            Show Full Text
                          • 12:48:42 PM

                            THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

                            WITHOUT OBJECTION. THE GENTLEMAN IS RECOGNIZED FOR ONE MINUTE.

                          • 12:48:57 PM

                            MR. PAYNE

                            MR. SPEAKER, CHILDREN'S HEALTH IS NOT A PARTISAN ISSUE, EAS A HUMAN ISSUE.…

                            MR. SPEAKER, CHILDREN'S HEALTH IS NOT A PARTISAN ISSUE, EAS A HUMAN ISSUE. NFERTLGS THE MAJORITY PARTY LET THE CHILDREN'S HEALTH INSURANCE PROGRAM EXPIRE MONTHS AGO. AS A RESULT, STATES ACROSS THE COUNTRY ARE GOING TO BE FORCED TO TERMINATE MILLIONS OF UNDERSERVED CHILDREN'S ONLY LIFELINE TO A DOCTOR. RATHER THAN WORKING WITH DEMOCRATS, THE REPUBLICAN LEADERSHIP PASSED A BILL THAT WOULD EXTEND CHIP, BUT STRIP HEALTH COVERAGE FROM AS MANY AS 668,000 AMERICAN CHILDREN. PARTISANSHIP HAS POISONNED THIS WELL. MR. SPEAKER, NEARLY 231,000 CHILDREN IN NEW JERSEY RELY ON CHIP TO GET THEM TO THE DOCTOR. MANY MORE PEOPLE IN MY STATE RELY ON COMMUNITY HEALTH CENTERS, MEDICARE AND THE AFFORDABLE CARE ACT PREVENTION FUND TO STAY HEALTHY. CONGRESS MUST PROTECT THESE PROGRAMS. I URGE MY COLLEAGUES TO PASS A BILL BEFORE THE END OF THE YEAR TO EXTEND THE FUNDING FOR THESE CRITICALLY IMPORTANT HEALTH CARE PROGRAMS INCLUDING CHIP AND COMMUNITY HEALTH CENTERS WITHOUT TAKING HEALTH CARE AWAY FROM MORE THAN HALF A MILLION AMERICANS. AND I YIELD BACK.

                            Show Full Text
                          • 12:50:19 PM

                            THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

                            FOR WHAT PURPOSE DOES THE GENTLEMAN FROM IOWA SEEK RECOGNITION?

                          • 12:50:23 PM

                            >>

                            ASK UNANIMOUS CONSENT TO ADDRESS THE HOUSE FOR ONE MINUTE AND REVISE AND…

                            ASK UNANIMOUS CONSENT TO ADDRESS THE HOUSE FOR ONE MINUTE AND REVISE AND EXTEND MY REMARKS.

                            Show Full Text
                          • 12:50:29 PM

                            THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

                            WITHOUT OBJECTION.

                          • 12:50:32 PM

                            >>

                            MR. SPEAKER, I RISE TODAY TO CALL ON MY COLLEAGUES IN CONGRESS TO QUICKLY…

                            MR. SPEAKER, I RISE TODAY TO CALL ON MY COLLEAGUES IN CONGRESS TO QUICKLY PASS A FIVE-YEAR EXTENSION OF THE CHILDREN'S HEALTH INSURANCE PROGRAM. IN IOWA, 85,000 CHILDREN RELY ON CHIP FOR THEIR HEALTH. THIS IS VERY IMPORTANT TO SO MANY FAMILIES IN OUR 3RD DISTRICT. I'M GRATEFUL A SHORT-TERM SOLUTION WAS INCLUDED AS PART OF THE CONTINUING RESOLUTION PASSED LAST WEEK. ON NOVEMBER 3, THE HOUSE PASSED FUNDING TO PASS CHIP WITH EVERY IOWA REPRESENTATIVE. HOWEVER SINCE THAT TIME, WE HAVE BEEN WAITING FOR OUR COLLEAGUES IN THE SENATE TO ACT. THEY NEED TO ACT NOW. WE MUST WORK TOGETHER TO FUND THIS BIPARTISAN PROGRAM. THE HEALTH OF OUR CHILDREN IS AT STAKE. CHILDREN OF LOW AND MIDDLE INCOME FAMILIES WILL BE HIT THE HARDEST IF WE DO NOT FULLY FUND CHIP. IF FAMILIES ARE LEFT WITHOUT COVERAGE AND ACCESS TO NEEDED MEDICAL COVERAGE TO OUR CHILDREN, WE MUST ACT. I URGE MY COLLEAGUES TO INCLUDE AN EXTENSION FOR CHIP AND THE IMPORTANT BILLS THAT WE ARE CONSIDERING IN THE WEEKS AHEAD BECAUSE FAMILIES SHOULDN'T BE WORRIED ABOUT LOSING COVERAGE FOR THEIR CHILDREN. AS CONGRESS WORKS ON THE MOST IMPORTANT ISSUES FACING OUR COUNTRY, I AND OTHER COLLEAGUES WILL CONTINUE TO SUPPORT THIS. I YIELD BACK.

                            Show Full Text
                          • 12:51:58 PM

                            THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

                            FOR WHAT PURPOSE DOES THE GENTLEMAN FROM ILLINOIS SEEK RECOGNITION?

                          • 12:52:02 PM

                            >>

                            ADDRESS THE HOUSE FOR ONE MINUTE AND REVISE AND EXTEND MY REMARKS.

                          • 12:52:07 PM

                            THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

                            WITHOUT OBJECTION.

                          • 12:52:09 PM

                            >>

                            TIMOTHY BRADFORD PASSED AWAY LAST WEEK.

                          • 12:52:15 PM

                            MR. DAVIS

                            HE WAS A COMMISSIONER OF THE COOK COUNTY METROPOLITAN WATER RECLAMATION…

                            HE WAS A COMMISSIONER OF THE COOK COUNTY METROPOLITAN WATER RECLAMATION DISTRICT BUT MUCH MORE THAN THAT. TIM GREW UP ON THE WEST SIDE OF THE CITY OF CHICAGO AND MOVED TO THE SOUTH SUBURBS AND BECAME KNOWN AS THE GODFATHER OF POLITICS IN SOUTH SUBURBAN COOK COUNTY. HE WAS IN LOVE WITH EVERYBODY HE MET, INVOLVED IN EVERYTHING THAT EXISTED, AND I EXPRESS CONDOLENCES TO HIS WIFE AND FAMILY ON HIS PASSING. AND I YIELD BACK THE BALANCE OF MY TIME.

                            Show Full Text
                          • 12:52:53 PM

                            THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

                            FOR WHAT PURPOSE DOES THE GENTLEMAN FROM TEXAS SEEK RECOGNITION?

                          • 12:52:55 PM

                            >>

                            PERMISSION TO ADDRESS THE HOUSE FOR ONE MINUTE AND REVISE AND EXTEND.

                          • 12:53:00 PM

                            THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

                            WITHOUT OBJECTION. THE GENTLEMAN IS RECOGNIZED FOR ONE MINUTE.

                          • 12:53:04 PM

                            MR. SMITH

                            THE LIBERAL MEDIA HELP ELECT A U.S. SENATOR FROM ALABAMA. THEIR ALLIANCE…

                            THE LIBERAL MEDIA HELP ELECT A U.S. SENATOR FROM ALABAMA. THEIR ALLIANCE WITH THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY IS NOW SO CLOSE, WE SHOULD CALL THEM MEDIACRATS. THEY GOT AN ASSIST FROM SOME REPUBLICANS AS WELL AS THE CANDIDATE HIMSELF. THE PRIMARY LESSON TO BE LEARNED FROM THE ELECTION IS THAT REPUBLICANS MUST CONFRONT MEDIA BIAS. THEY MUST CONSTANTLY POINT IT OUT AND REMIND THE AMERICAN PEOPLE OF ITS COULD ROSE I HAVE EFFECT ON OUR ELECTION PROCESS. REPUBLICANS SHOULD JOIN THE PRESIDENT IN EXPOSING FAKE NEWS. THE MEDIA SHOULD TRUST THE AMERICAN PEOPLE WITH THE FACTS, NOT TELL THEM WHAT TO THINK. BECAUSE THE MEDIA ARE SO BIASED, THE CREDIBILITY WITH THE AMERICAN PEOPLE IS AT AN ALL-TIME LOW. FOR THE SAKE OF OUR COUNTRY AND SAKE OF FAIR ELECTIONS, I HOPE THE MEDIA WILL RETURN TO THEIR PARAMOUNT RESPONSIBILITY PROVIDING THE AMERICAN PEOPLE WITH UNBIASED NEWS.

                            Show Full Text
                          • 12:54:07 PM

                            THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

                            FOR WHAT PURPOSE DOES THE GENTLEMAN FROM CALIFORNIA SEEK RECOGNITION?

                          • 12:54:11 PM

                            >>

                            PERMISSION TO ADDRESS THE HOUSE FOR ONE MINUTE AND REVISE AND EXTEND.

                          • 12:54:17 PM

                            THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

                            WITHOUT OBJECTION. THE GENTLEMAN IS RECOGNIZED FOR ONE MINUTE.

                          • 12:54:28 PM

                            >>

                            DONALD TRUMP CLAIMS HE HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH RUSSIA BUT WE HAVE SEEN…

                            DONALD TRUMP CLAIMS HE HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH RUSSIA BUT WE HAVE SEEN SECRET MEETINGS, BUSINESS AND FINANCIALENING TANGLEMENTS AND ELABORATE ATTEMPTS TO CONCEAL INFORMATION. IN ANY OTHER ERA THESE WOULD BE BOMBSHELL. BUT OUR MEDIA CYCLE BY TRUMP'S INFUSION OF DRAMA MAKES IT HARD TO CONNECT THE DOTS. THERE IS SO MUCH, IT MAKES YOUR HEAD SPIN. TODAY I'M BEGINNING A MOMENT OF TRUTH SERIES OF SPEECHES TO POINT OUT FACTS THAT SHOW AN ADMINISTRATION THAT IS COMPROMISED, THAT NOT ONLY COL LEWDED WITH RUSSIA AND KEEP US FROM KNOWING THE TRUTH. ONE OF THE SMOKING GUNS WHEN TRUMP'S ASSOCIATE WAS SEEKING FINANCING FROM A RUSSIAN BANK FACING AMERICAN SANCTIONS TO BUILD A TRUMP TOWER IN MOSCOW. THIS EMAIL FROM SAIDER TO TRUMP'S PERSONAL ATTORNEY. WE'LL GET DONALD ELECTED. THERE IS A LOT MORE TO COME, MR. SPEAKER. BUT FOR NOW, I YIELD BACK.

                            Show Full Text
                          • 12:55:42 PM

                            THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

                            IN PERSONALITIES TOWARDS THE PRESIDENT. FURTHER ONE-MINUTES?

                          • 12:55:54 PM

                            >>

                            PERMISSION TO ADDRESS THE HOUSE FOR ONE MINUTE.

                          • 12:55:58 PM

                            THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

                            WITHOUT OBJECTION. THE GENTLEWOMAN IS RECOGNIZED FOR ONE MINUTE.

                          • 12:56:05 PM

                            >>

                            MR. SPEAKER --

                          • 12:56:07 PM

                            MS. JACKSON LEE

                            OF THE SANDY HOOK ELEMENTARY SCHOOL SHOOTING WHICH TOOK THE LIBES OF 20…

                            OF THE SANDY HOOK ELEMENTARY SCHOOL SHOOTING WHICH TOOK THE LIBES OF 20 INNOCENT CHILDREN AND SIX BRAVE EDUCATORS. LAST NIGHT, I STOOD ON THE FLOOR OF THE HOUSE AND INDICATED HOW BREATHLESS I FELT WHEN THE NEWS CAME IN. ONE CHILD, TWO CHILDREN, THREE, FOUR, FIVE, SIX, SEVEN, EIGHT, NINE, 10. 11, 123, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18 AND 20 CHILDREN AND THE MOTHER OF PERPETRATOR. AND I RISE TODAY TO JOIN IN THE CALL FOR ACTS OF KINDNESS. TOMORROW I WILL BE GIVING OUT BOOKS AT THE AN A ELEMENTARY SCHOOL AND GIVING OUT SHOES. I HOPE WE UNDERSTAND THAT IT'S NOT ABOUT GUNS, PEOPLE KILL. GUNS KILL. I WOULD ASK THAT WE HAVE REAL GUN SAFETY LEGISLATION. AT THE SAME TIME, I HOPE AS WE LOOK TOWARD THE NEEDS OF OUR NATION, THE CHILDREN'S HEALTH INSURANCE PROGRAM AND THOSE WHO ARE SUFFERING FROM HURRICANES WILL BE PART OF OUR KINDNESS. BUT I TAKE A MOMENT FOR THESE CHILDREN. AMEN. I THANK YOU FOR ALLOWING ME TO HONOR THE SANDY HOOK CHILDREN AND THE BRAVE ADULTS THAT TRIED TO SAVE THEIR LIVES. MAY GOD BLESS THEM ALL. I YIELD BACK.

                            Show Full Text
                          • 12:57:47 PM

                            THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

                            ARE THERE ANY FURTHER ONE-MINUTE REQUESTS? UNDER THE SPEAKER'S ANNOYANCED…

                            ARE THERE ANY FURTHER ONE-MINUTE REQUESTS? UNDER THE SPEAKER'S ANNOYANCED POLICY OF JANUARY 3, 2017, THE GENTLEMAN FROM VIRGINIA, MR. GARRETT, IS RECOGNIZED FOR 60 MINUTES AS THE DESIGNEE OF THE MAJORITY LEADER. GARTH ZPWART 47 YEARS AGO --

                            Show Full Text
                          • 12:58:18 PM

                            MR. GARRETT

                            47 YEARS AGO AUGUST 11, BABY BOY WAS BORN NAMED BRIAN TERRY. 18 YEARS…

                            47 YEARS AGO AUGUST 11, BABY BOY WAS BORN NAMED BRIAN TERRY. 18 YEARS AFTER THAT, BRIAN MADE A COMMITMENT TO SERVE HIS COUNTRY BY ENLISTING IN THE UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS WHERE HE SERVED THREE YEARS HONORABLY INCLUDING A TOUR OF DUTY IN HARM'S WAY IN IRAQ. DISCHARGED FROM THE MARINE CORPS HONORABLY IN 1994, PRY AND TERRY FOLLOWED HIS CALLING TO SERVE BY BECOMING A POLICE OFFICER. AND THEN MADE ANOTHER COMMITMENT AGAIN NOT TO SERVE OUR COMMUNITY BUT IN OUR NATION IN 2007 HE JOINED THE CUSTOMS AND BORDER PATROL. BUT THIS WASN'T GOOD ENOUGH AS HIS MOTHER SAID HE WAS A STRONG DEFENDER. HE JOINED THE ELITE TACTICAL TEAM. SEVEN YEARS AGO, HE WAS TASKED WITH PURSUING AND APPREHENDING A RIP CREW. THIS RIP CREW IS ALLEGED TO HAVE BEEN AFFILIATED WITH THE DRUG CARTELS AND WHAT THEY DID WAS EXPLOIT THOSE WHO TOOK ADVANTAGE OF THE UNWILLINGNESS OF THOSE IN LEADERSHIP IN THIS COUNTRY TO PERFORM THAT BASIC PRINCIPLED RESPONSIBILITY WHICH IS TO SECURE OUR BORDERS. THE RIP CREW WOULD ROB DRUG MULES AS THEY CARRIED DRUGS ACROSS THE BORDERS BUT THEY WOULD DETAIN AND SHAKE DOWN THOSE WHO SNUCK THROUGH OUR POUROUS BORDERS. THIS RIP CREW HAD WEAPONS AND USED THOSE WEAPONS TO ROB AND TERRORIZE AND EXPLOIT IN THE WORST POSSIBLE WAYS PEOPLE WHO WERE INVITED HERE. SEVEN YEARS AGO TODAY BRIAN TERRY AND THREE OF HIS COLLEAGUES SET OUT NOT JUST TO PROTECT OUR BORDER BUT TO PROTECT INNOCENT PEOPLE WHO CAME WITH THEIR ENTIRE LIFE SAVINGS BECAUSE WE CHOSE TO LEAVE THAT BORDER POUROUS. . . H.R. 4433 IS CALLED SCURING D.H.S. FIREARMS ACT OF 2017. WE LEARNED DURING TESTIMONY ON THIS BILL THAT IN A TWO-YEAR PERIOD, ROUGHLY 200, JUST OVER 2 HUB FIREARMS WERE STOLEN FROM PEOPLE WHO WORKED FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY. OR LOST. AT LEAST ONE PERSON WAS KILLED BY THESE FIREARMS. AND I WOULD CONCUR THAT THAT IS UNACCEPTABLE. I CERTAINLY SUPPORT THE BILL. BUT HAVING SERVED IN THE UNITED STATES ARMY AS A LEADER OF SOLDIERS ON DEPLOYMENT, ALL OF WHOM WERE ISSUED AT LEAST ONE WEAPON, I WONDER IF IT LITERALLY REQUIRES AN ACT OF CONGRESS TO SUGGEST THAT D.H.S. PROMULGATE REGULATIONS TO OVERSEE THE LOSS OR THEFT OF D.H.S.-SUPPLIED WEAPONS. YES. OVER 200 WEAPONS IS HORRIBLE. YES, ONE LIFE LOST IS HORRIBLE. BUT SHOULD THERE BE AN ACT OF CONGRESS? BECAUSE AS I RECALL, AS A LEADER IN THE ARMY WHILE DEPLOYED OVERSEAS, WE HAD PROTOCOL FOR DEALING WITH LOST WEAPONS, WITH LOST SENSE OF ITEM, WITH LOST THINGS. WE DIDN'T NEED AN ACT OF CONGRESS TO TELL US TO PROMULGATE IT. SO WHILE I SUPPORT THIS BILL, IT BEGAN TO MAKE ME WONDER, AND THEN THINK OF A BIBLE VERSE, MATTHEW. WHY DO YOU LOOK AT THE SPECK OF SAW DUST IN YOUR BROTHER'S EYE AND PAY NO ATTENTION TO THE PLANK IN YOUR OWN? SO, CERTAINLY IT'S UNACCEPTABLE THAT OVER 200 WEAPONS SHOULD BE LOST OR STOLEN FROM D.H.S. EMPLOYEES IN A PERIOD OF TWO YEARS. BUT IT IS QUITE LITERALLY 1/10 OF THE SCALE OF THE WEAPONRY THAT OUR GOVERNMENT INTENTIONALLY PUT INTO THE STREAM OF COMMERCE TO BE USED BY THOSE WHO WOULD VISIT HARM, NOT ONLY ON THEIR NEIGHBORS AND FAMILY MEMBERS SOUTH OF OUR BORDER, BUT RIGHT HERE ON OUR OWN SOIL. SO WEAPONS LIKE THIS, TO THE QUANTITY OF OVER 200, WERE LOST OR STOLEN FROM MEMBERS OF D.H.S.. MEANWHILE SEVEN YEARS AGO WEAPONS LIKE THIS WERE PUT INTO THE STREAM OF COMMERCE BY OUR VERY GOVERNMENT. WEAPONS LIKE THIS TOOK THE LIVES OF AT LEAST ONE PERSON. WEAPONS LIKE THIS PUT INTO THE STREAM OF COMMERCE BY OUR VERY GOVERNMENT HAVE TAKEN AT THE VERY LEAST 70 TIMES AS MANY LIVES. AND YESTERDAY THE COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY PROMULGATED A BILL, AN ACT OF CONGRESS, TO ADDRESS 200 AND SOME WEAPONS LIKE THIS THAT HAVE COST AT LEAST ONE HUMAN LIFE. AND SEVEN YEARS AFTER BRIAN TERRY SET OUT ON PATROL THAT FATEFUL NIGHT IN ARIZONA, DAYS BEFORE HE WAS TO FLY HOME TO MICHIGAN TO SEE HIS FAMILY FOR CHRISTMAS, NOBODY'S TALKING ABOUT THE WEAPONS LIKE THIS THAT OUR GOVERNMENT INTENTIONALLY PLACED INTO THE STREAM OF COMMERCE, WHERE WE KNEW TO A MET PHYSICAL CERTAINTY THEY WOULD GO TO THOSE WHO WOULD DO HARM TO THEIR NEIGHBORS AND THEIR FAMILIES AND AMERICANS. SEVEN YEARS ON WE'VE SEEN JUSTICE TO THE KILLERS OF BRIAN TERRY. THEY'VE BEEN ARRESTED. THE FIRST MAN ARRESTED FOR HAVING SHOT MR. TERRY IN THE BACK WITH A MILITARY-STYLE RIFLE, LEAVING HIM TO BLEED TO DEATH ON THE MEDICAL CHOPPER THAT FLEW HIM OUT IN AN EFFORT TO SAVE HIS LIFE, HAD, I THINK, IRONICALLY ALREADY BEEN DEPORTED FROM THIS COUNTRY SEVEN TIMES. THE NIGHT THAT BRIAN TERRY SET OUT TO PROTECT NOT ONLY THE BORDERS OF THIS NATION, BUT THE PEOPLE WHO SEEK TO ENTER IT, BECAUSE WE WILL NOT UPHOLD OUR RESPONSIBILITY, THE MAN WHO KILLED HIM WAS ABOUT ROBBING THE VERY PEOPLE WHO WERE COMING HERE BECAUSE WE ALLOWED IT BY NOT DOING OUR JOBS. AND HE'D ALREADY BEEN DEPORTED SEVEN TIMES. NOW, WE KNOW THAT CLOSE TO 70 PEOPLE HAVE DIED BECAUSE WE INTENTIONALLY AS A NATION PUT INTO THE STREAM OF COMMERCE MILITARY-STYLE WEAPONS. IN FACT, WE'VE LOST TRACK OF OVER 1,400 OF THE OVER 2,000 WEAPONS THAT THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION THOUGHT IT WOULD BE A GOOD IDEA TO INTENTIONALLY LET GO TO MEXICO. THE WEAPON PICTURED NEXT TO ME IS A BARRETT M-82.50 CALIBER ANTI-PERSONNEL AND MATERIAL RIFLE. THERE ARE MEMBERS OF THIS BODY WHO HAVE SPOKEN ON HOW THIS WEAPON SHOULD BE ILLEGAL. BECAUSE CONCEIVABLY IT CAN TAKE DOWN AN AIRPLANE. WHY DO I DIGRESS? BECAUSE THAT WEAPON WAS RECOVERED IN A HIDEOUT KNOWN TO BE USED BY THE MOST NOTORIOUS MURDERER IN NORTH AMERICA IN THE LAST 100 YEARS, EL CHAPO GUZMAN. THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT WATCHED WHILE A WEAPON THAT SOME MEMBERS OF THIS BODY WOULD SUGGEST CAN TAKE DOWN AN AIRPLANE WAS TRAFFICED TO A MAN WHO WAS TRAFFICED IN DEATH TO THE POINT WHERE THE NEXT SLIDE I SHOW WILL BLOW ANY THINKING PERSON'S MINDS. MANY, MANY OF THE 160,000, ROUGHLY, DEATHS OF CIVILIANS IN MEXICO CAN BE TRACED DIRECTLY BACK TO THIS MAN. AND WE KNOW BECAUSE IT WAS RECOVERED THAT AT LEAST ONE OF THE MILITARY-STYLE WEAPONS THAT HE RECEIVED CAME FROM US. SO SEVEN YEARS AGO TODAY AN AMERICAN HERO NAMED BRIAN TERRY, WHO HAD SERVED AS A LAW ENFORCEMENT PROFESSIONAL AND AS A MARINE IN IRAQ, AND ON THE ELITE BORDER TACTICAL SQUADRON, SET OUT TO PROTECT AMERICA. BUT TO ALSO PROTECT THOSE WHO SOUGHT TO ENTER IT, WHETHER LEGALLY OR ILLEGALLY. AND WHEN HE DID SO, HE DID SO UNDERSTANDING FULLY, AS THOSE WHO TAKE AN OATH TO DEFEND THIS NATION DO, THAT SOME THINGS IN THIS WORLD ARE WORTH STANDING AND FIGHTING AND DYING FOR. AND TRAGICALLY SEVEN YEARS AGO TONIGHT BRIAN TERRY MADE THAT SACRIFICE. AND I HAD NO INTENTION OF STANDING AND SPEAKING ON THIS TODAY UNTIL H.R. 4433, SECURING D.H.S. FIREARMS ACT OF 2017, CAME BEFORE THE HOMELAND SECURITY COMMITTEE YESTERDAY. BUT IT STRUCK ME AS IRONIC. NOT ONLY DID I SERVE IN UNIFORM AS A COMBAT ARMS OFFICER FOR NEARLY SIX YEARS, I SPENT JUST UNDER 10 YEARS AS A PROSECUTOR AND I HAVE A PASSION FOR A NUMBER OF THINGS. BUT FOREMOST AMONG THESE IS JUSTICE. AND SO WHILE IT GIVES MY HEART SOME CONDOLENCE, I CAN'T BEGIN TO IMAGINE THE FEELINGS ON THIS SEVENTH ANNIVERSARY OF THE FAMILY MEMBERS OF THIS AMERICAN HERO, KNOWING THAT WHILE THE PEOPLE WHO PULLED THE TRIGGER HAVE BEEN CONVICTED, THE WEAPONS THAT THEY USED WERE PROVIDED TO HIM BY THE VERY NATION PROVIDE -- PROVIDED TO THEM BY THE VERY NATION THAT HE DIED TO PROTECT. SO, MR. SPEAKER, WITH THAT I WOULD SUBMIT THIS. I HAVE FAITH THAT IN LIFE OR AFTER LIFE THERE WILL ALWAYS ULTIMATELY BE JUSTICE. BUT IN THE CASE OF THOSE WHO WITH INTENT PUT THE FIREARMS INTO THE HANDS OF THE INDIVIDUALS WHO TOOK THE LIFE OF THIS AMERICAN HERO, I'LL TELL YOU THIS, I HOPE THAT JUSTICE COMES IN THIS LIFE AND NOT THE NEXT. SO WHILE WE MOVE ABOUT OUR BUSINESS OF PROMULGATING LAWS TO DICTATE TO D.H.S. THAT THEY SHOULD HAVE A POLICY TO ADDRESS THE LOSS OF FIREARMS, I HOPE WE DON'T TAKE OUR EYE OFF THE BALL OF THE VERY FIREARMS THAT WE INTENTIONALLY TRAFFICKED. LIKE THE TWO THAT WERE RECOVERED FROM THE SCENE OF THE MURDER OF BRIAN TERRY AND THAT WE WILL CONTINUE UNTIL WE FIND IT TO SEEK JUSTICE FOR THIS MAN AND ACT IN A MANNER SUCH THAT THERE ARE NO MORE BRIAN TERRY TRAGEDIES GOING FORWARD. I YIELD BACK.

                            Show Full Text
                          • 01:10:14 PM

                            THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

                            THE GENTLEMAN YIELDS BACK THE BALANCE OF HIS TIME. UNDER THE SPEAKER'S…

                            THE GENTLEMAN YIELDS BACK THE BALANCE OF HIS TIME. UNDER THE SPEAKER'S ANNOUNCED POLICY OF JANUARY 3, 2017, THE GENTLEMAN FROM MARYLAND, MR. RASKIN, IS RECOGNIZED FOR 60 MINUTES AS THE DESIGNEE OF THE MINORITY LEADER.

                            Show Full Text
                          • 01:11:04 PM

                            MR. RASKIN

                            MR. SPEAKER, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I'M DELIGHTED TO BE HERE ON BEHALF OF…

                            MR. SPEAKER, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I'M DELIGHTED TO BE HERE ON BEHALF OF THE MINORITY. AND I'M HERE TO DISCUSS A VERY SERIOUS ISSUE, WHICH ARE THE MOUNTING THREATS AND CRITICISM OF ROBERT MUELLER'S INVESTIGATION INTO CRIMINALITY TAKING PLACE IN THE COURSE OF THE PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION, WITH INTERFERENCE BY THE RUSSIANS AND POSSIBLE COLLUSION WITH VARIOUS AMERICANS WORKING WITH HIM. BUT I WANT TO START BY PUTTING THIS INTO A GENERAL CONTEXT, MR. SPEAKER. TOM PAYNE SAID THAT IN THE MONARCHIES, THE KING IS LAW. BUT IN THE DEMOCRACIES, THE LAW IS KING. AND WE PLACE EVERYTHING ON THE RULE OF LAW HERE IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. IT'S HOW WE CONTROL THE PEOPLE WHO OCCUPY THE HIGHEST OFFICES OF GOVERNMENT. AND CONTROL VAST AMOUNTS OF RESOURCES THAT BELONG TO THE PEOPLE OF THE UNITED STATES. IN THE MONARCHIES, IN THE DICTATORSHIPS, THE PEOPLE HAVE NO CONTROL OVER THOSE WHO OCCUPY GOVERNMENT, BUT IN THE DEMOCRACIES, IN THE CONSTITUTIONAL SOCIETIES, WE EXERCISE CONTROL OVER THE PEOPLE WHO LEAD THE GOVERNMENT, TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY DON'T ABUSE THEIR POWER FOR IMPROPER PURPOSES, FOR PRIVATE GAIN, FOR THE ENRICHMENT OF PARTICULAR CLASSES OR FOR THE PER PET SITUATION OF THEIR OWN PLIT -- PER PET -- PERPETUATION OF THEIR OWN POLITICAL POWER. WHEN WE TOOK OFFICE AT THE BEGINNING OF THE YEAR, MR. SPEAKER, WE RECEIVED AN INTELLIGENCE COMMITTEE REPORT SIGNED BY 18 INTELLIGENCE AGENCIES. THE F.B.I. AND THE C.I.A. AND THE N.S.A. AND THE DEFENSE INTELLIGENCE AGENCY AND ON AND ON. AND THEY ALL TOLD US THE SAME THING. WHICH IS THAT VLADIMIR PUTIN HAD ATTEMPTED TO INTERFERE AND HAD INTERFERED IN THE AMERICAN ELECTION. THROUGH CYBERESPIONAGE AND CYBERSABOTAGE. IN AN EFFORT TO DETERMINE THE OUTCOME OF OUR ELECTION. THAT TOOK PLACE. WE KNEW THAT WAY BACK WHEN WE FIRST TOOK OFFICE. NOW, IN THE HOUSE COMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT AND GOVERNMENT REFORM, WHICH I SERVE ON, AND IN THE HOUSE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE, WHICH I SERVE ON, WE WERE TOLD, AND WE'VE BEEN TOLD FOR MONTHS, GOING ALL THE WAY BACK TO THE GOLF SWING OF THE YEAR, THAT WE DON'T NEED -- GOING BACK ALL THE WAY TO THE BEGINNING OF THE YEAR, THAT WE DON'T NEED TO INVESTIGATE THIS ASSAULT ON THE SOVEREIGNTY OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE IN OUR OWN ELECTION, BECAUSE THERE'S AN EXCELLENT LAWYER AND LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL IN CHARGE OF THE SPECIAL COUNSEL INVESTIGATION, ROBERT MUELLER. AND INDEED ROBERT MUELLER IS A MAN OF EXTRAORDINARY AND PERHAPS SINGULAR QUALIFICATION. HE'S A DECORATED WAR HERO FROM THE VIETNAM WAR. A U.S. ATTORNEY WHO HAD BEEN THE U.S. ATTORNEY FOR BOTH THE COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS AND THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA. A FORMER DIRECTOR OF THE F.B.I. . AND, YOU KNOW WHAT, HE'S A REGISTERED REPUBLICAN. AND HE WAS NAMED AS SPECIAL COUNSEL BY ANOTHER REGISTERED REPUBLICAN AND ANOTHER WIDELY HERALDED AND HIGHLY QUALIFIED LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL, ROD ROSENSTEIN, WHO HAD BEEN A CAREER ATTORNEY IN THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE AND THEN THE U.S. ATTORNEY, APPOINTED BY PRESIDENT BUSH IN THE GREAT STATE, MY HOME STATE, OF MARYLAND. HE'S PRESENTLY THE DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE UNITED STATES. APPOINTED BY ANOTHER REPUBLICAN, ATTORNEY GENERAL SESSIONS. SO ATTORNEY GENERAL SESSIONS APPOINTED ROD ROSENSTEIN, WHO IS THE DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL, A REPUBLICAN, AND HE APPOINTED ANOTHER REPUBLICAN. AND WIDELIED A MIRED AND HIGHLY QUALIFIED -- WIDELIED A MIRED AND HIGHLY QUALIFIED -- WIDELY ED A MIRED AND HIGHLY QUALIFIED -- WIDELY ADMIRED AND HIGHLY QUALIFIED OFFICIAL. WITH REPUBLICANS SAYING, NO, WE WON'T DO ANY INVESTIGATIONS OF OUR OWN, DESPITE PAST PRACTICE, WE HAVE TO ASK WHY SPECIAL COUNSEL ROBERT MUELLER THIS WEEK HAS SUDDENLY COME UNDER WITHERING FIRE BY OUR G.O.P. COLLEAGUES. IN THE MOST FEROCIOUS, ORGANIZED ATTACK ON A FEDERAL PROSECUTION AND PROSECUTOR I'VE EVER SEEN. . WELL, THE ANSWER, ALAS, IS OBVIOUS. THEY'RE ATTACKING SPECIAL COUNSEL ROBERT MUELLER AND HIS FINE TEAM OF LAWYERS AND INVESTIGATORS BECAUSE MUELLER AND HIS TEAM ARE DOING THEIR JOBS AND JUSTICE IS BEING DONE. THERE HAVE ALREADY BEEN TWO GUILTY PLEAS ARISING FROM THIS INVESTIGATION. ONE FROM PRESIDENT TRUMP'S FORMER NATIONAL SECURITY ADVISOR, GENERAL FLYNN, WHO PLED GUILTY TO LYING TO THE F.B.I. ABOUT TRUMP-RUSSIA. AND ANOTHER CRIMINAL CONFESSION AND GUILTY PLEA FROM FORMER FOREIGN POLICY ASSISTANT GEORGE PAPADOPOULOS, WHO ALSO TOOK FULL RESPONSIBILITY FOR HIS CRIMINAL CONDUCT. IN LYING ABOUT TRUMP-RUSSIA TO THE F.B.I. AND THERE HAVE BEEN SWEEPING CRIMINAL INDICTMENTS HANDED DOWN BY THE MUELLER TEAM, THE SPECIAL COUNSEL, AGAINST PAUL MANAFORT, TRUMP'S FORMER CAMPAIGN MANAGER AND HIS ASSOCIATE, RICK GATES. NOW FOR ALL WE KNOW THIS MIGHT BE THE END OF IT. THE SPECIAL COUNSEL ISN'T TALKING. HE'S NOT LEAKING. HE'S DOING HIS JOB. BUT IT'S ALSO POSSIBLE THAT THE INVESTIGATION IS JUST GETTING STARTED. AND THAT THEY ARE CLOSING IN ON EVEN HIGHER TARGETS. PERHAPS JARED KUSHNER, THE ALL-PURPOSE TRUMP AIDE AND PRESIDENT'S SON-IN-LAY, PERHAPS HE'S WITHIN THE SCOPES OF THIS INVESTIGATION. PERHAPS DONALD TRUMP JR. AND PERHAPS THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES HIMSELF. DONALD TRUMP. AND SO THE WHITE HOUSE HAS ISSUED ITS APPARENTLY DESPERATE AND CORNERED ANIMAL ORDERS. THE PRESIDENT CRIES KAY KAYE YOSS AND LETS SLIP THE DOGS OF WAR AGAINST SPECIAL COUNSEL MUELLER AND THE RULE OF LAW. THIS WEEK, TRUMP HAS CALLED THE MUELLER INVESTIGATION AN INVESTIGATION LED BY A REPUBLICAN WHO IS NAMED BY A -- WHO WAS NAMED BY A REPUBLICAN, WHO WAS NAMED BY A REPUBLICAN , HE CALLS THIS INVESTIGATION, QUOTE, THE SINGLE GREATEST WITCH HUNT OF A POLITICIAN IN AMERICAN HISTORY. AND I DON'T WANT TO HEAR FROM ANY OF MY COLLEAGUES, EITHER G.O.P. OR OTHER, WHO SAY, YOU CAN'T TAKE SERIOUSLY WHAT THE PRESIDENT SAYS BECAUSE HE'S DISCONNECTING FROM REALITY OR HE'S PARANOID OR HE'S DELUSIONAL UNLESS YOU'RE WILLING TO TRY TO ACTIVATE THE PROVISIONS OF THE 25TH AMENDMENT. WE MUST TAKE THE PRESIDENT'S WORD SERIOUSLY. IN THE MEANTIME OF COURSE OUR FRIENDS ACROSS THE AISLE, MR. SPEAKER, ARE GOING ALONG WITH EVERYTHING THE PRESIDENT SAYS AND EVERYTHING THAT HE DOES AND THEY ARE ENABLING HIS ATTEMPT TO DEFAME THE SPECIAL COUNSEL, MR. MUELLER AND ATTACK THE WORK OF THE F.B.I. THE PRESIDENT CALLS THE F.B.I. AN AGENCY IN TATTERS. AND AN ONSLAUGHT HAS FOLLOWED IN THE MEDIA ON FOX NEWS, A FULL-SCALE CAMPAIGN AGAINST THE F.B.I. HAS ARISEN WITH LOTS OF PEOPLE COMPARING IT TO THE K.G.B. -- THE F.B.I. TO THE K.G.B. WHICH IS AMUSING BECAUSE IF TRUE THEY WOULD LIKE THE F.B.I. DONALD TRUMP'S BEST BUDDY IN FOREIGN RELATIONS AND FOX NEWS' BELOVED KLEPTOCRAT AUTHORITARIAN DICTATOR ABROAD IS VLADIMIR PUTIN, THE FORMER CHIEF OF THE K.G.B. BUT THEY COMPARE OUR F.B.I., THE TINS OF THOUSANDS OF MEN AND WOMEN WHO HAVE GIVEN THEIR LIVES TO LAW ENFORCEMENT IN AMERICA, THEY COMPARE OUR F.B.I. TO THE K.G.B. NEWT GINGRICH CALLS MUELLER CORRUPT. NEWT GINGRICH WHO WAS OFFICIALLY DISCIPLINED AND REPRIMANDED RIGHT HERE, MR. SPEAKER, RIGHT WHERE WE STAND TODAY, BY THIS BODY IN A VOTE OF 395-28. HE WAS REPRIMANDED AND DISCIPLINED FOR VIOLATING THE RULES OF THIS BODY AND HE CALLS THE FORMER F.B.I. DIRECTOR, THE SPECIAL COUNSEL MUELLER, CORRUPT IN AN EFFORT TO UNDERMINE AN DISCREDIT THE SPECIAL COUNSEL INVESTIGATION. AND NOW THIS PROPAGANDA CAMPAIGN COMES TO THE OFFICIAL EXANLS OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. YESTERDAY, DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL ROD ROSENSTEIN APPEARED BEFORE THE HOUSE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE FOR AN OVERSIGHT HEARING. AND I WAS APPALLED AND I WAS AMAZED AT THE WAY OUR G.O.P. COLLEAGUES ATTACKED HIM WITH A SERIES OF COMPLETELY PHONY, OVERBLOWN, AND MISLEADING ACCUSATIONS. THEY ARE IN FULL SCALE ASSAULT MODE NOW. THEY ARE IN A FRENZIED WILD GOOSE CHASE TO FIND ANYTHING POSSIBLE TO DISCREDIT SPECIAL COUNSEL MUELLER AND HIS INVESTIGATORS AND HIS TEAM. GUESS WHAT? THEY FINALLY FOUND THEIR VILLAIN THIS WEEK, THEY FOUND THEIR VILLAIN AND POUNCED ON HIM. IT'S AN F.B.I. AGENT NAMED PETER STRZOK, WHO IS WORKING ON THE -- WHO WAS WORKING ON THE INVESTIGATION BUT WAS REMOVED THIS SUMMER WHEN IT WAS DISCOVERED HE SENT A BUNCH OF TEXT MESSAGES TO HIS APPARENT GIRLFRIEND CRITICIZING A NUMBER OF POLITICIANS, INCLUDING DONALD TRUMP, WHO HE HE CALLED AN IDIOT, MR. SPEAKER. I THINK IT WAS WATCHING ONE THOUGH PRESIDENTIAL DEBATES WHERE HE SENT A TEXT MESSAGE TO HIS GIRLFRIEND, WRITING O.M.G., HE'S AN IDIOT. THAT'S THE WAY I'M READING THE TEXTS THAT WERE REVEALED TO US YESTERDAY. NOW HE WAS PROBABLY ONE OF MILLIONS OF PEOPLE TO SEND THAT EXACT SAME TEXT ACROSS THE COUNTRY. WASN'T A VERY NICE THING TO SAY BUT HE SAID IT. HE ALSO CALLED BERNIE SANDERS, THE DEMOCRATIC CANDIDATE FOR PRESIDENT, THE VERMONT U.S. SENATOR, AN IDIOT HE CALLED TRUMP AND IDIOT, CALLED SANDERS AN IDIOT AND HAD EVEN MORE CHOICE AND UNSPEAKABLE WORDS FOR MY FRIEND, THE FORMER GOVERNOR OF MARYLAND, MARTIN O'MALLEY, WHICH I DON'T THINK I CAN REPEAT ON THE FLOOR, MR. SPEAKER. ALL RIGHT, MR. STRZOK WAS SPEAKING HIS MIND IN THESE PRIVATE TEXTS. BUT IT RAISED THE POTENTIALITY OF BIAS IN ONE OF THE AGENTS WORKING ON THE TEAM AND SO WHAT DID MR. MUELLER DO WHEN HE LEARNED OF IT? HE FIRED HIM. IMMEDIATELY. HE -- HE GOT HIM OFF THE INVESTIGATION, REMOVED FROM IF HIM THE INFORMATION AND PUT HIM INTO A DIFFERENT PART OF THE F.B.I. HE REMOVED HIM IMMEDIATELY. FROM THE INVESTIGATION. UNLIKE PRESIDENT TRUMP, FOR EXAMPLE, WHO TOOK 18 DAYS TO FIRE GENERAL FLYNN AFTER LEARNING THAT FLYNN WAS A SERIAL LIAR ABOUT HIS CONNECTIONS WITH RUSSIA. TOOK PRESIDENT TRUMP 18 DAYS. MR. MUELLER FIRED THE GUY IMMEDIATELY BECAUSE PEOPLE MAKE MISTAKES THEY DO THE WRONG THING AND MUELLER SAID, I DON'T WANT HIM ON MY TEAM. REMOVED HIM. THEY PUT HIM SOMEWHERE ELSE. NOW, THAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN THE END OF THE MATTER. RIGHT? SOUNDS LIKE THE END OF THE STORY. IT'S NOT A BIG DEAL. BUT, ON THE EVE OF OUR HEARING YESTERDAY, WE RECEIVED A DUMP OF HUNDREDS OF THESE PRIVATE TEXT MESSAGES BETWEEN MR. STRZOK AND HIS FRIEND, MS. PAIGE. AND THEY MAKE NO DOUBT FOR TITILLATE, FASCINATING, ENGROSSING READING AS THESE TWO PEOPLE MAKE THEIR OBSERVATIONS ABOUT THE PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN. IT'S LIKE ANNA KARENINA OR "HOUSE OF CARDS." IT'S THE KIND OF TRIVIAL GOSSIP PEOPLE GET INTO SOMETIMES IN THIS TOWN. I WAS AMAZED TO LEARN THAT THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE ITSELF, NOT MUELLER, NOT HIS TEAM, BUT THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, THE FORMAL PUBLIC AFFAIRS CHANNEL, HAD ACTUALLY ORCHESTRATED THIS DUMP OF TEXT MESSAGES THAT WERE REVEALED IN THE COURSE OF AN ONGOING DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE INVESTIGATION. INSPECTOR GENERAL INVESTIGATION. THEY TOOK THIS MATERIAL FROM THE MIDDLE OF AN INVESTIGATION, CALLED UP A WHOLE BUNCH OF REPORTERS AND BROUGHT THEM IN TO SHOW THEM THESE TEXTS. WHY? WELL, NOBODY COULD REALLY EXPLAIN ITISM ASKED MR. ROSENSTEIN YESTERDAY AND HE COULDN'T EXPLAIN WHAT REALLY HE SAID, IT HAD BEEN APPROVED. WAS THERE ANY PRECEDENT FOR IT? I SAID. WAS THERE PRECEDENT FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE REVEALING MATERIAL THAT TURNED UP IN THE MIDDLE OF AN ONGOING INVESTIGATION TO REPORTERS? HE COULDN'T NAME ANY. IT WASN'T EVEN IN A PRESS CONFERENCE. SO THAT TOOK PLACE, THAT STRIKES ME AS VERY ODD THAT THERE ARE PEOPLE IN THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE WHO APPARENTLY ARE COOPERATING WITH THIS EFFORT TO UNDERMINE THE INTEGRITY AND THE STRENGTH OF THIS SPECIAL COUNSEL INVESTIGATION. WELL, THE KEY THING TO UNDERSTAND IS THAT ALL OF THOSE TEXT MESSAGES ARE TOTALLY IRRELEVANT. THE GREAT TEXT MESSAGE LOVE STORY SAGA WHICH WAS DUMPED ON US IS AN IRRELEVANT DISTRACTION. MR. MUELLER GOT RID OF MR. STRZOK, REMOVED HIM FROM THE TEAM, END OF STORY. OF COURSE, F.B.I. AGENTS, PROSECUTORS, ARE ALLOWED TO HAVE A POLITICAL PARTY. MUELLER'S GOT ONE, IT'S REPUBLICAN. ROSENSTEIN GOT ONE, HE'S A REPUBLICAN. THAT'S FINE. YOU CAN BE A REPUBLICAN, YOU CAN BE DEMOCRAT. YOU'RE NOT ALLOWED TO HAVE YOUR POLITICAL IDEAS AFFECT YOUR WORK TO THE POINT THAT YOU'RE BIASED. SO I TAKE IT, MR. MUELLER FIGURED THAT THOSE TEXT MESSAGES SUGGESTED THE POSSIBILITY OF BIAS, NOT JUST AGAINST BERNIE SANDERS AND MARTIN O'MALLEY BUT ALSO AGAINST DONALD TRUMP AND SAID, WE'LL REMOVE HIM FROM THE TEAM, HE'S GONE. YESTERDAY, THAT'S ALL THE REPUBLICANS WANTED TO TALK ABOUT THIS GREAT TRUMPED UP FAKE TEXT MESSAGE SCANDAL. TOTALLY IRRELEVANT. THE ONLY ONE WHO, TO HIS CREDIT, TRIED TO MAKE IT RELEVANT WAS A REPUBLICAN COLLEAGUE WHO SAID, THIS IS FRUIT OF THE POISONOUS TREE. AND HE REPEATED IT NUMEROUS TIMES HE INTONED THE WORDS, FRUIT OF THE POISONOUS TREE. I'M A LAW PROFESSOR SO I KNOW WHAT FRUIT OF THE POISONOUS TREE MEANS. IT'S A FOURTH AMENDMENT DOCTRINE WHICH SAYS THAT IF YOU'VE GOT AN ILLEGAL SEARCH OR SEIZURE BY THE GOVERNMENT, YOU CANNOT USE EVIDENCE THAT IS OBTAINED BY VIRTUE OF AN ILLEGAL SEARCH OR AN ILLEGAL SEIZURE AGAINST SOMEONE IN COURT. AND IF THE GOVERNMENT TRIES TO USE IT, THEN THE SO-CALLED EXCLUSIONARY RULE IS ACTIVATED AND YOU EXCLUDE EVIDENCE THAT IS RERIVE -- DERIVED FROM AN ILLEGAL SEARCH OR SEIZURE. THERE'S NO ILLEGAL SEARCH OR SEIZURE OR ALLEGATION OF ILLEGAL SEARCH OR SEIZURE. ALL THEY'VE GOT IS TEXT MESSAGES BETWEEN TWO LOVEBIRDS. THAT'S ITISM ASKED MR. ROSENSTEIN YESTERDAY, I SAID, WAS THERE AN ILLEGAL SEARCH OR SEIZURE? IS THERE AN ALLEGATION OF ILLEGAL SEARCH OR SEIZURE? NO, NONE AT ALL. WHAT'S THE RELEVANCE OF THAT STUFF? NOTHING. THEY FOUND ONE F.B.I. AGENT WHO WAS REMOVED DURING THE SUMMERTIME FOR TRASHING A BUNCH OF POLITICIANS ON BOTH SIDES OF THE AISLE, THEY FIND THAT GUY THEY TALK ONLY ABOUT THE FACT THAT HE CALLED THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES AN IDIOT, WHICH WE MUST CONCEDE HARDLY MAKES HIM AN ORIGINAL CRITIC OF THE PRESIDENT, OK. THEY FIND THAT ONE GUY AND THEN SUDDENLY THEY WANT TO USE THAT TO CLAIM THAT BIAS INFECTS THE WHOLE OPERATION. THE WHOLE INVESTIGATION. WHY ARE THEY DOING THAT? WELL, LOOK. IF THEY WANT TO PUT UP A PROPAGANDA SMOKE SCREEN, THAT'S WITHIN THEIR FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHTS TO DO SO. WITHIN THEIR RIGHTS UNDER THE SPEECH AND DEBATE CLAUSE. THE PROBLEM IS, THERE IS MOUNTING FEAR AND ANXIETY THAT THIS IS TRYING TO SET THE STAGE FOR PRESIDENT TRUMP TO FIRE ROBERT MUELLER. PERHAPS THE MOST ADMIRED LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL IN THE COUNTRY, THEY ARE SETTING THE STAGE TO FIRE HIM WITH ALL THIS TRUMPED UP STUFF ABOUT A BUNCH OF TECHES BETWEEN SOME LOVEBIRDS. THAT'S IT. THAT'S ALL THEY'VE GOT. AFTER ALL THIS TIME THAT'S WHAT THEY'RE USING TO TRY TO DISCREDIT ROBERT MUELLER. AND HIS CHIEF. WHO AT THE TIME OF HIS APPOINTMENT THEY DESCRIBED AS UNIMPEACHABLE, BEYOND REPROACH, AND SO ON. BUT NOW THAT HE'S DOING HIS JOB AND IT LOOKS LIKE THE MOMENTUM OF THE INVESTIGATION IS LEADING TO THE VERY TOP OF THE U.S. GOVERNMENT, THEY MAY BE LOOKING FOR A REASON TO FIRE HIM. WELL, THIS IS AN EMERGENCY, A CONSTITUTIONAL EMERGENCY, IF THIS IS GOING TO HAPPEN. THIS IS WHY WE'RE BLOWING THE WHISTLE ON IT. I'M DELIGHTED TO BE JOINED BY A GREAT LEDGE LATOR, SOMEONE WHOSE CAREER IS WOVEN INTO THE FABRIC OF THE U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, THE MINORITY WHIP OF THIS BODY. I'M JUST DELIGHTED TO YIELD TIME NOW TO STENY HOYER OF MARYLAND.

                            Show Full Text
                          • 01:29:28 PM

                            MR. HOYER

                            I THANK THE GENTLEMAN FOR YIELDING, I THANK HIM FOR TAKING THIS TIME ON…

                            I THANK THE GENTLEMAN FOR YIELDING, I THANK HIM FOR TAKING THIS TIME ON THE SPECIAL ORDER BECAUSE AS AN ASIDE, I NEED TO APOLOGIZE TO HIM FOR MAKING HIM WAIT SO LONG FOR THIS SPECIAL ORDER. I ALSO WANT TO TELL THE AMERICAN PEOPLE, MR. SPEAKER, THAT THE GENTLEMAN WHO HAS TAKE THEN SPECIAL ORDER, WHO IS TAKING THIS SPECIALED ORER IS PROBABLY THE CONSTITUTIONAL EXPERT NOT ONLY IN THIS BODY BUT ONE OF THE CONSTITUTIONAL EXPERTS IN OUR COUNTRY. HE IS A GREAT LEGISLATOR HIMSELF, ALTHOUGH NEW TO THIS BODY, NOT NEW TO BEING A LEGISLATIVE LEADER AT ALL. A LEGISLATIVE LEADER IN OUR STATE FOR MANY YEARS. WONDERFUL TEACHER. AND SOMEBODY WHO HAS GREAT POLITICAL COURAGE AND IS WILLING TO STAND AND SAY THE EMPEROR HAS NO CLOTHES. IS WILLING TO CALL ATTENTION TO THE FACT THAT OUR DEMOCRACY IS AT RISK. THAT OUR DUE PROCESS IS AT RISK. . HE USED THE PHRASE TRUMPED-UP. WHAT AN INTERESTING PHRASE THAT IS THAT WE HAVE USED FOR MANY YEARS. I DON'T KNOW IT'S HAD AS MUCH RELEVANCE IN YEARS PAST AS IT NOW MAY HAVE. MR. SPEAKER, I THANK MY FRIEND, MR. RASKIN, FOR LEADING THIS SPECIAL ORDER. OUR SYSTEM OF GOVERNMENT, AS HE HAS POINTED OUT, IS BASED ON THE RULE OF LAW. WE ARE A GOVERNMENT OF LAWS, NOT OF MEN. WHAT THAT MEANS IS, IT IS NOT PERSONALITIES, NOT DICTATORS, NOT KINGS THAT RULE OUR LAND. IT IS THE LAW. THE LAW OF OUR CONSTITUTION, THE LAW OF OUR LEGISLATORS, AND THE COMMON LAW THAT WE PURSUE. AS INTERRUPTED BY OUR COURT SYSTEMS. ITS FOUNDATION IS THE CONSTITUTIONAL PRINCIPLE THAT ALL ARE EQUAL UNDER THE LAW. NO ONE IS EXEMPT. THE APPOINTMENT OF A SPECIAL PROSECUTOR EARLIER THIS YEAR TO LOOK INTO THE POSSIBILITY OF THE ADMINISTRATION OR TRUMP CAMPAIGN OFFICIALS COLLUDING WITH FOREIGN ADVERSARY OR OBSTRUCTING JUSTICE FALLS INTO A LONG TRADITION IN OUR COUNTRY OF USING INDEPENDENT COUNSEL TO INVESTIGATE THOSE IN THE MOST SENIOR OFFICES OF OUR GOVERNMENT. OUR FOUNDING FATHERS WOULD SAY THAT IS A CHECK AND BALANCE. THAT IS A PROTECTION AGAINST THE EWE SURPATION OF DEMOCRAT -- USURPATION OF DEMOCRAT SIFMENT THE CHOICE OF BOB MUELLER TO BE THAT INDEPENDENT INVESTIGATOR WAS AN EXTRAORDINARY WISE ONE -- DEMOCRACY. THE CHOICE OF BOB MUELLER TO BE THAT INDEPENDENT INVESTIGATOR WAS AN EXTRAORDINARY WISE ONE. PRECISELY BECAUSE MR. MUELLER IS SO WIDELY RESPECTED FOR HIS INDEPENDENCE AND HIS COMMITMENT TO THE LAW ABOVE ALL ELSE. AND PARENTHETICALLY, ALTHOUGH IT IS NOT NECESSARILY RELEVANT, HE'S A REPUBLICAN. HE IS NOT, HOWEVER, DRIVEN BY THE POLITICS OF LEFT OR RIGHT OR REPUBLICAN OR DEMOCRAT. HE IS A MAN OF THE LAW. A MAN WHO SEEKS THE TRUTH. A MAN WHO HAS DEDICATED HIS CAREER TO ASSURING THAT WE REMAIN A LAND OF LIBERTY UNDER LAW. WE HAVE ALREADY SEEN A DEMONSTRATION OF THAT COMMITMENT IN THE PROMPT FIRING OF A SUBORDINATE INVESTIGATOR FOR AN ACT THAT WAS NOT ILLEGAL, AS THE GENTLEMAN FROM MARYLAND, OUR CONSTITUTIONAL SCHOLAR, HAS POINTED OUT. BUT, HOWEVER, THREATENED TO IMPUGN THE OBJECTTIVITY OF THE INVESTIGATION. IN OTHER WORDS, HE REMOVED SOMEBODY WHO HE THOUGHT MIGHT UNDERMINE THE CREDIBILITY OF THIS INVESTIGATION. BECAUSE HE IS SO COMMITTED TO THIS INVESTIGATION BEING OBJECTIVE AND UNQUESTIONABLY FAIR. MR. MUELLER HAS MADE IT ABUNDANTLY CLEAR THAT HE WILL NOT TOLERATE ANY HINT OF BIAS IN THIS INVESTIGATION. SO FAR IT APPEARS THAT HIS INVESTIGATION IS BEARING FRUIT. HAVING UNCOVERED SERIOUS CRIMES AND SECURED THREE INDICTMENTS AS WELL AS GUILTY PLEAS FROM TWO KEY SUBJECTS. GUILTY PLEAS. THIS WAS NOT A QUESTION OF HAVING A TRIAL AND SOMEBODY CONVINCED 12 PEOPLE THAT HE WAS GUILTY. THIS WAS A CASE WHERE THE INDIVIDUAL SAID, I AM GUILTY. I DID WHAT WAS ALLEGED. I KNOW THAT IT IS ILLEGAL. AND I SHOULD BEAR THE CONSEQUENCES. THAT INCLUDED, OF COURSE, THE NATIONAL SECURITY ADVISOR WHO WAS NATIONAL SECURITY ADVISOR, I THINK, FOR 25 DAYS. OR CLOSE TO THAT NUMBER. MR. FLYNN. AS THE INVESTIGATION HAS ADVANCED, MR. SPEAKER, WE'VE SEEN TROUBLING STATEMENTS FROM THE PRESIDENT. AND HIS ADVISORS. SEEKING TO SOW UNCERTAINTY ABOUT THE LEGITIMACY OF THE SPECIAL COUNSEL'S ACTIVITIES AND UNDERMINE CONFIDENCE IN HIM. BUT IT'S NOT SO MUCH THE CONFIDENCE IN HIM THAT IS CRITICAL. IT'S CONFIDENCE IN THE LAW. IT'S CONFIDENCE IN THE PROCESS. IT'S CONFIDENCE THAT IN FACT WE ARE A NATION OF LAWS AND WHETHER WE ARE PRESIDENT OR PEASANT WE WILL BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE. IF IN FACT WE BREAK THE LAWS. WHAT IS BEING DONE TO UNDERMINE THIS PROCESS THREATENS THE INDEPENDENCE OF THE INVESTIGATION AND THOSE WHO ARE UNDERTAKING IT. IT IS DANGEROUS TO OUR DEMOCRACY. AND TO OUR FREEDOM. NOW IN RECENT DAYS WE'VE HEARD CALLS BY THE PRESIDENT AND HIS ALLIES TO LAUNCH A COUNTERINVESTIGATION OF THE SPECIAL PROSECUTOR'S INVESTIGATION. THOSE OF US WHO KNOW HISTORY KNOW THAT THAT IS SO OFTEN THE DEFENSE OF THOSE WHO SEEK AUTHORITARIAN POWER. OF THOSE WHO BELIEVE THEY ARE ABOVE THE LAW. OF THOSE WHO BELIEVE THEY CAN INTIMIDATE OTHERS SO THAT THEY WILL NEVER BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE FOR WRONGDOING. THIS PREPOSTEROUS SUGGESTION HAS BUT ONE PURPOSE. TO CAST A SHADOW OF DOUBT OVER THE FINDINGS OF MR. MUELLER'S INQUIRY BY ATTEMPTING TO FRAME IT IN A PARTISAN WAY. IN FACT, MR. MUELLER WAS APPOINTED BY A REPUBLICAN -APPOINTED DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL. IT IS TACTICS LIKE THIS ONE THAT WE SEE SO OFTEN OVERSEAS IN COUNTRIES RULED BY DICTATORS AND THOSE SEEKING TO BECOME DICTATORS. THIS WILLFUL EFFORT TO ERODE CONFIDENCE IN ANY INSTITUTION, THAT MUST BE SEEN AS IMPARTIAL, IS HARMFUL. BECAUSE IF NOBODY AND NOTHING IS IMPARTIAL, IF EVERYONE AND EVERYTHING IS TAINTED BY POLITICS AND INTEREST, THEN NO ONE, NO ONE CAN POSSESS THE MORAL AUTHORITY TO HOLD ACCOUNTABLE ONE WHO WISHES TO BE ENTIRELY UNACCOUNTABLE. THAT, MR. SPEAKER, IS THE REASON, I THINK, THAT THE PRESIDENT HAS ALSO ATTACKED THE FOURTH ESTATE, THE NEWSPAPERS, THE BROADCASTERS, PEOPLE WHOSE DUTY IT IS TO BRING FACTS TO THE PEOPLE. SO THAT THEY, THE PEOPLE, CAN MAKE A RATIONAL JUDGMENT IN A DEMOCRACY. FOR IT IS IN THEIR HANDS THAT THE POWER ULTIMATELY RESIDES. AND IF YOU UNDERMINE THOSE WHO GIVE THEM THE FACTS, THEN YOU UNDERMINE THEIR ABILITY TO MAKE DECISIONS. THIS ULTIMATELY IS WHAT THE SPECIAL PROSECUTOR'S WORK IS ALL ABOUT. ACCOUNTABILITY. ENSURING THAT EVERY PERSON IS HELD TO THE SAME HIGH STANDARD OF BEHAVIOR UNDER THE LAWS OF OUR NATION. SO, MR. SPEAKER, I URGE MY COLLEAGUES IN BOTH PARTIES, THIS IS NOT ABOUT PARTY, THIS IS ABOUT COUNTRY. THIS IS ABOUT PATRIOTISM. THIS IS ABOUT THE RULE OF LAW. IF WE LOSE THAT RESPECT FOR LAW, WE WILL LOSE OUR COUNTRY. IT WILL BE A DIFFERENT, LESSER COUNTRY. I URGE MY COLLEAGUES FROM BOTH PARTIES, FROM EVERY IDEOLOGICAL CORNER, LET US NOT FORGET THE MOST FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLE THAT BINDS US TOGETHER AS AMERICAN AND AS PUBLIC -- AMERICANS AND AS PUBLIC SERVANTS. THAT ALL ARE CREATED EQUAL. THAT ALL OF US, AND ALL AMERICANS, ARE EQUAL UNDER THE LAW. THAT DOESN'T MEAN WE'RE THE SAME. BUT IT MEANS IN THE EYES OF THE LAW WE ARE EQUAL AS WE STAND TO BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE ON TO BE HELD INNOCENT -- OR TO BE HELD INNOCENT OR NOT INVOLVED OR NOT OWING SOMEBODY ELSE FOR WRONGDOING. WE NEED TO UPHOLD BY OUR WORDS AND BY OUR DEEDS, THE SPECIAL PROSECUTOR'S WORK MUST CONTINUE UNIMPEDED AND IT MUST CONTINUE TO BE RESPECTED. YESTERDAY IN THE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE, THAT WAS NOT THE CASE. TO DEFEND THE INDEFENSIBLE UNDERMINES RESPECT FOR LAW. I WANT TO THANK MY FRIEND AGAIN , MR. RASKIN FROM MONTGOMERY COUNTY, MARYLAND, AS I SAID, A GREAT CONSTITUTIONAL SCHOLAR AND TEACHER. A GREAT LEGISLATOR. BUT MORE IMPORTANTLY THAN THAT, AN INDIVIDUAL WHO LOVES HIS COUNTRY. AND THROUGHOUT HIS LIFE HAS FOUGHT TO MAKE THE COUNTRY ALL THAT THE FOUNDING FATHERS MEANT IT TO BE. I THANK HIM FOR COMING TO THIS FLOOR AND FOR HIS EFFORTS TO ENSURE THAT MR. MUELLER'S INVESTIGATION CAN CONTINUE TO BE SEEN AS IMPARTIAL AND WITH ITS OBJECTIVE UNQUESTIONED. AND THAT IS ACCOUNTABILITY. ACCOUNTABILITY AND JUSTICE. EQUAL JUSTICE UNDER THE LAW. THAT IS OUR BEDROCK. THAT IS OUR TOUCH STONE. THAT IS OUR GUIDING STAR. THAT IS WHAT PROFESSOR RASKIN, CONGRESSMAN RASKIN, CITIZEN RASKIN IS TALKING ABOUT TODAY. AND WE ALL OUGHT TO THANK HIM FOR THAT. AND I YIELD BACK THE TIME TO MY FRIEND, JAMIE RASKIN OF MARYLAND.

                            Show Full Text
                          • 01:41:10 PM

                            M. RASKIN

                            MR. HOYER, THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR KIND WORDS AND THANK YOU FOR YOUR…

                            MR. HOYER, THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR KIND WORDS AND THANK YOU FOR YOUR PATRIOTISM AND THANK YOU FOR ALSO POINTING OUT THE CRITICAL IMPORTANCE OF CIVIC EQUALITY TO THIS DISCUSSION. BECAUSE CIVIC EQUALITY IMPLIES THAT NONE OF US IS ABOVE THE LAW. OF THE MANY DANGEROUS THINGS I'VE HEARD UTTERED OVER THE LAST COUPLE OF WEEKS WITH RESPECT TO THIS INVESTIGATION, PERHAPS NONE IS MORE SINISTER OR DISTURBING THAN THE SUGGESTION THAT THE PRESIDENT CANNOT BE GUILTY OF OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE BECAUSE THE PRESIDENT HIMSELF OVERSEES THE WHOLE GOVERNMENT. WELL, AT THAT POINT WE MAY AS WELL HANG IT ALL UP AND GO BACK TO MONARCHY. BECAUSE THE GOVERNING PRINCIPLE OF OUR CONSTITUTION IS WE HAVE NO KINGS HERE. WE HAVE NO KINGS HERE. SO, MR. HOYER, I WANTED TO THANK YOU FOR THAT. JAMES MADISON WROTE THAT THE VERY DEFINITION OF TYRANNY IS THE COLLAPSELE -- IS THE COLLAPSE OF ALL POWERS INTO ONE. WE'RE TRYING TO DEFEND THE SEPARATION OF POWERSANCE WE'RE TRYING TO DEFEND THE -- POWERS AND WE'RE TRYING TO DEFEND THE RULE OF LAW, AGAINST ALL OF IT BEING DROWNED IN A POLITICAL AGENDA. WE ARE JOINED NOW BY A VERY DISTINGUISHED COLLEAGUE, AND MY COLLEAGUE ON THE HOUSE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE, STEVE COHEN OF TENNESSEE, AND I WOULD LIKE TO YIELD TO HIM AT THIS POINT, MR. SPEAKER.

                            Show Full Text
                          • 01:42:30 PM

                            MR. COHEN

                          • 01:46:49 PM

                            POP -- MR. RASKIN

                            GEORGE PAPADOPOULOS.

                          • 01:46:56 PM

                            MR. COHEN

                            AND THEN A GUILTY PLEA FROM FLYNN. MULER IS DOING HIS JOB AND I THINK HE'S…

                            AND THEN A GUILTY PLEA FROM FLYNN. MULER IS DOING HIS JOB AND I THINK HE'S MAN OF THE YEAR. I THINK HE'LL BE MAN OF THE YEAR NEXT YEAR. HE'S THE ONE PERSON BETWEEN US AND A KLEPTOCRACY A GROUP OF OLIGARCHES, KLEPTOCR TAMBINGS S WHO ARE USING POSITIONS IN GOVERNMENT TO BUILD UP THEMSELVES AND THEIR WEALTH, AND THIS TAX BILL IS THE SAME THING. OLIGARCHES NO INHRTANCE TAX. THEY GET HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS, HUNDREDS OF MALLS OF -- OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS. AND THE PRESIDENT GOES AND SAYS TO A MIDDLE CLASS FAMILY EARNING $75,000, YOU'LL HAVE $2,000 YOU CAN SPEND ANY WAY YOU WANT OR YOU CAN EVEN SAVE IT. $2,000 IS TIP CHANGE AT ORANGE JULIUS TO THOSE PEOPLE. THE BIG MONEY, HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS, HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS, MILLIONS OF DOLLAR THE INHERITANCE TAX BEING REPEALED, THE A.M.T. BEING REPEALED AND OTHER CHANGES. THEN THEY SAID WE ONLY REDUCED THE TAX ON THE WEALTHIEST FROM 39% TO 37% BECAUSE THEY WEREN'T GOING TO GET TO DEDUCT AS MUCH OF THEIR STATE AND LOCAL TAXES, IT WAS GOING TO HURT THEM MORE. THERE ARE PEOPLE NOT IN THE TOP BRACKET WHO AREN'T GOING TO GET TO REDUCE THEIR STATE AND LOCAL TAXES AND THEY GAVE THEM NADA, GAVE IT ALL TO THE WEALTHIEST. THIS IS WHAT IT'S ALL ABOUT. THIS IS ABOUT THE WEALTHIEST PEOPLE TAKING THIS COUNTRY OVER IN AN OLIGARCHY. TRUMP IS REPRESENTATIVE OF THEM. IT'S ABOUT HIM. IT'S NOT ABOUT THE INSTITUTIONS, NOT ABOUT THE CONSTITUTION, IT'S NOT ABOUT PEOPLE, IT'S NOT ABOUT THE FIRST AMENDMENT. SO MANY PEOPLE WHO SUPPORT HIM ARE GOOD, HARDWORK, DECENT AMERICAN PEOPLE WHO DON'T WANT TO BE IN BED WITH RUSSIA, DON'T WANT TO GIVE UP OUR DEMOCRACY, DON'T WANT TO GIVE UP OUR FREE ELECTIONS TO HACKING AND TO INTERNET SOCIAL MEDIA GAMES. THAT'S WHAT WE'VE HAD. SO I THANK YOU FOR HAVING THIS SPECIAL ORDER. I HAVE A BILL I TOOK OVER WITH MR. CONYERS WORK MR. WALTERS JONES, A REPUBLICAN THAT SAYS YOU CAN'T FIRE MR. MUELLER WITHOUT CAUSE AND GIVES REDRESS IN COURT. SHEILA JACKSON LEE HAS ANOTHER. WE HAVE TO BE AWARE AND ALERT. IF THIS HAPPENS, THE PEOPLE HAVE TO LET THEIR REPRESENTATIVES KNOW AND PARTICULARLY THE REPUBLICAN REPRESENTATIVES KNOW, THEY WON'T STAND FOR IT, THEY WON'T LET ANOTHER SATURDAY NIGHT MISS CAR, BECAUSE ROSENSTEIN SAID MR. MUELLER HAS DONE NOTHING TO BE FIRED, PROBABLY WOULD NOT FIRE HIM. WHICH MEANS ROSENSTEIN WILL BE FIRED. AND THAT IS THE END OF THE RULE OF LAW AND THAT'S WHAT MAKES US DIFFERENT FROM OTHER COUNTRIES. MAKES US DIFFERENT FROM DICTATORS. AND AUTOCRATS. THANK YOU, MR. RASKIN.

                            Show Full Text
                          • 01:49:31 PM

                            MR. RASKIN

                            THANK YOU FOR YOUR LEADERSHIP, THANK YOU FOR INVOKING THE CRITICAL…

                            THANK YOU FOR YOUR LEADERSHIP, THANK YOU FOR INVOKING THE CRITICAL WATERGATE ANALOGY, THE SATURDAY NIGHT MISS CAR -- MASSACRE WITH THE FIRING OF ARCHIBALD COX AND OTHERS WHO REFUSED TO COVER UP FOR THE PRESIDENT'S CRIMES AND MISDEEDS. THANK YOU FOR YOUR LEGISLATION THAT WOULD TRY TO EMPOWER THE SPECIAL COUNSEL NOT TO BE FIRED WITHOUT A COURT'S SAY-SO, AT LEAST. SO TO BUILD ANOTHER CHECK AND BALANCE. THANK YOU ALSO FOR INVOKING WHAT'S ALSO TAKING PLACE IN WASHINGTON RIGHT NOW, THIS MASSIVE ASSAULT ON THE AMERICAN MIDDLE CLASS THROUGH THIS TAX -- SO-CALLED TAX CUT BILL WHICH TAX SCAM, WHICH WOULD RAISE TAXES FOR TENS OF MILLIONS OF AMERICANS WHILE TRANSMITTING BILLIONS OF DOLLARS UP THE INCOME AND WEALTH LADDER AND EVER SINCE WE'VE ARRIVED HERE, THE WHOLE GOVERNMENT HAS FELT LIKE A MONEY MAKING OPERATION FOR A PERSON A FAMILY A SMALL GROUP OF BILLIONAIRES IN THE CABINET A HANDFUL OF PEOPLE IN THE COUNTRY LIKE THE KOCH BROTHERS AND THE MERSERS. AND WE CANNOT ALLOW EITHER THIS ASSAULT ON THE BASIC MIDDLE CLASS ECONOMICS OF THE COUNTRY TO GO THROUGH, OR THIS ASSAULT ON THE CONSTITUTION AND THE RULE OF LAW WHICH WE REASONS SOD VIVIDLY YESTERDAY IN THE HOW JUDICIARY COMMITTEE. I WANT TO THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE AND BEING ONE OF THE FIRST TO BLOW THE WHISTLE ABOUT WHAT WAS TAKING PLACE HERE.

                            Show Full Text
                          • 01:51:00 PM

                            MR. COHEN

                            THANK YOU, SIR, AND CARRY ON.

                          • 01:51:03 PM

                            MR. RASKIN

                            WITH THAT, I WOULD JUST LIKE TO SEEK THE OPPORTUNITY FOR US TO REVISE AND…

                            WITH THAT, I WOULD JUST LIKE TO SEEK THE OPPORTUNITY FOR US TO REVISE AND EXTEND OVER THE NEXT SEVERAL DAYS, MR. SPEAKER AND I'M GOING TO YIELD FINALLY TO MY FRIEND MR. MCGOVERN FROM MASSACHUSETTS.

                            Show Full Text
                          • 01:51:24 PM

                            THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

                            THE GENTLEMAN YIELDS BACK. MEMBERS ARE REMINED TO REFRAIN FROM ENGAGING IN…

                            THE GENTLEMAN YIELDS BACK. MEMBERS ARE REMINED TO REFRAIN FROM ENGAGING IN PERSONALITIES TOWARD THE PRESIDENT AND MEMBERS OF THE SENATE WHETHER ORIGINATED AS THE MEMBER'S OWN WORDS OR BEING REITERATED FROM ANOTHER SOURCE. UNDER THE SPEAKER'S ANNOUNCED POLICY OF JANUARY 3, 2017, THE GENTLEMAN FROM MASSACHUSETTS, MR. MCGOVERN, IS RECOGNIZED FOR THE REMAINDER OF THE HOUR AS THE DESIGNEE OF THE MINORITY LEADER.

                            Show Full Text
                          • 01:51:50 PM

                            MR. MCGOVERN

                            MR. SPEAKER, THIS WEEK PEOPLE ALL AROUND THE WORLD ARE COMMEMORATING HUMAN…

                            MR. SPEAKER, THIS WEEK PEOPLE ALL AROUND THE WORLD ARE COMMEMORATING HUMAN RIGHTS DAY. THE ANNUAL CELEBRATION OF THE ADOPTION OF THE UNIVERSAL DECLARATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS. ARTICLE 13 OF THE DECLARATION AFFIRMS THAT EVERYONE HAS THE RIGHT TO LEAD ANY -- LEAVE ANY COUNTRY, INCLUDING HIS OWN, AND RETURN TO HIS COUNTRY. I HAVE THAT RIGHT AS A CITIZEN OF THE UNITED STATES I CAN LEAVE MY COUNTRY WHEREVER I CHOOSE AND I HAVE THE RIGHT TO RETURN WHENEVER I LIKE. FOR ME, THIS RIGHT IS NOT THEORETICAL. I EXERCISE IT EVERY TIME I TRAVEL ABROAD AND EVERY TIME I RETURN HOME. BUT MR. SPEAKER, HIS HOLINESS THE 14TH DA LAMBINGS -- DALAI LLAMA -- LAMA HAS NOT SEEN HIS HOME SINCE HE WAS FORCED INTO EXILE IN 1949. HE DESCRIBES HIMSELF AS A SIMPLE BUDDHIST MONK. HE WAS RECOGNIZED AS THE REINCARNATION OF THE PREVIOUS DALAI LAMA WHEN HE WAS 2 YEARS OLD AND HE DWAN HIS MONASTIC STUDIES WHEN HE WAS 6. WELL BEFORE HE BEGAN HIS STUDIES, HE WAS CALLED UPON TO -- FINISH HIS STUDY, HE WAS CALLED UPON TO ASSUME LEADERSHIP. FOR THE NEXT NINE YEARS HE WORKED TO PRESERVITY BET'S AUTONOMY AND CULTURE. BUT AFTER YEARS OF GROWING RESENTMENT AGAINST RESTRICTIONS IMPOSED BY THE CHINESE COMMUNISTS, A FULL-SCALE REVOLT BROKE OUT IN MARCH, 1959, AND THE DALAI LAMA WAS FORCED TO FLEE AS THE UPRISING WAS CRUSHED BY CHINESE TROOPS. ON MARCH 31, 1959, HE BEGAN A PERMANENT EXILE IN INDIA, SETTLING IN DARAM SALAT IN NORTHERN INDIA. SINCE THEN HE'S NOT RETURNED TOITY BET, OR MORE RACK RATLY, HE'S NEVER BEEN PERMITTED TO RETURN. HE HAS SPENT MORE THAN 60 YEARS IN EXILE. TODAY, THE DALAI LAMA IS 8 YEARS OLD A MAN RENOWNED ALL OVER THE WORLD FOR HIS COMMITMENT TO PEACE. HE'S CONSISTENTLY ADVOCATED FOR POLICIES OF NONVIOLENCE, EVEN IN THE FACE OF EXTREME AGGRESSION. IN 1989, HE WON THE NOBLE PEACE PRIZE IN RECOGNITION OF WHAT WAS THEN HIS NEARLY 3046 YEAR NONVIOLENT CAMPAIGN -- HIS NEARLY 30-YEAR NONVIOLENT CAMPAIGN TO END CHINA'S DOMINATION OF HIS HOMELAND. IN 1987, HE WAS AWARDED THE CONGRESSIONAL GOLD MEDAL AND THEN-PRESIDENT GEORGE BUSH CALLED HIM A MAN OF FAITH, SINCERITY AND PEACE. I HAVE LONG BELIEVED THE DALAI LAMA IS AN PARENT PART OF ACHIEVINGITY BET TAN PEACE. STHINS 1970'S, THE DALAI LAMA HAS BEEN LOOKING FOR A WAY TO RESOLVE THE SITUATION THEY HAVITY BET TAN PEOPLE THROUGH NEGOTIATION HE PROPOSED THE MIDDLE WAY APPROACH AS A PATH TOWARDITY BET TAN AUTONOMY WITHIN CHINA. HIS COMMITMENT TO NONVIOLENCE AND RECOGNITION AS THE SPIRITUAL LEADER OFITY BET TANS WORLDWIDE CONFERS ON HIM AN UNDENIABLE LEGITIMACY THAT WOULD BE OF GREAT BENEFIT WERE CHINA WILLING TO RESTART THE DIALOGUE THAT'S BEEN SUSPENDED SINCE 2010. BUT CHINA HAS NOT RECOGNIZED THIS OR TAKEN ADVANTAGE OF THIS OPPORTUNITY TO ACHEE A PEACEFUL SOLUTION. INSTEAD, CHINESE AUTHORITIES CONTINUE TO VIEW THE DALAI LAMA WITH SUSPICION, DISPARAGE HIM AND ACCUSE OF HIM OF FOMENTING SEPARATISM. THEY SEEM TO BELIEVE WITH HIS EVENTUAL INEVITABLE DEATH THEY WILL BE ASSURED OF CONSOLIDATING THEIR HOLD ONITY BET. I WOULD NOT BE SO SURE. TODAY AROUND THE WORLD WE ARE SEING THE CONSEQUENCES OF REPRESSION OF RELIGIOUS AND ETHNIC MINORITIES. FOR THE CHINESE, THERE'S STILL TIME TO RECOGNIZE THAT INCLUSION AND RESPECT FOR HUMAN RIGHTS OFITY BET TANS OFFERS THE BEST PATH TO SECURITY. SO TODAY, I CALL ON CHINA TO FOLLOW A DIFFERENT PATH. I CALL ON THE CHINESE AUTHORITIES TO AFFIRM THE RIGHT OF THE 14TH DALAI LAMA TO RETURN TO HIS HOMELAND, WHETHER TO VISIT OR TO STAY. I CALL ON THEM TO WELCOME HIM HOME, AFFORD HIM THE RESPECT HE DESERVES AS A MAN OF PEACE AND SIT DOWN WITH HIM TO RESOLVITY BET TAN GRIEVANCES TO PREVENT THE DEEPING OF TENSIONS AND ERUPTION OF CONFLICT. WERE CHINA TO TAKE SUCH A STEP, I BELIEVE THE INTERNATIONAL REACTION WOULD BE POSITIVE. I WOULD BE AMONG THE FIRST TO RECOGNIZE AND CONGRATULATE AN IMPORTANT GESTURE. WE NEED TO BE IN THE BUSINESS OF PREVENTING AND TRANSFORMING CONFLICTS. INSTEAD OF BEING FORCED TO RESPOND TO THEIR CONSEQUENCE AFTER THE FACT. SO I URGE MY COLLEAGUES TO JOIN ME IN CALLING ON THE CHINESE AUTHORITIES TO ALLOW THE DALAI LAMA TO RETURN TO HIS HOMELAND. THE CHINESE GOVERNMENT SHOULD ALLOW HIS HOLINESS THE DALAI LAMA, WHO IS REVERED ALL AROUND THE WORLD, THE ABILITY TO GO BACK TO HIS HOME. TO GO BACK TO WHERE HE WAS BORN. S THAT TIME FOR BOLD ACTION. I URGE MY COLLEAGUES TO SPEAK OUT ALONG WITH ME IN URGING THE CHINESE GOVERNMENT TO DO THE RIGHT THING. NOW IS THE TIME TO RAISE OUR VOICES, NOW BEFORE IT IS TOO LATE. WITH THAT, I YIELD BACK MY TIME.

                            Show Full Text
                          • 01:57:09 PM

                            THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

                            UNDER THE SPEAKER'S ANNOUNCED POLICY OF JANUARY 3, 2017, THE CHAIR…

                            UNDER THE SPEAKER'S ANNOUNCED POLICY OF JANUARY 3, 2017, THE CHAIR RECOGNIZES THE GENTLEMAN GENTLEMAN FROM GEORGIA, MR. LOUDERMILK FOR 30 MINUTES.

                            Show Full Text
                          • 01:57:26 PM

                            MR. LOUDERMILK

                            THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. I DON'T INTEND TO TAKE ALL 30 MINUTES BUT THE TIME…

                            THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. I DON'T INTEND TO TAKE ALL 30 MINUTES BUT THE TIME I D SPEND IS IMPORTANT BECAUSE I WANT TO HONOR AN IMPORTANT PERSON. FIRST LET ME WISH YOU A MERRY CHRISTMAS. AS WE GET INTO THE SEASONMARK OF US ARE THINKING ABOUT FAMILY AND FRIENDS AND SPENDING CHRISTMAS TIME AT HOME, WHICH I HOPE TO BE ABLE TO DO AS WELL. EVERY CHRISTMAS SEASON, MY THOUGHT GOES BACK ABOUT 73 YEARS AGO MY DAD WAS A MEDIC IN WORLD WAR II. AND ON DECEMBER 16, WHICH WILL BE JUST A FEW DAYS FROM NOW, WILL BE THE 73RD ANNIVERSARY OF ONE OF THE LARGEST, MOST SIGNIFICANT BATTLES OF WORLD WAR II. THE BATTLE OF THE BULGE. MY FATHER WAS A MEDIC IN THE BATTLE OF THE BULGE. I STILL REMEMBER THE STORY HE IS USED TO TELL OF THE COLD WEATHER AND THE SNOW AND HOW WHEN THE GERMANS BROKE THROUGH THE SEEING FRED LINE THEY DECIMATED AMERICAN FORCES. WE LOST THOUSANDS AND THOUSANDS OF TROOPS IN THOSE FEW DAYS. AND HOW THE SNOW WAS JUST SO HEAVY AND SO THICK THAT THEY -- MANY WERE TRAPPED IN THEIR FOX HOLES, UNABLE TO ESCAPE. MANY RETREATED BACK TO THEIR -- TO AREAS OF SAFETY AND THE LINES BEHIND. BUT I DON'T WANT TO TALK ABOUT MY DAD HERE TODAY. I WANT TO TALK ABOUT SOMEONE ELSE A DEAR FRIEND OF MINE, SOMEONE I GOT TO SERB IN THE GEORGIA LEGISLATURE WITH. ANOTHER YOUNG GEORGIAN FROM SPALDING COUNTY, WHO WAS A PILOT IN THE ARMY AIR CORPS. NOW, CAPTAIN JOHN YATES WAS NOT WHAT YOU MAY THINK OF, MOST PEOPLE THINK OF AN ARMY AIR CORPS PILOT FLYING A BMBING-29 OR B-25 MITCHELL. WHAT JOHN YATES FLEW WAS A SMALL SINGLE ENGINE PIPER CUB AIRCRAFT. HE WAS LIAISON PILOT. MOST PEOPLE AREN'T FAMILIAR WITH WHAT A LIAISON PILOT IS, BUT THEY PLAYED A CRUCIAL AND CRITICAL ROLE IN THE VICTORY IN EUROPE IN WORLD WAR II AND EVEN IN THE PACIFIC THEATER. YOU SEE THIS -- AS A PILOT I HAVE A LOT OF APPRECIATION FOR SOMEONE WHO WILL FLY A VERY SMALL PLANE, I MEAN, I'M A PRETTY TALL GUY, I DON'T FIT IN THE COCKPIT OF A PIPER CUB VERY WELL. THAT'S WHY I'VE NEVER ACTUALLY FLOWN ONE. BUT JOHN YATES WOULD CLIMB INTO THE COCKPIT OF THIS SMALL, SINGLE ENGINE AIRCRAFT, WHICH ARE STILL IN USE TODAYMARK OF THEM ARE USED IN THE BUSH AREAS OF ALASKA BECAUSE OF HOW LIGHTWEIGHT THEY ARE AND SMALL AND COMPACT, DON'T TAKE A WHOLE LOT OF RUNWAY HE WOULD CLIMB INTO THIS SMALL ALUMINUM AIRPLANE AND WOULD FLY JUST ABOVE THE FREE TOP -- TREE TOPS TO DRAW ENEMY FIRE HE FLEW A PLANE TO BE SHOT AT. NOW THIS WASN'T LIKE CLOSE AIR SUPPORT AIRPLANES WE HAVE TODAY THAT HAVE TITANIUM SHELLS THAT CAN ABSORB A LOT OF IMPACT. NO, THIS WAS JUST A SMALL PLANE WITH AN ALUMINUM SKIN AROUND THE FUSELAGE. BUT WHAT HIS PURPOSE WAS, WAS TO FLY CLOSE TO THE ENEMY, TO TRY TO SPOT THE ENEMY, AND CAUSE THE ENEMY TO FIRE AT HIM, SO OUR ARTILLERY AND OUR OTHER AIRCRAFT WOULD ACTUALLY KNOW WHERE THE ENEMY FORCES WERE AND WHERE THEIR HEAVY ARTILLERY WAS. IT'S AN INCREDIBLE, INCREDIBLE JOB FOR SOMEONE TO DO, ESPECIALLY A YOUNG PERSON. MAYBE IN HIS 20'S. AS HE WAS SERVING IN WORLD WAR II. NOW, AFTER 60 YEARS OF -- FROM THE TIME THAT HE FLEW THOSE PIPER CUB AIRCRAFT I HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO SERVE WITH JOHN YATES IN THE GEORGIA LEGISLATURE. IT WAS ONE THING I APPRECIATED ABOUT JOHN, AS WE FIND FROM A LOT OF VETERANS, AS A VETERAN MYSELF I KNOW THAT SAME FEELING AS YOU -- ONCE YOU SERVE YOU ALWAYS HAVE THIS DESIRE TO SERVE IN ANOTHER CAPACITY. IN 1989, JOHN WAS ELECTED TO THE GEORGIA HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. I CAME SEVERAL YEARS LATER TO SERVE WITH HIM, BUT JOHN CONTINUED HIS FIGHT FOR HIS FELLOW SERVICEMEN, FOR HIS COUNTRY, AND THE GEORGIA LEGISLATURE, AS HE WAS CHAIRMAN OF THE VETERANS' COMMITTEE AND WAS ALWAYS ON THE FRONT LINES OF FIGHTING FOR VETERANS' CARE, FOR VETERANS AND TO ENSURE THE GOVERNMENT PROVIDED TO VETERANS THE CARE THAT THEY NEEDED AND THE SERVICES THAT THEY DESERVED. HE UNDERSTOOD THE MEANING OF PATRIOTISM. HE LIVED AS A PATRIOT, AND EVERYTHING HE DID PORTRAYED THE IDEA OF PATRIOTISM. ONE THING I LIKED ABOUT JOHN YATES WAS ONE OF HIS FAVORITE QUOTES WAS FROM WINSTON CHURCHILL AND THAT QUOTE WAS, NEVER GIVE UP, NEVER GIVE UP, NEVER GIVE UP. THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE CAN TAKE HOLD OF OURSELVES TODAY, ESPECIALLY AS AMERICANS. WE HAVE A HISTORY OF NEVER GIVING UP, OF FORTITUDE, THE NOT JUST TAKING DEFEAT AND RUNNING AWAY BUT TAKING DEFEAT AND TURNING IT INTO A VICTORY. JOHN YATES NEVER QUIT SERVING. ALL HE LOOKED FOR WAS THE ABILITY TO SERVE IN THE NEXT MISSION HE WAS CALLED FOR. AND ON DECEMBER 11 THIS YEAR, JOHN YATES WENT ON TO HIS NEXT MISSION IN HEAVEN. WE'RE GOING TO MISS JOHN YATES. THE STATE OF GEORGIA IS GOING TO MISS JOHN YATES, BUT I STAND HERE TODAY, MR. SPEAKER, TO HONOR ONE OF THOSE TRUE AMERICAN PATRIOTS WHO STOOD IN THE FACE OF BATTLE AND FACED THE ENEMY FACE TO FACE, AND WHEN HE CAME HOME HE FOLLOWED THAT DESIRE TO CONTINUE TO SERVE AND HE SERVED UNTIL HE PASSED AWAY JUST A FEW DAYS AGO. MR. SPEAKER, I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO JUST TAKE A MOMENT AND RECOGNIZE ANOTHER ANNIVERSARY. SIX MONTHS AGO TODAY ON A BASEBALL FIELD JUST A FEW MILES FROM HERE, I AND SEVERAL OF MY COLLEAGUES FOUND OURSELVES IN A COMBAT ZONE OF OUR OWN. DOESN'T SEEM LIKE IT'S BEEN SIX WHOLE MONTHS SINCE A CRAZED GUN MAN WALKED ONTO OUR FIELD AND STARTED SHOOTING AT US, BUT THE REASON I WANT TO BRING THAT UP TODAY IS BECAUSE EVERY PERSON ON THAT FIELD THAT DAY THAT WAS SHOT AT IS STILL IN THIS HOUSE TODAY AND STILL WALKING AROUND IN WASHINGTON, D.C. BY THE GRACE OF GOD, WE WERE PROTECTED DURING THAT TIME, AND I JUST WANT TO THANK EVERYONE WHOSE PRAYERS AND SUPPORT AND THOSE WHO RESPONDED TO THAT EVENT TO COME OUT AND SAVE THE LIVES OF MANY OF US. STEVE SCALISE, THE WHIP, THAT WE SERVE WITH HERE. MATT MICA,, ONE OF OUR STAFF MEMBERS. ZACH BARTH. AND CAPITOL POLICE CRYSTAL GRINER ALL WERE WOUNDED DURING THAT BALLOT. AND IT REALLY WAS A BATTLE. BUT I ALSO WANT TO HIGHLIGHT SOME OF THOSE THAT DIDN'T LEAVE THE FIELD THAT DAY, WHO STAYED AND HELP OTHERS. PEOPLE LIKE MY GOOD FRIEND FROM MISSISSIPPI, CONGRESSMAN TRENT KELLY, AN ARMY RESERVIST WHO WHEN HE IDENTIFIED THE SHOOTER HE DIDN'T PANIC AND LED MANY TO SAFETY. REPRESENTATIVE MISSOURI BROOKS WHO STAYED AND HELPED TURN GET ZACH BARTH WHO HAD BEEN SHOT IN THE CALF. BRAD WENSTRUP WHO IS ALSO A COLONEL IN THE ARMY RESERVE SERVES, A COMBAT DOCTOR, WHO WAS OUT ON THE EDGE OF THE FIELD AND COULD HAVE EASILY RAN AWAY BUT STAYED AND WAS ONE OF THE FIRST TO BE ABLE TO RUN OUT AND GIVE AID TO STEVE SCALISE OUT ON THE FIELD AS HE LAID NEAR SECOND BASE. RETIRED LIEUTENANT GENERAL JACK BERGMAN. GENERAL BERGMAN WAS ABLE TO ACTUALLY LEAD SEVERAL OF OUR PLAYERS AND STAFF MEMBERS TO SAFETY INSIDE OF THE DUGOUT AWAY FROM THE GUNFIRE. AND ALSO FOR BRIAN KELLY, CIVILIAN STAFF MEMBER ON THE TEAM WHO STAYED WITH ME THROUGHOUT THE GUNFIRE AS WE TRIED TO LEND AID TO MATT WHO WAS LAYING NEXT TO THE CAPITOL POLICE S.U.V. THROUGHOUT THE ENTIRE INCIDENT. AND FINALLY, AS MY THANKS GOES OUT TO SPECIAL AGENT DAVID BAILEY WHO I PERSONALLY WATCHED ON NUMEROUS OCCASIONS PUT HIS OWN LIFE IN DANGER AS HE WOULD MOVE OUT INTO THE LINE OF FIRE TO DRAW FIRE AWAY FROM MYSELF AND BRIAN KELLY BECAUSE HE SAW WHENEVER THE SHOOTER WAS NOT SHOOTING AT THE CAPITOL POLICE HE WAS SHOOTING AT US AND HE WOULD PURPOSEFULLY MOVE HIMSELF IN THE LINE OF FIRE AND MIR ACKLEY PROTECT -- MIRACULOUSLY PROTECTED. AND SO THE ALEXANDRIA POLICE DEPARTMENT WHO CAME TO OUR AID AND EVENTUALLY TOOK DOWN THE SHOOTER. YOU KNOW, MOMENTS LIKE THIS ARE SURREAL TO ME AND TO OTHERS AND THEY ARE IMPORTANT THAT WE GO BACK AND WE REFLECT AND WE REMEMBER THESE MOMENTS BECAUSE THE ONLY WAY THAT WE CAN CORRECT MISTAKES FROM OUR PAST IS IF WE GO BACK AND WE RELIVE THEM AND WE LOOK AT WHAT CAUSED THIS. AND AS WE STAND HERE TODAY, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I SEE THAT WE NEED IN AMERICA THAT WE HAVE LOST IS THE IDEA OF CIVILITY. WE HEARD HERE ON THE FLOOR TODAY DIFFERING OPINIONS REGARDING POLICY, IDEAS OF WHAT IS GOOD FOR THIS COUNTRY, WHAT IS RIGHT FOR THIS COUNTRY, AND THAT'S PART OF THE STRENGTH OF THIS COUNTRY. THAT IS THE FREEDOM THAT WE HAVE IS TO BRING DIFFERENT IDEAS. THE WHOLE IDEA OF THIS CHAMBER IS TO BRING DIFFERENT IDEAS AND DIFFERENT POLICY OPINIONS TO THE FLOOR AND DEBATE. AND THOSE THAT GET THE MAJORITY OF IDEAS, PEOPLE ON THEIR SIDE OF THE IDEAS, THEN WE MOVE FORWARD WITH THOSE. BUT AT SOME POINT IN THE PAST WE HAVE TRANSITIONED BEYOND JUST ARGUING OVER IDEAS, AND WE BRING RHETORIC THAT'S DISTASTEFUL. WE ATTACK THE PERSON, THEIR FAMILIES. I JUST BELIEVE THAT WE CAN DO A WHOLE LOT BETTER IN THIS NATION IF WE ONCE AGAIN FIND THE ABILITY TO AGREE TO DISAGREE BUT RESPECT THE RIGHTS AND THE FREEDOM AND THE LIBERTY OF THE OTHER PERSON TO HAVE THEIR OPINION. IF WE CAN DO THAT THEN WE CAN ENGAGE IN DISCOURSE AND WE WILL LESSEN THE AMOUNT OF VIOLENCE THAT WE SEE THAT ARE DRIVEN BY POLITICAL RHETORIC. THAT WILL BE THE MESSAGE THAT I WOULD PASS OFF TO AMERICA ON THE ANNIVERSARY OF THE SHOOTING, BECAUSE IT'S -- THAT'S THE IDEA, THAT PEOPLE LIKE JOHN YATES LIVED THEIR LIVES FOR, THAT FOUGHT THE BATTLES THEY FOUGHT FOR WAS FOR THE FREEDOM WE HAVE IN THIS NATION TO CONTINUE TO EXIST. I BELIEVE AMERICA'S GREATEST DAYS ARE AHEAD OF US, BUT WE GOT A LITTLE WORK TO DO TO ACTUALLY GRASP HOLD OF THIS. MR. SPEAKER, I THANK YOU FOR THE TIME, THANK YOU FOR ALLOWING ME TO HONOR THE MEMORY OF MY GOOD FRIEND AND COLLEAGUE, JOHN YATES, AND I YIELD BACK THE BALANCE OF MY TIME.

                            Show Full Text
                          • 02:09:32 PM

                            THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

                            THE GENTLEMAN YIELDS BACK. UNDER THE SPEAKER'S ANNOUNCED POLICY OF JANUARY…

                            THE GENTLEMAN YIELDS BACK. UNDER THE SPEAKER'S ANNOUNCED POLICY OF JANUARY 3, 2017, THE CHAIR RECOGNIZES THE GENTLEMAN FROM TEXAS, MR. GOHMERT, FOR 30 MINUTES.

                            Show Full Text
                          • 02:09:54 PM

                            MR. GOHMERT

                            THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. MY COLLEAGUES ACROSS THE AISLE DISCUSSING ISSUE OF…

                            THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. MY COLLEAGUES ACROSS THE AISLE DISCUSSING ISSUE OF SPECIAL COUNSEL MUELLER AND SINCE THERE'S ONE OR TWO POSSIBILITIES ABOUT SOME OF THE THINGS THEY SAID REGARDING REPUBLICANS AND ESPECIALLY ON THE COMMITTEE EITHER AS HIS MEMORY IS TERRIBLE OR HE'S FALSELY INTENTIONALLY MISREPRESENTING THINGS. I AM NOT SAYING THAT'S THE CASE. I'M SAYING IT'S ONE OR THE OTHER AND I WILL GET TO THAT MOMENTARILY. THIS HEARING WE HAD THIS WEEK IN JUDICIARY WITH DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL ROD ROSENSTEIN DEEPLY, DEEPLY TROUBLING TO THOSE WHO WANT THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE TO BE ABOUT JUSTICE. THOSE WHO WANT TO SEE THE F.B.I. BE THAT GREAT ARBITER, THAT GREAT ENTITY THAT WILL ASSURE THAT JUSTICE IS DONE. WE NEED AN ENTITY LIKE THAT. THE A.T.F., THEIR REPUTATION WAS SORELY SOILED BACK DURING THE ATTACK BY THE A.T.F. ON WACO, THE FACILITY WHERE SOME FOLKS THAT HAD BEEN SUCKED IN TO BASICALLY A CULT, IT DIDN'T HAVE TO HAPPEN, AND AS WE FOUND OUT, LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT SAID WE KNEW THAT DAVE OCCUR HE SHALL WENT TO SAM -- KURESH WENT TO SAM'S WHOLESALE IN BELL IMMEDIATE, I THINK TUESDAY, AND IF THE A.T.F. TOLD US THEY WANTED TO ARREST HIM, WE COULD HELP THEM ARRANGE, AS HE WALKED OUT OF SAM'S WITH GROCERY SACKS IN HIS ARMS AND THERE WOULD HAVE BEEN NO INCIDENT. NO LIVES WOULD HAVE BEEN LOST. NO CHILDREN BURNED UP IN A FIRE. NO PEOPLE KILLED SO UNNECESSARILY. BUT THE A.T.F. WANTED TO MAKE A POINT AND WANTED TO HAVE A BIG SHOW AND ACTUALLY THERE WERE CONSTITUTIONAL ISSUES THERE. I READ IN THE PAPER THAT THE GENTLEMAN THAT SERVED WITH ME AT FORT BENING, GEORGIA, DURING MY TIME IN THE ARMY HAD ADVISED THE POST COMMANDER OUT AT FORT BLISS THAT HE SHOULD NOT ALLOW THE U.S. ARMY TANKS OR EQUIPMENT TO BE USED IN VIOLATION UNLESS HE HAD A DIRECT ORDER FROM THE PRESIDENT HIMSELF AND AS WE FOUND OUT AFTER THE FACT, THE PRESIDENT MADE CLEAR THAT OH, THAT WAS RENO'S DEAL. YOU HAVE TO TALK TO HER ABOUT THAT. SO CLEARLY HE DID NOT ORDER U.S. MILITARY TO USE EQUIPMENT AND ALLOW THEIR EQUIPMENT TO BE USED AGAINST CIVILIAN AMERICAN CITIZENS. SO THERE WERE ALL KINDS OF TERRIBLE THINGS THAT CAME OUT AND IT REALLY MADE THE A.T.F. LOOK BAD. AND I WAS A FAN OF THE A.T.F., THE FEDERAL A.T.F. THEY KNEW THEM TO HAVE DONE SOME GREAT THINGS AND I HAD SOME GREAT DEAR FRIENDS AND STILL DO HAVE SOME VERY DEAR GREAT FRIENDS THAT ARE IN THE A.T.F., BUT THE POINT IS SUCH HORRENDOUS JUDGMENT IN THE A.T.F. SETTING UP WHAT THEY KNEW OR SHOULD HAVE KNOWN WOULD PROBABLY RESULT IN LOSSES OF LIVES, INCLUDING SEVERE INJURIES TO A.T.F. THEMSELVES. I DON'T THINK THEY LOST ANYBODY, BUT THEY CERTAINLY WERE SEVERELY WOUNDED AND TREATED THERE IN WACO, BUT THAT KIND OF OUTRAGEOUS JUDGMENT THAT PUTS POLITICAL AND NEWS INTERESTS AHEAD OF JUST DOING THE JOB AND SEEING JUSTICE DONE ENDS UP BEING SUCH A TERRIBLE BLOT ON THE REPUTATION OF ANY ENTITY THAT IT'S HARD TO WORK BACK FROM THAT. I STILL HEAR PEOPLE THAT REFER TO THAT INCIDENT NEARLY 25 YEARS AGO AND STILL IT'S SUCH A BLOT ON THE A.T.F. THAT IT'S HARD FOR PEOPLE TO CONSIDER THE A.T.F. WITHOUT THINKING HOW TERRIBLY -- JUST INAPPROPRIATE THE A.T.F. ACTED AT TIMES. . AND CAUSED PEOPLE TO WONDER, WAS THAT THE GENERAL RULE OR WAS THAT THE EXCEPTION AND PEOPLE AFTER SOME OTHER EPISODES THINK IT'S THE RULE WITH THE A.T.F., SOME SAY GET RID OF IT. WHAT'S GONE ON NOW IS CURRENTLY GOING ON NOW, WITH THE DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL TAKING ALL THREE POSITIONS THAT HE SEES NO EVIL , HE HEARS NO EVIL , HE DOESN'T KNOW OF ANY EVIL GOING ON HE THINKS EVERYTHING, LIKE THE PET SAID, GOD'S IN HIS HEAVEN AND ALL IS RIGHT WITH THE WORLD. I BELIEVE THE AUTHOR HAD A LITTLE GIRL SAYING THAT. BUT IT'S NOT RIGHT WITH THE WORLD. TERRIBLY WRONG. AND AMERICA AND THE WORLD SIT IN A POSITION WHERE POTENTIALLY WESTERN CIVILIZATION WHERE THE MOST INCREDIBLE, AMAZING STRIDES IN HEALTH CARE IN ENERGY, AND ALL KINDS OF AREAS OF LIFE ON THIS EARTH HAVE BEEN MADE BETTER EXPONENTIALLY. THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA IS AT THE VERY HEART OF THOSE GREAT DEVELOPMENTS. A MAJORITY IN THE UNITED STATES THROUGHOUT OUR HISTORY WOULD ALWAYS SAY, WE CALL THOSE BLESSINGS FROM GOD. NOW, MAYBE IT IS, MAYBE IT ISN'T, A MAJORITY, BUT WE ARE EVER GETTING CLOSER TO A POSITION WHERE THIS GRAND EXPERIMENT IN SELF-JUDGMENT IS POTENTIALLY ON THE VERGE OF BEING LOST. HISTORY IS NOT BEING TAUGHT AS ZELLOUSLY AS IT ONCE WAS. PLACES LIKE HILLDALE COLLEGE OR LIBERTY. THERE ARE SOME PLACES WHERE IT IS BEING TAUGHT. I HAD FANTASTIC HISTORY TEACHERS, WHICH IS WHAT I MAJORED IN AT TEXAS A&M, BECAUSE I KNEW I WAS GOING TO DO FOUR YEARS IN THE ARMY AT LEAST AND IF WE WERE AT WAR WHEN MY FOUR YEARS WERE UP, I WOULD HAVE CONTINUED TO SERVE. BUT OUR STUDENTS DON'T KNOW HISTORY ANYMORE. WHY? BECAUSE PRESIDENT CARTER DECIDED THAT THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT INTERVENTION INTO EDUCATION, EVEN THOUGH IT'S NOT AN ENUMERATED POWER UNDER THE CONSTITUTION AND IT IS THEREFORE A POWER THAT IS RESERVED TO THE STATES AND THE PEOPLE AND NOT THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT, WELL WE'VE BEEN ACTING EXTRA CONSTITUTIONALLY, THAT MEANS OUTSIDE THE INSTITUTION, FOR QUITE SOME TIME, GOING BACK TO THE LATE 1970'S UNDER PRESIDENT CARTER. AND OUR STUDENTS HAVE SUFFERED AS A RESULT. AND THEY DON'T KNOW HISTORY. AND SOMEONE HAD ADVISED ME THAT EVEN THOUGH HISTORY IS NOT AN IMPORTANT PART OF THE FEDERALLY MANDATED TEST, THERE ARE THINGS THAT IN DIFFERENT SUBJECTS ARE MANDATED BY THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. HERE IS AN ELEMENT THAT STUDENTS SHOULD KNOW ABOUT THE SUBJECT. I WAS ADVISED THAT THE ONE AREA THAT FEDERAL -- THE FEDERALLY MANDATED TEST, THE OBVIOUSLY AREA HISTORICALLY THAT STUDENTS WERE REQUIRED TO KNOW IS THAT WHEN THE UNITED STATES DROPPED TWO ATOMIC BOMBS, ONE ON HIGH ROSHE MA AND ONE ON -- ON HIROSHIMA AND ONE OF NAGASAKI, IT RAISED SERIOUS QUESTIONS ABOUT THE UNITED STATES' MORALITY WHICH IS ABSOLUTELY FICTITIOUS, UNLESS THE IGNORANCE OF THE AUTHORS REQUIRING SUCH A THING DID NOT ALLOW THEM TO KNOW THE TRUTH. THE TRUTH BEING THAT TRUMAN WAS ADVISED THAT BECAUSE THE EMPEROR OF JAPAN HAD ORDERED THE JAPANESE PEOPLE TO FIGHT FOR THEIR HOMES TO THE DEATH, THEN THE ALLIED FORCES WOULD HAVE TO LAND IN JAPAN, THEY WOULD HAVE HAD TO MOVE ACROSS THE COUNTRY AND IT WAS CONSIDERED A VERY FAIR AND POSSIBLY QUITE CONSERVATIVE ESTIMATE THAT THERE WOULD BE 10 MILLION PEOPLE LOSE THEIR LIVES IF ALLIED FORCES HAD TO LAND AND WERE FIGHTING THE JAPANESE PEOPLE HOME TO HOME TO HOME. SO THE MORALITY OF THE ISSUE IS, WOULD WE MORALLY BE BETTER OFF IN THIS ABSOLUTE WAR THAT THE JAPANESE STARTED AGAINST THE UNITED STATES, WOULD WE BE BETTER OFF LOSING THE HORRIBLE TRAGEDY OF 300,000 OR SO LIVES, OR WOULD WE BE BETTER OFF HAVING FIVE OR SO MILLION JAPANESE PEOPLE KILLED AND FIVE OR SO MILLION ALLIED FORCES BEING LOST? AND THE MORALLY CORRECT DECISION THAT A DEMOCRAT, A MAN THAT APPARENTLY REALLY WRESTLED WITH THE ISSUE FROM A MORAL STANDPOINT, HE DECIDED TO PUT THE AMERICAN BOMBERS AT RISK, THOSE FLYING THE PLANES AND TAKING THE ATOMIC BOMBS, AND TO PUT 200,000 OR 300,000 OR SO PEOPLE AT RISK IN AN EFFORT TO AVOID LOSING FIVE MILLION OR SO JAPANESE AND AN EQUAL NUMBER OF MORE OF THE ALLIED FORCES. I THINK HE MADE THE CORRECT MORAL DECISION. SO THAT DOESN'T RAISE MORAL ISSUES ABOUT THE UNITED STATES, IT RAISES IGNORANCE ISSUES ABOUT THE FEDERALLY MANDATED TEST. WE WOULD BE SO MUCH BETTER OFF IF WE GOT BACK TO ALLOWING LOCAL SCHOOL BOARDS TO DECIDE AND STATES TO DECIDE, AS THEY HAD BEEN FOR MANY DECADES, DECIDING WHAT THEIR STUDENTS SHOULD LEARN. THAT WAS THE BEAUTY OF A FEDERALIST SITUATION WHERE STATES WOULD HAVE SO MUCH POWER. BUT AS IS OFTEN THE CASE WHEN THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT TAKES OVER AN AREA LIKE EDUCATION, THEN IT GETS WORSE. AND I WAS ON THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE TEXAS A&M FORMER STUDENT ASSOCIATION AND I CAN RECALL THE PRESIDENT ADVISING US THAT THE S.A.T., OFFICIAL S.A.T. HAD TO CHANGE THE SCORING SYSTEM FOR THE S.A.T. BECAUSE STUDENTS ACROSS THE BOARD WERE DOING SO MUCH WORSE THAN THEY DID WHEN CLASSES AROUND MY ERA IN THE 1970'S HAD DONE. THAT WE HAD DONE OVERALL SO MUCH BETTER THAN THE STUDENTS THAT CAME THROUGH AFTER THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT TOOK OVER EDUCATION. AND SO I DON'T KNOW IF IT WAS ACCURATE BUT I HAD EDUCATORS BACK AT THE TIME SAY THERE'S A FORMULA SO IT'S HARD TO SAY BUT SAY IF YOU SCORED, SAY, 1400 OUT OF 1600 ON THE S.A.T. IN THE 1970'S, THEN UNDER THE NEW SCORING SYSTEM IT WOULD PROBABLY BE SCORED CLOSER TO 1600, 1500 TO 1600, MAYBE A COUPLE HUNDRED POINTS THEY HAD TO ADD TO THE SYSTEM -- THEY HAD TO ADD TO THE SYSTEM BECAUSE AFTER WE HAD A FEDERAL DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, THEN, YOU KNOW, STUDENTS STARTED DOING WORSE AND SO THE TO THE KEEP IT FROM LOOKING LIKE THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION HERE IN WASHINGTON MADE EDUCATION AS POOR AS IT HELPED TO DO, WE HAD TO RAISE THE S.A.T. SCORES BASICALLY ON AN ARBITRARY BASIS. WE KNOW THAT THE STUDENTS COMING THROUGH IN THE 1980'S, 1990'S, AND THEN THIS NEW MILLENNIUM, THEY HAD THE POTENTIAL TO DO BETTER THAN WE EVER DID BUT BECAUSE THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT GOT INVOLVED, I DON'T THINK IT'S JUST A GREAT IRONY THAT A -- WHEN THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT TOOK OVER EDUCATION UNDER PRESIDENT CARTER, THAT WOW, IRONICALLY, ISN'T IT AMAZING, AT THE SAME TIME STUDENTS WERE DOING WORSE AND WORSE. SO THAT'S WHAT OFTEN HAPPENS WHEN THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT GETS INVOLVED AND WE SAW THAT WITH WACO. IF THEY HAD GOTTEN THE HELP OF THE LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT, THERE WOULD HAVE BEEN NO LOSS OF LIFE IN ALL REALITY. BUT THE A.T.F. WAS GOING TO BUST IN AND MAKE A BIG SHOW OUT OF IT. AND IT COST AN AWFUL LOT OF LIVES. WELL, YOU'D LIKE TO THINK THAT WHEN THE F.B.I. COMES IN YOU DON'T HAVE TO WORRY. THEY'RE GOING TO DO THE RIGHT THING. AND I KNOW SO MANY INCREDIBLE, OUTSTANDING F.B.I. AGENTS. BUT FOR MR. COHEN TO CONTINUE TO SAY EVEN AFTER HE'S BEEN ADVISED AND REMINDED THAT I HAVE BEEN RAISING CAIN ABOUT ROBERT MUELLER FOR OVER A DECADE, I GUESS, HE CAME IN, SWORN IN IN JANUARY OF 2007 AS I UNDERSTAND IT, AND INITIALLY WHEN I QUESTIONED ROBERT MUELLER AS F.B.I. DIRECTOR, WHEN I FIRST GOT TO CONGRESS, I WAS CARRYING THAT IMAGE OF THE GREAT F.B.I., THE IMAGE THAT SO MANY OF THE AGENTS STILL CARRY. THOUSANDS OF THEM STILL CARRY. BUT WITH MORE AND MORE DIFFICULTY BECAUSE OF THE CESSPOOLS THAT HAVE DEVELOPED HERE IN WASHINGTON. AND THE WAY IN WHICH IT HAD BEEN USED AS WE SAW WITH THE I.R.S. DURING THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION, WEAPONIZED AND USED AS A POLITICAL INSTRUMENT. NOW, HOW DO WE KNOW THAT? WELL, WE DIDN'T KNOW NEAR AS MUCH AS WE CONTINUE TO FIND OUT, BUT ROBERT MUELLER RAN OFF THOUSANDS OF YEARS OF EXPERIENCE AND I CONTEND IT WAS BECAUSE HE WANTED NOTHING BUT YES PEOPLE. HE DIDN'T WANT THE EXPERIENCED PEOPLE AROUND THE COUNTRY THAT MIGHT TRY TO POINT OUT TO THE DIRECTOR WHEN HE MADE ONE OF HIS MANY MISTAKES, AS F.B.I. DIRECTOR OR CHOSE SOFTWARE PROGRAMS, CHOSE LAW ENFORCEMENT PROGRAMS, THAT CREATED PROBLEMS. BECAUSE THEY HAD MORE EXPERIENCE THAN HE DID. HE DID NOT REALLY WANT PEOPLE AROUND THE COUNTRY TO HAVE MORE EXPERIENCE THAN HE DID BECAUSE THEY MIGHT QUESTION SOMETHING THAT HE ORDERED INAPPROPRIATELY AND HE JUST WANTED PEOPLE TO SALUTE HIM, ABSOLUTE THE FLAG, FIGURATIVELY SPEAKING, AND DRIVE FORWARD. THAT MEANS WHEN MUELLER WANTED SOMEBODY TO BUST DOWN THE DOOR IN THE MIDDLE OF THE NIGHT EVEN THOUGH THERE WAS NO THREAT OF THE INDIVIDUAL FLEEING, NO THREAT OF THE INDIVIDUAL HIDING EVIDENCE, IT'S DONE AS WE ARE NOW SEEING THE MUELLER SPECIAL COUNSEL GROUP, TEAM, SWAT UNIT, UNOFFICIAL SWAT, OF COURSE, BUT WE'RE SEEING THEM USE THESE TYPE OF TACTICS. NOW I DON'T KNOW, REALLY KNOW PAUL MANAFORT, DOESN'T SEEM LIKE A FELLOW I WOULD ENJOY GETTING ALONG WITH. NONETHELESS, IT CERTAINLY APPEARED HE WAS VERY MATERIALLY MISTREATED BECAUSE MUELLER WANTED TO MAKE SURE HE GOT HIS POINT. THEY KNOCKED DOWN THE DOOR OR AT LEAST WENT IN IN THE MIDDLE OF THE NIGHT, HOWEVER THEY GOT IN, AND YOU KNOW, WE'VE HEARD THIS BEFORE. THIS HEAVY HANDED FEDERAL GOVERNMENT, AND THERE WAS NO REASON FOR THAT OTHER THAN BULLYING, MEAN, FEDERAL AGENTS AT THE TOP, WANTING TO BULLY PEOPLE AROUND. WE SAW THAT KIND OF CONDUCT WITH MIKE FLYNN AS HE WAS SET UP. HE HAD BEEN AS PART OF THE TRANSITION TEAM TALKING TO PEOPLE AT THE F.B.I. ABOUT DIFFERENT ISSUES. AND NOW WE KNOW STRZOK WAS PART OF THAT, THIS MAN THAT ABSOLUTELY LOATHED THE PRESIDENT -ELECT TRUMP. HE LOATHED EVERYTHING ABOUT TRUMP AND THOSE HE WAS GOING TO BE BRINGING INTO OFFICE. WE DIDN'T KNOW HOW BADLY THEY DESPICED OR LOATHED THE PRESIDENT AND REPUBLICANS SUPPORTING HIM UNTIL WE GOT MORE INFORMATION. BUT THESE KIND OF THINGS ARE THINGS THAT ROBERT MUELLER SHOULD HAVE KNOWN. HE SHOULD HAVE KNOWN THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE'S REPUTATION AND HOPE FOR BEING CONSIDERED RIGHTEOUS WAS ALL RIDING ON HIM. AND WHAT HE DID. AND YET HE RODE IN WITH HIS BLACK HAT, FIGURATIVELY, FOR THOSE IN THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA THAT DON'T UNDERSTAND THOSE TYPE OF REFERENCES. AND HE BEGAN TO OVERREACH AND WE HEARD FROM THE GUY THAT APPOINTED MUELLER YESTERDAY, ROD ROSENSTEIN, THAT, GEE, YEAH, REALLY, TO HAVE A SPECIAL COUNSEL YOU HAVE TO BELIEVE BASICALLY THAT A CRIME WAS COMMITTED. SO IT WOULD SEEM TO REASON THAT MUELLER WAS APPOINTED TO INVESTIGATE SOMETHING THEY HAD REASONABLY POSSIBLY A CRIME HAD BEEN COMMITTED. AND YET BECAUSE OF WHETHER IT'S INCOMPETENCE OR ZEAL WANTING MUELLER TO GO ON A WITCH-HUNT TO JUST KEEP SEARCHING UNTIL YOU FIND SOMETHING EVEN IF IT'S A POOR GUY LIKE SCOOTER LIBBY WHO DEVOTED HIS LIFE TO HELPING OUR COUNTRY, WE NEED SOMEBODY'S SCALP AND IT DOESN'T LOOK LIKE THAT DONALD J. TRUMP WAS COLLUDING WITH THE RUSSIANS SO WE GOT TO HAVE SOMEBODY'S SCALP. LET'S INTIMIDATE SOME PEOPLE. LET'S BULLY OUR WAY INTO HOMES IN THE MIDDLE OF THE NIGHT. LET'S DO WHATEVER WE GOT TO DO. MANY ARE SAYING MICHAEL FLYNN DIDN'T LIE. TO BE A LIE YOU HAVE TO INTENTIONALLY -- HAVE INTENT TO DECEIVE BUT WHETHER THEY'RE RIGHT OR WRONG ABOUT THAT, WORD IS HE WAS BANKRUPTED BY AN OVERZEALOUS BULLY. I MEAN, ALL MY FRIENDS ON THE LEFT TALKING ABOUT BULLYING. I WAS SMALL FOR MY AGE AND IN MY CLASS I WAS BULLIED. HAD BLACK EYE. BLOODY NOSE. HAD A FIFTH GRADE TEACHER AFTER A BIG BULLY TOOK MY FOOTBALL AND I TRIED TO GET IT BACK AND ENDED UP BLOODY NOSE, BLACK EYE. OUR TEACHER LOVED THE BULLY BACK THEN AND PULLED ME IN FRONT OF THE CLASS WHILE I WAS TRYING TO GET MY NOSE TO STOP BLEEDING AND TOLD THE CLASS, THIS IS WHAT HAPPENS WHEN LITTLE BOYS TRY TO PLAY WITH THE BIG BOYS. BUT I KNOW SOMETHING ABOUT BEING BULLIED. AND I RECOGNIZE IT IN A GOVERNMENT GROUP WHEN I SEE IT AND THE MUELLER TEAM HAS BEEN BULLIES BUT THAT'S WHAT MUELLER WANTED. WHY DO YOU THINK HE WENT AND HIRED WEISSMANN WHO DESTROYED THOUSANDS AND THOUSANDS OF EMPLOYEE'S LIVES TO WORK FOR ARTHUR ANDERSON IN A JOIST AT WINDMILLS THAT COST THESE PEOPLE THEIR LIVELIHOODS, CAUSED MORE PAIN AND SUFFERING IMAGINABLE FAR WHAT THE SUPREME COURT SAID 9-0 YOU'RE A FOOL? THIS WAS NOT A CRIME. YOU MADE THIS UP. AND THAT'S WHO MUELLER WANTED ON HIS TEAM. THIS IS THE SAME ROBERT MUELLER I HAVE BEEN POINTING OUT FOR YEARS THAT HAS BEEN GROSSLY UNFAIR AND RUNNING OFF THE THOUSANDS OF YEARS OF EXPERIENCE THAT HE DID SO HE COULD HAVE GREAT PEOPLE, WONDERFUL PEOPLE BUT KNEW AND THEY NOT ONLY WERE -- BUT NEW AND NOT ONLY WERE THEY NEW AND YOUNG BUT HE WAS ELIMINATING THE OLDER FOLKS THAT HAD THE EXPERIENCE THAT COULD BRING THEM ALONG BECAUSE MUELLER WANTED HEM CREATED -- THEM CREATED IN HIS IMAGE AND GET RID OF WISDOM THROUGH THE AGES. AND I AM SURE THERE WERE A BUNCH OF PEOPLE THAT NEEDED TO GO BUT YOU DON'T DESTROY AN ENTIRE ENTITY LIKE THE FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION JUST BECAUSE YOU WANT A BUNCH OF YES MEN AND THAT'S WHAT BOB MUELLER DID. THAT MAN SHOULD NEVER HAVE BEEN ANYWHERE CLOSE TO BEING A SPECIAL COUNSEL. HE COULDN'T STAND TRUMP, AND AS THE WASHINGTONIAN MAGAZINE WAS GLORIFYING CHAMES COMEY, I BELIEVE IT WAS -- JAMES COMEY, I BELIEVE IT WAS 2013 ISSUE WHERE THEY SAID BASICALLY, IN ESSENCE, IF THE WORLD WERE BURNING DOWN, YOU KNOW, JAMES COMEY KNEW THAT THE ONE PERSON THAT WOULD BE STANDING THERE WITH HIM WOULD BE BOB MUELLER. AND COMEY IS THE VERY GUY THAT ADMITTED LEAKING EVIDENCE OR LEAKING INFORMATION OUT IN ORDER TO TRY TO GET A SPECIAL COUNSEL APPOINTED. AS I COVERED WITH MR. ROSENSTEIN YESTERDAY, THIS IS PART OF AN F.B.I. TYPICAL EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT. EVERYBODY IS SUPPOSED TO SIGN THIS THING. ALL INFORMATION ACQUIRED BY ME IN CONNECTION WITH MY OFFICIAL DUTIES WITH THE F.B.I. AND ALL MATERIAL WHICH I HAVE ACCESS REMAIN THE PROPERTY OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. I WILL SURRENDER UPON DEMAND BY THE F.B.I. OR UPON THE SEPARATION FROM THE F.B.I. ALL MATERIALS CONTAINING F.B.I. INFORMATION IN MY POSSESSION. SO IF A MAN LIKE COMEY GOES TO A MEETING IN HIS OFFICIAL CAPACITY OF F.B.I. DIRECTOR WITH THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES AND HE COMES OUT OF THERE AND HE TYPES UP A MEMO , EVEN THOUGH IT APPEARS IT WAS A PRETTY LESS THAN UNBIASED MEMO TRYING TO MAKE PRESIDENT TRUMP LOOK BAD, SO HE COMMEMORATES IT WITH A MEMO. WELL, THAT MEMO, AS I DISCUSSED WITH MR. ROSEN STEIN -- ROSENSTEIN YESTERDAY, THAT IS PROBABLY GOVERNMENT PROPERTY. THAT'S GOVERNMENT INFORMATION, GOVERNMENT PROPERTY, AND THE QUESTION IS, DID HE COMMIT A CRIME WHEN HE LEAKED THAT INFORMATION? AND THERE'S A DECENT CHANCE YES. SO WHERE'S THE F.B.I. IN ITS INVESTIGATION INTO JAMES COMEY'S POTENTIAL, AND WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE RECORD AND YOU GO BACK, OH, NOW WE KNOW FROM THAT ONE INCIDENT THIS IS THE PERSON TO WHOM HE LEAKED AND THAT GOT TO "THE NEW YORK TIMES," OH, HERE'S ANOTHER MEETING WHERE HE WAS THE PRINCIPAL CHARACTER THERE, THE MOST LIKELY PERSON TO HAVE LEAKED, WELL, LO AND BEHOLD, HIS SAME CONDUIT FOR LEAKING INFORMATION THAT HE'S ADMITTED TO ENDS UP BEING IN PLACE IN THIS STORY. THERE MAY BE AT LEAST SIX OTHER PLACES WHERE HE'S LEAKED INFORMATION AND SOME OF THEM MAY BE CRIMES, BUT BECAUSE THE SPECIAL COUNSEL WAS ALL ABOUT TRYING TO STRIP THE WINNER OF A PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION, THAT'S -- WE'RE NOT GOING AFTER COMEY. WE'RE NOT GOING AFTER ANY OF THESE OTHER PEOPLE. THEY'RE TRYING TO FIND SOMETHING AS WE NOW KNOW FROM THE TEXT MESSAGES OF F.B.I. AGENT STRZOK, THEY WANTED AN INSURANCE POLICY SO THAT IN CASE TRUMP WON, THEY COULD STILL GET RID OF HIM. OF COURSE, STRZOK BELIEVED THAT NO ONE IN THIS COUNTRY SHOULD VOTE, NOT A SINGLE PERSON, NOT EVEN DONALD TRUMP'S FAMILY SHOULD VOTE FOR HIM. IT OUGHT TO BE 100 MILLION-0. BUT, MR. SPEAKER, IT IS SO CLEAR THAT IN MY DAYS OF TRYING CASES IN FEDERAL COURT, STATE COURT WHERE YOU'RE ASKING QUESTIONS OF A JURY PANEL TO SEE WHO WOULD BE FAIR ENOUGH TO SIT ON A JURY, WE CAN SEE THAT THESE PEOPLE THAT WERE WORKING AND HAVE BEEN AND SOME STILL ARE FOR THE F.B.I., FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, THEY HAVE NO BUSINESS GETTING CLOSE TO THIS INVESTIGATION UNLESS THEY ARE A TARGET OF INVESTIGATION. ANDREW WEISSMANN SHOULD NEVER HAVE BEEN PART OF THE SPECIAL COUNSEL TEAM. PETER STRZOK, THIS IS ONLY SOME OF THE TEXT MESSAGES HE SENT, BUT HE SAYS -- HE ASKED ME WHO I'D VOTE FOR. I GUESS KASICH. IT GOES ON. GOD, TRUMP IS A LOATHESOME HUMAN. MAY HE WIN. GOOD FOR HILLARY. WOULD HE BE WORSE PRESIDENT, CRUZ. TRUMP, YES, I THINK SO. THIS IS AN EXCHANGE BETWEEN PETER STRZOK, P.S. IN THIS -- AND HIS MISTRESS, LISA PAIGE, WHO'S ALSO WORKING FOR THE F.B.I. I MEAN, THESE PEOPLE HAVE DONE IRREPARABLE DAMAGE TO THE F.B.I. BUT WORSE THAN THAT, THEY HAVE MADE A MOCKERY OF JUSTICE IN THE UNITED STATES. AND WHAT REALLY GETS ME, I KNOW HOW UPSET I WAS IN THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION WHEN I SAW SOMEBODY DOING WRONG. I DIDN'T CARE IF HE WAS APPOINTED BY A REPUBLICAN OR DEMOCRAT. I DIDN'T CARE THAT PRESIDENT BUSH HAD APPOINTED A MAN OR WOMAN TO A POSITION. WHAT I CARED ABOUT IS THEM BEING RIGHTEOUS AND DOING THE RIGHT THING. AND NOW WHERE IS MY DEMOCRAT FRIEND WHO WILL STAND UP AND SAY THIS ISN'T RIGHT? WE KNOW ALAN DERSHOWITZ, GREAT DEMOCRAT, HE'S DONE IT. WHO WOULD PICK UP THE PHONE AND SAY THIS IS AN OUTRAGE? WHAT HAS HAPPENED UNDER THIS ATTORNEY GENERAL SHOULD NEVER HAVE HAPPENED. HE'S GOT TO GO. WHERE IS THE DEMOCRAT THAT HAS A SENSE OF MORAL OUTRAGE WHEN THE JUSTICE SYSTEM IS JUST SHAKEN TO ITS CORE BY PEOPLE THAT WANT TO TAKE OUT A PRESIDENT BECAUSE THEY DIDN'T SUPPORT HIM, THEY DIDN'T WANT HIM TO BE THERE, THEY DIDN'T THINK ANY AMERICAN SHOULD VOTE FOR HIM, AND THEY'RE DESTROYING OUR SENSE OF JUSTICE AND OUR JUSTICE SYSTEM? IT'S TIME FOR AMERICANS TO WAKE UP. IT'S TIME TO CLEAN HOUSE, GET RID OF MUELLER, GET SOME FAIR PEOPLE IN THERE TO INVESTIGATE AND WITH THAT I YIELD BACK.

                            Show Full Text
                          • 02:41:29 PM

                            THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

                            THE GENTLEMAN'S TIME HAS EXPIRED. REMARKS ON DEBATE IN THE HOUSE MAY NOT…

                            THE GENTLEMAN'S TIME HAS EXPIRED. REMARKS ON DEBATE IN THE HOUSE MAY NOT BE -- EXCUSE ME -- REREMARKS IN DEBATE IN THE HOUSE MAY NOT ENGAGE IN PERSONALITIES TO PRESIDENTS WHETHER ORIGINAL RATED FROM THE MEMBER'S OWN WORDS OR BEING REITERATED BY ANOTHER SOURCE. FOR WHAT PURPOSE DOES THE GENTLEMAN FROM TEXAS SEEK RECOGNITION?

                            Show Full Text
                          • 02:41:49 PM

                            MR. GOHMERT

                            I MOVE WE DO NOW HEREBY ADJOURN.

                          • 02:41:51 PM

                            THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

                            HEREBY ADJOURN.

                          Briefings for December 14, 2017

                          View all Congressional News Conferences

                          Hearings for December 14, 2017

                          Today
                          View All House Hearings

                          Statistics

                          115th Congress - House
                          Total Hours: 1286 (After 534 days)
                          • Debate606 Hours
                          • Special Orders259 Hours
                          • Votes201 Hours
                          • One Minute Speeches108 Hours
                          • Morning Hour93 Hours
                          • Opening Procedures7 Hours

                          Click a category within the legend to toggle its visibility.

                          Source: Resume of Congressional Activity (senate.gov)