House of Representatives

Description
Despite their best efforts, our Native American brothers and sisters cries have fallen on deaf ears.

Congressional Record
U
NUM
E PLURIB
U
S
United States
of America PROCEEDINGS AND DEBATES OF THE
113
th
CONGRESS, FIRST SESSION
b This symbol represents the time of day during the House proceedings, e.g., b 1407 is 2:07 p.m.
Matter set in this typeface indicates words inserted or appended, rather than spoken, by a Member of the House on the floor.
.
H3657
Vol. 159 WASHINGTON, MONDAY, JUNE 17, 2013 No. 86
House of Representatives
The House met at noon and was
called to order by the Speaker pro tem-
pore (Mr. BENTIVOLIO).
f
DESIGNATION OF SPEAKER PRO
TEMPORE
The SPEAKER pro tempore laid be-
fore the House the following commu-
nication from the Speaker:
WASHINGTON, DC,
June 17, 2013.
I hereby appoint the Honorable KERRY
BENTIVOLIO to act as Speaker pro tempore on
this day.
JOHN A. BOEHNER,
Speaker of the House of Representatives.
f
MORNING-HOUR DEBATE
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursu-
ant to the order of the House of Janu-
ary 3, 2013, the Chair will now recog-
nize Members from lists submitted by
the majority and minority leaders for
morning-hour debate.
The Chair will alternate recognition
between the parties, with each party
limited to 1 hour and each Member
other than the majority and minority
leaders and the minority whip limited
to 5 minutes each, but in no event shall
debate continue beyond 1:50 p.m.
f
NATIONAL FOOTBALL LEAGUE’S
WASHINGTON FOOTBALL FRAN-
CHISE NAME
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The
Chair recognizes the gentleman from
American Samoa (Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA)
for 5 minutes.
Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Mr. Speaker,
I rise today to denounce the dispar-
aging name of the National Football
League’s Washington, D.C., franchise,
the Redskins, which I will refer to as
the ‘‘R-word.’’ The Native American
community has spent millions of dol-
lars over the past two decades to fight
the racism that is perpetuated by this
slur. Despite their best efforts, our Na-
tive American brothers’ and sisters’
cries have fallen on deaf ears. Such an
impasse is largely due to the wide-
spread ignorance regarding the history
of this denigrating term. Mr. Speaker,
I would like to share with my col-
leagues the painful and violent past as-
sociated with the ‘‘R-word.’’
The origin of the ‘‘R-word’’ is com-
monly attributed to the historical
practice of trading Native American
Indian skins, Mr. Speaker, Native
American Indian skins and body parts
as bounties and trophies. For example,
in 1749, the British bounty on the
Mi’kmaq Nation of what is now Maine
and Nova Scotia was a straightforward
‘‘10 guineas for every Indian Mi’kmaq
taken or killed, to be paid upon pro-
ducing such savage taken or his scalp.’’
Just as devastating was the Phips
Proclamation, issued in 1755 by Spen-
cer Phips, lieutenant governor and
commander in chief of the Massachu-
setts Bay Province, who called for the
wholesale extermination of the Penob-
scot Indian Nation. The Phips Procla-
mation declared the Penobscot to be
‘‘enemies, rebels, and traitors to his
Majesty King George, II’’ and required
those residing in the province to ‘‘em-
brace all opportunities of pursuing,
capturing, killing, and destroying all
and every of the aforesaid Indians.’’
By vote of the General Court of the
Province, white settlers were paid out
of the public treasury for killing and
scalping the Penobscot people. The
bounty for a male Penobscot Indian
above the age of 12 was 50 pounds, and
his scalp was worth 40 pounds. The
bounty for a female Penobscot Indian
of any age and for males under the age
of 12 was 25 pounds, while their scalps
were worth 20 pounds. Historical ac-
counts show that these scalps were
called ‘‘Redskins.’’
The current chairman and chief of
the Penobscot Nation, Chief Kirk
Francis recently declared in a joint
statement that the ‘‘R-word’’ is ‘‘not
just a racial slur or a derogatory
term,’’ but a painful ‘‘reminder of one
of the most gruesome acts of ethnic
cleansing ever committed against the
Penobscot people.’’ The hunting and
killing of Penobscot Indians, as stated
by Chief Francis, Mr. Speaker, was ‘‘a
most despicable and disgraceful act of
genocide.’’
Mr. Speaker, such disgrace continues
to live on through Washington’s fran-
chise’s name. In a recent letter to 10 of
our colleagues, the National Football
League’s Commissioner Roger Goodell
said essentially that the use of the ‘‘R-
word’’ is meant to honor Native Ameri-
cans. Baloney. He added, ‘‘For the
team’s millions of fans and customers,
the name is a unifying force that
stands for strength, courage, pride, and
respect.’’ In other words, Mr. Speaker,
the National Football League is telling
everyone—Native Americans in-
cluded—that they cannot be offended
because the National Football League
means no offense.
Mr. Speaker, Mr. Goodell’s casual
and dismissive response is indicative of
the racist history beyond the Wash-
ington franchise’s name. Its founder,
George Preston Marshall, is identified
by historians as the driving force be-
hind the color barrier that existed for
12 years in the National Football
League, a sad chapter from 1934 to 1945
when African Americans were prohib-
ited from the league by a ‘‘gentleman’s
agreement’’ that we’re not allowed to
play. Mr. Marshall changed the team’s
name from the Braves in 1933, and after
the NFL’s color line was crossed in
1946, Marshall’s franchise was the last
team on the field where African Ameri-
cans were allowed to play—and not
until 1962.
I might also add that Mr. Marshall
did not welcome African American
players with open arms. It was then
that Secretary of the Interior, Stewart
Udall, and Attorney General Robert F.
VerDate Mar 15 2010 06:33 Jul 12, 2013 Jkt 079060 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 7634 Sfmt 0634 E:\RECORD13\RECFILES\H17JN3.REC H17JN3
b
j
n
e
a
l

o
n

D
S
K
4
S
P
T
V
N
1
P
R
O
D

w
i
t
h

C
O
N
G
-
R
E
C
-
O
N
L
I
N
E
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—HOUSE H3658 June 17, 2013
Kennedy presented Marshall with an
ultimatum: unless Marshall signed an
African American player, the govern-
ment would revoke his franchise’s 30-
year lease of the use of the stadium
here in the District of Columbia.
Mr. Speaker, today, we find ourselves
fighting the same racist threads that
pervaded the Washington franchise for
more than 50 years. We simply cannot
continue to carry on hateful traditions
that mock, belittle, disparage, and dis-
grace those of a different race because
of the color of their skin. As a Nation,
we have come too far to fight for these
rights, and I think Native Americans
deserve to have a better sense of self-
esteem and dignity.
With that, Mr. Speaker, I yield back
the balance of my time.
f
RECESS
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursu-
ant to clause 12(a) of rule I, the Chair
declares the House in recess until 2
p.m.
Accordingly (at 12 o’clock and 7 min-
utes p.m.), the House stood in recess.
f
b 1400
AFTER RECESS
The recess having expired, the House
was called to order by the Speaker at 2
p.m.
f
PRAYER
The Chaplain, the Reverend Patrick
J. Conroy, offered the following prayer:
God, our Father, we give You thanks
for giving us another day.
Bless the Members of the people’s
House as they return to Washington.
May their energy to address our Na-
tion’s issues be renewed following their
visits home for the Father’s Day week-
end.
Continue to bless all who work in the
Capitol. May our citizens be mindful of
their generous service to the oper-
ations of government and supportive of
them as they toil in relative anonym-
ity day in and day out.
We ask that what all those who work
within these hallowed Halls do would
be for Your greater honor and glory.
Amen.
f
THE JOURNAL
The SPEAKER. The Chair has exam-
ined the Journal of the last day’s pro-
ceedings and announces to the House
his approval thereof.
Pursuant to clause 1, rule I, the Jour-
nal stands approved.
f
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
The SPEAKER. Will the gentleman
from Ohio (Mr. WENSTRUP) come for-
ward and lead the House in the Pledge
of Allegiance.
Mr. WENSTRUP led the Pledge of Al-
legiance as follows:
I pledge allegiance to the Flag of the
United States of America, and to the Repub-
lic for which it stands, one nation under God,
indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.
f
SECURING THE FUTURE
(Ms. FOXX asked and was given per-
mission to address the House for 1
minute.)
Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, House Re-
publicans have a plan to create jobs,
grow our economy, and secure our fu-
ture for all Americans. And we’re going
to do it by expanding opportunity, not
expanding government.
We’re going to hold government ac-
countable to the hardworking tax-
payers of this country. We’re going to
rein in runaway Washington spending
that’s driving up our national debt.
We’re going to reform our Tax Code to
make it fair and simpler for all Ameri-
cans. We’re going to promote an all-of-
the-above, all-American energy strat-
egy that will create jobs, lower energy
costs, and strengthen our national se-
curity.
These are the commonsense solutions
that the American people deserve. It’s
not fair that Washington Democrats
keep offering up only more spending
and political games. Real solutions to
real problems, that’s the House Repub-
lican commitment.
f
THE GET RELIEF FROM ACADEMIC
DEBT ACT OF 2013
(Ms. NEGRETE MCLEOD asked and
was given permission to address the
House for 1 minute.)
Mrs. NEGRETE MCLEOD. Mr. Speak-
er, upon graduation, many students are
faced with repayment of student loans,
in addition to seeking employment in a
very tough job market. Over 5.4 million
Americans have at least one past-due
student loan account which affects
their credit and our Nation’s economy.
Last week my colleague, Representa-
tive JANICE HAHN, and I introduced
H.R. 2349, the Get Relief from Aca-
demic Debt Act of 2013. The GRAD Act
would extend the grace period of 6
months to 1 year after graduation be-
fore the onset of repayment of the Fed-
eral student loans.
By extending the grace period, grad-
uates have a longer period of oppor-
tunity to find a good-paying job before
repayment of these loans begins. I urge
the House to consider this legislation
for the millions of the Nation’s grad-
uate students who are struggling to
pay back loans.
f
SEXUAL ASSAULT WITHIN OUR
MILITARY MUST BE ADDRESSED
(Mr. WILSON of South Carolina
asked and was given permission to ad-
dress the House for 1 minute and to re-
vise and extend his remarks.)
Mr. WILSON of South Carolina.
Madam Speaker, sexual assault and
misconduct within our military ranks
occur far too often, and threaten the
safety of both men and women serving
in our Armed Forces. Our brave mili-
tary personnel go well beyond the call
of duty risking their lives to protect
American families and the freedoms we
hold dear. It is our obligation to crack
down on these heinous crimes by
strengthening the military justice sys-
tem so that we can better protect those
who protect us.
I am very grateful that last week
Members from both sides of the aisle
joined together in a bipartisan fashion
to address this problem by passing the
National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2014. Sexual Assault Pre-
vention Caucus leaders MIKE TURNER
and NIKI TSONGAS, with House Armed
Services Committee Chairman BUCK
MCKEON, worked together to make a
difference.
Thankfully, we were successful in in-
cluding 20 additional provisions that
will address prevention, investigation,
prosecution, and punishment of the
crime of sexual assault.
In conclusion, God bless our troops,
and we will never forget September the
11th in the global war on terrorism.
f
CDKL5 AWARENESS DAY
(Mr. WENSTRUP asked and was
given permission to address the House
for 1 minute.)
Mr. WENSTRUP. Madam Speaker, I
stand before you today to tell you
about a rare disorder known as CDKL5.
Today, June 17, is CDKL5 Awareness
Day. This genetic disorder was discov-
ered by genetic markers in 2004. Those
impacted usually suffer from seizures
and rarely, if ever, walk or talk.
My niece, Catie, is one of only 600
known cases in the world. When Catie
was born just 5 years ago, only 200 chil-
dren had been diagnosed with CDKL5
disorder. Due to the recent discovery of
this condition, and its resemblance to
Rett Syndrome, epilepsy and autism,
it’s likely that there are many children
who have been undiagnosed or
misdiagnosed.
Families are forced to turn to the
Internet and the community of parents
because even doctors know relatively
little about CDKL5. Unfortunately, at
this time there’s no cure, only hours of
therapy, and for many, traveling long
distances to specialists. Fortunately,
CDKL5 research is taking place.
The children impacted with CDKL5
disorder cannot talk to you about their
condition, so the responsibility falls to
us to raise awareness.
My family learns something from
Catie every day. It’s my hope that we
can continue to learn more for Catie
and the other young people impacted
by CDKL5 disorder.
f
THE AMERICAN DREAM
(Mr. YODER asked and was given
permission to address the House for 1
minute and to revise and extend his re-
marks.)
Mr. YODER. Madam Speaker, I rise
today to speak about the American
VerDate Mar 15 2010 06:33 Jul 12, 2013 Jkt 079060 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 7634 Sfmt 0634 E:\RECORD13\RECFILES\H17JN3.REC H17JN3
b
j
n
e
a
l

o
n

D
S
K
4
S
P
T
V
N
1
P
R
O
D

w
i
t
h

C
O
N
G
-
R
E
C
-
O
N
L
I
N
E
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—HOUSE H3659 June 17, 2013
Dream. In the United States, we are a
Nation of opportunity, a country that
provides everyone the chance to follow
their ideas, to innovate, to explore, to
create, and to build.
In the United States, this Nation of
opportunity is best represented by the
millions of small businesses that make
our economy grow and put our friends
and neighbors to work. That’s why I’m
proud today to speak to recognize Na-
tional Small Business Week.
More than two out of every three new
jobs created in our country are made
possible by small businesses. As we
spend this week highlighting the inno-
vations and successes of small busi-
nesses across the country, let us renew
our efforts to help all Americans get
back to work with bipartisan and com-
monsense legislation that helps these
small businesses grow and hire new em-
ployees.
Madam Speaker, we must continue to
work together to harness the full eco-
nomic drive of the United States econ-
omy, and that drive is led by the men
and women in the engine room of each
and every small business across our
great Nation.
f
RECESS
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Ms.
FOXX). Pursuant to clause 12(a) of rule
I, the Chair declares the House in re-
cess until approximately 5 p.m. today.
Accordingly (at 2 o’clock and 9 min-
utes p.m.), the House stood in recess.
f
b 1700
AFTER RECESS
The recess having expired, the House
was called to order by the Speaker pro
tempore (Mr. COLLINS of New York) at
5 p.m.
f
MESSAGE FROM THE PRESIDENT
A message in writing from the Presi-
dent of the United States was commu-
nicated to the House by Mr. Sherman
Williams, one of his secretaries.
f
ANNOUNCEMENT BY THE SPEAKER
PRO TEMPORE
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursu-
ant to clause 8 of rule XX, the Chair
will postpone further proceedings
today on motions to suspend the rules
on which a recorded vote or the yeas
and nays are ordered, or on which the
vote incurs objection under clause 6 of
rule XX.
Record votes on postponed questions
will be taken later.
f
IDAHO WILDERNESS WATER
RESOURCES PROTECTION ACT
Mr. BISHOP of Utah. Mr. Speaker, I
move to suspend the rules and pass the
bill (H.R. 876) to authorize the contin-
ued use of certain water diversions lo-
cated on National Forest System land
in the Frank Church-River of No Re-
turn Wilderness and the Selway-Bitter-
root Wilderness in the State of Idaho,
and for other purposes.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The text of the bill is as follows:
H.R. 876
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Rep-
resentatives of the United States of America in
Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Idaho Wil-
derness Water Resources Protection Act’’.
SEC. 2. TREATMENT OF EXISTING WATER DIVER-
SIONS IN FRANK CHURCH-RIVER OF
NO RETURN WILDERNESS AND
SELWAY-BITTERROOT WILDERNESS,
IDAHO.
(a) AUTHORIZATION FOR CONTINUED USE.—
The Secretary of Agriculture shall issue a
special use authorization to the owners of a
water storage, transport, or diversion facil-
ity (in this section referred to as a ‘‘facil-
ity’’) located on National Forest System
land in the Frank Church-River of No Return
Wilderness and the Selway-Bitterroot Wil-
derness for the continued operation, mainte-
nance, and reconstruction of the facility if
the Secretary determines that—
(1) the facility was in existence on the date
on which the land upon which the facility is
located was designated as part of the Na-
tional Wilderness Preservation System (in
this section referred to as ‘‘the date of des-
ignation’’);
(2) the facility has been in substantially
continuous use to deliver water for the bene-
ficial use on the owner’s non-Federal land
since the date of designation;
(3) the owner of the facility holds a valid
water right for use of the water on the own-
er’s non-Federal land under Idaho State law,
with a priority date that predates the date of
designation; and
(4) it is not practicable or feasible to relo-
cate the facility to land outside of the wil-
derness and continue the beneficial use of
water on the non-Federal land recognized
under State law.
(b) TERMS AND CONDITIONS.—
(1) REQUIRED TERMS AND CONDITIONS.—In a
special use authorization issued under sub-
section (a), the Secretary shall—
(A) allow use of motorized equipment and
mechanized transport for operation, mainte-
nance, or reconstruction of a facility, if the
Secretary determines that—
(i) the use is necessary to allow the facility
to continue delivery of water to the non-Fed-
eral land for the beneficial uses recognized
by the water right held under Idaho State
law; and
(ii) the use of nonmotorized equipment and
nonmechanized transport is impracticable or
infeasible; and
(B) preclude use of the facility for the stor-
age, diversion, or transport of water in ex-
cess of the water right recognized by the
State of Idaho on the date of designation.
(2) DISCRETIONARY TERMS AND CONDITIONS.—
In a special use authorization issued under
subsection (a), the Secretary may—
(A) require or allow modification or reloca-
tion of the facility in the wilderness, as the
Secretary determines necessary, to reduce
impacts to wilderness values set forth in sec-
tion 2 of the Wilderness Act (16 U.S.C. 1131)
if the beneficial use of water on the non-Fed-
eral land is not diminished; and
(B) require that the owner provide a recip-
rocal right of access across the non-Federal
property, in which case, the owner shall re-
ceive market value for any right-of-way or
other interest in real property conveyed to
the United States, and market value may be
paid by the Secretary, in whole or in part, by
the grant of a reciprocal right-of-way, or by
reduction of fees or other costs that may ac-
crue to the owner to obtain the authoriza-
tion for water facilities.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursu-
ant to the rule, the gentleman from
Utah (Mr. BISHOP) and the gentleman
from the Northern Mariana Islands
(Mr. SABLAN) each will control 20 min-
utes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman
from Utah.
GENERAL LEAVE
Mr. BISHOP of Utah. Mr. Speaker, I
ask unanimous consent that all Mem-
bers may have 5 legislative days to re-
vise and extend their remarks and to
include extraneous materials on the
bill under consideration.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there
objection to the request of the gen-
tleman from Utah?
There was no objection.
Mr. BISHOP of Utah. Mr. Speaker, I
yield myself such time as I may con-
sume.
This bill was a great bill the first
time we passed it, the second time we
passed it, and it is still a great bill, and
it’s necessary for the good people of
Idaho.
So I would yield such time as he may
consume to the gentleman from Idaho
(Mr. SIMPSON).
Mr. SIMPSON. I thank the gen-
tleman from Utah for yielding.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support
of H.R. 876, the Idaho Wilderness Water
Resources Protection Act. This bipar-
tisan, noncontroversial legislation is a
technical fix intended to enable the
Forest Service to authorize and permit
existing historical water diversions
within the Idaho wilderness.
A few years ago, one of my constitu-
ents came to me for help with a prob-
lem. The Middle Fork Lodge has a
water diversion within the Frank
Church-River of No Return Wilderness
Area that existed before the wilderness
area was established and is protected
under statute.
The diversion was beginning to leak
and was in desperate need of repairs to
ensure that it did not threaten the en-
vironment and watershed, but it turned
out that the Forest Service did not
have the authority to issue the lodge a
permit to make the necessary repairs.
As we looked into this issue, we dis-
covered that the Forest Service lacked
this authority throughout both the
Frank Church-River of No Return Wil-
derness, where there are 22 known
water developments, and the Selway-
Bitterroot Wilderness, where there are
three. These diversions are primarily
used to support irrigation and minor
hydropower generation for use on non-
Federal lands. While the critical situa-
tion at the Middle Fork Lodge brought
this issue to my attention, it is obvious
to me that this problem is larger than
just one diversion. At some point in
the future, all 25 of these existing di-
versions will need maintenance or re-
pair work done to ensure their integ-
rity.
VerDate Mar 15 2010 06:33 Jul 12, 2013 Jkt 079060 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 7634 Sfmt 0634 E:\RECORD13\RECFILES\H17JN3.REC H17JN3
b
j
n
e
a
l

o
n

D
S
K
4
S
P
T
V
N
1
P
R
O
D

w
i
t
h

C
O
N
G
-
R
E
C
-
O
N
L
I
N
E
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—HOUSE H3660 June 17, 2013
H.R. 876 authorizes the Forest Serv-
ice to issue special use permits for all
qualifying historic water systems in
these wilderness areas. I believe it is
important to get ahead of this problem
and to ensure that the Forest Service
has the tools necessary to manage
these lands.
For these reasons, I have introduced
H.R. 876. This legislation, which was
passed by the House during the last
two Congresses, allows the Forest
Service to issue the required special
use permits to owners of historic water
systems, and it sets out specific cri-
teria for doing so. Providing this au-
thority will ensure that existing water
diversions can be properly maintained
and repaired when necessary and pre-
serves beneficial use for private prop-
erty owners who hold water rights
under State law.
I have deeply appreciated the co-
operation of the Forest Service in ad-
dressing this problem. Not only have
they communicated with me the need
to find a systemwide solution to this
issue, but at my request, they have
drafted this legislation to ensure that
it only impacts specific targeted his-
torical diversions—those with valid
water rights that cannot feasibly be re-
located out of the wilderness area.
H.R. 876 is bipartisan and non-
controversial. It is intended as a sim-
ple, reasonable solution to a problem
that I think we can all agree should be
solved as quickly as possible. I am
hopeful that we can move this bill
through the legislative process without
delay so that the necessary mainte-
nance to these diversions may be com-
pleted before the damage is beyond re-
pair.
I urge my Members to support this
legislation.
Mr. SABLAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield
myself such time as I may consume.
This legislation provides common-
sense access to maintain water facili-
ties within the Frank Church-River of
No Return Wilderness Area. These
water features were present prior to
the congressional designation of ‘‘wil-
derness’’ and are necessary to protect
individual water rights in the State.
I applaud Chairman SIMPSON for his
legislation, and I support the passage
of this bill.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. BISHOP of Utah. Mr. Speaker, in
closing, when you have diversions that
predate a ‘‘wilderness’’ designation,
you need to give them the ability to
maintain those diversions. This is a
good bill.
I urge my colleagues to vote for it,
and more importantly, I urge the Sen-
ate to finally do something and pass it.
I yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The
question is on the motion offered by
the gentleman from Utah (Mr. BISHOP)
that the House suspend the rules and
pass the bill, H.R. 876.
The question was taken.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. In the
opinion of the Chair, two-thirds being
in the affirmative, the ayes have it.
Mr. BISHOP of Utah. Mr. Speaker, on
that I demand the yeas and nays.
The yeas and nays were ordered.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursu-
ant to clause 8 of rule XX, further pro-
ceedings on this motion will be post-
poned.
f
VIETNAM VETERANS DONOR AC-
KNOWLEDGEMENT ACT OF 2013
AMENDMENT
Mr. BISHOP of Utah. Mr. Speaker, I
move to suspend the rules and agree to
the resolution (H. Res. 264) providing
for the concurrence by the House in the
Senate amendment to H.R. 588, with an
amendment.
The Clerk read the title of the resolu-
tion.
The text of the resolution is as fol-
lows:
H. RES. 264
Resolved, That upon the adoption of this
resolution the House shall be considered to
have taken from the Speaker’s table the bill,
H.R. 588, with the Senate amendment there-
to, and to have concurred in the Senate
amendment with the following amendment:
In lieu of the matter proposed to be in-
serted by the amendment of the Senate to
the text of the bill, insert the following:
SEC. 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Vietnam
Veterans Donor Acknowledgment Act of
2013’’.
SEC. 2. DONOR CONTRIBUTION ACKNOWLEDG-
MENTS AT THE VIETNAM VETERANS
MEMORIAL VISITOR CENTER.
Section 6(b) of Public Law 96–297 (16 U.S.C.
431 note) is amended—
(1) in paragraph (4) by striking the ‘‘and’’
after the semicolon;
(2) in paragraph (5)—
(A) by striking ‘‘2014’’ and inserting ‘‘2018’’;
and
(B) by striking the period and inserting ‘‘;
and’’; and
(3) by inserting at the end the following
new paragraph:
‘‘(6) notwithstanding section 8905(b)(7) of
title 40, United States Code—
‘‘(A) the Secretary of the Interior shall
allow the Vietnam Veterans Memorial Fund,
Inc. to acknowledge donor contributions to
the visitor center by displaying, inside the
visitor center, an appropriate statement or
credit acknowledging the contribution;
‘‘(B) donor contribution acknowledgments
shall be displayed in a form approved by the
Secretary of the Interior and for a period of
time commensurate with the level of the
contribution and the life of the facility;
‘‘(C) the Vietnam Veterans Memorial Fund
shall bear all expenses related to the display
of donor acknowledgments;
‘‘(D) prior to the display of donor acknowl-
edgments, the Vietnam Veterans Memorial
Fund, Inc. shall submit to the Secretary for
approval, its plan for displaying donor ac-
knowledgments;
‘‘(E) such plan shall include the sample
text and types of the acknowledgments or
credits to be displayed and the form and lo-
cation of all displays;
‘‘(F) the Secretary shall approve the plan,
if the Secretary determines that the plan—
‘‘(i) allows only short, discrete, and unob-
trusive acknowledgments or credits;
‘‘(ii) does not permit any advertising slo-
gans or company logos; and
‘‘(iii) conforms to applicable National Park
Service guidelines for indoor donor recogni-
tion; and
‘‘(G) if the Secretary of the Interior deter-
mines that the proposed plan submitted
under this paragraph, does not meet the re-
quirements of this paragraph, the Secretary
shall—
‘‘(i) advise the Vietnam Veterans Memorial
Fund, Inc. not later than 30 days after re-
ceipt of the proposed plan of the reasons that
such plan does not meet the requirements;
and
‘‘(ii) allow the Vietnam Veterans Memorial
Fund, Inc. to submit a revised donor recogni-
tion plan.’’.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursu-
ant to the rule, the gentleman from
Utah (Mr. BISHOP) and the gentleman
from the Northern Mariana Islands
(Mr. SABLAN) each will control 20 min-
utes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman
from Utah.
GENERAL LEAVE
Mr. BISHOP of Utah. Mr. Speaker, I
ask unanimous consent that all Mem-
bers may have 5 legislative days to re-
vise and extend their remarks and to
include extraneous material on the bill
under consideration.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there
objection to the request of the gen-
tleman from Utah?
There was no objection.
Mr. BISHOP of Utah. Mr. Speaker, I
yield myself such time as I may con-
sume.
There comes a point in time when we
are always asking the Senate to do
something, and when they finally get
around to doing something, they decide
to mess it up by making it question-
able by trying to expand it. This is a
similar case in which we gave them a
simple and good bill. They have sent us
back something that is questionable
and expanded, and we are going to give
it back to them so that they just do it
right the second time around.
With that, I would like to yield such
time as he may consume to the sponsor
of the original bill, the gentleman from
Alaska (Mr. YOUNG).
Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. I thank the
gentleman for yielding.
Mr. Speaker, over a month ago, the
House passed the Vietnam Veterans
Donor Acknowledgment Act by a re-
sounding vote of 398–2. Unfortunately,
a couple of weeks ago, the Senate sub-
stantially changed this bipartisan and
noncontroversial piece of legislation.
Instead of only allowing donor recogni-
tion at a soon-to-be-built Vietnam Vet-
erans Education Center, the Senate
changed the bill to allow donor rec-
ognition, across the entire Mall, on all
future commemorative works. While I
am not fundamentally opposed to this
idea, neither the House nor the Senate
has done any hearings to consider the
implications of this issue. In fact, nei-
ther the House nor the Senate has done
a markup on this issue to allow Mem-
bers to add their input.
Mr. Speaker, put simply, this is just
a poor legislative process, and the
American people deserve better.
Today, we are here to undo what the
Senate has done and to, once again,
send the Senate a bipartisan and non-
controversial bill. Today’s resolution
VerDate Mar 15 2010 06:33 Jul 12, 2013 Jkt 079060 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 7634 Sfmt 0634 E:\RECORD13\RECFILES\H17JN3.REC H17JN3
b
j
n
e
a
l

o
n

D
S
K
4
S
P
T
V
N
1
P
R
O
D

w
i
t
h

C
O
N
G
-
R
E
C
-
O
N
L
I
N
E
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—HOUSE H3661 June 17, 2013
merely strikes the Senate language
that allows donor recognition across
The Mall and reinserts my original lan-
guage from H.R. 588. This language has
been through the full committee proc-
ess and is sound legislative text.
However, not all of the Senate addi-
tions are bad. In this bill, we will keep
one portion of the Senate’s language,
which extends the legislative authority
to construct the Vietnam Veterans
Education Center from 2014 until 2018.
b 1710
It is unfortunate that we must pro-
vide this extension, though. Our Na-
tion’s Vietnam veterans have waited
too long for this education center. It is
a shame that a long line of political
gamesmanship has delayed its con-
struction.
Mr. Speaker, after the Vietnam War,
many of our Nation’s bravest were wel-
comed home not with joyous cheers or
words of thanks, but dirty looks and
snide remarks.
Let us end these political games. I
call upon my colleagues in the House,
but especially on my colleagues in the
Senate, to quickly pass this resolution
so this education center can finally be
built. I think we can all agree that this
legislation and this center are a long
time coming.
Mr. SABLAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield
myself such time as I may consume.
This is a very important issue before
us today. The Senate amended H.R. 588
to allow any new memorial in D.C. to
acknowledge donors.
The original bill passed by the House
only allowed donor acknowledgement
for the Vietnam Memorial Visitor Cen-
ter. The Senate amendment also pro-
vided a 4-year extension of the legisla-
tive authority for the Vietnam Memo-
rial Visitors Center.
The resolution before us today would
narrow the Senate language back to
apply only to the Vietnam Memorial
Visitor Center while continuing to pro-
vide the visitor center with a 4-year ex-
tension of their authorization.
Mr. Speaker, our preference would be
to send a bill to the President to sign
today; however, the majority is insist-
ing on amending the Senate legislation
and sending this bill back to the Sen-
ate instead of to the President. While
we do not object to a policy of allowing
donor acknowledgement, we are con-
cerned that amending the Senate
amendment will unnecessarily delay
enactment of this legislation.
Given this is the only option we have
to support the Vietnam Memorial Vis-
itor Center, we support passage of this
bill, and I reserve the balance of my
time.
Mr. BISHOP of Utah. At this time, I
reserve the balance of my time as I will
be the last speaker.
Mr. SABLAN. Mr. Speaker, at this
time I yield as much time as he may
consume to a Vietnam War veteran,
the distinguished gentleman from
American Samoa (Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA).
(Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA asked and
was given permission to revise and ex-
tend his remarks.)
Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Mr. Speaker,
I thank the gentleman from Utah and
the gentleman from the Northern Mar-
iana Islands for their management of
this important legislation. I certainly
want to pay a special tribute to my
good friend, the gentleman from Alas-
ka (Mr. YOUNG), for his authorship of
this bill.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong
support of this resolution to amend the
Senate amendment to H.R. 588, the
Vietnam Veterans Donor Acknowledge-
ment Act of 2013.
I want to thank my good friend
again, Congressman DON YOUNG from
Alaska, for his leadership on this very
important issue. He has always been a
strong supporter of our military serv-
icemembers and veterans and has been
instrumental in moving forward to
building the Education Center at the
Wall that will educate the millions of
visitors to the Vietnam Veterans Me-
morial about its history and purpose.
Mr. Speaker, last month the House,
with overwhelming support, passed
H.R. 588, the Vietnam Veterans Donor
Acknowledgement Act of 2013. As we
all know, H.R. 588 is supported by all
the major veterans’ organizations
throughout the country. Unfortu-
nately, during its consideration, the
Senate significantly amended the bill,
which has drastically altered the origi-
nal intent of the bill. Much of the addi-
tions to H.R. 588 have not been evalu-
ated or considered by way of markup,
by either the Senate or the House,
which is critical in considering any leg-
islation. For this reason, my colleague
today offers this resolution to rein-
state the original bipartisan language.
Mr. Speaker, as a Vietnam veteran
myself, I strongly believe that my fel-
low soldiers and I have waited long
enough for the construction of this im-
portant educational center. It will ben-
efit the many tourists that visit our
Nation’s capital and educate and in-
form many of those who question why
the thousands of names are engraved
on such an extraordinary memorial.
Mr. Speaker, it is so beautiful to see
that our veterans coming from the Gulf
War are being praised by the American
public, which is great. Unfortunately,
those of us who were part of the Viet-
nam legacy of the war that occurred at
that time did not have a very sweet
welcoming home I can say, Mr. Speak-
er, being called ‘‘baby killers’’ and
‘‘warmongers’’ and all of this. To this
day I’m still very bitter in terms of the
treatment of our soldiers and veterans
who come from that terrible war that
our country was involved in.
This education center is so critical to
educate the American people—to edu-
cate America for that matter—so that
they will understand and better appre-
ciate the sacrifices and the contribu-
tions that our veterans and those who
wore the armed services uniform made
in protection of this country.
Again, I thank my dear friend, Mr.
YOUNG from Alaska, and I urge my col-
leagues to support this bill.
Mr. BISHOP of Utah. I reserve the
balance of my time.
Mr. SABLAN. Mr. Speaker, I have no
further speakers, and I yield back the
balance of my time.
Mr. BISHOP of Utah. I appreciate the
comments that were given by the gen-
tleman from Alaska (Mr. YOUNG), the
gentleman from the Northern Mariana
Islands (Mr. SABLAN), and I especially
respect and appreciate the comments
by the gentleman from American
Samoa, who has done so much, and I
appreciate all of those. In everything
that we are doing, in fact, their com-
ments were right on; that what we are
trying to do is ensure that what we do
here is to return to the cliche of the
House, which is regular order, which
means we go through a legitimate
process of trying to look at something
instead of just flying by the seat of our
pants.
Therefore, because this was changed
significantly in the Senate without
much input at all, we are simply doing
two things. First of all, we’ll be remov-
ing the provisions effected by the Sen-
ate changes so that the Vietnam Visi-
tors Center can move forward under
this bill without any delay, and it will
enhance the ability to raise their pri-
vate funds, but also we want to give
careful and due consideration to the
Senate-added provisions.
So the text of the Senate language
affecting future memorials is being in-
troduced today as a standalone bill in
the House. We will have a public hear-
ing. We will go through the process, to
be held very soon on this particular
bill, and then further action by the
committee will follow. Once again, this
is our process to re-ensure regular
order.
I urge my colleagues to vote for this
particular resolution, and I yield back
the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The
question is on the motion offered by
the gentleman from Utah (Mr. BISHOP)
that the House suspend the rules and
agree to the resolution, H. Res. 264.
The question was taken; and (two-
thirds being in the affirmative) the
rules were suspended and the resolu-
tion was agreed to.
A motion to reconsider was laid on
the table.
f
Y MOUNTAIN ACCESS
ENHANCEMENT ACT
Mr. BISHOP of Utah. Mr. Speaker, I
move to suspend the rules and pass the
bill (H.R. 253) to provide for the con-
veyance of a small parcel of National
Forest System land in the Uinta-
Wasatch-Cache National Forest in
Utah to Brigham Young University,
and for other purposes.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The text of the bill is as follows:
H.R. 253
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Rep-
resentatives of the United States of America in
Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Y Mountain
Access Enhancement Act’’.
VerDate Mar 15 2010 06:33 Jul 12, 2013 Jkt 079060 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 7634 Sfmt 0634 E:\RECORD13\RECFILES\H17JN3.REC H17JN3
b
j
n
e
a
l

o
n

D
S
K
4
S
P
T
V
N
1
P
R
O
D

w
i
t
h

C
O
N
G
-
R
E
C
-
O
N
L
I
N
E
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—HOUSE H3662 June 17, 2013
SEC. 2. LAND CONVEYANCE, UINTA-WASATCH-
CACHE NATIONAL FOREST, UTAH.
(a) CONVEYANCE REQUIRED.—On the request
of Brigham Young University submitted to
the Secretary of Agriculture not later than
one year after the date of the enactment of
this Act, the Secretary shall convey, not
later than one year after receiving the re-
quest, to Brigham Young University all
right, title, and interest of the United States
in and to the approximately 80-acres of Na-
tional Forest System land in the Uinta-
Wasatch-Cache National Forest in the State
of Utah generally depicted as ‘‘Proposed Con-
veyance Parcel’’ on the map titled ‘‘ ‘Y’
Mountain Access Enhancement Act’’ and
dated June 6, 2013. The conveyance shall be
subject to valid existing rights and shall be
made by quitclaim deed.
(b) CONSIDERATION.—
(1) CONSIDERATION REQUIRED.—As consider-
ation for the land conveyed under subsection
(a), Brigham Young University shall pay to
the Secretary an amount equal to the fair
market value of the land, as determined by
an appraisal approved by the Secretary and
conducted in conformity with the Uniform
Appraisal Standards for Federal Land Acqui-
sitions and section 206 of the Federal Land
Policy and Management Act of 1976 (43
U.S.C. 1716).
(2) DEPOSIT.—The consideration received
by the Secretary under paragraph (1) shall be
deposited in the general fund of the Treasury
to reduce the Federal deficit.
(c) GUARANTEED PUBLIC ACCESS TO Y MOUN-
TAIN TRAIL.—After the conveyance under
subsection (a), Brigham Young University
represents that it will—
(1) continue to allow the same reasonable
public access to the trailhead and portion of
the Y Mountain Trail already owned by
Brigham Young University as of the date of
the enactment of this Act that Brigham
Young University has historically allowed;
and
(2) allow that same reasonable public ac-
cess to the portion of the Y Mountain Trail
and the ‘‘Y’’ symbol located on the land de-
scribed in subsection (a).
(d) SURVEY AND ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS.—
The exact acreage and legal description of
the land to be conveyed under subsection (a)
shall be determined by a survey satisfactory
to the Secretary. Brigham Young University
shall pay the reasonable costs of survey, ap-
praisal, and any administrative analyses re-
quired by law.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursu-
ant to the rule, the gentleman from
Utah (Mr. BISHOP) and the gentleman
from the Northern Mariana Islands
(Mr. SABLAN) each will control 20 min-
utes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman
from Utah.
GENERAL LEAVE
Mr. BISHOP of Utah. I ask unani-
mous consent that all Members may
have 5 legislative days to revise and ex-
tend their remarks and include extra-
neous materials on the bill under con-
sideration.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there
objection to the request of the gen-
tleman from Utah?
There was no objection.
Mr. BISHOP of Utah. With that, I
yield myself such time as I may con-
sume.
I am very proud of this particular
bill, and I am happy to yield as much
time as he may consume to the author
of this bill, the gentleman from Utah
(Mr. CHAFFETZ), with the under-
standing that he will explain to you
that Y Mountain is not the same thing
as Yucca Mountain.
Mr. CHAFFETZ. The gentleman from
Utah is very correct, this is very dif-
ferent and not nearly as controversial,
I assure you.
H.R. 253, the Y Mountain Access En-
hancement Act, directs the Depart-
ment of Agriculture to sell 80 acres of
U.S. Forest Service land to Brigham
Young University often referred to as
BYU. This parcel of land includes the
block Y on Y Mountain, a major land-
mark in the Provo area.
H.R. 253 requires BYU to pay fair
market value for the land and requires
BYU to cover administrative and ap-
praisal costs associated with the sale.
Proceeds of the land sale would be used
to reduce the deficit.
H.R. 253 guarantees public access to
the block Y and the Y Mountain trail
after the sale. BYU has managed this
parcel of land for 50 years and has al-
ways allowed public access.
BYU actually owned the entire trail
at one point many years ago. H.R. 253
would restore ownership to Brigham
Young University, but BYU would have
to pay fair market value for the land.
Currently, one part of the trail is
owned by BYU and the other is owned
by the U.S. Forest Service. Split own-
ership of the trail complicates trail
maintenance and long-term planning,
which ultimately puts public access at
risk.
Restoring this land to BYU would
provide long-term certainty by remov-
ing any questions as to who owns the
land and who is responsible for main-
taining the trail.
Hiking up the Y is a popular pastime
in the Provo area, and H.R. 253 ensures
that the trail will be maintained for fu-
ture hikers.
b 1720
This bill was introduced in the 112th
Congress as H.R. 4484 and passed the
House on voice vote. I urge my col-
leagues to vote ‘‘yes’’ on this par-
ticular piece of legislation, and I appre-
ciate the bipartisan support and work
on this piece.
Mr. SABLAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield
myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, H.R. 253 provides for
conveyance of approximately 80 acres
of Forest Service lands to Brigham
Young University. We do not object to
this legislation.
At this time, I would like to yield
such time as he may consume to the
gentleman from American Samoa (Mr.
FALEOMAVAEGA).
(Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA asked and
was given permission to revise and ex-
tend his remarks.)
Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Mr. Speaker,
I rise today in strong support of H.R.
253, the Y Mountain Access Enhance-
ment Act. This legislation would direct
the U.S. Department of Agriculture to
sell approximately 80 acres to the U.S.
Forest Service land known for years by
the residents of the city of Provo,
Utah, as ‘‘Y Mountain’’ to Brigham
Young University.
Located directly east of the BYU
campus, the Y Mountain includes a
trail that leads 1.2 miles from the
mountain’s base up to a large white
concrete ‘‘Y’’ on the mountain’s hill-
side, which was built over 100 years
ago. The ‘‘Y,’’ which is 380 feet high by
130 feet wide, is even larger than the
‘‘Hollywood’’ sign in Hollywood, Cali-
fornia, and serves as an insignia for
Brigham Young University.
As an alumnus of BYU, I, too, have
come to know the ‘‘Y’’ as a symbol of
campus pride for the students, the
alumni, and members of the greater
Provo community. Some of my col-
leagues are probably wondering why
did an island boy like me want to go to
a place like Utah? I wanted to experi-
ence what snow was like; and guess
what, you can have all the snow you
want because I’m going back to the is-
lands.
But I will say, Mr. Speaker, the ‘‘Y’’
is illuminated five times a year, in-
cluding freshman orientation, home-
coming, graduations in April and Au-
gust, as well as ‘‘Y Days,’’ which cele-
brate BYU’s week of service activities.
As a nationally recognized symbol of
BYU, the Y Mountain is also a featured
shot in almost every BYU game broad-
cast on national television.
BYU currently manages the U.S. For-
est Service portion of the trail. H.R.
253, however, proposes that the Federal
Government sell Y Mountain at fair
market value to Brigham Young Uni-
versity. The bill also guarantees that
public access to the ‘‘Y’’ and the Y
Mountain Trail be maintained fol-
lowing the sale.
Mr. Speaker, it is my strong belief
that permitting BYU to purchase this
property would result in better mainte-
nance of the trail and mountain. Given
the immense source of pride in Y
Mountain, BYU ownership of the prop-
erty would only result in improved
maintenance, cleanliness, safety, and
access for the public. The transfer of
ownership would also allow Brigham
Young University to preserve a signifi-
cant monument for future generations
of students and members of the com-
munity.
I want to especially thank my col-
league, the gentleman from Utah (Mr.
CHAFFETZ), for his sponsorship of the
bill, who also happens to be an alum-
nus of BYU, for introducing this legis-
lation, and I do urge my colleagues to
vote in support of this bill.
Mr. BISHOP of Utah. Mr. Speaker, I
reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. SABLAN. Mr. Speaker, I have no
further speakers, and I yield back the
balance of my time.
Mr. BISHOP of Utah. Despite being a
graduate of the University of Utah and
finding myself surrounded by BYU peo-
ple here—it makes me terribly uncom-
fortable—this is still a good bill. It is a
win-win situation and will provide the
experience of those at BYU and the
VerDate Mar 15 2010 06:33 Jul 12, 2013 Jkt 079060 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 7634 Sfmt 0634 E:\RECORD13\RECFILES\H17JN3.REC H17JN3
b
j
n
e
a
l

o
n

D
S
K
4
S
P
T
V
N
1
P
R
O
D

w
i
t
h

C
O
N
G
-
R
E
C
-
O
N
L
I
N
E
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—HOUSE H3663 June 17, 2013
area a much safer and pleasant experi-
ence on Y Mountain, and so I urge my
colleagues to vote for this bill.
I yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The
question is on the motion offered by
the gentleman from Utah (Mr. BISHOP)
that the House suspend the rules and
pass the bill, H.R. 253, as amended.
The question was taken.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. In the
opinion of the Chair, two-thirds being
in the affirmative, the ayes have it.
Mr. SABLAN. Mr. Speaker, on that I
demand the yeas and nays.
The yeas and nays were ordered.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursu-
ant to clause 8 of rule XX, further pro-
ceedings on this motion will be post-
poned.
f
ROTA CULTURAL AND NATURAL
RESOURCES STUDY ACT
Mr. BISHOP of Utah. Mr. Speaker, I
move to suspend the rules and pass the
bill (H.R. 674) to authorize the Sec-
retary of the Interior to study the suit-
ability and feasibility of designating
prehistoric, historic, and limestone for-
est sites on Rota, Commonwealth of
the Northern Mariana Islands, as a
unit of the National Park System.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The text of the bill is as follows:
H.R. 674
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Rep-
resentatives of the United States of America in
Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; FINDINGS.
(a) SHORT TITLE.—This Act may be cited as
the ‘‘Rota Cultural and Natural Resources
Study Act’’.
(b) FINDINGS.—Congress finds as follows:
(1) The island of Rota was the only major
island in the Mariana Islands to be spared
the destruction and large scale land use
changes brought about by World War II.
(2) The island of Rota has been described
by professional archeologists as having the
most numerous, most intact, and generally
the most unique prehistoric sites of any of
the islands of the Mariana Archipelago.
(3) The island of Rota contains remaining
examples of what is known as the Latte
Phase of the cultural tradition of the indige-
nous Chamorro people of the Mariana Is-
lands. Latte stone houses are remnants of
the ancient Chamorro culture.
(4) Four prehistoric sites are listed on the
National Register of Historic Places:
Monchon Archeological District (also known
locally as Monchon Latte Stone Village),
Taga Latte Stone Quarry, the Dugi Archeo-
logical Site that contains latte stone struc-
tures, and the Chugai Pictograph Cave that
contains examples of ancient Chamorro rock
art. Alaguan Bay Ancient Village is another
latte stone prehistoric site that is sur-
rounded by tall-canopy limestone forest.
(5) In addition to prehistoric sites, the is-
land of Rota boasts historic sites remaining
from the Japanese period (1914–1945). Several
of these sites are on the National Register of
Historic Places: Nanyo Kohatsu Kabushiki
Kaisha Sugar Mill, Japanese Coastal Defense
Gun, and the Japanese Hospital.
(6) The island of Rota’s natural resources
are significant because of the extent and in-
tact condition of its native limestone forest
that provides habitat for several federally
endangered listed species, the Mariana crow,
and the Rota bridled white-eye birds, that
are also native to the island of Rota. Three
endangered plant species are also found on
Rota and two are endemic to the island.
(7) Because of the significant cultural and
natural resources listed above, on September
2005, the National Park Service, Pacific West
Region, completed a preliminary resource
assessment on the island of Rota, Common-
wealth of the Northern Mariana Islands,
which determined that the ‘‘establishment of
a unit of the national park system
appear[ed] to be the best way to ensure the
long term protection of Rota’s most impor-
tant cultural resources and its best examples
of its native limestone forest.’’.
SEC. 2. NPS STUDY OF SITES ON THE ISLAND OF
ROTA, COMMONWEALTH OF THE
NORTHERN MARIANA ISLANDS.
(a) STUDY.—The Secretary of the Interior
shall—
(1) carry out a study regarding the suit-
ability and feasibility of designating pre-
historic, historic, and limestone forest sites
on the island of Rota, Commonwealth of the
Northern Mariana Islands, as a unit of the
National Park System; and
(2) consider management alternatives for
the island of Rota, Commonwealth of the
Northern Mariana Islands.
(b) STUDY PROCESS AND COMPLETION.—Ex-
cept as provided by subsection (c) of this sec-
tion, section 8(c) of Public Law 91–383 (16
U.S.C. 1a–5(c)) shall apply to the conduct and
completion of the study required by this sec-
tion.
(c) SUBMISSION OF STUDY RESULTS.—Not
later than 3 years after the date that funds
are made available for this section, the Sec-
retary shall submit to the Committee on
Natural Resources of the House of Rep-
resentatives and the Committee on Energy
and Natural Resources of the Senate a report
describing the results of the study.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursu-
ant to the rule, the gentleman from
Utah (Mr. BISHOP) and the gentleman
from the Northern Mariana Islands
(Mr. SABLAN) each will control 20 min-
utes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman
from Utah.
GENERAL LEAVE
Mr. BISHOP of Utah. I ask unani-
mous consent that all Members may
have 5 legislative days to revise and ex-
tend their remarks, and include extra-
neous materials on the bill under con-
sideration.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there
objection to the request of the gen-
tleman from Utah?
There was no objection.
Mr. BISHOP of Utah. Mr. Speaker, I
yield myself such time as I may con-
sume.
Mr. Speaker, this bill authorizes a
study for the suitability and feasibility
of designating this particular area as
part of a unit of the National Park
System. I think it is a wise concept in
which to go to find out the cultural
and natural resources that are on this
particular area and look forward to its
further designation.
With that, I reserve the balance of
my time.
Mr. SABLAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield
myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R.
674, the Rota Cultural and Natural Re-
sources Study Act. The bill authorizes
the Secretary of the Interior to deter-
mine whether it would be suitable and
feasible to add certain cultural, ar-
cheological, historical, and natural re-
sources on the island of Rota in the
Northern Marianas to the National
Park System.
The House has already voted to au-
thorize the suitability and feasibility
study for Rota on two separate occa-
sions, but the other body did not follow
through, so here we are again. The
third time may be the charm.
Mindful of the previous House votes,
I will not preach to the choir, but I do
think that it is worth reminding my
colleagues that a Park Service recon-
naissance survey reported in 2005 that
Rota contains natural, archaeological,
and historical features of national sig-
nificance. These include precontact vil-
lage sites of the Chamorro people, who
discovered and populated the Mariana
Islands 3,500 years ago.
I also want to remind my colleagues,
because we’re all mindful of cost, that
the Congressional Budget Office finds
the bill will not affect direct spending
or revenues.
Finally, I want to thank Chairman
HASTINGS and Ranking Member MAR-
KEY of the Natural Resources Com-
mittee for their support of H.R. 674. I
also want to thank Chairman BISHOP
and Ranking Member GRIJALVA of the
Subcommittee on Public Lands and En-
vironmental Regulation for their help
in bringing this measure to the floor
today. I urge my colleagues to support
passage of H.R. 674.
At this time, I yield such time as he
may consume to the gentleman from
American Samoa (Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA).
Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Mr. Speaker,
this is getting to be an island occasion
or something. But at any rate, I do
thank the gentleman from Utah and
the gentleman from the Northern Mari-
anas for allowing me to comment on
this proposed legislation.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support
of H.R. 674, the Rota Cultural and Nat-
ural Resources Act.
First, I want to thank the gentleman
from the Commonwealth of the North-
ern Mariana Islands, my dear friend
Mr. SABLAN, for his authorship of this
important piece of legislation that will
authorize the Secretary of the Interior
to study the suitability and feasibility
of designating prehistoric, historic, and
limestone forest sites on Rota, the
southernmost island of CNMI, as a unit
of the National Park System.
This legislation is critical to CNMI
and will enable the preservation of vil-
lage sites of the ancient Chamorro peo-
ple and Rota’s native limestone forests
that provide a habitat for locally and
federally endangered listed bird spe-
cies, including the Mariana crow and
the Rota bridled white-eye birds.
Mr. Speaker, this legislation pre-
viously passed the House in the last
Congress, but, unfortunately, the Sen-
ate did not have time in its agenda to
address the legislation prior to the end
VerDate Mar 15 2010 06:33 Jul 12, 2013 Jkt 079060 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 7634 Sfmt 0634 E:\RECORD13\RECFILES\H17JN3.REC H17JN3
b
j
n
e
a
l

o
n

D
S
K
4
S
P
T
V
N
1
P
R
O
D

w
i
t
h

C
O
N
G
-
R
E
C
-
O
N
L
I
N
E
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—HOUSE H3664 June 17, 2013
of the Congress. Leaders of Rota unani-
mously support this legislation. Addi-
tionally, the National Park Service,
after completing a preliminary re-
sources assessment of Rota in 2005,
concluded that designating Rota as
part of the National Park System ap-
peared to be the best way to ensure the
long-term protection of Rota’s pre-
historic and historic natural and man-
made habitat structures.
Mr. Speaker, again, I commend Mr.
SABLAN for his leadership. I urge my
colleagues to support this bill.
I want to also share with my col-
leagues a little bit of history.
b 1730
Twenty miles away from the island
of Rota is the island called Tinian in
the Northern Mariana Islands. This is
where the Enola Gay was launched and
delivered the two atomic bombs that
were dropped in the war in Japan,
which brought about the closing of
World War II, especially against Japan.
So in terms of historical perspec-
tives, Rota, Tinian, the Northern Mar-
iana Islands, I think you’ve made a tre-
mendous contribution for the better-
ment of our country.
And, again, I urge my colleagues to
support this legislation.
Mr. BISHOP of Utah. I reserve the
balance of my time.
Mr. SABLAN. Mr. Speaker, before I
yield back my time, I’d also like to
thank the gentleman from American
Samoa for his support of the bill. And
because he mentioned Tinian, the
Enola Gay and the Boxcar did fly from
Tinian to bomb Hiroshima and Naga-
saki and ended the war against Japan.
Those airplanes, I’d like to also note
for the record, originated and took off
from Utah before they came to the
Mariana Islands. So there’s that con-
nection here.
So Mr. BISHOP is actually the one
who reminded me that while they took
off from Tinian, it was in Utah that
they started the flight to Tinian and
eventually flew to Japan.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance
of my time.
Mr. BISHOP of Utah. Mr. Speaker, he
did steal my thunder. They did train
and start in Wendover, Utah, which
was part of my district until the legis-
lature became involved in district lines
in this last session.
I urge my colleagues to support this
particular piece of legislation and re-
mind them that any costs that would
be associated with this study has to be
appropriated. We have another chance
to look at that. I firmly support it.
I yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The
question is on the motion offered by
the gentleman from Utah (Mr. BISHOP)
that the House suspend the rules and
pass the bill, H.R. 674.
The question was taken; and (two-
thirds being in the affirmative) the
rules were suspended and the bill was
passed.
A motion to reconsider was laid on
the table.
CONVEYANCE OF LAND TO COR-
RECT ERRONEOUS SURVEY,
COCONINO NATIONAL FOREST,
ARIZONA
Mr. BISHOP of Utah. Mr. Speaker, I
move to suspend the rules and pass the
bill (H.R. 862) to authorize the convey-
ance of two small parcels of land with-
in the boundaries of the Coconino Na-
tional Forest containing private im-
provements that were developed based
upon the reliance of the landowners in
an erroneous survey conducted in May
1960.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The text of the bill is as follows:
H.R. 862
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Rep-
resentatives of the United States of America in
Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. CONVEYANCE OF LAND TO CORRECT
ERRONEOUS SURVEY, COCONINO
NATIONAL FOREST, ARIZONA.
(a) CONVEYANCE AUTHORIZED.—The Sec-
retary of Agriculture may convey by quit-
claim deed all right, title, and interest of the
United States in and to the two parcels of
land described in subsection (b) to a person
or legal entity that represents (by power of
attorney) the majority of landowners with
private property adjacent to the two parcels.
These parcels are within the boundaries of
the Coconino National Forest and contain
private improvements that were developed
based upon the reliance of the landowners in
an erroneous survey conducted in May 1960.
(b) DESCRIPTION OF LAND.—The two parcels
of land authorized for conveyance under sub-
section (a) consist of approximately 2.67
acres described in the Bureau of Land Man-
agement’s Survey Plat titled Subdivision
and Metes and Bounds Surveys in secs. 28
and 29, T. 20 N., R. 7 E., Gila and Salt River
Meridian, approved February 2, 2010, as fol-
lows:
(1) Lot 2, sec. 28, T. 20 N., R. 7 E., Gila and
Salt River Meridian, Coconino County, Ari-
zona.
(2) Lot 1, sec. 29, T. 20 N., R. 7 E., Gila and
Salt River Meridian, Coconino County, Ari-
zona.
(c) CONSIDERATION.—
(1) AMOUNT OF CONSIDERATION.—As consid-
eration for the conveyance of the two parcels
under subsection (a), the person or legal en-
tity that represents (by power of attorney)
the majority of landowners with private
property adjacent to the parcels shall pay to
the Secretary consideration in the amount of
$20,000.
(2) DEPOSIT.—The Secretary shall deposit
the consideration received under this sub-
section in a special account in the fund es-
tablished under Public Law 90–171 (com-
monly known as the Sisk Act; 16 U.S.C.
484a).
(3) USE.—The deposited funds shall be
available to the Secretary, without further
appropriation and until expended, for acqui-
sition of land in the National Forest System.
(d) REVOCATION OF ORDERS.—Any public or-
ders withdrawing any of the Federal land
from appropriation or disposal under the
public land laws are revoked to the extent
necessary to permit conveyance of the Fed-
eral land under subsection (a).
(e) WITHDRAWAL OF FEDERAL LAND.—Sub-
ject to valid existing rights, the Federal land
authorized for conveyance under subsection
(a) is withdrawn from all forms of entry and
appropriation under the public land laws, lo-
cation, entry, and patent under the mining
laws, and operation of the mineral leasing
and geothermal leasing laws until the date
which the conveyance is completed.
(f) OTHER TERMS AND CONDITIONS.—The
conveyance authorized by subsection (a)
shall be subject only to those surveys and
clearances as needed to protect the interests
of the United States.
(g) DURATION OF AUTHORITY.—The author-
ity provided under this section shall termi-
nate three years after the date of the enact-
ment of this Act.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursu-
ant to the rule, the gentleman from
Utah (Mr. BISHOP) and the gentleman
from the Northern Mariana Islands
(Mr. SABLAN) each will control 20 min-
utes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman
from Utah.
GENERAL LEAVE
Mr. BISHOP of Utah. I ask unani-
mous consent that all Members may
have 5 legislative days to revise and ex-
tend their remarks and include extra-
neous materials on the bill under con-
sideration.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there
objection to the request of the gen-
tleman from Utah?
There was no objection.
Mr. BISHOP of Utah. I reserve the
balance of my time.
Mr. SABLAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield
myself as much time as I may con-
sume.
Mr. Speaker, this bill corrects a sur-
vey error made in the 1960s. The land-
owners will be required to pay $20,000
for these two parcels.
I want to commend my colleague,
Congresswoman KIRKPATRICK, for her
leadership on this issue. And at this
time, I yield as much time as she may
consume to the gentlewoman from Ari-
zona (Mrs. KIRKPATRICK).
Mrs. KIRKPATRICK. Mr. Speaker,
imagine waking up one day to learn
that your property really isn’t yours.
In fact, that’s exactly the situation
that a group of residents in my district
find themselves in.
They didn’t cause the problem. Over
40 years ago it was created because of
a land survey that simply got it wrong.
For years, even decades, they’ve lived
on their property, they’ve maintained
it, they’ve invested in it, only to find
that their property is within the
boundaries of the United States Forest
Service.
Now, this has been a real economic
hardship for these folks. Today we have
an opportunity to solve this for them.
I thank Congressman GOSAR and his
staff for the opportunity to work to-
gether on behalf of the people of Ari-
zona. Our bill, H.R. 862, has a simple,
commonsense conveyance which re-
turns this land to its rightful owners
and removes this economic hardship
that has been hanging over them for so
long.
We are pleased that the bill has bi-
partisan support, that it passed out of
Natural Resources with a unanimous
vote. And I urge my colleagues to join
us today to support H.R. 862, because
these people have been living in limbo
for way too long.
Mr. BISHOP of Utah. At this time, I
yield as much time as he may consume
VerDate Mar 15 2010 06:33 Jul 12, 2013 Jkt 079060 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 7634 Sfmt 0634 E:\RECORD13\RECFILES\H17JN3.REC H17JN3
b
j
n
e
a
l

o
n

D
S
K
4
S
P
T
V
N
1
P
R
O
D

w
i
t
h

C
O
N
G
-
R
E
C
-
O
N
L
I
N
E
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—HOUSE H3665 June 17, 2013
to the gentleman from Arizona (Mr.
GOSAR), someone who is clearly a bet-
ter gentleman than I am.
Mr. GOSAR. Mr. Speaker, I want to
thank my colleague for the time and
her teamwork on this public lands ini-
tiative.
But I am very frustrated that it even
is necessary for us to re-introduce this
legislation. It shouldn’t take years and
an act of Congress to right a wrong.
Last year, the House overwhelmingly
passed this bill by a vote count of 421–
1. Unfortunately, it was the victim of
partisan gridlock in the United States
Senate and was not sent to the Presi-
dent before the end of the 112th Con-
gress.
I see this initiative as unfinished
business from the last Congress; and I
hope, together, we can get this across
the finish line very quickly this year.
H.R. 862 is a commonsense solution
to an incomprehensible Federal land
situation in northern Arizona. In 1960,
the Federal Government conducted a
survey in which several acres of the
United States Forest Service land were
misidentified as private property.
It was not until 2007, when the Fed-
eral Government contracted another
private survey, that the mistakes were
realized, and the residents of the
Mountainaire neighborhood were in-
formed of these errors.
Until the 2007 survey, many of these
residents have maintained these par-
cels and developed them as their own
for years and, in some cases, decades.
In essence, the Federal Government
seized lands the residents had main-
tained, developed, and paid taxes on for
years.
Questions associated with the land
ownership have plummeted property
values in the neighborhood and pre-
vented a number of owners from selling
their homes. On some of those parcels,
the revised boundary goes practically
through portions of the residents’
homes or backyards.
To fix the untenable situation, we re-
introduced H.R. 862. The bill simply au-
thorizes the Forest Service to convey
all rights, titles, and interests to ap-
proximately 2.67 acres of the Coconino
National Forest to the homeowners for
a small fee, using an estimation proc-
ess Congress utilized in another land
exchange in the same northern Arizona
county from the 109th Congress, Public
Law No. 109–110.
The Forest Service does not want to
own these people’s living rooms, and
the property owners certainly do not
want to share their homes or their
yards with the Forest Service. This bill
is a no-brainer, reported out of the
Natural Resources Committee by unan-
imous consent.
I encourage my colleagues to vote in
favor of this legislation and relieve
some northern Arizonans of this finan-
cially burdensome situation.
Mr. SABLAN. Mr. Speaker, when the
House acts this way, it’s some of the
most brightest, proudest moments for
me—that I am a part of this House
when Congress, when Members of this
House do something to right a wrong.
And in this case, not just right a
wrong, but because of a survey and a
mistake by surveyors in the 1960s,
these homeowners are now even willing
to put up their own money and buy a
piece of property that they thought
they always owned.
This is a proud moment, and I sup-
port the bill, Mr. Speaker.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. BISHOP of Utah. Mr. Speaker,
this is one situation that is just unbe-
lievable that the situation exists. It is
unbelievable that it takes legislation
to solve this type of a problem.
And I want to thank Mr. GOSAR, as
well as Mrs. KIRKPATRICK from Arizona,
for working together to try and solve
this problem that should never have
existed in the first place.
It’s a good bill. I urge support.
I yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The
question is on the motion offered by
the gentleman from Utah (Mr. BISHOP)
that the House suspend the rules and
pass the bill, H.R. 862.
The question was taken.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. In the
opinion of the Chair, two-thirds being
in the affirmative, the ayes have it.
Mr. BISHOP of Utah. Mr. Speaker, on
that I demand the yeas and nays.
The yeas and nays were ordered.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursu-
ant to clause 8 of rule XX, further pro-
ceedings on this motion will be post-
poned.
f
b 1740
BUFFALO SOLDIERS IN THE
NATIONAL PARKS STUDY ACT
Mr. BISHOP of Utah. Mr. Speaker, I
move to suspend the rules and pass the
bill (H.R. 520) to authorize the Sec-
retary of the Interior to conduct a
study of alternatives for commemo-
rating and interpreting the role of the
Buffalo Soldiers in the early years of
the National Parks, and for other pur-
poses.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The text of the bill is as follows:
H.R. 520
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Rep-
resentatives of the United States of America in
Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Buffalo Sol-
diers in the National Parks Study Act’’.
SEC. 2. FINDINGS AND PURPOSE.
(a) FINDINGS.—The Congress finds the fol-
lowing:
(1) In the late 19th century and early 20th
century, African-American troops who came
to be known as the Buffalo Soldiers served in
many critical roles in the western United
States, including protecting some of the first
National Parks.
(2) Based at the Presidio in San Francisco,
Buffalo Soldiers were assigned to Sequoia
and Yosemite National Parks where they pa-
trolled the backcountry, built trails, stopped
poaching, and otherwise served in the roles
later assumed by National Park rangers.
(3) The public would benefit from having
opportunities to learn more about the Buf-
falo Soldiers in the National Parks and their
contributions to the management of Na-
tional Parks and the legacy of African-Amer-
icans in the post-Civil War era.
(4) As the centennial of the National Park
Service in 2016 approaches, it is an especially
appropriate time to conduct research and in-
crease public awareness of the stewardship
role the Buffalo Soldiers played in the early
years of the National Parks.
(b) PURPOSE.—The purpose of this Act is to
authorize a study to determine the most ef-
fective ways to increase understanding and
public awareness of the critical role that the
Buffalo Soldiers played in the early years of
the National Parks.
SEC. 3. STUDY.
(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary of the In-
terior shall conduct a study of alternatives
for commemorating and interpreting the
role of the Buffalo Soldiers in the early years
of the National Parks.
(b) CONTENTS OF STUDY.—The study shall
include—
(1) a historical assessment, based on exten-
sive research, of the Buffalo Soldiers who
served in National Parks in the years prior
to the establishment of the National Park
Service;
(2) an evaluation of the suitability and fea-
sibility of establishing a national historic
trail commemorating the route traveled by
the Buffalo Soldiers from their post in the
Presidio of San Francisco to Sequoia and Yo-
semite National Parks and to any other Na-
tional Parks where they may have served;
(3) the identification of properties that
could meet criteria for listing in the Na-
tional Register of Historic Places or criteria
for designation as National Historic Land-
marks;
(4) an evaluation of appropriate ways to
enhance historical research, education, in-
terpretation, and public awareness of the
story of the Buffalo Soldiers’ stewardship
role in the National Parks, including ways to
link the story to the development of Na-
tional Parks and the story of African-Amer-
ican military service following the Civil
War; and
(5) any other matters that the Secretary of
the Interior deems appropriate for this
study.
(c) REPORT.—Not later than 3 years after
funds are made available for the study, the
Secretary of the Interior shall submit to the
Committee on Natural Resources of the
House of Representatives and the Committee
on Energy and Natural Resources of the Sen-
ate a report containing the study’s findings
and recommendations.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursu-
ant to the rule, the gentleman from
Utah (Mr. BISHOP) and the gentleman
from the Northern Mariana Islands
(Mr. SABLAN) each will control 20 min-
utes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman
from Utah.
GENERAL LEAVE
Mr. BISHOP of Utah. Mr. Speaker,
again I ask unanimous consent that all
Members have 5 legislative days to re-
vise and extend their remarks and in-
clude extraneous materials on the bill
under consideration.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there
objection to the request of the gen-
tleman from Utah?
There was no objection.
Mr. BISHOP of Utah. I yield myself
such time as I may consume.
This particular bill authorizes the
National Park Service, again, to con-
duct a study. The cost of the study
VerDate Mar 15 2010 06:33 Jul 12, 2013 Jkt 079060 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 7634 Sfmt 0634 E:\RECORD13\RECFILES\H17JN3.REC H17JN3
b
j
n
e
a
l

o
n

D
S
K
4
S
P
T
V
N
1
P
R
O
D

w
i
t
h

C
O
N
G
-
R
E
C
-
O
N
L
I
N
E
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—HOUSE H3666 June 17, 2013
would be subject to appropriations.
This study would commemorate the
role of Buffalo Soldiers in the early
years of our National Park Service.
For 25 years preceding the creation of
the National Park Service, Yosemite
National Park was administered by the
United States Army, and the Buffalo
Soldiers played a key role protecting
the park resources that have been en-
joyed by many people today.
This bill would simply authorize a
study as to the role that we should do
in commemorating the Buffalo Soldiers
in the National Park system specifi-
cally as it deals with Yosemite Na-
tional Park.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. SABLAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield
myself as much time as I may con-
sume, and then I will also yield time to
the distinguished gentlelady from Cali-
fornia.
H.R. 520 would direct the Secretary
of the Interior to study ways the Na-
tional Park Service could commemo-
rate the role of Buffalo Soldiers. Buf-
falo Soldiers were African American
troops who served in our first National
Parks, including Yosemite and Sequoia
National Parks, prior to the establish-
ment of the National Park Service.
The legislation, sponsored by Con-
gresswoman SPEIER, was ordered favor-
ably reported by the Natural Resources
Committee in April. This legislation
has passed the House during the pre-
vious two Congresses.
I commend my colleague, Congress-
woman SPEIER, for introducing this
legislation and for her leadership on
this issue. We strongly support this
legislation.
At this time, I yield as much time as
she may consume to the Congress-
woman from California.
Ms. SPEIER. Mr. Speaker, I thank
my good friend from the Northern Mar-
iana Islands for yielding to me.
Mr. Speaker, I rise this evening in
support of my legislation, the Buffalo
Soldiers in the National Parks Study
Act, which will allow the Department
of the Interior to study the role the
Buffalo Soldiers played in defending
our first national parks. This is a key
step in preserving the legacy of the
Army’s first African American infantry
and cavalry units and the contribu-
tions they made to the Nation.
This bill has passed the House under
suspension of the rules twice before,
once in the 111th Congress and once in
the 112th Congress. I’m grateful to the
many cosponsors of this legislation, as
well.
Specifically, my bill would evaluate
the feasibility of a National Historic
Trail along the Buffalo Soldier route
from their historic military post at the
San Francisco Presidio to Yosemite
and Sequoia National Parks. The study
would also identify properties that
could be listed in the National Register
of Historic Places or designation as Na-
tional Historic Landmarks.
For several years, Buffalo Soldier
regiments traveled 320 miles along this
route to patrol the park lands for
loggers and poachers, build new trails,
and escort visitors. The Buffalo Sol-
diers were among our very first park
rangers, a task these troops took on
with pride after serving bravely in the
Civil War and other campaigns.
Because of the color of their skin, the
Buffalo Soldiers were all too often
marginalized instead of respected for
their service to the Nation, both on
and off the battlefield. However, during
their time protecting the parks, they
not only confronted racism and dis-
crimination—they overcame it. They
became respected neighbors and friends
to people living in the park regions,
and they made real inroads towards ra-
cial progress that was extraordinary
for their day. Although they were as-
signed to watch over government prop-
erty for only a relatively short time,
the Buffalo Soldiers helped lay the
groundwork for some of our greatest
wilderness to be preserved forever.
I’m proud that the Buffalo Soldiers
traveled through my district on their
way to the parks, and I believe this bill
will help shine a light on the history
they made in the great State of Cali-
fornia and in many places across our
great country.
All Americans, from all walks of life,
will benefit from learning about this
often-overlooked chapter in our his-
tory. The Buffalo Soldiers’ story is ul-
timately about the triumph not just of
African American troops over prejudice
and injustice, but about the movement
of our Nation toward a more tolerant
and courageous society. This is history
that should be more fully incorporated
into our parks system, and I believe it
will enhance the parks experience for
millions of visitors for many years to
come. I thank my colleagues for sup-
porting this bill.
Mr. SABLAN. Mr. Speaker, we sup-
port the bill.
I have no further speakers, and I
yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. BISHOP of Utah. I yield back the
balance of my time.
Mr. TURNER. Mr. Speaker, as we consider
H.R. 520, the Buffalo Soldiers in the National
Parks Study Act, I would like to recognize the
important contributions of Colonel Charles
Young.
As a Member of the House Armed Services
Committee and Co-Chair of the House Historic
Preservation Caucus, I have the privilege of
frequently working with our servicemembers
as well as a great appreciation for our nation’s
historic treasures. Additionally, Colonel
Young’s home, located in my community in
Southwest Ohio, was recently designated as a
National Historic Monument.
Colonel Young, the third African-American
to graduate from the United States Military
Academy at West Point in 1889, was a distin-
guished officer in the U.S. Army. He was a
pioneer of military intelligence techniques, a
commander of troops in combat in the Span-
ish-American War and the Mexican expedition
against Pancho Villa.
His first assignment after graduation was
with the Buffalo Soldiers in the 10th Cavalry in
Nebraska, and then with the 9th and 10th
Cavalries in Utah. With the outbreak of the
Spanish-American War, he was reassigned as
Second Lieutenant to training duty at Camp
Alger, Virginia.
In 1903, then-Captain Young was in com-
mand of the 10th Cavalry stationed at the Pre-
sidio of San Francisco. That summer, with the
Army responsible for its management, Colonel
Young was assigned to serve as Acting Su-
perintendent of Sequoia National Parks in
California.
Colonel Young was then awarded a com-
mission as a Major in the Ninth Ohio Volun-
teer Infantry. Later, during the Spanish-Amer-
ican War, he commanded a squadron of the
10th Cavalry Buffalo Soldiers in Cuba.
Throughout his military career, Colonel Young
distinguished himself in service to our nation
with the Buffalo Soldiers of the 9th and 10th
Cavalries, and the 25th Infantry, as well as
serving as Professor of Military Science at Wil-
berforce University, Ohio.
Today the House will continue to honor the
legacy and leadership of the Buffalo Soldiers.
Colonel Charles Young stands out as a shin-
ing example of the dedication, service, and
commitment of the Buffalo Soldiers throughout
United States and world history.
Mr. Speaker, I am glad to recognize the im-
portant historical contributions of Buffalo Sol-
diers such as Colonel Young.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The
question is on the motion offered by
the gentleman from Utah (Mr. BISHOP)
that the House suspend the rules and
pass the bill, H.R. 520.
The question was taken; and (two-
thirds being in the affirmative) the
rules were suspended and the bill was
passed.
A motion to reconsider was laid on
the table.
f
CONTINUATION OF THE NATIONAL
EMERGENCY WITH RESPECT TO
THE WESTERN BALKANS—MES-
SAGE FROM THE PRESIDENT OF
THE UNITED STATES (H. DOC.
NO. 113–37)
The SPEAKER pro tempore laid be-
fore the House the following message
from the President of the United
States; which was read and, together
with the accompanying papers, referred
to the Committee on Foreign Affairs,
and ordered to be printed:
To the Congress of the United States:
Section 202(d) of the National Emer-
gencies Act (50 U.S.C. 1622(d)) provides
for the automatic termination of a na-
tional emergency unless, within 90
days prior to the anniversary date of
its declaration, the President publishes
in the Federal Register and transmits to
the Congress a notice stating that the
emergency is to continue in effect be-
yond the anniversary date. In accord-
ance with this provision, I have sent to
the Federal Register for publication the
enclosed notice stating that the na-
tional emergency with respect to the
Western Balkans that was declared in
Executive Order 13219 of June 26, 2001,
is to remain in effect beyond June 26,
2013.
The crisis constituted by the actions
of persons engaged in, or assisting,
VerDate Mar 15 2010 06:33 Jul 12, 2013 Jkt 079060 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 7634 Sfmt 0634 E:\RECORD13\RECFILES\H17JN3.REC H17JN3
b
j
n
e
a
l

o
n

D
S
K
4
S
P
T
V
N
1
P
R
O
D

w
i
t
h

C
O
N
G
-
R
E
C
-
O
N
L
I
N
E
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—HOUSE H3667 June 17, 2013
sponsoring, or supporting (i) extremist
violence in the Republic of Macedonia
and elsewhere in the Western Balkans
region, or (ii) acts obstructing imple-
mentation of the Dayton Accords in
Bosnia or United Nations Security
Council Resolution 1244 of June 10, 1999,
related to Kosovo, which led to the dec-
laration of a national emergency on
June 26, 2001, in Executive Order 13219
and to the amendment of that order in
Executive Order 13304 of May 28, 2003,
to include acts obstructing implemen-
tation of the Ohrid Framework Agree-
ment of 2001 in Macedonia, has not
been resolved. The acts of extremist vi-
olence and obstructionist activity out-
lined in Executive Order 13219, as
amended, are hostile to U.S. interests
and continue to pose an unusual and
extraordinary threat to the national
security and foreign policy of the
United States. For this reason, I have
determined that it is necessary to con-
tinue the national emergency declared
with respect to the Western Balkans.
BARACK OBAMA.
THE WHITE HOUSE, June 17, 2013.
f
RECESS
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursu-
ant to clause 12(a) of rule I, the Chair
declares the House in recess until ap-
proximately 6:30 p.m. today.
Accordingly (at 5 o’clock and 48 min-
utes p.m.), the House stood in recess.
f
b 1830
AFTER RECESS
The recess having expired, the House
was called to order by the Speaker pro
tempore (Mr. BROOKS of Alabama) at 6
o’clock and 30 minutes p.m.
f
ANNOUNCEMENT BY THE SPEAKER
PRO TEMPORE
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursu-
ant to clause 8 of rule XX, proceedings
will resume on motions to suspend the
rules previously postponed.
Votes will be taken in the following
order:
H.R. 876, by the yeas and nays;
H.R. 253, by the yeas and nays;
H.R. 862, by the yeas and nays.
The first electronic vote will be con-
ducted as a 15-minute vote. Remaining
electronic votes will be conducted as 5-
minute votes.
f
IDAHO WILDERNESS WATER
RESOURCES PROTECTION ACT
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The un-
finished business is the vote on the mo-
tion to suspend the rules and pass the
bill (H.R. 876) to authorize the contin-
ued use of certain water diversions lo-
cated on National System land in the
Frank Church-River of No Return Wil-
derness and the Selway-Bitterroot Wil-
derness in the State of Idaho, and for
other purposes, on which the yeas and
nays were ordered.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The
question is on the motion offered by
the gentleman from Utah (Mr. BISHOP)
that the House suspend the rules and
pass the bill.
The vote was taken by electronic de-
vice, and there were—yeas 398, nays 0,
not voting 36, as follows:
[Roll No. 245]
YEAS—398
Alexander
Amash
Amodei
Andrews
Bachmann
Bachus
Barber
Barletta
Barr
Barrow (GA)
Bass
Beatty
Becerra
Benishek
Bentivolio
Bera (CA)
Bilirakis
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Bishop (UT)
Black
Blackburn
Blumenauer
Bonamici
Boustany
Brady (PA)
Braley (IA)
Bridenstine
Brooks (AL)
Brooks (IN)
Broun (GA)
Brown (FL)
Brownley (CA)
Bucshon
Burgess
Bustos
Butterfield
Calvert
Camp
Cantor
Capito
Capps
Capuano
Carney
Carson (IN)
Cartwright
Cassidy
Castor (FL)
Castro (TX)
Chabot
Chaffetz
Chu
Cicilline
Clarke
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Coble
Coffman
Cohen
Cole
Collins (GA)
Collins (NY)
Conaway
Connolly
Conyers
Cook
Cooper
Costa
Cotton
Cramer
Crawford
Crenshaw
Crowley
Cuellar
Culberson
Cummings
Daines
Davis (CA)
Davis, Danny
Davis, Rodney
DeFazio
DeGette
Delaney
DeLauro
DelBene
Denham
Dent
DeSantis
DesJarlais
Deutch
Diaz-Balart
Doggett
Doyle
Duckworth
Duffy
Duncan (SC)
Duncan (TN)
Edwards
Ellison
Ellmers
Engel
Enyart
Eshoo
Esty
Farenthold
Farr
Fattah
Fincher
Fitzpatrick
Fleischmann
Fleming
Flores
Forbes
Fortenberry
Foster
Foxx
Frankel (FL)
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Gabbard
Gallego
Garamendi
Garcia
Gardner
Garrett
Gerlach
Gibson
Gohmert
Goodlatte
Gosar
Gowdy
Granger
Graves (GA)
Graves (MO)
Grayson
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Griffin (AR)
Griffith (VA)
Grijalva
Grimm
Guthrie
Hahn
Hall
Hanabusa
Hanna
Harper
Harris
Hartzler
Hastings (FL)
Hastings (WA)
Heck (NV)
Heck (WA)
Hensarling
Herrera Beutler
Higgins
Himes
Hinojosa
Holding
Holt
Honda
Horsford
Hoyer
Hudson
Huelskamp
Huffman
Huizenga (MI)
Hultgren
Hurt
Israel
Issa
Jackson Lee
Jeffries
Jenkins
Johnson (GA)
Johnson (OH)
Johnson, E. B.
Johnson, Sam
Jones
Joyce
Kaptur
Keating
Kelly (IL)
Kelly (PA)
Kennedy
Kildee
Kilmer
King (IA)
Kingston
Kinzinger (IL)
Kirkpatrick
Kline
Kuster
Labrador
LaMalfa
Lance
Langevin
Lankford
Larson (CT)
Latham
Latta
Levin
Lewis
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Loebsack
Lofgren
Long
Lowenthal
Lowey
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Lujan Grisham
(NM)
Luja´ n, Ben Ray
(NM)
Lummis
Lynch
Maffei
Maloney, Sean
Marino
Massie
Matheson
Matsui
McCarthy (CA)
McCaul
McClintock
McCollum
McDermott
McGovern
McHenry
McIntyre
McKeon
McKinley
McMorris
Rodgers
McNerney
Meadows
Meehan
Meeks
Meng
Messer
Mica
Michaud
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller, Gary
Moore
Moran
Mulvaney
Murphy (FL)
Murphy (PA)
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Negrete McLeod
Neugebauer
Noem
Nolan
Nugent
Nunes
Nunnelee
O’Rourke
Olson
Owens
Palazzo
Pallone
Pascrell
Paulsen
Payne
Pearce
Pelosi
Perlmutter
Perry
Peters (CA)
Peters (MI)
Peterson
Petri
Pingree (ME)
Pittenger
Pitts
Pocan
Poe (TX)
Polis
Pompeo
Posey
Price (GA)
Price (NC)
Quigley
Radel
Rahall
Rangel
Reed
Reichert
Renacci
Ribble
Rice (SC)
Rigell
Roby
Roe (TN)
Rogers (AL)
Rokita
Rooney
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Ross
Rothfus
Roybal-Allard
Royce
Ruiz
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Ryan (WI)
Salmon
Sa´ nchez, Linda
T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sanford
Sarbanes
Scalise
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schneider
Schock
Schrader
Schwartz
Schweikert
Scott (VA)
Scott, David
Sensenbrenner
Serrano
Sessions
Sewell (AL)
Shea-Porter
Sherman
Shimkus
Shuster
Simpson
Sinema
Sires
Slaughter
Smith (MO)
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Smith (WA)
Southerland
Speier
Stewart
Stivers
Stutzman
Swalwell (CA)
Takano
Terry
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Thompson (PA)
Thornberry
Tiberi
Tierney
Tipton
Titus
Tonko
Tsongas
Turner
Upton
Valadao
Van Hollen
Vargas
Veasey
Vela
Vela´ zquez
Visclosky
Wagner
Walberg
Walden
Walorski
Walz
Wasserman
Schultz
Waters
Watt
Waxman
Weber (TX)
Webster (FL)
Welch
Wenstrup
Westmoreland
Whitfield
Williams
Wilson (FL)
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Wolf
Womack
Woodall
Yarmuth
Yoder
Yoho
Young (AK)
Young (IN)
NOT VOTING—36
Aderholt
Barton
Bonner
Brady (TX)
Buchanan
Campbell
Ca´ rdenas
Carter
Courtney
Dingell
Fudge
Gibbs
Gingrey (GA)
Gutierrez
Hunter
Jordan
Kind
King (NY)
Lamborn
Larsen (WA)
Lee (CA)
Maloney,
Carolyn
Marchant
Markey
McCarthy (NY)
Miller, George
Mullin
Pastor (AZ)
Richmond
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Runyan
Scott, Austin
Stockman
Young (FL)
b 1855
Mr. STIVERS changed his vote from
‘‘nay’’ to ‘‘yea.’’
So (two-thirds being in the affirma-
tive) the rules were suspended and the
bill was passed.
The result of the vote was announced
as above recorded.
A motion to reconsider was laid on
the table.
f
Y MOUNTAIN ACCESS
ENHANCEMENT ACT
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The un-
finished business is the vote on the mo-
tion to suspend the rules and pass the
bill (H.R. 253) to provide for the con-
veyance of a small parcel of National
Forest System land in the Uinta-
Wasatch-Cache National Forest in
Utah to Brigham Young University,
and for other purposes, as amended.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The
question is on the motion offered by
VerDate Mar 15 2010 06:33 Jul 12, 2013 Jkt 079060 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 7634 Sfmt 0634 E:\RECORD13\RECFILES\H17JN3.REC H17JN3
b
j
n
e
a
l

o
n

D
S
K
4
S
P
T
V
N
1
P
R
O
D

w
i
t
h

C
O
N
G
-
R
E
C
-
O
N
L
I
N
E
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—HOUSE H3668 June 17, 2013
the gentleman from Utah (Mr. BISHOP)
that the House suspend the rules and
pass the bill, as amended.
This is a 5-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic de-
vice, and there were—yeas 397, nays 1,
not voting 36, as follows:
[Roll No. 246]
YEAS—397
Alexander
Amodei
Andrews
Bachmann
Bachus
Barber
Barletta
Barr
Barrow (GA)
Bass
Beatty
Becerra
Benishek
Bentivolio
Bera (CA)
Bilirakis
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Bishop (UT)
Black
Blackburn
Blumenauer
Bonamici
Boustany
Brady (PA)
Braley (IA)
Bridenstine
Brooks (AL)
Brooks (IN)
Broun (GA)
Brown (FL)
Brownley (CA)
Bucshon
Burgess
Bustos
Butterfield
Calvert
Camp
Cantor
Capito
Capps
Capuano
Carney
Carson (IN)
Cartwright
Cassidy
Castor (FL)
Castro (TX)
Chabot
Chaffetz
Chu
Cicilline
Clarke
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Coble
Coffman
Cohen
Cole
Collins (GA)
Collins (NY)
Conaway
Connolly
Conyers
Cook
Cooper
Costa
Cotton
Cramer
Crawford
Crenshaw
Crowley
Cuellar
Culberson
Cummings
Daines
Davis (CA)
Davis, Danny
Davis, Rodney
DeFazio
DeGette
Delaney
DeLauro
DelBene
Denham
Dent
DeSantis
DesJarlais
Deutch
Diaz-Balart
Doggett
Doyle
Duckworth
Duffy
Duncan (SC)
Duncan (TN)
Edwards
Ellison
Ellmers
Engel
Enyart
Eshoo
Esty
Farenthold
Farr
Fattah
Fincher
Fitzpatrick
Fleischmann
Fleming
Flores
Forbes
Fortenberry
Foster
Foxx
Frankel (FL)
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Gabbard
Gallego
Garamendi
Garcia
Gardner
Garrett
Gerlach
Gibson
Gohmert
Goodlatte
Gosar
Gowdy
Granger
Graves (GA)
Graves (MO)
Grayson
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Griffin (AR)
Griffith (VA)
Grijalva
Grimm
Guthrie
Hahn
Hall
Hanabusa
Hanna
Harper
Harris
Hartzler
Hastings (FL)
Hastings (WA)
Heck (NV)
Heck (WA)
Hensarling
Herrera Beutler
Higgins
Himes
Hinojosa
Holding
Holt
Honda
Horsford
Hoyer
Hudson
Huelskamp
Huffman
Huizenga (MI)
Hultgren
Hurt
Israel
Issa
Jackson Lee
Jeffries
Jenkins
Johnson (GA)
Johnson (OH)
Johnson, E. B.
Johnson, Sam
Jones
Joyce
Kaptur
Keating
Kelly (IL)
Kelly (PA)
Kennedy
Kildee
Kilmer
King (IA)
Kingston
Kinzinger (IL)
Kirkpatrick
Kline
Kuster
Labrador
LaMalfa
Lance
Langevin
Lankford
Larson (CT)
Latham
Latta
Levin
Lewis
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Loebsack
Lofgren
Long
Lowenthal
Lowey
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Lujan Grisham
(NM)
Luja´ n, Ben Ray
(NM)
Lummis
Lynch
Maffei
Maloney, Sean
Marino
Massie
Matheson
Matsui
McCarthy (CA)
McCaul
McClintock
McCollum
McDermott
McGovern
McHenry
McIntyre
McKeon
McKinley
McMorris
Rodgers
McNerney
Meadows
Meehan
Meeks
Meng
Messer
Mica
Michaud
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller, Gary
Moore
Moran
Mulvaney
Murphy (FL)
Murphy (PA)
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Negrete McLeod
Neugebauer
Noem
Nolan
Nugent
Nunes
Nunnelee
O’Rourke
Olson
Owens
Palazzo
Pallone
Pascrell
Paulsen
Payne
Pearce
Pelosi
Perlmutter
Perry
Peters (CA)
Peters (MI)
Peterson
Petri
Pingree (ME)
Pittenger
Pitts
Pocan
Poe (TX)
Polis
Pompeo
Posey
Price (GA)
Price (NC)
Quigley
Radel
Rahall
Rangel
Reed
Reichert
Renacci
Ribble
Rice (SC)
Rigell
Roby
Roe (TN)
Rogers (AL)
Rokita
Rooney
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Ross
Rothfus
Roybal-Allard
Royce
Ruiz
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Ryan (WI)
Salmon
Sa´ nchez, Linda
T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sanford
Sarbanes
Scalise
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schneider
Schock
Schrader
Schwartz
Schweikert
Scott (VA)
Scott, David
Sensenbrenner
Serrano
Sessions
Sewell (AL)
Shea-Porter
Sherman
Shimkus
Shuster
Simpson
Sinema
Sires
Slaughter
Smith (MO)
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Smith (WA)
Southerland
Speier
Stewart
Stivers
Stutzman
Swalwell (CA)
Takano
Terry
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Thompson (PA)
Thornberry
Tiberi
Tierney
Tipton
Titus
Tonko
Tsongas
Turner
Upton
Valadao
Van Hollen
Vargas
Veasey
Vela
Vela´ zquez
Visclosky
Wagner
Walberg
Walden
Walorski
Walz
Wasserman
Schultz
Waters
Watt
Waxman
Weber (TX)
Webster (FL)
Welch
Wenstrup
Westmoreland
Whitfield
Williams
Wilson (FL)
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Wolf
Womack
Woodall
Yarmuth
Yoder
Yoho
Young (AK)
Young (IN)
NAYS—1
Amash
NOT VOTING—36
Aderholt
Barton
Bonner
Brady (TX)
Buchanan
Campbell
Ca´ rdenas
Carter
Courtney
Dingell
Fudge
Gibbs
Gingrey (GA)
Gutierrez
Hunter
Jordan
Kind
King (NY)
Lamborn
Larsen (WA)
Lee (CA)
Maloney,
Carolyn
Marchant
Markey
McCarthy (NY)
Miller, George
Mullin
Pastor (AZ)
Richmond
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Runyan
Scott, Austin
Stockman
Young (FL)
b 1902
So (two-thirds being in the affirma-
tive) the rules were suspended and the
bill, as amended, was passed.
The result of the vote was announced
as above recorded.
The title was amended so as to read:
‘‘A bill to provide for the conveyance of
approximately 80 acres of National
Forest System land in the Uinta-
Wasatch-Cache National Forest in
Utah to Brigham Young University,
and for other purposes.’’.
A motion to reconsider was laid on
the table.
f
CONVEYANCE OF LAND TO COR-
RECT ERRONEOUS SURVEY,
COCONINO NATIONAL FOREST,
ARIZONA
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The un-
finished business is the vote on the mo-
tion to suspend the rules and pass the
bill (H.R. 862) to authorize the convey-
ance of two small parcels of land with-
in the boundaries of the Coconino Na-
tional Forest containing private im-
provements that were developed based
upon the reliance of the landowners in
an erroneous survey conducted in May
1960, on which the yeas and nays were
ordered.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The
question is on the motion offered by
the gentleman from Utah (Mr. BISHOP)
that the House suspend the rules and
pass the bill.
This is a 5-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic de-
vice, and there were—yeas 395, nays 1,
not voting 38, as follows:
[Roll No. 247]
YEAS—395
Alexander
Amodei
Andrews
Bachmann
Bachus
Barber
Barletta
Barr
Barrow (GA)
Bass
Beatty
Becerra
Benishek
Bentivolio
Bera (CA)
Bilirakis
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Bishop (UT)
Black
Blackburn
Blumenauer
Bonamici
Boustany
Brady (PA)
Braley (IA)
Bridenstine
Brooks (AL)
Brooks (IN)
Broun (GA)
Brown (FL)
Brownley (CA)
Bucshon
Burgess
Bustos
Butterfield
Calvert
Camp
Cantor
Capito
Capps
Capuano
Carney
Carson (IN)
Cartwright
Cassidy
Castor (FL)
Castro (TX)
Chabot
Chaffetz
Chu
Cicilline
Clarke
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Coble
Coffman
Cohen
Cole
Collins (GA)
Collins (NY)
Conaway
Connolly
Conyers
Cook
Cooper
Costa
Cramer
Crawford
Crenshaw
Crowley
Cuellar
Culberson
Cummings
Daines
Davis (CA)
Davis, Danny
Davis, Rodney
DeFazio
DeGette
Delaney
DeLauro
DelBene
Denham
Dent
DeSantis
DesJarlais
Deutch
Diaz-Balart
Doggett
Doyle
Duckworth
Duffy
Duncan (SC)
Duncan (TN)
Edwards
Ellison
Ellmers
Engel
Enyart
Eshoo
Esty
Farenthold
Farr
Fattah
Fincher
Fitzpatrick
Fleischmann
Fleming
Flores
Forbes
Fortenberry
Foster
Foxx
Frankel (FL)
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Gabbard
Gallego
Garamendi
Garcia
Gardner
Garrett
Gerlach
Gibson
Gohmert
Goodlatte
Gosar
Gowdy
Granger
Graves (GA)
Graves (MO)
Grayson
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Griffin (AR)
Griffith (VA)
Grijalva
Grimm
Guthrie
Hahn
Hall
Hanabusa
Hanna
Harper
Harris
Hartzler
Hastings (FL)
Hastings (WA)
Heck (NV)
Heck (WA)
Hensarling
Herrera Beutler
Higgins
Himes
Hinojosa
Holding
Holt
Honda
Horsford
Hoyer
Hudson
Huelskamp
Huffman
Huizenga (MI)
Hultgren
Hurt
Israel
Issa
Jackson Lee
Jeffries
Jenkins
Johnson (GA)
Johnson (OH)
Johnson, E. B.
Johnson, Sam
Jones
Joyce
Kaptur
Keating
Kelly (IL)
Kelly (PA)
Kennedy
Kildee
Kilmer
King (IA)
Kingston
Kinzinger (IL)
Kirkpatrick
Kline
Kuster
Labrador
LaMalfa
Lance
Langevin
Lankford
Larson (CT)
Latham
Latta
Levin
Lewis
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Loebsack
Lofgren
Long
Lowenthal
Lowey
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Lujan Grisham
(NM)
Luja´ n, Ben Ray
(NM)
Lummis
Lynch
Maffei
Maloney, Sean
Marino
Massie
Matheson
VerDate Mar 15 2010 06:33 Jul 12, 2013 Jkt 079060 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 7634 Sfmt 0634 E:\RECORD13\RECFILES\H17JN3.REC H17JN3
b
j
n
e
a
l

o
n

D
S
K
4
S
P
T
V
N
1
P
R
O
D

w
i
t
h

C
O
N
G
-
R
E
C
-
O
N
L
I
N
E
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—HOUSE H3669 June 17, 2013
Matsui
McCarthy (CA)
McCaul
McClintock
McCollum
McDermott
McGovern
McHenry
McIntyre
McKeon
McKinley
McMorris
Rodgers
McNerney
Meadows
Meehan
Meeks
Meng
Messer
Mica
Michaud
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller, Gary
Moore
Moran
Mulvaney
Murphy (FL)
Murphy (PA)
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Negrete McLeod
Neugebauer
Noem
Nolan
Nugent
Nunes
Nunnelee
O’Rourke
Olson
Owens
Palazzo
Pallone
Pascrell
Paulsen
Payne
Pearce
Pelosi
Perlmutter
Perry
Peters (CA)
Peters (MI)
Peterson
Petri
Pingree (ME)
Pittenger
Pitts
Pocan
Poe (TX)
Polis
Pompeo
Posey
Price (GA)
Price (NC)
Quigley
Radel
Rahall
Rangel
Reed
Reichert
Renacci
Ribble
Rice (SC)
Rigell
Roby
Roe (TN)
Rogers (AL)
Rokita
Rooney
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Ross
Rothfus
Roybal-Allard
Royce
Ruiz
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Ryan (WI)
Salmon
Sa´ nchez, Linda
T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sanford
Sarbanes
Scalise
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schneider
Schock
Schrader
Schwartz
Schweikert
Scott (VA)
Sensenbrenner
Serrano
Sessions
Sewell (AL)
Shea-Porter
Sherman
Shimkus
Shuster
Simpson
Sinema
Sires
Slaughter
Smith (MO)
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Smith (WA)
Southerland
Speier
Stewart
Stivers
Stutzman
Swalwell (CA)
Takano
Terry
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Thompson (PA)
Thornberry
Tiberi
Tierney
Tipton
Titus
Tonko
Tsongas
Turner
Upton
Valadao
Van Hollen
Vargas
Veasey
Vela
Vela´ zquez
Visclosky
Wagner
Walberg
Walden
Walorski
Walz
Wasserman
Schultz
Waters
Watt
Waxman
Weber (TX)
Webster (FL)
Welch
Wenstrup
Westmoreland
Whitfield
Williams
Wilson (FL)
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Wolf
Womack
Woodall
Yarmuth
Yoder
Yoho
Young (AK)
Young (IN)
NAYS—1
Amash
NOT VOTING—38
Aderholt
Barton
Bonner
Brady (TX)
Buchanan
Campbell
Ca´ rdenas
Carter
Cotton
Courtney
Dingell
Fudge
Gibbs
Gingrey (GA)
Gutierrez
Hunter
Jordan
Kind
King (NY)
Lamborn
Larsen (WA)
Lee (CA)
Maloney,
Carolyn
Marchant
Markey
McCarthy (NY)
Miller, George
Mullin
Pastor (AZ)
Richmond
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Runyan
Scott, Austin
Scott, David
Stockman
Young (FL)
b 1911
So (two-thirds being in the affirma-
tive) the rules were suspended and the
bill was passed.
The result of the vote was announced
as above recorded.
A motion to reconsider was laid on
the table.
REPORT ON RESOLUTION PRO-
VIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF
H.R. 1947, FEDERAL AGRI-
CULTURE REFORM AND RISK
MANAGEMENT ACT OF 2013; AND
PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION
OF H.R. 1797, PAIN-CAPABLE UN-
BORN CHILD PROTECTION ACT
Ms. FOXX, from the Committee on
Rules, submitted a privileged report
(Rept. No. 113–114) on the resolution (H.
Res. 266) providing for consideration of
the bill (H.R. 1947) to provide for the
reform and continuation of agricul-
tural and other programs of the De-
partment of Agriculture through fiscal
year 2018, and for other purposes; and
providing for consideration of the bill
(H.R. 1797) to amend title 18, United
States Code, to protect pain-capable
unborn children in the District of Co-
lumbia, and for other purposes, which
was referred to the House Calendar and
ordered to be printed.
f
REMOVAL OF NAME OF MEMBER
AS COSPONSOR OF H.R. 1797
Mr. BROUN of Georgia. Mr. Speaker,
I ask unanimous consent that my name
be removed as a cosponsor of H.R. 1797,
the Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protec-
tion Act.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr.
DESANTIS). Is there objection to the re-
quest of the gentleman from Georgia?
There was no objection.
f
REPORT ON H.R. 2397, DEPART-
MENT OF DEFENSE APPROPRIA-
TIONS ACT, 2014
Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN, from the Com-
mittee on Appropriations, submitted a
privileged report (Rept. No. 113–113) on
the bill (H.R. 2397) making appropria-
tions for the Department of Defense for
the fiscal year ending September 30,
2014, and for other purposes, which was
referred to the Union Calendar and or-
dered to be printed.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursu-
ant to clause 1, rule XXI, all points of
order are reserved on the bill.
f
ENROLL AMERICA
(Mr. BURGESS asked and was given
permission to address the House for 1
minute and to revise and extend his re-
marks.)
Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Speaker, today,
the White House’s permanent campaign
machine released a television ad pro-
moting the Affordable Care Act and,
unfortunately, it aims to completely
mislead the public. The ad claims that
Americans are seeing better coverage
and lower costs because of the Afford-
able Care Act. That is pure fantasy.
The fact is that premiums have been
ratcheting upward across the country.
On average, rates in Ohio will go up to
almost $200 a month because of this
law. It’s the same story state by state.
These rising costs clearly have the ad-
ministration worried that people are
going to understand how bad the Af-
fordable Care Act is.
Enroll America is set to spend tens of
millions of dollars in promoting this
law. This is money that they raised by
using current and former administra-
tion officials to unethically, if not ille-
gally, strong-arm donations from
health care companies that are regu-
lated by the Department of Health and
Human Services.
The administration put together a
law that hurts families and now they
have to spend tens of millions of dol-
lars telling people that ‘‘hey, it ain’t so
bad.’’
Mr. Speaker, this is a travesty. It
should be stopped.
f
CLIMATE CHANGE
(Mr. WAXMAN asked and was given
permission to address the House for 1
minute and to revise and extend his re-
marks.)
Mr. WAXMAN. Mr. Speaker, this last
week, the International Energy Agency
came out with a very important report
about climate change. They said that if
we don’t act soon, we are going to see
extreme weather events—droughts,
hurricanes, all sorts of flooding, real
serious problems for our children and
our grandchildren. But the important
thing in this report is if we do act now,
we can avert some of those horrible
consequences that will face our chil-
dren, and especially our grandchildren.
I want to urge the Congress to take
this report seriously and let us start
acting to protect future generations
and this planet. We only have one at-
mosphere we share with everyone else.
Let’s not pollute it so that the carbon
emissions and greenhouse gases con-
tinue to heat the planet and cause cli-
mate problems that we’re already wit-
nessing today. Let’s move. It will help
our economy, as well as our environ-
ment.
f
ABUNDANT, CLEAN, AND
AFFORDABLE NATURAL GAS
(Mr. THOMPSON of Pennsylvania
asked and was given permission to ad-
dress the House for 1 minute and to re-
vise and extend his remarks.)
Mr. THOMPSON of Pennsylvania.
Mr. Speaker, America is blessed with
abundant, clean, and affordable natural
gas. As the amount of known natural
gas reserves continually increases, we
are also blessed with the technology to
be environmentally responsible when
accessing this resource.
In my home State of Pennsylvania,
the discovery and extraction of the
Marcellus shale has been transforming.
During the difficult years of an econ-
omy in recession, unemployment num-
bers in the Keystone State have re-
mained well below the national rates.
We can attribute a substantial portion
of this prosperity to development re-
lated to this plentiful natural resource.
A study by the Allegheny Institute
for Public Policy is a recent testament
VerDate Mar 15 2010 06:33 Jul 12, 2013 Jkt 079060 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 7634 Sfmt 0634 E:\RECORD13\RECFILES\H17JN3.REC H17JN3
b
j
n
e
a
l

o
n

D
S
K
4
S
P
T
V
N
1
P
R
O
D

w
i
t
h

C
O
N
G
-
R
E
C
-
O
N
L
I
N
E
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—HOUSE H3670 June 17, 2013
to this fact. The report shows that
rents and royalties reported on Penn-
sylvania income tax returns from 2006
to 2010 have increased 61 percent state-
wide and 119 percent in counties with
Marcellus shale activity.
Mr. Speaker, we must continue to re-
sponsibly develop this resource so that
we ensure it offers future generations
the same and greater economic oppor-
tunities.
f
b 1920
A WOMAN’S RIGHT TO CHOOSE
(Mr. BARBER asked and was given
permission to address the House for 1
minute.)
Mr. BARBER. I rise tonight as the fa-
ther of two strong and accomplished
women and as the grandfather of three
grandchildren in order to speak against
H.R. 1797, which will come before the
House tomorrow, in which we will be
asked yet again to put government in
charge of a woman’s private medical
decisions.
We must protect the right of every
woman to make her health care deci-
sions with her doctor without inter-
ference by politicians in Washington.
Only she can decide what is best for her
and her family. This is an issue of per-
sonal liberty. The Supreme Court ruled
more than half a century ago that
Americans had the right to make their
own choices about reproductive health.
Yet, once again, we will debate a new
piece of legislation to limit the rights
of women.
I will oppose H.R. 1797 tomorrow, and
I strongly urge my colleagues on both
sides of the aisle to do the same—to
stand up for women and to oppose the
latest attempt to intrude into their
most personal health care decisions.
f
OBAMACARE AND AMNESTY
(Mr. FLEMING asked and was given
permission to address the House for 1
minute.)
Mr. FLEMING. Mr. Speaker, what do
you get when you add the Senate’s am-
nesty immigration bill to ObamaCare?
More people losing their jobs.
ObamaCare mandates that employers
with 50 or more full-time employees
provide government-approved health
insurance or pay a penalty. Many busi-
nesses with around 50 employees al-
ready say they’ll cut some full-timers
to part-time positions to avoid this
penalty.
But that’s not all.
The Senate immigration bill would
give legal status to about 11 million
people who have come here illegally,
and employers could hire any of those
11 million without counting them to-
ward the ObamaCare mandate. So em-
ployers who are trying to make ends
meet and balance a budget are being
told by their government that they can
save money by unloading full-time,
hardworking American citizens and by
replacing them with immigrants who
are here on a provisional status.
I know my colleagues on the other
side will say we should just add all 11
million, but I think that’s the wrong
thing to do. Let’s repeal ObamaCare.
f
SMALL BUSINESS WEEK
(Mr. SWALWELL of California asked
and was given permission to address
the House for 1 minute and to revise
and extend his remarks.)
Mr. SWALWELL of California. This
week marks the 50th annual National
Small Business Week, where we recog-
nize the importance of the entre-
preneurs and small business owners
who work hard to fulfill the promise of
the American Dream.
I saw this firsthand as a Dublin plan-
ning commissioner and, later, as a city
council member, which is that, when
small businesses get off the ground and
succeed, the entire community around
them benefits and our economy grows.
In fact, more than one half of all Amer-
icans either own or work for a small
business, and they account for about
two out of every three new jobs created
every year.
This Saturday, I went from store-
front to storefront in downtown Hay-
ward to speak to local small business
owners in my congressional district. To
help address the problems that I heard
about—not having enough capital to
start up or not having enough business-
to-business transactions or foot traf-
fic—I introduced the Main Street Re-
vival Act. My bill will allow certain
small businesses to elect to defer pay-
ing Federal payroll taxes in the first
year of operation in order to help offset
their costs.
Small businesses form the backbone
of our communities—opening new
storefronts, training American workers
and selling goods in our neighborhoods.
It’s through supporting them that we
expand economic opportunity and help
make the American Dream a reality.
f
CUTTING RED TAPE FOR U.S.
SMALL BUSINESSES
(Mr. PAULSEN asked and was given
permission to address the House for 1
minute and to revise and extend his re-
marks.)
Mr. PAULSEN. Mr. Speaker, re-
cently, I held a telephone town hall
meeting with 7,000 of my constituents,
and a good part of our conversation
centered on our economy’s anemic eco-
nomic job growth and lackluster job
creation. One woman with whom I
spoke, whose name was Gloria, is a
small business owner in Chanhassen.
She expressed her deep frustration with
the growing weight of new regulations
on her business and on small busi-
nesses.
Mr. Speaker, Americans are burdened
with $2 trillion nearly every year of
new regulations—with the number only
increasing. Since 2008, 156 new major
regulations have been instituted, add-
ing about $90 billion in regulatory
costs to the economy and stifling eco-
nomic growth and job creation. This
needs to be fixed.
Congress should have more control
over a growing bureaucracy by requir-
ing that elected representatives sign
off on those new rules and regulations
that would have a major economic im-
pact. Cutting red tape will help lower
one more hurdle that is impeding op-
portunity for new jobs, job growers and
creators, and entrepreneurs like Glo-
ria.
f
FEDERAL PROBATION SYSTEM
AFFECTED BY SEQUESTER
(Mr. MAFFEI asked and was given
permission to address the House for 1
minute and to revise and extend his re-
marks.)
Mr. MAFFEI. On March 14, Lori
Bresnahan, a school librarian who lived
in my district, and a 10-year-old child
were attacked in a shopping center
parking lot.
The attacker was facing Federal
child pornography charges and was out
on bail and ordered to wear an elec-
tronic monitoring bracelet. He disabled
the bracelet, stabbed Ms. Bresnahan to
death and sexually assaulted the young
girl.
It was later found that he had tam-
pered with the bracelet 47 times, and
each time, the Federal probation office
in Syracuse did not respond. I wrote to
the administrative office of the United
States Courts, asking them to inves-
tigate this gross negligence. This is
their response:
The Director says, ‘‘Nothing can ex-
cuse the deficiencies in the supervision
of this case,’’ but he also says, ‘‘Re-
duced resources due to the sequester is
harming the efforts to keep it from
happening again.’’ He continued, ‘‘We
are bracing for even larger reductions
next year.’’
An innocent woman was stabbed to
death, an innocent child was sexually
assaulted, and the answer from the
courts is that their ability to keep it
from happening again is limited be-
cause their funding was cut. This is un-
acceptable. To Lori Bresnahan and
that young girl, we owe a full inves-
tigation, not excuses.
Mr. Speaker, we owe them the guar-
antee that this cannot happen again.
We owe them an end to the sequester
cuts, which are affecting our Federal
probation system.
ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE OF THE
UNITED STATES COURTS,
Washington, DC, June 14, 2013.
Hon. DAN MAFFEI,
U.S. House of Representatives,
Washington, DC 20515.
DEAR REPRESENTATIVE MAFFEI: I write in
response to your letters to the Judicial Con-
ference of the United States and to me as Di-
rector of the Administrative Office of the
U.S. Courts (AO). We share your grave con-
cern with the crimes attributed to David
Renz, a defendant under pretrial supervision
and electronic monitoring by the federal pro-
bation office in Syracuse, New York.
While nothing can diminish the severity of
crimes attributed to David Renz or excuse
VerDate Mar 15 2010 06:33 Jul 12, 2013 Jkt 079060 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 7634 Sfmt 0634 E:\RECORD13\RECFILES\H17JN3.REC H17JN3
b
j
n
e
a
l

o
n

D
S
K
4
S
P
T
V
N
1
P
R
O
D

w
i
t
h

C
O
N
G
-
R
E
C
-
O
N
L
I
N
E
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—HOUSE H3671 June 17, 2013
the deficiencies in supervision of his case,
our view—based on our knowledge from reg-
ular program reviews in the field and other
ongoing communication with field offices
from around the country—is that David Renz
was not supervised in a manner typical of
federal probation and pretrial services prac-
tices. The vast majority of the 200,000 defend-
ants and offenders supervised every year re-
main arrest-free and comply with the condi-
tions imposed by their supervising court. In
instances where they are returned to prison,
it is most often for technical violations (such
as refusing to participate in treatment or as-
sociating with a known felon) rather than
for new crimes. Such success does not come
easily when dealing with high-risk defend-
ants and offenders, and reflects the hard
work of many dedicated employees of the Ju-
diciary.
Probation officers carry out their duties
pursuant to statutes enacted by Congress
and policies approved by the Judicial Con-
ference. The AO is responsible for, among
other things, investigating the work of pro-
bation and pretrial services offices and ad-
vising courts about Judicial Conference poli-
cies and best practices. As you know, the AO
initiated an investigation into the handling
of the Renz case shortly after learning of his
rearrest. On April 9, 2013, a report based on
that investigation—which included a number
of findings that you cited in your letters—
was submitted to the chief judge of the
Northern District of New York, who directly
supervises the probation office in that dis-
trict. The chief judge has the authority to
take personnel action and make other
changes. We also re-submitted to the chief
judge an earlier ‘‘program review’’ report,
describing the work of the probation office in
2010. In the interest of transparency and pub-
lic awareness, the court posted the report on
their website.
We reported to the chief judge that the
probation office failed to make desired
changes following the 2010 program review
but, in consultation with the chief judge and
the AO, the probation office has made sub-
stantial changes in response to our findings
and recommendations in the 2013 report.
Those changes have included dismissing and
demoting certain probation office personnel,
reorganizing the office’s location monitoring
unit, retraining staff, and inviting in a tech-
nical assistance team from the AO for con-
sultation and training. In addition, the pro-
bation office indicated that it will cooperate
fully with cyclical reinvestigations to be
conducted (as funding permits) by the AO.
Nonetheless, the AO is in the process of re-
examining policy for and reviewing the oper-
ations of probation and pretrial services of-
fices with respect to location monitoring. We
appreciate your offer to introduce supportive
legislation. At this time, the Judicial Con-
ference does not have legislative rec-
ommendations related to the location moni-
toring program. After we complete our pol-
icy review, we may seek assistance from
Congress. Of note, we will need to work with-
in available funding. Funding for salaries
and operations in the probation and pretrial
services system has been reduced 14 percent
this fiscal year, and resources for location
monitoring, mental health and substance
abuse treatment have been cut 20 percent.
We are bracing for even larger reductions
next year, and the vacancy rate in probation
and pretrial services offices now stands at 25
percent. Your continued support of our ap-
propriation request is much appreciated.
The AO remains committed to public safe-
ty, and we appreciate your interest in our
federal probation and pretrial services func-
tions. If we may be of additional assistance,
please do not hesitate to call our Office of
Legislative Affairs at 202–502–1700.
Sincerely,
THOMAS F. HOGAN,
Director.
f
GITMO UNIVERSITY ON THE
CARIBBEAN
(Mr. POE of Texas asked and was
given permission to address the House
for 1 minute.)
Mr. POE of Texas. Mr. Speaker,
‘‘English as a second language,’’
‘‘Pashto to English,’’ ‘‘Arabic to
English,’’ ‘‘art,’’ ‘‘life skills,’’ ‘‘com-
puters,’’ ‘‘personal health and
wellness,’’ ‘‘finance and business’’—
sounds like courses at a swanky New
England university, but these are just
a few classes offered at Gitmo Univer-
sity on the Caribbean.
That’s not all.
These terrorists get training in re-
sume writing and interviewing. Are
they going someplace? And what do
they put on that resume—‘‘professional
bomb maker’’?
If they get bored with classes, they
can meander over to the ‘‘detainee li-
brary’’ with its 17,000 books, video
games and CDs.
More still.
Terrorists have access to the fancy,
new taxpayer-funded $750,000 soccer
field—play volleyball, basketball, table
tennis, and even foosball. Lastly, they
get cultural religious training—ironic
since the radicals kill in the name of
religion.
Mr. Speaker, why does the govern-
ment spend millions to train and enter-
tain those who kill Americans?
However, this is just another day for
the 166 terrorist trainers, financiers
and Osama bin Laden bodyguards at
Gitmo University on the Caribbean.
And that’s just the way it is.
f
NATIONAL UNEMPLOYMENT
(Mr. VALADAO asked and was given
permission to address the House for 1
minute.)
Mr. VALADAO. Mr. Speaker, earlier
this month, the national unemploy-
ment report was released for this past
May.
While some Americans were able to
find low-paying jobs, I remain ex-
tremely disappointed with this slug-
gish economic recovery. For example,
parts of my district in the Central Val-
ley are still suffering from 30 percent
unemployment. This is simply unac-
ceptable.
The economic downturn, caused by
burdensome regulatory policies at the
State and Federal levels, cannot con-
tinue. Our communities should be
growing, our businesses should be ex-
panding, and our families should be
able to provide better lives for their
children. This can be done by allowing
safe oil and natural gas exploration
and by providing a clean, reliable water
supply for Central Valley farmers, farm
workers and their communities.
My constituents have faced chronic
unemployment for too long. It is time
for Washington bureaucrats to get out
of the way and to let America prosper.
f
JUNETEENTH INDEPENDENCE DAY
AND THE NSA
(Ms. JACKSON LEE asked and was
given permission to address the House
for 1 minute.)
Ms. JACKSON LEE. I am very
pleased today to say that Members
have joined me in introducing H. Res.
268, which is observing the historical
significance of Juneteenth Independ-
ence Day, which is going to be this
Wednesday, June 19.
I hope that all of those across Amer-
ica will understand the meaning of
Juneteenth, which is to express a cele-
bration for the freeing of the slaves,
which did not come to the south-
western States, like Texas, until al-
most 2 years later. That was 1865 after
1863.
Mr. Speaker, I want to quickly
change the topic and indicate that I be-
lieve it’s important to get an under-
standing of the individual who has al-
legedly been providing the leaks from
the NSA. I have been restrained as to
call him anything until the laws deter-
mine who he is, but I do believe that
we are now tipping the scales of fair-
ness when more and more is coming
out in a foreign country, and I do be-
lieve something has to be done.
I will be introducing legislation on
the reduction of private-intel utiliza-
tion, an explanation of FISA Court
opinions and strengthening the FISA
Court because I believe that it is ex-
tremely important in strengthening
the public trust and in strengthening
the rights of the American people. We
have to do it, and we have to be able to
find this gentleman quickly so that the
intelligence that will protect Ameri-
cans will be done.
f
b 1930
ENTANGLING ALLIANCES
(Mr. GOHMERT asked and was given
permission to address the House for 1
minute.)
Mr. GOHMERT. Mr. Speaker, I real-
ize that there are many in schools that
are not taught as much history as they
should now because they’re teaching to
this ridiculous test, but it is important
we learn from history.
Right now in Syria, we have rebels
that are backed by al Qaeda. And this
administration, and even some in this
building, want to rush to the aid of the
al Qaeda-backed rebels, while there are
others that say, well, maybe we’d be
better off if Assad stayed in power. It’s
a lose-lose situation for the United
States, and when that’s the case, it’s
time to stay out.
Maybe early on, before al Qaeda got
so powerful, it would have been time to
do something; but when it is a national
security risk, when we get involved in
VerDate Mar 15 2010 06:33 Jul 12, 2013 Jkt 079060 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 7634 Sfmt 0634 E:\RECORD13\RECFILES\H17JN3.REC H17JN3
b
j
n
e
a
l

o
n

D
S
K
4
S
P
T
V
N
1
P
R
O
D

w
i
t
h

C
O
N
G
-
R
E
C
-
O
N
L
I
N
E
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—HOUSE H3672 June 17, 2013
an entangling situation like that, it’s
time to look back.
What caused World War I? Entan-
gling alliances.
Does entangling alliances involving
Russia and so many other countries in
Syria ring bells?
It’s time the bells rang and we stayed
out.
f
REGULATORY REFORM AND
REGULATORY RELIEF
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under
the Speaker’s announced policy of Jan-
uary 3, 2013, the gentleman from Geor-
gia (Mr. COLLINS) is recognized for 60
minutes as the designee of the major-
ity leader.
GENERAL LEAVE
Mr. COLLINS of Georgia. I ask unan-
imous consent that all Members may
have 5 legislative days within which to
revise and extend their remarks and in-
clude extraneous materials on the sub-
ject of my Special Order.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there
objection to the request of the gen-
tleman from Georgia?
There was no objection.
Mr. COLLINS of Georgia. Mr. Speak-
er, I rise in another of a series of Re-
publican freshman class Special Or-
ders, this time to focus on our Nation’s
need for regulatory reform and regu-
latory relief.
As an American and a parent, I value
the role of responsible regulations.
Many regulations were designed with
personal safety in mind, and these reg-
ulations make our workforce stronger.
All too often, however, the Federal
Government designs regulations that
are often unnecessary and achieve lit-
tle or no benefit at a very high cost.
These regulations directly impact the
hardworking men and women of north-
east Georgia and across the Nation.
Over the next hour, my colleagues and
I will discuss the growing problem of
regulation and why our Nation’s econ-
omy so desperately needs regulatory
relief.
I am pleased to yield 5 minutes to the
president of our freshman class, my
dear friend and a tireless worker on
this issue as well, the gentleman from
Indiana (Mr. MESSER).
Mr. MESSER. I want to thank my
good friend from Georgia (Mr. COLLINS)
for recognizing me and for leading this
Republican freshman class Special
Order on the need for regulatory re-
form.
I also want to commend him and the
gentleman from Florida (Mr. YOHO) for
their initiative in creating the Fresh-
man Regulatory Reform Working
Group, of which I am pleased to be a
member.
A recent editorial written by George
Washington University Professor Jona-
than Turley declared that:
Our carefully constructed system of checks
and balances is being negated by the rise of
a fourth branch, an administrative state of
sprawling departments and agencies that
govern with increasing autonomy and de-
creasing transparency.
The voice of the American people is
marginalized when this so-called
fourth state of government, our Fed-
eral agencies, fail to follow the wishes
of their elected representatives or
make policy in the absence of direction
by Congress. And the American people
are paying the price of this regulatory
maze created by this unelected govern-
ment.
For example, the Heritage Founda-
tion has found that annual regulatory
costs increased by more than $23.5 bil-
lion during President Obama’s fourth
year in office. The total cost of regula-
tions during the President’s first term
were nearly $70 billion, a level un-
matched by any previous administra-
tion.
It’s time to unshackle America from
the stranglehold these regulations have
on our economy.
I again want to thank Mr. COLLINS
and Mr. YOHO for leading efforts among
the freshman Republicans to eliminate
and streamline burdensome Federal
regulations. I look forward to working
with them and all Members of the
House to help create jobs by allowing
America’s businesses to grow and inno-
vate by reining in the unelected bu-
reaucracy standing in their way.
Mr. COLLINS of Georgia. I thank the
gentleman from Indiana.
I think you bring up a great point,
and that’s the issue of an unelected bu-
reaucracy that is forcing sometimes
businesses who just want to create,
want to expand, and want to do those
things. I appreciate your interest in
this, and we are going to continue this
fight because this matters to real peo-
ple. This matters to Main Street. And
when we matter to Main Street, then
people understand what we’re trying to
do up here, and I think they then begin
to have confidence that Washington
has their best interest at heart.
Mr. MESSER. I would just add, some-
times I think this comes from both
sides. In other words, there are times
when laws passed by Congress are in-
tentionally vague so that the bureauc-
racy steps in and leaders are able to
say, Hey, blame it on those regulators.
I think we have a responsibility to
make sure that we’re making laws spe-
cific enough and simple enough to be
understood by the American people.
Mr. COLLINS of Georgia. I agree
with that, and I thank the gentleman
from Indiana. I appreciate his work on
this.
It’s now my pleasure to introduce
someone who not only has come to
Congress fired up about the issues that
are going on, but has become my co-
chair on this regulatory working group
and bringing forth, I believe, a fresh
perspective from Florida.
It is now my pleasure to yield to the
gentleman from Florida (Mr. YOHO).
Mr. YOHO. I thank my good friend
from Georgia for yielding, and I appre-
ciate the comments.
I’d like to title this talk, ‘‘Burden-
some Regulations: The Dysfunctional
Government Tax.’’
More than $14,000 every year, that’s
what the average American family
loses out on because of Federal regula-
tions either in taxes or lower wages be-
cause their employers are carrying
that burden.
How do we even get all these regula-
tions, more than 6,000 regulations just
this year? It happens when the execu-
tive branch goes around Congress to
create their own policies. Some people
call this ‘‘legislation through regula-
tion.’’ I call it the ‘‘dysfunctional gov-
ernment tax.’’ It’s the $40 a day every
American has to pay because the exec-
utive branch won’t go through Con-
gress. It won’t work with those of us
who are here tonight because we were
sent here by the people.
In more places in my district, you
could take your spouse out for a nice
dinner for $40. A person could fill up
their gas tank and a minivan for about
$40, or you could take your children to
a matinee movie on the weekends for
$40.
When I’m at home in my district, I
hear from people who own their own
business and from people who just care
about their work, about how Federal
regulations are making it harder to
make ends meet. We’re going to talk
about a few of these regulations to-
night, but let me tell you about a few
stories from north central Florida.
There’s a lumber company in my dis-
trict that has to aim lower. By that I
mean versus aiming higher to expand
their business. This is because of the
burden of the Affordable Care Act. It’s
too great to bear. They would love
nothing more than to hire more people,
more workers, or buy that extra piece
of equipment, but there’s no telling
what the compliance cost of the ACA
will be.
Not only that, these poor folks are
subject to the rules and perhaps fines
based on the discretion or interpreta-
tion of whatever inspector happens
upon them that day. There is no cer-
tainty. And I think that’s one of the
biggest roles that we have to do is cre-
ate certainty in the environment of the
workplace so that businesses can go
forward and expand their businesses.
To create a stable economy, we need a
stable environment for businesses to
work in. The overregulation we’ve seen
in recent years creates neither.
Yet another example comes from a
watermelon grower in my district and
an interpretation of a rule from the
Food Safety Modernization Act, com-
monly called FSMA. This rule says
that the use of water bottles cannot be
used by workers in the field when they
are picking the melons. I don’t know if
words can describe just how hot and
humid it gets in Florida during this
time of year, but it gets pretty darn
hot. Not allowing water in the fields is
tantamount to cruel and unusual pun-
ishment.
Even more ridiculous are the posters
that have to be placed on site that talk
about the risk of heat stroke. What
you see here is a poster that’s put up
VerDate Mar 15 2010 06:33 Jul 12, 2013 Jkt 079060 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 7634 Sfmt 0634 E:\RECORD13\RECFILES\H17JN3.REC H17JN3
b
j
n
e
a
l

o
n

D
S
K
4
S
P
T
V
N
1
P
R
O
D

w
i
t
h

C
O
N
G
-
R
E
C
-
O
N
L
I
N
E
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—HOUSE H3673 June 17, 2013
by one of the regulatory agencies warn-
ing people about heat stroke, but yet
they won’t let you take water into the
field to pick watermelons.
These are some of the regulations
that don’t make any sense, and it
causes confusion in the workplace.
b 1940
Another example that comes from
Florida has to do with the poultry re-
cycling program. This act was amended
in 1997 to include new definitions; poul-
try products that have been below 26
degrees Fahrenheit may not be labeled
as ‘‘fresh.’’ Such labeled product is con-
sidered ‘‘misbranded.’’ A company I
know had a USDA inspection and iden-
tified poultry labeled as ‘‘fresh,’’ and
they said the product was frozen below
26 degrees Fahrenheit. Due to the rule,
the product was detained. Keep in mind
that, as a veterinarian, this poses no
safety risk to the average consumer, to
any consumer. After 4 months of en-
gaging the agency with time and
money spent on litigation, the USDA
changed the rule to allow poultry fro-
zen below 26 Fahrenheit to be labeled
as fresh as long as they sold the prod-
uct to end users like hospitals and res-
taurants. Precisely. This is the busi-
ness that this company was selling
their product to all along.
The bottom line is that it wound up
costing them 4 months of lost revenue,
and the rule cost this business $681,000.
And they had absolutely no way to re-
coup their losses.
These things have to change because
they wind up stifling the entrepreneur.
What we have is a regulatory agency
that starts out to make the public
safer, whether on the job or on the
highways or the foods we eat. And it’s
a good thing. But what happens is they
often overstep their authority, and
often it is the interpretation of that
rule by the inspector that gets the mis-
interpretation. And the end result is
the owner gets fined and sometimes
has to shut down until the situation
gets resolved.
Yes, we want safer workplaces, safer
highways, and cleaner air and water;
but we shouldn’t impede the very peo-
ple trying to create jobs. Our govern-
ment agencies should be a facilitator
to our businesses, not a debilitator to
these businesses. After all, with the
lack of the extra regulations up to this
point in our history, I think it has
worked pretty good, and we shouldn’t
overstep that boundary, and we need to
have commonsense regulations.
Mr. COLLINS of Georgia. I appre-
ciate the gentleman from Florida’s
comments. It is amazing some of the
things we’re hearing and the examples,
simply by putting it out there. I want
to extend an invitation to our fresh-
man class and others who may want to
join us in this regulatory working
group. Contact our offices; we would
love to hear your input as we go for-
ward.
It is now my pleasure to welcome and
I yield to the gentlewoman from Mis-
souri (Mrs. WAGNER).
Mrs. WAGNER. I thank the gen-
tleman from Georgia (Mr. COLLINS) for
putting this Special Order together.
Mr. Speaker, in his time served in of-
fice thus far, President Obama has said
he’s for the reduction of government
red tape that places an unnecessary
burden on government people. Again
and again, he has extolled the virtues
of transparency and bipartisanship in
an effort to put people back to work;
but if we look at his track record, this
has simply turned out to be yet an-
other string of broken promises and a
failure of leadership.
In his first term alone, President
Obama has finalized 130 major rules, a
shocking 160 percent increase over the
previous term under President George
W. Bush. This alarming growth in gov-
ernment is an assault on our free en-
terprise system and on our individual
liberties. Either the President is not
interested in keeping the America’s
people’s trust, or he simply does not
have a handle on his own Federal agen-
cies. Given recent events, either of
these could very well be true.
The truth, however, Mr. Speaker, is
that cost from new regulatory burdens
on Americans increased by nearly $70
billion during President Obama’s first
term in office, which is based on his
own agency’s estimates. It is very pos-
sible that the real costs far exceed this
number. With major regulations in
Dodd-Frank and ObamaCare still yet to
be implemented, these burdens on
small businesses and the American peo-
ple will only skyrocket.
Dodd-Frank alone required govern-
ment bureaucrats to write nearly 400
new rules, and yet 3 years later we
have barely completed a third of them.
Most of the laws’ provisions have little
or no connection to the financial crisis
that prompted their creation in the
first place. As a member of the Finan-
cial Services Committee, I have wit-
nessed firsthand how arbitrary and ir-
relevant these rules can be, and how
they cost the American people jobs and
their hard-earned savings.
We can and must do more to hold
these agencies accountable and stop
this governance by fiat and the bypass-
ing of Congress—we the people. This is
why we must have the REINS Act,
which I am proud to cosponsor. This
legislation would rein in the Federal
agencies and would require Congress to
approve every new major rule proposed
by the executive branch having an an-
nual economic impact of $100 million
or more. It would allow Congress to re-
gain our constitutional authority by
limiting the size and scope of the rule-
making powers of government bureau-
crats who were not elected.
Mr. Speaker, the American people
are fed up with this Big Government
agenda. It’s time to hold this adminis-
tration accountable for the gross over-
reach of their power, whether it’s regu-
lation from the EPA or regulations im-
plementing Dodd-Frank or ObamaCare.
Enough is enough. The American peo-
ple are tired of this government over-
stepping their constitutional author-
ity.
Mr. COLLINS of Georgia. I appre-
ciate the gentlewoman from Missouri.
She’s right. That’s the anger we feel
and we hear from our constituents
when they just don’t understand what’s
going on here, and we need to continue
that. I appreciate those words.
It’s now my pleasure to yield to the
gentleman from Kentucky to provide
an insight into what we’re seeing right
now of a regulatory environment gone
amuck in a lot of ways.
Mr. BARR. I appreciate the oppor-
tunity to participate in this Special
Order this evening. This is a very im-
portant topic, and I applaud Mr. COL-
LINS and Mr. YOHO for forming the
Freshman Working Group on Regu-
latory Reform. Regulatory reform is
desperately needed in this country to
get our economy back on track.
We have seen persistent high unem-
ployment in our country for the last 5
years. We got another bad jobs report
just last week: 7.6 percent is the unem-
ployment rate. But even more alarm-
ing than our persistent high unemploy-
ment rate is the fact that we have
underemployment in this country.
Only 58 percent of the American people
who are eligible for employment who
are of working-age population are actu-
ally employed. Only 58 percent.
Yes, we have a high unemployment
rate. Yes, it has been persistently over
7.5 percent for the last 5 years. But
even more troubling is the fact that
only 58 percent of working-age people
in this country are employed. That is 5
percent below the average employment
rate for working-age people prior to
the recession, and that number has
been static for the last 5 years. So the
question we have to ask ourselves is
why is this happening; why are the
American people not getting back to
work.
Well, one of the primary impedi-
ments to economic recovery, to job
growth, and job creation is the ava-
lanche of new rules, regulations, and
red tape coming out of Washington, all
of which impose huge costs on busi-
nesses and create a destructive envi-
ronment of uncertainty in the private
sector. And it affects virtually every
sector of our economy. It affects the
health care sector with ObamaCare and
the reams of regulations coming out of
HHS. It affects the financial services
industry with Dodd-Frank and all of
the rulemakings. You know, Dodd-
Frank authorizes over 400 new rules
and regulations. A little more than
half of those have been issued. Accord-
ing to certain estimates, compliance
with those regulations equals about 24
million hours annually in man-hours to
comply with the Dodd-Frank rules and
regulations. To put that in perspective,
20 million man-hours was what was re-
quired to build the Panama Canal. This
is literally an avalanche of rules and
regulations crushing our financial in-
stitutions and impeding access to cred-
it for entrepreneurs and small busi-
nesses. It’s affecting the energy sector
VerDate Mar 15 2010 06:33 Jul 12, 2013 Jkt 079060 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 7634 Sfmt 0634 E:\RECORD13\RECFILES\H17JN3.REC H17JN3
b
j
n
e
a
l

o
n

D
S
K
4
S
P
T
V
N
1
P
R
O
D

w
i
t
h

C
O
N
G
-
R
E
C
-
O
N
L
I
N
E
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—HOUSE H3674 June 17, 2013
where environmental regulations are
destroying jobs.
In my home State, the coal industry
has been devastated by the EPA’s as-
sault on the coal industry through
over-regulation of the energy sector. In
most countries that conduct mining
activities, about 2 years is the average
length of time for a regulator to review
an application for mining. In the
United States today, it takes 7 years
for EPA regulators just to review and
approve a surface mining permit.
b 1950
So this backlog and this overregula-
tion of mining activities is resulting in
massive layoffs. Mining in central Ap-
palachia is at its lowest production
level since 1965. We’ve lost 4,000 coal
mining jobs in just the last couple of
years in eastern Kentucky as a result
of the EPA’s overzealous overregula-
tion of the coal industry.
Yes, it’s driving utility rates higher.
Yes, it is certainly bad in terms of low-
cost electricity for our manufacturers
and small businesses and our seniors on
fixed income, but it’s also costing jobs.
And it’s having a negative impact on
all of those people whose paychecks
take care of their families.
We talked about the impact on
health care. I had an administrator of
a local small hospital in central Ken-
tucky tell me that it used to be that
they took care of patients. Today they
take care of paper.
A small banker, community banker
in eastern Kentucky told me that it
used to be, in the community banking
business, that they would provide loans
and make a business decision based on
the creditworthiness of the borrower,
whether it was a farmer or a small
business owner or an entrepreneur.
Today, this banker says that the gov-
ernment makes that decision for them
because of the avalanche of new rules
and regulations.
There’s another important dimension
to this in addition to impeding eco-
nomic recovery, and that’s our Con-
stitution. For the last 80 years, the
growth of the administrative state has
been a huge detractor from the original
meaning of our Constitution. It has
been offensive to the separation of pow-
ers doctrine. And one need only look to
article I, section 1 of the U.S. Constitu-
tion, which simply reads:
All legislative powers herein granted shall
be vested in a Congress of the United States,
which shall consist of a Senate and House of
Representatives.
Mr. Speaker, the word ‘‘all’’ should
be recognized as granting the Congress
exclusive legislative power. And yet,
for the last 80 years, as the administra-
tive state has grown in Washington,
the Congress has delegated its law-
making powers to unaccountable,
unelected bureaucrats in the executive
branch. And so what we need to do in
Congress is we need to rehabilitate
what’s known as the nondelegation
doctrine, the idea that Congress
shouldn’t delegate away its lawmaking
powers to another branch of the gov-
ernment.
In the last several years, we’ve seen a
dramatic growth in the regulatory bur-
den on the private economy. The pages
in the Code of Federal Regulations hit
an all-time high of 174,000 pages in 2012.
That’s an increase of more than 21 per-
cent during the last decade.
In 2012, the cost of Federal rules ex-
ceeded $1.8 trillion, roughly equal to
the gross domestic product of Canada,
which is about $1.81 trillion, and India,
$1.82 trillion.
The regulatory burden cost each U.S.
household approximately $14,768, mean-
ing that red tape is now the second
largest item in the typical family
budget after housing.
And in 2012, 4,062 Federal regulations
were at various stages of implementa-
tion. The government completed work
on 1,172, an increase of 16 percent over
the 1,010 that the Feds imposed in 2011,
which was a 40 percent increase over
the 722 in 2010.
And another measure of the regu-
latory burden, the pages in the Federal
Register. By that measure, the Obama
administration did not break the all-
time record of 81,405 pages it set in
2010. But the 78,961 pages it churned out
in 2012 mean that the President has
posted three of the four greatest paper-
work years on record.
Mr. Speaker, this avalanche of red
tape is strangling American economic
recovery. It is an offense to the Con-
stitution of the United States, and it
lacks all common sense. For the sake
of the U.S. Constitution, for the sake
of economic recovery, for the sake of
common sense, and for the sake of the
American people who are suffering in
one of the worst economic downturns
since the Great Depression, we need to
rein in burdensome regulations.
Mr. COLLINS of Georgia. I appre-
ciate the gentleman from Kentucky.
He brings a good point. I think it would
behoove all of us—we hear often on this
floor we need to talk about jobs, we
need to talk about job creation; and
what we’re finding right here is the
very thing that is coming out of this
bureaucracy, and this red tape is job-
killing. And I think this is something
we could find common ground on. I
think it’s a little bit of an agenda issue
here, though.
When you come to Congress, you
look for those who’ve stood the fight
before you, and I am pleased tonight to
yield some time to the gentleman from
Indiana (Mr. YOUNG), sponsor of the
REINS Act, who has fought this fight
before we got here. And I am pleased to
welcome him as an honorary freshman
tonight, as part of the sophomore class,
because you’ve led the way, and I ap-
preciate that, and I am happy to yield
time to you tonight.
Mr. YOUNG of Indiana. I thank so
much the gentleman from Georgia for
his hard work on this issue, working
with our colleague, Mr. YOHO of Flor-
ida, and organizing this freshman ini-
tiative designed to tackle overly bur-
densome regulations, ensure that we
produce smart regulations here at the
Federal level and alleviate some of the
pain during this very down economy
that so many Americans are facing.
You know, when you talk about regu-
lations, this is not some arcane issue.
These are the rules we live by, just like
the legislation that emerges out of this
body. It impacts our jobs, our economic
growth, the level of personal income
that Americans enjoy. It impacts the
number of long-term unemployed we
have in this country, and right now
we’re at a historic low. It impacts
these things and so many others.
People have too many hassles, too
many burdens, too many anxieties, and
regulations are a big part of the reason
why. There are direct costs of regula-
tions that come out of the alphabet
soup agencies that populate Wash-
ington, D.C.
There are compliance costs that our
small businesses, in particular, must
contend with. There’s a great deal of
uncertainty associated with the regula-
tions being developed in the buildings
around Washington, D.C.; and regula-
tions lead to an increase in the costs of
our goods and services produced, thus
making us less competitive economi-
cally vis-a-vis our international com-
petitors. Regulations reduce, often-
times, the productivity of our workers,
which drives down their wages, which
hurts our competitiveness once again.
So what’s the solution to this?
Well, we here in Congress, especially
folks on this side of the aisle—al-
though, I have to say, this doesn’t have
to be a partisan issue, and, histori-
cally, it has not always been. I think
that’s a good thing. But we on this side
of the aisle have been trying to allevi-
ate the pain that many businesses and
Americans feel by the costliest regula-
tions coming out of Washington, D.C. I
think that is proper, and I think we
should continue to do so.
But I also believe it’s time for us to
consider a comprehensive approach to
improving the entire regulatory proc-
ess, and so that’s why I have intro-
duced, in this 113th Congress, the
REINS Act.
Now, what the REINS Act does is it
establishes a $100 million threshold.
This is the threshold established his-
torically by our Office of Management
and Budget for a so-called major regu-
lation. And every major regulation,
after it goes through the public hearing
process, under the REINS Act, it has to
go before Congress for an up-or-down
vote before it can become the law of
the land.
This would improve immeasurably
the quality of regulations that come
out of Washington, D.C. It would slow
down the regulatory process, to be
sure. But let’s remember, our Founding
Fathers devised a system where they
wanted people in Washington to delib-
erate before we acted. This would lead
to more deliberation, wiser judgment.
VerDate Mar 15 2010 06:33 Jul 12, 2013 Jkt 079060 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 7634 Sfmt 0634 E:\RECORD13\RECFILES\H17JN3.REC H17JN3
b
j
n
e
a
l

o
n

D
S
K
4
S
P
T
V
N
1
P
R
O
D

w
i
t
h

C
O
N
G
-
R
E
C
-
O
N
L
I
N
E
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—HOUSE H3675 June 17, 2013
This would also allow the American
people, the citizens of this great coun-
try, to weigh in on given regulations,
ones they feel passionately about.
And, most importantly, the REINS
Act would hold Members of Congress
accountable for the regulations that
come out of Washington.
You know, of course it would allow
us to tame some of the executive agen-
cies that have gone rogue from time to
time, that pass unwise regulations. But
I think, more importantly, it would
allow those who elect us to bodies like
this to hold us accountable for the
things that cause pain to them, those
imperial regulations that are promul-
gated from a distant Capitol, which our
Founding Fathers were so upset about
when this Nation was founded.
b 2000
To the issue of congressional ac-
countability, too many vague laws are
made in this body—Dodd-Frank, the
Affordable Care Act. I could go on and
on. We pass and we kick the can down
the road, as is often heard, on sticky
issues, politically sensitive issues that
politicians don’t want to deal with be-
cause we know ultimately there will be
regulators to fill in the gaps of our
vague laws.
Well, the REINS Act would prevent
that. It would incentivize Members of
Congress to take on the hard issues in
the beginning because they’d know
that in the end those issues are going
to come back and have to be resolved
in this body.
When I go home and meet with small
business people and individual con-
stituents and they speak to me about
specific regulations that are causing
them pain, oftentimes, the best I can
do and my colleagues can do is say,
Listen, we’ll try and repeal that par-
ticular regulation by preventing it
from being implemented at the agency
and by impacting the funding of that
agency. These are very difficult things
to do, and it’s so incredibly difficult to
identify all the bad regulations that
are out there. But under the REINS
Act, that would no longer be an accept-
able excuse to my constituents.
Unelected bureaucrats, in the end,
would not be accountable; Members of
Congress would. And that is the intent,
in the end, of the REINS Act.
Now, I believe in regulations, smart
regulations, and this bill is about im-
proving the regulatory process so that
here in the United States of America
this remains a vibrant place to live
with a growing economy. Our rules
must be balanced against economic
concerns. The American people must
have a voice about what those rules
will be, and Congress cannot skirt re-
sponsibility to legislate.
Again, I’d like to close here by
thanking those who led this effort—Mr.
COLLINS, in particular, for leading the
floor conversation this evening. He’s
shown some great leadership as a fresh-
man. He’s working very hard. I know
he came here, as did other Members,
the freshman class of the 113th Con-
gress, to make a difference. By sup-
porting the REINS Act, I think you
will help advance that cause in a very
big way.
Mr. COLLINS of Georgia. Well, I ap-
preciate it.
It’s always easy to follow in the foot-
steps of those who fought the fight be-
fore us, and I appreciate what you’ve
done and what others have done. We’re
going to continue that fight, because
this matters to Americans, and that’s
what we’ve got to continue on. So I
thank you for being here tonight.
It is now with great pleasure, another
freshman who has come from just
north of me in North Carolina, who has
passionately fought for his constitu-
ents but also sees this from a different
perspective, at this time, I want to
yield to the gentleman from North
Carolina (Mr. HOLDING).
Mr. HOLDING. Mr. Speaker, I thank
the gentleman from Georgia for the op-
portunity to discuss this administra-
tion’s excessive regulation.
We know the harmful effect that
overregulation has had on the econ-
omy. And since taking office, President
Obama and his administration have
continuously burdened the American
people with an exceptional number of
regulations, harming businesses and
the economy.
Mr. Speaker, small businesses in this
country are essential to our economic
stability. Small businesses encourage
innovation and hard work. It’s the
American Dream to have a unique idea
and build something from scratch—and
that, Mr. Speaker, is exactly what
small businesses do.
Mr. Speaker, small businesses have
created 64 percent of net new jobs over
the past 15 years and employed just
over half of all private sector employ-
ees. In this stalled economy, small
businesses are already struggling to be
successful, and we need to take some of
the current regulatory weight off their
shoulders.
Recently, back home, I spent the
week going around to different cham-
bers of commerce in my district. I went
to Wake Forest. I went to Fuquay-
Varina. I went to Apex. I went to Nash-
ville and Rocky Mount and met with
several hundred small business owners
and folks who work in small busi-
nesses. Of course, I have the constant
complaint of overregulation. I started
asking the question. I said, Has the
government done anything that you
know of in the last 5 years which would
make your life as a small business per-
son better? I got no positive responses,
Mr. Speaker. That’s stunning.
New regulations are complicated, and
compliance is time consuming and ex-
pensive; and sometimes, job creators
aren’t informed of new regulations in a
timely manner, giving them little time
to prepare to comply with them. Busi-
ness owners and their employees are
now facing a time of uncertainty due
to regulations. They’re not confident
in government policy coming out of
Washington, and they have no trust in
the ability of Washington to do things
that are in their better interest.
This sense of uncertainty, Mr. Speak-
er, may prevent an employer from hir-
ing more people or force them to let go
of current employees. As Mr. YOHO said
earlier in his comments, he has small
businesses in his district that are hav-
ing to shoot lower rather than shoot
higher. Small businesses may have to
reevaluate how and when they do busi-
ness, and that is unfortunate. Small
businesses have no confidence in their
government to give them pro-growth
policy.
Excessive regulation harms not only
individual small businesses but our
country’s growth as a whole. The
Small Business Office of Advocacy has
reported that Federal rulemaking has
imposed a cumulative burden of $1.75
trillion on our economy. Earlier this
year in the Judiciary Committee, on
which I serve, we heard testimony
that, in the past 4 years alone, the cu-
mulative cost burden has increased by
$520 billion.
Mr. Speaker, I’m not only concerned
about the negative effect of regulations
on our overall economy, but also the
administration’s abuse of power. Presi-
dent Obama has been encouraged by
regulatory advocates to circumvent
regular order and impose his climate
change agenda through regulations,
and he made it clear in his State of the
Union speech earlier this year his in-
tent to do so.
I’m also concerned with the fact that
the administration has repeatedly
missed its required deadline for releas-
ing a Unified Agenda of Federal Regu-
latory and Deregulatory Actions twice
a year. This agenda lays out each gov-
ernmental agency’s proposed regula-
tion and annual regulatory plan, and
businesses need to know this informa-
tion so they can anticipate how forth-
coming regulations will affect them.
And this administration needs to have
more accountability and more trans-
parency about the harmful effects of
these abundant—may I say, excessive—
regulations.
Mr. Speaker, in my district in North
Carolina, many of the towns rely on
small businesses. That’s all that’s
there is small businesses. And whether
it’s a local restaurant owned by the
same family for generations or an ac-
counting firm or a clothing store or the
town doctor, regulations are a major
concern for them. We should be doing
what we can do to encourage small
businesses, not to deter them with
strenuous and excessive regulations.
Mr. COLLINS of Georgia. I thank the
gentleman from North Carolina.
What we’re dealing with here is deal-
ing with jobs. And I think what you
shared in your time back in the dis-
trict is small businesses, as we’ve seen,
small business persons comprise 44 per-
cent of the total U.S. private payroll
and create more than half of the non-
farm jobs in the gross domestic product
here.
VerDate Mar 15 2010 06:33 Jul 12, 2013 Jkt 079060 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 7634 Sfmt 0634 E:\RECORD13\RECFILES\H17JN3.REC H17JN3
b
j
n
e
a
l

o
n

D
S
K
4
S
P
T
V
N
1
P
R
O
D

w
i
t
h

C
O
N
G
-
R
E
C
-
O
N
L
I
N
E
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—HOUSE H3676 June 17, 2013
We’ve got to look at this. This is
something that I think we can all come
together, as the gentleman from Indi-
ana stated just a few moments ago,
this could be a bipartisan issue as we
look to jobs and things we can bring to
the floor. I know in talking to you and
your passion about this, we came up
here to try and help. We came up here
to bring the voices of those who could
not be up here on a given day to help
them in their businesses and work
hard.
I appreciate you so much for sharing
your experiences in North Carolina.
Really, what we’re doing is fighting
hard against these regulations so that
we can see more jobs created.
Mr. HOLDING. As my friend from
Georgia knows, numbers don’t lie; and
when we’re spending $1.75 trillion a
year complying with regulations,
that’s a lot of money.
Mr. COLLINS of Georgia. It is that.
I appreciate the gentleman for being
here tonight. I think this is something
that we all see. In fact, in the 2011
speech, President Barack Obama stated
that ‘‘rules have gotten out of bal-
ance,’’ and the result is ‘‘a chilling ef-
fect on growth and jobs.’’ I believe the
President is correct about that. The
rules have become so skewed that our
Nation’s regulatory system is at war
with America’s businesses.
In fact, he went ahead and even, in
an executive order, stated that:
The last barriers we’re trying to remove
are outdated and unnecessary regulations.
I’ve ordered a government-wide review, and
if there are rules on the books that are need-
lessly stifling job creation and economic
growth, we will fix them.
I’ll tell you what. I will agree with
the President on this. And I want to
say this is something we can move for-
ward with, and it’s something that has
an effect, because right now these bur-
dens are killing American industry and
American jobs.
When businesses are more con-
cerned—right now, 40 percent is what
I’ve seen in the latest survey from Mor-
gan Stanley, said 40 percent of compa-
nies say policy uncertainty in Wash-
ington is preventing them from putting
investments and job creation to work.
This is something we’ve got to be a
part of fixing because it matters, and it
matters for jobs.
Industries such as manufacturing and
technology are fighting to compete in a
global market, but they first must sur-
vive the regulatory beast that is stran-
gling innovation and growth.
b 2010
Congress should be encouraging inno-
vation to make it easier for businesses
to bring new products or processes to
the market. Outdated regulations
should be cleared off the books—espe-
cially those created by unelected bu-
reaucrats.
Let’s go back to the basics of regu-
latory overhaul and restore a common-
sense approach to regulations that en-
courage innovation and allow job cre-
ators to thrive.
I wrote to all the businesses in north-
east Georgia and asked them to tell me
how regulations are impacting their
ability to grow and create jobs. Here
are some of the responses that we re-
ceived back:
Due to the new regulations that require
businesses to issue 1099s to virtually every-
one that we write a check to, we have to be
more selective when we consider a new hire.
I no longer have the opportunity to give un-
employed folks a shot at a job to see how
they are going to do. We have to make them
full regular employees right out of the chute
so we just don’t look at hiring as many peo-
ple, we look at other employees to work
more hours.
Another of my constituents said that
‘‘the biggest issue we face from the
Federal Government is the EPA’s lack
of approval of products in a timely
manner, and their removal of excel-
lent, safe products from the market al-
together.’’
Unfortunately, regulatory burdens
created by the EPA are an all too com-
mon story. A business owner in north-
east Georgia wrote to me:
Currently the EPA is requiring off-road
diesel engines to meet new tiers, or levels, of
exhaust emission standards. These new
standards are changing every 1 to 2 years.
The final (we hope) regulations will be in
place in 2015.
The result of the dramatic and frequent
changes in regulations is the complete rede-
sign of our products, which would allow us to
retool and move manufacturing to the U.S.,
cannot happen cost effectively until 2015. At
that time, we hope to move manufacturing
of our products to Georgia.
I say hope to, because the rapid rise in reg-
ulations under the current administration
may cause us to not move production at all.
We are all for protecting the environment
and being good corporate citizens. However,
the new regulations are burdensome, costly
and add no value to the productivity of the
product or the marketplace.
I couldn’t have said that better my-
self. Regulations should be expedient
and unambiguous, minimizing the un-
certainty facing industries and busi-
nesses. This is how the government can
facilitate, and no longer debilitate,
economic growth.
I appreciate the comments from my
colleagues tonight. It is clear that the
need for regulatory relief is greater
now than ever. As we’ve heard tonight,
for the first time in history, the esti-
mated cost of regulations is more than
half the Federal budget itself. Let me
just stop right there. For the first time
in history, the estimated cost of regu-
lations is more than half the Federal
budget itself.
And we wonder why we’re struggling
with jobs right now. We wonder why
our businesses are struggling with
what they’re going to do and how
they’re going to manage. I’m a firm be-
liever, and it’s been spoken of here to-
night, there’s many times we come to
this House floor and we talk about
things in ambiguous terms. We talk
about the big picture. We talk about
the process. People hear those con-
versations, they hear these words, but
they’re not really sure how it affects
them. I’m a firm believer, both from a
Democrat perspective, a Republican
perspective, how we can best lead is by
understanding and giving people infor-
mation on why this matters to them.
I’m just going to spend a few minutes
here tonight talking about that. It is
troubling in a time where families are
struggling to make ends meet, Amer-
ican families are paying almost $15,000
per year in hidden regulatory taxes.
They are paying $14,678 in hidden regu-
latory taxes. You want to know how
that affects you. That’s going on and
you want to know how we’re causing
people to spend and we’re also at the
same time saying we want to create
new jobs, we want to create new oppor-
tunities.
Well, here’s what happens. Instead of
paying a hidden regulatory tax, Amer-
ican families could, one, buy a new car.
A 2013 Ford Fiesta, $13,200; a 2013 Chev-
rolet Sonic, $14,185. We hear it all the
time how manufacturing creates jobs
on all levels, starting from the manu-
facturing, from the parts and the deal-
ers and the auto parts that come into
this, how they all work together.
Well, instead of paying these regu-
latory costs, why don’t we get them to
buy a new car? I mean, I think that’s
what the American people would like. I
think that’s what our auto dealers
would like. That’s what the others in
the chain of automotive supply would
like. But, instead, they’re trapped and
they’re bound.
Another constituent writes:
Most of the rules and regulations that are
preventing our business from growing are a
result of ObamaCare. Many of the provisions
in this legislation are counterproductive to
the growth of a medical practice.
I want to go back to what it means to
the person sitting around the table to-
night who may have just somehow
turned over here and said, what are
they talking about in our nation’s Cap-
itol? What we’re talking about is your
pocketbook. What we’re talking about
is regulations that can help you spend
money the way you want to, spend
money for your family’s future, spend
money that revives our economy and
strengthens us as a nation.
This is what we’re talking about. You
can send their child to college. One
year of tuition and fees at the Univer-
sity of Georgia is $10,262. One year of
tuition and fees at the University of
Florida is $6,150. Instead, they’re
trapped paying almost $15,000 in hidden
regulatory tax that comes through
every year.
We all know the need for some rules
for everyone to abide by. Make the reg-
ulations where they’re simple to under-
stand and inexpensive to comply with.
One of the problems I also see in
Washington sometimes is we come to
the floor and we talk about problems,
but we never provide an answer. We
never provide an answer on what can
actually be done. As my colleagues and
I have demonstrated, we are committed
to providing regulatory relief to busi-
nesses and families.
There are several key pieces of legis-
lation that are first and important
VerDate Mar 15 2010 06:33 Jul 12, 2013 Jkt 079060 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 7634 Sfmt 0634 E:\RECORD13\RECFILES\H17JN3.REC H17JN3
b
j
n
e
a
l

o
n

D
S
K
4
S
P
T
V
N
1
P
R
O
D

w
i
t
h

C
O
N
G
-
R
E
C
-
O
N
L
I
N
E
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—HOUSE H3677 June 17, 2013
steps in alleviating the regulatory bur-
den. The first bill I introduced in Con-
gress was H.R. 1493, the Sunshine for
Regulatory Decrees and Settlements
Act of 2013. This legislation ensures the
EPA cannot continue to enter into
closed-door agreements with environ-
mental groups without transparency
and public participation. It does not af-
fect the ability to bring suits. It just
makes them clearer. Many of the cost-
ly rules and regulations that have im-
pacted businesses and industries across
the Nation have resulted from these
backroom consent decrees. It’s time we
bring transparency and public partici-
pation back into the rulemaking proc-
ess.
What else can we do? H.R. 367: re-
quire congressional approval for all
major rules. We end the sue and settle
EPA settlements—that’s the one I just
mentioned, H.R. 1493. We can require
Federal agencies to choose the lowest-
cost rulemaking alternative, H.R. 2122.
There are things that we can do. I be-
lieve the American public is looking to
this place. They’re looking to their
Capitol for real solutions. They’re
looking to their Capitol for hope.
They’re looking for relief.
Every day, men and women get up
and they wake their children up as I
did this morning and they go to work
and they go to make a better life.
Many of those are small business own-
ers wanting to add jobs, wanting to add
to their businesses, but these regula-
tions are killing that possibility right
now. I believe when you look at what
we’ve talked about here and my col-
leagues have talked about here on the
floor, and I appreciate all of them
being here, we bring to light what is
really happening, and that is that regu-
lations are not adding anything except
government jobs. It’s time we get back
out and add jobs on Main Street, and
when we add jobs on Main Street, ev-
erybody is impacted.
I want to thank my colleagues for
joining me tonight and highlighting
why American families and businesses
so desperately need regulatory relief.
Our freshmen are going to continue to
do this, highlighting the real work that
we believe matters to families and
matters to Americans. Because when
we’re up here, we’re up here doing your
work. The thing that you sent us here
to do was to work for you, and that’s
what we’re going to continue to do and
the freshman class are going to con-
tinue to do just that.
As we have mentioned tonight, not
only are we talking about overregula-
tion, we’re going to be talking about
many things in the weeks to come, and
we’re just letting the people know that
we are here because we believe we can
make a difference along with both sides
of the aisle. Let’s come together and
see what we can do to make sure that
not only regulations but other things
get done so this government helps the
businesses in our communities get
back to work. That’s what I want to be
about, and I’m glad that we were here
tonight to do that.
Before I close out, I do see a friend on
the floor, the gentleman from Arizona
(Mr. FRANKS). As we’re through with
our regulation part, I noticed that you
had asked for time and I’m going to at
this time yield to the gentleman from
Arizona, my friend, Mr. FRANKS.
Mr. FRANKS of Arizona. Mr. Speak-
er, I just want to thank the distin-
guished gentleman from Georgia for
yielding this time. One of the great
hopes that I see that portends for a
better future for America is to see men
like DOUG COLLINS join this group and
this Congress.
Mr. Speaker, it seems like we are
never quite so eloquent as when we are
decrying the crimes of a past genera-
tion, while we oftentimes remain as
staggering blind as some of our most
intellectually sightless predecessors
when it comes to facing and rejecting
atrocities in our own time. Whether it
was slavery, or the many human geno-
cides across history, the patterns were
the same.
b 2020
Mr. Speaker, innocent human beings,
children of God all, were systemati-
cally dehumanized and then subjected
to the most horrifying inhumanity. All
the while, human society as a whole at
first hardened their hearts and turned
away.
But, Mr. Speaker, truth and time
travel on the same road; and though it
was often agonizingly slow, the truth
of these tragic inhumanities in our
past began to dawn on the people of
reason and goodwill. Their hearts first,
and then their minds, began to change.
Mr. Speaker, I have often asked my-
self, what was it—what was it that
changed their minds? What changed
the minds of those who had previously
embraced an almost invincible igno-
rance to hide from themselves the hor-
ror of what was happening to their in-
nocent fellow human beings? I so wish
I knew that answer, Mr. Speaker.
Because you see, today, such a co-
nundrum looms before humanity again,
the most glaring recent example of
which are the gut-wrenching revela-
tions surrounding the trial and convic-
tion in Philadelphia of Dr. Kermit
Gosnell. In the words of the grand jury
report:
Gosnell had a simple solution for unwanted
babies: he killed them. He didn’t call it that.
He called it ‘‘ensuring fetal demise.’’ The
way he ensured fetal demise was by sticking
open scissors in the back of the baby’s neck
and cutting the spinal cord. He called it
‘‘snipping.’’ Over the years, there were hun-
dreds of ‘‘snippings.’’
When authorities entered the clinic of Dr.
Gosnell, they found a torture chamber for
little babies that I do not have the words or
the stomach to adequately describe. Suffice
it to say, Dr. Gosnell ran a systematic prac-
tice in his late-term abortion clinic to cut
the spines of those babies who had survived
his attempt to abort them.
Ashley Baldwin, one of Dr. Gosnell’s em-
ployees, said she saw babies breathing, and
she described one as 2 feet long that no
longer had eyes or a mouth, but, in her
words, was making this ‘‘screeching’’ sound,
and it ‘‘sounded like a little alien.’’
For God’s sake, Mr. Speaker, we are
better than that. America is better
than that. And yet if Kermit Gosnell
had killed these children he now stands
convicted of murdering before they had
passed through the birth canal only a
few moments earlier, it would have all
been perfectly legal in many States, in
this the land of the free and the home
of the brave.
Mr. Speaker, more than 325 late-term
unborn babies were torturously killed
without anesthesia in America just
yesterday. Many of them—so many of
them cried and screamed as they died.
But because it was amniotic fluid going
over the vocal cords instead of air, we
couldn’t hear them.
All of them had at least four things
in common. First, they were just little
babies who had done nothing wrong to
anyone on Earth. And each one of them
died a nameless, lonely, and agonizing
death. And each one of their mothers
was callously abandoned to deal with
the emotional results that will inevi-
tably follow. And all the gifts that
these children might have brought to
humanity, Mr. Speaker, are lost for-
ever.
So if there is one thing we must not
miss about this unspeakably evil epi-
sode, it is that Kermit Gosnell is not
an anomaly; he is the face of this mur-
derous Fortune 500 enterprise of killing
helpless unborn children in the United
States of America. With all of the dis-
tortions and the bait-and-switch tac-
tics opponents have hurdled at the
Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection
Act leading up to this historic floor de-
bate, the Pain-Capable Unborn Child
Protection Act is very truly and sim-
ply a deeply sincere effort to protect
both mothers and their pain-capable
unborn babies entering their sixth
month of gestation from heartless
monsters like Kermit Gosnell.
Given the cataclysmic implications,
Mr. Speaker, for any society who turns
a blind eye to atrocities truly forced
upon the most innocent and helpless of
its members, would it be too much to
hope for that Members of this body and
Americans in general might research
this issue and learn the truth of it for
themselves?
Because you see, Mr. Speaker, the
real question in the debate before us is
not whether these unborn children en-
tering their sixth month of gestation
are capable of feeling pain. The real
question is: Are we?
If our society is to survive with our
humanity intact, our human compas-
sion toward our fellow human beings
must first survive. Fifty million chil-
dren—50 million dead children are
enough. That is why it is so important
for people to see for themselves the hu-
manity of these little victims and the
inhumanity of what is being done to
them.
Now, maybe it won’t change every-
one’s mind, but it has changed so many
minds; and most of these changed
minds share a common thread. They
were confronted with the brutal reality
VerDate Mar 15 2010 06:33 Jul 12, 2013 Jkt 079060 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 7634 Sfmt 0634 E:\RECORD13\RECFILES\H17JN3.REC H17JN3
b
j
n
e
a
l

o
n

D
S
K
4
S
P
T
V
N
1
P
R
O
D

w
i
t
h

C
O
N
G
-
R
E
C
-
O
N
L
I
N
E
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—HOUSE H3678 June 17, 2013
of abortion on demand, and something
inside them could no longer deny the
truth, or they could no longer condone
the murder of a defenseless child.
What changed their minds? Perhaps I
will really never understand what
sparked that change in their hearts,
Mr. Speaker. But I am convinced of one
thing: that it is the same spark in the
human soul that has turned the tide of
blood and tragedy and hatred and inhu-
manity throughout human history.
And whatever else it is, Mr. Speaker, it
is mankind’s only hope.
Mr. COLLINS of Georgia. Mr. Speak-
er, I yield back the balance of my time.
f
CBC HOUR: SMALL BUSINESS
WEEK
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr.
HOLDING). Under the Speaker’s an-
nounced policy of January 3, 2013, the
gentleman from New York (Mr.
JEFFRIES) is recognized for 60 minutes
as the designee of the minority leader.
GENERAL LEAVE
Mr. JEFFRIES. Mr. Speaker, I ask
unanimous consent that all Members
may have 5 legislative days in which to
revise and extend their remarks and in-
clude any extraneous materials into
the RECORD on the subject of this Spe-
cial Order.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there
objection to the request of the gen-
tleman from New York?
There was no objection.
Mr. JEFFRIES. Mr. Speaker, it is my
honor and my privilege once again to
stand here on behalf of the Congres-
sional Black Caucus to help anchor
this Special Order along with my good
friend, the distinguished gentleman
from the Silver State, Representative
STEVEN HORSFORD, where for the next
60 minutes, members of the Congres-
sional Black Caucus have an oppor-
tunity to speak directly to the Amer-
ican people about an issue of great sig-
nificance as we kick off Small Business
Week in America and commemorate
the 50th anniversary.
Entrepreneurship innovation, the ca-
pacity of Americans who have an idea
and want to translate that idea into a
business initiative in urban America,
in rural America, in suburban America,
is something that we here in the Con-
gress should not simply celebrate, as
we will do this week, but figure out
ways to make sure that we can facili-
tate those entrepreneurial ideas in the
most robust manner possible and help
those entrepreneurs from all over the
country translate their ideas and their
dreams into small business reality.
It goes without saying that small
businesses are the heart and soul of the
American economy. A significant num-
ber of people all throughout the coun-
try are employed in small businesses
on Main Street and throughout inner-
city commercial corridors and in the
far reaches of rural America. Many of
these small businesses we, of course,
know were also hit extremely hard in
the aftermath of the collapse of the
economy in 2008. They were knocked
down on the ground. And it’s our job in
the Congress and government, working
with industry, to help lift those small
businesses up off the ground and get
them back on their feet so they can
survive and thrive in the face of the
economic difficulty that they con-
fronted.
b 2030
So we will be presenting ideas related
to entrepreneurship for small busi-
nesses throughout America generally
and in the context of entrepreneurship
and innovation in the African Amer-
ican community.
We are going to begin today with the
distinguished gentleman from Newark,
New Jersey, our good friend, Rep-
resentative DONALD PAYNE, who is a
distinguished member of the Small
Business Committee. Prior to arriving
in Congress, he worked hard on these
issues, and he has been a leader since
being sworn in as a Member of the
House of Representatives. It is my
honor and my privilege to yield to Rep-
resentative PAYNE.
Mr. PAYNE. Mr. Speaker, I want to
thank my colleagues for anchoring to-
night’s CBC Special Order on entrepre-
neurship in the Black community.
Since 1963, the President of the
United States has issued a proclama-
tion designating a week in which the
country applauds the critical contribu-
tions of America’s entrepreneurs and
small business owners. Annually, we
recognize the fact that, though they
are called ‘‘small businesses,’’ there is
nothing small about the impact they
have on the Nation’s economy. Last
year, small businesses created nearly
700,000 jobs, accounting for 40 percent
of employment gains across companies
of all sizes nationwide. So it is fair to
say that small businesses are truly the
backbone of our economy and that en-
trepreneurship is still a primary path-
way to realizing the American Dream.
This is particularly true in the Black
community. The heart of entrepreneur-
ship is opportunity, and, historically,
Black entrepreneurship has meant op-
portunities for equality, equity and a
vehicle out of poverty. Throughout the
years, Black entrepreneurs have har-
nessed economic power to strengthen
the Black community, create jobs and
develop a voice to advocate for the
well-being of Blacks in America.
After the Civil War, though employ-
ment prospects were slim for former
enslaved men, Isaac Myers organized
1,000 black ship caulkers who had lost
their jobs in Baltimore. He created a
union, bought a shipyard and won a
government contract to provide em-
ployment for these men.
In 1903, Maggie Lena Walker pooled
her community’s money to charter the
St. Luke Penny Savings Bank. This
bank was for the community, by the
community, and it provided a safe and
courteous place to conduct business
away from the racism and harsh treat-
ment often encountered in White-
owned businesses.
In 1906, a young entrepreneur by the
name of Dr. O.W. Gurley bought 40
acres of land in Tulsa, Oklahoma. He
created and supported the creation of
several businesses which attracted Af-
rican Americans fleeing the oppression
in Mississippi. The area became known
as ‘‘Black Wall Street,’’ and it was
home to several prominent Black busi-
nessmen who created jobs and provided
a safe haven for African Americans
who were banned from other sections of
the town.
We well know that Madam C.J. Walk-
er revolutionized black hair care and
that she was America’s first Black fe-
male millionaire. However, she also
used her financial power to contribute
to anti-lynching campaigns and other
efforts to equalize rights for Blacks in
America.
These are a few of the countless ex-
amples of Black entrepreneurs who,
through their businesses and their phil-
anthropic efforts, have empowered the
Black community. These efforts, as
well as their relevance, continue today.
It is estimated that by the year 2015
Black buying power will be $1.1 tril-
lion. In this economy where the Black
unemployment rate is double that of
the Whites and where the income and
wealth gap persistently intersects with
the race gap, Black entrepreneurship is
more important than ever in helping
the community at large. More than 60
cents out of every dollar spent at local
businesses is recirculated into the local
economy. So local Black-owned busi-
nesses are a true asset to the commu-
nity.
As a member of the Committee on
Small Business, I have worked to
strengthen the SBA’s lending programs
and have increased access to capital for
all populations but especially for mi-
norities and women. I will also be in-
troducing two key pieces of legislation
to assist small businesses as well. Rec-
ognizing the Nation’s energy boom and
green energy potential, this legislation
will ensure that ‘‘green’’ small busi-
nesses have the resources to grow their
businesses and hire more workers, es-
pecially in low-income communities.
This effort will help Black businesses
and other marginalized populations re-
main competitive in the small business
arena.
Small businesses and entrepreneur-
ship fuel the engine for economic
growth and opportunity. For the Black
community, that means lower unem-
ployment, higher college attendance
and completion, and strong outcomes
for the present and the future. Con-
sequently, there is no time to waste in
getting our small businesses up and
running. I will continue to be an out-
spoken advocate in empowering entre-
preneurs to take risks, to pursue their
dreams and to continue being an inte-
gral part of growing this Nation’s econ-
omy.
Mr. Speaker, before I take my seat, I
would just like to talk a minute about
my entrepreneurial experiences back in
the mid-seventies, when my uncle, Wil-
liam Payne, a former assemblyman for
VerDate Mar 15 2010 06:33 Jul 12, 2013 Jkt 079060 PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 7634 Sfmt 0634 E:\RECORD13\RECFILES\H17JN3.REC H17JN3
b
j
n
e
a
l

o
n

D
S
K
4
S
P
T
V
N
1
P
R
O
D

w
i
t
h

C
O
N
G
-
R
E
C
-
O
N
L
I
N
E
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—HOUSE H3679 June 17, 2013
the State of New Jersey, created a
business in 1969 that manufactured
computer forms—the old printed sheets
that we used to use that had the holes
down the side. I’m sure some of us re-
member that who are old enough. We
were the only African American firm in
the Nation in Newark, New Jersey,
that manufactured computer forms,
and the challenges that my uncle faced
in business were great.
He would have to pay for his raw ma-
terials ahead of time and was not given
the normal net 30 days or 60 days in
order to manufacture the product and
sell it. He had to come with a certified
check, and there was no other reason
than the color of his skin. So I under-
stand what it is to have your back
against the wall in terms of trying to
make it in this Nation. But he per-
severed, and we were in business for 20
years. I am very proud of that legacy
that he left behind. He was hiring peo-
ple with handicaps back in those days.
Our forklift driver was actually hear-
ing impaired—deaf—but he worked. He
was a great worker, and he did not let
that get in the way of his being a use-
ful person in society and earning his
way. We also in the seventies were
ahead of the curve in terms of hiring
young men who were coming back from
prison, far before ‘‘reentry’’ was the
word of the day.
I am very proud of that legacy and
heritage there in Newark, New Jersey,
with Urban Data Systems, and that is
why I feel so strongly about continuing
to support small businesses throughout
this Nation.
Mr. JEFFRIES. I thank the distin-
guished gentleman from New Jersey for
so eloquently laying out the history of
entrepreneurship in America through
the lens of the Black community, and
also for detailing his own personal ex-
periences in Newark, New Jersey, expe-
riences that, I think, were replicated in
many inner cities all across the coun-
try in the face of urban decay and
abandonment that took place in the
1960s and in the 1970s. It was those Afri-
can Americans who remained behind in
inner city after inner city after inner
city in America with an entrepre-
neurial idea of providing a service that
otherwise may not have been available.
We want to make sure that we create
opportunities for all Americans to be
able to grow their businesses and
transform their ideas into reality.
b 2040
I look forward, and all the members
of the CBC look forward, to working
with Representative PAYNE in his ca-
pacity on the Small Business Com-
mittee with the leadership that he has
demonstrated.
We’ve now been joined by another
distinguished member of the freshman
class who also has experience from a
personal perspective as a successful
small business owner and entrepreneur.
So it’s my honor right now to yield the
floor to the distinguished gentlelady
from Ohio, Representative JOYCE
BEATTY.
Mrs. BEATTY. I thank my colleague,
Congressman JEFFRIES.
I rise this evening to discuss a very
important topic to me, a topic that is
important to me, to my district and to
this Nation: why entrepreneurship
matters to Black America.
This week, we celebrate National
Small Business Week, which gives us a
chance to collectively recognize small
businesses and the impact they have
and have had on our local communities
and the Nation. Tonight you will hear
a lot about African Americans who
started from humble means; African
Americans who had great ideas and de-
cided that they wanted to open a beau-
ty shop, a barbershop, maybe a bakery
or like my husband’s family, a family
restaurant. We’ll hear the stories about
how they became millionaires and bil-
lionaires.
We’ve heard about Madam C.J. Walk-
er who started with a small idea and
became the first African American fe-
male millionaire. Then we all know
about the young lady in the State next
to mine that grew up and wanted to be
a radio announcer, and probably 50
some years ago she had no idea that
she’d be one of America’s billionaires.
And that’s Oprah Winfrey. So today is
so important to us not only as mem-
bers of the Congressional Black Cau-
cus, but it’s important to us as a Na-
tion that we recognize those who spur
the economy.
So often we think that it is large in-
dustrial operations that make up the
businesses in this wonderful country.
But if you thought about where half of
this Nation works, they work in small
businesses, they own small businesses.
You see, small business in America
has been the stabling force in the econ-
omy. Entrepreneurs are the backbone
of creativity and production. Small
business is what stimulates economic
growth. With over 60 percent of all pri-
vate sector nonfarm jobs coming from
small businesses, it is a proven fact
that small businesses are critical to
the United States’ economy.
Minority-owned businesses are also
very important to the economy. The
strong growth in owner income and de-
crease in the amount of companies
going bankrupt is a great sign. Self-
employment figures are also growing in
this Nation.
As a matter of fact, in the last year
alone, small businesses created nearly
700,000 jobs, accounting for 40 percent
of employment gains across companies
of all sizes. You see, I know firsthand
the value of being a small business
owner because for the past 20 years, I
have been a small business owner. My
husband is a small business owner, and
we have been able to employ a diverse
group of employees right in Columbus,
Ohio, providing our employees with
stable wages and the opportunity for
professional development.
For minority communities, small
businesses are often the primary eco-
nomic drivers by employing those who
are seniors, those who are unemployed,
those who live right in the neighbor-
hood or have had some financial or
workforce development challenges.
This is why we are here today and
why it is so important in minority
communities for the Small Business
Administration to continue to develop
programs which help minority small
business owners break through the
many barriers that prevent them from
entering into the business community.
But more can be done and more should
be done to help support minority busi-
nesses because in addition to the many
economic benefits they provide, small
businesses also foster innovation, en-
trepreneurship, and creativity.
As a member of the Financial Serv-
ices Committee, I was pleased to learn
that tucked within that broad package
of financial industry reforms contained
in the Dodd-Frank Wall Street reform
and the Consumer Protection Act law
is a provision that mandates that each
covered governmental agency establish
an office of minority and women inclu-
sion.
The Office of Minority and Women
Inclusion directors must develop and
implement standards and procedures to
ensure to the maximum extent possible
the fair and inclusion utilization of mi-
norities, women and minority-and
women-owned businesses in all busi-
ness activities of all levels in the agen-
cies, including procurement, insurance,
and all other types of contracts.
So what I’ve decided to do is to host
a roundtable discussion with small and
minority women-owned businesses
through the leadership of our ranking
member on Financial Services, Con-
gresswoman MAXINE WATERS. I’m also
so pleased that so many organizations
like Black Enterprise recently
partnered with Nationwide Insurance
to hold its 2013 entrepreneurs con-
ference right in my district in Colum-
bus, Ohio, this past May. This con-
ference provided a great platform for
African American entrepreneurs to
share ideas, to be able to network, and
to grow their businesses among some
1,200 participants. We also honored Af-
rican American entrepreneurs who own
some of the best small businesses in
the country.
I think it’s also important for us to
know, as in my home State and many
other States, small business owners
can take advantage of SBA programs.
In my district, too, the Ohio Mini-Loan
Guarantee program provides guaran-
tees or fixed assets for small businesses
for projects of $100,000 or less. Also,
there is a mini-direct loan program,
which provides direct loans for busi-
nesses that are going to locate in Ohio
or that want to expand their business
to demonstrate that they can create
new ideas and new jobs for Ohioans.
It is very clear to me that small busi-
nesses will continue to grow and they
will grow our economy at a proven
rate. While effective programs exist
today to help minority-owned small
businesses, I believe we can continue to
do more. I believe that’s why my col-
leagues are here today, allowing us the
VerDate Mar 15 2010 06:33 Jul 12, 2013 Jkt 079060 PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 7634 Sfmt 0634 E:\RECORD13\RECFILES\H17JN3.REC H17JN3
b
j
n
e
a
l

o
n

D
S
K
4
S
P
T
V
N
1
P
R
O
D

w
i
t
h

C
O
N
G
-
R
E
C
-
O
N
L
I
N
E
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—HOUSE H3680 June 17, 2013
opportunity to come and tell our sto-
ries, because it educates the public, it
makes a difference, and that’s why I
am here.
I thank you so very much for allow-
ing me the opportunity to come and
talk about small businesses and more
importantly to talk about small busi-
nesses that are owned by women and
that are owned by African Americans,
because we’re making a difference.
Mr. JEFFRIES. I thank the distin-
guished gentlelady from Ohio. She cer-
tainly eloquently illustrated the point
that small business and entrepreneur-
ship are as American as baseball and
apple pie. And for women and minor-
ity-owned businesses to thrive is for
America to thrive, as has been pointed
out by speaker after speaker.
So many of the jobs that Americans
hold to this day are as a result of the
employment that small businesses pro-
vide. So as we figure out how we can
continue to recover from the Great Re-
cession of 2008, it’s critically important
for us to make sure that we can guar-
antee the best possible opportunity for
small businesses to succeed and for en-
trepreneurial ideas to flourish. That is
why we’ve taken to the floor today,
and it’s my honor and my privilege to
now yield to another distinguished
member of the freshman class, my co-
anchor for the CBC Special Order, the
gentleman from the Silver State, Rep-
resentative STEVEN HORSFORD.
b 2050
Mr. HORSFORD. Good evening.
Let me first thank my good friend,
the gentleman from the Empire State,
my coanchor, Mr. JEFFRIES. It has been
a pleasure now, for the first six months
of our term in this 113th Congress, to
work with you to bring these issues to
the floor each week on behalf of the
Congressional Black Caucus. I really
have appreciated your friendship, your
perspective, and your intelligence on so
many issues, and I look forward to con-
tinuing to work with you.
And to my other colleagues, the dy-
namic freshman class, it is so great to
have colleagues who work together,
who have like mindedness to represent
our communities and to do it in a way
that addresses the needs of all people.
The gentlewoman from Ohio (Mrs.
BEATTY) has so many experiences from
the private sector, to her role working
as an administrator in the university,
Ohio State University. It has been
great to get to know her, as well as my
good friend and colleague, the gen-
tleman from New Jersey (Mr. PAYNE).
These are individuals who have great
perspective and experience and whose
voice on these issues are incredibly im-
portant. I’m just pleased to be among
such a dynamic group that is trying to
make a difference here in this 113th
Congress.
So today, we are here to bring atten-
tion and focus to celebrating the 50th
anniversary of National Small Business
Week. It is fitting that tonight’s Spe-
cial Order hour will focus on how small
businesses are critical to the growth of
our economy. As we do during these
normal hours, people can follow us on
#CBCTalks. If you have a question or
you have an idea, if you have a perspec-
tive that you want heard, this is your
opportunity because it’s not just about
us coming here, but it is about us lis-
tening to what it is our constituents
want us to bring to the floor.
As my colleagues have already said,
small businesses are the backbone of
our economy. The CBC has fought and
continues to fight to strengthen pro-
grams that create economic oppor-
tunity and foster entrepreneurship.
Over the last year, small businesses in
our country have created 700,000 jobs,
accounting for 40 percent of employ-
ment gains, across companies of all
sizes. More than half of all Americans
either own or work for a small busi-
ness.
So when we talk about increasing ac-
cess to capital, enhancing business
partnerships, and providing important
technical assistance, the CBC is talk-
ing about the small businesses who are
the engines of our economy. And we
have solutions, and they are solutions
that we hope our colleagues on the
other side of the aisle will work with
us to pass because they are the right
solutions for America—solutions like
Representative RUSH’s expanding op-
portunities for Main Street. So much
focus is always on Wall Street, but we
want to bring the issues of Main Street
and small businesses to this body.
Whether it is Representative RICH-
MOND’s Microenterprise and Youth En-
trepreneurship Development Act, mak-
ing sure we are helping new businesses
and young entrepreneurs have the re-
sources they need to start and grow
their business, or whether it is Rep-
resentative CLARKE’s Expanding Oppor-
tunities for Small Businesses Act, the
CBC is working on solutions. And these
are the types of real policies that are
before this body, and we would urge
our colleagues on both sides of the
aisle to work with us to make these
bills law. These bills, if enacted, would
greatly enhance the small business
landscape for minority entrepreneurs.
You know, I had an opportunity re-
cently to visit the American History
Museum. When you’re there and you
reflect on our history as a Nation and
you see the important contributions
that African Americans have made to
the establishment and growth of our
great Nation, whether it be in politics
or government, civil rights or social
justice, and, yes, entrepreneurship, it’s
African Americans who have helped
build our country, and it is African
American businesses that need to be
part of our plan for economic growth.
Three issues that I hear most from
my constituents, small business owners
that I believe have to be at the center
of our discussion as we celebrate the
50th anniversary of Small Business
Week, is, number one, access to cap-
ital, whether it be on the need for lines
of credit to help with the day-to-day
operations of a business or capital
loans to help a business buy new equip-
ment so that they can expand or grow.
The second issue is equal opportunity
to bid on and win contracts both in the
private sphere but, most importantly
in our role, the Federal contracting op-
portunities. When I look at the amount
of money that is being spent by these
Federal agencies and to know that
there are not the types of efforts to
really provide outreach or support to
our minority- and women-owned and
veteran-owned businesses is something
that the Congressional Black Caucus
believes has to be a priority.
And third is the need to ensure com-
pliance with minority participation in
Federal contracting. This is an area, to
my good friend from New York, I hope
that we will be able to work on. I know
the ranking member over Small Busi-
ness, this is a priority of hers as well,
and I want to see what we can do to
hold accountable every agency to do
their part to ensure that there’s ample
participation from all communities.
You know, in April I held my first
small business forum with my con-
stituents that focused on creating
good-paying jobs through Federal con-
tracting opportunities. We held an-
other one recently on access to capital.
It was the Small Business Administra-
tion which was there that talked about
the fact that they deliver millions of
dollars of loans, contracts, counseling
sessions, and other forms of assistance
to small businesses. Well, we sought to
replicate that type of support in our
district with our small business own-
ers. We had representatives from var-
ious agencies attend, and they mapped
out strategies for local businesses who
are looking to grow and add more
workers. We had representatives from
agencies, including the Department of
Defense, the General Services Adminis-
tration, the Department of Energy, the
Department of Veterans Affairs, the
Environmental Protection Agency, and
the Small Business Administration, as
well as our Governor’s Office of Eco-
nomic Development.
The forum provided a great oppor-
tunity to discuss our plan to create
jobs in our local community. Over 60
local small business owners attended
the event, along with representatives
from Federal agencies. Other business
owners helped local residents and as-
piring entrepreneurs figure out how to
position themselves to compete for
Federal contracts and grants. Those
grants create jobs in our local commu-
nity, and job creation and economic
growth is what we should be about as
we talk about celebrating National
Small Business Owners Week.
What was most rewarding, to my
friend from New York, was a panel of
young entrepreneurs. We had young
people who are still in high school who
have a business plan for how they can
create everything from backpacks to
marketing to social marketing oppor-
tunities. These are young people with
ideas, with passion, with vision; but we
VerDate Mar 15 2010 06:33 Jul 12, 2013 Jkt 079060 PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 7634 Sfmt 0634 E:\RECORD13\RECFILES\H17JN3.REC H17JN3
b
j
n
e
a
l

o
n

D
S
K
4
S
P
T
V
N
1
P
R
O
D

w
i
t
h

C
O
N
G
-
R
E
C
-
O
N
L
I
N
E
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—HOUSE H3681 June 17, 2013
want to make sure that they have the
right support as well. So listening to
these young people makes me appre-
ciate just how important these re-
sources are and why we need to con-
tinue to work to make them a reality.
Let me finish my remarks at this
point by talking about the need for
business-to-business partnerships and
making sure that we have these face-
to-face meetings with those who know
the ins and outs of securing grants,
those who know how to go about con-
tracting, and also the need for access
to capital and how to secure the loans
that small businesses need to grow
their business.
b 2100
We want to encourage those who are
listening, or following us on
#CBCtalks, to attend one of the Small
Business Administration’s match-
making events during Small Business
Week—there are several. There’s one in
Seattle, there’s one in Dallas, St.
Louis, Pittsburgh, and even here in the
Nation’s Capital in Washington, D.C.—
and to reach out to resources like
Black Enterprise.
They have a very successful Young
Entrepreneurs Conference that they
hold annually that helps young people
learn about the opportunities of start-
ing their small business and what it
means to develop a plan to do mar-
keting, to have all of their plans in
place so that their business, once
launched, is successful.
And, finally, I want to encourage
people to reach out and join the U.S.
Black Chamber of Commerce and their
local urban and Black chambers of
commerce because these are opportuni-
ties where they can connect to re-
sources, get the support that they
need, and help to grow their businesses.
So I yield back to the gentleman
from New York at this time and thank
him and the other Members for this
spotlight on Small Business Week.
Mr. JEFFRIES. I want to thank my
good friend, Representative HORSFORD,
who’s made several important points.
And if I could just highlight a few in
particular, we hear a lot of talk here in
Washington, D.C., about the evils of
regulation. That talk is generally put
forth in very generalized terms, with-
out being able to point to specific regu-
lations that actually are impeding the
growth and opportunities of small busi-
nesses, but is certainly something that
we hear a lot about, the evils of regula-
tion.
But the reality is if you really want
to deal with some of the problems that
are confronting small businesses in
America, I think Representative
HORSFORD has laid it out in pretty
compelling ways.
One, we need to ensure that our
small businesses have access to capital
in order to be able to grow their busi-
nesses, allow them to flourish and ex-
pand, build upon the ideas that exist.
Two, we’ve got to make sure that we
give these small businesses access to
contracting and procurement opportu-
nities. Many times there are small
businesses that have the capacity to do
the job, but are unaware of the oppor-
tunities that actually exist, whether
that’s at the Federal Government
level, the State government level, or
down at the municipal or county gov-
ernmental level.
And, lastly, as my good friend, Rep-
resentative HORSFORD, pointed out,
we’ve got to make sure that we provide
access to technical assistance to deal
with the compliance issues that busi-
nesses do confront. That doesn’t mean
that all of these issues are overly bur-
densome or unnecessary. But we want
to make sure that small businesses do
have the capacity to operate within the
regulatory framework that is applica-
ble and reasonable and that the elected
officials in whatever the particular ju-
risdiction have deemed necessary for
the proper functioning of a small busi-
ness.
So I thank the distinguished gen-
tleman from Nevada for raising those
very compelling points.
We’ve now been joined by a very im-
portant leader on the issue of small
business and entrepreneurship, who
comes from the great State of New
York, the great borough and county of
Kings and Brooklyn, where we have
many entrepreneurs. And she’s helped
many businesses over time. She is on
the Small Business Committee.
She’s my neighbor, so I wanted to
make sure I gave her the appropriately
generous introduction. It’s an honor to
yield the floor to the distinguished
gentlelady from New York, Congress-
woman YVETTE CLARKE.
Ms. CLARKE. Let me thank you, Mr.
Speaker. And I’d like to thank my col-
league, Mr. HORSFORD of Nevada, and
my colleague and neighbor from
Brooklyn, New York, the Honorable
Congressman HAKEEM JEFFRIES, for
yielding their time and for their tre-
mendous leadership, week in and week
out, in providing a view into the Con-
gressional Black Caucus perspective on
the issues of the day.
Mr. Speaker, it has been nearly 5
years since our Nation experienced the
worst financial calamity since the
Great Depression. However, as our
economy continues to recover, unem-
ployment remains stubbornly high, sit-
ting at 7.5 percent nationally, with un-
employment at 13.2 percent and 9 per-
cent, respectively, for African Ameri-
cans and Latino Americans.
As a member of the House Small
Business Committee, I know the chal-
lenges facing our Nation’s minority-
owned small businesses and entre-
preneurs, from access to capital, a
problem for minority-owned and dis-
advantaged small businesses in the
best of economic times, or a lack of ac-
cess to knowledge and information of
the available options to assist them.
I understand that we must—that we
must work increasingly and unceas-
ingly to ensure that, even as the media
focuses on the booming stock market,
that our Nation’s real job creators are
not forgotten, not marginalized and
overlooked. Their success is vital, not
only for a more robust recovery, but it
is to fully addressing our Nation’s na-
tional employment crisis.
Ironically enough, Mr. Speaker, this
week is the 50th commemoration of Na-
tional Small Business Week. It ap-
pears, though, that the Republican-led
House is totally tone deaf to the mil-
lions of Americans still unable to find
gainful employment, that not one of
the bills before the House this week
supports job creation, real job creation,
nor do they rescind the harmful effects
of the sequester, which, by almost
every measure, has been clearly detri-
mental to our Nation’s economy and is
tantamount, it is tantamount to neg-
ligence.
In my capacity as a member of the
Small Business Committee, I’ve
worked with my colleagues to promote
all small businesses, especially minor-
ity, women, and veteran-owned small
businesses in my district and across
the Nation as they try to navigate
these self-imposed and manufactured
uncertain economic times.
I am a strong supporter of the
SCORE Program, which provides tech-
nical assistance necessary for small
businesses in underserved communities
to just get off the ground. I also work
with the SBA and the SBA’s Office of
Advocacy to ensure that all the firms
that qualify for SBA contracting and
capital access programs are provided
an equal opportunity for participation.
Mr. Speaker, I have the honor and
privilege of representing Brooklyn’s
Ninth Congressional District. My con-
stituency includes an extremely large
small business community with com-
merce corridors lined from block to
block with small mom-and-pop busi-
nesses and storefronts.
This unique community provides the
foundation of not only the economic
but the unique social fabric of Brook-
lyn. We must build on this foundation
in Brooklyn, New York, and across our
great Nation.
Every day that the House majority
focuses the people’s time on issues that
divide us is another day that our small
businesses are treated as a subordinate
concern. It is another day that our Na-
tion’s job-seekers spend time searching
in vain, looking for the proverbial
‘‘needle in the haystack,’’ and another
day that our Nation will have to wait
for the engine that powers our econ-
omy to be firing on all cylinders.
Mr. Speaker, as our Nation cele-
brates National Small Business Week, I
look forward to a genuine debate that
addresses the totality of our Nation’s
small business communities, and not
cherry-picking the low-hanging fruit.
I’d like to thank the Congressional
Black Caucus, which, like myself,
treats every week as Small Business
Week, for focusing on this crucially
important issue and for having me this
evening.
VerDate Mar 15 2010 06:33 Jul 12, 2013 Jkt 079060 PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 7634 Sfmt 0634 E:\RECORD13\RECFILES\H17JN3.REC H17JN3
b
j
n
e
a
l

o
n

D
S
K
4
S
P
T
V
N
1
P
R
O
D

w
i
t
h

C
O
N
G
-
R
E
C
-
O
N
L
I
N
E
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—HOUSE H3682 June 17, 2013
b 2110
In closing, I just want to share with
you that, as we go through the immi-
gration debate, we acknowledge that
oftentimes in the Black community
much of our entrepreneurial spirit is
found in those entrepreneurs who have
come to the United States and find a
niche market where they can provide
goods, services, and products to people
from their homes of origin and, by ex-
tension, to the rest of the Nation.
I had the distinct honor and privilege
of meeting a gentleman who immi-
grated to the United States from the
island nation of Jamaica. One of the
great delicacies, and they’ve actually
become nationally renowned, it’s
called the beef patty. This gentleman’s
name is none other than Lowell Haw-
thorne, and he started with a small
storefront in the Bronx, New York, and
has now grown that storefront into a
franchise opportunity that has made
him, his family, and all those who have
engaged very wealthy individuals, cre-
ated job opportunities for hundreds of
people and has provided one of the
most delicious delicacies that one can
ever taste.
Lowell Hawthorne is truly an entre-
preneur who has availed himself of
small business support from the SBA
and has been able to grow his business.
This is a success story that can be
modeled and patterned after. We need
to make sure that those entrepreneurs
who have ideas that are innovative and
that are creative get the support they
need to continue to build this great
country of ours.
I’d like to thank my colleague for an-
choring this CBC Special Order.
Mr. JEFFRIES. I thank the distin-
guished gentlelady from New York for
her very thoughtful and insightful re-
marks, and I certainly thank her for
pointing out that immigrants from the
great State of New York and, in fact,
immigrants who have come across the
world to States all across the United
States are hardworking, family-ori-
ented, entrepreneurial, and innovative
individuals who have helped to revive
and rejuvenate communities all across
this great land. It’s something that we
in this Chamber need to recognize as
we celebrate and commemorate Small
Business Week and prepare to move
forward hopefully with some form of
comprehensive immigration reform
that we recognize the contributions
that immigrants have made in the
small business context.
We’ve been joined by another cham-
pion of small businesses here in the
Congress who has got a very distin-
guished record on a wide variety of
issues. She has been a thoughtful, elo-
quent, and passionate voice as it re-
lates to entrepreneurship in America,
and specifically within the black com-
munity. It is my honor and privilege
now to yield the floor to the distin-
guished gentlelady from the great Lone
Star State of Texas, Representative
SHEILA JACKSON LEE.
Ms. JACKSON LEE. Let me thank
my colleagues who have gathered here
today and tonight.
Thank you, Congressman JEFFRIES
again for the combined leadership of
yourself, Mr. HORSFORD from Nevada,
and, of course, my dear, dear friend,
Congressman DON PAYNE, Congress-
woman YVETTE CLARKE, and I know
that the gentlelady from Ohio was also
contributing this evening, and I cer-
tainly thank her for her leadership.
I am very pleased to be able to stand
here and honor a group that I, frankly,
believe are the anchor of the economy
for the United States of America, and
that is small businesses. We look at the
landscape of American history. We did
not start with multinationals and
international corporations. We really
started with mom-and-pop businesses,
whether it is, in fact, when we were
told in the historical concept to go
West young man and woman, and those
from the 13 Colonies originally as they
moved from the east coast to explore
the West as far as California. In those
pioneering towns, you had to have
small businesses.
Then, of course, if we speak about
the history of our community, first
coming to this Nation as slaves and
then developing artisan skills in the
spirit of Booker T. Washington, being
carpenters, painters, and bricklayers.
If you will look at the history of the
South, many of the African Americans,
this was their business, along with fu-
neral homes and along with res-
taurants.
I remember the aunt of my husband.
It was one of our special treats to be
able to go down to Aunt Frances’ loca-
tion in Alabama. Her store was near
Alabama State, and it was the place to
go. It was also a little hotel, and there
was no doubt that Aunt Frances could
cook, but she turned it into a business.
And the students knew that that was a
place that was a comfort to them, that
good meals could be gotten for reason-
able prices. Those were small busi-
nesses in the African American com-
munity.
Frankly, I believe that we have not
done well by them. We have not done
well by minority businesses overall, by
women-owned businesses. Yes, there
are some moments of success that I
will recount in just a moment, but in
terms of the Federal Government real-
ly putting elbow grease to the idea of
outreach to minority businesses, they
can do better. Yes, we have the Small
Business Administration and there are
many instances of outreach, but let me
share with you how we could do better.
First of all, we can eliminate the se-
questration. We can put on the floor
H.R. 900, which is legislation that
many of us have signed, led by JOHN
CONYERS. I’m an original cosponsor
among many others. Eliminate the se-
questration. It is killing us. Frankly, it
is killing small businesses. It is killing
the opportunities for small businesses
in terms of small businesses who do a
small amount of business with the Fed-
eral Government. All of that is being
cut.
We can also fix the Internal Revenue
Service because I will tell you, Mr.
JEFFRIES, if you poll any of your small
businesses, any of those S corporations
or any of those mom-and-pops or any of
those individuals who have businesses
in their name, I can assure you that
there is a difficult situation with IRS
audits. They seem to find small busi-
nesses, and they seem to find minority
businesses. And so I think, as a Con-
gress, we want fairness. We certainly
want the IRS, that has a lot of hard-
working workers—we have just found
out that they targeted liberal groups
as well as others. We want them to find
a sort of the right space to be able to
allow our small businesses to not suf-
focate but to grow and to work with
them in what we call offer in com-
promise. So I think we need to fix the
IRS.
Certainly, we need to fix the whole
issue of credit scoring, allowing small
businesses to access, if you will, the
right kind of credit. If they can get
credit, then they can grow. I would
imagine that if this whole place was
filled up with small businesses and I
asked them, the colleagues that are in
this room, it was all filled up with
small businesses, asked them to raise
their hand about access to credit or
this whole issue of credit scoring—and
we in the Federal Government can do
better. We can do better with a fixed
tax system that respects the growth of
small businesses to allow them to grow
their business and give them the kind
of tax incentives that would be helpful.
Let me also say, as I bring my re-
marks to a close, and I want to say to
Congresswoman CLARKE, who is al-
ready on the floor—she knows now that
I’m going to have to cite some of my
businesses that have come and made
great opportunities for workers. But
let me just say that we need to be able
to—how should I say it?—encourage,
encourage all these government agen-
cies.
Do you know how much the General
Services Administration buys and how
much they build? All of these agencies,
every single bill that comes through
here, we should work with our Repub-
lican colleagues, who believe in small
businesses, to be able to add amend-
ments that deal with the outreach to
minority, women, and small busi-
nesses. That’s what we’re missing.
They’re intimidated by doing business
with the Federal Government.
The General Service Administration
is one of the worst offenders. They
spend money on building buildings.
They spend money on buying buildings,
and their MWBD record is horrific. And
what they say is they don’t have a pro-
vision that incentivizes them, or
there’s no provision in their structure
that causes them to move forward on
MWBD.
We’ve got to do something about
that. Maybe we can collectively do it
as a Congressional Black Caucus to be
VerDate Mar 15 2010 06:33 Jul 12, 2013 Jkt 079060 PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 7634 Sfmt 0634 E:\RECORD13\RECFILES\H17JN3.REC H17JN3
b
j
n
e
a
l

o
n

D
S
K
4
S
P
T
V
N
1
P
R
O
D

w
i
t
h

C
O
N
G
-
R
E
C
-
O
N
L
I
N
E
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—HOUSE H3683 June 17, 2013
able to address the question of an agen-
cy that buys everything and builds ev-
erything for the Federal Government,
and they don’t have an incentive.
b 2120
Just last week I put an amendment
on the defense authorization. I want to
thank the Democrats and Republicans
for being supportive. I look forward to
working with them again in the agri-
culture bill.
But finally what I would say is that
I am grateful that we are highlighting
small businesses today, and I hope that
I’ve listed a few items that we will hear
from small businesses about, that we
can hear your voices tell us how we can
help you better, either with the IRS,
with sequestration, with the outreach
in the Small Business Administration
or working with the General Services
Administration so that you have more
opportunity to participate as a small
business.
Now let me cite a few of my busi-
nesses, as I go to my seat, in Texas. I
want to celebrate Frenchy’s, the
Creuzot family, that has been in the
chicken frying business for 50 years
plus. Yes, I have a great excitement
that they have taken that business and
they are in the marketing business of
making food products that they are
selling to grocery stores. They’ve
grown from being that place where the
students from Texas Southern Univer-
sity would go and the rest of us would
go by expanding. They have kept peo-
ple hired for 50 years. Their father has
gone on to glory, their mother is still
alive, but the children have kept it
alive. I want to salute them because it
is a business of the family. They came
from Louisiana, made their way over in
this direction.
I want to salute Kase Lawal and
CAMAC as one of the only standing en-
ergy companies owned by an African
American in the United States, along
with Osyka, owned by Michael Harness,
and a pipeline company, Milton Car-
roll, who’s had Precision Instruments
for a number of years that was in the
oil drilling business. I want to salute
them.
I want to salute Cool Runnings, my
first visit to them, a Jamaican res-
taurant. They have taken their busi-
ness and grown it—in Houston, Texas
by the way. To be able to have a res-
taurant and a takeout business is
great. I want to salute the Houston
Black Expo, because they are having
their big event on June 21 and busi-
nesses all over Houston will be bene-
fiting from Mr. Love’s great effort in
the Houston Black Expo.
Finally, I want to conclude by saying
that small businesses are in fact the
backbone of America. I know that
there will be a great opportunity for us
to expand on that.
Let me close by thanking you, Mr.
JEFFRIES and Mr. HORSFORD, thank you
so very much for highlighting what is
truly the infrastructure of jobs in
America, small businesses and minor-
ity-owned businesses, women-owned
businesses. Thank you for your cour-
tesy.
Mr. JEFFRIES. I thank the distin-
guished gentlelady from Texas for her
very eloquent and thoughtful remarks
and for her putting forth some very im-
portant policy prescriptions for what
we in the Congress can do to help ad-
vance the agenda on behalf of small
businesses all across this country, and
certainly in the women- and minority-
owned business context.
I also want to note, I am thankful
that Representative CLARKE mentioned
one of the important immigrant busi-
nesses that began in the Bronx, New
York, but has spread all across the
country, the Golden Crust Caribbean
Bakery and Grill, as well as I thank
the distinguished gentlewoman from
Texas for highlighting some of the im-
portant businesses that have sprouted
up in Houston, Texas. Those are just a
few examples of what entrepreneurs in
the black immigrant community, in
the African American community,
have done all across the land. All we’re
saying is we want to make sure that we
provide these businessmen and -women
the same opportunities that others
throughout time in America have had,
because if we do, they will be able to
translate their entrepreneurial spirit,
their innovative ideas, their vision,
into reality that will make economic
sense for their communities and lead to
the hiring of American citizens and
others who need the employment op-
portunity that these small businesses
will continue to generate.
Just a few observations in closing.
One of the things that was mentioned
earlier today on the floor was the fact
that many small businesses confront
an uncertain economic environment.
And as a result of this uncertainty,
they are unable to move forward in any
concrete fashion because they don’t
know when the next crisis will hit our
economy: Are we going to default on
our debt? Are we going to fall over the
fiscal cliff? How long are we going to be
dealing with sequestration?
I would suggest to my good friends
on the other side of the aisle that if we
really want to help out small busi-
nesses and entrepreneurs, we’ve got to
figure out a way to come together and
find common ground as it relates to
moving our economy forward, because
as long as we’re in this period of uncer-
tainty, it will be difficult for small
businesses and for entrepreneurs to
take any step forward as it relates to
growing their businesses and allowing
them to be more prosperous.
Now there is a vehicle for us to try
and find common ground. For 4 years,
my good friends on the other side of
the aisle were complaining about the
fact that we were not in regular order,
that the Senate failed to pass a budget.
Well, this year a budget resolution was
passed in the House of Representatives.
A budget resolution was passed in the
Senate. Two very different visions for
where we should go as a country. But
the vehicle to find common ground is
to move forward with a conference
committee. The majority in the Senate
has indicated they are prepared to
move forward and appoint conferees,
but the Speaker of the people’s House
refuses to do so, even though for the
last 4 years folks were complaining
about the absence of regular order.
If you want to do something about
small businesses, what we should do in
America is figure out how we in the
Congress can come together, find com-
mon ground and create some economic
certainty so these entrepreneurs can
move forward.
I don’t know if my good friend has
any parting comments, but let me just
say that we in the CBC are committed
to continuing to stand up for entrepre-
neurship in America, for opportunity,
for the fruitful pursuit of the American
Dream through innovation, and we ex-
tend an olive branch to Members of the
other side of the aisle on this issue and
on all other issues so we can finally
find a way to come together and move
this economy forward in a way that
should benefit all Americans.
With that, I yield back the balance of
my time.
Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas.
Mr. Speaker, as we celebrate American small
businesses during the 50th Annual National
Small Business Week, it is important that we
recognize minority entrepreneurs and their
contributions to local economies all across the
country. Small businesses serve as the back-
bone of America’s economy, and minority-
owned enterprises have played a critical role
in our Nation’s economic development, gener-
ating an estimated $1 trillion in annual rev-
enue as of 2011.
In Texas, there are more than 365,000 mi-
nority-owned firms, employing more than
690,000 individuals. Small businesses account
for the majority of the employers in the State
of Texas, and create a substantial number of
local new jobs. Small businesses bring dy-
namic ideas, and generate innovative services
and products, to the marketplace which are
necessary for economic prosperity.
Mr. Speaker, as we honor small businesses
this week, let us all reaffirm our commitment
to expand economic opportunities for aspiring
business owners all across the country. These
enterprises are a key component to a strong
economy and a flourishing middle class.
f
ANNOUNCEMENT BY THE SPEAKER
PRO TEMPORE
The SPEAKER pro tempore. With re-
spect to a unanimous-consent request
entered earlier today, the Chair would
clarify that, under clause 7 of rule XII,
a request to remove the name of a co-
sponsor cannot be entertained after the
final committee authorized to consider
the measure reports it to the House or
is discharged from its consideration.
H.R. 1797 is currently on the Union
Calendar and any request to remove a
cosponsor at this point may not be en-
tertained.
VerDate Mar 15 2010 06:33 Jul 12, 2013 Jkt 079060 PO 00000 Frm 00027 Fmt 7634 Sfmt 0634 E:\RECORD13\RECFILES\H17JN3.REC H17JN3
b
j
n
e
a
l

o
n

D
S
K
4
S
P
T
V
N
1
P
R
O
D

w
i
t
h

C
O
N
G
-
R
E
C
-
O
N
L
I
N
E
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—HOUSE H3684 June 17, 2013
JOBS
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under
the Speaker’s announced policy of Jan-
uary 3, 2013, the Chair recognizes the
gentleman from Illinois (Mr.
HULTGREN) for 30 minutes.
GENERAL LEAVE
Mr. HULTGREN. Thank you, Mr.
Speaker.
Before I begin, I ask unanimous con-
sent that all Members may have 5 leg-
islative days in which to revise and ex-
tend their remarks and include extra-
neous materials on the topic of my
Special Order.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there
objection to the request of the gen-
tleman from Illinois?
There was no objection.
Mr. HULTGREN. Mr. Speaker, as I
begin, I do want to wish and hope that
you and others of our colleagues had a
very happy Father’s Day yesterday. It
is one of the most important things for
fathers, and mothers, to be able to pro-
vide for their families.
Mr. Speaker, this evening I would
like to talk about what for many
Americans is probably the most press-
ing, or maybe depressing, issue our
country is facing right now: jobs, un-
employment and the need to create
more jobs. But while we as a Nation
face challenges, the roadmap to pros-
perity is clear. The question is, will we
act on the recommendations of those
who create the jobs, that drive our na-
tional economy, America’s small busi-
nesses and entrepreneurs?
As I speak, the unemployment rate
in the United States stands at 7.6 per-
cent. According to the American En-
terprise Institute, just 64.4 percent of
working age men are employed, the
lowest level by far since the Great De-
pression, and an astounding 5 percent-
age points lower than at the beginning
of the current downturn. A staggering
4.4 million workers have been out of
work for 27 weeks or longer.
b 2130
In Illinois, my home State, the un-
employment rate is even higher—at 9.3
percent. The unemployment rate in my
home State has been at or above 8.6
percent since April of 2009; 611,000 peo-
ple are currently out of work in Illi-
nois.
According to the Bureau of Labor
and Statistics, of the 26.3 million part-
time workers, 7.8 million are working
part time for economic reasons, mean-
ing the job market wasn’t robust
enough to support full-time positions
or they could only find part-time work.
Jobs, unemployment, job growth—all
of these are issues on the minds of
Americans because, directly or indi-
rectly, all Americans are affected by
them. When I meet with small busi-
nesses and employers around my dis-
trict, I ask them, what would it take
for you to create just one more job? I
would love for them to create 10 more
jobs or 20 more jobs or 50 more jobs;
but I ask them, what would it take for
you to create just one more job? They
tell me that the best way to spur job
creation and economic growth is to re-
duce government regulations, cut taxes
and simplify the Tax Code, and reduce
the size of government by cutting
spending.
Having a full-time, stable job and
going to work every day is necessary
just to meet the challenges of daily liv-
ing. Americans’ pocketbooks are pum-
meled every day. Take gas prices, for
instance. The nationwide average price
for a gallon of gas has jumped by more
than $1 in the last 4 years from $2.58 a
gallon in June of 2009 to $3.64 a gallon
in June of this year.
The price of gas in Illinois right now
is averaging $4.08 a gallon. That’s 15
cents per gallon higher than this time
last year. In the Chicago area and in
my district, prices are even higher. The
average price for a gallon of regular
gas is a ridiculous $4.28. This is just
one example of how everyday life is be-
coming less and less affordable for or-
dinary Americans.
Creating good, full-time jobs must be
our priority. But small business owners
in my district tell me that in the cur-
rent ‘‘business averse’’ climate, this is
difficult, if not impossible, for them to
do.
Jeff, the president of a small indus-
trial pump manufacturing company, is
not hiring. He would like to, but he
says he can’t. He says that ‘‘business
owners have to be optimistic that the
business environment will be suitable
for business growth.’’ He goes on to
say, however, ‘‘The unfriendly business
climate coming from Washington and
the huge deficit spending reduces opti-
mism that the business climate will
continue to improve or even remain
stable.’’ Jeff also says, ‘‘Government
regulations and high taxation create
uncertainty—and government regula-
tion and inflationary policies are driv-
ing up the cost of hiring. The primary
resource of business needs is employ-
ees.’’
Then there’s Tom, the president of a
raw materials distribution company in
my district, who says ‘‘the biggest
thing holding me back from hiring is
uncertainty of the future business cli-
mate.’’ Tom said, ‘‘We have already
seen health care cost increases of near-
ly 20 percent year over year in early
2013, which was on top of the 12 percent
increase in 2012.’’ Tom also stated, ‘‘We
pay for 75 percent of the cost of health
care for our employees. The parts of
health care legislation yet to be imple-
mented will probably penalize us even
more for doing the right thing. We do
not understand how health care legisla-
tion will impact our business.’’
The recommendations of the small
businesses that create the jobs in this
country—the ‘‘engines of the econ-
omy’’—are critical to increasing em-
ployment and spurring growth in our
national economy.
Reducing the regulatory burden on
small businesses is one critical factor
toward inducing them to hire more
workers. The burdensome nature of
proposed Federal regulations is making
long-term planning for businesses and
growth virtually impossible. An inabil-
ity to plan is having a paralyzing effect
on local investment and hiring.
According to the National Federation
of Independent Business, in only the
last 3 months there have been 6,669 reg-
ulatory changes posted or notices post-
ed on the Federal regulatory Web site.
That’s an average of 74 regulations per
day. Let me repeat that: NFIB’s own
study says in only the last 3 months
there have been 6,669 regulatory
changes posted or notices posted on the
Federal regulatory Web site, an aver-
age of 74 regulations every single day.
This regulatory morass forces small
businesses to hold onto any extra rev-
enue they may have for fear of new
compliance costs. This means fore-
going opportunities to invest or hire
new workers. Some businesses are
forced to close altogether.
A recent poll of the National Associa-
tion of Manufacturers and the National
Federation of Independent Business
found that 62 percent of small business
owners and manufacturers say the
United States’ own regulations, rules,
and taxes impact their businesses more
negatively than foreign competition.
So our own regulations, according to a
majority of business owners, are more
harmful to them or more threatening
to them than foreign competition.
Small businesses are the engine of
our Nation’s economy. They create
about two-thirds of new jobs in the
United States. They employ more than
half of the private sector workforce.
We need to unleash their potential.
So what can be done? Well, we must
require regulatory authorities to re-
view their regulations for usefulness
and relevance and amend them as nec-
essary to get rid of them if they are ob-
solete.
I have introduced legislation to do
just that. H.R. 309, the Regulatory Sun-
set and Review Act, requires Federal
agencies to regularly review regula-
tions on their books and establish a
process to sunset those that are dupli-
cative, conflicting, or no longer nec-
essary.
Small businesses need a seat at the
table at the earliest stages of crafting
regulations. Too often, regulators gen-
erating rules have little or no contact
with the businesses affected by those
regulations they implement and, thus,
little knowledge of the impact on jobs.
Regulators need to assess the long-
term costs and benefits of regula-
tions—including how they will affect
job loss and job creation—using the
best available tools and adopt only
those regulations whose benefits clear-
ly outweigh the costs.
The regulatory process requires
transparency and accountability. Shar-
ing publicly the reasons why certain
public input was not incorporated and
disclosing the data, methods, and mod-
els underlying Federal regulatory deci-
sionmaking are also important steps to
restoring trust to the Federal regu-
latory process.
VerDate Mar 15 2010 06:33 Jul 12, 2013 Jkt 079060 PO 00000 Frm 00028 Fmt 7634 Sfmt 0634 E:\RECORD13\RECFILES\H17JN3.REC H17JN3
b
j
n
e
a
l

o
n

D
S
K
4
S
P
T
V
N
1
P
R
O
D

w
i
t
h

C
O
N
G
-
R
E
C
-
O
N
L
I
N
E
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—HOUSE H3685 June 17, 2013
Reducing red tape is critical, but cut-
ting taxes and implementing meaning-
ful tax reform that incentivizes busi-
nesses to hire is also key to invig-
orating job growth. When taxes are
lower, businesses invest their resources
and hire more workers, which is ex-
actly what we want. When taxes are
lower, taxpaying citizens are able to
keep more of their own money, money
to spend as they see fit, to save, or to
invest.
Congress must consider the impact
tax policy is having on small busi-
nesses’ ability to succeed when small
businesses are a primary source of job
creation in the United States and the
engines of economic growth.
Small businesses—those with less
than 500 employees—represent 99.7 per-
cent of all employers, and employ al-
most half of the private sector labor
force—55 million workers. In Illinois,
again my home State, small businesses
represent 98.3 percent of all employers
and provide jobs to 2.4 million workers,
about half of the private labor force.
So when it comes to economic and
tax policy, we need to listen to Main
Street small businesses and mom-and-
pop shops that create the jobs in this
country. This is what they are saying
when it comes to taxes and spending:
Ninety-one percent of small busi-
nesses find that the Tax Code is com-
plicated enough to hire their own tax
preparer.
Eighty-five percent think Congress
should revise the Tax Code.
Eighty-one percent think govern-
ment should cut spending before ever
considering tax increases.
Seventy-eight percent want to close
tax loopholes.
And 71 percent agree that tax reform
should include lowering the tax burden
on small businesses.
Thus, to enable small businesses to
create jobs and improve the employ-
ment climate in this country, tax rates
must be low.
High tax rates are a problem for
small businesses because they siphon
off revenue owners need to reinvest for
growth and to create jobs.
b 2140
So what needs to be done?
The implementation of comprehen-
sive tax reform that makes the Tax
Code fairer, less burdensome, and more
comprehensible for the folks who pay
taxes and the small businesses that in-
vest in hiring;
The permanent repeal of the estate,
or death, tax, which I have long advo-
cated is critical for small businesses
and maintaining a healthy jobs cli-
mate. Many small businesses are fam-
ily owned. The death tax is a major im-
pediment for such businesses to keep
operating in a down economy once the
owner retires or dies. Protecting small
businesses from the death tax is impor-
tant in order to keep Main Street busi-
nesses operating for future generations
and for preserving their ability to cre-
ate jobs as we try to grow this econ-
omy;
We should cut taxes to spur invest-
ment and hiring. Lower tax rates lower
the cost of capital and increase the re-
wards for the risks that businesses
take in hiring new workers. I support
increasing the small business expens-
ing limit so businesses can imme-
diately recover their costs and invest
in their businesses and hire new work-
ers;
We must simplify the Tax Code. It is
too complicated when 9 out of 10 small
businesses must hire someone to pre-
pare their own taxes. Making the Tax
Code easier to understand and follow
and not placing new reporting burdens
on small businesses will help them
focus on growing their businesses and
creating jobs.
In addition to reducing regulatory
burdens and cutting taxes, eliminating
wasteful spending and reducing the size
of government is key to job growth:
Current trends have government
spending continuing to hover at 22 per-
cent of gross domestic product for the
next 10 years;
Continued spending adds to the $16.6
trillion debt, and that, in turn, drives
up interest costs to pay for borrowing;
The CBO estimates that interest paid
on the national debt as a percentage of
the overall budget will more than dou-
ble from the current 6.2 percent of the
budget to 14.1 percent, consuming an
ever larger share of Federal resources.
Clearly, we do need to cut spending
relative to the overall Federal budget.
Cutting spending reduces the amount
of money government takes from the
private economy. Cutting spending and
reducing the size of government rel-
ative to the private sector keeps more
money in the private sector where it
can be put to productive use, such as in
hiring and creating jobs. Cutting
wasteful spending and balancing our
national budget will also absolutely
help job growth.
It’s simple: the Federal Government
should not spend more than it takes in
if we want to create an environment
conducive to job creation. I have advo-
cated for and have supported the budg-
et my House colleagues passed this
spring that balances the budget in 10
years by cutting spending and fixing
our broken Tax Code so that it is fairer
and simpler for everyone. I also sup-
port and have worked hard to pass a
balanced budget amendment to the
Constitution.
Requiring the Federal Government to
live within its means and balance
spending with the money it takes in,
just as families in Illinois and across
America have to do, will instill fiscal
discipline required to get our economy
moving in the right direction. This will
also promote confidence and create
certainty within our Nation’s private
sector businesses so they can take pro-
ductive steps towards hiring workers
and growing their businesses.
According to the small businesses I
meet in my district, there are more
things we can do to spur job creation in
this country. We can open up American
markets overseas. New markets mean a
greater demand for American-made
goods. The businesses that manufac-
ture these products will hire workers
to meet the demand.
In that regard, I have voted in favor
of free trade agreements with countries
such as Colombia and Panama and
South Korea. I have also supported per-
manent normal trade relations with
Russia in order that American manu-
facturers can receive the benefits of
open markets as a result of Russia’s
joining the WTO. We also must elimi-
nate the bureaucracy that hinders the
development of American products. Bu-
reaucracy should not stand in the way
of American innovation and bringing
products to market.
I am a cosponsor of the Protect
Small Business Jobs Act. This legisla-
tion would provide small businesses
with a limited grace period to correct
regulatory violations, and if the viola-
tion is corrected in a timely manner, it
allows for the waiver of any sanctions
against the small business. This will
help business owners like Tom, who, in
referring to one Federal regulatory au-
thority with which he was dealing,
said, ‘‘Rather than working with indus-
try to fix alleged issues, it is imposing
significant fines right off the bat with-
out giving companies the opportunity
to first fix the concerns.’’ Government
should be a facilitator, not an obstacle,
to new product development and job
creation.
Mr. Speaker, the pathway to a grow-
ing economy and putting people back
to work is clear. The small business job
creators in my district and around the
country have spoken: they want to get
rid of burdensome and unnecessary red
tape; they want lower taxes and a sim-
pler Tax Code that lends to certainty
and encourages growth and invest-
ment; and they want the Federal Gov-
ernment to exercise fiscal discipline
and to serve as a facilitator for Amer-
ican innovation, product development,
and marketing.
Mr. Speaker, we can help American
small businesses get Americans back to
work. America is the land of oppor-
tunity where, with a mixture of aspira-
tion and diligence, anyone can achieve
one’s dreams. Let’s redouble our efforts
and renew our commitment to our fel-
low citizens to help them build a bright
future for themselves, their children,
and for this Nation.
I yield back the balance of my time.
VerDate Mar 15 2010 06:33 Jul 12, 2013 Jkt 079060 PO 00000 Frm 00029 Fmt 7634 Sfmt 0634 E:\RECORD13\RECFILES\H17JN3.REC H17JN3
b
j
n
e
a
l

o
n

D
S
K
4
S
P
T
V
N
1
P
R
O
D

w
i
t
h

C
O
N
G
-
R
E
C
-
O
N
L
I
N
E
CORRECTION
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—HOUSE H3686 June 17, 2013
LEAVE OF ABSENCE
By unanimous consent, leave of ab-
sence was granted to:
Mr. LAMBORN (at the request of Mr.
CANTOR) for today on account of per-
sonal reasons.
f
ADJOURNMENT
Mr. HULTGREN. Mr. Speaker, I
move that the House do now adjourn.
The motion was agreed to; accord-
ingly (at 9 o’clock and 46 minutes
p.m.), under its previous order, the
House adjourned until tomorrow, Tues-
day, June 18, 2013, at 10 a.m. for morn-
ing-hour debate.
f
EXECUTIVE COMMUNICATIONS,
ETC.
Under clause 2 of rule XIV, executive
communications were taken from the
Speaker’s table and referred as follows:
1876. A letter from the Director, Program
Development and Regulatory Analysis,
Rural Development Utilities Programs, De-
partment of Agriculture, transmitting the
Department’s final rule — Community Con-
nect Broadband Grant Program (RIN: 0572-
AC30) received June 4, 2013, pursuant to 5
U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on Ag-
riculture.
1877. A letter from the Assistant Secretary
for Special Education and Rehabilitative
Services, Department of Education, trans-
mitting the Department’s final rule — Final
priority. Technical Assistance to Improve
State Data Capacity--National Technical As-
sistance Center to Improve State Capacity to
Accurately Collect and Report IDEA Data
[CDFA Number: 84.373Y.] received June 6,
2013, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the
Committee on Education and the Workforce.
1878. A letter from the Assistant General
Counsel for Regulatory Services, Depart-
ment of Education, transmitting the Depart-
ment’s final rule — Final Priority; Technical
Assistance To Improve State Data Capacity-
National Technical Assistance Center To Im-
prove State Capacity To Accurately Collect
and Report IDEA Data [CFDA Number:
84.373Y] received June 5, 2013, pursuant to 5
U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on Edu-
cation and the Workforce.
1879. A letter from the Director of Congres-
sional Affairs, Nuclear Regulatory Commis-
sion, transmitting the Commission’s final
rule — Implementation of Regulatory Guide
1.221 on Design-Basis Hurricane and Hurri-
cane Missiles [NRC-2012-0247] received June
4, 2013, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to
the Committee on Energy and Commerce.
1880. A letter from the Director, Office of
Congressional Affairs, Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, transmitting the Commission’s
final rule — Models for Plant-Specific Adop-
tion of Technical Specifications Task Force
Traveler TSTF-426, Revision 5, ‘‘Revise or
Add Actions to Preclude Entry into LCO
3.0.3-RITSTF Initiatives 6B & 6C’’, Using the
Consolidated Line Item Improvement Proc-
ess [Project No.: 753; NRC-2013-0007] received
June 5, 2013, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A);
to the Committee on Energy and Commerce.
1881. A letter from the Director, Office of
Congressional Affairs, Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, transmitting the Commission’s
final rule — Updated Aging Management Cri-
teria for Reactor Vessel Internal Compo-
nents for Pressurized Water Reactors [LR-
ISG-2011-04] received June 5, 2013, pursuant
to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on
Energy and Commerce.
1882. A letter from the Director, Office of
Congressional Affairs, Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, transmitting the Commission’s
final rule — Quality Verification For Plate-
Type Uranium-Aluminum Fuel Elements For
Use In Research and Test Reactors Regu-
latory Guide 2.3 received June 4, 2013, pursu-
ant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee
on Energy and Commerce.
1883. A letter from the Acting Assistant
Secretary, Legislative Affairs, Department
of State, transmitting a report on Inter-
national Religious Freedom for 2012; to the
Committee on Foreign Affairs.
1884. A letter from the Acting Director, Of-
fice of Personnel Management, transmitting
the Office’s final rule — Prevailing Rate Sys-
tems; Redefinition of the Minneapolis-St.
Paul, MN, and Southwestern Wisconsin Ap-
propriated Fund Federal Wage System Wage
Areas (RIN: 3206-AM75) received June 6, 2013,
pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Com-
mittee on Oversight and Government Re-
form.
1885. A letter from the Principal Deputy
Assistant Attorney General, Department of
Justice, transmitting the Department’s re-
port on the activities of the Community Re-
lations Service (CRS) for Fiscal Year 2012,
pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 2000g-3; to the Com-
mittee on the Judiciary.
1886. A letter from the Chairman, Surface
Transportation Board, Department of Trans-
portation, transmitting the Department’s
final rule — Assessment of Mediation and
Arbitration Procedures [Docket No.: EP 699]
received June 5, 2013, pursuant to 5 U.S.C.
801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on Transpor-
tation and Infrastructure.
1887. A letter from the Acting Chief, Publi-
cations and Regulation, Internal Revenue
Service, transmitting the Service’s final rule
— Wilson v. Commissioner, 705 F.3d 980 (9th
Cir. 213), aff’g T.C. Memo. 2010-134, pursuant
to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on
Ways and Means.
1888. A letter from the Assistant Director,
Legal Processing Division, Internal Revenue
Service, transmitting the Service’s final rule
— Revenue Procedure: United States and
Area Median Gross Income Figures [Rev.
Proc. 2013-27] received June 6, 2013, pursuant
to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on
Ways and Means.
1889. A letter from the Assistant Director,
Legal Processing Division, Internal Revenue
Service, transmitting the Service’s final rule
— Empowerment Zone Designation Exten-
sion [Notice: 2013-38] received June 6, 2013,
pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Com-
mittee on Ways and Means.
1890. A letter from the Assistant Director,
Legal Processing Division, Internal Revenue
Service, transmitting the Service’s final rule
— Credit for Renewable Electricity Produc-
tion, Refined Coal Production, and Indian
Coal Production, and Publication of Infla-
tion Adjustment Factors and Reference
Process for Calendar Year 2013 [Notice 2013-
33] received June 6, 2013, pursuant to 5 U.S.C.
801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on Ways and
Means.
1891. A letter from the Chief, Publications
and Regulations Branch, Internal Revenue
Service, transmitting the Service’s final rule
— Update of Weighted Average Interest
Rates, Yield Curves, and Segment Rates [No-
tice 2013-37] received June 12, 2013, pursuant
to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on
Ways and Means.
1892. A letter from the Chief, Publications
and Regulations Branch, Internal Revenue
Service, transmitting the Service’s final rule
— Temporary Shelter for Individuals Dis-
placed by Severe Storms and Tornadoes in
Oklahoma [Notice 2013-39] received June 12,
2013, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the
Committee on Ways and Means.
f
REPORTS OF COMMITTEES ON
PUBLIC BILLS AND RESOLUTIONS
Under clause 2 of rule XIII, reports of
committees were delivered to the Clerk
for printing and reference to the proper
calendar, as follows:
Mr. HASTINGS of Washington: Committee
on Natural Resources. H.R. 85. A bill to cre-
ate the Office of Chief Financial Officer of
the Government of the Virgin Islands, and
for other purposes (Rept. 113–110). Referred
to the Committee of the Whole House on the
state of the Union.
Mr. HASTINGS of Washington: Committee
on Natural Resources. H.R. 1169. A bill to di-
rect the Secretary of the Interior to transfer
to the Secretary of the Navy certain Federal
land in Churchill County, Nevada; with an
amendment (Rept. 113–111). Referred to the
Committee of the Whole House on the state
of the Union.
Mr. HASTINGS of Washington: Committee
on Natural Resources. H.R. 1300. A bill to
amend the Fish and Wildlife Act of 1956 to
reauthorize the volunteer programs and com-
munity partnerships for the benefit of na-
tional wildlife refuges, and for other pur-
poses; with an amendment (Rept. 113–112).
Referred to the Committee of the Whole
House on the state of the Union.
Mr. YOUNG of Florida: Committee on Ap-
propriations. H.R. 2397. A bill making appro-
priations for the Department of Defense for
the fiscal year ending September 30, 2014, and
for other purposes (Rept. 113–113). Referred
to the Committee of the Whole House on the
state of the Union.
Ms. FOXX: Committee on Rules. House
Resolution 266. Resolution providing for con-
sideration of the bill (H.R. 1947) to provide
for the reform and continuation of agricul-
tural and other programs of the Department
of Agriculture through fiscal year 2018, and
for other purposes; and providing for consid-
eration of the bill (H.R. 1797) to amend title
18, United States Code, to protect pain-capa-
ble unborn children in the District of Colum-
bia, and for other purposes (Rept. 113–114).
Referred to the House Calendar.
Mr. HASTINGS of Washington: Committee
on Natural Resources. H.R. 1080. A bill to
amend the Sikes Act to promote the use of
cooperative agreements under such Act for
land management related to Department of
Defense readiness activities and to amend
title 10, United States Code, to facilitate
interagency cooperation in conservation pro-
grams to avoid or reduce adverse impacts on
military readiness activities, with an amend-
ment (Rept. 113–115 Pt. 1). Ordered to be
printed.
f
PUBLIC BILLS AND RESOLUTIONS
Under clause 2 of rule XII, public
bills and resolutions of the following
titles were introduced and severally re-
ferred, as follows:
VerDate Mar 15 2010 06:33 Jul 12, 2013 Jkt 079060 PO 00000 Frm 00030 Fmt 7634 Sfmt 0634 E:\RECORD13\RECFILES\H17JN3.REC H17JN3
b
j
n
e
a
l

o
n

D
S
K
4
S
P
T
V
N
1
P
R
O
D

w
i
t
h

C
O
N
G
-
R
E
C
-
O
N
L
I
N
E
CORRECTION
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—HOUSE H3687 June 17, 2013
By Mr. FATTAH:
H.R. 2393. A bill to direct the Secretary of
the Treasury to develop and present to Con-
gress a legislative proposal to establish a
consumption tax; to the Committee on Ways
and Means.
By Mr. GARRETT (for himself, Mr.
BISHOP of Utah, Mr. SOUTHERLAND,
Mr. PEARCE, Mr. HUELSKAMP, Mr.
KING of Iowa, Mr. HUIZENGA of Michi-
gan, Mr. MULVANEY, Mr. LAMALFA,
Mr. PITTENGER, Mr. FRANKS of Ari-
zona, Mr. CHABOT, Mr. POSEY, Mr.
GOHMERT, Mrs. BLACKBURN, Mr.
MULLIN, Mr. CAMPBELL, Mr. BROUN of
Georgia, and Mr. JONES):
H.R. 2394. A bill to allow a State to opt out
of K-12 education grant programs and the re-
quirements of those programs, to amend the
Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide a
credit to taxpayers in such a State, and for
other purposes; to the Committee on Ways
and Means, and in addition to the Committee
on Education and the Workforce, for a period
to be subsequently determined by the Speak-
er, in each case for consideration of such pro-
visions as fall within the jurisdiction of the
committee concerned.
By Mr. HASTINGS of Washington:
H.R. 2395. A bill to provide for donor con-
tribution acknowledgments to be displayed
at projects authorized under the Commemo-
rative Works Act, and for other purposes; to
the Committee on Natural Resources.
By Mr. MCDERMOTT:
H.R. 2396. A bill to amend the Internal Rev-
enue Code of 1986 to establish the Coal Miti-
gation Trust Fund funded by the imposition
of a tax on the extraction of coal, and for
other purposes; to the Committee on Ways
and Means, and in addition to the Committee
on Transportation and Infrastructure, for a
period to be subsequently determined by the
Speaker, in each case for consideration of
such provisions as fall within the jurisdic-
tion of the committee concerned.
By Mr. BISHOP of Utah (for himself,
Mr. GOODLATTE, Mr. SMITH of Texas,
Mr. KING of New York, Mr. CARTER,
Mr. LABRADOR, Mr. HASTINGS of
Washington, and Mr. MCCAUL:
H.R. 2398. A bill to prohibit the Secretaries
of the Interior and Agriculture from taking
action on Federal lands that impede border
security on such lands, and for other pur-
poses; to the Committee on Natural Re-
sources, and in addition to the Committees
on Agriculture, and Homeland Security, for
a period to be subsequently determined by
the Speaker, in each case for consideration
of such provisions as fall within the jurisdic-
tion of the committee concerned.
By Mr. CONYERS (for himself, Mr.
AMASH, Mr. NADLER, Mr. MULVANEY,
Ms. JACKSON LEE, Mr. BROUN of Geor-
gia, Mr. JOHNSON of Georgia, Mr.
DUNCAN of Tennessee, Ms. CHU, Mr.
GRIFFITH of Virginia, Ms. DELBENE,
Mr. JONES, Mr. ENYART, Mr. MASSIE,
Ms. GABBARD, Mr. MCCLINTOCK, Mr.
GRIJALVA, Mr. PEARCE, Mr. HOLT, Mr.
RADEL, Ms. LEE of California, Mr.
SALMON, Mr. MCDERMOTT, Mr. SAN-
FORD, Mr. MCGOVERN, Mr. O’ROURKE,
Mr. POLIS, Ms. SINEMA, Mr. WELCH,
and Ms. LOFGREN):
H.R. 2399. A bill to prevent the mass collec-
tion of records of innocent Americans under
section 501 of the Foreign Intelligence Sur-
veillance Act of 1978, as amended by section
215 of the USA PATRIOT Act, and to provide
for greater accountability and transparency
in the implementation of the USA PATRIOT
Act and the Foreign Intelligence Surveil-
lance Act of 1978; to the Committee on the
Judiciary, and in addition to the Committee
on Intelligence (Permanent Select), for a pe-
riod to be subsequently determined by the
Speaker, in each case for consideration of
such provisions as fall within the jurisdic-
tion of the committee concerned.
By Mrs. CAPPS (for herself, Mr.
HANNA, Mr. DEFAZIO, and Mr. FARR):
H.R. 2400. A bill to amend the Organic
Foods Production Act of 1990 to require rec-
ordkeeping and authorize investigations and
enforcement actions for violations of such
Act, and for other purposes; to the Com-
mittee on Agriculture.
By Mr. COTTON:
H.R. 2401. A bill to authorize the Secretary
of Agriculture and the Secretary of the Inte-
rior to enter into cooperative agreements
with State foresters authorizing State for-
esters to provide certain forest, rangeland,
and watershed restoration and protection
services; to the Committee on Natural Re-
sources, and in addition to the Committee on
Agriculture, for a period to be subsequently
determined by the Speaker, in each case for
consideration of such provisions as fall with-
in the jurisdiction of the committee con-
cerned.
By Mr. DUFFY:
H.R. 2402. A bill to replace the Director of
the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protec-
tion with a five person Commission; to the
Committee on Financial Services.
By Mr. GINGREY of Georgia:
H.R. 2403. A bill to amend the National
Voter Registration Act of 1993 to permit a
State to require an applicant for voter reg-
istration in the State who uses the Federal
mail voter registration application form de-
veloped by the Election Assistance Commis-
sion under such Act to provide additional in-
formation as a condition of the State’s ac-
ceptance of the form; to the Committee on
House Administration.
By Mr. PAULSEN (for himself, Ms.
MCCOLLUM, and Mr. MCGOVERN):
H.R. 2404. A bill to amend the Food and Nu-
trition Act of 2008 to permit providers of eli-
gible food purchasing and delivery services
to be approved as retail food stores that ac-
cept and redeem supplemental nutrition as-
sistance benefits; to the Committee on Agri-
culture.
By Mr. SCOTT of Virginia:
H.R. 2405. A bill to amend chapter 44 of
title 18, United States Code, to clarify the
circumstances under which the enhanced
penalty provisions for subsequent convic-
tions apply; to the Committee on the Judici-
ary.
By Mr. BISHOP of Utah (for himself
and Mr. HASTINGS of Washington):
H. Res. 264. A resolution providing for the
concurrence by the House in the Senate
amendment to H.R. 588, with an amendment;
considered and agreed to.
By Mr. CA
´
RDENAS (for himself, Mr.
TIPTON, Mr. GRIJALVA, Mr. DANNY K.
DAVIS of Illinois, Mr. COFFMAN, Ms.
SHEA-PORTER, Mr. OWENS, Mr. HINO-
JOSA, Ms. MATSUI, Mr. LOEBSACK, Mr.
MICHAUD, Ms. GABBARD, Mr. HIMES,
Mr. KENNEDY, Mr. KILMER, Mr.
VEASEY, Ms. HERRERA BEUTLER, Mrs.
BUSTOS, Ms. DELBENE, Mr. VARGAS,
Mr. LOWENTHAL, Ms. BORDALLO, Ms.
SEWELL of Alabama, Mr. PAYNE, Mr.
KIND, Ms. WILSON of Florida, Mr.
COLLINS of New York, Mr. HASTINGS
of Florida, Mr. MURPHY of Florida,
Ms. SINEMA, Ms. MCCOLLUM, Mr.
COURTNEY, Mr. BARBER, Mr. TAKANO,
Ms. TITUS, Ms. SPEIER, Mr. LUETKE-
MEYER, Mr. CICILLINE, Ms. CLARKE,
and Ms. BONAMICI):
H. Res. 265. A resolution honoring the en-
trepreneurial spirit of small business con-
cerns in the United States during National
Small Business Week, which begins on June
17, 2013; to the Committee on Small Busi-
ness.
By Mr. MCDERMOTT (for himself, Mr.
LARSEN of Washington, Mr. SMITH of
Washington, Ms. DELBENE, Mr. KIL-
MER, Mr. HECK of Washington, and
Ms. HERRERA BEUTLER):
H. Res. 267. A resolution congratulating
the University of Washington Huskies’ Men’s
Crew Team for winning the 2013 Intercolle-
giate Rowing Association National Cham-
pionship; to the Committee on Education
and the Workforce.
By Ms. JACKSON LEE (for herself, Mr.
GENE GREEN of Texas, Mr.
BUTTERFIELD, Mr. HASTINGS of Flor-
ida, Mr. MCGOVERN, Ms. LORETTA
SANCHEZ of California, Ms. ROYBAL-
ALLARD, Ms. KELLY of Illinois, Ms.
BROWN of Florida, Mr. CARSON of In-
diana, Mr. CUELLAR, Mr. O’ROURKE,
Mr. JEFFRIES, Mr. BECERRA, Mr.
HINOJOSA, Mr. DOGGETT, Ms.
WASSERMAN SCHULTZ, Mr. KENNEDY,
Mr. LEWIS, Ms. BASS, Ms. SEWELL of
Alabama, Mr. CLYBURN, Mr. BISHOP of
Georgia, Mr. CONYERS, Ms. WATERS,
Mr. COHEN, Mr. CASTRO of Texas, Mr.
RANGEL, Ms. WILSON of Florida, Mr.
CUMMINGS, Mr. AL GREEN of Texas,
Mr. POE of Texas, Ms. PELOSI, Ms.
LEE of California, Ms. CLARKE, Ms.
NORTON, Mr. PAYNE, Mr. MEEKS, and
Mr. HORSFORD):
H. Res. 268. A resolution observing the his-
torical significance of Juneteenth Independ-
ence Day; to the Committee on Oversight
and Government Reform.
f
MEMORIALS
Under clause 3 of rule XII, memorials
were presented and referred as follows:
53. The SPEAKER presented a memorial of
the House of Representatives of the Com-
monwealth of Massachusetts, relative to a
House Resolution recognizing the 65th Infan-
try Regiment known as the Borinqueneers;
to the Committee on Financial Services.
54. Also, a memorial of the Legislature of
the State of Indiana, relative to House Con-
current Resolution No. 51 urging the Presi-
dent and the Congress to repeal the excise
tax on medical devices; to the Committee on
Ways and Means.
55. Also, a memorial of the House of Rep-
resentatives of the State of Indiana, relative
to House Concurrent Resolution No. 51 urg-
ing the President and the Congress to repeal
the excise tax on medical devices; to the
Committee on Ways and Means.
f
PRIVATE BILLS AND
RESOLUTIONS
Under clause 3 of rule XII,
Mr. RANGEL introduced a bill (H.R. 2406)
for the relief of Daniel Wachira; which was
referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
f
CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITY
STATEMENT
Pursuant to clause 7 of rule XII of
the Rules of the House of Representa-
tives, the following statements are sub-
mitted regarding the specific powers
granted to Congress in the Constitu-
tion to enact the accompanying bill or
joint resolution.
By Mr. FATTAH:
H.R. 2393.
Congress has the power to enact this legis-
lation pursuant to the following:
The Congress shall have Power to lay and
collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises,
to pay the Debts and provide for the common
Defence and general Welfare of the United
States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises
shall be uniform throughout the United
States.
VerDate Mar 15 2010 06:33 Jul 12, 2013 Jkt 079060 PO 00000 Frm 00031 Fmt 7634 Sfmt 0634 E:\RECORD13\RECFILES\H17JN3.REC H17JN3
b
j
n
e
a
l

o
n

D
S
K
4
S
P
T
V
N
1
P
R
O
D

w
i
t
h

C
O
N
G
-
R
E
C
-
O
N
L
I
N
E
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—HOUSE H3688 June 17, 2013
By Mr. GARRETT:
H.R. 2394.
Congress has the power to enact this legis-
lation pursuant to the following:
The Tenth Amendment to the Constitu-
tion: ‘‘The powers not delegated to the
United States by the Constitution, nor pro-
hibited by it to the States, are reserved to
the States respectively, or to the people.’’
By Mr. HASTINGS of Washington:
H.R. 2395.
Congress has the power to enact this legis-
lation pursuant to the following:
Article IV, Section 3, Clause 2
The Congress shall have Power to dispose
of and make all needful Rules and Regula-
tions respecting the Territory or other Prop-
erty belonging to the United States; and
nothing in this Constitution shall be so con-
strued as to Prejudice any Claims of the
United States, or of any particular State.
By Mr. MCDERMOTT:
H.R. 2396.
Congress has the power to enact this legis-
lation pursuant to the following:
Clause 1 of Section 8 of Article 1 of the
United States Constitution
By Mr. YOUNG of Florida:
H.R. 2397.
Congress has the power to enact this legis-
lation pursuant to the following:
The principal constitutional authority for
this legislation is clause 7 of section 9 of ar-
ticle I of the Constitution of the United
States (the appropriation power), which
states: ‘‘No Money shall be drawn from the
Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropria-
tions made by Law . . . .’’ In addition, clause
1 of section 8 of article I of the Constitution
(the spending power) provides: ‘‘The Con-
gress shall have the Power . . . to pay the
Debts and provide for the common Defence
and general Welfare of the United States
. . . .’’ Together, these specific constitu-
tional provisions establish the congressional
power of the purse, granting Congress the
authority to appropriate funds, to determine
their purpose, amount, and period of avail-
ability, and to set forth terms and conditions
governing their use.
By Mr. BISHOP of Utah:
H.R. 2398.
Congress has the power to enact this legis-
lation pursuant to the following:
The constitutional authority of Congress
to enact this legislation is provided by Arti-
cle IV, section 3, clause 2 (relating to the
power of Congress to dispose of and make all
needful rules and regulations respecting the
territory or other property belonging to the
United States), and Clause 1 of Article 1,
Section 8, which grants Congress the author-
ity to provide for the common defense and
general welfare of the United States, and
Clause 18 of Article 1 Section 8, which allows
the authority to make laws deemed nec-
essary and proper.
By Mr. CONYERS:
H.R. 2399.
Congress has the power to enact this legis-
lation pursuant to the following:
Article I, Section 8, clauses 1, 3, and 18 of
the Constitution of the United States.
By Mrs. CAPPS:
H.R. 2400.
Congress has the power to enact this legis-
lation pursuant to the following:
Article 1, Section 8, Clause 3
By Mr. COTTON:
H.R. 2401.
Congress has the power to enact this legis-
lation pursuant to the following:
Article 4, section 3, clause 2
‘‘The Congress shall have power to dispose
of and make all needful Rules and Regula-
tions respecting the territory or other prop-
erty belonging to the United States; and
nothing in this Constitution shall be so con-
strued as to Prejudice any Claims of the
United States, or of any particular State.’’
By Mr. DUFFY:
H.R. 2402.
Congress has the power to enact this legis-
lation pursuant to the following:
Article 1, Section 8, Clause 1 (related to
the general welfare of the United States);
and
Article I, Section 8, Clause 3 (related to the
power to regulate interstate commerce).
By Mr. GINGREY of Georgia:
H.R. 2403.
Congress has the power to enact this legis-
lation pursuant to the following:
Article I, Section 4, Clause 1 of the Con-
stitution states that ‘‘The Times, Places and
Manner of holding Elections for Senators
and Representatives shall be prescribed in
each State by the Legislature thereof; but
the Congress may at any time by Law make
or alter such Regulations, except as to the
Places of choosing Senators.’’
By Mr. PAULSEN:
H.R. 2404.
Congress has the power to enact this legis-
lation pursuant to the following:
Article 1 Section 8
By Mr. SCOTT of Virginia:
H.R. 2405.
Congress has the power to enact this legis-
lation pursuant to the following:
Article I, Section 8, Clause 3 of the Con-
stitution.
Mr. RANGEL:
H.R. 2406.
Congress has the power to enact this legis-
lation pursuant to the following:
Congress has the power to enact this legis-
lation pursuant to the following: Section 8 of
Article I of the Constitution.
f
ADDITIONAL SPONSORS
Under clause 7 of rule XII, sponsors
were added to public bills and resolu-
tions as follows:
H.R. 5: Mr. SALMON.
H.R. 127: Mr. COLE, Mr. PEARCE, Mr. CUL-
BERSON, Mr. COTTON, Mrs. BACHMANN, Mr.
WEBER of Texas, Mr. HALL, Mr. LAMALFA,
Mr. WILSON of South Carolina, Mr. KING of
Iowa, Mr. MCHENRY, Mr. GRIFFIN of Arkan-
sas, and Mr. STUTZMAN.
H.R. 164: Mr. ISRAEL.
H.R. 279: Mr. KLINE.
H.R. 309: Mr. RODNEY DAVIS of Illinois, Mr.
GRIFFIN of Arkansas, Mr. POSEY, and Mr.
YOUNG of Indiana.
H.R. 310: Ms. BROWNLEY of California.
H.R. 351: Ms. SINEMA.
H.R. 411: Ms. HAHN.
H.R. 455: Mr. CONNOLLY and Mrs. CAROLYN
B. MALONEY of New York.
H.R. 475: Mr. RANGEL.
H.R. 523: Mr. HIGGINS.
H.R. 533: Mr. PEARCE.
H.R. 685: Mr. HIGGINS, Mr. BARLETTA, and
Mr. PASCRELL.
H.R. 693: Mrs. BEATTY, Ms. LEE of Cali-
fornia, and Mr. TIBERI.
H.R. 702: Mr. POCAN, Mr. STIVERS, and Mr.
HASTINGS of Florida.
H.R. 713: Mr. JOYCE, Mr. CUMMINGS, Mr.
WILSON of South Carolina, Mr. DESANTIS, Mr.
SWALWELL of California, and Mr. DENT.
H.R. 721: Ms. DELBENE.
H.R. 725: Ms. HAHN.
H.R. 741: Mr. TIERNEY, Mr. HASTINGS of
Florida, Mr. JONES, and Mr. POCAN.
H.R. 755: Mr. GRAVES of Missouri, Mr. LAB-
RADOR, Mr. PASCRELL, Mr. DENT, Mr. GOOD-
LATTE, Mr. MCHENRY, Mr. HUNTER, Mr. YAR-
MUTH, and Mr. BERA of California.
H.R. 830: Mr. VISCLOSKY.
H.R. 838: Ms. WILSON of Florida.
H.R. 904: Mr. PETRI and Mr. WESTMORELAND
H.R. 924: Mrs. BEATTY.
H.R. 925: Mr. GRIMM.
H.R. 938: Mr. VAN HOLLEN, Mr. TERRY, Mr.
STUTZMAN, Ms. CLARKE, and Mr. ALEXANDER.
H.R. 1009: Mr. MCINTYRE.
H.R. 1101: Mr. ANDREWS.
H.R. 1146: Mr. JOHNSON of Ohio.
H.R. 1150: Mr. MARKEY, Mr. HUFFMAN, Mr.
RUSH, and Mr. MCGOVERN.
H.R. 1151: Mr. BARLETTA, Mr. MILLER of
Florida, and Ms. WILSON of Florida.
H.R. 1250: Mr. RAHALL.
H.R. 1309: Mr. THOMPSON of California.
H.R. 1319: Mr. VELA.
H.R. 1389: Mr. KEATING.
H.R. 1395: Mrs. CAPPS.
H.R. 1416: Mr. YOUNG of Alaska.
H.R. 1421: Mr. BERA of California.
H.R. 1427: Mr. PAYNE.
H.R. 1437: Mr. TIERNEY.
H.R. 1450: Mr. GRAYSON.
H.R. 1466: Mr. CONYERS, Mr. MEEKS, and
Mr. TIERNEY.
H.R. 1507: Mr. RUPPERSBERGER and Mr. HIG-
GINS.
H.R. 1508: Mr. MCGOVERN.
H.R. 1518: Mr. LEVIN.
H.R. 1528: Mr. POCAN.
H.R. 1563: Mr. HUIZENGA of Michigan and
Mr. MICA.
H.R. 1619: Mr. ISRAEL.
H.R. 1620: Mr. GRIJALVA.
H.R. 1717: Mr. PERLMUTTER, Mr. COHEN, and
Mr. RADEL.
H.R. 1731: Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ, Mr.
KEATING, Mr. LANCE, Mr. MCDERMOTT, Mr.
LOWENTHAL, Mr. MEEKS, Mr. LOBIONDO, Mr.
GARAMENDI, Mrs. LOWEY, and Ms. SINEMA.
H.R. 1763: Mr. BERA of California and Mr.
KEATING.
H.R. 1771: Mr. SMITH of New Jersey, Mr.
MICA, Mr. GOHMERT, Mr. DEUTCH, and Mr.
PETERSON.
H.R. 1825: Mr. FLEISCHMANN and Mr. SHU-
STER.
H.R. 1830: Mr. DUFFY and Mr. NOLAN.
H.R. 1843: Ms. HAHN.
H.R. 1845: Mr. LOWENTHAL.
H.R. 1851: Ms. WILSON of Florida.
H.R. 1852: Mr. DEFAZIO, Mr. MICHAUD, Mr.
CAPUANO, Mr. WELCH, and Mr. LONG.
H.R. 1871: Mr. MESSER.
H.R. 1874: Mr. ROKITA.
H.R. 1877: Mr. PETRI and Mr. PASCRELL.
H.R. 1896: Mr. BUCHANAN.
H.R. 1918: Mr. MAFFEI.
H.R. 1920: Mr. MICHAUD, Mr. CUELLAR, Mr.
RUPPERSBERGER, Mr. RAHALL, and Mr. AN-
DREWS.
H.R. 1933: Mr. RYAN of Ohio.
H.R. 1971: Mr. JOHNSON of Ohio.
H.R. 1995: Mr. CONNOLLY.
H.R. 2009: Mr. JOHNSON of Ohio.
H.R. 2016: Mr. COLE.
H.R. 2019: Mrs. BROOKS of Indiana and Mr.
SCHOCK.
H.R. 2022: Mrs. WAGNER.
H.R. 2032: Ms. SCHAKOWSKY.
H.R. 2033: Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of
exas and Ms. CLARKE.
H.R. 2053: Mr. RAHALL and Mr. GUTHRIE.
H.R. 2089: Mr. SALMON.
H.R. 2094: Mr. CASSIDY.
H.R. 2122: Mr. GRIFFIN of Arkansas and Mr.
BARR.
H.R. 2123: Ms. SCHAKOWSKY.
H.R. 2150: Mr. SWALWELL of California, Mr.
COSTA, Mr. VALADAO, Mr. POCAN, and Mr.
O’ROUKE.
H.R. 2160: Mr. PAYNE and Ms. WILSON of
Florida.
H.R. 2182: Mr. O’ROURKE.
H.R. 2194: Mr. LATHAM.
H.R. 2239: Mr. GRAVES of Georgia.
H.R. 2252: Mr. HIMES, Mr. ANDREWS, and
Mr. PIERLUISI.
H.R. 2273: Mr. LEVIN.
VerDate Mar 15 2010 06:33 Jul 12, 2013 Jkt 079060 PO 00000 Frm 00032 Fmt 7634 Sfmt 0634 E:\RECORD13\RECFILES\H17JN3.REC H17JN3
b
j
n
e
a
l

o
n

D
S
K
4
S
P
T
V
N
1
P
R
O
D

w
i
t
h

C
O
N
G
-
R
E
C
-
O
N
L
I
N
E
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—HOUSE H3689 June 17, 2013
H.R. 2288: Mrs. CAPPS.
H.R. 2300: Mr. SALMON and Mr. COFFMAN.
H.R. 2310: Mr. KEATING, Ms. BORDALLO, and
Mr. ENYART.
H.R. 2319: Mr. KIRKPATRICK.
H.R. 2329: Mr. GRIFFIN of Arkansas.
H.R. 2375: Mr. POSEY, MS. ROS-LEHTINEN,
Mr. RUPPERSBERGER, Mr. ROONEY, and Mr.
BARLETTA.
H. Con. Res. 24: Mr. HURT.
H. Res. 35: Mr. LAMALFA, Mr. NEUGEBAUER,
Mr. CALVERT, Mr. PERRY, Mr. CONAWAY, Mr.
DAINES, Ms. JENKINS, Mr. POSEY, Mr.
CRAMER, Mr. GUTHRIE, Mr. FORBES, Mr.
YODER, Mr. SAM JOHNSON of Texas, Mr.
HULTGREN, Mr. DUNCAN of Tennessee, Mr.
ROONEY, Mr. TIBERI, Mr. WHITFIELD, Mr.
SIMPSON, Mr. BILIRAKIS, Mr. SMITH of New
Jersey, Mr. MURPHY of Pennsylvania, Mrs.
ELLMERS, Mr. HECK of Nevada, and Mr.
KINZINGER of Illinois.
H. Res. 36: Mr. YODER.
H. Res. 97: Mr. NOLAN.
H. Res. 109: Mr. PITTS and Ms. LOFGREN.
H. Res. 112: Mr. GALLEGO, Mrs. LOWEY, and
Ms. WILSON of Florida.
H. Res. 211: Mr. BLUMENAUER.
H. Res. 213: Mr. HECK of Washington.
H. Res. 220: Mr. MCNERNEY and Mr.
HUFFMAN.
H. Res. 248: Ms. JACKSON LEE.
VerDate Mar 15 2010 06:33 Jul 12, 2013 Jkt 079060 PO 00000 Frm 00033 Fmt 7634 Sfmt 0634 E:\RECORD13\RECFILES\H17JN3.REC H17JN3
b
j
n
e
a
l

o
n

D
S
K
4
S
P
T
V
N
1
P
R
O
D

w
i
t
h

C
O
N
G
-
R
E
C
-
O
N
L
I
N
E
Congressional Record
U
NUM
E PLURIB
U
S
United States
of America PROCEEDINGS AND DEBATES OF THE
113
th
CONGRESS, FIRST SESSION
? This ‘‘bullet’’ symbol identifies statements or insertions which are not spoken by a Member of the Senate on the floor.
.
S4497
Vol. 159 WASHINGTON, MONDAY, JUNE 17, 2013 No. 86
Senate
The Senate met at 2 p.m. and was
called to order by the President pro
tempore (Mr. LEAHY).
PRAYER
The Chaplain, Dr. Barry C. Black, of-
fered the following prayer:
Let us pray.
O Omnipotent Sovereign God, be-
neath whose all-seeing eye our mortal
lives are passed, may all our deeds and
purposes today bring honor to You.
Lord, save us from pride and arrogance,
and help us to be quick to see the needs
of those less fortunate than ourselves
and promote goodwill and fellowship
among all people.
Today, bless our lawmakers. Let
their motives be transparent and their
word be their bond. May they be gen-
erous in their judgment of others, loyal
in their friendships, and magnanimous
to their opponents.
Sovereign God, let every knee be
bent before You and every tongue con-
fess that You are Lord.
We pray in Your great Name. Amen.
f
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
The President pro tempore led the
Pledge of Allegiance, as follows:
I pledge allegiance to the Flag of the
United States of America, and to the Repub-
lic for which it stands, one nation under God,
indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.
f
RESERVATION OF LEADER TIME
The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Under
the previous order, leadership time is
reserved.
f
RECOGNITION OF THE MAJORITY
LEADER
The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The
majority leader is recognized.
f
SCHEDULE
Mr. REID. Mr. President, following
leader remarks the Senate will be in
morning business until 5 p.m. today.
At 5 p.m. the Senate will be in execu-
tive session to consider a couple nomi-
nations for United States district
judges. One is for Pennsylvania and one
is for New Mexico. At 5:30 p.m. there
will be at least one rollcall vote on the
confirmation of the nominations. The
Restrepo and Gonzales nominations are
the two nominations we have. Restrepo
is from Pennsylvania and Gonzales is
from New Mexico.
Following those votes, the Senate
will resume consideration of the immi-
gration bill.
f
BUDGET CONFERENCE
Mr. REID. Mr. President, it has been
86 days since the Senate passed its
budget. We have been through this on
several occasions. We have had Repub-
lican Senators come and criticize the
Republican leadership here for not let-
ting us go to conference. They talked
about their wanting regular order so
we could move forward in dealing with
the financial crisis facing this country,
but they have ignored us.
We are proud of the budget we
passed. It was hard, but it reflects our
priorities: protecting middle-class fam-
ilies and growing the economy. Even
though that is the case, we are still
willing to work out a compromise with
our Republican counterparts.
We are not going to get everything
we want. That is what conferences are
all about. They have been going on in
this country for more than two cen-
turies. But we believe our sound fiscal
policy would stand out as being so
much better than what they have done
in the House. We could do this through
the regular order of the budget process.
Unfortunately, Democrats and Repub-
licans are not going to find common
ground if we never start negotiating.
As I said, for 86 days Republican lead-
ers have objected to a conference with
the House of Representatives. In con-
ference, Democrats and Republicans
could work together to work out our
differences—differences between our
budgets as well as our priorities. But
Senate Republicans have objected to a
conference time and time again.
Today, I read in the Hill newspaper
called Politico that the House Repub-
licans are more than happy for their
Senate colleagues to obstruct and
delay. They know a budget conference
would only put the spotlight on divi-
sions within the House Republican cau-
cus. Here is what the article said:
Going to conference to match the House
and Senate-passed budgets—or making any
movement on the budget right now—could
open up a schism in the [Republican] caucus
on spending that for months leadership has
managed to keep mostly at bay.
So what they are saying is the Re-
publican leadership over here is pro-
tecting the House. The House Repub-
lican leadership understands they can-
not agree on anything—nothing. There-
fore, objecting to this is the right thing
to do because they will never get out in
the open as to how crazy their budget
priorities are.
But as Senate Republicans cover for
their dysfunctional House colleagues,
the country inches closer to another
crisis: a default on the Nation’s bills.
Reasonable Republicans are just as
concerned as I am about this last man-
ufactured crisis—a crisis that would
undercut the economic progress of the
last 4 years. Those reasonable Repub-
licans have come to the floor repeat-
edly to call on Republican leaders to
stop blocking bipartisan budget nego-
tiations. I hope those reasonable Re-
publicans prevail. I hope Republican
leaders in the House and in the Senate
will stop bowing to tea party extrem-
ists and listen to the more reasonable
Members of their caucus.
I repeat, Republican Senators have
arrived here on the floor on more than
one occasion and criticized our not
being able to go to conference. So if
past is prologue, using the full faith
and credit of the U.S. Government as a
political hostage will not only be bad
VerDate Mar 15 2010 00:42 Jun 18, 2013 Jkt 029060 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 E:\CR\FM\A17JN6.000 S17JNPT1
p
w
a
l
k
e
r

o
n

D
S
K
7
T
P
T
V
N
1
P
R
O
D

w
i
t
h

S
E
N
A
T
E
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE S4498 June 17, 2013
for the economy, it will also be bad for
the Republican Party.
It is time Republican leaders ac-
knowledge that compromise—not reck-
less brinkmanship—will put America
on the road to fiscal responsibility.
f
IMMIGRATION REFORM
Mr. REID. Mr. President, for 16 years,
Blanca Gamez thought she was an av-
erage American girl. But when she
turned 16, one by one her friends
learned to drive. Her parents sat her
down and explained an important truth
she did not know at the time: She
could not get her driver’s license be-
cause she is an undocumented immi-
grant.
Blanca’s parents brought her from
Mexico to the United States when she
was 7 months old. Because they came
without proper paperwork, she was
missing something really important.
Blanca’s parents told her: ‘‘You need
nine numbers.’’ That refers to a Social
Security number, which she did not
have. A Social Security number—those
nine numbers—opens doors to Amer-
ican citizens, which American citizens
take for granted.
I had an opportunity to visit with
Blanca when I was in Las Vegas re-
cently. She is a young woman with ev-
erything going for her. She is smart,
she is driven, and she loves this coun-
try with a passion that is truly mov-
ing. In fact, she does not remember the
country she was born in, Mexico. She
was 7 months old when she came here.
To her home means Nevada. That is
our State song: ‘‘Home Means Nevada.’’
And home certainly means Nevada to
this young woman.
Unfortunately, without a Social Se-
curity number—those nine numbers—
Blanca faced challenges her American-
born peers simply did not.
But all that changed a year ago this
week when President Obama signed a
directive suspending deportation of up-
standing young people such as Blanca
who were brought to this country as
children. As a result, she now has her
nine numbers.
Almost 300,000 DREAMers—undocu-
mented immigrants who came to this
country as children—have already
taken advantage of this opportunity.
Thanks to President Obama’s coura-
geous action, Blanca and hundreds of
thousands of upstanding young men
and women like her can rest easier
knowing they are no longer in danger
of being deported. They can now drive,
they can work, and they can get the
nine numbers that unlock a successful
future—I repeat: a Social Security
number.
Blanca’s future—and the future of
800,000 young DREAMers—will remain
uncertain until Congress passes com-
monsense immigration reform. Presi-
dent Obama’s directive is only a tem-
porary solution.
The Republican majority in the
House of Representatives has taken
aim at the DREAMers, voting recently
to resume deportation of promising
young people such as Blanca.
The directive does not address the 10
million people living in this country
without the proper documentation who
do not qualify for deferred action.
Many of these individuals are the par-
ents or siblings of DREAMers such as
Blanca. The bipartisan legislation be-
fore the Senate is the opportunity they
have been waiting for. This bill offers a
pathway to earned citizenship that be-
gins by going to the back of the line,
paying penalties and fines, working,
paying taxes, staying out of trouble,
learning English, getting right with
the law.
The measure will be good for na-
tional security, it will be great for the
economy, and it will be good for mil-
lions of immigrant families.
The bill is not perfect, but it takes
important steps to reform our broken
legal immigration system and
strengthen border security.
I know many of my colleagues have
ideas about how to improve this bill. I
hope we will be able to process addi-
tional amendments soon so we can give
these ideas the debate they deserve
here in the Senate and, after that, of
course, the votes they deserve.
We have five amendments pending.
We could vote on four of them right
away. I also think it would be fair to
add the Heller amendment. That would
mean three Republican amendments
and two Democratic amendments.
My colleagues should be aware, un-
less we begin voting on amendments
soon, we will need to work through the
weekend in order to finish the bill be-
fore July 4.
Recognizing that this is a Nation
founded by immigrants, I hope Sen-
ators will consider every amendment
to this bill with compassion. Like gen-
erations before them, Blanca’s parents
and millions of other undocumented
immigrants came here seeking a better
life. The famous author C.S. Lewis
said:
You are never too old . . . to dream a new
dream.
It is time for Congress to help 11 mil-
lion dreamers—young and old—get
right with the law and unlock their po-
tential.
f
MORNING BUSINESS
Mr. REID. Would the Chair announce
the business of the day, please.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. MUR-
PHY). Under the previous order, the
Senate will be in a period of morning
business until 5 o’clock p.m., with Sen-
ators permitted to speak therein for up
to 10 minutes each.
The Senator from Vermont.
f
COMMENDING THE MAJORITY
LEADER
Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, as al-
ways, I commend the distinguished ma-
jority leader for his words on immigra-
tion reform. We are on this bill because
he set this time aside, and he, like I,
hopes we will soon be voting on amend-
ments. There are a lot of potential
amendments, just as we had 300 amend-
ments filed in the Senate Judiciary
Committee. We were able to work
through them. I know we do not expect
that many here on the floor, but I
know the leader has set aside time for
us, and I know his commitment to get
this filed and fulfilled, and I joined him
on that. I think the time is right. We
either do it now or we are never going
to do it.
So I thank the leader again.
f
MANDATORY MINIMUM
SENTENCES
Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, there are
two matters I want to talk about. Be-
fore I speak about the immigration, I
want to speak about the Supreme
Court ruling today in Alleyne v. the
United States, that facts underlying
mandatory minimum sentences must
be proved to a jury beyond a reasonable
doubt.
I continue to believe our criminal
justice system’s reliance on mandatory
minimum sentences is a mistake.
In March, Senator PAUL and I intro-
duced the Justice Safety Valve Act of
2013, to give Federal judges greater
flexibility in sentencing in cases where
a mandatory minimum is not only un-
necessary but often counterproductive.
Mandatory minimum sentences im-
prison some people, particularly non-
violent offenders, for far longer than is
just or beneficial.
Looking at it just from a fiscal point
of view, as a result of mandatory mini-
mums the Federal prison population
has exploded in recent years. This has
placed enormous strain on the Justice
Department’s budget. That means less
money for Federal law enforcement,
less aid to State and local law enforce-
ment, less funding for crime prevention
programs that make us safer, plus less
money for prisoner reentry programs.
Sentencing reform has worked at the
State level. The Justice Safety Valve
Act is an important step toward the
sentencing reform our Federal system
desperately needs. I applaud the Su-
preme Court decision today in Alleyne.
I have long felt that when legislative
bodies pass mandatory minimums, it is
a feel-good response to crime, but it
does no good.
Judges need discretion. Every case
that comes before a judge is different.
Now, do judges always get it right out
of the tens of thousands of cases that
come before them? No. Of course not.
Sometimes they might not, but they
are far more often right than wrong.
They are always more right than a leg-
islative one-size-fits-all approach. Man-
datory minimum laws are one size fits
all. Anybody who has spent time in the
criminal justice system either as a de-
fense counsel or as a prosecutor or as a
judge knows that one size does not fit
all. We should get rid of all of our man-
datory minimums, have real standards
VerDate Mar 15 2010 00:42 Jun 18, 2013 Jkt 029060 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 E:\CR\FM\G17JN6.003 S17JNPT1
p
w
a
l
k
e
r

o
n

D
S
K
7
T
P
T
V
N
1
P
R
O
D

w
i
t
h

S
E
N
A
T
E
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE S4499 June 17, 2013
that judges will follow, and then let
the individual men and woman who sit
on the bench make the decision.
f
IMMIGRATION REFORM
Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, as we
continue yet another week debating S.
744, the bipartisan immigration bill, I
hope we can start making some
progress on this vital legislation. The
American people know what some of us
have to realize: our immigration sys-
tem is broken; it has to be fixed. If we
are going to have an effective solution
to this complex problem, we cannot
focus simply and effectively on one
border or any single aspect of our im-
migration system. We have to address
all parts of our immigration system.
Of course, we all agree we have to se-
cure our borders, but we must also re-
duce the incentives people have to
come here illegally or to overstay their
visas. It means we have to implement
E-Verify so employers stop hiring
those who are not authorized to work
here. We also have to eliminate the ex-
tensive backlogs that tear so many
families apart.
We have to respond to the needs of
American farmers and technology com-
panies and investors who create jobs in
this country. We also need to remem-
ber that our history and the future of
the Nation is based on immigrants
when we are considering the legaliza-
tion process provided in this bill.
Almost 4 weeks ago the Judiciary
Committee voted to report this immi-
gration reform bill with a strong bipar-
tisan vote of 13 to 5. I understand the
Congressional Budget Office’s task is a
difficult one, with complex, com-
prehensive measures such as this. We
expected their score today. I hope they
are able to get the official score early
tomorrow so we can move forward and
complete consideration of this bill. As
we closed out each title during our ex-
tended mark ups, we forwarded the
text to the CBO, so they have had the
border security title and the non-immi-
grant visa title for well over a month.
I look forward to reviewing their anal-
ysis when we receive it.
In addition to the CBO score we are
awaiting, we should also credit the ex-
tensive testimony the Judiciary Com-
mittee received from former CBO Di-
rector Douglas Holtz-Eakin. He testi-
fied that immigration reform ‘‘will in-
crease the productivity growth in the
U.S. economy, the fundamental build-
ing block of higher standards of living,
and generate larger economic growth
numbers than we have seen in recent
years.’’
Specifically, he estimated reform of
this nature would increase growth so
that ‘‘the overall growth rate and real
GDP would rise from 3 percent to 3.9
percent, on average annually, over the
first 10 years. The upshot of GDP after
10 years would be higher—a difference
of $64,700 per capita versus $62,900 per
capita. This higher per capita income
of $1,700 after 10 years is a core benefit
of immigration reform.’’
According to Holtz-Eakin this in-
crease in growth would also help lower
our deficit. In fact, he testified that
‘‘Over 10 years an additional 0.1 per-
centage in average economic growth
will reduce the federal deficit by a bit
over $300 billion. In this context, the
rules imply that over the first 10 years
of the benchmark immigration reform
the federal deficit would be reduced by
a cumulative amount of $2.7 trillion.’’
Also, the Judiciary Committee re-
ceived powerful testimony from Grover
Norquist. He was asked repeatedly by
those who oppose this bill whether le-
galizing immigrants would lead to a
drain on our safety net. His response
was that just the opposite would occur.
He testified that ‘‘immigrants come at
the beginning of their working lives,
which means they will have years to
pay taxes and contribute to the econ-
omy before being eligible for entitle-
ments.’’ Furthermore, Mr. Norquist
testified that ‘‘Some argue that the fis-
cal burden of America’s entitlement
programs make more immigration cost
prohibitive. That is a false choice. That
our entitlement systems are broken is
not an argument for less immigration;
it is an argument to fix our entitle-
ment systems.’’
It is not every day that I agree with
these very conservative commentators
and advocates, but I was happy to in-
vite them to testify before the com-
mittee and commend their analysis to
Members who are concerned about the
approximate ‘cost’ of reforming our
broken immigration system. All the
valid testimony—all the valid testi-
mony we received says that fixing the
broken immigration system adds to
our bottom line in a beneficial way.
One of the hallmarks of this country
is how we have historically treated
those who have sought shelter and ref-
uge on our shores. America protects
the most vulnerable among us. This in-
cludes survivors of domestic violence
and human trafficking, as well as preg-
nant women and children. I am proud
to report that there are strong protec-
tions in this bill for the treatment of
children caught in the broken immi-
gration enforcement system.
In the Judiciary Committee we added
to those protections for domestic vio-
lence and human trafficking victims.
But the Judiciary Committee also con-
sidered and rejected, as it should, sev-
eral amendments that sought to take
away protections in our safety net pro-
grams for immigrants who need them.
I know some may want to punish the 11
million undocumented people currently
living here in the shadows. The bill
specifically contains a steep financial
penalty for that purpose. The undocu-
mented also need to go to the back of
the line and take classes to learn
English, but even these tough steps are
not enough for those who oppose this
bipartisan bill.
While some may want to look like
they are being even tougher on the un-
documented population, we all need to
consider how further punitive measures
may deter people from coming out of
the shadows. When children and preg-
nant women are put at risk by an urge
to punish millions of people who are
trying to make a better life for their
families, as my grandparents did, we do
not live up to our American values and
we do not make this a safer country.
Last week, Senator HATCH filed several
amendments to deny or delay protec-
tions for the millions of people who
apply for registered provisional immi-
grant status. I will oppose all of those
amendments. They are not fair. They
deter people from coming forward to
register. That makes us all less safe.
It is a cruel irony when my friends on
the other side of the aisle talk about
border security, the high cost of imple-
menting their proposed measures is al-
ways absent from the discussion. But
when we are talking about programs
that help children who live near the
poverty line, well, then suddenly fiscal
concerns are paramount.
So if we are talking about a specific
type of fencing, or a new expensive exit
program, our concern is supposed to
trump any hesitancy about govern-
ment spending. Spend whatever it
takes. Spend whatever it takes, and at
the same time dramatically increase
the boon that their proposals give to
the government contracting firms that
make money off of them.
However, if we are talking about pro-
grams literally to feed the hungry or
provide vaccinations to children, vac-
cinations which make us all healthier
because of the disease it stops, then we
hear lectures as to how we cannot af-
ford those programs in the current fis-
cal environment. Maybe some of these
contractors with their lobbyists ought
to be covering those programs. Maybe
we will hear more need for them.
I would say from a moral point of
view, as an indication of how great a
country we are, we ought to be saying:
Hungry children, children who can be
saved from childhood illnesses, it is in
our moral core as a Nation, the most
wealthy, powerful Nation on Earth to
help them. The bill we are considering
prohibits immigrants in registered pro-
visional immigrant status from access-
ing Federal means-tested public benefit
programs throughout their time in pro-
visional status.
In addition, as a result of the Per-
sonal Responsibility and Work Oppor-
tunity Reconciliation Act of 1996, even
qualified legal permanent resident im-
migrants must wait an additional 5
years after they are legalized to re-
ceive any safety net protections. We
have already put all kinds of barriers
up here.
So including the 5-year bar, most im-
migrants who are working their way
through the path to legalization will
have to wait anywhere from 13 to 15
years before having any access to safe-
ty net programs. Given the penalties
and the fines they have to pay, it is
wrong to further deny these low-in-
come families protection that some
may desperately need.
VerDate Mar 15 2010 00:42 Jun 18, 2013 Jkt 029060 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 E:\CR\FM\G17JN6.005 S17JNPT1
p
w
a
l
k
e
r

o
n

D
S
K
7
T
P
T
V
N
1
P
R
O
D

w
i
t
h

S
E
N
A
T
E
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE S4500 June 17, 2013
We have seen amendments that try
to designate an immigrant a ‘‘public
charge’’ and thus deportable simply be-
cause the individual’s child received
health or nutrition benefits. If a child
is an American citizen, would we really
want that child’s parents deported sim-
ply because the child needed food
stamps while the parent was in provi-
sional status?
We should protect the children of im-
migrants and their families. In 2009,
President Obama signed the Children’s
Health Insurance Reauthorization Act
(CHIPRA). Under Senator ROCKE-
FELLER’s strong leadership, CHIPRA
included a provision which allowed
states the option to waive the five-year
bar to the Children’s Health Insurance
Program (CHIP) and Medicaid for law-
fully residing immigrant children and
pregnant women. Today, 25 states offer
this safety net for children and 20
states offer it to pregnant women. My
own state of Vermont offers this pro-
tection to both pregnant women and
children. I commend my friend, Chair-
man ROCKEFELLER, for allowing states
the option to immediately provide
CHIP and Medicaid for immigrant chil-
dren and pregnant women.
Like so many harsh amendments
that have been filed with respect to the
safety net, I have seen similarly harm-
ful amendments on the issue of the
earned income tax credit, the EITC, or
the child tax credit, CTC, which were
designed to help hard-working families
pay their taxes.
The earned income tax credit is
available only to families who are
working and paying payroll taxes, not
some kind of giveaway. They have to
be working and paying taxes. EITC is a
core part of the Tax Code like any
other tax credit that adjusts Federal
tax liability, based on family cir-
cumstances. It is not, and it has never
been, considered a ‘‘public benefit.’’
But some amendments have been filed
seeking to deny the EITC for all reg-
istered immigrants for eternity, even
after they have obtained legal status.
One of these amendments was offered
during the committee process, and was
rejected.
Similarly, the Child Tax Credit was
enacted in 1998 for the benefit of U.S.
citizens or U.S. resident alien children
under the age of 17. In practice, it first
requires that an individual work and
pay her taxes. If the person meets this
basic requirement, undocumented or
otherwise, the Child Tax Credit may be
claimed for the benefit of the U.S. cit-
izen or U.S. resident alien child. Un-
documented immigrants who use an In-
dividual Taxpayer Identification Num-
ber are able to benefit from the Child
Tax Credit since they work and pay
taxes. However, there are numerous
workers who are lawfully present that
also use Individual Taxpayer Identi-
fication Numbers to pay taxes. During
the Committee markup, one senator
proposed an amendment that would
have denied the Child Tax Credit to
low-wage workers who pay their taxes
using an Individual Taxpayer Identi-
fication Number. This overreach would
have harmed numerous U.S. citizen
children and their families. Fortu-
nately, this unduly harsh amendment
was rejected by the Committee as well.
I would strongly oppose any amend-
ment to deny hard-working families
from participating in these tax credits
when they are paying payroll taxes. We
know that these credits are vital to
working families and we have a moral
obligation not to harm children in our
communities and their families by de-
nying their families these credits.
We give huge tax benefits and loop-
holes to millionaires. Yet a hard-work-
ing family, should they not be entitled
to these tiny benefits? They are
dwarfed by what we give to million-
aires. Let’s start paying attention to
the people who need our help.
Some who oppose comprehensive im-
migration reform have raised the false
alarm this immigration bill would
drain the Social Security trust fund
and bankrupt our Medicare system.
Nothing could be further from the
truth. The Wall Street Journal and
Commentary are two publications that
almost never agree with my positions.
In fact, the opposite is true. In an edi-
torial dated June 2, 2013, entitled, ‘‘A
$4.6 Trillion Opportunity,’’ the Wall
Street Journal states unequivocally
that ‘‘Immigration reform will improve
Social Security’s finances’’—not take
away from it, but will improve it. In
fact, it notes that
The Senate bill raises immigration quotas
by about 500,000 a year over the next decade
(to reduce backlogs) and by about 150,000 a
year after that. Thus the net effect of the
immigration bill on the long-range Social
Security trust fund ‘‘actuarial balance will
be positive,’’ Mr. Goss recently wrote in a
letter to Senator MARCO RUBIO. These higher
post-reform levels of immigration would
mean an extra $600 billion into the trust fund
to about $4.6 trillion over 75 years.
It is true that ‘‘Immigration won’t
solve all of Social Security’s financial
problems.’’ However, it said ‘‘immi-
grants unquestionably narrow the
funding gap. More generous immigra-
tion is a wise step toward solving the
entitlement crisis in Washington.’’
I ask unanimous consent to have the
editorial printed in the RECORD.
There being no objection, the mate-
rial was ordered to be printed in the
RECORD, as follows:
[From the Wall Street Journal, June 2, 2013]
A $4.6 TRILLION OPPORTUNITY
IMMIGRATION REFORM WILL IMPROVE SOCIAL
SECURITY’S FINANCES
The Senate immigration bill has ignited a
debate over the fiscal costs of reform, with
some conservatives claiming costs far exceed
the benefits. We think that’s wrong, and one
place to look for evidence is the costliest of
all federal programs, Social Security. As
some 75 million baby boomers prepare to re-
tire, immigrants will be crucial to keeping
the federal pension program afloat.
As too few Americans understand, Social
Security is not a pre-funded retirement sys-
tem and there is no ‘‘lock box’’ with money
set aside for each worker’s retirement. It op-
erates as a pay-as-you-go system.
Benefits paid out each year roughly match
payroll tax revenues collected, at least until
the program goes into annual deficit in a few
more years, and the so-called trust fund only
contains IOUs that the government owes
itself. Those IOUs don’t help. The Social Se-
curity Administration estimates that the
present discounted value of the 75-year
shortfall of promised benefits beyond the
taxes expected to be collected is $8.6 trillion.
The crux of the problem is that the ratio of
workers to retirees is falling fast. While
there were 16 workers for every retiree in
1950, the ratio now stands at a little under 3
to 1 and within 20 years when the baby
boomers are age 65 or older the ratio will fall
to about 2.5 to 1.
Immigrants help ease this demographic
problem in three ways. First, most come
here between the ages of 18 and 35, near the
start of their working years. Second, few
come with elderly parents (only about 2.5%
of immigrants are over age 65 when they ar-
rive), and the seniors who do come aren’t eli-
gible for Social Security because they have
no U.S. work history. Third, immigrants
tend to have more children than do native-
born Americans and their offspring will also
pay into the system.
These facts are confirmed in the latest re-
port of the Social Security trustees released
last week. They conclude that the program’s
long-term funding shortfall ‘‘decreases with
an increase in net immigration because im-
migration occurs at relatively young ages,
thereby increasing the numbers of covered
workers earlier than the numbers of bene-
ficiaries.’’
How big a bonus are we talking about?
Enormous. We asked Stephen Goss, Social
Security’s chief actuary, to estimate the
value of the 1.08 million net new legal and il-
legal immigrants that currently come to the
U.S. each year. He calculates that over 25
years the trust fund is enriched in today’s
dollars by $500 billion and the surplus from
immigration mushrooms to $4 trillion over
75 years.
‘‘The numbers get much larger for longer
periods,’’ Mr. Goss explains, ‘‘because that is
when the additional children born to the im-
migrants really help.’’
The Senate bill raises immigration quotas
by about 500,000 a year over the next decade
(to reduce backlogs) and by about 150,000 a
year after that. Thus the net effect of the
immigration bill on the long-range Social
Security trust fund ‘‘actuarial balance will
be positive,’’ Mr. Goss recently wrote in a
letter to Senator Marco Rubio. These higher
post-reform levels of immigration would
mean an extra $600 billion into the trust fund
to about $4.6 trillion over 75 years.
The reason is that most immigrant work-
ers pay into the program for 20 to 40 years
before they collect any benefits, and they
don’t have parents who collect benefits while
they pay in. Once the immigrants retire and
collect benefits, their children are making
tax payments roughly covering the pay-
ments to their parents.
All of this offsets the cost of legalizing cur-
rently illegal immigrants. Illegal workers
are especially beneficial to Social Security
because millions pay into the system—for
example, by using fake Social Security num-
bers when they apply for a job. But since
they are illegal, they don’t qualify for bene-
fits when they get old. Legalizing their sta-
tus means they will qualify for future bene-
fits based on their work from now on, but the
fiscal impact of the Senate bill is still posi-
tive, says Mr. Goss.
The relative skills and earnings of immi-
grants and their children also matter a great
deal in measuring their financial contribu-
tions. More skilled immigrants have higher
earnings, so they pay more in payroll taxes.
VerDate Mar 15 2010 00:42 Jun 18, 2013 Jkt 029060 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 E:\CR\FM\G17JN6.006 S17JNPT1
p
w
a
l
k
e
r

o
n

D
S
K
7
T
P
T
V
N
1
P
R
O
D

w
i
t
h

S
E
N
A
T
E
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE S4501 June 17, 2013
And because of the progressive benefit struc-
ture of Social Security, those with higher in-
comes collect less per dollar paid in.
This underscores an under-appreciated
bonus of the Senate immigration bill. The
bill shifts U.S. immigration policy somewhat
more toward skills-based entry rather than
family unification. It also increases green
cards for foreigners who graduate from
American schools in science and engineering,
thus raising the education and skills of new
immigrants. This means the future fiscal im-
migration windfall is likely to exceed $4.6
trillion.
Immigration won’t solve all of Social Se-
curity’s financial problems. The program
still needs reform in its benefit formula and
to allow private accounts. But immigrants
unquestionably narrow the funding gap.
More generous immigration is a wise step to-
ward solving the entitlement crisis in Wash-
ington.
Mr. LEAHY. Likewise, an article
dated June 6, 2013 in Commentary de-
bunks the myth that immigration
would bankrupt the Medicare trust
fund. The title of the article is notable:
‘‘Message to Congress: Immigrants Pay
More Than Their ‘Fair Share’ of Medi-
care.’’ According to the article, ‘‘it
turns out that closing the borders
would deplete Medicare’s trust fund.’’
In fact, ‘‘over a seven-year period, im-
migrants paid in $115.2 billion more
than they took out. Meanwhile, native-
born Americans drained $28.1 billion
from Medicare. In other words, immi-
grants are keeping Medicare afloat.
And it’s non-citizen immigrants who
make the biggest contribution. On av-
erage, each one subsidizes Medicare by
$466 annually.’’ It concludes that
‘‘Scare-mongering about the cost of
immigration has become a staple of po-
litical debate . . . But our findings in-
dicate that economic fairness, not just
morality, argues for immigrants’
rights to care.’’
The goal in this bill is to encourage
undocumented immigrants to come out
of the shadows so we can bring them
into our legal system and then do what
all Vermonters tell me, what Ameri-
cans everywhere tell me: Play by the
same rules. I mean, that is a sense of
fairness we should agree to. If we cre-
ate a reason for people not to come out
and register, this is going to defeat the
purpose of this whole bill. It makes all
of this work: the hearings, the hours
and days and weeks of markups and
consideration, makes it for naught.
Amendments that seek to further pe-
nalize the undocumented would just
encourage them to stay in the shadows.
These steps are not going to make us
safer and they are not going to spur
our economy.
One of the many reasons we need im-
migration reform is to ensure there is
not a permanent underclass in this Na-
tion. As part of this effort, we need to
continue the vital safety net programs
that protect children, pregnant women,
and other vulnerable populations.
Too often immigrants have been un-
fairly blamed and demonized as a drain
on our resources. Facts prove the oppo-
site.
We are a nation of immigrants. As I
have said many times before, my ma-
ternal grandparents came from Italy to
Vermont seeking a better life. They
created many jobs when they did that.
They sent their children to college and
saw their grandson become a Senator.
My wife’s parents came from the
Province of Quebec, speaking French.
She was born here. Her family contrib-
uted to the economy of Vermont, and
our whole region, with the jobs they
created. They raised three wonderful
children at the same time.
We are a nation of immigrants. Let’s
fight to maintain our tradition of pro-
tecting the vulnerable. Let’s allow the
American dream to be a reality for all
those who are in this country because
they want to be in this country.
Time is not now divided from one
side to the other, is it?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. It is not.
Mr. LEAHY. I yield the floor, and I
suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
clerk will call the roll.
The legislative clerk proceeded to
call the roll.
Mr. ALEXANDER. Mr. President, I
ask unanimous consent that the order
for the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without
objection, it is so ordered.
f
TRIBUTE TO DOUG BAILEY
Mr. ALEXANDER. Mr. President, I
come to the floor to talk about Doug
Bailey. Doug Bailey died last week at
age 79. The New York Times reported
on Tuesday that Doug Bailey helped
define the role of political consultant
in the 1960s and 1970s and that he
founded the Hotline. He was much
more than that to me and to countless
others for whom he was an example of
how to live a public life.
I am aware that when offering a eu-
logy it is good form to speak more of
the deceased than of oneself, but that
is hard to do with Doug because he
cared so much about everyone he met
and everyone he worked with. I first
met Doug Bailey in Washington, DC, in
the spring of 1977. I was here for a few
months working with Howard Baker,
the former Senator from Tennessee,
who had just been elected to be the Re-
publican leader of this body. He asked
me to come work for him. I think part
of that was to console me, to let me
lick my wounds for having lost the
Governor’s race a couple years earlier
in Tennessee. There wasn’t much pros-
pect for a political future for me then
because the Nashville Tennessean had
written that there wouldn’t be a Re-
publican Governor in Tennessee for an-
other 50 years.
So I was here in Washington, and
while I was here I became energized by
the Republican Senators. It looked to
me as though Jimmy Carter was al-
ready in trouble, and my friend Wyatt
Stewart introduced me to Doug Bailey.
The reason I thought it was an impor-
tant meeting was because at that time
he and his partner John Deardourff
represented 7 of the 12 Republican Gov-
ernors in the country who were still in
office after the Watergate debacle of
1974.
Doug came to Nashville. He sat down
with my wife Honey, Tom Ingram, and
me, and we talked about the idea of an-
other Governor’s race—this time in
1978. Doug’s view was that I had lost,
among other things, because I wasn’t a
very interesting candidate, that I cam-
paigned in a blue suit and talked to Re-
publicans and to rotary clubs. So the
talk was about what would be authen-
tic, what did I really like to do.
To make a long story short, I ended
up walking 1,000 miles across Ten-
nessee over 6 months in a red-and-
black plaid shirt, followed by a group
of four University of Tennessee band
members in a flatbed truck. And sev-
eral times a day we would get up on
the truck and play in Alexander’s
washboard band. Doug put all that on
television, and I won the election.
Now, to some, that would seem like
an ultimate political gimmick, but if
you think about it, the idea of the
walk across Tennessee was a good deal
more authentic than the photo-ops and
the press releases and the 5-second
sound bites that are often what we end
up with in politics today. But let me
just say it this way: I would have never
been elected Governor if it hadn’t been
for Doug Bailey.
He also did something else I had
never seen anybody else do—no other
political consultant. He actually wrote
a plan and we actually followed it dur-
ing the campaign.
The important thing for me to say
today is that political consulting was
not the end of Doug Bailey’s help. He
came to Nashville once a week during
my first term as Governor not so much
to talk about politics, but to talk
about how to be a better Governor,
which was his idea of how to be a polit-
ical success. Our conversations were
usually not about how to follow, but
how to lead, and how to deal with the
political implications, for example, of
wanting to have three big road pro-
grams and do it on a pay-as-you-go
basis so we could attract the auto in-
dustry to our State without running up
debt and persuade all the Republican
Members to vote for three gas tax in-
creases, which every single one of them
did.
Doug’s advice was that a good tactic
was to do the right thing because it
would confuse your opponents; they
wouldn’t understand what you were up
to.
His advice about recruiting people to
work in the cabinet, for example, was
not to just invite someone who might
take the job, but to make a list of the
four or five best persons to do the job
and then ask the best one. He said: You
might be surprised—that person might
be waiting for an opportunity to serve
the public. That was some of the best
advice I ever got because some of the
best persons were waiting for the right
opportunity for public service.
All this sounds hopelessly naive, es-
pecially today, in a time when there is
VerDate Mar 15 2010 00:42 Jun 18, 2013 Jkt 029060 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 E:\CR\FM\G17JN6.001 S17JNPT1
p
w
a
l
k
e
r

o
n

D
S
K
7
T
P
T
V
N
1
P
R
O
D

w
i
t
h

S
E
N
A
T
E
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE S4502 June 17, 2013
so much cynicism about politics. But
that is the way it was then, and that is
the way I was trained, and that is the
way I tried to do my job. I would wake
up every day literally thinking about
almost nothing else other than how I
could help our State move ahead.
I called Doug Bailey throughout the
last 30 or 35 years whenever I needed
good advice. I called him when the
Democrats swore me in early to re-
move a corrupt Governor who was sell-
ing pardons for cash in Tennessee, and
he gave me a few words I used to speak
to the public on that day.
One of the best pieces of advice he
gave me was when the first President
Bush called me while I was the Univer-
sity of Tennessee president. I knew
President Bush was going to ask me to
be the new Education Secretary, and I
had about 2 hours to think about it.
Doug said: Ask these two questions.
One, Mr. President, may I come up
with a plan, subject to your approval?
Two, may I go and recruit a team, sub-
ject to your approval? Well, that may
not seem like much, but after I was an-
nounced by the President, I walked
into the White House personnel office,
and they tried to tell me whom to hire.
I said: I don’t have to do that. I already
have the President’s assurance that I
can recruit a team subject to his ap-
proval. So I was able to recruit David
Kearns, former head of Xerox, and
Diane Ravitch and others who never
would have ended up in President
Bush’s administration, and he was de-
lighted with them.
Doug always had a project. Some
were zany. Some were downright bril-
liant. One of the most recent was to
try to persuade someone to run for
President on an Independent ticket on-
line. He didn’t succeed at that. He was
starting another project when I saw
him last at a dinner at the end of Janu-
ary in Washington this year.
Ironically, Doug Bailey was an expert
in the technology, TV ads, and the Hot-
line, which have contributed to today’s
polarization in politics. But he with-
drew from politics after a while and
from political consulting because he
didn’t like what politics had become.
He thought more elected officials need-
ed to understand that there is a dif-
ference between campaigning and gov-
erning and that differences should be
resolved in the middle rather than en-
trenched in the fringes or on the ex-
tremes.
In a tribute, Judy Woodruff wrote
about perhaps Doug’s greatest passion
and his greatest legacy: inspiring
youngsters such as Chuck Todd and
Norah O’Donnell—whom he paid al-
most nothing to work at the Hotline—
to care about and be involved in Amer-
ica’s political system. I am sure Chuck
and Norah would tell you that Doug
considered it even more important and
an even nobler calling to actually serve
in government, and that he spent most
of his life teaching and helping those
who were willing to do it.
I would never have been elected Gov-
ernor without Doug Bailey’s help. More
important, I will give Doug most of the
credit for whatever success I had as
Governor and in politics. It has been a
long time since I regularly checked
with him before I made a political
move, but when I did, I always felt as
though the next step was a surer step
and a step more likely to be in a direc-
tion that served a larger purpose other
than my own political existence.
I have never known a person who
cared more about each person he met
in every issue he tackled. So I wanted
to come to the floor today and express
this tribute to a public life well lived,
and to offer my condolences to his wife
Pat, his children Kate and Edward, his
brothers and his grandson.
I ask unanimous consent to have
printed in the RECORD following my re-
marks the New York Times story
about Doug Bailey’s death and Judy
Woodruff’s blog about his passing. It
has lots of comments from other peo-
ple, and I have not seen a blog in a long
time where all the comments are posi-
tive. Usually that is not the case.
There being no objection, the mate-
rial was ordered to be printed in the
RECORD, as follows:
[From the New York Times, June 13, 2013]
DOUG BAILEY, G.O.P. POLITICAL CONSULTANT,
DIES AT 79
(By Paul Vitello)
Doug Bailey, who helped define the expand-
ing role of political consultants in the 1960s
and ’70s and later founded The Hotline, a di-
gest of political news, distributed by fax,
that became an indispensable tool of the po-
litical trade in the pre-Web 1980s and ’90s,
died on Monday at his home in Arlington,
Va. He was 79.
Mr. Bailey, who had health problems in re-
cent years, was working at home on several
projects when he died, apparently in his
sleep, said his daughter, Kate Bailey.
His consulting firm, Bailey Deardourff &
Associates, which he started in 1967 with a
fellow political hand, John Deardourff,
worked mainly for moderate Republican can-
didates like Gov. Nelson A. Rockefeller of
New York, Mayor John V. Lindsay of New
York and Senator Charles H. Percy of Illi-
nois. At one point in the late 1970s, the firm
had 11 of the country’s 19 Republican gov-
ernors as clients.
Its work on behalf of President Gerald R.
Ford’s campaign in 1976 against Jimmy Car-
ter, then a former Georgia governor, was
widely credited with helping to narrow Mr.
Ford’s deficit of much as 20 points in the
polls—most of it attributed to his pardon of
President Richard M. Nixon for his role in
Watergate—to 2 points by Election Day.
The firm made some commercials fea-
turing ordinary Americans questioning Mr.
Carter’s lack of national experience, and oth-
ers focused on Mr. Ford’s likability and long
government service, all to the tune of a cam-
paign song, ‘‘I’m Feeling Good About Amer-
ica.’’
‘‘We said to ourselves, what the country
knows about Gerald Ford is that he pardoned
Nixon,’’ Mr. Bailey told The New York
Times. ‘‘Let’s tell them more, let’s give
them a view of Jerry Ford the man that’s up-
beat.’’
Mr. Deardourff died in 2004 at 71.
Mr. Bailey, who had grown dismayed by
the polarization of national campaigns in the
1980s, started The Hotline in 1987 partly as an
experiment in bipartisanship, he said. With
the Democratic strategist Roger Craver as
his partner, he sought to expose the profes-
sional political class to a broad range of
issues across the ideological spectrum.
Mr. Bailey told interviewers that in The
Hotline’s first year, potential subscribers
asked three main questions: ‘‘You’re going
to do what?’’ ‘‘You want me to pay you how
much?’’ And ‘‘What’s a fax?’’
The Hotline’s 500 or so paying sub-
scribers—among them politicians, pundits,
political operatives and Congressional staff
members—received an exhaustive aggrega-
tion of information at 11:30 each morning, in-
cluding news about state and local election
campaigns and grass-roots trends like tax re-
volts, term-limit drives and environmental
initiatives.
It also offered a roundup of political jokes
from the previous night’s talk-show mono-
logues. Before ‘‘The Daily Show,’’ The Hot-
line was one of the most prodigious pur-
veyors of political humor in the country.
‘‘That’s part of political communication
these days,’’ Mr. Bailey said, presciently, in
a 1991 interview with The Washington Post.
‘‘As a practical matter, if you want to know
where the people are, their views come from
television, and more from programs that
don’t try to influence them directly, such as
the late-night monologues.’’
The Hotline, which was bought by The Na-
tional Journal in 1996 and is part of its Web
site, became a training ground for political
reporters, including Chuck Todd of NBC and
Norah O’Donnell of CBS. Its currency has
been somewhat devalued in the past decade
by free political sites like Politico and Talk-
ing Points Memo, whose creators acknowl-
edge The Hotline in their lineage.
Douglas Lansford Bailey was born on Oct.
5, 1933, in Cleveland to Walter and Marion
Bailey. His father ran a manufacturing com-
pany. After receiving a bachelor’s degree
from Colgate University, Mr. Bailey received
his master’s and doctorate degrees from the
Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy at
Tufts.
Besides his daughter, Mr. Bailey is sur-
vived by his wife, Patricia, a commissioner
of the Federal Trade Commission from 1979
to 1988; his son, Ed; a brother, David; and a
grandson.
In 1999, again with Mr. Craver, Mr. Bailey
founded the Freedom Channel, which offers
politically oriented video online on demand.
In 2006, Mr. Bailey joined with the Demo-
cratic political consultants Hamilton Jordan
and Gerald Rafshoon in founding a political
reform organization, Unity08. It suspended
its activities in 2008 after a failed effort to
draft Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg of New
York to run for president.
‘‘The two-party system has worked well for
200 years and can continue to do so,’’ Mr.
Bailey said at the time, ‘‘but only when elec-
tions are fought over the middle. Our goal is
to jolt the two parties into recognizing this,
by drawing them into a fight over the middle
rather than allowing them to keep maxi-
mizing the appeal to their bases at the ex-
tremes.’’
Asked in another interview about politics
today, Mr. Bailey said, ‘‘Candidates listen
too much to consultants because they’re
driven by winning and money.’’
This article has been revised to reflect the
following correction:
Correction: June 17, 2013
An earlier version of this obituary omitted
one survivor and erroneously included two
brothers among the survivors. Of Mr. Bai-
ley’s three brothers, only one, David, sur-
vives him; Robert and Richard are deceased.
[From the Rundown, June 13, 2013]
REMEMBERING DOUG BAILEY
(By Judy Woodruff)
It doesn’t happen often. But every once in
a while, you meet a person who carries the
VerDate Mar 15 2010 00:42 Jun 18, 2013 Jkt 029060 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 E:\CR\FM\G17JN6.009 S17JNPT1
p
w
a
l
k
e
r

o
n

D
S
K
7
T
P
T
V
N
1
P
R
O
D

w
i
t
h

S
E
N
A
T
E
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE S4503 June 17, 2013
human equivalent of sunshine around with
them. It’s the guy or girl who always seems
to be smiling—if not outright, then just be-
neath the surface. And not in a goofy way,
but rather as if they love life and what
they’re doing and have decided not to let the
gremlins throw them off course. My friend
Doug Bailey, who died this week at the age
of 79, was like that. I never had a conversa-
tion with him, over the course of more than
thirty years, when he didn’t have a piece of
good news to share. He was one of the most
upbeat people I’ve ever known.
What may surprise you is that he spent his
life in politics. Given the partisanship and
negativity that define today’s political
arena, it’s hard to imagine. But Doug got his
start when things were different, when can-
didates could be moderate Republicans (as
most of those he supported were), or conserv-
ative Democrats, and still get elected to of-
fice. This was back in the 1960s and ’70s when
Republicans such as New York Gov. Nelson
Rockefeller, and Sens. Charles Percy of Illi-
nois, Howard Baker of Tennessee and Rich-
ard Lugar of Indiana were running for elec-
tion and re-election. Doug Bailey worked for
all of them, and for President Gerald Ford in
his re-election campaign of 1976.
Tennessee Republican Sen. Lamar Alex-
ander, whose gubernatorial campaign Bailey
worked on in that era, told the National
Journal in an interview this week, ‘‘He cared
about every person he met and every issue he
tackled.’’
President Ford’s close loss to challenger
Jimmy Carter was hard on Doug, but what
caused him to leave campaign work alto-
gether, he later told friends, was the nega-
tive tone politics started to take on in the
1980s. He went on to create the Hotline, a
pioneering daily newsletter on campaigns
and candidates, and later to launch a succes-
sion of projects aimed at bringing the two
parties together, searching for the increas-
ingly elusive common ground between the
far left and the far right.
But what I remember best about Doug Bai-
ley was his passion for getting young people
turned on to politics. He refused to accept
the idea that entire generations of Ameri-
cans would grow up and be repelled by the
thought of a life in public service. When I
first talked to him in 2005 about a rough plan
for a documentary project, traveling around
the United States and profiling the group
that has come to be known as ‘‘millennials,’’
no one was more enthusiastic than Doug.
He put me in touch with the surprisingly
large national network of young people he
knew—all leaders, many then still in college;
at the same time, he urged me not to forget
to talk to young people who were not in
school. In 2007, when the project was over,
after two documentaries and other reports
had been aired or published, he urged me to
do a sequel. Since then, and as recently as
this spring, he’s had one idea after another
about how to engage young people in public
life. In the hundreds of tweets that popped
up after word spread of his death, there were
scores from young folks he mentored.
Doug was not only really smart; he was
wise. He believed politics was meant to help
people and to make this a better country,
and he thought political people should work
together to make that happen. He never gave
up on the idea. We honor his legacy by not
giving up either. Doug Bailey is survived by
his wife Pat, their children Ed and Kate, and
a grandchild.
Mr. ALEXANDER. Mr. President, I
yield the floor and I suggest the ab-
sence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
clerk will call the roll.
The legislative clerk proceeded to
call the roll.
Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I ask
unanimous consent that the quorum
call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without
objection, it is so ordered.
f
THE DREAM ACT
Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, last Sat-
urday was the first anniversary of a
very historic day. On June 15, 2012,
President Barack Obama announced he
would grant temporary legal status to
immigrant students who arrived in the
United States as children. This status,
known as deferred action for children
arrivals, or DACA, allows these young
people to live and work legally in
America on a temporary basis without
fear of deportation.
June 15, 2012, is a day I will never for-
get. It was personal. It was 12 years ago
that I introduced legislation known as
the DREAM Act. This bill gives immi-
grant students who grew up in this
country a chance to earn their citizen-
ship. I have worked hard to pass this
bill for 12 years. During that time it
has been my honor to meet hundreds of
the young people who would be eligible
for the DREAM Act.
I don’t know when it started, but we
started calling them, and they called
themselves, the DREAMers. They were
brought to the United States as chil-
dren. They grew up in this country, and
they have overcome some amazing ob-
stacles. They are tomorrow’s doctors,
engineers, teachers, and soldiers. They
are young people who will make Amer-
ica a better country. But for most of
their young lives they have been
trapped in a legal limbo, fearing that
they could be deported away from their
families, away from their homes, away
from the only country they have ever
called home with just a knock on the
door. Yet they have developed amazing
lives with great potential.
Incidentally, we have already in-
vested in them. They were educated in
America. They have a great potential
to make this country even better for
the future generations. It just doesn’t
make any sense to walk away from the
talents they can bring to us.
In 2010, Senator Richard Lugar of In-
diana and I joined together across the
aisle to ask the Obama administration
to grant deferred action to DREAMers.
President Obama wanted to give Con-
gress a chance to act before using his
Executive power, and he said: I know I
have the authority, but let’s see if you
can pass the DREAM Act.
We brought it to the floor of the Sen-
ate. I remember that day. If I am not
mistaken, it was a Saturday, and that
gallery was filled. It was filled with
young people in caps and gowns who
were watching the debate on the floor
of the Senate on the DREAM Act. We
needed 60 votes because we faced a Re-
publican filibuster. We have always
faced a Republican filibuster.
Fifty-five Senators voted for it,
which by most standards is a sufficient
majority, but not by the Senate stand-
ard. We fell five votes short of defeat-
ing the filibuster.
I watched those students file out of
those doors, and then I left the floor of
the Chamber. I walked downstairs to
meet with them. There was not a dry
eye in the room. They had just watched
their dreams disappear right here on
the floor of the Senate—five votes
short.
The House, in which the Presiding
Officer was serving, had already passed
the DREAM Act under the leadership
of Speaker NANCY PELOSI, Howard Ber-
man, ZOE LOFGREN, and especially my
colleague from Illinois, LUIS GUTIER-
REZ. The House had risen to that chal-
lenge. We had our chance and fell short
by five votes.
After that Republican filibuster of
the DREAM Act, President Obama de-
cided he needed to take charge. He es-
tablished the deferred action for child-
hood arrivals to give those DREAMers
and the thousands like them across the
country a chance to come out of the
shadows and be part of America.
What has happened since then? In the
last year more than 539,000 have ap-
plied for DACA. So far about 365,000 ap-
plications have been granted; 140,000
applications are still being considered.
I am proud to say my home State of Il-
linois has the third most DACA appli-
cants, more than 28,000, and the third
most DACA recipients, approximately
23,000 young people. It wasn’t too sur-
prising because shortly after the Presi-
dent announced his program, Congress-
man LUIS GUTIERREZ and I held a gath-
ering at the Navy Pier, which is kind of
a seminal site in downtown Chicago.
We invited those who wanted to
apply for this deferred action. We
thought: What are we going to do if 400
or 500 people show up? Then we were
worried no one would show up. We
didn’t know what to expect. Well, we
knew the night before what was com-
ing. The line started forming at mid-
night. At midnight these families stood
there—mom, dad, and their son or
daughter—waiting for a chance for that
son or daughter to apply for this deci-
sion by President Obama of deferred
action.
Many times the parents were undocu-
mented themselves and even risked de-
portation by showing up. But the
thought of saving a child in their fam-
ily and giving that child a chance was
enough for them to take the risk.
Well, it turned out over 12,000 people
showed up. We were overwhelmed. We
couldn’t even come close to processing
the applications that were involved. We
knew then this was an idea whose time
had come.
It is especially important to note the
1-year anniversary of President
Obama’s announcement as we consider
what is going on on the floor of the
Senate this week. We are debating
comprehensive immigration reform.
The reality is that DACA is over-
whelmingly popular with the American
people. The American people—I have
always trusted—have in their heart of
VerDate Mar 15 2010 00:42 Jun 18, 2013 Jkt 029060 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 E:\CR\FM\G17JN6.012 S17JNPT1
p
w
a
l
k
e
r

o
n

D
S
K
7
T
P
T
V
N
1
P
R
O
D

w
i
t
h

S
E
N
A
T
E
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE S4504 June 17, 2013
hearts a goodness, an understanding,
and a caring. They saw these young
people brought here as babies, infants,
as little children, and they knew they
had not made the decision to come
here, but their parents made the deci-
sion to come here. If anybody did any-
thing wrong, violated any law, over-
stayed a visa, whatever the cir-
cumstances, it wasn’t the child, it was
the parent. They understand the basic
element of justice not just in America
but in life, and it is this: You don’t
hold a child responsible for the wrong-
doing of a parent. Most Americans un-
derstood that and want to give these
young people a chance.
On election day last year, Hispanic
Americans voted overwhelmingly in
favor of President Barack Obama.
There were many Republican Members
of Congress, including my good friend
Senator JOHN MCCAIN of Arizona, who
heard that message loudly and clearly,
and that—in no small part—is why we
are considering comprehensive immi-
gration reform today. Within this bill
is the DREAM Act, and not just the
DREAM Act, but the strongest version
of the DREAM Act that has ever been
written.
It is also important to note what
happened to the DREAMers in the last
year. These young Americans were fi-
nally able to work legally in America
and have already stepped forward to
contribute their talents. The Center for
American Progress and the bipartisan
Partnership for a New American Econ-
omy has concluded that giving legal
status to DREAMers will add $329 bil-
lion to America’s economy and create
1.4 million new jobs by 2030. The eco-
nomic benefit of legalizing 11 million
undocumented could be even greater.
According to the study by the Center
for American Progress, if comprehen-
sive immigration reform becomes law,
undocumented immigrants will in-
crease their earnings by 15 percent over
5 years, leading to $832 billion in eco-
nomic growth and $109 billion in in-
creased tax revenues—money that will
be paid by the currently undocumented
immigrants who will become legally
part of America in the next 10 years. It
will also create an estimated 120,000
jobs every single year—a growth en-
gine. It always has been a growth en-
gine in America. This Nation of immi-
grants, when it builds on the strength
and commitment of newcomers, is a
stronger and better Nation and con-
tinues to lead the world. How could we
have forgotten that lesson of history?
Conservative economist Douglas
Holtz-Eakin recently concluded immi-
gration reform would actually reduce
Federal deficits by $2.7 trillion, add a
full percentage point to our economic
growth, and raise GDP per capita by
approximately $1,700.
I started several years ago coming to
the floor of the Senate to not just
speak about the DREAM Act but to
tell the stories of DREAMers. It was
something I came to do because I fi-
nally witnessed their courage and real-
ized I had to share it here on the floor
of the Senate. When I first started
talking about the DREAM Act and un-
documented young people who could be
deported in a moment, torn away from
their families and their lives and sent
to a place they could never remember,
facing a language they couldn’t speak,
they would very quietly wait until my
meeting was over and come out of the
darkness by my car as I was leaving
and say, Senator, I am one of those
kids who would be helped by the
DREAM Act. They didn’t want anyone
to see them for fear of being deported.
But over time they came to realize
that standing up, with the courage to
tell their stories, they risked deporta-
tion but they put a face on this issue.
It wasn’t some politician giving a
speech, it was a real life, and that is
what they did. As they came forward to
tell their stories with their courage, I
came to the floor of the Senate.
I wish to take a moment now to
thank a man who is sitting to my
right, Joe Zogby. Joe has been a staffer
on this issue from the beginning, and
when it passes I know he will celebrate
just as I do, understanding, as I do, the
lives that will be impacted by this de-
cision if the DREAM Act becomes the
law of the land.
These DREAMers are an amazing
group. The stories I told on the floor
included DREAMers who grew up in 17
different States, from Arizona and
Texas in the Southwest, Missouri and
Ohio in the Midwest, and North Caro-
lina and Georgia in the Southeast.
These talented young people came to
America from all over the world—19
different countries represented—and
from every continent except Antarc-
tica. Yet all of them share something
in common: America is their home.
They are only asking for a chance to
give back to their home.
Today I wish to spend a minute or
two to update the Senate on what has
happened to some of these DREAMers
since they received DACA—this de-
ferred status—last year.
Angelica Hernandez was brought to
America when she was 9 years old. Two
years ago, Angelica graduated from Ar-
izona State University as the out-
standing senior in the mechanical engi-
neering department with a 4.1 GPA.
Angelica just finished her first year of
graduate school at Stanford University
where she is working on a master’s de-
gree in civil and environmental engi-
neering with a focus on energy. Her
dream is to dedicate her career to de-
veloping renewable energy. After re-
ceiving DACA, because of the Presi-
dent’s Executive order, this summer
Angelica will work at Enphase Energy,
a solar energy startup company.
This is Pierre Berastain. Pierre and
his sister were brought to the United
States from Peru in 1998 when they
were children. Pierre didn’t speak a
word of English when he arrived in
Texas, but he went on to receive a
bachelor’s degree with honors from
Harvard University. He is currently
pursuing a master’s degree at Harvard
Divinity School. Two years ago, Pierre
cofounded the Restorative Justice Col-
laborative, a nonprofit organization
which involves criminal offenders in
the process of repairing the harm they
have done. Since he received DACA,
Pierre was awarded one of only 10 Har-
vard Presidential Public Service Fel-
lowships so he can expand this organi-
zation.
This is Carlos Martinez. Carlos and
his brother were brought to the United
States when he was only 9 years old. He
graduated with honors with a bachelor
of science degree in computer engineer-
ing from the University of Arizona.
Carlos received job offers from Intel,
IBM, and many high-tech companies,
but he couldn’t work because he was
undocumented. So he went on to get a
master’s degree in software systems
engineering at the University of Ari-
zona. After receiving DACA, Carlos is
finally able to work in America as an
engineer. This Wednesday he will start
a new job with IBM, a company that
first tried to hire him 6 years ago when
he was undocumented. Out of more
than 10,000 applicants who applied to
IBM, Carlos Martinez was 1 of only 75
people they hired.
This is Nelson and Jhon Magdaleno.
They came to the State of Georgia
from Venezuela when Nelson was 11
and Jhon was 9. Nelson and Jhon went
to Georgia Tech University, one of the
most selective engineering schools in
America. Nelson graduated with an
honors degree in computer engineering
and Jhon is currently an honor student
majoring in chemical and biomolecular
engineering. After receiving deferred
action, Jhon is working at a bio-
medical engineering lab at Georgia
Tech researching glaucoma. He re-
cently secured an internship with East-
man Chemical Company. Nelson is now
working at Texas Instruments, one of
America’s top high-tech companies.
Ola Kaso was brought to the United
States from Albania at the age of 5.
What a superstar. Valedictorian of her
high school class, she is now a pre-med
student in the honors program at the
University of Michigan. Her dream is
to become a surgical oncologist. Can
we use more of those? You bet. In 2011,
I invited Ola to testify at a hearing on
the DREAM Act. She was the first un-
documented immigrant to openly tes-
tify before the Senate. It took amazing
courage for this young woman. After
receiving deferred action this spring,
Ola interned in the office of my col-
league and friend Senator CARL LEVIN.
This is someone those following the
debate may recognize: Tolu Olubumni
was brought to the United States from
Nigeria when she was a child. In 2002,
Tolu graduated with a degree in chem-
ical engineering from Washington and
Lee University in Virginia. For 10
years—10 years after graduating from
college—Tolu couldn’t work as an engi-
neer. She spent her time working to
pass the DREAM Act. Since receiving
the deferred action, Tolu is working as
VerDate Mar 15 2010 00:42 Jun 18, 2013 Jkt 029060 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 E:\CR\FM\G17JN6.014 S17JNPT1
p
w
a
l
k
e
r

o
n

D
S
K
7
T
P
T
V
N
1
P
R
O
D

w
i
t
h

S
E
N
A
T
E
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE S4505 June 17, 2013
an advocate for comprehensive immi-
gration reform with the Center for
Community Change. Last week, Tolu
was introduced to America. She had
the honor of introducing President
Obama at a White House event on im-
migration reform.
I met with the President last week. I
asked him about those DREAMers. He
said they came into the Oval Office and
met with him, and he said there were
tears in everyone’s eyes as they real-
ized the opportunity these young peo-
ple might finally get if we pass com-
prehensive immigration reform.
This is Erika Andiola. Erika was
brought to our country from Mexico
when she was 11 years old. She grad-
uated with honors from Arizona State
with a bachelor’s degree in psychology.
Erika was the founder and president of
the Arizona DREAM Act Coalition, an
immigration group advocating for the
passage of the bill. She received DACA
and has since been working in Con-
gress. She is the district outreach di-
rector for one of the Arizona delega-
tion’s newest members, Representative
KRYSTEN SINEMA.
Now I want my colleagues to meet
Carlos and Rafael Robles. Carlos and
Rafael were brought to the United
States as children. They grew up in
suburban Chicago in my home State of
Illinois. They were both honor students
at Palatine High School and Harper
Community College. Carlos is now at-
tending the University of Chicago ma-
joring in education. With DACA, Carlos
can pursue his dream to become a
teacher and he will have the oppor-
tunity to student-teach in a suburban
high school in the Chicagoland area.
Rafael is at the University of Illinois in
Chicago where he is majoring in archi-
tecture. After receiving DACA, he is
working at Studio Gang Architects, an
award-winning architectural firm in
the great city of Chicago.
This is Jose Magana. Jose was
brought to the United States from
Mexico at the age of 2. He graduated
valedictorian of his high school. He is
the first member of his family to at-
tend college. In 2008, he graduated
summa cum laude from Arizona State
University with a major in business
management. He went on to graduate
from Baylor University Law School.
After receiving DACA, Jose began
working with the Mexican American
Legal Defense Fund, a leading civil
rights organization. This week, Jose
will be sworn in as a member of the bar
which he was unable to do before Presi-
dent Obama’s Executive order 1 year
ago.
To hear the stories of these amazing
young people is to realize the benefits
immigration has always meant for
America. Imagine what will happen
when 11 million undocumented immi-
grants have the opportunity to come
out of the shadows and be part of
America. Like these DREAMers, they
will be able to contribute even more to
this country they worked so hard to
come to and worked so hard to stay in
and now call home. Legalization will
unleash the earning potential for mil-
lions of people. They will be able to
pursue jobs and manage the skills they
have instead of working and being ex-
ploited in the underground economy. It
is the right thing to do and it will
make America stronger.
It was so disappointing last week
when the Republicans in the House of
Representatives passed an amendment
to cut off funding for this program.
That is right. All of these young people
who have received a chance—the first
chance ever to be part of America’s fu-
ture—would have the program shut
down by a vote last week in the House
of Representatives. Supporters of this
amendment want to deport these
young people. They make no bones
about it. They believe they should
leave. Their belief is that if these
DREAMers are forced out of the coun-
try and deported to some other coun-
try, we will be a stronger Nation be-
cause of that. What are they thinking,
to lose people such as Carlos Martinez
and Tolu Olubumni? These young peo-
ple can make a positive difference for
America. It is shameless, absolutely
shameless, to play with the lives of
these young people. These are people
who need a chance. They don’t need to
be the victims of some political gam-
bit. It would be bad for America’s fu-
ture if they leave. We couldn’t possibly
be stronger if Angelica Hernandez
could not continue to work on future
renewable sources of energy and Ola
Kaso could no longer be the researcher
in cancer she wants to be.
The answer is clear: We need to pass
comprehensive immigration reform on
a bipartisan basis right here in the
Senate. We have waited way too long.
For over 25 years this broken immigra-
tion system has not done these people
justice nor has it done America justice.
During the next 2 weeks the Senate
will conclude one of its most historic
debates on comprehensive immigration
reform. It has been over 4 months that
I have been actively involved in this
Gang of 8—four Democrats and four Re-
publican Senators. We have had over 30
sitdown meetings, face to face. Many of
them went smoothly, as did the discus-
sion of the DREAM Act; some of them
not so smoothly. We disagreed, and
some of the disagreements were pretty
vocal. At the end of the day, though,
we realized we had a larger responsi-
bility that went beyond any single dif-
ference of opinion we might have. We
reached a bipartisan agreement. Now
the question is, can the Senate hold
that agreement together, on the floor
of the Senate, when the amendment
process begins, and next week when we
face a vote.
The values and principles that under-
lie this agreement are fundamental and
critical. They include a path to citizen-
ship not only for these young people
but for many of their parents. They
have to come out of the shadows, up to
11 million of them, and identify them-
selves to a government they have
feared their whole lives. They have to
register with this government and then
submit themselves to a criminal back-
ground check. If they are found to have
a serious problem in their background,
they are gone. They don’t have a
chance to become legal in America.
But if they pass that background
check, they have to pay a substantial
fine, pay their taxes, and then learn
English and be monitored during the
course of 10 years—10 years—in proba-
tionary status. During that period,
they can work legally in America—
they won’t be deported—and they can
travel without fear of being stopped at
the border. Then, at the end of 10 years,
if they have met all of the standards,
all of the scrutiny, if they have paid
the fines and paid their taxes, they will
have a chance for a 3- to 5-year path to
citizenship. It is a long process. For
many of them, it will be a great sac-
rifice, but they have offered great sac-
rifices with their lives already.
On the other side, we have agreed
with our Republican colleagues to do
even more in our power to make sure
our border with Mexico is as strong as
humanly possible and to make certain
our immigration system is changed so
we don’t face this debate every 5, 10, or
25 years.
I think it is a good bill. There are
parts of it I am very proud of, some
parts of it I do not like at all, but that
is the nature of a compromise, that is
how you get something done.
I look around this institution, and I
realize how important this issue is, but
I also realize how important this issue
is to the Senate. If I asked the people
of America, what do you think about
Congress these days, I think I would
know the answer. Somebody said our
approval rating just broke double dig-
its again. We are up to 10 percent of the
American people who think we might
be worth having. That must include a
lot of our relatives and close friends
that we made it up to 10 percent.
We better prove something on the
floor of the Senate over the next 2
weeks. We better prove that we can
work together, Democrats and Repub-
licans; that we will not break down and
fall apart over one issue or the other;
that we will keep our focus on getting
this job done.
Then we need to turn to our col-
leagues and friends in the U.S. House of
Representatives and tell them they
face the same historic responsibility
we faced. I have heard a lot of specula-
tion about what might happen in the
House. Let’s just focus on the Senate
for the next 2 weeks. Let’s do our part
and do our job and let the American
people witness this process as it should
be. If we are successful at the end of
next week and pass this legislation,
then let the American people speak up
to the Members of the House of Rep-
resentatives. Let them hear from their
districts and the people they represent
what they feel about the importance of
this issue when it comes to immigra-
tion reform. I am confident, as I said
VerDate Mar 15 2010 02:05 Jun 18, 2013 Jkt 029060 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 E:\CR\FM\G17JN6.015 S17JNPT1
p
w
a
l
k
e
r

o
n

D
S
K
7
T
P
T
V
N
1
P
R
O
D

w
i
t
h

S
E
N
A
T
E
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE S4506 June 17, 2013
earlier, that deep in their hearts, the
American people are good people, they
know our roots, they know our story,
they know our origin.
I stand here today as the son of an
immigrant. My mother came to this
country at the age of 2. She was a
DREAMer in her day. Her mom
brought her to the Port of Baltimore,
put her on a train, and they linked up
with my grandfather in East Saint
Louis, IL. Upstairs in my office is my
mother’s naturalization certificate. It
is proudly displayed because I want
people to know who I am and where I
came from. It is my story, it is my
family’s story, but it is America’s
story that the son of an immigrant can
be standing on the floor of the Senate
representing the great State of Illinois
and speaking to the next generation of
immigrants to America and the dif-
ference they can make.
This is our opportunity. We know
America will be a stronger and better
nation when we do it.
Thank you, Mr. President.
I yield the floor and suggest the ab-
sence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
clerk will call the roll.
The assistant legislative clerk pro-
ceeded to call the roll.
Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. President, I ask
unanimous consent that the order for
the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr.
KING). Without objection, it is so or-
dered.
Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. President, last
week I gave remarks on the floor that
pointed out that promises made that
the immigration bill before us was a
significant move toward merit-based
immigration and away from chain im-
migration—I dealt with that subject. I
am not aware that any of my com-
ments have fundamentally been dis-
puted.
The fact is that 30 million people will
be given legal status as an immigrant
on a pathway to citizenship over the
next 10 years—that 30 million is three
times the current legal flow of 1 mil-
lion a year, which would be 10 million
a year. It would triple the number of
people put on a path to permanent
legal residence and citizenship. Only 2.5
million of those would be admitted
under this new, small, actually weak,
merit-based section of the bill. This is
nowhere close to the truly effective
and popular merit-based immigration
system which Canada adopted a dec-
ade—maybe more—ago and which is
being followed and adopted in other de-
veloped countries around the world.
Evidence has also been introduced
that nonimmigrant guest workers—
that is, those who come not for immi-
gration, to be a citizen and be perma-
nent, but come to work for a period of
time and return home—that group of
workers will double under the legisla-
tion that is before us over current law.
All of this is at a time of persistently
high unemployment and when virtually
all serious academics, economic ex-
perts agree that such a huge flow will
depress wages of our middle-class
workers and increase unemployment.
Politicians blithely claim otherwise,
but Professor Borjas at Harvard and
the Federal Reserve in Atlanta and
others have studied this, and they show
otherwise with in-depth economic re-
search.
There is a long list of other promises.
The reason I raise this is because these
were promises that we are going to im-
prove the working conditions of Ameri-
cans, we are going to shift to a merit-
based system. That is not correct.
There are other promises. I made a
speech and so have others that have
clearly demonstrated that the triggers
in the bill do not work. The triggers
are supposed to say: You do not get
legal status or you do not get green
card status until these law enforce-
ment issues are fixed, until the ille-
gality is fixed. The triggers are ineffec-
tive. That has been documented. It
really is not disputable, in my opinion.
All the Secretary of Homeland Secu-
rity has to do is to submit a plan that
she says will work. It does not require
any fencing or any other actions spe-
cifically. And she gets to determine
whether it is working. If it does not
meet the standards according to the
Secretary, then a border commission is
established, but the border commission
has no power. It can only issue a re-
port, and it dissolves in 30 days. So
these promises that we have a very
tough plan that is guaranteed through
a series of triggers are not so.
Today I will talk about the DACA
program and how that has undermined
law enforcement. Surely we can agree
that congressional legislation is more
than salesmanship, it is more than
puffing, it is more than promises. Sure-
ly it represents a bill and a bill that
must be read.
The words of legislation are not a
mere vision designed to touch our
hearts. It is not something that the
sponsors can come in and say: We be-
lieve the American people are correct.
They want A, B, C, and D. We have a
bill that does it. And then nobody
reads the bill to determine whether it
does it. So that is what I have been try-
ing to do.
Congress and the good American peo-
ple do want to solve our immigration
problems—problems that our politi-
cians and government leaders have
messed up for 30 years. The American
people have pleaded with Congress to
fix this system for 30 years. Congress
has failed to do so. They continue to
promise to do so but do not. Now, that
is a fact.
But legislative language is the real
thing. Legislation is not a vision. Leg-
islation has power—power to fix our
broken system or power to allow the
lawlessness to continue. Thus, it is leg-
islation, not spin, that we will be vot-
ing on. A promise made by a gang is of
no value if the bill language does not
produce the results they promise. So
that is the rub. That is the problem we
face.
Presumably there are ads running
this very day which claim to be spon-
sored by conservative voices, founded
by Mr. Zuckerberg of Facebook, no
conservative to my knowledge, fea-
turing Senator RUBIO urging the pas-
sage of the bill. Indeed, Mr. Zuckerberg
created a front group that is on the ad-
vertisement—they are called Ameri-
cans for a Conservative Direction, that
purports to be reflective of conserv-
ative thinking in America.
I think that is a bit odd. It is odd
right now that Senator RUBIO, who is
still talking to the American people on
those ads and to my constituents in
Alabama, is saying all of this on the ad
when he has already said the bill is
flawed and he cannot vote for it in its
current circumstance. I think that ad-
vertisement ought to be pulled.
Worse, virtually everything in the
ad, especially in the voiceover—not
Senator RUBIO—but the voiceover is
false. It is not an accurate description
of the legislation, what it does, how it
will work. It is just not. If it was, I
would be intrigued by this legislation
and would be interested in thinking it
should set sort forth a framework that
most Americans agree would be a basis
for immigration reform.
So conservatives should be careful,
no matter how sincere, in being part of
promoting legislation that we do not
fully understand or will not do what it
claims it will do. A commitment to
truth is a conservative value. I like all
of the Gang of 8 members personally. I
have worked with them for a number of
years. I truly admire Senator RUBIO.
He is a fantastic new Member of the
body. I understand the goals they ar-
ticulate and would support most of
those goals. So it is no pleasure for me
to raise these uncomfortable points.
But at this very minute, Mark
Zuckerberg and his supporters are run-
ning these ads promoting legislation as
doing something I do not believe it
does. I think we should be working on
that. I know we have had a number of
our colleagues, another one of my good
friends this weekend pronounced a po-
litical doctrine of the death spiral of
the Republican Party. I have to tell
you, we have a lot of people who make
political prognostications. But the
truth is who knows what political
issues will dominate in 2016 or 2020 or
2030.
Mr. President, is there a time agree-
ment?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Each
Senator has 10 minutes to speak.
Mr. SESSIONS. Thank you. I did not
realize that. How much time is remain-
ing?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen-
ator has 1 minute.
Mr. SESSIONS. I thank the Chair.
The best politics, in my view, is to do
the right thing for the right reason and
to be able to explain what one is doing
cogently and honestly to the American
people, and then the people will decide.
If they do not like your decisions over
a period of time you are out. So be it.
VerDate Mar 15 2010 02:05 Jun 18, 2013 Jkt 029060 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 E:\CR\FM\G17JN6.018 S17JNPT1
p
w
a
l
k
e
r

o
n

D
S
K
7
T
P
T
V
N
1
P
R
O
D

w
i
t
h

S
E
N
A
T
E
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE S4507 June 17, 2013
Is that not the way the system is sup-
posed to work?
It is not wrong to give respect to the
opinions of the American people, to ask
what they think about issues and how
they react to issues. There is nothing
wrong with that. Actually, we should
do that. But it is not right to poll a
large and complex issue to find out
what people want and then propose leg-
islation that you say fulfills their de-
sires, when the legislation does not ful-
fill those desires.
That is not the right thing to do, to
promote good policy in America. As a
matter of fact, polls show the Amer-
ican people want enforcement before
amnesty by a 4-to-1 margin. Polls also
show a clear majority actually favor a
lower legal flow or the same amount of
legal flow into our country from immi-
gration.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen-
ator’s time has expired.
Mr. SESSIONS. They do not favor
the huge increase of legal flow that is
called for in this bill. Maybe later I
will be able to talk about some of the
difficulties of enforcement under cur-
rent law.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen-
ator from Connecticut.
f
GUN VIOLENCE
Mr. MURPHY. Mr. President, I appre-
ciate the great work my colleagues,
Senator DURBIN, Senator SCHUMER,
Senator RUBIO, and others, have done
on the immigration bill. I am going to
be pleased this week to support their
work. But I came to the floor, as I have
most weeks since being sworn in, to
talk about the issue that has domi-
nated discussions in my State over the
past 6 months; that is, the issue of gun
violence.
Last week we commemorated the 6-
month anniversary of the deadly shoot-
ing in Sandy Hook, CT, in which 20 6-
and 7-year-olds, first graders, were
gunned down, and 6 of their teachers,
including as well the gunman and his
mother. A lot of families came down
here last week to continue to lobby
both the House and the Senate.
The look on their face is a com-
plicated look. It is clearly first and
foremost the look of incalculable grief
as these families still try to figure out
how to live the first summer of their
life without their loved one, whether it
be a first grader who would have been
heading into second grade or a mother
or a teacher or a brother or sister.
But there is also, in combination
with this grief, this look of shock, this
look of shock that frankly gets worse
every time they come down here as
they try to understand how this place
could stand by and do nothing, abso-
lutely nothing, in the wake of the hor-
ror that Newtown, CT, has seen.
At least we have taken a vote on the
Senate floor. Very much like the de-
scription that Senator DURBIN gave
earlier of his attempt several years ago
to pass the DREAM Act, we got 54
votes on the floor of the Senate. Under
our Draconian and backward rules,
that was not enough to get the bill
done. But the House has not even
scheduled a debate on gun violence leg-
islation. Families in Newtown, CT,
cannot understand that. They cannot
understand how Senators and House
Members can look them in the eye, can
hear the story of their grief and do
nothing.
They certainly cannot understand it
after, almost to the day of the 6-month
anniversary, another mass shooting oc-
curred, this time on the other side of
the country. We almost know the story
before we hear it: Mass shooting; four
dead; others wounded. In Newtown, we
did not even have to pick up the paper
to know it was going to be an assault
weapon; it was going to be high-capac-
ity magazines, once again.
Every story is a little bit different.
So this one was an assault weapon that
was partially handmade. This time
there was a lot of ammunition that
may not have been used. But it is a
story that gets repeated over and over:
Lots of people dead, assault weapon
used, high-capacity magazines.
So for those people who say we can-
not do anything about it, we can. We
can. Because we can keep these dan-
gerous, military-style weapons in the
hands of law enforcement and people
who are hired and trained to shoot
these weapons for a living. We can say
that 8, 10, 15 rounds is enough, that you
do not need 30 rounds in a magazine,
you do not need 100 rounds.
We can do something about our men-
tal health system, try to reach out and
give some help to people who are strug-
gling, but we do not. That is what is so
hard for the families of Newtown to un-
derstand. What is additionally hard for
them to understand is this number.
Since those 28 people were killed in
Newtown on December 14, 5,033 people
have died at the hands of gun violence
across this country. This chart is a
couple of days old, so we can take down
the 33 and add a handful more.
I hope people here have gotten to un-
derstand the stories of people such as
Jack Pinto and Dylan Hockley, Grace
McDonnell. I hope people here have
come to know the stories of the 20 lit-
tle boys and girls whom we will never
know their greatness because they
were cut down in their youth.
But I wish to tell some other stories,
about the common, everyday, almost
routine gun violence that for some rea-
son we have decided to live with in this
country. So I am coming down here
every week to tell another handful of
stories about victims. Today, instead
of telling detailed stories about spe-
cific victims, I wish to talk about one
weekend in New York City.
About 2 weeks ago, the weekend of
May 31 to June 2 was kind of the first
truly warm outdoor weekend we had in
the Northeast. The police, in places
such as New York City and Bridgeport
and Hartford, have come to dread that
first real hot summer weekend because
the summers tend to come with a lot of
guns and a lot of gun violence and a lot
of shootings in places that maybe not a
lot of Americans are used to, living in
the safety and security of their neigh-
borhoods.
Let me tell you what happened on
that one weekend in one city, New
York, NY. That weekend 25 people were
shot over the course of 48 hours. Six
people were killed over one single
weekend in New York City. It started
with Ivan Martinez, 21 years old, who
was approached at about 3:25 a.m. on
Friday night by a 20-year-old gunman
and a woman in the Bronx. The gun-
man shot Martinez once in the head.
Then he ran off with the woman.
Over the course of the weekend, 12
people were shot in Brooklyn, 8 people
were shot in the Bronx, 4 in Queens. It
went like this on Sunday night: At
12:10 a.m., a 21-year-old man was shot
in the leg; at 2:36 a.m., a 22-year-old
man was shot three times on East New
York Avenue in Brooklyn; about an
hour later at 3:30, a 20-year-old man
was shot in the leg at Bedford Park in
the Bronx; at 4:12 a.m. that morning, a
35-year-old man brought himself to Ja-
maica Hospital with a gunshot wound;
at 11:40 a.m., a 15-year-old was shot in
the leg and the back—at 11:40 a.m.,
middle of the day on Sunday, a 15-year-
old shot in the leg and the back. At
about 3:25, a gunman opened fire at the
corner of Bedford and Lenox at Pros-
pect-Lefferts Gardens.
The carnage in one weekend barely
made news across this country. Most
people would not know it if I did not
come down to the Senate floor and tell
this story. That is what we have come
to accept in this country. This rep-
resents a dramatic drop in gun violence
in New York City. So far we have had
440 shootings in New York City. That is
a 23-percent reduction from last year.
This has been a good year in New York
City, and 440 people have been shot.
We do nothing about it. We cannot
even bring ourselves to say criminals
should not have guns, that gun traf-
ficking, done out of the back of vans on
the side streets of the Bronx and
Brooklyn and Queens should be a
crime. We cannot even do that on the
floor of the Senate.
That weekend, maybe the most trag-
ic shooting was one that didn’t end up
in a death, and that was the shooting
of a little girl named Tayloni Mazyck.
Three men opened fire in a wild epi-
sode that weekend in Brooklyn. People
said it sounded as though it was the 4th
of July, so many gunshots were going
off in this neighborhood. It was likely
gang activity, but the consequence of
the shooting wasn’t a gang member, it
was a little 11-year-old girl who was
struck through her neck. The bullet
lodged in her spine. Although Tayloni
lived, she will never walk again.
Listen, I grieve every single morning
and every single night for the 20 little
girls and boys who died in Newtown,
CT. If that is what has prompted us to
VerDate Mar 15 2010 02:05 Jun 18, 2013 Jkt 029060 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 E:\CR\FM\G17JN6.019 S17JNPT1
p
w
a
l
k
e
r

o
n

D
S
K
7
T
P
T
V
N
1
P
R
O
D

w
i
t
h

S
E
N
A
T
E
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE S4508 June 17, 2013
finally have a serious discussion here
on the floor of the House and the Sen-
ate about gun violence reform, then so
be it.
This is an average summer weekend
in New York, with a little girl getting
paralyzed and shootings throughout
Saturday and Sunday night. People are
getting shot in the middle of broad
daylight on a Sunday afternoon. We
can do something about it. We don’t
have the power to eliminate gun vio-
lence, we can’t make bad people stop
doing bad things, but we can pass com-
monsense laws such as background
checks to check if criminals are get-
ting guns or people with serious, dan-
gerous mental illness. We can increase
the resources of social workers and
psychologists to try to reach some of
these kids to try to teach them other
ways of dealing with their anger than
going in and reaching for a gun. We can
lock up anybody who takes a bunch of
guns from a gun show, throws them
into a sack and sells them to criminals
on the streets of New York, Bridgeport,
Los Angeles, or Chicago.
We are not helpless. We have power
in this place to do something about the
mass shootings in Newtown, the mass
shootings in Santa Monica, and the
5,033 people who have died across this
country since December 14, in the 6
months since. It is not too late. We
have a chance to come back to this
floor after immigration, perhaps after
the summer, let cooler heads prevail
and allow this body to do something
about the scourge of gun violence that
so far this place has had no answer for.
It causes the families of Newtown and
the families of these victims to leave
this place shaking their heads.
I yield the floor, and I suggest the ab-
sence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
clerk will call the roll.
Mr. SESSIONS. I ask unanimous con-
sent that the order for the quorum call
be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without
objection, it is so ordered.
f
IMMIGRATION REFORM
Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. President, I ear-
lier reported on some points in speech-
es I had made about some of the prom-
ises from the Gang of 8 concerning the
legislation they have offered and why
they are not fulfilled in their bill; for
example, the triggers, and the merit-
based movement they claim is signifi-
cant in their legislation. I believe both
of those are inaccurate.
Today I wanted to point out how gov-
ernment officials are refusing to en-
force our current law and the unease
that causes all of us. This bill does not
fix that problem but gives even more
power and discretion to the political
appointees to waive, moderate, and get
around the enforcement requirements
of this new bill. These are the require-
ments of enforcement that our bill’s
sponsors say are important and must
happen, but the bill does not require it
to happen in many different places.
The story I will be telling is effective
to explain why, despite the pleas from
the American people for 30 years, law-
lessness continues to rise in the immi-
gration area and why we now have 11
million people here illegally.
Senator DURBIN earlier made a ref-
erence to the DREAM Act that he has
worked hard on. It does present, for the
most part, some of the most sympa-
thetic claims for some sort of legaliza-
tion in the country. The reason Con-
gress rejected his legislation is because
it overreached, in my opinion, which is
not necessarily to say that it would
have passed had it been more narrowly
drafted.
It did not pass, but the President of
the United States did it anyway. The
President of the United States just did
it anyway. He issued a directive to
Federal law enforcement officers:
Don’t enforce this law, this law, and
this law. Instead, do it as we tell you
to.
That comes from the President to the
Secretary of Homeland Security, to
John Morton, and all the supervisors
down to the officers.
Officers are up in arms about this.
The ICE officers who enforce these laws
have voted no confidence in Mr. John
Morton. Today Mr. Morton announced
his resignation after quite a long time
being the center of this controversy.
ICE officers said they had no con-
fidence in him. He basically spent his
time promoting amnesty, meeting with
special-interest groups, not helping
them do their job, and directing them
not to do what the law plainly required
them to do. It put them in an unten-
able position of having to follow their
boss’s political direction and violate
their oath to follow the law.
Indeed, and amazingly, the law en-
forcement officers filed a lawsuit
against Secretary Napolitano and Mr.
Morton. They are claiming they are
being forced to violate the law.
The judge has allowed this case to go
forward, and it is being reviewed. It is
in court right now. I never heard, as a
federal prosecutor of nearly 15 years, of
such a thing where the officers are
suing their supervisors who won’t let
them follow plain law. This is the prob-
lem we are dealing with.
Over a year ago, as Senator DURBIN
mentioned earlier, the Obama adminis-
tration implemented a backdoor am-
nesty for an estimated 1.7 million, a
Pew estimate, illegal immigrants
through a program called the Deferred
Action for Childhood Arrivals, the
DACA Program. It covers aliens who
entered the country illegally when
they were under the age of 16 and not
older than 31 as of June 15, 2012.
Congress dealt with legislation to
that effect and rejected it. It did not
pass it. According to the published De-
partment of Homeland Security guide-
lines, each DACA applicant is required
to submit biographic and biometric in-
formation along with other informa-
tion to prove they are eligible for the
program.
The U.S. Citizenship and Immigra-
tion Services, USCIS, is to process the
applications. In a little under a year,
USCIS has approved an astonishing
291,859 applicants. On May 20, Kevin
Palinkas, president of the National
Citizenship and Immigration Service
Council, the union representing the
12,000 USCIS adjudication officers who
were supposed to adjudicate these mat-
ters, issued a press release reporting ‘‘a
99.5 percent approval rating for all ille-
gal alien applications for legal status
filed under the Obama administration’s
new deferred action for childhood ar-
rivals, DACA, policies.’’
He reported a 99.5-percent approval.
He attributed the exceptionally high
approval rate to policies implemented
by the Department of Homeland Secu-
rity leadership that essentially made it
impossible to make any real effort to
eliminate fraud or identify dangerous
criminal aliens.
He goes on to say:
DHS and USCIS leadership have inten-
tionally established an application process
for DACA applicants that bypasses tradi-
tional in-person investigatory interviews
with trained USCIS adjudications officers.
These practices were put in place to stop
proper screening and enforcement.
He is saying the new policies that
eliminate the interviews ‘‘were put in
place to stop proper screening and en-
forcement, and guarantee that applica-
tions will be rubber-stamped for ap-
proval, a practice that virtually guar-
antees widespread fraud and places
public safety at risk.’’
That is a pretty gutsy thing to say
for a person who works in the Depart-
ment of Homeland Security about his
supervisors. I am sure he gave great
thought to that.
This press statement goes on to say:
The attitude of USCIS management—
These are the political appointees.
is not that the agency serves the American
public or the laws of the United States, or
public safety and national security, but in-
stead that the agency serves illegal aliens
and the attorneys which represent them.
While we believe in treating all people with
respect, we are concerned that this agency
tasked with such a vital security mission is
too greatly influenced by special interest
groups—to the point that it no longer prop-
erly performs its mission.
That is a strong statement. It should
be something we listen to as we evalu-
ate whether we need to give more dis-
cretion to these supervisors when we
pass a new bill.
Mr. Palinkas sent a letter to Con-
gress on June 5 of this year, a few
weeks ago, reiterating his concerns in
light of S. 744.
He wrote and said this bill ‘‘would
lead to the rubber-stamping of millions
of applications for both amnesty and
future admissions, putting the public
safety and the taxpayer at risk.’’
He further stated:
In addition to the impossible time con-
straints imposed on each and every adjudi-
cator to complete our assigned workloads,
we are currently lacking the manpower,
training, and office space to accomplish our
mission and achieve what our jobs demand.
VerDate Mar 15 2010 02:05 Jun 18, 2013 Jkt 029060 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 E:\CR\FM\G17JN6.021 S17JNPT1
p
w
a
l
k
e
r

o
n

D
S
K
7
T
P
T
V
N
1
P
R
O
D

w
i
t
h

S
E
N
A
T
E
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE S4509 June 17, 2013
These challenges cry out for reconsideration
of S. 744 in its present form.
A few days ago, a report released by
Judicial Watch revealed that docu-
ments obtained through the Freedom
of Information Act confirm all of Mr.
Palinkas’ concerns. The documents re-
veal the administration has abandoned
official background check procedures
in order to keep up with the hundreds
of thousands of amnesty applications
under the program.
For example, according to a Sep-
tember 17, 2012, e-mail from Associate
Regional Director for Operations Gary
Garman, field offices could expect the
benefits center to conduct just ‘‘lean &
light’’ background checks with only
random samples of modified cases
being sent to the field for verification.
It goes on to say about the inad-
equacy of the applications submitted
for amnesty under the ‘‘lean & light’’
system, St. Paul Field Director Sharon
Cooley e-mailed staffers in October of
last year with the following observa-
tion:
As you are already aware the [applica-
tions] will not be as complete and interview
ready as we are used to seeing. This is a tem-
porary situation—I just can’t tell you when
things will revert back to the way things
used to be.
That is the kind of situation we are
in today. Then, on November 9, 2012,
last November, the entire agency was
directed to halt all background checks.
It is unknown how long USCIS stopped
conducting background checks, but ap-
parently they did. They may still be
approving applications without back-
ground checks.
We must conduct background checks
to protect against public safety and na-
tional security threats. We can say
that we want to move people out of the
shadows, but if we don’t complete the
necessary background checks, those
who are criminals or terrorists would
be out of the shadows, and hiding in
broad daylight with the absolute pro-
tection of legal immigration status. We
should not transform them from the
shadows to legal status without some
sort of serious analysis of who they
are, as the USCIS adjudicators and ICE
officers tell us.
If nobody is checking, nobody is
digging into it, then this will become a
common thing. They will just submit
some false documentation, nobody will
look at it, and they are home free.
That is not the way we should be doing
this. It is the kind of sliding, slipping
away from real enforcement that has
helped put us in the fix we are in
today.
This is troubling because the bill of
the Gang of 8 gives Secretary Napoli-
tano the discretion to determine the
specifics of the amnesty application
process for the entire 11 million people
who will be given legal status in the
country, including the responsibility or
the discretion to determine the specific
information required of the applicant;
the form of the application, paper or
electronic—and electronic ought to be
a big part of it because we can imme-
diately check with the National Crime
Information Center on criminal back-
grounds. It would be easier whether
any applicant is actually going to be
interviewed or not.
It also requires the Secretary to col-
lect biometric, biographic, and other
data the Secretary deems appropriate
for use in conducting ‘‘national secu-
rity and enforcement clearances,’’
which is left undefined.
Knowing the administration is so de-
termined to accelerate these other
clearances, we can assume they would
not be following strictly any of the law
as it would be passed. This is why our
law enforcement officers are concerned
about the bill. This is what is causing
them angst.
If the administration does not cur-
rently do even minimum interviews
under the DACA Program they are not
going to do it in the future when we
have 11 million people being cleared.
These clearances should include checks
against Federal and State law enforce-
ment databases, both biometric and
biographic, including the Department
of Homeland Security and FBI data-
bases, the consolidated watch list, and
‘‘lookout,’’ and the biometric immigra-
tion databases. They are there to iden-
tify people who may be in violation of
the law, have warrants out for their ar-
rest for murder, drug dealing, or rob-
bery, and are on a terrorist watch list.
That is why we have these systems.
I offered an amendment during the
Judiciary Committee markup that
would have mandated those checks as
well as allowed for electronic filing of
applications so that information could
be easily checked against the law en-
forcement electronic data bases. It
would have required in-person inter-
views where national security or public
safety concerns arise, not interviewing
everybody—although we really prob-
ably should interview everybody. But
my amendment just said for those
where national security or public safe-
ty concerns arise.
Under this legislation, the Secretary
doesn’t have to interview a single am-
nesty applicant. But my amendment
was rejected. This is a quote from the
bill’s lead sponsor, Senator SCHUMER,
when talking about requiring such
safeguards being unacceptable because
they would ‘‘slow things down dramati-
cally. It will be impossible—it could
take a year, 18 months, 2 years before
this would be effectuated. We hope that
most folks could get in[to] within 6
months.’’
So I would say this is the plan: We
say we have an effective background
check system for all those who are
going to be applying to be put on a
guaranteed path to citizenship. We say
to the American people we have a sys-
tem, while failing to require any of
that in any effective way.
Mr. President, I don’t know, do we
have a time limit on these remarks? I
see some of my colleagues here.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen-
ator may proceed for 3 additional min-
utes.
Mr. SESSIONS. I thank the Chair.
A quick turnaround of applications
seems to be far more important to the
Gang of 8 than the issue of identifying
people who may be a threat to public
safety—criminals who may have war-
rants out for them and who may have
been arrested or served time for felo-
nies. We need to know that. They are
not supposed to be given status if they
have been convicted of a felony.
This is despite what we learned from
the 1986 amnesty. The failure to con-
duct adequate background checks in
1986 and vet for national security
threats enabled both criminals and ter-
rorists to be legalized. A 2009 report by
the Homeland Security Institute, pre-
pared at the request of the USCIS Om-
budsman in anticipation of immigra-
tion reform concluded:
The potential volume of new cases gen-
erated by immigration reform legislation
could overwhelm USCIS capabilities and ca-
pacities.
I think that is true. The report also
warned:
It is important to recognize that every in-
eligible illegal immigrant who comes across
the border during the preparation and imple-
mentation phases of any new legalization
program intending to apply for legal status
entails yet another possible fraudulent appli-
cation for a limited number of adjudicators
to weed out.
In other words, we are going to have
people coming right now—the immi-
gration flow has picked up dramati-
cally—once they hear amnesty is afoot.
If we don’t have any ability to do the
kind of fundamental checking here, ev-
erybody will be successful and fraudu-
lent applications will be cleared in
large numbers.
The bill does not require the Sec-
retary to interview a single amnesty
applicant, including those who might
pose a national security risk. Even the
2007 comprehensive immigration re-
form bill mandated in-person inter-
views, with terrorism concerns being
one of the reasons. The 1986 amnesty
required face-to-face interviews, but no
routine interviews are being conducted
under the President’s DACA Program—
his amnesty for those who came here
as teenagers—and there is no reason to
expect there will be anything done in
this program either, which is 22 times
larger.
Interviews are very important. Not
interviewing applicants for admission
to the country facilitated the 9/11 hi-
jackers, hundreds of terrorists who
have entered the country since the
1990s, and most recently was a contrib-
uting factor to the Boston Marathon
terrorist attack. The 9/11 Commission
concluded that:
There were opportunities to stop both
World Trade Center pilots in secondary
interviews at the border. That did not hap-
pen. We also know that not having a fifth
man on the Pennsylvania flight mattered as
well. Al-Kahtani’s turn-around at Orlando
International Airport after an extensive sec-
ondary interview meant there were only four
VerDate Mar 15 2010 03:04 Jun 18, 2013 Jkt 029060 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 E:\CR\FM\G17JN6.022 S17JNPT1
p
w
a
l
k
e
r

o
n

D
S
K
7
T
P
T
V
N
1
P
R
O
D

w
i
t
h

S
E
N
A
T
E
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE S4510 June 17, 2013
hijackers on the flight headed for either the
White House or the Capitol. That plane was
overrun by the passengers who knew their
plane was headed for disaster, and gave their
lives to stop the hijackers. This one sec-
ondary interview prompted by two astute
border inspectors in Orlando determined how
many hijackers the passengers had to fight
on Flight 93.
Press reports indicate that Boston
bomber Tamarlan Tsarneav was
watchlisted, but because of a ‘‘down-
grade’’ on the watchlist, he was not
placed in a secondary interview when
he returned from six months in Russia
in 2011. If Tsarneav had been inter-
viewed, and even slightly questioned
about where he had been and why,
knowing he was already watchlisted,
then he could well have been further
interviewed by the FBI’s Joint Ter-
rorism Task Force. Because the bill
does not require basic checks, the bill
will continue to allow terrorists and
criminals to exploit weaknesses in our
immigration system and use it to gain
legal status.
Indeed, the bill specifically permits
the Secretary to streamline applica-
tions for adjustment of status of those
who were recipients of the administra-
tion’s DACA initiative. In fact, in the
Justice Department’s brief recently
filed in Crane v. Napolitano, in which
ICE agents have sued DHS leadership
over policies that they believe require
them to violate the law and their oath,
the Obama administration made clear
that it believes it ‘‘inherently’’ has al-
most unbridled discretion in the mat-
ter of immigration enforcement. It
even argued that the federal court has
no jurisdiction to review or question
DHS’s decisions. The court disagreed.
This bill surrenders to the executive
branch’s overreach. In fact, many pro-
visions inexplicably weaken the law
with regard to future illegal immigra-
tion and we are going to talk more
about that as this debate continues. If
this bill is going to secure the border
and end illegal immigration ‘‘once and
for all’’ as its sponsors say it will,
these provision that weaken law en-
forcement must be removed.
The American people rightly expect
their government to enforce the laws
enacted by Congress and keep its prom-
ises. But given this administration’s
refusal to enforce the laws currently on
the books, the American people have
no reason to believe that the loopholes,
waivers and discretion granted to the
administration will not be used, as
they are being used now, to reduce en-
forcement and public safety.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen-
ator’s time has expired.
Mr. SESSIONS. I thank the Chair.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen-
ator from Indiana.
f
NSA SURVEILLANCE PROGRAMS
Mr. COATS. Mr. President, I come to
the floor today to discuss recent na-
tional security leaks by a former NSA
contractor by the name of Edward
Snowden. His name is known now
throughout the world. Some have
praised Snowden as a hero and a whis-
tleblower. I do not. Anyone who vio-
lates their sworn oath to not disclose
classified information and then leaks
national security documents that com-
promise our intelligence operations
and harm our country’s ability to pre-
vent future terrorist attacks should
neither be called a hero nor a whistle-
blower. What Snowden has done bor-
ders on treason, and I believe he should
be prosecuted to the fullest extent of
the law.
Mr. President, it is no secret we have
a serious trust deficit in this country
with the Federal Government. I under-
stand the concerns and the fears of my
constituents and the American people
relative to some of the things that
have occurred here that lead them to
question their trust in their elected of-
ficials or in their government.
There has been a series of scandals
over the past several months, including
but not limited to the IRS targeting
conservative groups, the actions of At-
torney General Eric Holder, and the
ever-changing responses from this ad-
ministration regarding the attacks on
Americans in Benghazi. We still don’t
have the full story, and the narrative
keeps bouncing around with change
after change after change. So I under-
stand this distrust the American peo-
ple have about anything that comes
out of Washington, DC.
A lot of this is being fueled by
mischaracterizations and misrepresen-
tations in the media, grabbing onto
whatever is said in the Guardian. Of
course, the Guardian says, and people
hear: This is what is happening to your
country. This is what is happening
with your government. They are vio-
lating your civil rights and violating
your privacy. But none of us stand for
that, nor will we stand for that. But in
their rush to be the first to break the
news of the NSA or other classified
programs, to break it first online or on
the air, the media has fueled this dis-
trust of the American people by mis-
representing the facts.
Contrary to what some news reports
and other sources have said, let me say
this for the record: The government is
not and cannot indiscriminately listen
in on any Americans’ phone calls. It is
not targeting the e-mails of innocent
Americans. It is not indiscriminately
collecting the content of their con-
versations. And it is not tracking the
location of innocent Americans
through cell towers or their cell
phones.
There are civil liberties and privacy
protections built into this program
that are now being released in great de-
tail, and it is important the American
people understand those and know
what they are. We have to understand
this careful balancing act between pro-
tecting classified methods and sources
to the detriment of losing that infor-
mation, losing lives, identifying
sources, and compromising programs,
and the need to reassure the American
people we are following the law and fol-
lowing the constitutional right of
Americans to privacy. All of this has to
be put in the right context.
As a side note, let me just simply
say, Mr. President, that it is ironic
that a lot of American private compa-
nies seem to have more information
about us than the government does.
They may have a phone number, but
many of the private companies know
what we like to eat, where we shop,
what we like to wear, what movies we
order, where we like to vacation, and
we are flooded with marketing at-
tempts to use the information they
have collected against us.
But that is not what the NSA is
doing under these programs and the
programs in question. These programs
are in place solely for the purpose of
detecting communications between
terrorists who are operating outside of
our country but communicating with
operatives potentially within the
United States.
The intelligence community neither
has the time nor the inclination nor
the authority to track people’s Inter-
net activity or pry into their private
lives. Even if someone is suspected, by
the way, of a phone call match with a
foreign terrorist and someone residing
or living in America and suspected of
having a link to terrorism, the govern-
ment can go no further than the court
to get an order to investigate any
other information or material about
them. And let’s not forget why these
programs are there in the first place.
Following the tragic attacks on Sep-
tember 11, 2001, America realized it
needed to greatly improve our intel-
ligence efforts and communications
among our agencies—we were facing a
different kind of war. This wasn’t two
States lining up against each other.
This wasn’t addressing wars from the
past. This was a whole new way that
enemies were attacking Americans on
our homeland. We needed to modernize
our approach, and we needed to con-
nect the dots before a terrorist attack
occurred again at the level of 9/11 or
others.
In fact, had these programs been
available to NSA before that Sep-
tember date, I believe we could have
identified some or all of the hijackers.
When one of the September 11 hijack-
ers called a contact in Yemen from San
Diego, we could have identified them
through this program. We could have
prevented the terrorists from boarding
those planes and blowing up the World
Trade Center, striking the Pentagon,
crashing into a field in Pennsylvania,
and killing thousands of Americans.
These programs connect the dots and
have successfully thwarted dozens of
terrorist attacks. They are some of the
most effective tools available to pro-
tect our country from terrorist organi-
zations like al-Qaida.
That is why I find it so troubling and,
frankly, irresponsible for the media
and others to distort the nature of
VerDate Mar 15 2010 02:05 Jun 18, 2013 Jkt 029060 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 E:\CR\FM\G17JN6.024 S17JNPT1
p
w
a
l
k
e
r

o
n

D
S
K
7
T
P
T
V
N
1
P
R
O
D

w
i
t
h

S
E
N
A
T
E
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE S4511 June 17, 2013
these counterterrorism programs.
These programs are legal, constitu-
tional, and utilized only under the
strict oversight of both parties and all
three branches of government, includ-
ing a highly scrutinized judicial proc-
ess. In the end, these programs rely on
the trust of the American people. And
with that trust lacking today, I am
asking my fellow Members of Congress,
as well as the media, to fact-check first
before mischaracterizing programs
that save lives.
I believe we can—and we must—pro-
tect both security and liberty when it
comes to counterterrorism efforts, and
I believe these programs do just that.
Mr. President, I yield the floor.
f
CONCLUSION OF MORNING
BUSINESS
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under
the previous order, morning business is
closed.
f
EXECUTIVE SESSION
f
NOMINATION OF LUIS FELIPE
RESTREPO TO BE UNITED
STATES DISTRICT JUDGE FOR
THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF
PENNSYLVANIA
f
NOMINATION OF KENNETH JOHN
GONZALES TO BE UNITED
STATES DISTRICT JUDGE FOR
THE DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under
the previous order, the Senate will pro-
ceed to executive session to consider
the following nominations, which the
clerk will report.
The legislative clerk read the nomi-
nations of Luis Felipe Restrepo, of
Pennsylvania, to be United States Dis-
trict Judge for the Eastern District of
Pennsylvania and
Kenneth John Gonzales, of New Mex-
ico, to be United States District Judge
for the District of New Mexico.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under
the previous order, there will be 30
minutes of debate equally divided and
controlled in the usual form.
The Senator from New Mexico.
Mr. UDALL of New Mexico. Mr.
President, I am pleased to rise today to
strongly support the confirmation of
Kenneth Gonzales for U.S. district
judge for the District of New Mexico.
Mr. Gonzales is an exceptional nomi-
nee with an impressive range of legal
experience and expertise. He was
unanimously confirmed by the Senate
as the U.S. attorney for the District of
New Mexico in 2010. But he is more
than just his resume, remarkable as it
is. He is also an inspiring American
story.
Mr. Gonzales grew up in the Pojoaque
Valley in the northern part of our
State. He was the first in his family to
graduate from college. With the help of
scholarships and grants, he received his
undergraduate and law degrees from
the University of New Mexico, a school
that I am proud to call my alma mater.
After graduating he was a law clerk
to New Mexico Supreme Court Justice
Joseph Baca, and he worked as a legis-
lative assistant for Senator Jeff Binga-
man.
He began his career as a Federal
prosecutor in the U.S. Attorney’s Of-
fice for the District of New Mexico in
1999, prosecuting a wide range of Fed-
eral offenses, including narcotics and
violent crime cases. He holds the rank
of major as a judge advocate in the
U.S. Army Reserve, which he joined in
September 2001. He has provided crit-
ical legal assistance to hundreds of ac-
tive and retired soldiers and spouses,
both here and overseas. In 2008 he was
called to Active Duty as a part of Oper-
ation Enduring Freedom, where he was
stationed at Fort Bragg and served as a
senior trial counsel.
Mr. Gonzales has been an exemplary
U.S. attorney for the District of New
Mexico. He oversees a broad array of
criminal and civil cases.
I would also like to note that he has
made Indian Country a priority in the
U.S. Attorney’s Office, making a real
difference in prosecuting cases of vio-
lence against native women and chil-
dren.
Not surprisingly, his advice and
counsel are highly valued. He serves on
the Attorney General’s Advisory Com-
mittees on Native American Issues, on
the Southwest Border and Immigration
Issues, on the Environmental and Nat-
ural Resources Working Group, and is a
member of the Tenth Circuit Advisory
Council.
He is also a member of the New Mex-
ico Hispanic Bar Association. If con-
firmed, he will join only 58 other His-
panic active district court judges—less
than 10 percent of the country’s 677 dis-
trict court judgeships.
Mr. Gonzales is esteemed for his di-
verse experience, for his even tempera-
ment, and for his integrity. From a
young man dreaming of going to col-
lege, to his life in public service, his
story is one of great determination and
commitment. He has shown a reverence
for and dedication to the law through-
out his career.
I urge his confirmation. I know Ken
Gonzales will serve New Mexico well on
the Federal bench.
Mr. President, I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen-
ator from New Mexico.
Mr. HEINRICH. Mr. President, I
would like to take a few minutes to
also speak about the nomination of
Kenneth Gonzales to be a Federal dis-
trict judge for the District of New Mex-
ico.
Ken, as he is known back home to
many of us, is truly a standout nomi-
nee. I wish I could take credit for his
nomination, but that credit belongs to
our former U.S. Senator Jeff Bingaman
and to our senior Senator TOM UDALL.
But I want to thank both of them for
putting forward such a great candidate
for this position, and I am very pleased
to be here today to support him.
Ken has a long and distinguished
record of public service, including more
than a decade of service in our mili-
tary. Ken has served as the U.S. attor-
ney for New Mexico since April 2010.
His elevation to lead that office fol-
lowed more than a decade of service
there as an assistant U.S. attorney. I
would like to highlight at least one of
his many accomplishments that I find
particularly important.
I think Ken’s efforts as U.S. attorney
demonstrate not only his character and
his intellect but the dedication that he
has to serving his home State and
making it a better place for all our
residents.
Much of New Mexico is Indian Coun-
try for which the U.S. attorney has the
responsibility to prosecute criminal ac-
tivity. Ken has taken the initiative to
reorganize and focus the U.S. attor-
ney’s resources to more effectively
combat the higher-than-average rates
of violent crime, sexual assault, and
sexual abuse that have plagued Indian
Country.
This includes creating the first In-
dian Country Crime Section within any
U.S. Attorney Office. This section in-
cludes a team of lawyers responsible
for pursuing felony offenses on tribal
lands. The office is also collaborating
with tribal prosecutors to investigate
and prosecute domestic violence in
more than 20 pueblos and tribes located
throughout the State of New Mexico.
This is just one example of Ken’s
work, but throughout his career Ken
has shown a dedication to serving the
people of New Mexico. It is the sum of
all his efforts and accomplishments
that make me believe he will make an
outstanding addition to the Federal
bench, and I am pleased that today we
are at the final step toward getting
him here.
The process for getting to the Fed-
eral bench is a long road to travel. The
Judiciary Committee’s leadership from
both sides of the aisle takes seriously
its responsibility to ensure that every
nominee is fit to serve. I want to say a
special thanks to Senator LEAHY and
Senator GRASSLEY for working to-
gether and with Senator UDALL and
myself to get Ken through this process.
As the vetting process surely showed,
Ken has the knowledge, temperament,
and integrity to serve on the Federal
bench. I have no doubt that he will dis-
tinguish himself there, as he has
throughout his entire legal career.
I strongly support his nomination,
and I urge all of my colleagues to do
the same.
Mr. President, I yield the floor.
? Mr. TOOMEY. Mr. President, I wish
to offer my full support for the nomi-
nation of Judge Luis Felipe Restrepo
to serve as U.S. District Judge for the
Eastern District of Pennsylvania.
Before I begin, I wish to take this op-
portunity to thank Chairman LEAHY
and Senator GRASSLEY for helping fa-
cilitate Judge Restrepo’s confirmation
VerDate Mar 15 2010 02:05 Jun 18, 2013 Jkt 029060 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 E:\CR\FM\G17JN6.026 S17JNPT1
p
w
a
l
k
e
r

o
n

D
S
K
7
T
P
T
V
N
1
P
R
O
D

w
i
t
h

S
E
N
A
T
E
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE S4512 June 17, 2013
hearing and Leader REID and Leader
MCCONNELL for their assistance in
bringing his nomination to the Senate
floor.
I would also like to thank Senator
CASEY for his collaboration in our bi-
partisan effort to fill Pennsylvania’s
judicial vacancies with exceptional
candidates. Over the past 2
1
?2 years, we
have worked together to identify and
recommend eight candidates, seven of
whom have been confirmed. The people
of Pennsylvania value this bipartisan
spirit and I am pleased our joint efforts
have led to today’s consideration of
Judge Restrepo.
Judge Restrepo currently serves as a
Federal magistrate judge for the U.S.
District Court for the Eastern District
of Pennsylvania. A native of Columbia,
he was raised in Northern Virginia and
received his citizenship in 1993. A grad-
uate of the University of Pennsylvania,
he went on to earn his J.D. from
Tulane School of Law.
Judge Restrepo brings a strong
record as an attorney in both the pub-
lic and private sector, which helps ex-
plain why he merited a unanimous
‘‘Well Qualified’’ rating from the
American Bar Association. After work-
ing as a public defender, he then prac-
ticed law at the law firm of Krasner &
Restrepo, focusing on criminal defense
and civil rights litigation. After 13
years in the private sector, Judge
Restrepo was selected to be a Federal
magistrate judge and has served the
public in this capacity for 7 years.
Aside from his legal duties, Judge
Restrepo has devoted significant time
to his community. In addition to his
involvement with the Make-A-Wish
Foundation, he established the Police/
Barrio project, which focuses on im-
proving the relationship between the
Police Department and Latino Commu-
nity in Philadelphia.
I am very confident that Judge
Restrepo’s judicial experience, legal
acumen, and dedication to public serv-
ice will serve him well should he be
confirmed for the Federal bench. I am
pleased to support this highly qualified
nominee and I urge my colleagues to
vote for his confirmation.?
Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, I
suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
clerk will call the roll.
Mr. ISAKSON. Mr. President, I ask
unanimous consent that the order for
the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without
objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. ISAKSON. I ask permission to
speak for 3 minutes as if in morning
business.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without
objection, it is so ordered.
CONGRESSMAN JOHN ROBERT LEWIS
Mr. ISAKSON. Mr. President, I rise
proudly today to speak to a resolution
that I have submitted in the Senate
commending JOHN ROBERT LEWIS, Con-
gressman, from the city of Atlanta,
civil rights leader in the 1960s and
1950s, and my personal friend.
In 1954, I was 10 years old in the At-
lanta public schools when Brown v.
Board of Education was decided in the
U.S. Supreme Court. JOHN LEWIS was 4
years older than me. He was born just
outside of Pike County, AL, and went
to the Pike County, AL, segregated
public school. He went on to Fisk Uni-
versity to get a degree in religion and
philosophy and volunteered for sit-ins
in Nashville to break the first sit-in on
lunch counters in the history of that
city.
This year marks the 50th anniversary
of what is called the Big Six in civil
rights. As I am sure the Presiding Offi-
cer will remember, it was 50 years ago
this August that Martin Luther King
led a march in Washington and gave
his great speech, ‘‘I Have a Dream’’ at
the Lincoln Memorial. There were six
great civil rights leaders then. There is
only one left, and that is JOHN ROBERT
LEWIS. He is my friend, he is my com-
patriot, and our lives have paralleled
each other all the way through.
JOHN introduced me when I was first
elected to the U.S. House of Represent-
atives, and I was honored for that in-
troduction. This year I joined JOHN on
the 50th anniversary of the crossing of
the Edmund Pettus Bridge in Selma,
AL, the historic march, the bloody
march on Bloody Sunday, which turned
around the Voting Rights Act, saw to
it that every American got equal ac-
cess to vote, and changed the history of
our country.
It is an honor and a privilege for me
to honor JOHN today on this 50th anni-
versary of the crossing of the Edmund
Pettus Bridge and honor a career that
has been dedicated to liberty and free-
dom for all Americans.
JOHN recently suffered the loss of his
beautiful wife Lillian. She is survived
by their son John Miles Lewis. JOHN is
a great leader to this day on the floor
of the House, a great leader for the
State of Georgia, and one with whom I
am pleased to serve as Senator.
History has many heroes, as we all
know—their pictures and their carv-
ings are all over this Capitol. But none
is greater than one who has sacrificed
their life for the rights of others and
for everyone to enjoy the same rights
that everyone else in America has.
JOHN LEWIS is such a person. I am hon-
ored to recognize him with this resolu-
tion.
Mr. President, I yield for the distin-
guished Senator from Vermont.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen-
ator from Vermont.
Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, on the
question of nominations, I attended
President Obama’s announcement of
the nomination to the DC Circuit a
couple of weeks ago. I have heard some
of my colleagues on the Republican
side being very critical of the Presi-
dent for not sending nominations for
judicial vacancies to the Senate, even
though when he has, some of them
have held them up for 6 months to a
year before they then vote overwhelm-
ingly for the person. They hold him up
and then say: Why don’t you send more
people? Frankly, a lot of people say:
Why should I spend 6 months or a year
waiting while they hold me up? Now
the President has sent nominees for
the multiple vacancies that continue
on the DC Circuit. So the same Sen-
ators who are complaining that he was
not sending up nominees now say he is
sending up too many. My friends on the
other side of the aisle are saying: You
are not sending up enough, but you are
sending up too many. I think maybe
the American people see the fallacy of
that argument.
Having been unfairly criticized in
connection with the nomination of
Judge Srinivasan, with some Senate
Republicans saying: Why didn’t you get
him up here earlier for a vote, even
though Republicans had asked us to
delay him, I have learned from that
that when cooperating and delaying at
their request, I am going to get criti-
cized for delaying, so going forward I
will be making every effort to schedule
prompt hearings for these impressive
nominees, each of whom received the
highest possible rating of ‘‘well quali-
fied’’ from the nonpartisan ABA Stand-
ing Committee on the Federal Judici-
ary. We have three people with the
highest possible rating.
The last time we had someone for the
DC Circuit, even though Republicans
kept saying: Let’s delay, keep delay-
ing—and I did so at their request—and
they criticized me for delaying, here we
are and we are going forward with
them.
Frankly, I voted for a lot of Presi-
dent Bush’s nominees. In fact, I would
say I voted for 97 or 98 percent of all
Republican nominees over 38 years. I
voted for more Republican judicial
nominees than any Republican pres-
ently in the Senate. There is no Repub-
lican in the Senate who has voted for
more Republican nominees of Repub-
lican Presidents, nominees for judge-
ships, than I have. So I do not need a
lecture about holding things up.
I have consulted with the ranking
Republican on the committee and in-
formed him that I plan to notice the
first hearing for July 10. That gives
plenty of time for everybody to read all
the nominee’s materials. We will be on
vacation for the Fourth of July week;
they can read it during vacation. That
will be 36 days since the nominations
and on a slightly slower timeline than
we followed for the more recent con-
firmation of the nominee to the Eighth
Circuit. I am delighted to include the
nomination of Patricia Millett of Vir-
ginia, who should have broad bipar-
tisan support, in our July 10 confirma-
tion hearing.
It is disappointing that the same Re-
publican Senators who said during the
George W. Bush administration that
the DC Circuit should have 11 filled
judgeships and who voted to confirm
President Bush’s nominees for the 9th,
10th and 11th seats, now that there is a
Democratic President of the United
States in the White House, they say no,
VerDate Mar 15 2010 02:05 Jun 18, 2013 Jkt 029060 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 E:\CR\FM\A17JN6.026 S17JNPT1
p
w
a
l
k
e
r

o
n

D
S
K
7
T
P
T
V
N
1
P
R
O
D

w
i
t
h

S
E
N
A
T
E
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE S4513 June 17, 2013
no, they should not be filled. It seems
this President has to be treated dif-
ferently than the previous Presidents. I
am not sure why the difference, but
that is what they want. It is dis-
appointing as well that Republican
Senators I have helped fill circuit va-
cancies with nominees from their home
states, over opposition from their own
Republican Senate caucus, are ready to
tow their party’s line when it comes to
the D.C. Circuit.
Following President Obama’s reelec-
tion, Senate Republicans are even pro-
posing to eliminate those D.C. Circuit
judgeships legislatively. Their claims
of concern about the caseloads of the
Second and Eleventh Circuits but not
the most overburdened Ninth Circuit
are difficult to reconcile with their
votes for President Bush’s D.C. Circuit
nominees. As one scholar at the non-
partisan Brookings Institution has
said, this ‘‘fooled no one who was pay-
ing attention.’’
I cannot help but wonder where Sen-
ate Republicans’ concern about the
caseload of the Second Circuit was
when they needlessly delayed the con-
firmation of Gerard Lynch for three
months; when they needlessly delayed
the confirmation of Raymond Lohier
for seven months; when they needlessly
delayed the confirmation of Susan Car-
ney for five months; when they un-
fairly stalled the nomination of Judge
Robert Chatigny and then needlessly
delayed the confirmation of the next
Connecticut nominee, Chris Droney,
for four months; or when they need-
lessly delayed the confirmation of
Denny Chin for four months and forced
the Majority Leader to file cloture to
get a confirmation vote.
I wonder where their concern about
the caseload of the Eleventh Circuit
was when they needlessly delayed the
confirmation of Beverly Martin for
four months, or when they needlessly
delayed the confirmation of Adalberto
Jordan for four months and forced a
cloture vote before his confirmation. I
am prepared to help alleviate concern
about the caseload of the Eleventh Cir-
cuit by scheduling a hearing on the
nomination of Jill Pryor, a ‘‘well quali-
fied’’ nominee from Georgia to the
Court, if her home State Senators
would return their blue slips indicating
that they do not object to her nomina-
tion going forward.
The American people are not fooled.
Senate Republicans are now playing by
a different set of rules. Politifact has
looked at their argument that Presi-
dent Obama is trying to ‘‘pack’’ the
D.C. Circuit, and rated it ‘‘false.’’ It
goes on to note that the Republican
bill to eliminate D.C. Circuit judge-
ships ‘‘comes closer to the kind of
structural meddling typical of court
packing than does Obama’s approach.’’
In the last 30 years, Republican presi-
dents have appointed 15 of the last 19
judges named to the D.C. Circuit. Now
that these three vacancies exist during
a Democratic presidency, Senate Re-
publicans are trying to use legislation
to lock in their partisan advantage,
and thwart the will of the American
people, who elected Barack Obama.
Even conservative columnist Byron
York has tweeted: ‘‘It doesn’t strike
me as ‘packing’ to nominate candidates
to available seats.’’
The Washington Post’s ‘‘Fact Check-
er’’ blog has also looked at the argu-
ments about the D.C. Circuit’s caseload
that Senate Republicans are using to
justify their attempt to eliminate
three seats on that court, and has
judged them worthy of two
‘‘Pinocchios,’’ meaning: ‘‘Significant
omissions and/or exaggerations. Some
factual error may be involved but not
necessarily. A politician can create a
false, misleading impression by playing
with words and using legalistic lan-
guage that means little to ordinary
people.’’
Senate Republicans should know that
their argument about the D.C. Circuit’s
caseload is misleading. While they
claim expertise in the matter because
of a hearing they held in 1995, the fact
is that their current claims fly in the
face of the actual testimony from that
hearing. They are fond of citing the
testimony of Judge Laurence Silber-
man, a Reagan appointee, that he felt
the 12th seat was not necessary. What
Senate Republicans do not mention is
that Judge Silberman believed that 11
judgeships was the proper number on
that Circuit, and that the notion that
the D.C. Circuit should have only nine
judges was ‘‘quite farfetched.’’ Judge
Silberman also said that ‘‘the unique
nature of the D.C. Circuit’s caseload’’
means that it is not directly com-
parable to the other circuit courts.
Even though their own witness contra-
dicted them, 18 years later Senate Re-
publicans continue to make their par-
tisan argument. In addition, we elimi-
nated that twelfth seat years ago.
In its April 5, 2013 letter, the Judicial
Conference of the United States,
chaired by Chief Justice John Roberts,
sent us recommendations ‘‘based on
our current caseload needs.’’ They did
not recommend stripping judgeships
from the D.C. Circuit but stated that
they should continue at 11. Three are
currently vacant. According to the Ad-
ministrative Office of U.S. Courts, the
caseload per active judge for the D.C.
Circuit has actually increased by 46
percent since 2005, when the Senate
confirmed President Bush’s nominee to
fill the eleventh seat on the D.C. Cir-
cuit. When the Senate confirmed
Thomas Griffith—President Bush’s
nominee to the eleventh seat—in 2005,
the confirmation resulted in there
being approximately 121 pending cases
per active D.C. Circuit judge. Accord-
ing to the most recent data, there are
currently 177 pending cases for each ac-
tive judge on the D.C. Circuit, 46 per-
cent higher.
Further, concerns about low case-
loads did not bother Senate Repub-
licans voting this past February to
confirm a Tenth Circuit nominee from
Oklahoma, giving that Court the low-
est number of pending appeals per ac-
tive judge in the country. It did not
bother Senate Republicans voting this
past April to confirm an Eighth Circuit
nominee from Iowa, giving that Court
the lowest number of pending appeals
per active judge in the country. Yes,
lower than the D.C. Circuit. I do not re-
call seeing any bills from Senate Re-
publicans to eliminate the Oklahoma
and Iowa judgeships.
This falls into a pattern that we have
seen from Senate Republicans over the
past 20 years. While they had no prob-
lem adding a twelfth seat to the D.C.
Circuit in 1984, and voting for Presi-
dent Reagan’s and President George
H.W. Bush’s nominees for that seat,
they suddenly ‘‘realized’’ in 1995, when
a Democrat served as President, that
the Court did not need that judge.
Judge Merrick Garland was finally con-
firmed in 1997 after President Clinton
was reelected but Senate Republicans
would not act on his final two nomi-
nees to the D.C. Circuit.
In 2002, during the George W. Bush
administration, the D.C. Circuit’s case-
load had dropped to its lowest level in
the last 20 years. During that Repub-
lican administration, Senate Repub-
licans had no problem voting to con-
firm President Bush’s nominees to the
ninth, tenth and eleventh seats. These
are the same seats they wish to elimi-
nate now that Barack Obama is Presi-
dent, even though the Court’s current
caseload is consistent with the average
over the past 10 years. Even on its own
terms, it is apparent that this argu-
ment has nothing to do with caseload,
and everything to do with who is Presi-
dent. When Senate Republicans get se-
rious about ensuring our Federal
courts are adequately staffed, I am
more than happy to work with them on
a long-overdue judgeship bill. But this
selective concern about the D.C. Cir-
cuit, and the fact that in 2008 the mi-
nority blocked a Judiciary Committee
hearing on ‘‘The Growing Need for Fed-
eral Judgeships,’’ does not reflect such
seriousness.
I urge those Republicans who say
first that the President is not moving
fast enough and then, when he does
move, say he is moving too fast, to re-
consider their approach, work with the
President, and let’s have fair hearings
on these three nominees and go for-
ward with them. If we do, I am con-
fident we will agree that they are well-
qualified judicial nominees.
RESTREPO AND GONZALES NOMINATIONS
Last week the Senate failed to com-
plete action on one of the three nomi-
nations pending for vacancies in the
Eastern District of Pennsylvania. Even
though Senate Democrats had expe-
dited three of President Bush’s nomi-
nees to that court, confirming them all
by voice vote just 1 day after they had
been reported by the Judiciary Com-
mittee, Senate Republicans refused to
do the same for President Obama’s
nominees. They refused even though all
three had the bipartisan support of
their home State Senators and the
VerDate Mar 15 2010 02:05 Jun 18, 2013 Jkt 029060 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 E:\CR\FM\G17JN6.030 S17JNPT1
p
w
a
l
k
e
r

o
n

D
S
K
7
T
P
T
V
N
1
P
R
O
D

w
i
t
h

S
E
N
A
T
E
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE S4514 June 17, 2013
unanimous support of all Republicans
on the Committee. Two were confirmed
last week but one was held back. After
waiting 98 days for a vote, Judge
Alejandro and Judge Schmehl were
confirmed unanimously last week.
Today, after another unnecessary
delay, the Senate will finally vote on
the nomination of Judge Luis
Restrepo, more than 100 days after he
was voted out of the Judiciary Com-
mittee unanimously. When the Senate
is finally allowed to act, we will con-
firm a judge to fill a 4-year vacancy.
The Eastern District of Pennsylvania
is a court that needs judges. Even with
today’s vote, it will remain nearly 20
percent vacant. The Senate should be
taking swift action to fill these kinds
of vacancies, not delaying for no good
reason. This obstruction does a dis-
service to the people of Pennsylvania,
and to all Americans who depend on
our Federal courts for justice.
I regret that I must correct the
RECORD, again. The recent assertion by
Senate Republicans that 99 percent of
President Obama’s nominees have been
confirmed is not accurate. President
Obama has nominated 237 individuals
to be circuit or district judges, and 195
have been allowed to be confirmed by
the Senate. That is 82 percent, not 99
percent. By way of comparison, at the
same point in President Bush’s second
term, June 17 of his fifth year in office,
President Bush had nominated four
fewer people, but had seen 215 of them
confirmed, which is 20 more confirma-
tions. The truth is that 92 percent of
President Bush’s judicial nominees had
been confirmed at the same point, 10
percentage points more than have been
allowed President Obama. That is an
apples to apples comparison, and it
demonstrates the undeniable fact that
the Senate has confirmed a lower num-
ber and lower percentage of President
Obama’s nominees than President
Bush’s nominees at the same time in
their presidencies.
I noted at the end of last year, while
Senate Republicans were insisting on
delaying confirmations of 15 judicial
nominees that could and should have
taken place then, that we would not
likely be allowed to complete work on
them until May. That was precisely the
Republican plan. So when Senate Re-
publicans now seek to claim credit for
their confirmations in President
Obama’s second term, they are inflat-
ing the confirmation statistics. The
truth is that only nine confirmations
have taken place this year that are not
attributable to those nominations Sen-
ate Republicans held over from last
year and that could and should have
taken place last year. To return to the
baseball analogy, if a baseball player
goes 0-for-9, and then gets a hit, we do
not say he is an all-star because he is
batting 1.000 in his last at bat. We rec-
ognize that he is just 1-for-10, and not
a very good hitter. Nor would a fair
calculation of hits or home runs allow
a player to credit those that occurred
in one game or season to the next be-
cause it would make his stats look bet-
ter.
If President Obama’s nominees were
receiving the same treatment as Presi-
dent Bush’s, today’s votes would bring
us to 215 confirmations, not 197, and va-
cancies would be far lower. The non-
partisan Congressional Research Serv-
ice has noted that it will require 31
more district and circuit confirmations
this year to match President Bush’s 5-
year total. Even with the confirma-
tions finally concluded during the first
6 months of this year, Senate Repub-
licans have still not allowed President
Obama to match the record of Presi-
dent Bush’s first term. Even with an
extra 6 months, we are still 10 con-
firmations behind where we were at the
end of 2004.
Luis Restrepo has served as a U.S.
Magistrate Judge in the Eastern Dis-
trict of Pennsylvania since 2006. Prior
to his appointment to the Federal
bench, he was a founding partner of
Krasner & Restrepo, a firm that fo-
cused on civil rights and criminal de-
fense work. He has also worked as an
adjunct professor at Temple Univer-
sity, Beasley School of Law and the
University of Pennsylvania Law
School. Before co-founding his own law
firm, Judge Restrepo was an Assistant
Federal Defender for the Eastern Dis-
trict of Pennsylvania, an Assistant De-
fender for the Defender Association of
Philadelphia, and a Law Clerk for the
ACLU’s National Prison Project. The
nonpartisan ABA Standing Committee
on the Federal Judiciary has unani-
mously rated Judge Restrepo ‘‘well
qualified.’’ He is supported by both his
home State Senators, Senator CASEY
and Senator TOOMEY.
Kenneth Gonzales has been the
United States Attorney for the District
of New Mexico since 2010. He served as
an Assistant U.S. Attorney in that of-
fice for the previous 11 years. Prior to
working with the U.S. Attorney’s Of-
fice, Kenneth Gonzales spent 3 years as
a Legislative Assistant to former Sen-
ator Jeff Bingaman and 2 years as law
clerk to the Honorable Joseph F. Baca
of the New Mexico Supreme Court. He
also serves in the United States Army
Reserve as a Judge Advocate General.
Kenneth Gonzales has the support of
his home State Senators, Senator TOM
UDALL and Senator MARTIN HEINRICH,
and was reported unanimously from
the Judiciary Committee 2 months ago.
I want the Senate to make real
progress on filling judicial vacancies so
that the American people have access
to justice. In President Bush’s first
term, half of his consensus district
nominees waited 18 days or fewer for a
vote, so we know the Senate is capable
of swift action on nominations. There
is no reason consensus nominees like
Judge Restrepo and Kenneth Gonzales
should have to wait 2 or 3 months for a
vote. The only reason for these delays
is because of Republican refusal to
allow votes. These nominees deserve
better, and the American people de-
serve better.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen-
ator from Iowa.
Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, I am
going to vote for both judges today.
But today I want to inform my fellow
Senators and American people regard-
ing the facts on judicial nominations.
Today, we will confirm two more nomi-
nees. I would note that we confirmed
two judges just 4 days ago.
After today, the Senate will have
confirmed 197 lower court nominees; we
have defeated two. That is 197–2. That
is an outstanding record. That is a suc-
cess rate of 99 percent.
And we have been doing that at a fast
pace. During the last Congress we con-
firmed more judges than any Congress
since the 103rd Congress, which was
1993–94.
This year, the beginning of President
Obama’s second term, we have already
confirmed more judges than were con-
firmed in the entire first year of Presi-
dent Bush’s second term. Let me em-
phasize that again—We have already
confirmed more nominees this year
than we did during the entirety of 2005,
the first year of President Bush’s sec-
ond term.
After today, only five article III
judges remain on the Executive Cal-
endar—three district nominees and two
Circuit nominees.
Two of those were reported out last
week, two more about a month ago,
and one has been on the calendar for
about two months. Yet, somehow Sen-
ate Democrats cite this as evidence of
obstructionism.
Compare that to the calendar of June
2004, when 30 judicial nominations were
on the Calendar—10 Circuit and 20 Dis-
trict. In fact, four of those were from
Pennsylvania, as is one of our nomi-
nees today. I don’t recall any Senate
Democrats complaining about how
many nominations were piling up on
the calendar, nor do I remember prot-
estations from my colleagues on the
other side that judicial nominees were
moving too slowly.
Last week, when we confirmed two
Pennsylvania judges, there were state-
ments made on the floor that we were
treating President Obama’s nominees
very different than those of President
Bush. But look at the record. As I said,
there were four Pennsylvania nominees
on the calendar in June of 2004.
Gene Pratter was nominated in No-
vember 2003, had a hearing in the fol-
lowing January, was reported in
March, and was confirmed in June.
Lawrence Stengel was nominated in
November 2003, had a hearing the fol-
lowing February, was reported in
March, and was confirmed in June.
Juan Sanchez was nominated in No-
vember, had a hearing the following
February, was reported in March, and
was confirmed in June.
Those milestones are nearly identical
to our Pennsylvania nominee today
who was nominated last November.
Just like the ones I mentioned, he had
a hearing the following February, was
reported in March, and now will be con-
firmed in June.
VerDate Mar 15 2010 02:23 Jun 18, 2013 Jkt 029060 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 E:\CR\FM\G17JN6.029 S17JNPT1
p
w
a
l
k
e
r

o
n

D
S
K
7
T
P
T
V
N
1
P
R
O
D

w
i
t
h

S
E
N
A
T
E
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE S4515 June 17, 2013
If we have been unfair to this nomi-
nee, as it is now claimed, where was
the outcry from Senate Democrats on
the Bush nominees I just described?
The fact is there is no difference in how
this President’s nominees are being
treated versus how President Bush’s
nominees were treated.
Remember, now there are only five
article III judicial nominees remaining
after today’s vote. Yet, as I mentioned,
in June 2004 there were 30 nominations
pending on the calendar. Some of those
nominees had been reported out more
than a year earlier and most were
pending for months. And some of them
never got an up or down vote.
The bottom line is that the Senate is
processing the President’s nominees
exceptionally fairly. President Obama
certainly is being treated more fairly
in the beginning of his second term
than Senate Democrats treated Presi-
dent Bush in 2005. It is not clear to me
how allowing more votes so far this
year than President Bush got in an en-
tire year amounts to ‘‘unprecedented
delays and obstruction.’’ Yet, that is
the complaint we here over and over
from the other side.
Last week it was stated that with
this President, ‘‘Republicans have
never let vacancies get below 72.’’
After today’s votes there will be 77
vacancies in the federal judiciary. But
52 of those spots are without a nomi-
nee. How is it the fault of the Repub-
licans that the President has not sent
52 nominees to the Committee? Obvi-
ously, common sense ought to tell you
that we can’t act on nominees who are
not presented to the Senate.
Just one example will illustrate this.
Last week the Chairman of the Judici-
ary Committee singled out the vacan-
cies on the Eastern District of Pennsyl-
vania. We are confirming the third
judge to that Court, after the two last
week. Four vacancies remain, but there
are no nominees pending in the Senate
for the Eastern District of Pennsyl-
vania.
It was also stated that the seat we
are filling today has been vacant for
over 4 years, as if Republicans were to
blame for that. The fact is, this seat
went vacant on June 8, 2009. President
Obama was the President then. He
waited over 3 years and 5 months be-
fore making a nomination on Novem-
ber 27, 2012. Why did the President
make the people of Pennsylvania wait
so long? That wasn’t the fault of this
side of the aisle. Yet now we are ac-
cused of obstruction.
So I just wanted to set the record
straight—again—before we vote on
these nominees. I expect they will both
be confirmed and I congratulate them
on their confirmations. And as I said at
the beginning, I’m going to vote to sup-
port these nominees.
Kenneth John Gonzales is nominated
to be United States District Court
Judge for the District of New Mexico.
Upon graduation from the University
of New Mexico School of Law in 1994,
Mr. Gonzales clerked for Chief Justice
Joseph F. Baca of the New Mexico Su-
preme Court. In 1996 he worked as a
legislative assistant to Senator Jeff
Bingaman. From 1999 to 2010, Mr.
Gonzales served as an Assistant United
States Attorney in the U.S. Attorney’s
Office for the District of New Mexico.
His primary responsibility was crimi-
nal prosecution including large-scale
drug trafficking cases with various
Federal agencies and a small number of
violent crime cases originating in the
Mescalero Apache Reservation. In 2006
Mr. Gonzales transferred to the Albu-
querque Violent Crime Section where
he prosecuted violent crime occurring
on Indian Reservations as well as sev-
eral bank robbery and firearms-related
cases that originated in the Albu-
querque area. In 2009 he transferred to
the Narcotics section as a designated
attorney for the Department of Justice
Organized Crime Drug Enforcement
Task Force where his work was pri-
marily long-term and complex nar-
cotics trafficking investigations and
prosecutions. In 2010 he became the
United States Attorney for the District
of New Mexico.
Since 2001 Mr. Gonzales has served as
a Reserve officer with the United
States Army Judge Advocate General’s
Corps. In November 2008 he was mobi-
lized to active duty and stationed at
Fort Bragg, NC with the 18th Airborne
Corps where he conducted legal re-
views, official responses to Freedom of
Information Act requests, Army Regu-
lation 15–6 investigations, and property
accountability investigations. Cur-
rently he fulfills his annual Reserve re-
quirement as an Adjunct Professor of
Criminal Law at the JAG Legal Center
& School in Charlottesville, VA.
The American Bar Association’s
Standing Committee on the Federal
Judiciary gave him a ‘‘Qualified’’ rat-
ing.
Luis Felipe Restrepo is nominated to
be United States District Court Judge
for the Eastern District of Pennsyl-
vania. Judge Restrepo received his B.A.
from the University of Pennsylvania in
1989, and his J.D. from Tulane Univer-
sity Law School in 1986. Upon gradua-
tion, he clerked at the ACLU Prison
Project in Washington, DC. From 1987
to 1990, he was an assistant defender
with the Defender Association of Phila-
delphia where he represented criminal
defendants in State and Federal court.
In 1990, he became an assistant federal
defender for the Federal Community
Defender for the Eastern District of
Pennsylvania, appearing at the trial
and appellate level.
Judge Restrepo was in private prac-
tice with one partner from 1993–2006.
There, he focused primarily on crimi-
nal defense, including some death pen-
alty cases. He defended clients on re-
tainer and as a court-appointed coun-
sel. While in private practice the ma-
jority of Judge Restrepo’s civil cases
consisted of Section 1983 actions alleg-
ing police abuse and mistreatment.
Other civil matters included represen-
tation in workplace accident, medical
malpractice, wrongful death, and fire
cases.
Judge Restrepo was appointed to be a
United States Magistrate Judge for the
Eastern District of Pennsylvania in
2006. As magistrate judge, he manages
all aspects of the pre-trial process in
civil cases: conducting evidentiary
hearings, ruling on non-dispositive mo-
tions, and making reports and rec-
ommendations regarding dispositive
motions.
The American Bar Association’s
Standing Committee on the Federal
Judiciary gave him a ‘‘Well Qualified’’
rating.
I yield the floor, and I suggest the ab-
sence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
clerk will call the roll.
The assistant bill clerk proceeded to
call the roll.
Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, I ask
unanimous consent that the order for
the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without
objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, I ask
that any time remaining be yielded
back.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without
objection, it is so ordered.
All time is yielded back.
The question is, Will the Senate ad-
vise and consent to the nomination of
Luis Felipe Restrepo, of Pennsylvania,
to be United States District Judge for
the Eastern District of Pennsylvania?
The nomination was confirmed.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
President will be immediately notified
of the Senate’s action.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under
the previous order, the question is, Will
the Senate advise and consent to the
nomination of Kenneth John Gonzales,
of New Mexico, to be United States
District Judge for the District of New
Mexico?
Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, I request
the yeas and nays.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a
sufficient second?
There appears to be a sufficient sec-
ond.
The clerk will call the roll.
The assistant bill clerk called the
roll.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Ms.
BALDWIN). Are there any other Sen-
ators in the Chamber desiring to vote?
Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the
Senator from Iowa (Mr. HARKIN) and
the Senator from Maryland (Ms. MI-
KULSKI) are necessarily absent.
Mr. CORNYN. The following Senators
are necessarily absent: the Senator
from Oklahoma (Mr. COBURN), the Sen-
ator from Mississippi (Mr. COCHRAN),
the Senator from Wyoming (Mr. ENZI),
the Senator from Oklahoma (Mr.
INHOFE), the Senator from Alaska (Ms.
MURKOWSKI), the Senator from Ala-
bama (Mr. SHELBY), the Senator from
Pennsylvania (Mr. TOOMEY), the Sen-
ator from Louisiana (Mr. VITTER), and
the Senator from Mississippi (Mr.
WICKER).
VerDate Mar 15 2010 02:23 Jun 18, 2013 Jkt 029060 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 E:\CR\FM\G17JN6.046 S17JNPT1
p
w
a
l
k
e
r

o
n

D
S
K
7
T
P
T
V
N
1
P
R
O
D

w
i
t
h

S
E
N
A
T
E
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE S4516 June 17, 2013
The result was announced—yeas 89,
nays 0, as follows:
[Rollcall Vote No. 150 Ex.]
YEAS—89
Alexander
Ayotte
Baldwin
Barrasso
Baucus
Begich
Bennet
Blumenthal
Blunt
Boozman
Boxer
Brown
Burr
Cantwell
Cardin
Carper
Casey
Chambliss
Chiesa
Coats
Collins
Coons
Corker
Cornyn
Cowan
Crapo
Cruz
Donnelly
Durbin
Feinstein
Fischer
Flake
Franken
Gillibrand
Graham
Grassley
Hagan
Hatch
Heinrich
Heitkamp
Heller
Hirono
Hoeven
Isakson
Johanns
Johnson (SD)
Johnson (WI)
Kaine
King
Kirk
Klobuchar
Landrieu
Leahy
Lee
Levin
Manchin
McCain
McCaskill
McConnell
Menendez
Merkley
Moran
Murphy
Murray
Nelson
Paul
Portman
Pryor
Reed
Reid
Risch
Roberts
Rockefeller
Rubio
Sanders
Schatz
Schumer
Scott
Sessions
Shaheen
Stabenow
Tester
Thune
Udall (CO)
Udall (NM)
Warner
Warren
Whitehouse
Wyden
NOT VOTING—11
Coburn
Cochran
Enzi
Harkin
Inhofe
Mikulski
Murkowski
Shelby
Toomey
Vitter
Wicker
The nomination was confirmed.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under
the previous order, the motions to re-
consider are considered made and laid
upon the table. The President will be
immediately notified of the Senate’s
action.
f
LEGISLATIVE SESSION
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen-
ate will resume legislative session.
f
MORNING BUSINESS
Mr. REID. Madam President, I ask
unanimous consent the Senate proceed
to a period of morning business from
now until 6:40 p.m. to allow a colloquy
between Senator BROWN and Senator
ISAKSON.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without
objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. REID. When that time is up, I
ask unanimous consent to be recog-
nized.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without
objection, it is so ordered.
The Senator from Georgia.
Mr. ISAKSON. I ask unanimous con-
sent to be recognized along with Sen-
ator BROWN of Ohio for up to 15 min-
utes and to engage in a colloquy.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without
objection, it is so ordered.
f
THE CENTERS FOR DISEASE
CONTROL
Mr. ISAKSON. Madam President, I
am proud to stand here today as a resi-
dent of Georgia and its capital city At-
lanta, which is the home of the Centers
for Disease Control and Prevention in
America, a great institution with
which Senator BROWN and I are famil-
iar. We want to talk about some of its
great achievements today.
CDC is the Nation’s health protection
agency, but it is really the world’s
health protection agency. What CDC
has done is build a strong national pub-
lic health and disease detection net-
work for working with State and local
agencies, private partners, universities,
and communities to stop disease and
stop outbreaks.
By way of example, CDC led a multi-
State response to last year’s fungal
meningitis outbreak that resulted in
745 infections and 58 deaths in 20
States. CDC identified and contained
dangerous foodborne pathogen out-
breaks, such as hepatitis A found in
frozen berry blend; salmonella found in
the poultry industry; and E. coli found
in frozen food products.
CDC puts science into action every
day to protect the American people,
using breakthroughs such as microbial
genomics to find outbreaks sooner,
stop them earlier, and prevent them
better in environmental hazards, bio-
security threats, and national disaster.
CDC provided direct support within
hours of Superstorm Sandy to the dev-
astated northeast last year. We need to
be able to be ready for this year’s hur-
ricane system as it deals with other
public threats.
The CDC provides crucial informa-
tion on the status of health risks to the
American people. With data it helps de-
termine the best options for preventing
illness and reducing medical costs. At a
time when the U.S. Government is not
looked upon with a lot of favor by the
American people, I think it is very in-
teresting to note that a recent Gallup
poll identified the CDC as the most
trusted Federal Government agency
with the American people. I think that
is something to which we owe a tip of
the hat.
Mr. BROWN. I thank Senator ISAK-
SON. I am so appreciative of the work
the Senator has done with the Centers
for Disease Control in his home State
of Georgia. There is no Federal agency
that is quite like the CDC in this coun-
try or across the world.
Our Nation’s fiscal health cannot be
strengthened at the expense of our Na-
tion’s public health. In the 21st century
it is easy to overlook this country’s
public health safety net. Too often we
take for granted that our children are
not being crippled by polio or dying
from whooping cough because we have
immunizations. We take for granted
that we have stronger teeth and less
tooth decay because of water fluorida-
tion in many of our communities. We
take for granted that few people in this
country now die of infectious diseases
such as cholera and tuberculosis be-
cause we have made the kind of re-
markable progress we have in sanita-
tion, in hygiene, antibiotics, and dis-
ease surveillance. We take these ad-
vancements for granted because for
over six decades the CDC has been
doing an extraordinary job of ensuring
Americans have basic health protec-
tions.
The CDC’s work, along with that of
other public health advocates and re-
searchers, is credited with increasing
the average American’s life expectancy
over the last many decades, increasing
the average American’s life expectancy
by 25 years—25 years, a quarter of a
century longer because of our invest-
ment in public health.
The CDC’s reach and responsibility,
as intimated by Senator ISAKSON, is
not limited by our country’s borders.
Due to globalization it matters a great
deal how other countries respond to
health threats. The CDC plays an es-
sential role in helping its international
partners react to these threats.
The CDC is the gold standard, the
global leader in disease prevention and
public health preparedness. Other na-
tions follow our lead. Yet the CDC’s
leadership is not guaranteed. Even
with its topnotch facilities and world-
class staff, the CDC faces challenges to
this continued leadership. The CDC’s
base budget authority is at its lowest
level in a decade.
The fiscal year 2013 budget is about
$600 million below its fiscal year 2012
level. This reduction undercuts the
health security of all Americans, even
those who never once think of the ex-
istence of the Centers for Disease Con-
trol. The reduction in the CDC budget
has harmful, immediate, and long-term
consequences across the United States
and around the world. This reduction
affects the ability of our State and
local health departments to provide on-
the-ground services.
As my friend from Georgia explained
during his discussion of the deadly
fungal meningitis outbreak, funding
the CDC is critical to the foundation of
our public health. When we invest in
CDC, we invest in the health of fami-
lies in Lorain, OH, and Cuyahoga Falls,
OH. When we invest in CDC, we support
programs such as the Epidemiology
Laboratory Capacity Program which
addresses infectious disease threats.
When we invest in the CDC, we en-
sure that our State and local health de-
partments on the frontlines are able to
detect the first signs of outbreak.
Without this critical funding, we leave
ourselves vulnerable to the initial
spread of health threats, such as fungal
meningitis and emerging new diseases
such as the MERS coronavirus and the
novel H7N9 avian flu virus, which we
read about. Unfortunately, public
health departments across the Nation
have already lost thousands of jobs and
will lose more if our support of CDC
continues to dwindle.
Before turning it back over to Sen-
ator ISAKSON, I would like to emphasize
a point he made. The CDC responds to
long-term health threats as well as to
urgent immediate health dangers.
These threats don’t make the head-
lines. So much of CDC’s work you
never hear about, you never read about
VerDate Mar 15 2010 02:23 Jun 18, 2013 Jkt 029060 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 E:\CR\FM\A17JN6.019 S17JNPT1
p
w
a
l
k
e
r

o
n

D
S
K
7
T
P
T
V
N
1
P
R
O
D

w
i
t
h

S
E
N
A
T
E
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE S4517 June 17, 2013
because of its name, Centers for Dis-
ease Control and Prevention. Preven-
tion is such an important part of this.
CDC continues a longstanding tradi-
tion of working in partnership with
many international organizations and
global partners to ensure that our
country takes the lead in stopping
these threats.
I have had the pleasure of seeing
CDC’s dedicated, expert staff working
in Africa, in Atlanta, in communities
such as Medina County, OH, and all
over the world, working to keep these
countries and our communities
healthier, safer, and helping to keep all
Americans safe as well.
Mr. ISAKSON. Would the Senator
from Ohio yield for a moment?
Mr. BROWN. I yield to the Senator.
Mr. ISAKSON. I ran a company for 20
years, and a healthy workforce that
was ready, willing, and able to go to
work every single day made a big dif-
ference.
A lot of times when we think of CDC,
we think of outbreaks in Africa, we
think of ebola, and we think of sal-
monella. In fact, it is also an advocate
for wellness, better health habits, and
health care for Americans. Does the
Senator think that is important for the
productivity of the American people
and the American worker?
Mr. BROWN. I thank the Senator
from Georgia. I think that is exactly
the point. While perhaps those who
know CDC—obviously in the State of
Georgia people know it more inti-
mately than in my State. They more
likely think of CDC doing something in
Africa or Asia, not so much what it
means locally. We know that our hos-
pitals, for instance, are sometimes ha-
vens for high health care costs and un-
necessary illnesses due to infections
acquired in the hospital and antibiotic-
resistant superbugs such as CRE—a
family of germs with high levels of re-
sistance to antibiotics. I wonder if my
friend is familiar with CDC’s work in
these areas and if he would expand on
that.
Mr. ISAKSON. I appreciate the focus
on that. My friend from Ohio is exactly
correct. Antimicrobial resistance is a
serious threat to our Nation’s health.
Many bacteria become resistant to
multiple classes of antibiotics.
I might add a personal note at this
point. Three years ago I developed a
MRSA infection in a hospital in At-
lanta and almost lost my life to an an-
tibiotic-resistant disease and infection.
I know how important it is to have a
research facility such as the CDC that
can constantly stay one step ahead of
the evolution of defenses these mi-
crobes bring up themselves.
As a recent example, a recent out-
break of drug-resistant CRE where one
in two patients affected with bacteria
unfortunately passed away—CDC must
have resources to quickly track and
stop outbreaks and give health care
providers timely information. Without
that, there is the risk of contagion.
Mr. BROWN. That is certainly right.
It seems there are new emerging and
potentially dangerous health threats.
We obviously know of the disease—the
acquired infection you just mentioned.
We know now of the H7N9 bird flu and
MERS. How does the Senator see CDC’s
unique role in tracking and attempting
to prevent the spread of these threats
before they reach our shores, before we
in American hospitals such as Grady
Memorial or at MedCentral of Ohio
might be victims of that?
Mr. ISAKSON. Well, the Senator
makes a great point because CDC is
kind of the crucible where all the part-
ners in health care in the country come
together. You might remember when
we were here on 9/11/01, shortly after
the attack on the Trade Center in New
York. Then the anthrax letters started
to be mailed to Capitol Hill. It was
CDC that within days tracked down the
anthrax and helped us develop the de-
fenses so we didn’t have a problem with
the anthrax infection. We got the Cipro
distributed to those who were exposed
to keep them from succumbing to that
disease. That is the kind of timely ef-
fort we need for an agency like the
CDC to be able to quickly respond.
Public health security is a compo-
nent of our national security, as is evi-
denced by the anthrax case. With the
potential threat of engineered biologi-
cal weapons, CDC remains vigilant and
ready to act with experts and counter-
measures to protect the American peo-
ple. With emerging diseases such as
MERS and H7N9, CDC has sent CDC
teams around the globe to investigate
their origin, develop and ship labora-
tory diagnostic kits to the affected
areas, and save lives day in and day out
around the world.
Mr. BROWN. If the Senator would
yield for a moment, MERS was identi-
fied recently, and CDC scientists devel-
oped and shipped a diagnostic kit to be
used in the field. To talk about one—
when I talk to people about public
health and certainly the importance of
NIH but especially the focus on public
health by CDC, we talk about polio and
what CDC did to address and not quite
yet wipe out but in our country cer-
tainly wipe out—and in most of the
rest of the world—the polio virus. Give
us a little bit of history on how impor-
tant that was and what we learned
from that, if you would, Senator ISAK-
SON.
Mr. ISAKSON. When I grew up in the
fifties, I remember taking the sugar
cube, the anti-polio vaccine, the Jonas
Salk vaccine, for the first time ever.
Polio has been a dread disease that has
affected the American people and peo-
ple around the world for many years,
but now it is almost totally eradicated.
Why? Because of a worldwide effort by
many organizations—not the least of
which is the CDC—to see to it that the
inoculations are made available. In
fact, polio now only resides in three
countries: Afghanistan, Pakistan, and
Nigeria. We are close to closing the
door and having a polio-free world, just
as we are getting closer and closer to
eradicating measles, which now pri-
marily still has an outbreak in Nigeria.
CDC’s readiness and ability to deploy
at a moment’s notice makes all the dif-
ference in the world. I don’t wish to
sell here, but I have to make one note.
One of the reasons CDC is in Atlanta
and that is such a good location is they
can be anywhere in the world in a mat-
ter of a day by the Hartsfield Inter-
national Airport.
Not a day goes by but somewhere
around the world a country or a com-
munity calls and says: We need help.
We have a problem. We don’t know
what it is, but it has to be identified.
CDC scientists and doctors are put on
the planes to fly around the world to
diagnose, identify, and provide the cure
so the disease does not become an out-
break that takes thousands of lives.
Mr. BROWN. I wish to close with a
personal story about polio. My brother,
born in 1947—there are three of us,
three boys. My brother is the oldest,
my brother Bob. When he was in about
the first, second, or maybe the third
grade, my father, who was a local fam-
ily physician in Mansfield, was asked
by—if not the CDC, some national
health organization to give polio vac-
cines in Mansfield, OH. There were doc-
tors in other communities who were
asked to do that. They chose my father
in part because he was a good doctor.
They also chose him because he had
son, he had a child who was in second
or third or fourth grade at the time.
People were afraid. They weren’t sure
about injecting that vaccine into their
arm because a lot of families thought
that actually could cause polio. There
was always that fear. Scientists didn’t
believe that, but an awful lot of people
did.
There was a picture on the front page
of the Mansfield News Journal in the
1950s of my brother getting a polio vac-
cine. I believe his was Salk. Sabin
came later with the cube. He got the
Salk vaccine, administered by my dad.
CDC or one of the other public health
groups—I apologize, I don’t know
which—made sure that happened all
over the country so people could be
more reassured. That was really the be-
ginning, with Salk and then Sabin, of
the eradication of polio in this coun-
try.
It is hard to think back—the Pre-
siding Officer is not old enough—Sen-
ator ISAKSON and I can remember with
our parents the fear, until the end of
the 1950s, of parents that their child
would go swimming and might come
back, as Franklin Roosevelt did, with a
case of polio. Whatever the causes, that
virus spreading scared so many people.
In these days of hyper-partisanship
consuming Washington, I appreciate
the work of Senator ISAKSON, working
together with CDC because this is far
and above, far and away more impor-
tant than any kinds of political dif-
ferences that we might have.
I will let Senator ISAKSON close.
Mr. ISAKSON. I appreciate very
much the Senator’s focus on CDC. I
think it is ironic that we close talking
about Franklin Delano Roosevelt be-
cause in the 1940s, as our President, he
VerDate Mar 15 2010 02:23 Jun 18, 2013 Jkt 029060 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 E:\CR\FM\G17JN6.036 S17JNPT1
p
w
a
l
k
e
r

o
n

D
S
K
7
T
P
T
V
N
1
P
R
O
D

w
i
t
h

S
E
N
A
T
E
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE S4518 June 17, 2013
suffered from polio. He would take the
train to Georgia to go down to Warm
Springs to get the therapy of those
warm springs, which then was the only
mechanism of treating polio.
Today in Georgia, because of the
CDC, we have a mechanism of eradi-
cating polio. That is the type of evo-
lution we want to see in health care
not just for our country but for the
world.
CDC is the best investment of Amer-
ican tax dollars we could possibly
make. I support it wholeheartedly, and
I thank Senator BROWN for his partici-
pation in the colloquy today.
I yield back the remainder of my
time and suggest the absence of a
quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
clerk will call the roll.
The legislative clerk proceeded to
call the roll.
Mr. UDALL of New Mexico. I ask
unanimous consent that the order for
the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without
objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. UDALL of New Mexico. I ask to
speak as in morning business.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without
objection, it is so ordered.
f
SYRIA
Mr. UDALL of New Mexico. Madam
President, like many others, I am deep-
ly disturbed by the current situation in
Syria, the appalling atrocities, the
tragic loss of life, the reported use of
chemical weapons. This deserves the
clear condemnation of the inter-
national community.
I am also concerned by the push for
intervention in this war, by the rush to
judgment for the United States to yet
again become entangled in a civil war.
The President has decided to send arms
to the rebels to fight the government
of the Bashar al-Asad. The full scope of
this intervention is not yet clear, but
this path is dangerous and unneces-
sary.
The Asad regime is cruel and corrupt.
We can all agree on that point. Many of
the groups fighting against him do not
share our values and could be worse.
They may pose long-term risks to us
and our allies. Asad’s enemies may
very well be America’s enemies. The
fact is that we do not know. A number
of experts, including our military
brass, have sounded alarms warning
that the options to intervene in Syria
range from bad to worse and could
prove damaging to America’s strategic
interests. By flooding Syria with weap-
ons, we risk arming those who ulti-
mately may seek to do us harm.
We have been down this road before.
Recent history tells a cautionary tale.
In the 1980s the United States sup-
ported a rebel insurgency to repel the
Soviet occupation of Afghanistan.
Back then as now, many Members of
Congress pushed for arming these
rebels. The United States supplied
weapons, intelligence, and training,
with the goal to defeat the Soviets in
Afghanistan.
Our short-term victory had tragic
consequences for the future. Radical
members of the insurgency formed the
Taliban regime, giving safe haven to
terrorist training camps, providing ma-
terial support to Osama bin Laden and
his fledgling al-Qaida movement.
Through state-sponsored terrorism in
Afghanistan, al-Qaida thrived and per-
petrated attacks on the USS Cole and
the World Trade Center on 9/11. The
aftermath has been more than a decade
of war, with tragic loss of American
lives and treasure.
This is history to learn from, not re-
peat, and yet many who advocated for
previously disastrous Middle East
interventions are leading the charge to
arm groups we know little about and to
declare war through air strikes on an-
other Middle Eastern country.
What little we do know about the
Syrian rebels is extremely disturbing.
The opposition is fractured. Some are
sympathetic to the enemies of the
United States and our allies, including
Israel and Turkey. There are reliable
reports that some of the rebels even in-
clude Iraqi Sunni insurgents—the same
groups who killed many U.S. troops
and still target the current Iraqi Army
and Government.
We know American law currently
considers some of the rebel elements to
be terrorist groups. The United States
has designated one of the key opposi-
tion factions, the Nursa Front, as a ter-
rorist organization for being an al-
Qaida-affiliated group.
The Syrian opposition is very unor-
ganized. They lack a chain of com-
mand, they are subject to deadly in-
fighting, and if they are able to defeat
Asad, they may turn on each other or
worse the United States or our allies.
Simply put, once we have introduced
arms, neither we nor their fighters
may be able to guarantee control over
them. Such weapons could end up in
the hands of groups and people who do
not represent our interests, possibly in-
cluding terrorists who target the
United States, our allies, such as Israel
and Turkey, and the Iraqi Army and
Government—an Iraq that we spent bil-
lions of dollars and thousands of Amer-
ican lives to establish.
Given this reality, those who are
pushing for military intervention
should answer three basic questions:
Can arms be reasonably accounted for
and kept out of the hands of terrorists
and extremist groups? Can they assure
us those arms will not become a threat
to our regional allies and friends, in-
cluding Israel, Turkey, and the Govern-
ment of Iraq? And if the answer to the
two previous questions is no, can they
then explain why transferring our
weapons to the rebels, whose members
may themselves be affiliated with ter-
rorist and extremist groups, is a sen-
sible option for the American people?
What national interest does this serve?
I do not believe those questions have
been answered. I think the majority of
the American people agree. They do
not see the justification of our inter-
vention in this civil war. We need to
slow down this clamor for more weap-
ons to Syria and war and take a step
back from this plunge into very muddy
and dangerous waters.
Stopping radicalism and protecting
our allies is of vital importance; how-
ever, we come to the ultimate ques-
tion, one that has not been adequately
answered: Will this hasty march to in-
tervene in another Middle East conflict
achieve these goals or will it ulti-
mately harm the interests of the
United States, leading to yet another
bloody, costly, overseas conflict and,
ironically, worsening the terrorist
threat?
We should listen to the lessons of his-
tory. After over a decade of war over-
seas, now is not the time to arm an un-
organized, unfamiliar, and unpredict-
able group of rebels. Now is not the
time to rush headlong into another
Middle Eastern civil war. The winds of
war are blowing yet again, and we
should be ever vigilant before we ven-
ture into another storm.
Madam President, I yield the floor.
f
UNANIMOUS CONSENT
AGREEMENT—S. 744
Mr. REID. Madam President, I ask
unanimous consent that when the Sen-
ate resumes consideration of S. 744,
which is the immigration bill, on Tues-
day, June 18, the time until 12:30 p.m.
and the time from 2:15 to 3 p.m. be
equally divided between the two lead-
ers or their designees for debate on the
pending amendments listed below in
the following order: Thune No. 1197,
Landrieu No. 1222, Vitter No. 1228, and
Tester No. 1198; that there be no sec-
ond-degree amendments in order prior
to the votes; that all the amendments
be subject to a 60-affirmative-vote
threshold; that there be 2 minutes
equally divided between the votes; and
that all after the first vote be 10-
minute votes.
Madam President, I have spoken with
my friend, the ranking member of the
Judiciary Committee, the senior Sen-
ator from Iowa, because I wanted to
add the Heller amendment; however, I
understand the Republicans want to
pick their own amendments. They do
not want me picking them. I under-
stand that, so I haven’t included that
one in the consent request.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there
objection?
Without objection, it is so ordered.
f
BORDER SECURITY, ECONOMIC OP-
PORTUNITY, AND IMMIGRATION
MODERNIZATION ACT
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under
the previous order, the Senate will re-
sume consideration of S. 744, which the
clerk will report.
The legislative clerk read as follows:
A bill (S. 744) to provide for comprehensive
immigration reform and for other purposes.
VerDate Mar 15 2010 02:23 Jun 18, 2013 Jkt 029060 PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 E:\CR\FM\G17JN6.037 S17JNPT1
p
w
a
l
k
e
r

o
n

D
S
K
7
T
P
T
V
N
1
P
R
O
D

w
i
t
h

S
E
N
A
T
E
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE S4519 June 17, 2013
Pending:
Leahy/Hatch amendment No. 1183, to en-
courage and facilitate international partici-
pation in the performing arts.
Thune amendment No. 1197, to require the
completion of the 350 miles of reinforced,
double-layered fencing described in section
102(b)(1)(A) of the Illegal Immigration Re-
form and Immigrant Responsibility Act of
1996 before registered provisional immigrant
status may be granted and to require the
completion of 700 miles of such fencing be-
fore the status of registered provisional im-
migrants may be adjusted to permanent resi-
dent status.
Landrieu amendment No. 1222, to apply the
amendments made by the Child Citizenship
Act of 2000 retroactively to all individuals
adopted by a citizen of the United States in
an international adoption and to repeal the
pre-adoption parental visitation requirement
for automatic citizenship and to amend sec-
tion 320 of the Immigration and Nationality
Act relating to automatic citizenship for
children born outside of the United States
who have a United States citizen parent.
Tester amendment No. 1198, to modify the
Border Oversight Task Force to include trib-
al government officials.
Vitter amendment No. 1228, to prohibit the
temporary grant of legal status to, or adjust-
ment to citizenship status of, any individual
who is unlawfully present in the United
States until the Secretary of Homeland Se-
curity certifies that the US–VISIT System (a
biometric border check-in and check-out sys-
tem first required by Congress in 1996) has
been fully implemented at every land, sea,
and airport of entry and Congress passes a
joint resolution, under fast track procedures,
stating that such integrated entry and exit
data system has been sufficiently imple-
mented.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen-
ator from Iowa.
Mr. GRASSLEY. Madam President,
at every confirmation hearing of every
Cabinet position, and probably a lot of
other positions as well, a Cabinet
nominee is invariable asked a question
similar to this: Will you come when
you are called to a committee meeting
for a hearing, and will you answer in-
quiries made by members of the com-
mittee to certain questions you might
be asked? Invariably—and I don’t know
an exception to this—we get the an-
swer that, yes, they will respond to our
communiques.
Well, I come to the Senate today to
ask why Secretary Napolitano of the
Department of Homeland Security
hasn’t answered inquiries we have
made that ought to have been answered
by now. And the answers ought to have
been made by now because we are deal-
ing with the legislation to which the
questions refer.
On April 23, the Judiciary Committee
held a hearing to discuss immigration
reform and the bill presented by the
Gang of 8. Secretary Napolitano was
the only witness. The hearing lasted 2
hours and 20 minutes, and most mem-
bers were able to ask her 5 to 10 min-
utes’ worth of questions. We also sub-
mitted questions for the record, which
means we submitted questions to her
in writing for her to answer. Com-
mittee members were given just 24
hours to turn around those questions
to present to her. But it has been over
7 weeks—that is more than 49 days—
since we submitted those questions to
Secretary Napolitano, and we have yet
to get answers to those questions.
The questions I asked were genuine
and related to the implementation of
the bill if it were to be signed into law.
I asked questions of the Secretary be-
cause she will be responsible for car-
rying out Congress’s intentions. I
wanted to know about costs and feasi-
bility, and I asked for data and spe-
cifics. So I am concerned I have yet to
receive responses.
Keeping information from Congress
and the American people is not helpful
to ensuring we have the best product
coming out of the Senate. Since this
bill is right now before the Senate, it is
important for Members of this body to
have the answers to the questions I am
going to describe that I submitted to
her.
I will take this opportunity to dis-
cuss some of the questions I asked of
Secretary Napolitano, although not all
of them. Right now I will focus on nine
questions I asked about border security
because border security is an issue be-
fore the Senate as part of this 1,175-
page bill. I may discuss other questions
later in the week.
Question No. 1 to Secretary Napoli-
tano: You have emphasized that appre-
hensions at the border are down and in
doing so praised the administration’s
record on border security; however,
Customs and Border Protection has
just released numbers showing that ap-
prehensions increased 13 percent over
the last year. Does the fact that border
apprehensions are up mean that the
border is becoming less secure?
That was question No. 1 to Secretary
Napolitano.
Obviously, is the border more secure
or isn’t the border more secure? That
was the whole basis of the debate over
the last week in this body.
Question No. 2 to Secretary Napoli-
tano: The bill only calls for estab-
lishing an entry-exit system for air and
seaports before implementing the path
to citizenship. Aside from cost, what
impediments are there to instituting
the system at land ports?
Question No. 3: The bill requires your
department to establish a strategy to
identify where fencing should be de-
ployed along the southern border. Dur-
ing the hearing, you indicated the ad-
ministration believes that sufficient
fencing is in place and that you would
prefer not to increase fencing along the
southern border. So my question: Do
you anticipate that your study will
call for any additional physical fenc-
ing?
Now that seems to me to be a pretty
important question at this time when
border security is very basic to wheth-
er there will be any legalization. We
have not received an answer yet.
Question No. 4: During the hearing
we discussed the fact that the northern
border was not part of the trigger and
did not need to be secured before green
cards are distributed. You said the
northern border is a different border
but that it is a part of the discussion.
Can you elaborate? Can you describe
how the northern border is ‘‘different’’?
Please provide a list of ‘‘other than Ca-
nadians’’ who have crossed the north-
ern border illegally in the last 10 years,
including their country of origin.
Question No. 5. Section 1102 of S. 744
requires the Secretary to increase the
number of CBP officers by 3,500; how-
ever, it does not specify how many of
those agents will be used to secure the
physical border versus customs en-
forcement and other mission require-
ments. How do you envision this sec-
tion being implemented and how would
the Department make decisions with
regard to determining how many
agents are hired to secure the physical
borders?
Talking about border security, that
seems to me to be a legitimate ques-
tion that ought to have been answered
by the Secretary a long time before we
even started debate on this bill but
surely before we get done with it.
The sixth question: Section 1104 pro-
vides funding for only the Tucson sec-
tor of the southwest border region.
Does the administration support only
resources to this sector? Are there
other sectors that should be included?
If so, please provide details.
Seventh question: Section 1105 re-
lates solely to the State of Arizona.
Should this provision be expanded to
all of the southwest border States?
Question No. 8: Section 1107 provides
for a grant program in which individ-
uals who reside or work in the border
region and are ‘‘at greater risk of bor-
der violence due to the lack of cellular
service’’ can apply to purchase phones
with access to 911 and equipped with
GPS. Does the administration believe
the Southwest border region is safe and
secure, rendering this grant program
unnecessary?
Question No. 9, and my last question
I will discuss tonight, does the admin-
istration have any views on section
1111 on the use of force, including the
requirement that the Department col-
laborate with the Assistant Attorney
General for the Civil Rights Division of
the Department of Justice?
Those are the nine questions that I
think are very pertinent to just the
part of the bill we spent the last week
debating and we are going to spend a
few more days debating. Is the border
secure? That is very basic to every-
thing else that goes on in this piece of
legislation.
As I said, the questions I have asked
the Secretary are meant to ensure that
we pass the best bill possible. We ought
to know how she will carry out the bill
if it is signed into law. I hope she will
provide answers to these and the other
questions I submitted on April 24.
I yield the floor.
Mrs. BOXER. Madam President, on
June 12 and 13, 2013, I filed two amend-
ments, Nos. 1258 and 1282, to S. 744, the
Border Security, Economic Oppor-
tunity, and Immigration Moderniza-
tion Act. The name of Senator HIRONO
VerDate Mar 15 2010 03:04 Jun 18, 2013 Jkt 029060 PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 E:\CR\FM\G17JN6.038 S17JNPT1
p
w
a
l
k
e
r

o
n

D
S
K
7
T
P
T
V
N
1
P
R
O
D

w
i
t
h

S
E
N
A
T
E
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE S4520 June 17, 2013
was inadvertently omitted as a cospon-
sor of both amendments. I have asked
that Senator HIRONO be added as a co-
sponsor to amendment No. 1258 and
amendment No. 1282.
f
MORNING BUSINESS
Mr. KING. Madam President, I ask
unanimous consent that the Senate
proceed to a period of morning busi-
ness, with Senators permitted to speak
for up to 10 minutes each.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without
objection, it is so ordered.
f
REMEMBERING FRANK R.
LAUTENBERG
Mr. CASEY. Madam President. I am
honored to join my fellow Senators as
we remember our friend and colleague
Senator Frank Lautenberg. A dedi-
cated public servant, Frank proudly
represented New Jersey almost con-
tinuously from 1982 until his death.
Long before reaching the Senate,
Frank Lautenberg had proven himself
a patriot. Following his high school
graduation, Frank enlisted in the
Army and served his country in Europe
as a member of the Army Signal Corps
during the Second World War. A mem-
ber of the ‘‘Greatest Generation’’ and
the last World War II veteran to serve
in the Senate, Frank was a true public
servant.
Motivated by the desire to give back
to the country that provided him with
so much, Frank’s work in the Senate
improved the lives of all Americans
and left a lasting impact on our Na-
tion. Through his legislative efforts,
Senator Lautenberg helped to safe-
guard our Nation’s transportation in-
frastructure, increase access to quality
healthcare, and ensure that the brave
men and women who serve our country
today will have access to the same ben-
efits and opportunities that Frank fre-
quently credited with his success.
Frank’s strong moral character often
made him a leader on some of the most
pressing issues of the day, and his ef-
forts will undoubtedly leave a lasting
legacy. Having cast more than 9,000
votes on the floor—more than any pre-
vious Senator from New Jersey—Frank
played an influential role in shaping
important policies, directing funding,
and helping people in need.
On a personal note, I will always re-
call what a privilege it was to travel to
Israel and Turkey with Frank in 2009 as
part of a Congressional delegation. I
admired his strong support of Israel
and he will certainly be remembered as
a tireless friend and advocate.
In closing, I am reminded of a
quotation from President Kennedy.
Senator Frank Lautenberg truly was
‘‘someone who looks ahead and not be-
hind, someone who welcomes new ideas
without rigid reactions, someone who
cares about the welfare of the people—
their health, their housing, their
schools, their jobs, their civil rights
and their civil liberties.’’ We will miss
him in this Chamber but our country
and our children have a brighter future
because of his dedicated service.
f
ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS
CORNISH, NEW HAMPSHIRE
? Ms. AYOTTE. Madam President,
today I wish to recognize and honor the
town of Cornish, NH as it celebrates
the 250th anniversary of its founding.
Established in 1763 and incorporated
in 1765 by Colonial Gov. Benning Went-
worth, Cornish was named for Sir Sam-
uel Cornish, a distinguished vice-admi-
ral of the Royal Navy.
This area, located in Sullivan Coun-
ty, was once known as Mast Camp be-
cause it was the shipping point for the
tall masts floated down the river by
the English for use by the Royal Navy.
Forestry and agriculture continue to
be important components of Cornish’s
economy and lifestyle.
Cornish is known as a summer resort
for artists and writers. In 1885, sculptor
Augustus Saint-Gaudens sought a sum-
mer studio away from the heat of New
York City and found himself in Cor-
nish. Maxfield Parrish and other art-
ists soon followed Saint-Gaudens,
transforming the area into a popular
artists’ colony. In 1964, Saint-Gaudens’
home and studio were named a na-
tional historic site. Famous authors
Winston Churchill and J.D. Salinger
wrote at homes in Cornish.
Cornish is home to four covered
bridges, all of which are on the Na-
tional Register of Historic Places. The
Cornish-Windsor Covered Bridge built
in 1866 is the longest two-span covered
bridge in the world. The Cornish-Wind-
sor Covered Bridge has been designated
a National Civil Engineering Land-
mark by the American Society of Civil
Engineers and still carries daily auto-
mobile traffic.
Whether it is the Cornish Fair or a
summer concert at Saint-Gaudens Na-
tional Historic Site, Cornish has con-
tributed so much to the rich heritage
of New Hampshire during its first 250
years. I am pleased to join the citizens
across New Hampshire in celebrating
this special milestone for the people of
Cornish, whose accomplishments, love
of country, and spirit of independence
have enriched our State.?
f
RECOGNIZING QUEST AIRCRAFT
? Mr. RISCH. Madam President, a cor-
nerstone of the American dream has al-
ways been the belief that those individ-
uals with a good idea and a strong
work ethic can become successful. In
these tough economic times, it is in-
spiring to hear the stories of small
businesses that have risen above the
challenges they have faced and are
making their dreams come true. That
is why during National Small Business
Week, I rise today to honor Quest Air-
craft located in Sandpoint, ID
Quest Aircraft was founded in 2001 by
Tom Hamilton and David Voetmann.
These men saw the need for develop-
ment of a plane that could be used for
humanitarian work in remote areas of
the world. Tom and David brought on
Bruce R. Kennedy to chair Quest’s
board of trustees. Bruce was a man who
had a noteworthy aviation career,
holding the positions of chairman,
chief executive officer, and president of
Alaska Airlines. Bruce helped bring
Tom Hamilton’s and David Voetmann’s
vision to fruition, chairing Quest’s
board of trustees until his tragic death
in 2007. That same year, Quest started
its first production run of the KODIAK
airplane.
The KODIAK airplane is a rugged
short takeoff and landing, STOL, tur-
boprop aircraft that requires only 1,000
feet of runway, making it ideally suit-
ed for the demanding nature of global
humanitarian work. The KODIAK is
currently in use around the world.
While principally marketed for human-
itarian missions, purchasers of the KO-
DIAK include the U.S. Park Service,
foreign governments, and private citi-
zens.
Despite the impact the global reces-
sion has had on the airplane industry,
Quest Aircraft has persevered and ex-
panded their company in recent years.
Quest Aircraft has expanded from a
staff of 14 in 2001 to currently employ-
ing nearly 200 people. Shortly after the
first year of business, Quest Aircraft
moved into its 27,000-square-foot facil-
ity at the Sandpoint, ID, Municipal
Airport. By May 2007, the KODIAK re-
ceived FAA type certification and
began global deliveries that year.
Keeping in line with the mission put
forward by the founders of Quest Air-
craft, approximately every 10th plane
produced is subsidized by the profits
the company brings in. This aircraft is
then donated to a participating not-
for-profit humanitarian organization.
This is testament to the good that can
be spread from a success story such as
this, and serves as an inspiration to
many who wish to find the successful
intersection of humanitarian work and
financial success.
Small businesses like Quest Aircraft
are on the cutting edge of technology
and innovation. These businesses are
often at the forefront of
groundbreaking advances that provide
much-needed solutions to the market-
place. Small businesses are the eco-
nomic engines of our economy and crit-
ical to the national economic recovery.
I have faith in the many small busi-
nesses that spring up in Idaho and
around the United States today, and
success stories such as Quest Aircraft
should serve as inspiration for the fu-
ture generation of innovators and en-
trepreneurs.?
f
MESSAGES FROM THE PRESIDENT
Messages from the President of the
United States were communicated to
the Senate by Mr. Williams, one of his
secretaries.
VerDate Mar 15 2010 02:23 Jun 18, 2013 Jkt 029060 PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 E:\CR\FM\G17JN6.041 S17JNPT1
p
w
a
l
k
e
r

o
n

D
S
K
7
T
P
T
V
N
1
P
R
O
D

w
i
t
h

S
E
N
A
T
E
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE S4521 June 17, 2013
EXECUTIVE MESSAGES REFERRED
As in executive session the Presiding
Officer laid before the Senate messages
from the President of the United
States submitting sundry nominations
which were referred to the Committee
on Foreign Relations.
(The messages received today are
printed at the end of the Senate pro-
ceedings.)
f
REPORT ON THE CONTINUATION
OF THE NATIONAL EMERGENCY
THAT WAS ORIGINALLY DE-
CLARED IN EXECUTIVE ORDER
13219 OF JUNE 26, 2001, WITH RE-
SPECT TO THE WESTERN BAL-
KANS—PM 13
The PRESIDING OFFICER laid be-
fore the Senate the following message
from the President of the United
States, together with an accompanying
report; which was referred to the Com-
mittee on Banking, Housing, and
Urban Affairs:
To the Congress of the United States:
Section 202(d) of the National Emer-
gencies Act (50 U.S.C. 1622(d)) provides
for the automatic termination of a na-
tional emergency unless, within 90
days prior to the anniversary date of
its declaration, the President publishes
in the Federal Register and transmits to
the Congress a notice stating that the
emergency is to continue in effect be-
yond the anniversary date. In accord-
ance with this provision, I have sent to
the Federal Register for publication the
enclosed notice stating that the na-
tional emergency with respect to the
Western Balkans that was declared in
Executive Order 13219 of June 26, 2001,
is to remain in effect beyond June 26,
2013.
The crisis constituted by the actions
of persons engaged in, or assisting,
sponsoring, or supporting (i) extremist
violence in the Republic of Macedonia
and elsewhere in the Western Balkans
region, or (ii) acts obstructing imple-
mentation of the Dayton Accords in
Bosnia or United Nations Security
Council Resolution 1244 of June 10, 1999,
related to Kosovo, which led to the dec-
laration of a national emergency on
June 26, 2001, in Executive Order 13219
and to the amendment of that order in
Executive Order 13304 of May 28, 2003,
to include acts obstructing implemen-
tation of the Ohrid Framework Agree-
ment of 2001 in Macedonia, has not
been resolved. The acts of extremist vi-
olence and obstructionist activity out-
lined in Executive Order 13219, as
amended, are hostile to U.S. interests
and continue to pose an unusual and
extraordinary threat to the national
security and foreign policy of the
United States. For this reason, I have
determined that it is necessary to con-
tinue the national emergency declared
with respect to the Western Balkans.
BARACK OBAMA.
THE WHITE HOUSE, June 17, 2013.
REPORTS OF COMMITTEES
The following reports of committees
were submitted:
By Mr. LEAHY, from the Committee on
the Judiciary, with an amendment in the na-
ture of a substitute:
S. 394. A bill to prohibit and deter the theft
of metal, and for other purposes.
f
INTRODUCTION OF BILLS AND
JOINT RESOLUTIONS
The following bills and joint resolu-
tions were introduced, read the first
and second times by unanimous con-
sent, and referred as indicated:
By Mr. MORAN (for himself, Mr. KING,
Ms. STABENOW, Mr. COCHRAN, Mr.
GRASSLEY, Mr. BARRASSO, Mr. ENZI,
and Mrs. GILLIBRAND):
S. 1171. A bill to amend the Controlled Sub-
stances Act to allow a veterinarian to trans-
port and dispense controlled substances in
the usual course of veterinary practice out-
side of the registered location; to the Com-
mittee on the Judiciary.
f
SUBMISSION OF CONCURRENT AND
SENATE RESOLUTIONS
The following concurrent resolutions
and Senate resolutions were read, and
referred (or acted upon), as indicated:
By Mr. BLUNT:
S. Res. 172. A resolution designating the
first Wednesday in September 2013 as ‘‘Na-
tional Polycystic Kidney Disease Awareness
Day’’ and raising awareness and under-
standing of polycystic kidney disease; to the
Committee on the Judiciary.
f
ADDITIONAL COSPONSORS
S. 109
At the request of Mr. HELLER, his
name was added as a cosponsor of S.
109, a bill to preserve open competition
and Federal Government neutrality to-
wards the labor relations of Federal
Government contractors on Federal
and federally funded construction
projects.
S. 153
At the request of Mr. BEGICH, the
name of the Senator from North Da-
kota (Ms. HEITKAMP) was added as a co-
sponsor of S. 153, a bill to amend sec-
tion 520J of the Public Health Service
Act to authorize grants for mental
health first aid training programs.
S. 170
At the request of Mr. FLAKE, his
name was added as a cosponsor of S.
170, a bill to recognize the heritage of
recreational fishing, hunting, and rec-
reational shooting on Federal public
land and ensure continued opportuni-
ties for those activities.
S. 234
At the request of Mr. REID, the name
of the Senator from Massachusetts
(Ms. WARREN) was added as a cosponsor
of S. 234, a bill to amend title 10,
United States Code, to permit certain
retired members of the uniformed serv-
ices who have a service-connected dis-
ability to receive both disability com-
pensation from the Department of Vet-
erans Affairs for their disability and ei-
ther retired pay by reason of their
years of military service or Combat-
Related Special Compensation, and for
other purposes.
S. 272
At the request of Mr. BEGICH, the
name of the Senator from Hawaii (Mr.
SCHATZ) was added as a cosponsor of S.
272, a bill to promote research, moni-
toring, and observation of the Arctic
and for other purposes.
S. 313
At the request of Mr. CASEY, the
name of the Senator from Massachu-
setts (Ms. WARREN) was added as a co-
sponsor of S. 313, a bill to amend the
Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to pro-
vide for the tax treatment of ABLE ac-
counts established under State pro-
grams for the care of family members
with disabilities, and for other pur-
poses.
S. 315
At the request of Ms. KLOBUCHAR, the
name of the Senator from Michigan
(Ms. STABENOW) was added as a cospon-
sor of S. 315, a bill to reauthorize and
extend the Paul D. Wellstone Muscular
Dystrophy Community Assistance, Re-
search, and Education Amendments of
2008.
S. 337
At the request of Ms. STABENOW, the
name of the Senator from Delaware
(Mr. COONS) was added as a cosponsor
of S. 337, a bill to provide an incentive
for businesses to bring jobs back to
America.
S. 395
At the request of Mr. BENNET, his
name was added as a cosponsor of S.
395, a bill to amend the Animal Welfare
Act to provide further protection for
puppies.
S. 463
At the request of Mr. PRYOR, the
name of the Senator from Montana
(Mr. BAUCUS) was added as a cosponsor
of S. 463, a bill to amend the Farm Se-
curity and Rural Investment Act of
2002 to modify the definition of the
term ‘‘biobased product’’.
S. 511
At the request of Ms. LANDRIEU, the
name of the Senator from Massachu-
setts (Mr. COWAN) was added as a co-
sponsor of S. 511, a bill to amend the
Small Business Investment Act of 1958
to enhance the Small Business Invest-
ment Company Program, and for other
purposes.
S. 520
At the request of Mr. BEGICH, the
name of the Senator from Hawaii (Mr.
SCHATZ) was added as a cosponsor of S.
520, a bill to strengthen Federal con-
sumer protection and product
traceability with respect to commer-
cially marketed seafood, and for other
purposes.
S. 596
At the request of Mr. THUNE, the
name of the Senator from Massachu-
setts (Ms. WARREN) was added as a co-
sponsor of S. 596, a bill to establish
VerDate Mar 15 2010 02:23 Jun 18, 2013 Jkt 029060 PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 E:\CR\FM\A17JN6.001 S17JNPT1
p
w
a
l
k
e
r

o
n

D
S
K
7
T
P
T
V
N
1
P
R
O
D

w
i
t
h

S
E
N
A
T
E
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE S4522 June 17, 2013
pilot projects under the Medicare pro-
gram to provide incentives for home
health agencies to furnish remote pa-
tient monitoring services that reduce
expenditures under such program.
S. 602
At the request of Mr. TESTER, the
name of the Senator from South Da-
kota (Mr. JOHNSON) was added as a co-
sponsor of S. 602, a bill to amend the
Public Health Service Act to provide
for the participation of physical thera-
pists in the National Health Service
Corps Loan Repayment Program, and
for other purposes.
S. 718
At the request of Mr. DURBIN, the
name of the Senator from Pennsyl-
vania (Mr. CASEY) was added as a co-
sponsor of S. 718, a bill to create jobs in
the United States by increasing United
States exports to Africa by at least 200
percent in real dollar value within 10
years, and for other purposes.
S. 723
At the request of Mrs. GILLIBRAND,
the name of the Senator from Vermont
(Mr. LEAHY) was added as a cosponsor
of S. 723, a bill to require the Commis-
sioner of Social Security to revise the
medical and evaluation criteria for de-
termining disability in a person diag-
nosed with Huntington’s Disease and to
waive the 24-month waiting period for
Medicare eligibility for individuals dis-
abled by Huntington’s Disease.
S. 731
At the request of Mr. MANCHIN, the
name of the Senator from Montana
(Mr. TESTER) was added as a cosponsor
of S. 731, a bill to require the Board of
Governors of the Federal Reserve Sys-
tem, the Federal Deposit Insurance
Corporation, and the Office of the
Comptroller of the Currency to conduct
an empirical impact study on proposed
rules relating to the International
Basel III agreement on general risk-
based capital requirements, as they
apply to community banks.
S. 769
At the request of Mr. DURBIN, the
name of the Senator from Connecticut
(Mr. BLUMENTHAL) was added as a co-
sponsor of S. 769, a bill to designate as
wilderness certain Federal portions of
the red rock canyons of the Colorado
Plateau and the Great Basin Deserts in
the State of Utah for the benefit of
present and future generations of peo-
ple in the United States.
S. 772
At the request of Mr. NELSON, the
name of the Senator from Nevada (Mr.
HELLER) was added as a cosponsor of S.
772, a bill to amend the Federal Food,
Drug, and Cosmetic Act to clarify the
Food and Drug Administration’s juris-
diction over certain tobacco products,
and to protect jobs and small busi-
nesses involved in the sale, manufac-
turing and distribution of traditional
and premium cigars.
S. 789
At the request of Mr. BAUCUS, the
name of the Senator from Ohio (Mr.
PORTMAN) was added as a cosponsor of
S. 789, a bill to grant the Congressional
Gold Medal, collectively, to the First
Special Service Force, in recognition of
its superior service during World War
II.
S. 810
At the request of Mr. DONNELLY, the
name of the Senator from Mississippi
(Mr. WICKER) was added as a cosponsor
of S. 810, a bill to require a pilot pro-
gram on an online computerized assess-
ment to enhance detection of behaviors
indicating a risk of suicide and other
mental health conditions in members
of the Armed Forces, and for other pur-
poses.
S. 815
At the request of Mr. MERKLEY, the
name of the Senator from Delaware
(Mr. CARPER) was added as a cosponsor
of S. 815, a bill to prohibit the employ-
ment discrimination on the basis of
sexual orientation or gender identity.
S. 824
At the request of Mr. MENENDEZ, the
name of the Senator from California
(Mrs. FEINSTEIN) was added as a co-
sponsor of S. 824, a bill to amend the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 to re-
quire shareholder authorization before
a public company may make certain
political expenditures, and for other
purposes.
S. 842
At the request of Mr. SCHUMER, the
name of the Senator from Missouri
(Mrs. MCCASKILL) was added as a co-
sponsor of S. 842, a bill to amend title
XVIII of the Social Security Act to
provide for an extension of the Medi-
care-dependent hospital (MDH) pro-
gram and the increased payments
under the Medicare low-volume hos-
pital program.
S. 909
At the request of Mr. REED, the name
of the Senator from Hawaii (Mr.
SCHATZ) was added as a cosponsor of S.
909, a bill to amend the Federal Direct
Loan Program under the Higher Edu-
cation Act of 1965 to provide for stu-
dent loan affordability, and for other
purposes.
S. 913
At the request of Mrs. SHAHEEN, the
name of the Senator from New York
(Mr. SCHUMER) was added as a cospon-
sor of S. 913, a bill to amend the Na-
tional Oilheat Research Alliance Act of
2000 to reauthorize and improve that
Act, and for other purposes.
S. 916
At the request of Mr. KAINE, the
name of the Senator from New York
(Mrs. GILLIBRAND) was added as a co-
sponsor of S. 916, a bill to authorize the
acquisition and protection of nation-
ally significant battlefields and associ-
ated sites of the Revolutionary War
and the War of 1812 under the American
Battlefield Protection Program.
S. 917
At the request of Mr. CARDIN, the
names of the Senator from Pennsyl-
vania (Mr. CASEY) and the Senator
from New York (Mrs. GILLIBRAND) were
added as cosponsors of S. 917, a bill to
amend the Internal Revenue Code of
1986 to provide a reduced rate of excise
tax on beer produced domestically by
certain qualifying producers.
S. 918
At the request of Mr. COONS, the
name of the Senator from New York
(Mrs. GILLIBRAND) was added as a co-
sponsor of S. 918, a bill to award grants
in order to establish longitudinal per-
sonal college readiness and savings on-
line platforms for low-income students.
S. 967
At the request of Mrs. GILLIBRAND,
the name of the Senator from Oregon
(Mr. WYDEN) was added as a cosponsor
of S. 967, a bill to amend title 10,
United States Code, to modify various
authorities relating to procedures for
courts-martial under the Uniform Code
of Military Justice, and for other pur-
poses.
S. 971
At the request of Mr. WYDEN, the
names of the Senator from North Caro-
lina (Mrs. HAGAN) and the Senator
from Mississippi (Mr. COCHRAN) were
added as cosponsors of S. 971, a bill to
amend the Federal Water Pollution
Control Act to exempt the conduct of
silvicultural activities from national
pollutant discharge elimination system
permitting requirements.
S. 1046
At the request of Mr. SCHATZ, the
name of the Senator from Oregon (Mr.
WYDEN) was added as a cosponsor of S.
1046, a bill to clarify certain provisions
of the Native American Veterans’ Me-
morial Establishment Act of 1994.
S. 1068
At the request of Mr. BEGICH, the
name of the Senator from Connecticut
(Mr. BLUMENTHAL) was added as a co-
sponsor of S. 1068, a bill to reauthorize
and amend the National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration Commis-
sioned Officer Corps Act of 2002, and for
other purposes.
S. 1072
At the request of Ms. KLOBUCHAR, the
name of the Senator from Oklahoma
(Mr. INHOFE) was added as a cosponsor
of S. 1072, a bill to ensure that the Fed-
eral Aviation Administration advances
the safety of small airplanes and the
continued development of the general
aviation industry, and for other pur-
poses.
S. 1086
At the request of Mrs. GILLIBRAND,
her name was added as a cosponsor of
S. 1086, a bill to reauthorize and im-
prove the Child Care and Development
Block Grant Act of 1990, and for other
purposes.
S. 1088
At the request of Mr. FRANKEN, the
name of the Senator from Delaware
(Mr. CARPER) was added as a cosponsor
of S. 1088, a bill to end discrimination
based on actual or perceived sexual ori-
entation or gender identity in public
schools, and for other purposes.
VerDate Mar 15 2010 02:23 Jun 18, 2013 Jkt 029060 PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 E:\CR\FM\A17JN6.005 S17JNPT1
p
w
a
l
k
e
r

o
n

D
S
K
7
T
P
T
V
N
1
P
R
O
D

w
i
t
h

S
E
N
A
T
E
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE S4523 June 17, 2013
S. 1104
At the request of Mr. NELSON, the
name of the Senator from New York
(Mrs. GILLIBRAND) was added as a co-
sponsor of S. 1104, a bill to measure the
progress of recovery and development
efforts in Haiti following the earth-
quake of January 12, 2010, and for other
purposes.
S. 1117
At the request of Ms. STABENOW, the
names of the Senator from Vermont
(Mr. SANDERS) and the Senator from
Minnesota (Mr. FRANKEN) were added
as cosponsors of S. 1117, a bill to pre-
pare disconnected youth for a competi-
tive future.
S. 1123
At the request of Mr. CARPER, the
name of the Senator from South Da-
kota (Mr. THUNE) was added as a co-
sponsor of S. 1123, a bill to amend titles
XVIII and XIX of the Social Security
Act to curb waste, fraud, and abuse in
the Medicare and Medicaid programs.
S. CON. RES. 15
At the request of Ms. CANTWELL, her
name was added as a cosponsor of S.
Con. Res. 15, a concurrent resolution
expressing the sense of Congress that
the Chained Consumer Price Index
should not be used to calculate cost-of-
living adjustments for Social Security
or veterans benefits, or to increase the
tax burden on low- and middle-income
taxpayers.
S. RES. 157
At the request of Ms. KLOBUCHAR, the
name of the Senator from Kansas (Mr.
ROBERTS) was added as a cosponsor of
S. Res. 157, a resolution expressing the
sense of the Senate that telephone
service must be improved in rural areas
of the United States and that no entity
may unreasonably discriminate against
telephone users in those areas.
AMENDMENT NO. 1197
At the request of Mr. THUNE, the
name of the Senator from Oklahoma
(Mr. INHOFE) was added as a cosponsor
of amendment No. 1197 proposed to S.
744, a bill to provide for comprehensive
immigration reform and for other pur-
poses.
AMENDMENT NO. 1198
At the request of Mr. TESTER, the
name of the Senator from New Mexico
(Mr. HEINRICH) was added as a cospon-
sor of amendment No. 1198 proposed to
S. 744, a bill to provide for comprehen-
sive immigration reform and for other
purposes.
AMENDMENT NO. 1199
At the request of Mrs. BOXER, the
name of the Senator from Washington
(Mrs. MURRAY) was added as a cospon-
sor of amendment No. 1199 intended to
be proposed to S. 744, a bill to provide
for comprehensive immigration reform
and for other purposes.
AMENDMENT NO. 1209
At the request of Mr. JOHANNS, his
name was added as a cosponsor of
amendment No. 1209 intended to be pro-
posed to S. 744, a bill to provide for
comprehensive immigration reform
and for other purposes.
AMENDMENT NO. 1225
At the request of Mr. JOHANNS, his
name was added as a cosponsor of
amendment No. 1225 intended to be pro-
posed to S. 744, a bill to provide for
comprehensive immigration reform
and for other purposes.
AMENDMENT NO. 1237
At the request of Mr. MERKLEY, the
name of the Senator from Oregon (Mr.
WYDEN) was added as a cosponsor of
amendment No. 1237 intended to be pro-
posed to S. 744, a bill to provide for
comprehensive immigration reform
and for other purposes.
AMENDMENT NO. 1242
At the request of Mr. UDALL of New
Mexico, the name of the Senator from
New York (Mrs. GILLIBRAND) was added
as a cosponsor of amendment No. 1242
intended to be proposed to S. 744, a bill
to provide for comprehensive immigra-
tion reform and for other purposes.
AMENDMENT NO. 1258
At the request of Mrs. BOXER, the
name of the Senator from Hawaii (Ms.
HIRONO) was added as a cosponsor of
amendment No. 1258 intended to be pro-
posed to S. 744, a bill to provide for
comprehensive immigration reform
and for other purposes.
AMENDMENT NO. 1278
At the request of Mr. BLUMENTHAL,
the name of the Senator from Wash-
ington (Mrs. MURRAY) was added as a
cosponsor of amendment No. 1278 in-
tended to be proposed to S. 744, a bill to
provide for comprehensive immigration
reform and for other purposes.
AMENDMENT NO. 1282
At the request of Mrs. BOXER, the
name of the Senator from Hawaii (Ms.
HIRONO) was added as a cosponsor of
amendment No. 1282 intended to be pro-
posed to S. 744, a bill to provide for
comprehensive immigration reform
and for other purposes.
AMENDMENT NO. 1286
At the request of Mr. CARDIN, the
name of the Senator from Ohio (Mr.
PORTMAN) was added as a cosponsor of
amendment No. 1286 intended to be pro-
posed to S. 744, a bill to provide for
comprehensive immigration reform
and for other purposes.
f
STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED
BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS
By Mr. MORAN (for himself, Mr.
KING, Ms. STABENOW, Mr. COCH-
RAN, Mr. GRASSLEY, Mr. BAR-
RASSO, Mr. ENZI, and Mrs.
GILLIBRAND):
S. 1171. A bill to amend the Con-
trolled Substances Act to allow a vet-
erinarian to transport and dispense
controlled substances in the usual
course of veterinary practice outside of
the registered location; to the Com-
mittee on the Judiciary.
Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, I am
pleased to join Senators MORAN and
KING in reintroducing the Veterinary
Medicine Mobility Act of 2013. This leg-
islation comes in response to a Drug
Enforcement Administration, DEA, in-
terpretation of the Controlled Sub-
stances Act, which requires veterinar-
ians to treat animals with controlled
substances at the location in which
they are registered. This interpretation
of the law is very burdensome to both
farmers and veterinarians, and it shows
a lack of common sense by the DEA. In
many cases a sick animal such as a
horse, cow or pig cannot be transported
to the veterinarian’s office, and has to
be treated on the farm or even in the
pasture. When a larger animal is ill and
needs treatment it has been common
practice for the veterinarian to make a
house call to treat the affected animal.
The ability for veterinarians to make
house calls is a key component in the
ability to effectively treat livestock
animals.
I am very concerned about the prob-
lems we face in the diversion of con-
trolled substances especially powerful
narcotics. However, efforts to control
the diversion of controlled substances
need to take into account the needs of
legitimate patients whether human or
livestock. Forcing a farmer to load a
sick animal into a trailer for a trip to
the veterinarian’s office is not a prac-
tical solution to ward off the diversion
of controlled substances. Rules gov-
erning the use and transportation of
controlled substances must be prac-
tical and not overly burdensome. In the
case of veterinary medicine the Veteri-
nary Medicine Mobility Act of 2013
strikes the right balance.
This legislation allows a veterinarian
to transport a controlled substance ‘‘in
the usual course of veterinary medicine
practice at a site other than the reg-
istrants registered principal place of
business or professional practice.’’ The
bill also requires the veterinarian to
only dispense controlled substances in
a State where they are licensed to
practice veterinary medicine, which
will help to eliminate the transpor-
tation of controlled substances across
State lines. I have heard from numer-
ous veterinarians and other stake-
holders that this bill is needed in order
to provide certainty that our veteri-
narians will be able to use the nec-
essary tools available to them without
interference from the DEA. Overly bur-
densome regulations can have a detri-
mental impact on businesses in this
country. This is an instance of the Fed-
eral Government not using common
sense, and causing unnecessary prob-
lems for the people responsible for
maintaining the health of our Nation’s
livestock herds. I urge my colleagues
to join us in supporting this common-
sense bill.
VerDate Mar 15 2010 03:04 Jun 18, 2013 Jkt 029060 PO 00000 Frm 00027 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 E:\CR\FM\A17JN6.006 S17JNPT1
p
w
a
l
k
e
r

o
n

D
S
K
7
T
P
T
V
N
1
P
R
O
D

w
i
t
h

S
E
N
A
T
E
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE S4524 June 17, 2013
SUBMITTED RESOLUTIONS
SENATE RESOLUTION 172—DESIG-
NATING THE FIRST WEDNESDAY
IN SEPTEMBER 2013 AS ‘‘NA-
TIONAL POLYCYSTIC KIDNEY
DISEASE AWARENESS DAY’’ AND
RAISING AWARENESS AND UN-
DERSTANDING OF POLYCYSTIC
KIDNEY DISEASE
Mr. BLUNT submitted the following
resolution; which was referred to the
Committee on the Judiciary:
S. RES. 172
Whereas National Polycystic Kidney Dis-
ease Awareness Day will raise public aware-
ness and understanding of polycystic kidney
disease, one of the most prevalent, life-
threatening genetic kidney diseases;
Whereas National Polycystic Kidney Dis-
ease Awareness Day will also foster under-
standing of the impact polycystic kidney dis-
ease has on patients and their families;
Whereas polycystic kidney disease is a pro-
gressive, genetic disorder of the kidneys that
causes damage to the kidneys and the car-
diovascular, endocrine, hepatic, and gastro-
intestinal organ systems;
Whereas polycystic kidney disease has a
devastating impact on the health and fi-
nances of people of all ages, and equally af-
fects people of all races, genders, nationali-
ties, geographic locations, and income levels;
Whereas, of the people diagnosed with
polycystic kidney disease, approximately 10
percent have no family history of the dis-
ease, with the disease developing as a spon-
taneous (or new) mutation;
Whereas there is no treatment or cure for
polycystic kidney disease, which is one of
the 4 leading causes of kidney failure in the
United States;
Whereas the vast majority of patients with
polycystic kidney disease reach kidney fail-
ure at an average age of 53, causing a severe
strain on dialysis and kidney transplan-
tation resources and on the delivery of
health care in the United States as the larg-
est segment of the population of the United
States, the ‘‘baby boomers’’, continues to
age;
Whereas polycystic kidney disease instills
in patients fear of an unknown future with a
life-threatening genetic disease and appre-
hension over possible discrimination, includ-
ing the risk of losing their health and life in-
surance, their jobs, and their chances for
promotion;
Whereas countless friends, loved ones,
spouses, and caregivers must shoulder the
physical, emotional, and financial burdens
that polycystic kidney disease causes;
Whereas the severity of the symptoms of
polycystic kidney disease and the limited
public awareness of the disease cause many
patients to live in denial and forego regular
visits to their physicians or avoid following
good health management, which would help
avoid more severe complications when kid-
ney failure occurs;
Whereas people who have chronic, life-
threatening diseases like polycystic kidney
disease have a predisposition to depression
and its resultant consequences of 7 times the
national average because of their anxiety
over pain, suffering, and premature death;
and
Whereas the PKD Foundation and its more
than 60 volunteer chapters around the
United States are dedicated to conducting
research to find treatments and a cure for
polycystic kidney disease, fostering public
awareness and understanding of the disease,
educating patients and their families about
the disease to improve their treatment and
care, and providing support and encouraging
people to become organ donors, including by
sponsoring the annual ‘‘Walk for PKD’’ to
raise funds for polycystic kidney disease re-
search, education, advocacy, and awareness:
Now, therefore, be it
Resolved, That the Senate—
(1) designates the first Wednesday in Sep-
tember 2013 as ‘‘National Polycystic Kidney
Disease Awareness Day’’;
(2) supports the goals and ideals of Na-
tional Polycystic Kidney Disease Awareness
Day to raise public awareness and under-
standing of polycystic kidney disease;
(3) recognizes the need for additional re-
search to find a cure for polycystic kidney
disease; and
(4) encourages all people in the United
States and interested groups to support Na-
tional Polycystic Kidney Awareness Day
through appropriate ceremonies and activi-
ties to promote public awareness of poly-
cystic kidney disease and to foster under-
standing of the impact of the disease on pa-
tients and their families.
f
AMENDMENTS SUBMITTED AND
PROPOSED
SA 1287. Mr. COATS submitted an amend-
ment intended to be proposed by him to the
bill S. 744, to provide for comprehensive im-
migration reform and for other purposes;
which was ordered to lie on the table.
SA 1288. Mr. COATS submitted an amend-
ment intended to be proposed by him to the
bill S. 744, supra; which was ordered to lie on
the table.
SA 1289. Mr. GRASSLEY (for Mr. VITTER)
submitted an amendment intended to be pro-
posed by Mr. GRASSLEY to the bill S. 744,
supra; which was ordered to lie on the table.
SA 1290. Mr. GRASSLEY (for Mr. VITTER)
submitted an amendment intended to be pro-
posed by Mr. GRASSLEY to the bill S. 744,
supra; which was ordered to lie on the table.
SA 1291. Mr. GRASSLEY (for Mr. VITTER)
submitted an amendment intended to be pro-
posed by Mr. GRASSLEY to the bill S. 744,
supra; which was ordered to lie on the table.
SA 1292. Mr. GRASSLEY (for Mr. VITTER)
submitted an amendment intended to be pro-
posed by Mr. GRASSLEY to the bill S. 744,
supra; which was ordered to lie on the table.
SA 1293. Mr. BEGICH submitted an amend-
ment intended to be proposed by him to the
bill S. 744, supra; which was ordered to lie on
the table.
SA 1294. Mr. CARDIN submitted an amend-
ment intended to be proposed by him to the
bill S. 744, supra; which was ordered to lie on
the table.
SA 1295. Mr. CRUZ (for himself and Mr.
VITTER) submitted an amendment intended
to be proposed by him to the bill S. 744,
supra; which was ordered to lie on the table.
SA 1296. Mr. SCHATZ (for himself and Mr.
KIRK) submitted an amendment intended to
be proposed by him to the bill S. 744, supra;
which was ordered to lie on the table.
SA 1297. Ms. KLOBUCHAR (for herself, Mr.
COATS, and Ms. LANDRIEU) submitted an
amendment intended to be proposed by her
to the bill S. 744, supra; which was ordered to
lie on the table.
SA 1298. Mr. PRYOR (for himself and Mr.
JOHANNS) submitted an amendment intended
to be proposed by him to the bill S. 744,
supra; which was ordered to lie on the table.
SA 1299. Mr. GRASSLEY (for himself and
Mr. KIRK) submitted an amendment intended
to be proposed by him to the bill S. 744,
supra; which was ordered to lie on the table.
SA 1300. Mr. GRASSLEY submitted an
amendment intended to be proposed by him
to the bill S. 744, supra; which was ordered to
lie on the table.
SA 1301. Mr. GRASSLEY submitted an
amendment intended to be proposed by him
to the bill S. 744, supra; which was ordered to
lie on the table.
SA 1302. Mr. GRASSLEY submitted an
amendment intended to be proposed by him
to the bill S. 744, supra; which was ordered to
lie on the table.
SA 1303. Mr. GRASSLEY submitted an
amendment intended to be proposed by him
to the bill S. 744, supra; which was ordered to
lie on the table.
SA 1304. Mr. GRASSLEY submitted an
amendment intended to be proposed by him
to the bill S. 744, supra; which was ordered to
lie on the table.
SA 1305. Mr. GRASSLEY submitted an
amendment intended to be proposed by him
to the bill S. 744, supra; which was ordered to
lie on the table.
SA 1306. Mr. GRASSLEY submitted an
amendment intended to be proposed by him
to the bill S. 744, supra; which was ordered to
lie on the table.
SA 1307. Mr. GRASSLEY submitted an
amendment intended to be proposed by him
to the bill S. 744, supra; which was ordered to
lie on the table.
SA 1308. Mr. WYDEN submitted an amend-
ment intended to be proposed by him to the
bill S. 744, supra; which was ordered to lie on
the table.
SA 1309. Mr. WYDEN submitted an amend-
ment intended to be proposed by him to the
bill S. 744, supra; which was ordered to lie on
the table.
SA 1310. Mr. WYDEN submitted an amend-
ment intended to be proposed by him to the
bill S. 744, supra; which was ordered to lie on
the table.
SA 1311. Mr. BROWN (for himself, Mr.
GRASSLEY, Mr. MANCHIN, and Mr. SESSIONS)
submitted an amendment intended to be pro-
posed by him to the bill S. 744, supra; which
was ordered to lie on the table.
SA 1312. Mr. SANDERS (for himself and
Ms. STABENOW) submitted an amendment in-
tended to be proposed by him to the bill S.
744, supra; which was ordered to lie on the
table.
SA 1313. Mr. SANDERS submitted an
amendment intended to be proposed by him
to the bill S. 744, supra; which was ordered to
lie on the table.
SA 1314. Mr. PAUL submitted an amend-
ment intended to be proposed by him to the
bill S. 744, supra; which was ordered to lie on
the table.
SA 1315. Mr. KING (for Mr. GRASSLEY) pro-
posed an amendment to the bill S. 330, to
amend the Public Health Service Act to es-
tablish safeguards and standards of quality
for research and transplantation of organs
infected with human immunodeficiency
virus (HIV).
f
TEXT OF AMENDMENTS
SA 1287. Mr. COATS submitted an
amendment intended to be proposed by
him to the bill S. 744, to provide for
comprehensive immigration reform
and for other purposes; which was or-
dered to lie on the table; as follows:
On page 855, strike line 24 and all that fol-
lows through page 856, line 9, and insert the
following:
(1) PROCESSING OF APPLICATIONS FOR REG-
ISTERED PROVISIONAL IMMIGRANT STATUS.—
(A) IN GENERAL.—Not earlier than the date
on which the Secretary submits a certifi-
cation to Congress stating that the Depart-
ment has maintained effective control of
high-risk border sectors along the Southern
border for a period of not less than 6 months,
the Secretary may commence processing ap-
plications for registered provisional immi-
grant status pursuant to section 245B of the
VerDate Mar 15 2010 02:23 Jun 18, 2013 Jkt 029060 PO 00000 Frm 00028 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 E:\CR\FM\A17JN6.008 S17JNPT1
p
w
a
l
k
e
r

o
n

D
S
K
7
T
P
T
V
N
1
P
R
O
D

w
i
t
h

S
E
N
A
T
E
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE S4525 June 17, 2013
Immigration and Nationality Act, as added
by section 2101 of this Act.
(B) HIGH-RISK BORDER SECTOR DEFINED.—In
this paragraph, the term ‘‘high-risk border
sector’’ means a border sector in which more
than 30,000 individuals were apprehended by
the Department during the most recent fis-
cal year.
SA 1288. Mr. COATS submitted an
amendment intended to be proposed by
him to the bill S. 744, to provide for
comprehensive immigration reform
and for other purposes; which was or-
dered to lie on the table; as follows:
On page 1583, line 19, before ‘‘to conduct’’
insert ‘‘, in addition to for-profit entities,’’.
SA 1289. Mr. GRASSLEY (for Mr.
VITTER) submitted an amendment in-
tended to be proposed by Mr. GRASSLEY
to the bill S. 744, to provide for com-
prehensive immigration reform and for
other purposes; which was ordered to
lie on the table; as follows:
At the appropriate place, insert the fol-
lowing:
SEC. ll. ELIGIBILITY FOR CHILD TAX CREDIT.
(a) REQUIRED SUBMISSION OF TAXPAYER
IDENTIFICATION NUMBERS.—
(1) IN GENERAL.—Subsection (e) of section
24 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is
amended by striking ‘‘under this section to a
taxpayer’’ and all that follows and inserting
‘‘under this section to any taxpayer unless—
‘‘(1) such taxpayer includes the taxpayer’s
valid identification number (as defined in
section 6428(h)(2)) on the return of tax for the
taxable year, and
‘‘(2) with respect to any qualifying child,
the taxpayer includes the name and taxpayer
identification number of such qualifying
child on such return of tax.’’.
(2) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment
made by this subsection shall apply to tax-
able years beginning after the date of the en-
actment of this Act.
(b) REPORT BY INSPECTOR GENERAL FOR TAX
ADMINISTRATION.—Not later than 90 days
after the end of the first fiscal year following
the date of the enactment of this Act, the
Treasury Inspector General for Tax Adminis-
tration shall submit a report to the relevant
committees of Congress that includes the
total amount of credits allowed under sec-
tion 24 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986
for the preceding fiscal year to individuals
who—
(1) were unlawfully present in the United
States; or
(2) were not citizens or lawful permanent
residents of the United States and filed a tax
return without a valid identification number
for the taxpayer or the qualifying child.
SA 1290. Mr. GRASSLEY (for Mr.
VITTER) submitted an amendment in-
tended to be proposed by Mr. GRASSLEY
to the bill S. 744, to provide for com-
prehensive immigration reform and for
other purposes; which was ordered to
lie on the table; as follows:
At the end of subtitle G of title III, add the
following:
SEC. 3722. UNLAWFUL VOTING.
(a) AGGRAVATED FELONY.—Paragraph (43)
of section 101(a) of the Immigration and Na-
tionality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101(a)) is amended—
(1) in subparagraph (T), by striking ‘‘and’’
at the end;
(2) in subparagraph (U), by striking the pe-
riod at the end and inserting a semicolon and
‘‘and’’; and
(3) by adding at the end the following:
‘‘(V) an offense described in section 611 of
title 18, United States Code, committed by
an alien who is unlawfully present in the
United States.’’.
(b) DEPORTABLE OFFENSE.—Paragraph (2) of
section 237(a) of the Immigration and Na-
tionality Act (8 U.S.C. 1227(a)), as amended
by sections 3701 and 3702, is further amended
by adding at the end the following:
‘‘(I) VOTING OFFENSES.—Any alien who is
unlawfully present in the United States and
who knowingly commits a violation of sec-
tion 611 of title 18, United States Code.’’.
SA 1291. Mr. GRASSLEY (for Mr.
VITTER) submitted an amendment in-
tended to be proposed by Mr. GRASSLEY
to the bill S. 744, to provide for com-
prehensive immigration reform and for
other purposes; which was ordered to
lie on the table; as follows:
At the appropriate place, insert the fol-
lowing:
SEC. lll. PROHIBITION ON USE OF FEDERAL
FUNDS IN CONTRAVENTION OF SEC-
TION 642(A) OF THE ILLEGAL IMMI-
GRATION REFORM AND IMMIGRANT
RESPONSIBILITY ACT OF 1996.
No funds made available under part Q of
title I of the Omnibus Crime Control and
Safe Streets Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 3796dd et
seq.) or under section 241(i) of the Immigra-
tion and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1231(i))
may be used in contravention of section
642(a) of the Illegal Immigration Reform and
Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 (8
U.S.C. 1373(a)).
SA 1292. Mr. GRASSLEY (for Mr.
VITTER) submitted an amendment in-
tended to be proposed by Mr. GRASSLEY
to the bill S. 744, to provide for com-
prehensive immigration reform and for
other purposes; which was ordered to
lie on the table; as follows:
On page 1300, between lines 11 and 12, insert
the following:
CHAPTER 5—BIRTHRIGHT CITIZENSHIP
SEC. 2561. SHORT TITLE.
This chapter may be cited as the ‘‘Birth-
right Citizenship Act of 2013’’.
SEC. 2562. CITIZENSHIP AT BIRTH FOR CERTAIN
PERSONS BORN IN THE UNITED
STATES.
(a) IN GENERAL.—Section 301 (8 U.S.C. 1401)
is amended—
(1) by inserting ‘‘(a) IN GENERAL.—’’ before
‘‘The following’’;
(2) by redesignating subsections (a)
through (h) as paragraphs (1) through (8), re-
spectively, and indenting such paragraphs,
as redesignated, an additional 2 ems to the
right; and
(3) by adding at the end the following:
‘‘(b) DEFINITION.—Acknowledging the right
of birthright citizenship established by sec-
tion 1 of the 14th Amendment to the Con-
stitution of the United States, a person born
in the United States shall be considered ‘sub-
ject to the jurisdiction’ of the United States
for purposes of subsection (a)(1) only if the
person is born in the United States and at
least 1 of the person’s parents is—
‘‘(1) a citizen or national of the United
States;
‘‘(2) an alien lawfully admitted for perma-
nent residence in the United States whose
residence is in the United States; or
‘‘(3) an alien performing active service in
the armed forces (as defined in section 101 of
title 10, United States Code).’’.
(b) APPLICABILITY.—The amendment made
by subsection (a)(3) may not be construed to
affect the citizenship or nationality status of
any person born before the date of the enact-
ment of this Act.
SA 1293. Mr. BEGICH submitted an
amendment intended to be proposed by
him to the bill S. 744, to provide for
comprehensive immigration reform
and for other purposes; which was or-
dered to lie on the table; as follows:
On page 1829, between lines 20 and 21, insert
the following:
‘‘(C) SET ASIDE.—
‘‘(i) IN GENERAL.—Of the registered posi-
tions authorized under each of clauses (i),
(ii), and (iii), 5,000 shall be set aside for W
nonimmigrants who will be employed in
areas of Alaska designated by the Alaska De-
partment of Labor and Workforce Develop-
ment in an occupation in the seafood proc-
essing industry that has been designated by
the Commissioner as a shortage occupation.
‘‘(ii) RELEASE OF VISAS.—Any visas set
aside in a program year pursuant to clause
(i) that are not issued by July 1st of such
year, shall be made available for W non-
immigrants not described in clause (i).
SA 1294. Mr. CARDIN submitted an
amendment intended to be proposed by
him to the bill S. 744, to provide for
comprehensive immigration reform
and for other purposes; which was or-
dered to lie on the table; as follows:
On page 969, beginning on line 15, strike
‘‘employment’’ and insert ‘‘employment,
community service, or education’’.
On page 969, line 24, strike ‘‘EMPLOYMENT
OR EDUCATION’’ and inserting ‘‘EMPLOYMENT,
EDUCATION, OR COMMUNITY SERVICE’’.
On page 970, line 7, insert ‘‘or engaged in
community service’’ after ‘‘regularly em-
ployed’’.
On page 986, line 3, insert ‘‘or engaged in
community service’’ after ‘‘regularly em-
ployed’’.
On page 987, beginning on line 6, strike
‘‘employment or education’’ and insert ‘‘em-
ployment, education, or community serv-
ice’’.
On page 987, line 11, strike ‘‘employment or
education,’’ and insert ‘‘employment, edu-
cation, or community service,’’.
On page 987, between lines 18 and 19 insert
the following:
‘‘(V) records of a faith-based or nonprofit
organization recognized as such, pursuant to
section 501(c) of the Internal Revenue Code
16 of 1986;’’.
SA 1295. Mr. CRUZ (for himself and
Mr. VITTER) submitted an amendment
intended to be proposed by him to the
bill S. 744, to provide for comprehen-
sive immigration reform and for other
purposes; which was ordered to lie on
the table; as follows:
On page 1626, between lines 12 and 13, insert
the following:
Subtitle ll—PROTECTING VOTER INTEGRITY
SEC. 3901. STATES PERMITTED TO REQUIRE
PROOF OF CITIZENSHIP FOR VOTER
REGISTRATION.
Section 6 of the National Voter Registra-
tion Act of 1993 (42 U.S.C. 1973gg-4) is amend-
ed by adding at the end the following new
subsection:
‘‘(e) PROOF OF CITIZENSHIP.—Nothing in
subsection (a) shall be construed to preempt
any State law requiring evidence of citizen-
ship in order to complete any requirement to
register to vote in elections for Federal of-
fice.’’.
SA 1296. Mr. SCHATZ (for himself
and Mr. KIRK) submitted an amend-
ment intended to be proposed by him
to the bill S. 744, to provide for com-
prehensive immigration reform and for
VerDate Mar 15 2010 02:23 Jun 18, 2013 Jkt 029060 PO 00000 Frm 00029 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 E:\CR\FM\A17JN6.010 S17JNPT1
p
w
a
l
k
e
r

o
n

D
S
K
7
T
P
T
V
N
1
P
R
O
D

w
i
t
h

S
E
N
A
T
E
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE S4526 June 17, 2013
other purposes; which was ordered to
lie on the table; as follows:
At the end, add the following:
TITLE V—MISCELLANEOUS
SEC. 5001. REPORT ON VISA PROCESSING AT
UNITED STATES EMBASSIES AND
CONSULATES.
(a) INITIAL REPORT.—Not later than 1 year
after the date of the enactment of this Act,
the Comptroller General of the United States
shall submit to Congress a report on visa
processing at United States embassies and
consulates that—
(1) assesses the efforts of the Department
of State to expand its visa processing capac-
ity in the People’s Republic of China and
Brazil;
(2) provides recommendations, if war-
ranted, for improving the effectiveness of
those efforts;
(3) identifies the challenges to meeting
staffing requirements with respect to visa
processing at United States embassies and
consulates, including staffing shortages and
foreign language proficiency requirements;
(4) discusses how those challenges affect
the ability of the Department of State to
carry out visa operations;
(5) describes what actions the Department
of State has taken to address those chal-
lenges; and
(6) provides recommendations, if war-
ranted, for improving the efforts of the De-
partment of State to meet staffing require-
ments at United States embassies and con-
sulates.
(b) SUBSEQUENT REPORT.—Not later than 2
years after submitting the report required by
subsection (a), the Comptroller General shall
submit to Congress a report assessing the
progress made by the Department of State
with respect to the matters included in the
report required by subsection (a) since the
submission of that report.
SA 1297. Ms. KLOBUCHAR (for her-
self, Mr. COATS, and Ms. LANDRIEU) sub-
mitted an amendment intended to be
proposed by her to the bill S. 744, to
provide for comprehensive immigration
reform and for other purposes; which
was ordered to lie on the table; as fol-
lows:
On page 1226, line 3, strike ‘‘Section’’ and
insert the following:
(a) IN GENERAL.—Section
On page 1226, after line 25, add the fol-
lowing:
(b) EFFECT OF ADOPTION DOCUMENTATION.—
(1) IN GENERAL.—For purposes of all immi-
gration laws of the United States, the Direc-
tor of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration
Services, the Secretary of State, and all
other Federal agencies shall accept adoption
documentation presented on behalf of a child
as evidence that the child satisfies the re-
quirements set forth in section 101(b)(1)(E) of
the Immigration and Nationality Act (8
U.S.C. 1101(b)(1)(E)), regardless of whether
the child has been in the legal custody of,
and has resided with, the adopting parent or
parents for 2 years, if the documentation in-
cludes—
(A) a Hague Adoption Certificate, certi-
fying that the adoption of the child was
granted in compliance with the Convention,
affixed to an adoption decree issued by the
Central Authority (as such term is used in
the Convention on Protection of Children
and Co-operation in Respect of Intercountry
Adoption, done at the Hague on May 29, 1993)
of the child’s sending country to the adop-
tive parents,; or
(B) a Hague Custody Declaration, certi-
fying that the custody of the child was
granted in compliance with the Convention,
affixed to a custody or guardianship decree
issued by the Central Authority of the
child’s sending country to the adoptive par-
ents, and a final adoption decree, verifying
that the adoption of the child was later fi-
nalized outside the United States by the
adoptive parents.
(2) SUBSTANTIAL COMPLIANCE WITH HAGUE
CONVENTION.—Paragraph (1) shall not apply
unless, on the date on which the underlying
adoption, custody, or guardianship decree
was issued by the child’s sending country,
that country’s adoption procedures substan-
tially complied with the requirements of the
Convention.
SA 1298. Mr. PRYOR (for himself and
Mr. JOHANNS) submitted an amendment
intended to be proposed by him to the
bill S. 744, to provide for comprehen-
sive immigration reform and for other
purposes; which was ordered to lie on
the table; as follows:
At the end of section 1102, add the fol-
lowing:
(e) RECRUITMENT OF FORMER MEMBERS OF
THE ARMED FORCES AND MEMBERS OF RE-
SERVE COMPONENTS OF THE ARMED FORCES.—
(1) REQUIREMENT FOR PROGRAM.—The Sec-
retary, in conjunction with the Secretary of
Defense, shall establish a program to ac-
tively recruit members of the reserve compo-
nents of the Armed Forces and former mem-
bers of the Armed Forces, including the re-
serve components, to serve in United States
Customs and Border Protection and United
States Immigration and Customs Enforce-
ment.
(2) RECRUITMENT INCENTIVES.—
(A) STUDENT LOAN REPAYMENTS FOR UNITED
STATES BORDER PATROL AGENTS WITH A THREE-
YEAR COMMITMENT.—Section 5379(b) of title 5,
United States Code, is amended by adding at
the end the following new paragraph:
‘‘(4) In the case of an employee who is oth-
erwise eligible for benefits under this section
and who is serving as a full-time active-duty
United States border patrol agent within the
Department of Homeland Security—
‘‘(A) paragraph (2)(A) shall be applied by
substituting ‘$20,000’ for ‘$10,000’; and
‘‘(B) paragraph (2)(B) shall be applied by
substituting ‘$80,000’ for ‘$60,000’.’’.
(B) RECRUITMENT AND RELOCATION BONUSES
AND RETENTION ALLOWANCES FOR PERSONNEL
OF THE DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECU-
RITY.—The Secretary of Homeland Security
shall ensure that the authority to pay re-
cruitment and relocation bonuses under sec-
tion 5753 of title 5, United States Code, the
authority to pay retention bonuses under
section 5754 of such title, and any other simi-
lar authorities available under any other
provision of law, rule, or regulation, are ex-
ercised to the fullest extent allowable in
order to encourage service in the Depart-
ment of Homeland Security.
(3) REPORT ON RECRUITMENT INCENTIVES.—
(A) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 90 days
after the date of the enactment of this Act,
the Secretary and the Secretary of Defense
shall jointly submit to the appropriate com-
mittees of Congress a report including an as-
sessment of the desirability and feasibility
of offering incentives to members of the re-
serve components of the Armed Forces and
former members of the Armed Forces, in-
cluding the reserve components, for the pur-
pose of encouraging such members to serve
in United States Customs and Border Protec-
tion and Immigration and Customs Enforce-
ment.
(B) CONTENT.—The report required by sub-
paragraph (A) shall include—
(i) a description of various monetary and
non-monetary incentives considered for pur-
poses of the report; and
(ii) an assessment of the desirability and
feasibility of utilizing any such incentive.
(4) APPROPRIATE COMMITTEES OF CONGRESS
DEFINED.—The term ‘‘appropriate commit-
tees of Congress’’ means—
(A) the Committee on Appropriations, the
Committee on Armed Services, and the Com-
mittee on Homeland Security and Govern-
mental Affairs of the Senate; and
(B) the Committee on Appropriations, the
Committee on Armed Services, and the Com-
mittee on Homeland Security of the House of
Representatives.
SA 1299. Mr. GRASSLEY (for himself
and Mr. KIRK) submitted an amend-
ment intended to be proposed by him
to the bill S. 744, to provide for com-
prehensive immigration reform and for
other purposes; which was ordered to
lie on the table; as follows:
Strike section 3701 and insert the fol-
lowing:
SEC. 3701. CRIMINAL GANGS.
(a) DEFINITION OF CRIMINAL GANG.—Section
101(a) (8 U.S.C. 1101(a)) is amended by insert-
ing after paragraph (51) the following:
‘‘(52)(A) The term ‘criminal gang’ means an
ongoing group, club, organization, or asso-
ciation of 5 or more persons—
‘‘(i) that has as 1 of its primary purposes
the commission of 1 or more of the criminal
offenses described in subparagraph (B); and
‘‘(ii) the members of which engage, or have
engaged within the past 5 years, in a con-
tinuing series of offenses described in sub-
paragraph (B).
‘‘(B) The offenses described in this subpara-
graph are the following, whether in violation
of Federal or State law or in violation of the
law of a foreign country:
‘‘(i) A felony drug offense (as defined in
section 102 of the Controlled Substances Act
(21 U.S.C. 802)).
‘‘(ii) A felony offense involving firearms or
explosives or in violation of section 931 of
title 18, United States Code (relating to pur-
chase, ownership, or possession of body
armor by violent felons).
‘‘(iii) An offense under section 274 (relating
to bringing in and harboring certain aliens),
section 277 (relating to aiding or assisting
certain aliens to enter the United States), or
section 278 (relating to importation of alien
for immoral purpose).
‘‘(iv) A felony crime of violence (as defined
in section 16 of title 18, United States Code).
‘‘(v) A crime involving obstruction of jus-
tice, tampering with or retaliating against a
witness, victim, or informant, or burglary
‘‘(vi) Any conduct punishable under sec-
tions 1028 and 1029 of title 18, United States
Code (relating to fraud and related activity
in connection with identification documents
or access devices), sections 1581 through 1594
of such title (relating to peonage, slavery
and trafficking in persons), section 1952 of
such title (relating to interstate and foreign
travel or transportation in aid of racket-
eering enterprises), section 1956 of such
title(relating to the laundering of monetary
instruments), section 1957 of such title (re-
lating to engaging in monetary transactions
in property derived from specified unlawful
activity), or sections 2312 through 2315 of
such title(relating to interstate transpor-
tation of stolen motor vehicles or stolen
property).
‘‘(vii) Conspiracy to commit an offense de-
scribed in specified in clauses (i) through
(vi).’’.
(b) INADMISSIBILITY.—Section 212(a)(2) (8
U.S.C. 1182(a)(2)) is amended by inserting
after subparagraph (I) the following:
‘‘(J) ALIENS IN CRIMINAL GANGS.—Any alien
is inadmissible who—
VerDate Mar 15 2010 02:23 Jun 18, 2013 Jkt 029060 PO 00000 Frm 00030 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 E:\CR\FM\A17JN6.013 S17JNPT1
p
w
a
l
k
e
r

o
n

D
S
K
7
T
P
T
V
N
1
P
R
O
D

w
i
t
h

S
E
N
A
T
E
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE S4527 June 17, 2013
‘‘(i) is a member of a criminal gang unless
the alien can demonstrate by clear and con-
vincing evidence that the alien did not know,
and should not reasonably have known, that
the organization was a criminal gang; and
‘‘(ii) is determined by an immigration
judge to be a danger to the community.’’.
(c) GROUNDS FOR DEPORTATION.—Section
237(a)(2) (8 U.S.C. 1227(a)(2)) is amended by
adding at the end the following:
‘‘(G) ALIENS IN CRIMINAL GANGS.—Any alien
is removable who—
‘‘(i) is a member of a criminal gang unless
the alien can demonstrate by clear and con-
vincing evidence that the alien did not know,
and should not reasonably have known, that
the organization was a criminal gang; and
‘‘(ii) is determined by an immigration
judge to be a danger to the community.’’.
(d) GROUND OF INELIGIBILITY FOR REG-
ISTERED PROVISIONAL IMMIGRANT STATUS.—
An alien who is 18 years of age or older is in-
eligible for registered provisional immigrant
status if the Secretary determines that the
alien—
(1) is a member of a criminal gang (as de-
fined in section 101(a)(52) of the Immigration
and Nationality Act, as amended by sub-
section (a)) unless the alien can demonstrate
by clear and convincing evidence that the
alien did not know, and should not reason-
ably have known, that the organization was
a criminal gang; and
(2) has been determined by the Secretary
to be a danger to the community.
SA 1300. Mr. GRASSLEY submitted
an amendment intended to be proposed
by him to the bill S. 744, to provide for
comprehensive immigration reform
and for other purposes; which was or-
dered to lie on the table; as follows:
At the appropriate place, insert the fol-
lowing:
SEC. ll. IDENTITY THEFT.
(a) FRAUD.—Section 1028 of title 18, United
States Code, is amended—
(1) in subsection (a)(7), by striking ‘‘of an-
other person’’ and inserting ‘‘that is not his
or her own’’; and
(2) in subsection (b)(3)—
(A) in subparagraph (B), by striking ‘‘or’’
at the end;
(B) in subparagraph (C), by adding ‘‘or’’ at
the end; and
(C) by adding at the end the following:
‘‘(D) to facilitate or assist in harboring or
hiring unauthorized workers in violation of
section 274, 274A, or 274C of the Immigration
and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1324, 1324a,
1324c);’’.
(b) AGGRAVATED IDENTITY THEFT.—Section
1028A(a) of such title is amended by striking
‘‘of another person’’ both places it appears
and inserting ‘‘that is not his or her own’’.
SA 1301. Mr. GRASSLEY submitted
an amendment intended to be proposed
by him to the bill S. 744, to provide for
comprehensive immigration reform
and for other purposes; which was or-
dered to lie on the table; as follows:
Strike sections 3704 through 3707 and insert
the following:
SEC. 3704. ILLEGAL ENTRY.
(a) IN GENERAL.—Section 275 (8 U.S.C. 1325)
is amended to read as follows:
‘‘SEC. 275. ILLEGAL ENTRY.
‘‘(a) IN GENERAL.—
‘‘(1) CRIMINAL OFFENSES.—An alien shall be
subject to the penalties set forth in para-
graph (2) if the alien—
‘‘(A) enters, attempts to enter, or crosses
the border into the United States at any
time or place other than as designated by
the Secretary of Homeland Security;
‘‘(B) eludes examination or inspection by
an immigration officer, or a customs or agri-
culture inspection at a port of entry; or
‘‘(C) attempts to enter or obtains entry to
the United States by means of a knowingly
false or misleading representation or the
concealment of a material fact.
‘‘(2) CRIMINAL PENALTIES.—Any alien who
violates any provision under paragraph (1)—
‘‘(A) shall, for the first violation, be fined
under title 18, United States Code, impris-
oned not more than 12 months, or both;
‘‘(B) shall, for a second or subsequent vio-
lation, or following an order of voluntary de-
parture, be fined under such title, impris-
oned not more than 3 years, or both;
‘‘(C) if the violation occurred after the
alien had been convicted of 3 or more mis-
demeanors or of a felony, shall be fined
under such title, imprisoned not more than
10 years, or both; and
‘‘(D) if the violation occurred after the
alien had been convicted of a felony for
which the alien was sentenced to a term of
imprisonment, shall be fined under such
title, imprisoned not more than 15 years, or
both.
‘‘(3) PRIOR CONVICTIONS.—The prior convic-
tions described in subparagraphs (C) and (D)
of paragraph (2) are elements of the offenses
described in that paragraph and the pen-
alties in such subparagraphs shall apply only
in cases in which the conviction or convic-
tions that form the basis for the additional
penalty are—
‘‘(A) alleged in the indictment or informa-
tion; and
‘‘(B) proven beyond a reasonable doubt at
trial or admitted by the defendant under
oath as part of a plea agreement.
‘‘(b) IMPROPER TIME OR PLACE; CIVIL PEN-
ALTIES.—Any alien who is apprehended while
knowingly entering, attempting to enter, or
crossing or attempting to cross the border to
the United States at a time or place other
than as designated by immigration officers
shall be subject to a civil penalty, in addi-
tion to any criminal or other civil penalties
that may be imposed under any other provi-
sion of law, in an amount equal to—
‘‘(1) not less than $250 or more than $5,000
for each such entry, crossing, attempted
entry, or attempted crossing; or
‘‘(2) twice the amount specified in para-
graph (1) if the alien had previously been
subject to a civil penalty under this sub-
section.
‘‘(c) FRAUDULENT MARRIAGE.—An indi-
vidual who knowingly enters into a marriage
for the purpose of evading any provision of
the immigration laws shall be imprisoned for
not more than 5 years, fined not more than
$250,000, or both.
‘‘(d) COMMERCIAL ENTERPRISES.—Any indi-
vidual who knowingly establishes a commer-
cial enterprise for the purpose of evading any
provision of the immigration laws shall be
imprisoned for not more than 5 years, fined
in accordance with title 18, United States
Code, or both.’’.
(b) CLERICAL AMENDMENT.—The table of
contents is amended by striking the item re-
lating to section 275 and inserting the fol-
lowing:
‘‘Sec. 275. Illegal entry.’’.
(c) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments
made by this section shall take effect 1 year
after the date of the enactment of this Act.
SEC. 3705. REENTRY OF REMOVED ALIEN.
Section 276 (8 U.S.C. 1326) is amended to
read as follows:
‘‘SEC. 276. REENTRY OF REMOVED ALIEN.
‘‘(a) REENTRY AFTER REMOVAL.—Any alien
who has been denied admission, excluded, de-
ported, or removed, or who has departed the
United States while an order of exclusion,
deportation, or removal is outstanding, and
subsequently enters, attempts to enter,
crosses the border to, attempts to cross the
border to, or is at any time found in the
United States, shall be fined under title 18,
United States Code, imprisoned not more
than 2 years, or both.
‘‘(b) REENTRY OF CRIMINAL OFFENDERS.—
Notwithstanding the penalty provided in
subsection (a), if an alien described in that
subsection—
‘‘(1) was convicted for 3 or more mis-
demeanors before such removal or departure,
the alien shall be fined under title 18, United
States Code, imprisoned not more than 10
years, or both;
‘‘(2) was convicted for an aggravated felony
before such removal or departure, the alien
shall be fined under such title, imprisoned
not more than 20 years, or both;
‘‘(3) was convicted for a felony before such
removal or departure for which the alien was
sentenced to a term of imprisonment of not
less than 60 months, the alien shall be fined
under such title, imprisoned not more than
20 years, or both;
‘‘(4) was convicted for 3 felonies before
such removal or departure, the alien shall be
fined under such title, imprisoned not more
than 20 years, or both, unless the Attorney
General expressly consents to the entry or
reentry, as the case may be, of the alien; or
‘‘(5) was convicted, before such removal or
departure, for murder, rape, kidnapping, or a
felony offense described in chapter 77 (relat-
ing to peonage and slavery) or 113B (relating
to terrorism) of such title, the alien shall be
fined under such title, imprisoned not more
than 20 years, or both.
‘‘(c) REENTRY AFTER REPEATED REMOVAL.—
Any alien who has been denied admission,
excluded, or deported and thereafter enters,
attempts to enter, crosses the border to, at-
tempts to cross the border to, or is at any
time found in the United States, shall be
fined under title 18, United States Code, im-
prisoned not more than 10 years, or both, un-
less the Attorney General expressly consents
to the entry or reentry, as the case may be,
of the alien.
‘‘(d) PROOF OF PRIOR CONVICTIONS.—The
prior convictions described in subsection (b)
are elements of the offenses described in that
subsection, and the penalties in such sub-
section shall apply only in cases in which the
conviction or convictions that form the basis
for the additional penalty are—
‘‘(1) alleged in the indictment or informa-
tion; and
‘‘(2) proven beyond a reasonable doubt at
trial or admitted by the defendant under
oath as part of a plea agreement.
‘‘(e) AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES.—It shall be an
affirmative defense to a violation of this sec-
tion that—
‘‘(1) prior to the alleged violation, the alien
had sought and received the express consent
of the Secretary of Homeland Security to re-
apply for admission into the United States;
or
‘‘(2) at the time of the prior exclusion, de-
portation, removal, or denial of admission
alleged in the violation, the alien had not
yet reached 18 years of age and had not been
convicted of a crime or adjudicated a delin-
quent minor by a court of the United States,
or a court of a state or territory, for conduct
that would constitute a felony if committed
by an adult.
‘‘(f) LIMITATION ON COLLATERAL ATTACK ON
UNDERLYING DEPORTATION ORDER.—In a
criminal proceeding under this section, an
alien may not challenge the validity of the
deportation order described in subsection (a)
or subsection (c) unless the alien dem-
onstrates that—
‘‘(1) the alien exhausted any administra-
tive remedies that may have been available
to seek relief against the order;
VerDate Mar 15 2010 02:23 Jun 18, 2013 Jkt 029060 PO 00000 Frm 00031 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 E:\CR\FM\A17JN6.013 S17JNPT1
p
w
a
l
k
e
r

o
n

D
S
K
7
T
P
T
V
N
1
P
R
O
D

w
i
t
h

S
E
N
A
T
E
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE S4528 June 17, 2013
‘‘(2) the deportation proceedings at which
the order was issued improperly deprived the
alien of the opportunity for judicial review;
and
‘‘(3) the entry of the order was fundamen-
tally unfair.
‘‘(g) REENTRY OF ALIEN REMOVED PRIOR TO
COMPLETION OF TERM OF IMPRISONMENT.—Any
alien removed pursuant to section 241(a)(4)
who enters, attempts to enter, crosses the
border to, attempts to cross the border to, or
is at any time found in, the United States
shall be incarcerated for the remainder of
the sentence of imprisonment which was
pending at the time of deportation without
any reduction for parole or supervised re-
lease. Such alien shall be subject to such
other penalties relating to the reentry of re-
moved aliens as may be available under this
section or any other provision of law.
‘‘(h) LIMITATION.—It is not aiding and abet-
ting a violation of this section for an indi-
vidual to provide an alien with emergency
medical care and food or to transport the
alien to a location where such medical care
or food can be provided without compensa-
tion or the expectation of compensation.
‘‘(i) DEFINITIONS.—In this section:
‘‘(1) FELONY.—The term ‘felony’ means any
criminal offense punishable by a term of im-
prisonment of more than 1 year under the
laws of the United States, any State, or a
foreign government.
‘‘(2) MISDEMEANOR.—The term ‘mis-
demeanor’ means any criminal offense pun-
ishable by a term of imprisonment of not
more than 1 year under the applicable laws
of the United States, any State, or a foreign
government.
‘‘(3) REMOVAL.—The term ‘removal’ in-
cludes any denial of admission, exclusion,
deportation, or removal, or any agreement
by which an alien stipulates or agrees to ex-
clusion, deportation, or removal.
‘‘(4) STATE.—The term ‘State’ means a
State of the United States, the District of
Columbia, and any commonwealth, territory,
or possession of the United States.’’.
SEC. 3706. PENALTIES RELATED TO REMOVAL.
(a) PENALTIES RELATING TO VESSELS AND
AIRCRAFT.—Section 243(c) (8 U.S.C. 1253(c)) is
amended—
(1) by striking ‘‘Attorney General’’ each
place such term appears and inserting ‘‘Sec-
retary of Homeland Security’’; and
(2) by striking ‘‘Commissioner’’ each place
such term appears and inserting ‘‘Secretary
of Homeland Security’’; and
(3) in paragraph (1)—
(A) in subparagraph (A), by striking
‘‘$2,000’’ and inserting ‘‘$5,000’’;
(B) in subparagraph (B), by striking
‘‘$5,000’’ and inserting ‘‘$10,000’’; and
(C) by inserting at the end the following:
‘‘(D) EXCEPTION.—A person, acting without
compensation or the expectation of com-
pensation, is not subject to penalties under
this paragraph if the person is—
‘‘(i) providing, or attempting to provide, an
alien with emergency medical care or food or
water; or
‘‘(ii) transporting the alien to a location
where such medical care, food, or water can
be provided without compensation or the ex-
pectation of compensation.’’.
(b) DISCONTINUATION OF VISAS TO NATION-
ALS OF COUNTRIES DENYING OR DELAYING AC-
CEPTING ALIEN.—Section 243(d) (8 U.S.C.
1253(d)) is amended—
(1) by striking ‘‘Attorney General’’ each
place such term appears and inserting ‘‘Sec-
retary of Homeland Security’’; and
(2) by striking ‘‘notifies the Secretary’’
and inserting ‘‘notifies the Secretary of
State’’.
SEC. 3707. REFORM OF PASSPORT, VISA, AND IM-
MIGRATION FRAUD OFFENSES.
(a) TRAFFICKING IN PASSPORTS.—Section
1541 of title 18, United States Code, is amend-
ed to read as follows:
‘‘§ 1541. Issuance of passports without author-
ity
‘‘(a) IN GENERA.—Subject to subsection (b),
any person who knowingly—
‘‘(1) and without lawful authority pro-
duces, issues, or transfers a passport;
‘‘(2) forges, counterfeits, alters, or falsely
makes a passport;
‘‘(3) secures, possesses, uses, receives, buys,
sells, or distributes a passport, knowing the
passport to be forged, counterfeited, altered,
falsely made, stolen, procured by fraud, or
produced or issued without lawful authority;
or
‘‘(4) completes, mails, prepares, presents,
signs, or submits an application for a United
States passport, knowing the application to
contain any materially false statement or
representation,
shall be fined under this title, imprisoned
not more than 20 years, or both.
‘‘(b) USE IN A TERRORISM OFFENSE.—Any
person who commits an offense described in
subsection (a) to facilitate an act of inter-
national terrorism (as defined in section
2331) shall be fined under this title, impris-
oned not more than 25 years, or both.
‘‘(c) PASSPORT MATERIALS.—Any person
who knowingly and without lawful authority
produces, buys, sells, possesses, or uses any
official material (or counterfeit of any offi-
cial material) to make a passport, including
any distinctive paper, seal, hologram, image,
text, symbol, stamp, engraving, or plate,
shall be fined under this title, imprisoned
not more than 20 years, or both.’’.
(b) FALSE STATEMENT IN AN APPLICATION
FOR A PASSPORTS.—Section 1542 of title 18,
United States Code, is amended to read as
follows:
‘‘§ 1542. False statement in an application for
a passport
‘‘(a) IN GENERAL.—Any person who—
‘‘(1) knowingly makes any false statement
or representation in an application for a
United States passport, or mails, prepares,
presents, or signs an application for a United
States passport knowing the application to
contain any false statement or representa-
tion and with intent to induce or secure the
issuance of a passport under the authority of
the United States, either for the person’s
own use or the use of another, contrary to
the laws regulating the issuance of passports
or the rules prescribed pursuant to such
laws; or
‘‘(2) knowingly uses or attempts to use, or
furnishes to another for use, any passport
the issuance of which was secured in any way
by reason of any false statement,
shall be fined under this title, imprisoned
not more than 25 years (if the offense was
committed to facilitate an act of inter-
national terrorism (as defined in section 2331
of this title)), 20 years (if the offense was
committed to facilitate a drug trafficking
crime (as defined in section 929(a) of this
title)), or 15 years (in the case of any other
offense), or both.
‘‘(b) VENUE.—
‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—An offense under sub-
section (a) may be prosecuted in any dis-
trict—
‘‘(A) in which the false statement or rep-
resentation was made or the application for
a United States passport was prepared or
signed; or
‘‘(B) in which or to which the application
was mailed or presented.
‘‘(2) OFFENSES OUTSIDE THE UNITED
STATES.—An offense under subsection (a) in-
volving an application prepared and adju-
dicated outside the United States may be
prosecuted in the district in which the re-
sultant passport was or would have been pro-
duced.
‘‘(c) SAVINGS CLAUSE.—Nothing in this sec-
tion may be construed to limit the venue
otherwise available under sections 3237 and
3238 of this title.’’.
(c) MISUSE OF A PASSPORT.—Section 1544 of
title 18, United States Code, is amended to
read as follows:
‘‘§ 1544. Misuse of a passport
‘‘Any person who knowingly—
‘‘(1) uses or attempts to use any passport
issued or designed for the use of another;
‘‘(2) uses or attempts to use any passport
in violation of the conditions and restric-
tions specified in the passport or any rules or
regulations prescribed pursuant to the laws
regulating the issuance of passports; or
‘‘(3) secures, possesses, uses, receives, buys,
sells, or distributes any passport knowing
the passport to be forged, counterfeited, al-
tered, falsely made, procured by fraud, or
produced or issued without lawful authority,
shall be fined under this title, imprisoned
not more than 25 years (if the offense was
committed to facilitate an act of inter-
national terrorism (as defined in section 2331
of this title)), 20 years (if the offense was
committed to facilitate a drug trafficking
crime (as defined in section 929(a) of this
title)) or 15 years (in the case of any other
offense), or both.’’.
(d) SCHEMES TO PROVIDE FRAUDULENT IMMI-
GRATION SERVICES.—Section 1545 of title 18,
United States Code, is amended to read as
follows:
‘‘§ 1545. Schemes to provide fraudulent immi-
gration services
‘‘(a) IN GENERAL.—Any person who know-
ingly executes a scheme or artifice, in con-
nection with any matter that is authorized
by or arises under any Federal immigration
law or any matter the offender claims or rep-
resents is authorized by or arises under any
Federal immigration law, to—
‘‘(1) defraud any person; or
‘‘(2) obtain or receive money or anything
else of value from any person by means of
false or fraudulent pretenses, representa-
tions, or promises,
shall be fined under this title, imprisoned
not more than 10 years, or both.
‘‘(b) MISREPRESENTATION.—Any person who
knowingly and falsely represents that such
person is an attorney or an accredited rep-
resentative (as that term is defined in sec-
tion 1292.1 of title 8, Code of Federal Regula-
tions (or any successor regulation)) in any
matter arising under any Federal immigra-
tion law shall be fined under this title, im-
prisoned not more than 15 years, or both.’’.
(e) IMMIGRATION AND VISA FRAUD.—Section
1546 of title 18, United States Code, is amend-
ed by amending the section heading to read
as follows:
‘‘§ 1546. Immigration and visa fraud’’.
(f) ALTERNATIVE IMPRISONMENT MAXIMUM
FOR CERTAIN OFFENSES.—Section 1547 of title
18, United States Code, is amended—
(1) in the matter preceding paragraph (1),
by striking ‘‘(other than an offense under
section 1545)’’;
(2) in paragraph (1), by striking ‘‘15’’ and
inserting ‘‘20’’; and
(3) in paragraph (2), by striking ‘‘20’’ and
inserting ‘‘25’’.
(g) AUTHORIZED LAW ENFORCEMENT ACTIVI-
TIES.—Chapter 75 of title 18, United States
Code, is amended by adding after section 1547
the following:
‘‘§ 1548. Authorized law enforcement activi-
ties
‘‘Nothing in this chapter may be construed
to prohibit—
VerDate Mar 15 2010 02:23 Jun 18, 2013 Jkt 029060 PO 00000 Frm 00032 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 E:\CR\FM\A17JN6.012 S17JNPT1
p
w
a
l
k
e
r

o
n

D
S
K
7
T
P
T
V
N
1
P
R
O
D

w
i
t
h

S
E
N
A
T
E
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE S4529 June 17, 2013
‘‘(1) any lawfully authorized investigative,
protective, or intelligence activity of a law
enforcement agency of the United States, a
State, or a political subdivision of a State,
or an intelligence agency of the United
States; or
‘‘(2) any activity authorized under title V
of the Organized Crime Control Act of 1970
(Public Law 91–452; 84 Stat. 933).’’.
(h) TABLE OF SECTIONS AMENDMENT.—The
table of sections for chapter 75 of title 18,
United States Code, is amended to read as
follows:
‘‘Sec.
‘‘1541. Trafficking in passports.
‘‘1542. False statement in an application for
a passport.
‘‘1543. Forgery or false use of a passport.
‘‘1544. Misuse of a passport.
‘‘1545. Schemes to provide fraudulent immi-
gration services.
‘‘1546. Immigration and visa fraud.
‘‘1547. Alternative imprisonment maximum
for certain offenses.
‘‘1548. Authorized law enforcement activi-
ties.’’.
SA 1302. Mr. GRASSLEY submitted
an amendment intended to be proposed
by him to the bill S. 744, to provide for
comprehensive immigration reform
and for other purposes; which was or-
dered to lie on the table; as follows:
On page 1572, beginning on line 23, strike
‘‘abandonment, provided the alien served at
least 1 year imprisonment for the crime, or
provided the alien was convicted of offenses
constituting more than 1 such crime, not
arising out of a single scheme of criminal
misconduct,’’ and insert ‘‘abandonment’’.
On page 1574, lines 9 and 10, strike ‘‘con-
stitutes criminal contempt of’’ and insert
‘‘violates’’.
SA 1303. Mr. GRASSLEY submitted
an amendment intended to be proposed
by him to the bill S. 744, to provide for
comprehensive immigration reform
and for other purposes; which was or-
dered to lie on the table; as follows:
Strike section 3717, relating to procedures
for bond hearings and filing of notices to ap-
pear.
SA 1304. Mr. GRASSLEY submitted
an amendment intended to be proposed
by him to the bill S. 744, to provide for
comprehensive immigration reform
and for other purposes; which was or-
dered to lie on the table; as follows:
Beginning on page 1490, strike line 8 and
all that follows through ‘‘(d)’’ on page 1491,
line 4, and insert the following:
(a) IMMIGRATION COURT JUDGES.—The At-
torney General may increase the total num-
ber of immigration judges to adjudicate cur-
rent pending cases and process future cases,
in a cost-effective manner, to the extent that
such increase is consistent with the findings
in the report prepared by the Comptroller
General of the United States pursuant to
subsection (d).
(b) NECESSARY SUPPORT STAFF FOR IMMI-
GRATION COURT JUDGES.—The Attorney Gen-
eral may address the shortage of support
staff for immigration judges by ensuring
that each immigration judge has the assist-
ance of the necessary support staff to the ex-
tent recommended in the report prepared by
the Comptroller General of the United States
pursuant to subsection (d).
(c) ANNUAL INCREASES IN BOARD OF IMMI-
GRATION APPEALS PERSONNEL.—The Attorney
General may increase the number of Board of
Immigration Appeals staff attorneys and
support staff to the extent that such in-
crease is consistent with the findings in the
report prepared by the Comptroller General
of the United States pursuant to subsection
(d).
(d) STUDY AND REPORT.—
(1) STUDY.—The Comptroller General of the
United States shall conduct a study of—
(A) the workload at the Executive Office
for Immigration Review of the Department
of Justice (referred to in this paragraph as
the ‘‘EOIR’’) during the 1-year period begin-
ning on the date of the enactment of this
Act;
(B) the change in the workload at the
EOIR from the 1-year period ending on the
date of the enactment of this Act to the pe-
riod described in subparagraph (A);
(C) the potential impact of this Act on the
workload at the EOIR during the 15-year pe-
riod beginning on the date of the enactment
of this Act; and
(D) the number of judges, attorneys, and
support staff needed at the EOIR to cost-ef-
fectively manage the workload described in
subparagraph (A).
(2) REPORT.—Not later than 18 months
after the date of the enactment of this Act,
the Comptroller General shall submit a re-
port to the Committee on the Judiciary of
the Senate and the Committee on the Judici-
ary of the House of Representatives that
contains the results of the study conducted
under paragraph (1), including any staffing
recommendations.
(e)
SA 1305. Mr. GRASSLEY submitted
an amendment intended to be proposed
by him to the bill S. 744, to provide for
comprehensive immigration reform
and for other purposes; which was or-
dered to lie on the table; as follows:
On page 1498, line 3, strike ‘‘a 3-judge panel
of’’.
On page 1498, beginning on line 14, strike
‘‘a written opinion.’’ and all that follows
through ‘‘discretion.’’ on line 21, and insert
‘‘an opinion.’’.
SA 1306. Mr. GRASSLEY submitted
an amendment intended to be proposed
by him to the bill S. 744, to provide for
comprehensive immigration reform
and for other purposes; which was or-
dered to lie on the table; as follows:
Beginning on page 1491, strike line 11 and
all that follows through ‘‘(d)’’ on page 1494,
line 18, and insert the following:
(a) APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL FOR UNACCOM-
PANIED ALIEN CHILDREN AND ALIENS WITH A
SERIOUS MENTAL DISABILITY.—Section 292 (8
U.S.C. 1362) is amended by adding at the end
the following: ‘‘The Attorney General may
appoint counsel to represent an alien in a re-
moval proceeding who has been determined
by the Secretary to be an unaccompanied
alien child or is incompetent to represent
himself or herself due to a serious mental
disability such that the appointment of
counsel is necessary to help ensure fair reso-
lution and efficient adjudication of the pro-
ceedings.’’.
(b)
SA 1307. Mr. GRASSLEY submitted
an amendment intended to be proposed
by him to the bill S. 744, to provide for
comprehensive immigration reform
and for other purposes; which was or-
dered to lie on the table; as follows:
Beginning on page 1494, strike line 23 and
all that follows through page 1496, line 25.
SA 1308. Mr. WYDEN submitted an
amendment intended to be proposed by
him to the bill S. 744, to provide for
comprehensive immigration reform
and for other purposes; which was or-
dered to lie on the table; as follows:
At the appropriate place, insert the fol-
lowing:
SEC. lll. VIRGIN ISLANDS VISA WAIVER PRO-
GRAM.
(a) IN GENERAL.—Section 212(l) of the Im-
migration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C.
1182(l)) is amended—
(1) by amending the subsection heading to
read as follows: ‘‘GUAM, NORTHERN MARIANA
ISLANDS, AND VIRGIN ISLANDS VISA WAIVER
PROGRAMS.—’’; and
(2) by adding at the end the following:
‘‘(7) VIRGIN ISLANDS VISA WAIVER PRO-
GRAM.—
‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—The requirement of sub-
section (a)(7)(B)(i) may be waived by the Sec-
retary of Homeland Security, in the case of
an alien who is a national of a country de-
scribed in subparagraph (B) and who is ap-
plying for admission as a nonimmigrant vis-
itor for business or pleasure and solely for
entry into and stay in the United States Vir-
gin Islands for a period not to exceed 30 days,
if the Secretary of Homeland Security, after
consultation with the Secretary of the Inte-
rior, the Secretary of State, the Governor of
the United States Virgin Islands, determines
that such a waiver does not represent a
threat to the welfare, safety, or security of
the United States or its territories and com-
monwealths.
‘‘(B) COUNTRIES.—A country described in
this subparagraph is a country that—
‘‘(i) is a member or an associate member of
the Caribbean Community (CARICOM); and
‘‘(ii) is listed in the regulations described
in subparagraph (D).
‘‘(C) ALIEN WAIVER OF RIGHTS.—An alien
may not be provided a waiver under this
paragraph unless the alien has waived any
right—
‘‘(i) to review or appeal under this Act an
immigration officer’s determination as to
the admissibility of the alien at the port of
entry into the United States Virgin Islands;
or
‘‘(ii) to contest, other than on the basis of
an application for withholding of removal
under section 241(b)(3) of this Act or under
the Convention Against Torture, or an appli-
cation for asylum if permitted under section
208, any action for removal of the alien.
‘‘(D) REGULATIONS.—All necessary regula-
tions to implement this paragraph shall be
promulgated by the Secretary of Homeland
Security, in consultation with the Secretary
of the Interior and the Secretary of State, on
or before the date that is 1 year after the
date of enactment of the Virgin Islands Visa
Waiver Act of 2013. The promulgation of such
regulations shall be considered a foreign af-
fairs function for purposes of section 553(a) of
title 5, United States Code. At a minimum,
such regulations should include, but not nec-
essarily be limited to—
‘‘(i) a listing of all member or associate
member countries of the Caribbean Commu-
nity (CARICOM) whose nationals may ob-
tain, on a country by country basis, the
waiver provided by this paragraph, except
that such regulations shall not provide for a
listing of any country if the Secretary of
Homeland Security determines that such
country’s inclusion on such list would rep-
resent a threat to the welfare, safety, or se-
curity of the United States or its territories
and commonwealths; and
‘‘(ii) any bonding requirements for nation-
als of some or all of those countries who may
present an increased risk of overstays or
other potential problems, if different from
such requirements otherwise provided by law
for nonimmigrant visitors.
VerDate Mar 15 2010 02:23 Jun 18, 2013 Jkt 029060 PO 00000 Frm 00033 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 E:\CR\FM\A17JN6.012 S17JNPT1
p
w
a
l
k
e
r

o
n

D
S
K
7
T
P
T
V
N
1
P
R
O
D

w
i
t
h

S
E
N
A
T
E
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE S4530 June 17, 2013
‘‘(E) FACTORS.—In determining whether to
grant or continue providing the waiver under
this paragraph to nationals of any country,
the Secretary of Homeland Security, in con-
sultation with the Secretary of the Interior
and the Secretary of State, shall consider all
factors that the Secretary deems relevant,
including electronic travel authorizations,
procedures for reporting lost and stolen pass-
ports, repatriation of aliens, rates of refusal
for nonimmigrant visitor visas, overstays,
exit systems, and information exchange.
‘‘(F) SUSPENSION.—The Secretary of Home-
land Security shall monitor the admission of
nonimmigrant visitors to the United States
Virgin Islands under this paragraph. If the
Secretary determines that such admissions
have resulted in an unacceptable number of
visitors from a country remaining unlaw-
fully in the United States Virgin Islands, un-
lawfully obtaining entry to other parts of
the United States, or seeking withholding of
removal or asylum, or that visitors from a
country pose a risk to law enforcement or se-
curity interests of the United States Virgin
Islands or of the United States (including the
interest in the enforcement of the immigra-
tion laws of the United States), the Sec-
retary shall suspend the admission of nation-
als of such country under this paragraph.
The Secretary of Homeland Security may in
the Secretary’s discretion suspend the
United States Virgin Islands visa waiver pro-
gram at any time, on a country-by-country
basis, for other good cause.
‘‘(G) ADDITION OF COUNTRIES.—The Gov-
ernor of the United States Virgin Islands
may request the Secretary of the Interior
and the Secretary of Homeland Security to
add a particular country to the list of coun-
tries whose nationals may obtain the waiver
provided by this paragraph, and the Sec-
retary of Homeland Security may grant such
request after consultation with the Sec-
retary of the Interior and the Secretary of
State, and may promulgate regulations with
respect to the inclusion of that country and
any special requirements the Secretary of
Homeland Security, in the Secretary’s sole
discretion, may impose prior to allowing na-
tionals of that country to obtain the waiver
provided by this paragraph.’’.
(b) CONFORMING AMENDMENTS.—
(1) DOCUMENTATION REQUIREMENTS.—Sec-
tion 212(a)(7)(iii) of the Immigration and Na-
tionality Act (8 U.S.C. 1182(a)(7)(iii)) is
amended to read as follows:
‘‘(iii) SPECIAL VISA WAIVER PROGRAMS.—For
a provision authorizing waiver of clause (i)
in the case of visitors to Guam, the Com-
monwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands,
or the United States Virgin Islands, see sub-
section (l).’’.
(2) ADMISSION OF NONIMMIGRANTS.—Section
214(a)(1) of such Act (8 U.S.C. 1184(a)(1)) is
amended by inserting before the final sen-
tence the following: ‘‘No alien admitted to
the United States Virgin Islands without a
visa pursuant to section 212(l)(7) may be au-
thorized to enter or stay in the United
States other than in United States Virgin Is-
lands or to remain in the United States Vir-
gin Islands for a period exceeding 30 days
from date of admission to the United States
Virgin Islands.’’.
SA 1309. Mr. WYDEN submitted an
amendment intended to be proposed by
him to the bill S. 744, to provide for
comprehensive immigration reform
and for other purposes; which was or-
dered to lie on the table; as follows:
On page 1740, between lines 14 and 15, insert
the following:
(c) ARTISTS PERFORMING SPECIALIZED OR
UNIQUE SKILLS IN SUPPORT OF AMERICAN CRE-
ATIVE INDUSTRIES.—Section 101(a)(15)(P) (8
U.S.C. 1101(a)(15)(P)) is amended—
(1) in clause (iii), by striking ‘‘or’’ at the
end;
(2) by redesignating clause (iv) as clause
(v);
(3) by inserting after clause (iii) the fol-
lowing:
‘‘(iv) performs work that requires the at-
tainment of specialized or unique skills
within the arts or creative industries to be
performed solely for an American firm or
corporation engaged in whole or in part in
the development of foreign trade and com-
merce of the United States, which shall in-
clude the production or distribution of the
arts for international display or distribution,
including motion pictures or television pro-
ductions; or’’; and
(4) in clause (v) (as so redesignated) by
striking ‘‘or (iii)’’ and inserting ‘‘(iii), or
(iv)’’.
(d) EMPLOYMENT AUTHORIZATION FOR
SPOUSES.—Section 214(e)(6) (42 U.S.C.
1184(e)(6)) is amended by inserting
‘‘101(a)(15)(O), or 101(a)(15)(P)’’ after
‘‘101(a)(15)(E),’’.
SA 1310. Mr. WYDEN submitted an
amendment intended to be proposed by
him to the bill S. 744, to provide for
comprehensive immigration reform
and for other purposes; which was or-
dered to lie on the table; as follows:
On page 1207, line 24, insert after ‘‘equiva-
lent’’ the following: ‘‘, or who are required to
submit health-care worker certificates pur-
suant to section 212(a)(5)(C) or certified
statements pursuant to section 212(r),’’.
On page 1824, between lines 14 and 15, insert
the following:
‘‘(iii) CERTIFIED HEALTH-CARE WORKERS.—
An occupation for which an alien is required
to have a health-care worker certificate pur-
suant to section 212(a)(5)(C) or certified
statement pursuant to section 212(r) may not
be an eligible occupation.
SA 1311. Mr. BROWN (for himself,
Mr. GRASSLEY, Mr. MANCHIN, and Mr.
SESSIONS) submitted an amendment in-
tended to be proposed by him to the
bill S. 744, to provide for comprehen-
sive immigration reform and for other
purposes; which was ordered to lie on
the table; as follows:
On page 1679, strike lines 12 through 17 and
insert the following:
‘‘(iii) has offered the job to any United
States worker who applies and is equally or
better qualified for the job for which the
nonimmigrant or nonimmigrants is or are
sought.’’.
SA 1312. Mr. SANDERS (for himself
and Ms. STABENOW) submitted an
amendment intended to be proposed by
him to the bill S. 744, to provide for
comprehensive immigration reform
and for other purposes; which was or-
dered to lie on the table; as follows:
On page 1920, after line 13, add the fol-
lowing:
TITLE V—JOBS FOR YOUTH
SEC. 5101. DEFINITIONS.
In this title:
(1) CHIEF ELECTED OFFICIAL.—The term
‘‘chief elected official’’ means the chief
elected executive officer of a unit of local
government in a local workforce investment
area or in the case in which such an area in-
cludes more than one unit of general govern-
ment, the individuals designated under an
agreement described in section 117(c)(1)(B) of
the Workforce Investment Act of 1998 (29
U.S.C. 2832(c)(1)(B)).
(2) LOCAL WORKFORCE INVESTMENT AREA.—
The term ‘‘local workforce investment area’’
means such area designated under section 116
of the Workforce Investment Act of 1998 (29
U.S.C. 2831).
(3) LOCAL WORKFORCE INVESTMENT BOARD.—
The term ‘‘local workforce investment
board’’ means such board established under
section 117 of the Workforce Investment Act
of 1998 (29 U.S.C. 2832).
(4) LOW-INCOME YOUTH.—The term ‘‘low-in-
come youth’’ means an individual who—
(A) is not younger than 16 but is younger
than 25;
(B) meets the definition of a low-income
individual provided in section 101(25) of the
Workforce Investment Act of 1998 (29 U.S.C.
2801(25)), except that States and local work-
force investment areas, subject to approval
in the applicable State plans and local plans,
may increase the income level specified in
subparagraph (B)(i) of such section to an
amount not in excess of 200 percent of the
poverty line for purposes of determining eli-
gibility for participation in activities under
section 5103; and
(C) is in one or more of the categories spec-
ified in section 101(13)(C) of the Workforce
Investment Act of 1998 (29 U.S.C. 2801(13)(C)).
(5) POVERTY LINE.—The term ‘‘poverty
line’’ means a poverty line as defined in sec-
tion 673 of the Community Services Block
Grant Act (42 U.S.C. 9902), applicable to a
family of the size involved.
(6) STATE.—The term ‘‘State’’ means each
of the several States of the United States,
and the District of Columbia.
SEC. 5102. ESTABLISHMENT OF YOUTH JOBS
FUND.
(a) ESTABLISHMENT.—There is established
in the Treasury of the United States an ac-
count that shall be known as the Youth Jobs
Fund (referred to in this title as ‘‘the
Fund’’).
(b) DEPOSITS INTO THE FUND.—Out of any
amounts in the Treasury not otherwise ap-
propriated, there is appropriated
$1,500,000,000 for fiscal year 2014, which shall
be paid to the Fund, to be used by the Sec-
retary of Labor to carry out this title.
(c) AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS.—Of the
amounts deposited into the Fund under sub-
section (b), the Secretary of Labor shall allo-
cate $1,500,000,000 to provide summer and
year-round employment opportunities to
low-income youth in accordance with section
5103 .
(d) PERIOD OF AVAILABILITY.—The amounts
appropriated under this title shall be avail-
able for obligation by the Secretary of Labor
until December 31, 2014, and shall be avail-
able for expenditure by grantees (including
subgrantees) until September 30, 2015.
SEC. 5103. SUMMER EMPLOYMENT AND YEAR-
ROUND EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNI-
TIES FOR LOW-INCOME YOUTH.
(a) IN GENERAL.—From the funds available
under section 5102(c), the Secretary of Labor
shall make an allotment under subsection (c)
to each State that has a modification to a
State plan approved under section 112 of the
Workforce Investment Act of 1998 (29 U.S.C.
2822) (referred to in this section as a ‘‘State
plan modification’’) (or other State request
for funds specified in guidance under sub-
section (b)) approved under subsection (d)
and recipient under section 166(c) of the
Workforce Investment Act of 1998 (29 U.S.C.
2911(c)) (referred to in this section as a ‘‘Na-
tive American grantee’’) that meets the re-
quirements of this section, for the purpose of
providing summer employment and year-
round employment opportunities to low-in-
come youth.
(b) GUIDANCE AND APPLICATION OF REQUIRE-
MENTS.—
VerDate Mar 15 2010 03:04 Jun 18, 2013 Jkt 029060 PO 00000 Frm 00034 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 E:\CR\FM\A17JN6.014 S17JNPT1
p
w
a
l
k
e
r

o
n

D
S
K
7
T
P
T
V
N
1
P
R
O
D

w
i
t
h

S
E
N
A
T
E
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE S4531 June 17, 2013
(1) GUIDANCE.—Not later than 20 days after
the date of enactment of this Act, the Sec-
retary of Labor shall issue guidance regard-
ing the implementation of this section.
(2) PROCEDURES.—Such guidance shall, con-
sistent with this section, include procedures
for—
(A) the submission and approval of State
plan modifications, for such other forms of
requests for funds by the State as may be
identified in such guidance, for modifica-
tions to local plans approved under section
118 of the Workforce Investment Act of 1998
(29 U.S.C. 2833) (referred to individually in
this section as a ‘‘local plan modification’’),
or for such other forms of requests for funds
by local workforce investment areas as may
be identified in such guidance, that promote
the expeditious and effective implementa-
tion of the activities authorized under this
section; and
(B) the allotment and allocation of funds,
including reallotment and reallocation of
such funds, that promote such implementa-
tion.
(3) REQUIREMENTS.—Except as otherwise
provided in the guidance described in para-
graph (1) and in this section and other provi-
sions of this title, the funds provided for ac-
tivities under this section shall be adminis-
tered in accordance with the provisions of
subtitles B and E of title I of the Workforce
Investment Act of 1998 (29 U.S.C. 2811 et seq.,
2911 et seq.) relating to youth activities.
(c) STATE ALLOTMENTS.—
(1) IN GENERAL.—Using the funds described
in subsection (a), the Secretary of Labor
shall allot to each State the total of the
amounts assigned to the State under sub-
paragraphs (A) and (B) of paragraph (2).
(2) ASSIGNMENTS TO STATES.—
(A) MINIMUM AMOUNTS.—Using funds de-
scribed in subsection (a), the Secretary of
Labor shall assign to each State an amount
equal to
1
?2 of 1 percent of such funds.
(B) FORMULA AMOUNTS.—The Secretary of
Labor shall assign the remainder of the
funds described in subsection (a) among the
States by assigning—
(i) 33
1
?3 percent on the basis of the relative
number of individuals in the civilian labor
force who are not younger than 16 but young-
er than 25 in each State, compared to the
total number of individuals in the civilian
labor force who are not younger than 16 but
younger than 25 in all States;
(ii) 33
1
?3 percent on the basis of the relative
number of unemployed individuals in each
State, compared to the total number of un-
employed individuals in all States; and
(iii) 33
1
?3 on the basis of the relative num-
ber of disadvantaged young adults and youth
in each State, compared to the total number
of disadvantaged young adults and youth in
all States.
(3) REALLOTMENT.—If the Governor of a
State does not submit a State plan modifica-
tion or other State request for funds speci-
fied in guidance under subsection (b) by the
date specified in subsection (d)(2)(A), or a
State does not receive approval of such State
plan modification or request, the amount the
State would have been eligible to receive
pursuant to paragraph (1) shall be allocated
to States that receive approval of State plan
modifications or requests specified in the
guidance. Each such State shall receive a
share of the total amount available for real-
lotment under this paragraph, in accordance
with the State’s share of the total amount
allotted under paragraph (1) to such State.
(4) DEFINITIONS.—For purposes of para-
graph (2), the term ‘‘disadvantaged young
adult or youth’’ means an individual who is
not younger than 16 but is younger than 25
who received an income, or is a member of a
family that received a total family income,
that, in relation to family size, does not ex-
ceed the higher of—
(A) the poverty line; or
(B) 70 percent of the lower living standard
income level.
(d) STATE PLAN MODIFICATION.—
(1) IN GENERAL.—For a State to be eligible
to receive an allotment of funds under sub-
section (c), the Governor of the State shall
submit to the Secretary of Labor a State
plan modification, or other State request for
funds specified in guidance under subsection
(b), in such form and containing such infor-
mation as the Secretary may require. At a
minimum, such State plan modification or
request shall include—
(A) a description of the strategies and ac-
tivities to be carried out to provide summer
employment opportunities and year-round
employment opportunities, including link-
ages to training and educational activities,
consistent with subsection (f);
(B) a description of the requirements the
State will apply relating to the eligibility of
low-income youth, consistent with section
5101(4), for summer employment opportuni-
ties and year-round employment opportuni-
ties, which requirements may include cri-
teria to target assistance to particular cat-
egories of such low-income youth, such as
youth with disabilities, consistent with sub-
section (f);
(C) a description of the performance out-
comes to be achieved by the State through
the activities carried out under this section
and the processes the State will use to track
performance, consistent with guidance pro-
vided by the Secretary of Labor regarding
such outcomes and processes and with sec-
tion 5104(b);
(D) a description of the timelines for im-
plementation of the strategies and activities
described in subparagraph (A), and the num-
ber of low-income youth expected to be
placed in summer employment opportuni-
ties, and year-round employment opportuni-
ties, respectively, by quarter;
(E) assurances that the State will report
such information, relating to fiscal, perform-
ance, and other matters, as the Secretary
may require and as the Secretary determines
is necessary to effectively monitor the ac-
tivities carried out under this section;
(F) assurances that the State will ensure
compliance with the requirements, restric-
tions, labor standards, and other provisions
described in section 5104(a); and
(G) if a local board and chief elected offi-
cial in the State will provide employment
opportunities with the link to training and
educational activities described in sub-
section (f)(2)(B), a description of how the
training and educational activities will lead
to the industry-recognized credential in-
volved.
(2) SUBMISSION AND APPROVAL OF STATE
PLAN MODIFICATION OR REQUEST.—
(A) SUBMISSION.—The Governor shall sub-
mit the State plan modification or other
State request for funds specified in guidance
under subsection (b) to the Secretary of
Labor not later than 30 days after the
issuance of such guidance.
(B) APPROVAL.—The Secretary of Labor
shall approve the State plan modification or
request submitted under subparagraph (A)
within 30 days after submission, unless the
Secretary determines that the plan or re-
quest is inconsistent with the requirements
of this section. If the Secretary has not made
a determination within that 30-day period,
the plan or request shall be considered to be
approved. If the plan or request is dis-
approved, the Secretary may provide a rea-
sonable period of time in which the plan or
request may be amended and resubmitted for
approval. If the plan or request is approved,
the Secretary shall allot funds to the State
under subsection (c) within 30 days after
such approval.
(3) MODIFICATIONS TO STATE PLAN OR RE-
QUEST.—The Governor may submit further
modifications to a State plan modification
or other State request for funds specified
under subsection (b), consistent with the re-
quirements of this section.
(e) WITHIN-STATE ALLOCATION AND ADMINIS-
TRATION.—
(1) IN GENERAL.—Of the funds allotted to
the State under subsection (c), the Gov-
ernor—
(A) may reserve not more than 5 percent of
the funds for administration and technical
assistance; and
(B) shall allocate the remainder of the
funds among local workforce investment
areas within the State in accordance with
clauses (i) through (iii) of subsection
(c)(2)(B), except that for purposes of such al-
location references to a State in subsection
(c)(2)(B) shall be deemed to be references to
a local workforce investment area and ref-
erences to all States shall be deemed to be
references to all local workforce investment
areas in the State involved.
(2) LOCAL PLAN.—
(A) SUBMISSION.—In order to receive an al-
location under paragraph (1)(B), the local
workforce investment board, in partnership
with the chief elected official for the local
workforce investment area involved, shall
submit to the Governor a local plan modi-
fication, or such other request for funds by
local workforce investment areas as may be
specified in guidance under subsection (b),
not later than 30 days after the submission
by the State of the State plan modification
or other State request for funds specified in
guidance under subsection (b), describing the
strategies and activities to be carried out
under this section.
(B) APPROVAL.—The Governor shall ap-
prove the local plan modification or other
local request for funds submitted under sub-
paragraph (A) within 30 days after submis-
sion, unless the Governor determines that
the plan or request is inconsistent with re-
quirements of this section. If the Governor
has not made a determination within that
30-day period, the plan shall be considered to
be approved. If the plan or request is dis-
approved, the Governor may provide a rea-
sonable period of time in which the plan or
request may be amended and resubmitted for
approval. If the plan or request is approved,
the Governor shall allocate funds to the
local workforce investment area within 30
days after such approval.
(3) REALLOCATION.—If a local workforce in-
vestment board and chief elected official do
not submit a local plan modification (or
other local request for funds specified in
guidance under subsection (b)) by the date
specified in paragraph (2), or the Governor
disapproves a local plan, the amount the
local workforce investment area would have
been eligible to receive pursuant to the for-
mula under paragraph (1)(B) shall be allo-
cated to local workforce investment areas
that receive approval of their local plan
modifications or local requests for funds
under paragraph (2). Each such local work-
force investment area shall receive a share
of the total amount available for realloca-
tion under this paragraph, in accordance
with the area’s share of the total amount al-
located under paragraph (1)(B) to such local
workforce investment areas.
(f) USE OF FUNDS.—
(1) IN GENERAL.—The funds made available
under this section shall be used—
(A) to provide summer employment oppor-
tunities for low-income youth, with direct
linkages to academic and occupational
learning, and may be used to provide sup-
portive services, such as transportation or
VerDate Mar 15 2010 02:23 Jun 18, 2013 Jkt 029060 PO 00000 Frm 00035 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 E:\CR\FM\A17JN6.016 S17JNPT1
p
w
a
l
k
e
r

o
n

D
S
K
7
T
P
T
V
N
1
P
R
O
D

w
i
t
h

S
E
N
A
T
E
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE S4532 June 17, 2013
child care, that is necessary to enable the
participation of such youth in the opportuni-
ties; and
(B) to provide year-round employment op-
portunities, which may be combined with
other activities authorized under section 129
of the Workforce Investment Act of 1998 (29
U.S.C. 2854), to low-income youth.
(2) PROGRAM PRIORITIES.—In administering
the funds under this section, the local board
and chief elected official shall give priority
to—
(A) identifying employment opportunities
that are—
(i) in emerging or in-demand occupations
in the local workforce investment area; or
(ii) in the public or nonprofit sector and
meet community needs; and
(B) linking participants in year-round em-
ployment opportunities to training and edu-
cational activities that will provide such
participants an industry-recognized certifi-
cate or credential (referred to in this title as
an ‘‘industry-recognized credential’’).
(3) ADMINISTRATION.—Not more than 5 per-
cent of the funds allocated to a local work-
force investment area under this section
may be used for the costs of administration
of this section.
(4) PERFORMANCE ACCOUNTABILITY.—For ac-
tivities funded under this section, in lieu of
meeting the requirements described in sec-
tion 136 of the Workforce Investment Act of
1998 (29 U.S.C. 2871), States and local work-
force investment areas shall provide such re-
ports as the Secretary of Labor may require
regarding the performance outcomes de-
scribed in section 5104(b)(5).
SEC. 5104. GENERAL REQUIREMENTS.
(a) LABOR STANDARDS AND PROTECTIONS.—
Activities provided with funds made avail-
able under this title shall be subject to the
requirements and restrictions, including the
labor standards, described in section 181 of
the Workforce Investment Act of 1998 (29
U.S.C. 2931) and the nondiscrimination provi-
sions of section 188 of such Act (29 U.S.C.
2938), in addition to other applicable Federal
laws.
(b) REPORTING.—The Secretary of Labor
may require the reporting of information re-
lating to fiscal, performance and other mat-
ters that the Secretary determines is nec-
essary to effectively monitor the activities
carried out with funds provided under this
title. At a minimum, recipients of grants (in-
cluding recipients of subgrants) under this
title shall provide information relating to—
(1) the number of individuals participating
in activities with funds provided under this
title and the number of such individuals who
have completed such participation;
(2) the expenditures of funds provided
under this title;
(3) the number of jobs created pursuant to
the activities carried out under this title;
(4) the demographic characteristics of indi-
viduals participating in activities under this
title; and
(5) the performance outcomes for individ-
uals participating in activities under this
title, including—
(A) for low-income youth participating in
summer employment activities under sec-
tion 5103, performance on indicators con-
sisting of—
(i) work readiness skill attainment using
an employer validated checklist;
(ii) placement in or return to secondary or
postsecondary education or training, or
entry into unsubsidized employment; and
(B) for low-income youth participating in
year-round employment activities under sec-
tion 5103, performance on indicators con-
sisting of—
(i) placement in or return to postsecondary
education;
(ii) attainment of a secondary school di-
ploma or its recognized equivalent;
(iii) attainment of an industry-recognized
credential; and
(iv) entry into, retention in, and earnings
in, unsubsidized employment.
(c) ACTIVITIES REQUIRED TO BE ADDI-
TIONAL.—Funds provided under this title
shall only be used for activities that are in
addition to activities that would otherwise
be available in the State or local workforce
investment area in the absence of such
funds.
(d) ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS.—The Sec-
retary of Labor may establish such addi-
tional requirements as the Secretary deter-
mines may be necessary to ensure fiscal in-
tegrity, effective monitoring, and the appro-
priate and prompt implementation of the ac-
tivities under this title.
(e) REPORT OF INFORMATION AND EVALUA-
TIONS TO CONGRESS AND THE PUBLIC.—The
Secretary of Labor shall provide to the ap-
propriate committees of Congress and make
available to the public the information re-
ported pursuant to subsection (b).
SEC. 5105. VISA SURCHARGE.
(a) COLLECTION.—
(1) IN GENERAL.—Subject to paragraph (2),
and in addition to any fees otherwise im-
posed for such visas, the Secretary shall col-
lect a surcharge of $10 from an employer that
submits an application for—
(A) an employment-based visa under para-
graph (3), (4), (5), or (6) of section 203(b) of
the Immigration and Nationality Act (8
U.S.C. 1153(b)); and
(B) a nonimmigrant visa under subpara-
graph (C), (H)(i)(b), (H)(i)(c), (H)(ii)(a),
(H)(ii)(B), (O), (P), (R), or (W) of section
101(a)(15) of such Act (8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(15)).
(2) EXPIRATION.—The Secretary shall sus-
pend the collection of the surcharge author-
ized under paragraph (1) on the date on
which the Secretary has collected a cumu-
lative total of $1,500,000,000 under this sub-
section.
(b) DEPOSIT.—All of the amounts collected
under subsection (a)(1) shall be deposited in
the general fund of the Treasury.
SA 1313. Mr. SANDERS submitted an
amendment intended to be proposed by
him to the bill S. 744, to provide for
comprehensive immigration reform
and for other purposes; which was or-
dered to lie on the table; as follows:
On page 1743, strike lines 1 through 4, and
insert the following:
SEC. 44081. J VISA ELIGIBILITY.
(a) SPEAKERS OF CERTAIN FOREIGN LAN-
GUAGES.—Section 101(a)(15)(J) (8 U.S.C.
1101(a)(15)(J)) is amended to read as follows:
On page 1744, between lines 16 and 17, insert
the following:
(c) REFORM OF SUMMER WORK TRAVEL PRO-
GRAM.—
(1) PROHIBITION ON EMPLOYMENT.—Notwith-
standing any other provision of law or regu-
lation, including section 62.32 of title 22,
Code of Federal Regulations, the Secretary
of State may not implement the Summer
Work Travel program described in such sec-
tion 62.32 in a manner that permits an alien
who is admitted under section 101(a)(15)(J) of
the Immigration and Nationality Act (8
U.S.C. 1101(a)(15)(J)), as amended by sub-
section (a), as part of a cultural exchange to
be employed in the United States.
(2) REGULATIONS.—The Secretary of State
shall issue regulations that modify the Sum-
mer Work Travel program so that such pro-
gram—
(A) permits cultural exchanges as de-
scribed in such section 62.32; and
(B) does not permit participants to be em-
ployed in the United States.
SA 1314. Mr. PAUL submitted an
amendment intended to be proposed by
him to the bill S. 744, to provide for
comprehensive immigration reform
and for other purposes; which was or-
dered to lie on the table; as follows:
At the appropriate place, insert the fol-
lowing:
SEC. lll. REQUIREMENTS TO ENSURE LEGAL
VOTING.
(a) SHORT TITLE.—This section may be
cited as the ‘‘Secure the Vote Act of 2013’’.
(b) RESTRICTIONS.—
(1) AFFIDAVIT REQUIRED.—Any individual in
registered provisional immigrant status,
blue card status, asylum status, refugee sta-
tus, legal permanent resident status, or any
other permanent or temporary visa status
who intends to remain in the United States
in such status for longer than 6 months shall
submit to the Secretary, during the period
specified by the Secretary, a signed affidavit
that states that the alien—
(A) has not cast a ballot in any Federal
election in the United States; and
(B) will not register to vote, or cast a bal-
lot, in any Federal election in the United
States while in such status.
(2) PENALTY.—If an alien described in para-
graph (1) fails to timely submit the affidavit
described in paragraph (1) or violates any
term of such affidavit—
(A) the Secretary shall immediately—
(i) revoke the legal status of such alien;
and
(ii) deport the alien to the country from
which he or she originated; and
(B) the alien will be permanently ineligible
for United States citizenship.
(3) BARS TO LEGAL STATUS.—Any individual
in registered provisional immigrant status,
blue card status, asylum status, refugee sta-
tus, legal permanent resident status, or any
other permanent or temporary visa status
who illegally registers to vote or who votes
in any Federal election after receiving such
status or visa—
(A) shall not be eligible to apply for perma-
nent residence or citizenship; and
(B) if such individual has already been
granted permanent residence, shall lose such
status and be subject to deportation pursu-
ant to section 237(a)(6) of the Immigration
and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1227(a)(6)).
(c) RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE SECRETARY OF
HOMELAND SECURITY.—
(1) ELIGIBILITY DETERMINATION.—In deter-
mining whether an individual described in
subsection (a)(1) is eligible for legal status,
including naturalization, under the Immi-
gration and Nationality Act, the Secretary
shall verify that the alien has not registered
to vote, or cast a ballot, in a Federal elec-
tion in the United States.
(2) VERIFICATION OF CITIZENSHIP.—The Sec-
retary shall provide the election director of
each State, and such local election officials
as may be designated by such State direc-
tors, with access to relevant databases con-
taining information about aliens who have
been granted registered provisional immi-
grant status, asylum, refugee status, blue
card status, and any other permanent or
temporary visa status authorized under this
Act or the Immigration and Nationality Act,
for the sole purpose of verifying the citizen-
ship status of registered voters and all indi-
viduals applying to register to vote.
(3) ANNUAL REPORT.—The Secretary shall
submit an annual report to Congress that
identifies all jurisdictions in the United
States that have registered individuals who
are not United States citizens to vote in a
Federal election.
(d) RESPONSIBILITIES OF STATES.—
(1) PROOF OF CITIZENSHIP.—Notwith-
standing the Voting Rights Act of 1965 (42
VerDate Mar 15 2010 02:23 Jun 18, 2013 Jkt 029060 PO 00000 Frm 00036 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 E:\CR\FM\A17JN6.016 S17JNPT1
p
w
a
l
k
e
r

o
n

D
S
K
7
T
P
T
V
N
1
P
R
O
D

w
i
t
h

S
E
N
A
T
E
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE S4533 June 17, 2013
U.S.C. 1973 et seq.), the National Voter Reg-
istration Act of 1993 (42 U.S.C. 1973gg et seq.),
and any other Federal law, all States and
local governments—
(A) shall require individuals registering to
vote in Federal elections to provide adequate
proof of citizenship;
(B) may not accept an affirmation of citi-
zenship as adequate proof of citizenship for
voter registration purposes; and
(C) may require identification information
from all such voter registration applicants.
(2) COOPERATION WITH DEPARTMENT OF
HOMELAND SECURITY.—All States and local
governments shall provide the Department
with the registration and voting history of
any alien seeking registered provisional sta-
tus, naturalization, or any other immigra-
tion benefit, upon the request of the Sec-
retary.
(3) CONSEQUENCE OF NONCOMPLIANCE.—
(A) FIRST YEAR.—If any State is not in
compliance with the proof of citizenship re-
quirements set forth in paragraph (1) on or
before the date that is 1 year after the date
of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary
of Transportation shall reduce the appor-
tionment calculated under section 104(c) of
title 23, United States Code, for that State
for the following fiscal year by 10 percent.
(B) SUBSEQUENT YEARS.—For each subse-
quent year in which any State is not in com-
pliance with the proof of citizenship require-
ments set forth in paragraph (1), the Sec-
retary of Transportation shall reduce the ap-
portionment calculated under section 104(c)
of title 23, United States Code, for that State
for the following fiscal year by an additional
10 percent.
SA 1315. Mr. KING (for Mr. GRASS-
LEY) proposed an amendment to the
bill S. 330, to amend the Public Health
Service Act to establish safeguards and
standards of quality for research and
transplantation of organs infected with
human immunodeficiency virus (HIV);
as follows:
Strike section 3 and insert the following:
SEC. 3. CONFORMING AMENDMENT TO TITLE 18
OF THE UNITED STATES CODE.
Section 1122(a) of title 18, United States
Code, is amended by inserting ‘‘or in accord-
ance with all applicable guidelines and regu-
lations made by the Secretary of Health and
Human Services under section 377E of the
Public Health Service Act’’ after ‘‘research
or testing’’.
f
NOTICES OF HEARINGS
COMMITTEE ON SMALL BUSINESS AND
ENTREPRENEURSHIP
Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, I
would like to announce that the Com-
mittee on Small Business and Entre-
preneurship will meet on June 17, 2013,
at 5:30 p.m. in the Mansfield Room of
the Capitol (S–207) to hold a markup on
Committee legislation.
COMMITTEE ON SMALL BUSINESS AND
ENTREPRENEURSHIP
Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, I
would like to announce that the Com-
mittee on Small Business and Entre-
preneurship will meet on Thursday,
June 20, 2013, at 10 a.m. in room 428A
Russell Senate Office building to hold a
roundtable entitled ‘‘Sequestration:
Small Business Contractors Weath-
ering the Storm in a Climate of Fiscal
Uncertainty.’’
AUTHORITY FOR COMMITTEES TO
MEET
COMMITTEE ON SMALL BUSINESS AND
ENTREPRENEURSHIP
Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I ask
unanimous consent that the Com-
mittee on Small Business and Entre-
preneurship be authorized to meet dur-
ing the session of the Senate on June
17, 2013, at 5:30 p.m. in the Mansfield
Room, S–207 of the Capitol.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without
objection, it is so ordered.
f
HIV ORGAN POLICY EQUITY ACT
Mr. KING. Madam President, I ask
unanimous consent that the Senate
proceed to the immediate consider-
ation of Calendar No. 75, S. 330.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
clerk will report the bill by title.
The legislative clerk read as follows:
A bill (S. 330) to amend the Public Health
Service Act to establish safeguards and
standards for research and transplantation
of organs infected with human immuno-
deficiency virus (HIV).
There being no objection, the Senate
proceeded to consider the bill (S. 330)
to amend the Public Health Service
Act to establish safeguards and stand-
ards of quality for research and trans-
plantation of organs infected with
human immunodeficiency virus (HIV),
which had been reported from the Com-
mittee on Health, Education, Labor,
and Pensions, with an amendment to
strike all after the enacting clause and
insert in lieu thereof the following:
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ‘‘HIV Organ Pol-
icy Equity Act’’.
SEC. 2. AMENDMENTS TO THE PUBLIC HEALTH
SERVICE ACT.
(a) STANDARDS OF QUALITY FOR THE ACQUISI-
TION AND TRANSPORTATION OF DONATED OR-
GANS.—
(1) ORGAN PROCUREMENT AND TRANSPLAN-
TATION NETWORK.—Section 372(b) of the Public
Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 274(b)) is amend-
ed—
(A) in paragraph (2)(E), by striking ‘‘, includ-
ing standards for preventing the acquisition of
organs that are infected with the etiologic agent
for acquired immune deficiency syndrome’’; and
(B) by adding at the end the following:
‘‘(3) CLARIFICATION.—In adopting and using
standards of quality under paragraph (2)(E),
the Organ Procurement and Transplantation
Network may adopt and use such standards
with respect to organs infected with human im-
munodeficiency virus (in this paragraph re-
ferred to as ‘HIV’), provided that any such
standards ensure that organs infected with HIV
may be transplanted only into individuals
who—
‘‘(A) are infected with HIV before receiving
such organ; and
‘‘(B)(i) are participating in clinical research
approved by an institutional review board under
the criteria, standards, and regulations de-
scribed in subsections (a) and (b) of section
377E; or
‘‘(ii) if the Secretary has determined under
section 377E(c) that participation in such clin-
ical research, as a requirement for such trans-
plants, is no longer warranted, are receiving a
transplant under the standards and regulations
under section 377E(c).’’.
(2) CONFORMING AMENDMENT.—Section
371(b)(3)(C) of the Public Health Service Act (42
U.S.C. 273(b)(3)(C); relating to organ procure-
ment organizations) is amended by striking ‘‘in-
cluding arranging for testing with respect to
preventing the acquisition of organs that are in-
fected with the etiologic agent for acquired im-
mune deficiency syndrome’’ and inserting ‘‘in-
cluding arranging for testing with respect to
identifying organs that are infected with human
immunodeficiency virus (HIV)’’.
(3) TECHNICAL AMENDMENTS.—Section
371(b)(1) of the Public Health Service Act (42
U.S.C. 273(b)(1)) is amended by—
(A) striking subparagraph (E);
(B) redesignating subparagraphs (F) and (G)
as subparagraphs (E) and (F), respectively;
(C) striking ‘‘(H) has a director’’ and inserting
‘‘(G) has a director’’; and
(D) in subparagraph (H)—
(i) in clause (i) (V), by striking ‘‘paragraph
(2)(G)’’ and inserting ‘‘paragraph (3)(G)’’; and
(ii) in clause (ii), by striking ‘‘paragraph (2)’’
and inserting ‘‘paragraph (3)’’.
(b) PUBLICATION OF RESEARCH GUIDELINES.—
Part H of title III of the Public Health Service
Act (42 U.S.C. 273 et seq.) is amended by insert-
ing after section 377D the following:
‘‘SEC. 377E. CRITERIA, STANDARDS, AND REGULA-
TIONS WITH RESPECT TO ORGANS
INFECTED WITH HIV.
‘‘(a) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 2 years
after the date of the enactment of the HIV
Organ Policy Equity Act, the Secretary shall de-
velop and publish criteria for the conduct of re-
search relating to transplantation of organs
from donors infected with human immuno-
deficiency virus (in this section referred to as
‘HIV’) into individuals who are infected with
HIV before receiving such organ.
‘‘(b) CORRESPONDING CHANGES TO STANDARDS
AND REGULATIONS APPLICABLE TO RESEARCH.—
Not later than 2 years after the date of the en-
actment of the HIV Organ Policy Equity Act, to
the extent determined by the Secretary to be
necessary to allow the conduct of research in
accordance with the criteria developed under
subsection (a)—
‘‘(1) the Organ Procurement and Transplan-
tation Network shall revise the standards of
quality adopted under section 372(b)(2)(E); and
‘‘(2) the Secretary shall revise section 121.6 of
title 42, Code of Federal Regulations (or any
successor regulations).
‘‘(c) REVISION OF STANDARDS AND REGULA-
TIONS GENERALLY.—Not later than 4 years after
the date of the enactment of the HIV Organ Pol-
icy Equity Act, and annually thereafter, the
Secretary, shall—
‘‘(1) review the results of scientific research in
conjunction with the Organ Procurement and
Transplantation Network to determine whether
the results warrant revision of the standards of
quality adopted under section 372(b)(2)(E) with
respect to donated organs infected with HIV
and with respect to the safety of transplanting
an organ with a particular strain of HIV into a
recipient with a different strain of HIV;
‘‘(2) if the Secretary determines under para-
graph (1) that such results warrant revision of
the standards of quality adopted under section
372(b)(2)(E) with respect to donated organs in-
fected with HIV and with respect to trans-
planting an organ with a particular strain of
HIV into a recipient with a different strain of
HIV, direct the Organ Procurement and Trans-
plantation Network to revise such standards,
consistent with section 372 and in a way that
ensures the changes will not reduce the safety
of organ transplantation; and
‘‘(3) in conjunction with any revision of such
standards under paragraph (2), revise section
121.6 of title 42, Code of Federal Regulations (or
any successor regulations).’’.
SEC. 3. CONFORMING AMENDMENT TO TITLE 18
OF THE UNITED STATES CODE.
Section 1122 of title 18, United States Code, is
amended by adding at the end the following:
‘‘(d) EXCEPTION.—An organ donation does not
violate this section if the donation is in accord-
ance with all applicable criteria and regulations
VerDate Mar 15 2010 02:23 Jun 18, 2013 Jkt 029060 PO 00000 Frm 00037 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 6333 E:\CR\FM\A17JN6.015 S17JNPT1
p
w
a
l
k
e
r

o
n

D
S
K
7
T
P
T
V
N
1
P
R
O
D

w
i
t
h

S
E
N
A
T
E
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE S4534 June 17, 2013
of the Secretary made under section 377E of the
Public Health Service Act.’’.
Mr. KING. I further ask that the
committee-reported substitute be con-
sidered; the Grassley amendment,
which is at the desk, be agreed to; the
substitute, as amended, be agreed to;
the bill, as amended, be read a third
time and passed; and the motions to re-
consider be made and laid upon the
table, with no intervening action or de-
bate.
The amendment (No. 1315) was agreed
to, as follows:
AMENDMENT NO. 1315
Strike section 3 and insert the following:
SEC. 3. CONFORMING AMENDMENT TO TITLE 18
OF THE UNITED STATES CODE.
Section 1122(a) of title 18, United States
Code, is amended by inserting ‘‘or in accord-
ance with all applicable guidelines and regu-
lations made by the Secretary of Health and
Human Services under section 377E of the
Public Health Service Act’’ after ‘‘research
or testing’’.
The committee amendment, as
amended, was agreed to.
The bill was ordered to be engrossed
for a third reading, was read the third
time, and passed, as follows:
S. 330
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Rep-
resentatives of the United States of America in
Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ‘‘HIV Organ
Policy Equity Act’’.
SEC. 2. AMENDMENTS TO THE PUBLIC HEALTH
SERVICE ACT.
(a) STANDARDS OF QUALITY FOR THE ACQUI-
SITION AND TRANSPORTATION OF DONATED OR-
GANS.—
(1) ORGAN PROCUREMENT AND TRANSPLAN-
TATION NETWORK.—Section 372(b) of the Pub-
lic Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 274(b)) is
amended—
(A) in paragraph (2)(E), by striking ‘‘, in-
cluding standards for preventing the acquisi-
tion of organs that are infected with the
etiologic agent for acquired immune defi-
ciency syndrome’’; and
(B) by adding at the end the following:
‘‘(3) CLARIFICATION.—In adopting and using
standards of quality under paragraph (2)(E),
the Organ Procurement and Transplantation
Network may adopt and use such standards
with respect to organs infected with human
immunodeficiency virus (in this paragraph
referred to as ‘HIV’), provided that any such
standards ensure that organs infected with
HIV may be transplanted only into individ-
uals who—
‘‘(A) are infected with HIV before receiving
such organ; and
‘‘(B)(i) are participating in clinical re-
search approved by an institutional review
board under the criteria, standards, and reg-
ulations described in subsections (a) and (b)
of section 377E; or
‘‘(ii) if the Secretary has determined under
section 377E(c) that participation in such
clinical research, as a requirement for such
transplants, is no longer warranted, are re-
ceiving a transplant under the standards and
regulations under section 377E(c).’’.
(2) CONFORMING AMENDMENT.—Section
371(b)(3)(C) of the Public Health Service Act
(42 U.S.C. 273(b)(3)(C); relating to organ pro-
curement organizations) is amended by
striking ‘‘including arranging for testing
with respect to preventing the acquisition of
organs that are infected with the etiologic
agent for acquired immune deficiency syn-
drome’’ and inserting ‘‘including arranging
for testing with respect to identifying organs
that are infected with human immuno-
deficiency virus (HIV)’’.
(3) TECHNICAL AMENDMENTS.—Section
371(b)(1) of the Public Health Service Act (42
U.S.C. 273(b)(1)) is amended by—
(A) striking subparagraph (E);
(B) redesignating subparagraphs (F) and
(G) as subparagraphs (E) and (F), respec-
tively;
(C) striking ‘‘(H) has a director’’ and in-
serting ‘‘(G) has a director’’; and
(D) in subparagraph (H)—
(i) in clause (i) (V), by striking ‘‘paragraph
(2)(G)’’ and inserting ‘‘paragraph (3)(G)’’; and
(ii) in clause (ii), by striking ‘‘paragraph
(2)’’ and inserting ‘‘paragraph (3)’’.
(b) PUBLICATION OF RESEARCH GUIDE-
LINES.—Part H of title III of the Public
Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 273 et seq.) is
amended by inserting after section 377D the
following:
‘‘SEC. 377E. CRITERIA, STANDARDS, AND REGULA-
TIONS WITH RESPECT TO ORGANS
INFECTED WITH HIV.
‘‘(a) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 2 years
after the date of the enactment of the HIV
Organ Policy Equity Act, the Secretary shall
develop and publish criteria for the conduct
of research relating to transplantation of or-
gans from donors infected with human im-
munodeficiency virus (in this section re-
ferred to as ‘HIV’) into individuals who are
infected with HIV before receiving such
organ.
‘‘(b) CORRESPONDING CHANGES TO STAND-
ARDS AND REGULATIONS APPLICABLE TO RE-
SEARCH.—Not later than 2 years after the
date of the enactment of the HIV Organ Pol-
icy Equity Act, to the extent determined by
the Secretary to be necessary to allow the
conduct of research in accordance with the
criteria developed under subsection (a)—
‘‘(1) the Organ Procurement and Trans-
plantation Network shall revise the stand-
ards of quality adopted under section
372(b)(2)(E); and
‘‘(2) the Secretary shall revise section 121.6
of title 42, Code of Federal Regulations (or
any successor regulations).
‘‘(c) REVISION OF STANDARDS AND REGULA-
TIONS GENERALLY.—Not later than 4 years
after the date of the enactment of the HIV
Organ Policy Equity Act, and annually
thereafter, the Secretary, shall—
‘‘(1) review the results of scientific re-
search in conjunction with the Organ Pro-
curement and Transplantation Network to
determine whether the results warrant revi-
sion of the standards of quality adopted
under section 372(b)(2)(E) with respect to do-
nated organs infected with HIV and with re-
spect to the safety of transplanting an organ
with a particular strain of HIV into a recipi-
ent with a different strain of HIV;
‘‘(2) if the Secretary determines under
paragraph (1) that such results warrant revi-
sion of the standards of quality adopted
under section 372(b)(2)(E) with respect to do-
nated organs infected with HIV and with re-
spect to transplanting an organ with a par-
ticular strain of HIV into a recipient with a
different strain of HIV, direct the Organ Pro-
curement and Transplantation Network to
revise such standards, consistent with sec-
tion 372 and in a way that ensures the
changes will not reduce the safety of organ
transplantation; and
‘‘(3) in conjunction with any revision of
such standards under paragraph (2), revise
section 121.6 of title 42, Code of Federal Reg-
ulations (or any successor regulations).’’.
SEC. 3. CONFORMING AMENDMENT TO TITLE 18
OF THE UNITED STATES CODE.
Section 1122(a) of title 18, United States
Code, is amended by inserting ‘‘or in accord-
ance with all applicable guidelines and regu-
lations made by the Secretary of Health and
Human Services under section 377E of the
Public Health Service Act’’ after ‘‘research
or testing’’.
f
APPOINTMENT
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
Chair, on behalf of the majority leader,
pursuant to Public Law 111–5, appoints
the following individual to the Health
Information Technology Policy Com-
mittee: Dr. Aury Nagy of Nevada, vice
Dr. Frank Nemec of Nevada.
f
ORDERS FOR TUESDAY, JUNE 18,
2013
Mr. KING. Madam President, I ask
unanimous consent that when the Sen-
ate completes its business today, it ad-
journ until 10 a.m. on Tuesday, June 18,
2013; that following the prayer and
pledge, the morning hour be deemed
expired, the Journal of proceedings be
approved to date, the time for the two
leaders be reserved for their use later
in the day; that following any leader
remarks, the Senate be in a period of
morning business for 1 hour, with Sen-
ators permitted to speak therein for up
to 10 minutes each, with the time
equally divided and controlled between
the two leaders or their designees, with
the Republicans controlling the first
half and the majority controlling the
final half; that following morning busi-
ness, the Senate resume consideration
of S. 744, the comprehensive immigra-
tion reform bill, under the previous
order; and finally that the Senate re-
cess from 12:30 p.m. until 2:15 p.m. to
allow for the weekly caucus meetings.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without
objection, it is so ordered.
f
PROGRAM
Mr. KING. There will be up to four
rollcall votes at 3 p.m. in relation to
the amendments to the immigration
bill tomorrow.
f
ADJOURNMENT UNTIL 10 A.M.
TOMORROW
Mr. KING. If there is no further busi-
ness to come before the Senate, I ask
unanimous consent that it adjourn
under the previous order.
There being no objection, the Senate,
at 7:15 p.m., adjourned until Tuesday,
June 18, 2013, at 10 a.m.
VerDate Mar 15 2010 03:04 Jun 18, 2013 Jkt 029060 PO 00000 Frm 00038 Fmt 0624 Sfmt 0634 E:\CR\FM\A17JN6.021 S17JNPT1
p
w
a
l
k
e
r

o
n

D
S
K
7
T
P
T
V
N
1
P
R
O
D

w
i
t
h

S
E
N
A
T
E
EXTENSIONS OF REMARKS
? This ‘‘bullet’’ symbol identifies statements or insertions which are not spoken by a Member of the Senate on the floor.
Matter set in this typeface indicates words inserted or appended, rather than spoken, by a Member of the House on the floor.
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—Extensions of Remarks E883 June 17, 2013
HONORING THE KOREAN AMER-
ICAN COMMUNITY SERVICES ON
THE OCCASION OF THEIR 41ST
ANNUAL BENEFIT GALA
HON. BRADLEY S. SCHNEIDER
OF ILLINOIS
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Friday, June 14, 2013
Mr. SCHNEIDER. Mr. Speaker, I rise today
to honor the Korean American Community
Services (KACS) for more than 40 years of
commitment to helping Korean Americans in
the greater Chicagoland area.
On the eve of their 41st Annual Benefit
Gala, it is fitting to pay tribute to an organiza-
tion dedicated to fostering open, vibrant com-
munities. Through a vast array of services,
KACS has helped thousands of Korean Ameri-
cans become active members of their commu-
nities.
KACS has been able to benefit its more
than 7,000 annual clients in many ways, with
programs in early education, public health,
legal services, computer skills, the arts and
much more.
As the needs of their clients have evolved
over the years, so too have their methods.
Information technology and public health
programs have grown in demand and there-
fore grown in scope over recent years. As
more and more of our economy depends on
technological savvy and broad education,
KACS has expanded computer courses and
grown their Early Childhood Center into a na-
tional leader.
The KACS Community Technology Center
serves more than 1,000 immigrants and low–
income individuals, and the broad reach of
these programs is equaled only by their high
quality. These services are only a snapshot of
the total offered for toddlers through seniors.
KACS helps mold strong, active, engaged
members of the community, and we are lucky
to enjoy their services in the Tenth District.
f
HONORING THE TOWN OF ST.
ALBANS, MAINE
HON. MICHAEL H. MICHAUD
OF MAINE
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Friday, June 14, 2013
Mr. MICHAUD. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to
congratulate the people of the town of St. Al-
bans, Maine, as they celebrate their commu-
nity’s bicentennial.
Like many of Maine’s early settlements, the
Town of St. Albans began as part of Massa-
chusetts and has been in existence longer
than the State of Maine itself. In 1794, the
land first known as Township No. 5—located
in the 4th range of townships, north of the
Waldo patent in the county of Somerset—was
surveyed and in 1799, it was purchased by
the renowned Boston doctor, John Warren.
While its name changed several times from
Township 5 to Berlin, and then to Fairhaven,
this community would later be incorporated on
June 14, 1813, as the town of St. Albans and
it became the 199th town in the District of
Maine.
This weekend, the people of St. Albans will
celebrate the bicentennial of their town filled
with the same local spirit and sense of com-
mon purpose that filled those first residents
who first petitioned to have their community
recognized. The residents of St. Albans em-
body the values of the hardworking people of
Maine and can take great pride in the rich her-
itage they have created over the past 200
years.
It is an honor and a privilege to represent
the people of St. Albans in Congress, and I
am pleased to have this opportunity to help
the town celebrate its 200th anniversary.
Mr. Speaker, please join me in congratu-
lating the people of St. Albans and wishing
them well on this joyous occasion.
f
H.R. 1919 THE SAFEGUARDING
AMERICA’S PHARMACEUTICALS
ACT OF 2013
HON. RUSH HOLT
OF NEW JERSEY
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Friday, June 14, 2013
Mr. HOLT. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of
H.R. 1919, the Safeguarding America’s Phar-
maceuticals Act of 2013. Currently, there ex-
ists a patchwork of state regulations that pro-
vide for uneven detection of contaminated
drugs and falsified medicines. Recognizing
this, the Institutes of Medicine (IOM) rec-
ommend in a February 2013 report that ‘‘Con-
gress should authorize and fund the U.S.
Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to estab-
lish a mandatory track-and trace system.’’ The
Safeguarding America’s Pharmaceuticals Act
of 2013 makes important progress in providing
for a national standard of tracing medicines
electronically through the supply chain. We
should be doing all that we can to ensure the
security and authenticity of all medicines in the
United States. The enhanced drug distribution
security required by this legislation provides
manufacturers with important protections
against counterfeit drugs as well as increases
patient safety for American consumers.
f
NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZA-
TION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2014
SPEECH OF
HON. JOHN CONYERS, JR.
OF MICHIGAN
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Thursday, June 13, 2013
The House in Committee of the Whole
House on the state of the Union had under
consideration the bill (H.R. 1960) to authorize
appropriations for fiscal year 2014 for mili-
tary activities of the Department of Defense
and for military construction, to prescribe
military personnel strengths for such fiscal
year, and for other purposes:
Mr. CONYERS. Madam Chair, I rise to dis-
cuss my amendment, number 104, to H.R.
1960, the ‘‘National Defense Authorization Act
for Fiscal Year 2014.’’ I would like to thank
Chairman MCKEON and Ranking Member
SMITH for accepting this amendment in en bloc
amendment number five.
This technical amendment would improve
Section 1036 of the underlying bill, which re-
quires the President to provide information to
Congress as to which organizations it believes
are affiliates or adherents of Al-Qaeda, the
reasoning justifying such designation, and
whether each group constitutes an associated
force that is engaged in hostilities against the
United States or its coalition partners. My
amendment addresses the latter part of this
assessment dealing with so-called ‘‘associated
forces’’ affiliated with Al-Qaeda or the Taliban.
The 2001 Authorization for the Use of Mili-
tary Force passed shortly after the 9/11 at-
tacks has been interpreted by the last two Ad-
ministrations as authorizing war between the
United States and Al-Qaeda, the Taliban, and
co-belligerent ‘‘associated forces.’’ Although
we clearly know who Al-Qaeda or the Taliban
are, it is unclear which organizations the Exec-
utive Branch is referring to when referencing
‘‘associated forces.’’ This absence of trans-
parency as to the government’s application of
this legal concept allows for the possibility that
the United States could rely on the AUMF as
a broad, nearly limitless source of authority for
military operations, including drone strikes,
against groups that have little to no connection
to the September 11 attacks in places like
Mali, Somalia, or even Syria.
It is my understanding that Section 1036 of
the bill attempts to address this ambiguity by
attempting to discern the Administration’s
thinking about which groups it considers en-
gaged in hostilities against our country. Unfor-
tunately, it is unclear if Section 1036 is asking
for information about ‘‘associated forces’’ for
the purposes of interpreting the 2001 AUMF or
simply seeking information about groups that
affiliate with Al-Qaeda or the Taliban in a dif-
ferent context. This distinction is critically im-
portant, because the United States is only
technically at war with ‘‘associated forces’’
covered by the 2001 AUMF and not with
groups that have some other affiliation with Al-
Qaeda or the Taliban.
My amendment eliminates this ambiguity by
explicitly requiring the President to provide in-
formation about organizations it considers to
be ‘‘associated forces’’ for the purposes of in-
terpreting this war authorization. In doing so, it
should help the Congress understand the
scope of this outdated law, which has been in-
terpreted by the Executive Branch and the
courts in an overbroad manner, and ensure
that it is not being used to justify uses of force
unauthorized by and inconsistent with Con-
gress, the Constitution, and international law.
Again, I thank my colleagues for supporting
my amendment.
VerDate Mar 15 2010 03:59 Jun 18, 2013 Jkt 029060 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 0626 Sfmt 0634 E:\CR\FM\K14JN8.006 E17JNPT1
s
m
a
r
t
i
n
e
z

o
n

D
S
K
6
T
P
T
V
N
1
P
R
O
D

w
i
t
h

R
E
M
A
R
K
S
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—Extensions of Remarks E884 June 17, 2013
NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZA-
TION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2014
SPEECH OF
HON. GERALD E. CONNOLLY
OF VIRGINIA
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Thursday, June 13, 2013
The House in Committee of the Whole
House on the state of the Union had under
consideration the bill (H.R. 1960) to authorize
appropriations for fiscal year 2014 for mili-
tary activities of the Department of Defense
and for military construction, to prescribe
military personnel strengths for such fiscal
year, and for other purposes:
Mr. CONNOLLY. Madam Chair, I am
pleased to offer this simple bipartisan amend-
ment with Reps. WOLF and SCHNEIDER to ex-
pand an existing report required by Section
1242 of the bill. The amendment clarifies that
the report ought to include information on how
the Egyptian military is supporting the rights of
individuals involved in civil society and demo-
cratic promotion efforts through non-govern-
mental organizations or NG0s.
This a timely issue, given the guilty verdict
rendered by an Egyptian court June 4th
against 43 NGO workers—including 17 Ameri-
cans—because of their involvement with pro-
democracy groups. The guilty verdict renews
concerns about Egypt’s commitment to demo-
cratic principles. In fact, I am circulating a bi-
partisan letter with my Virginia colleague, Rep.
WOLF, urging Egyptian President Morsi to im-
mediately reconsider this action and permit the
NGOs to continue their important.work. So far,
more than 50 Members of Congress have
signed our bipartisan letter, including Rep.
SCHNEIDER, who also cosponsored this
amendment.
The United States supports the aspirations
of the Egyptian people to become a free and
fair society, in which all NG0s—regardless of
their nation of origin—are allowed to operate
freely. I hope that Egyptian officials will come
to this same realization and return property
confiscated from the NGOs 18 months ago,
remove their staff from the no-fly list, and per-
mit them to continue their work supporting a
fair and open election process and helping to
improve the lives of all Egyptians.
If the U.S. government and the American
people are to have any confidence that the
Egyptian government is undertaking a genuine
transition to a democratic state, under civilian
control, where the freedoms of assembly, as-
sociation, religion, and expression are guaran-
teed and the rule of law is upheld, then we
must see a swift and satisfactory resolution to
this case.
As my colleagues will recall, this ordeal
began a year and a half ago, when Egyptian
forces raided both American and non-Amer-
ican NGO offices. During the raids, Egyptian
forces seized records, computers, other elec-
tronic equipment, and hard currency. At every
turn Egyptian authorities assured the NGOs
and U.S. authorities that the situation would
be appropriately resolved, only to renege on
their word. For example, three days after the
raids, U.S. NGOs were waiting for the return
of their confiscated property as promised by
Field Marshal Tantawi while simultaneously,
another Egyptian official—Fayza Abou Naga,
the government minister in charge of coordi-
nating foreign aid—was holding a press con-
ference saying the property would not be re-
turned. Abou Naga also accused the NGOs of
illicitly funneling money to the April 6th Youth
Movement.
When I traveled to Egypt in March of last
year, my colleagues and I raised the issue of
the NGOs with General Tantawi. During that
trip, we also met with the Egyptian staffers
who were facing charges. They were in a pre-
carious position, and their situation has only
worsened with the June 4th verdict.
We cannot in good conscience ignore the
results of the recent trial, which comes on the
heels of a draft law that further restricts
NGOs, fails to meet Egypt’s international com-
mitments with respect to freedom of associa-
tion, and lends credence to the opinion that
there is an ongoing war against civil society in
Egypt.
U.S. law with regard to this issue is clear in
the restrictions placed on the $1.3 billion in
military aid for Egypt:
Prior to the obligation of funds appro-
priated by this Act under the heading ‘For-
eign Military Financing Program,’ the Sec-
retary of State shall certify to the Commit-
tees on Appropriations that the Government
of Egypt is supporting the transition to ci-
vilian government including holding free and
fair elections; implementing policies to pro-
tect freedom of expression, association, and
religion, and due process of law.
With the current state of affairs in Egypt,
any such certification that Egypt is, in fact, im-
plementing policies to guarantee the pillars of
a free society would be met with skepticism.
That is why news reports of Sec. Kerry’s re-
cent action to waive the restrictions on that
military aid are of particular concern. It is not
too late to include these important NGO
issues in a larger discussion about releasing
(or withholding) other tranches of money to
Egypt.
Our amendment would further support the
transition to democracy by requiring the Pen-
tagon report on how Egyptian military activities
contribute to an atmosphere where pro-de-
mocracy NGOs can operate freely. I encour-
age my colleagues to support the Connolly/
Wolf/Schneider amendment and to sign the re-
lated letter to President Morsi of Egypt.
f
CANCEL THE SEQUESTER: LET
HERIBERTO LEO
´
N DO HIS JOB
HON. JANICE D. SCHAKOWSKY
OF ILLINOIS
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Friday, June 14, 2013
Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Mr. Speaker, I rise to
tell my colleagues about one of my constitu-
ents, Heriberto Leo´ n, who wrote recently to
explain the real-life consequences of the se-
quester, for him and for our country.
Mr. Leo´ n is not asking Congress for much—
he simply wants to be able to do his job as an
EPA community involvement coordinator, help-
ing to improve access to clean air and clean
water for communities in the Chicagoland
area.
My constituent spends his day providing in-
formation to communities that are dealing with
well water contamination from benzene. He is
working to address the environmental and
health consequences of pollution, effects that
are particularly harmful to children and older
Americans. He obviously enjoys his work and
he is making a real contribution.
Mr. Leo´ n is not trying to enrich himself—in
fact, he took a $20,000 pay cut when he took
his EPA job in 2010 and has been living with
a three-year pay freeze. It is clear to me that,
like so many Federal workers, he is committed
to serving the public. And, like so many Fed-
eral workers, he cannot understand why he is
unable to do his job and is being asked to
take an additional personal, financial hit be-
cause of the sequester.
Mr. Leo´ n is being asked to take 13 furlough
days, because of the arbitrary and harsh im-
pacts of the across-the-board sequester cuts.
That’s about a $4,000—11% pay cut. We
need people like Heriberto Leo´ n at EPA, and
I worry how we will be able to attract and re-
tain dedicated Federal workers when they are
faced with furloughs and budget cuts that pre-
vent them from fulfilling their mission and im-
pose serious financial hardships on them.
I hope that my colleagues will take the time
to read Mr. Leo´ n’s full letter and that, after
doing so, you will join me in supporting H.R.
900, the Cancel the Sequester Act. Our con-
stituents are counting on us to act now.
LETTER FROM HERIBERTO LEO
´
N
Re Furlough Imposed on U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency Employees.
DEAR REPRESENTATIVE SCHAKOWSKY: It is
with much frustration and heartbreak that I
write to you this letter to urge you to con-
tinue efforts to end the sequester and its im-
pact on working class public employees such
as myself.
Today is my second furlough day since the
sequester began earlier this year. Because
I’m not at work today, I am unable to attend
to Americans struggling with the impact of
soil, water and air pollution in their commu-
nities. As a community involvement coordi-
nator in EPA’s Region 5 office, I translate to
Spanish EPA information for Chicago neigh-
borhoods like Pilsen and Little Village and
help explain to residents in Wedron, IL how
the Superfund Law and the Clean Drinking
Water Act each will help the EPA address
the benzene contamination in their well
water. I have similar assignments with com-
munities facing contaminated sites through-
out the Great Lakes states of Ohio, Michi-
gan, Indiana, Illinois, Wisconsin, and Min-
nesota. My workload is sufficient to keep me
busy many hours beyond my regular work
hours, which many times I am happy to offer
because I love to contribute to citizens who
are victims of industrial pollution. Instead
I’m asked to not show up to work so that my
salary can be used to save money for a made-
up fiscal crisis.
According to EPA’s announcement earlier
this year I have a total of 13 furlough days
between April and September, the end of the
fiscal year. That means a pay-cut of nearly
$4000, or 11% of my salary between now and
September. That amount is almost what I
will need in August to pay the second in-
stallment of my Cook County real estate tax
bill! Shall I sell my house and move out of
Cook County or Illinois altogether?
Congresswoman Schakowsky, I gladly took
a pay cut of 20K to come to work for the fed-
eral government in 2010 as I understood that
I would be able to progress through the fed-
eral employment step and grade system.
However, that same year a now three-year-
old pay freeze was imposed on government
workers.
I have had many employers in my work-
life from institutions of higher learning such
as Loyola University Chicago to private con-
tractors for the Chicago Housing Authority.
Never have I experienced the utter disregard
and insulting treatment I feel from my em-
ployer, the Government of the United States
VerDate Mar 15 2010 03:59 Jun 18, 2013 Jkt 029060 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 0626 Sfmt 0634 E:\CR\FM\A14JN8.026 E17JNPT1
s
m
a
r
t
i
n
e
z

o
n

D
S
K
6
T
P
T
V
N
1
P
R
O
D

w
i
t
h

R
E
M
A
R
K
S
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—Extensions of Remarks E885 June 17, 2013
of America, and the politicians responsible
for its policies. The most demeaning day for
me was just a few days ago when my super-
visor ordered me to fill out EPA’s ‘‘Request
for Leave’’ form to ‘‘request’’ my own fur-
lough days. This sequestration was never
supposed to happen. It is unfair and unrea-
sonable. But it has happened anyway.
I am happy that Air Traffic workers and
other co-workers throughout the federal gov-
ernment have by now been exempted from
furloughs. It pains me terribly that no simi-
lar consideration is expressed for those of us
who are charged with caring for the environ-
mental, economic, health, housing and other
equally important concerns of the American
people.
Finally, I would like to thank your staff
for listening to me and submit this letter for
your consideration.
Sincerely,
HERIBERTO LEO
´
N.
f
HONORING COL. SCOTT W. GORDON
HON. TIM RYAN
OF OHIO
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Friday, June 14, 2013
Mr. RYAN of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I rise today
to honor the career of an exemplary public
servant, Col. Scott W. Gordon. After over thirty
years of service, Col. Gordon is retiring at the
end of August from the United States Army.
Col. Gordon was born in Utica, NY and
grew up in Youngstown, OH. He earned his
undergraduate degree in Zoology from Miami
University in Oxford, OH in 1973 and went on
to earn his masters in entomology from The
Ohio State University in 1976. He was award-
ed a Ph.D. in Microbiology from Colorado
State University in Fort Collins, CO in 1993.
Col. Gordon joined the military in 1984 after
being employed as a medical entomologist by
the Vector-borne Disease Unit of the Ohio De-
partment of Health. Throughout Col. Gordon’s
thirty years of service to his country, he
worked in several distinguished capacities
within the United States Army. Col. Gordon’s
work and dedication is exhibited through the
numerous awards and decorations he has ac-
crued throughout his three decades of service.
Since joining the military, Col. Gordon has
remained active in entomological research as
a member of numerous professional organiza-
tions including the American Society of Trop-
ical Medicine and Hygiene, The American
Mosquito Control Association, and the Ento-
mological Society of America. Col. Gordon has
authored or co-authored over 20 publications
in peer-reviewed journals.
I want to extend my warmest and sincere
thanks to Col. Scott W. Gordon for his many
years of service to his country. His long and
illustrious military career will not be forgotten
and I would like to wish him congratulations
and all the best in his well-deserved retire-
ment.
f
HONORING THE LIFE OF
CHARLOTTE TASHJIAN AARON
HON. JIM COSTA
OF CALIFORNIA
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Friday, June 14, 2013
Mr. COSTA. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to
pay tribute to the life of Charlotte Tashjian
Aaron, who passed away on June 7, 2013 at
the age of 97. Charlotte’s thoughtfulness, gen-
erosity, and overwhelming love for others will
be greatly missed.
Charlotte was born into a family with very
strong Armenian roots. The Tashjians immi-
grated to the United States to escape the Ar-
menian Genocide. They settled in Madera,
California, and ran a small family business,
‘‘Simon Cleaners.’’ After Charlotte graduated
from Madera High School, she decided to stay
close to home and work for her parents.
Charlotte’s faith in God and her religion
were extremely important to her. For over 50
years she was a part of the Fidelis Society,
and served as a choir member at the First Ar-
menian Presbyterian Church in Fresno, Cali-
fornia for almost 70 years. Charlotte was sing-
ing in the choir when she saw the love of her
life, Isaac, for the very first time. Isaac and
Charlotte got married, and raised three be-
loved sons: James, Edward, and Richard.
For Armenians, family is everything, and
Charlotte loved her family dearly. She leaves
behind her sons and daughter-in-laws: Heath-
er, Kris, and Nancy; her grandchildren: David,
Michael, Janelle, Stephanie, Steven, John,
Kirsten, and Danielle; and her brother Ed and
her sister-in-law, Wilma.
Mr. Speaker, it is with great respect that I
ask my colleagues in the House of Represent-
atives to pay tribute to the life of Charlotte
Tashjian Aaron. Charlotte will undoubtedly be
missed many, and she will always be in the
hearts of those who love her deeply.
f
PERSONAL EXPLANATION
HON. GWEN MOORE
OF WISCONSIN
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Friday, June 14, 2013
Ms. MOORE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today re-
garding one missed vote on June 12, 2013.
Had I been present for rollcall 217, On Mo-
tion to Recommit with Instructions for the
Swap Jurisdiction Certainty Act, I would have
voted ‘‘aye.’’
f
NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZA-
TION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2014
SPEECH OF
HON. BILL PASCRELL, JR.
OF NEW JERSEY
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Thursday, June 13, 2013
The House in Committee of the Whole
House on the state of the Union had under
consideration the bill (H.R. 1960) to authorize
appropriations for fiscal year 2014 for mili-
tary activities of the Department of Defense
and for military construction, to prescribe
military personnel strengths for such fiscal
year, and for other purposes:
Mr. PASCRELL. Madam Chair, it has been
over 10 years since the start of the wars in
Iraq and Afghanistan and I fear we are still not
properly addressing traumatic brain injury, also
known as ‘‘the signature injury of the war.’’ I
would like to thank Chairman MCKEON and
Ranking Member SMITH for their commitment
to this issue in recent authorizations. I would
also like to thank Mr. THOMPSON for his co-
sponsorship of my first amendment.
Over the last few years, Congress has con-
tinued to emphasize the importance of this
issue and has made funds available for the
identification and treatment of brain injuries in
our soldiers. It is important these funds be
used wisely to ensure that our men and
women in uniform are getting timely and prop-
er care. A January 2012 GAO report high-
lighted the need to coordinate TBI and psy-
chological health activities within the Depart-
ment.
In the National Defense Authorization for FY
2013, Congress mandated that the Secretary
of Defense submit a plan to Congress that
would improve coordination and integration of
the programs that address traumatic brain in-
jury and psychological health of members of
the Armed Forces. Specifically, this report
would require the identification of gaps in serv-
ices and treatments, a plan for addressing any
gaps or redundancies and identifying an offi-
cial to lead the implementation of any
changes. This report is due in July of this
year, and my amendment underscores the im-
portance of this mandated report, and strongly
urges the Secretary to deliver it to Congress
within the appropriate timeframe.
My second amendment addresses the con-
tinuing issue of identification of traumatic brain
injuries. Although the Department of Defense
has made a strong commitment to identifying,
and treating those men and women who have
suffered a traumatic brain injury while serving
our Nation, there are still problems with
screening our troops.
In June 2010, a memorandum issued by the
Department of Defense made a 50- meter dis-
tance from an explosion the criterion to iden-
tify, refer, and treat members for potential
traumatic brain injury in theater. However, the
Department of Defense has yet to address
those service members who may have been
exposed to a blast prior to that time. Many of
these soldiers remain on active duty and we
must ensure they are tested and treated. My
amendment mandates a report on how the
Secretary of Defense will identify, refer, and
treat possible traumatic brain injuries with re-
spect to members of the Armed Forces who
served in Operation Enduring Freedom or Op-
eration Iraqi Freedom prior to June 2010. This
is a vitally important report for ensuring the
health of our troops. I ask that my colleagues
support these amendments for those service
members who are struggling with invisible
wounds.
f
NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZA-
TION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2014
SPEECH OF
HON. DANA ROHRABACHER
OF CALIFORNIA
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Thursday, June 13, 2013
The House in Committee of the Whole
House on the state of the Union had under
consideration the bill (H.R. 1960) to authorize
appropriations for fiscal year 2014 for mili-
tary activities of the Department of Defense
and for military construction, to prescribe
military personnel strengths for such fiscal
year, and for other purposes:
Mr. ROHRABACHER. Madam Chair, in-
cluded in this en bloc package is an amend-
ment I offered that relates to Pakistan. It adds,
VerDate Mar 15 2010 03:59 Jun 18, 2013 Jkt 029060 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 0626 Sfmt 9920 E:\CR\FM\A14JN8.027 E17JNPT1
s
m
a
r
t
i
n
e
z

o
n

D
S
K
6
T
P
T
V
N
1
P
R
O
D

w
i
t
h

R
E
M
A
R
K
S
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—Extensions of Remarks E886 June 17, 2013
as a condition of aid to Pakistan, that
Islamabad must not use the funding we pro-
vide to its security forces for purposes of do-
mestic repression of ethnic and religious mi-
nority groups as it has in the past.
The State Department’s 2012 Country Re-
port on Human Rights in Pakistan states, ‘‘The
most serious human rights problems were
extrajudicial and targeted killings, forced dis-
appearances, and torture, which affected thou-
sands of citizens in nearly all parts of the
country.’’ Members of the Pakistani military as
well as police are involved in these lethal
abuses of human rights.
Repression of minority groups is systemic.
Human rights organizations have reported that
many Sindhi and Baloch nationalists were
among those missing. Non-Sunni religious
practitioners, Christians, Ahmadis, and Shia
Muslims, are attacked with impunity.
There are already four conditions in the core
bill and my amendment simply adds a fifth re-
quirement to prevent the misuse of our aid.
Thank you, Madam Chair, for accepting my
amendment.
f
SALUTING SERVICE ACADEMY
STUDENTS
HON. SAM JOHNSON
OF TEXAS
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Friday, June 14, 2013
Mr. SAM JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Speaker,
I rise today to honor an extraordinary group of
21 students who have been chosen as the fu-
ture leaders of our Armed Forces by the pres-
tigious United States service academies.
These brave young men and women will com-
mit the next four years to diligently study and
rigorously train to become our Nation’s de-
fenders and protectors. I am proud to see
such a fine group of young adults earnestly
pursue a world-class education and a lifetime
of service. I have no doubt they will represent
the Third District of Texas well.
As we keep them and their families in our
prayers, may we never forget the commitment
they are making now and will make in the fu-
ture to preserve the freedoms we all hold
dear. These students are the cream of the
crop. They embody the best of their genera-
tion, a generation full of courage, honor, and
integrity; a generation with a deep sense of
duty to uphold America’s belief in democracy,
liberty, and justice for all.
Young men and women, I salute each one
of you for your dedication to this great country
and thank you from the bottom of my heart.
God bless you and God Bless America.
The name and hometown of each appointee
follows:
THIRD CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT SERVICE
ACADEMY BOUND STUDENTS—CLASS OF 2017
UNITED STATES AIR FORCE ACADEMY
Bryan Lawrence Driskell, from McKinney,
graduate of McKinney Boyd High School;
Hunter Logan Hill, from Richardson, grad-
uate of Jesuit College Preparatory School;
Benjamin Darrell Legband, from Dallas,
graduate of Trinity Christian Academy;
Zachary David Missimo, from Dallas, grad-
uate of Prestonwood Christian Academy;
Chandler Avery Myers, from Garland, grad-
uate of Naaman Forest High School; Darrius
Anthonye Parker, from Allen, graduate of
Allen High School in 2012 and the U.S. Air
Force Academy Preparatory School in 2013;
Cortland Shonell Tolbert, from McKinney,
graduate of Allen High School in 2012 and the
U.S. Air Force Academy Preparatory School
in 2013; and Russell Howard Williams, from
McKinney, graduate of McKinney Boyd High
School.
UNITED STATES NAVAL ACADEMY
John-Charles Cheng Arion, from Plano,
graduate of Coram Deo Academy; Kim Anh
Do, from Murphy, graduate of Plano East
Senior High School; Phillip Thomas
Metcalfe, from Plano, graduate of Plano East
Senior High School; and Victor Vinh Truong,
from Garland, graduate of Garland High
School.
UNITED STATES MILITARY ACADEMY
Aaron Michael Anderson, from Frisco,
graduate of Frisco High School in 2012 and
the U.S. Military Academy’s Preparatory
School in 2013; Nicholas Martin Bergstein,
from Parker, graduate of Plano East Senior
High School; Kaleb Samuel Fields, from
Plano, graduate of Trinity Christian Acad-
emy; Frank Yilong Lin, from Plano, grad-
uate of Centennial High School; Anthony
Park, from Plano, graduate of Plano Senior
High School; Matthew Daniel Salazar, from
Plano, graduate of Plano Senior High
School; Blair Dillon Swanner, from Frisco,
graduate of Centennial High School; and
Samantha Lee Todd, from Plano, graduate of
Plano Senior High School.
UNITED STATES MERCHANT MARINE ACADEMY
Ha-Young Daniel Rhee, from Plano, grad-
uate of Plano East Senior High School.
f
IN HONOR OF THE WHAYNE SUP-
PLY COMPANY’S 100 YEAR ANNI-
VERSARY
HON. ANDY BARR
OF KENTUCKY
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Friday, June 14, 2013
Mr. BARR. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to
honor the Whayne Supply Company in Lex-
ington, Kentucky, and to congratulate them on
their 100 Year Anniversary.
Whayne Supply Company, headquartered in
Louisville, was founded by Roy C. Whayne,
Sr. in 1913. He was the only employee during
the company’s infancy, and sold items such as
light engines, pumps, and bicycles. Twelve
years later, he began what would become a
very long-term relationship with Caterpillar,
and today the company employs over 1,300
people, operating 15 facilities in 12 cities in
Kentucky and Indiana.
Whayne Supply Company is well-known for
its equipment sales, rental and service offer-
ings throughout Kentucky, but is also contrib-
utes to our Commonwealth in other ways.
Whayne Supply has installed and services
power stations and generators at medical cen-
ters to ensure that power is supplied to the
hospital during power outages, and provides
the same service to broadcasting stations so
that these radio stations can continue to oper-
ate during power outages. Whayne Supply
also supplies and services hybrid school
buses throughout the state.
Mr. Speaker, I ask that my colleagues join
me in congratulating the Whayne Supply Com-
pany on 100 years of successful business. I
would also like to extend my personal appre-
ciation to the Whayne Supply Company and
all of its employees for all that they have done
and continue to do for our community our the
Commonwealth.
CONGRESSIONAL GOLD MEDAL
FOR RABBI ARTHUR SCHNEIER
HON. CAROLYN B. MALONEY
OF NEW YORK
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Friday, June 14, 2013
Mrs. CAROLYN B. MALONEY of New York.
Mr. Speaker, together with my bipartisan col-
leagues Reps. CHARLIE RANGEL, ELIOT ENGEL,
BRIAN HIGGINS, NITA LOWEY, JERROLD NADLER,
and MICHAEL GRIMM, I am introducing a bill to
award a Congressional Gold Medal to Rabbi
Arthur Schneier, in recognition of his pio-
neering role in promoting religious freedom
and human rights throughout the world for
over half a century.
Born in Vienna, Austria, in 1930, Rabbi
Schneier lived under Nazi occupation in Buda-
pest during World War II and came to the
United States in 1947. He has been the Spir-
itual Leader of the Park East Synagogue in
New York City since 1962.
A Holocaust survivor, and the Founder and
President of the Appeal of Conscience Foun-
dation, Rabbi Schneier has devoted his life to
overcoming the forces of hatred and intoler-
ance.
He has been a pioneer in bringing together
religious leaders to address ethnic or religious
conflicts. For example, in Bosnia in 1997, he
convened government and religious leaders to
promote healing and conciliation between Or-
thodox, Muslim and Jewish communities. In
the Balkans, the Caucasus and Central Asia
he worked with the Orthodox Patriarch and the
Turkish Government to hold the Peace and
Tolerance Conference in 1994 and address
religious and ethnic tensions in that area. In
the former Yugoslavia, he mobilized religious
leaders to halt the bloodshed of the early 90’s,
holding the Religious Summit on the Former
Yugoslavia and the Conflict Resolution Con-
ference to build support and consensus
among religious leaders of different faiths.
Since the early 1980s, he has led delegations
of religious leaders to China to open a dia-
logue on religious freedom.
I hope my colleagues will join us in honoring
this distinguished pioneer of religious freedom
with a Congressional Gold Medal.
f
HONORING THE SERVICE OF
HURST COUNCILMAN CHARLES
SWEARENGEN
HON. KENNY MARCHANT
OF TEXAS
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Friday, June 14, 2013
Mr. MARCHANT. Mr. Speaker, I am proud
to recognize Charles Swearengen for his 30
years of service as the councilman for Place
1 of the City of Hurst, Texas.
Charles has spent nearly a half-century of
his life serving Hurst. Prior to taking the oath
of office as a councilman in 1983, Charles
served 18 years on the Hurst Parks and
Recreation Board in which he spent 13 of
those years as the chairman.
Throughout his years of service to the City
of Hurst, Charles has been a pivotal influence
in the development of recreational projects in
the city. Under his guidance, the city has
opened two aquatics centers, renovated a
VerDate Mar 15 2010 03:59 Jun 18, 2013 Jkt 029060 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 0626 Sfmt 9920 E:\CR\FM\A14JN8.031 E17JNPT1
s
m
a
r
t
i
n
e
z

o
n

D
S
K
6
T
P
T
V
N
1
P
R
O
D

w
i
t
h

R
E
M
A
R
K
S
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—Extensions of Remarks E887 June 17, 2013
recreation center, developed multiple parks,
established the Hurst Athletic Center, and
opened the Hurst Senior Citizens Activities
Center.
Aside from his leadership role as a council-
man, Charles has served on numerous civic
committees and boards in North Texas. Some
of these civic organizations included North
Central Texas Council of Governments,
Tarrant County Crime Prevention Resource
Center Board of Directors, Hurst-Euless-Bed-
ford Chamber of Commerce Board of Direc-
tors, National Management Association, City
of Hurst Finance and Investment Committee,
City of Hurst Crime Control District Board of
Directors, City of Hurst Community Services
Development Corporation Board of Directors,
Resource Conservation Council and Stop Ille-
gal Dumping Committee, Public Safety and
Crime Prevention Committee of the National
League of Cities, and Fort Worth Water and
Wastewater Advisory Committee for the City
of Hurst.
Charles is married to Gwendolyn, and to-
gether they have two children and four grand-
children. He and his wife have been attending
the First United Methodist Church of Hurst
since 1959 where he once served as the
chairman of church’s Mission Central Pro-
gram.
Mr. Speaker, on behalf of the 24th Congres-
sional District of Texas, I ask all my distin-
guished colleagues to join me in thanking
Charles Swearengen for his 30 years of public
service as a councilman for the City of Hurst.
f
NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZA-
TION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2014
SPEECH OF
HON. SHEILA JACKSON LEE
OF TEXAS
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Wednesday, June 12, 2013
The House in Committee of the Whole
House on the state of the Union had under
consideration the bill (H.R. 1960) to authorize
appropriations for fiscal year 2014 for mili-
tary activities of the Department of Defense
and for military construction, to prescribe
military personnel strengths for such fiscal
year, and for other purposes:
Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chair, I rise to
speak on House consideration of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2014.
I thank Chairman MCKEON, Ranking Mem-
ber SMITH and the Rules Committee, and the
Armed Services Committee for their work on
the National Defense Authorization Act for Fis-
cal Year 2014.
The National Defense Authorization Act’s
purpose is to address the threats our nation
must deal with not just today, but into the fu-
ture. This makes our work vital to our national
interest and it should reflect our strong com-
mitment to ensure that the men and women of
our Armed Services receive the benefits and
support that they deserve for their faithful
service.
This is the 52nd consecutive National De-
fense Authorization Act, which speaks to the
long-term commitment of the Congress and
successive Administrations to provide for Na-
tional Defense. This bill encompasses a num-
ber of initiatives designed to confront sexual
assault in the military, making more efficient
the work of protecting America, addresses the
mental health needs of men and women in the
armed services, and extends economic oppor-
tunity to small minority and women owned
businesses.
We do live in a dangerous world, where
threats are not always easily identifiable, and
our enemies are not bound by borders. The
recent Boston terrorist attack reminds us of
how fragile our nation’s security could be with-
out a well trained and equipped military.
The definition of war has changed and with
it our understanding about what is needed to
combat a unique type of enemy that fights
under no flag or for any nation.
U.S. Special Operations Command, a vital
part of our military, provides much of the spe-
cial skills needed to defend our nation today.
This legislation continues to build on previous
efforts to support their important work.
I am still deeply concerned about the Presi-
dent’s authority, as stipulated by the 2001 Au-
thorization for the Use of Military Force,
AUMF, to indefinitely detain individuals appre-
hended in the United States—including citi-
zens of the United States—without due proc-
ess and with little independent review or over-
sight. As a senior member of the House Judi-
ciary Committee, I am committed to making
sure that the Constitution and its protections
are enforced. The purpose to defend this na-
tion is not just on the grounds of this Capitol,
but also the foundation that supports the prin-
ciples of liberty, freedom and democratic val-
ues.
The bill includes several provisions that rec-
ognize the strain of more than a decade of
war has placed on our troops and the equip-
ment, technology, and tools that they use. It
supports a 1.8 percent pay raise. I had wanted
a 2 percent raise for our troops.
This Congress must communicate its whole-
hearted support for the security of the nation
by addressing mindless cuts created by se-
questration, the $174.6 billion in operation and
maintenance funding the bill provides will help
mend some of the damage that has been
done to overused equipment and neglected fa-
cilities. It also strengthens our ability to con-
front cyber threats, and provides important au-
thorities to protect vital information. The bill
also continues to lay the foundation for ena-
bling competition in military space launch.
I am also pleased that so much has oc-
curred to improve the bill during its consider-
ation on the House Floor, including the adop-
tion of seven amendments that I offered. Com-
bined, these amendments will help our military
families have access to mental health coun-
seling when needed and that contracting op-
portunities with the Department of Defense are
extended to women and minority owned busi-
nesses. In addition, the bill has been improved
to include provisions that are critically impor-
tant to women, including provisions to prevent
and respond to sexual assault and research to
combat Triple Negative Breast Cancer.
The bill amended on the House floor now
also contains provisions that will help secure
our borders and make the defense logistics
management system more efficient.
Let me discuss briefly the amendments I of-
fered that were adopted by the House and in-
cluded in the final version of the bill.
Jackson Lee Amendment #1 directs the
DoD and NIH to collaborate be to combat Tri-
ple Negative Breast Cancer. The amendment
directs the Department of Defense to identify
specific genetic and molecular targets and bio-
markers for TNBC.
Triple Negative Breast Cancer is a term
used to describe breast cancers whose cells
do not have estrogen receptors and progester-
one receptors, and do not have an excess of
the ‘‘HER2’’ protein on their cell membrane of
tumor cells. This makes commonly used test
and methods to detect breast cancer not as
effective.
This is a serious illness that effects between
10–17 percent of female breast cancer pa-
tients and this condition is more likely to cause
death than the most common form of breast
cancer. Seventy percent of women with meta-
static triple negative breast cancer do not live
more than five years after being diagnosed.
Jackson Lee Amendment #1 will help to
save lives. TNBC disproportionately impacts
younger women, African American women,
Hispanic/Latina women, and women with a
‘‘BRCA1’’ genetic mutation, which is prevalent
in Jewish women. TNBC usually affects
women under 50 years of age and makes up
more than 30 percent of all breast cancer di-
agnoses in African American. Black women
are far more susceptible to this dangerous
subtype than white or Hispanic women
Jackson Lee Amendment that #2 directs the
Department of Defense to post information on
sexual assault prevention and response re-
sources online for ease of access by men and
women in the armed services.
There is no greater crime that an individual
can commit than the crime of sexual molesta-
tion and sexual assault. The perpetrators of
these crimes rob victims of their dignity and
sense of wellbeing. Victimization is not easily
relieved by treating the immediate physical in-
juries that may result, but can last for years.
Moreover, victims of sexual assault are pro-
foundly affected for the rest of their lives often
with PTSD or other medical conditions. As
elected officials, we have an obligation to con-
demn this violence, work for stronger enforce-
ment of laws and provide adequate funding for
programs to assist individuals who may have
experienced such abuse.
In 2012, we know that victims of sexual vio-
lence or abuse among civilians are routinely
under reported. The Defense Department re-
port states that of the 26,000 estimated vic-
tims only 3,374 crimes were reported and just
302 of the 2,558 incidents pursued by victims
were prosecuted.
Jackson Lee Amendment #2 will make sure
that information is available and easily acces-
sible to military personnel for the purpose of
raising awareness, promoting education and
the long term goal of influencing organizational
culture around the issue of sexual violence.
Many in the military are just learning that
there is a huge difference between sex and
sexual violence. Jackson Lee Amendment #3
would educate both victims, potential victims,
witnesses or victimizers that these are acts of
violence and should be treated as such. It
may also help influence thinking among mili-
tary leaders on the nature of these crimes and
promote changes in policy to aggressively pro-
vide support to victims and judicial remedies
to prosecute and punish criminal behavior.
Jackson Lee Amendment #4 expresses the
sense of the Congress that the Secretary of
Defense should develop a plan to ensure a
sustainable flow of qualified mental health
counselors to meet the long-term needs of
VerDate Mar 15 2010 03:59 Jun 18, 2013 Jkt 029060 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 0626 Sfmt 9920 E:\CR\FM\A14JN8.035 E17JNPT1
s
m
a
r
t
i
n
e
z

o
n

D
S
K
6
T
P
T
V
N
1
P
R
O
D

w
i
t
h

R
E
M
A
R
K
S
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—Extensions of Remarks E888 June 17, 2013
members of the Armed Forces, veterans, and
their families.
Houston is home to one of the largest popu-
lations of military service members and their
families in the nation. There are over 200,000
veterans of military service who live and work
in Houston; more than 13,000 are veterans
from the Iraq and Afghanistan. For the brave
men and women who have been wounded in
combat, help is on the way.
Although some of a soldier’s wounds are in-
visible to the naked eye they are still wounds
that should be properly treated. One of the
best ways to increase access to treatment is
to increase the number of medical facilities
and mental health professionals who are avail-
able to serve the needs of men and women
currently serving and those who have become
veterans.
Jackson Lee Amendment #5 will improve
the efficiency of the management system and
how the Department of Defense inventory will
support modernization that uses technology to
tag and track items purchased to increase
transparency to the agency on what it has and
where it is located. This change could mean
tens of millions in savings if implemented DoD
wide by reducing labor cost for tracking and
moving equipment, but more important prevent
repurchasing of items that agency already
owns, but may not be able to locate.
The private sector has leaped forward in
using inventory tracking technology and proto-
cols to monitor large and small products from
the time they leave manufacturing facilities
until they are sold at retail or wholesale stores.
The DoD is one of the largest customers for
products in the nation and should have the
benefit of the best knowledge and technology
available to more efficiently manage its inven-
tory.
The most advanced warehouse inventory
management systems are fully automated and
biometrically controlled to track items and cre-
ate records of people who make request to
transport items from storage to use. These
systems make sure that persons seeking to
move items have the authority to do so and
that the requests create records that can be
tracked as well as track the items moved.
These fully automated warehouses have no
staff, but rely upon technology that is designed
to store and retrieve items in the most cost ef-
fective and efficient manner possible.
Jackson Lee Amendment #5 will extend
economic opportunity to small businesses by
requiring DoD to small business concerns
owned and controlled by women and minori-
ties before conversion of certain functions to
contractor performance would aid the econ-
omy. Federal contracting can be an important
revenue source for businesses of any size. In
fiscal year 2011, federal agencies obligated a
total of around $537 billion in government con-
tracts to businesses. However, federal agen-
cies’ goal for contracting with women and mi-
nority owned businesses is five percent.
The Department of Defense is a major con-
sumer of products and services that range
from office products to military specific equip-
ment. The wide ranges of business opportuni-
ties provide ample reasons to engage women
and minority owned businesses as contractors
or subcontractors.
In addition to the Jackson Lee Amendments
offered to this bill, I joined my Colleagues on
the Committee on Homeland Security in sup-
porting an amendment to promote collabora-
tion and cooperation between the Department
of Defense and Department of Homeland Se-
curity regarding the identification of equipment,
either declared excess, or made available to
DHS on a long-term loan basis that will help
increase security along the border.
I also request that my colleagues support
another amendment that I joined in sponsoring
along with the leadership of the House Com-
mittee on Homeland Security which would
allow the transfer of technology from DoD to
state and local law enforcement. Before the
creation of DHS a program was created to fa-
cilitate this type of equipment transfer and this
amendment adds the Secretary of Homeland
Security in a consultative role in the equip-
ment transfer process. This amendment also
gives applicants seek DoD equipment for use
in border security preference in this statute.
This will facilitate expedited transfer of equip-
ment that Federal, state and local first re-
sponders can use to strengthen our border se-
curity efforts.
I do have grave concerns about some fea-
tures of the National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 2014. For example this bill
assumes adoption of the House Budget Reso-
lution framework, which would hurt our econ-
omy and require draconian cuts to middle-
class priorities. This is a serious concern for
me because of how it would impact my con-
stituents in the 18th Congressional District.
The Administration has communicated that it
would veto this bill in its current for and I hope
that the conference process will resolve the
issues that are the most troubling like the
treatment of the Guantanamo detainees. This
issue is a mark against everything the United
States stands for and it is damaging our rep-
utation and credibility around the world.
The detentions should end and people prop-
erly processed to other facilities or tried in
courts of law to address charges or crimes
against the United States. My hope is that this
provision will be dropped from the bill as the
legislative process goes forward.
We must continue to direct our efforts as a
body to ensure that our troops remain the best
equipped and prepared military force in the
world. They are not just soldiers they are sons
and daughters, husbands and wives, brothers
and sisters—they are some of the people we
represent as members of Congress. Support
of them is a sacred obligation of Congress
both to those who are at risk on battlefields
and serving as the guard against threats
around the world, but they are also those who
have returned home from war.
I thank Chairman MCKEON and Ranking
Member SMITH for their work on this bill.
f
HONORING ROY APSELOFF
HON. TIM RYAN
OF OHIO
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Friday, June 14, 2013
Mr. RYAN of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I rise today
to honor the career of an exemplary public
servant, Roy Apseloff. After 32 years of serv-
ice, Mr. Apseloff will be retiring from the De-
fense Intelligence Agency.
Mr. Apseloff is a native of Kent, Ohio and
earned his Bachelor of Arts in Psychology
from Cornell University. He continued his edu-
cation earning a Master of Arts in International
Relations from Catholic University and a Mas-
ter of Science in National Security Strategy
from the National War College. He began his
career with the Defense Intelligence Agency in
1981 as a U.S. Navy Officer assigned to the
Directorate for Collection. Mr. Apseloff
transitioned to civilian service in 1985 and
since then he has held a series of positions of
increasing responsibility within human intel-
ligence and collection operations.
Mr. Apseloff will be retiring from the De-
fense Intelligence Agency as the Vice Presi-
dent for Information Management and Deputy
CIO; he also serves as the Deputy Chief of a
Global Information Technology organization of
over 3,000 people and $1 billion that provides
IT support to 20,000 customers worldwide. In
addition, Mr. Apseloff serves on various senior
interagency boards and forums. Despite leav-
ing for civilian service in 1985, Mr. Apseloff
continued to serve in the U.S. Navy Reserve
until his retirement in 2003 with the rank of
captain. His many reserve assignments in-
cluded: Operations Officer, Executive Officer
and Commanding Officer. His longtime service
in the U.S. Navy is yet another testament to
his long career of service to his country.
Mr. Apseloff’s exemplary work ethic has
been recognized by the many awards and dis-
tinctions he has received in his 32 years with
the Defense Intelligence Agency. He has re-
ceived the Presidential Rank Award of Distin-
guished Executive, the Presidential Rank
Award of Meritorious Executive, the DIA Direc-
tor’s Award for Exceptional Civilian Service,
and the Defense Intelligence Director’s Award.
I want to extend my warm and sincere
thanks to Roy Apseloff for his life’s devotion to
serving his country. His long and illustrious ca-
reer with the United States Navy and The De-
fense Intelligence Agency will not be forgotten.
I would like to wish him congratulations on all
he has accomplished and all the best in his
well-deserved retirement.
f
REMEMBERING WILLIAM E.
THRASH
HON. PHIL GINGREY
OF GEORGIA
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Friday, June 14, 2013
Mr. GINGREY of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I
rise today to celebrate the life of Kennesaw
City Councilman William E. ‘‘Bill’’ Thrash, and
thank him for his service to country and com-
munity.
After a long battle with cancer, Bill passed
away on May 22.
A native of Texas, Thrash grew up in Okla-
homa before serving in the U.S. Army during
Vietnam, and the Colorado National Guard.
After his service, he attended nursing school
and was an EMT/paramedic in his early career
before moving into the security management
business.
In 1992, Thrash moved to Kennesaw and
began looking to ways that he could serve the
community. He served on the Kennesaw De-
velopment Authority, the Downtown Develop-
ment Authority, the Recreation and Culture
Commission, and the Historic Preservation
Commission before his election to city council
in 2001. At the time of his passing, he was
serving his third term after being re-elected in
2010, and being named Mayor Pro-Tem in
2011.
VerDate Mar 15 2010 03:59 Jun 18, 2013 Jkt 029060 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 0626 Sfmt 9920 E:\CR\FM\A14JN8.037 E17JNPT1
s
m
a
r
t
i
n
e
z

o
n

D
S
K
6
T
P
T
V
N
1
P
R
O
D

w
i
t
h

R
E
M
A
R
K
S
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—Extensions of Remarks E889 June 17, 2013
Thrash was a role model and community
leader, he served in the Georgia Municipal
and Cobb Municipal associations, and his
service to the National League of Cities Coun-
cil on Youth, Education, and Families, Thrash
was named Citizen of the Year by the North-
west Cobb Area Council of the Chamber of
Commerce and the Kennesaw Business Asso-
ciation.
His colleagues and friends will always re-
member Thrash as someone who loved public
service and was particularly passionate about
creating programs for young people to thrive
in the community. He is credited as being the
driving force behind an after-school rec-
reational program for at-risk teens, and for the
development of Cantrell Park.
Mr. Speaker, I extend my deepest condo-
lences to William E. Thrash’s wife Suzie, his
daughter Mandy, and sons Robbie and Billy
during these most difficult of times. It saddens
me to know that the world is missing an hon-
orable and dedicated man, but I am humbled
to know that he is now in a better place.
f
NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZA-
TION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2014
SPEECH OF
HON. BILL POSEY
OF FLORIDA
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Thursday, June 13, 2013
The House in Committee of the Whole
House on the state of the Union had under
consideration the bill (H.R. 1960) to authorize
appropriations for fiscal year 2014 for mili-
tary activities of the Department of Defense
and for military construction, to prescribe
military personnel strengths for such fiscal
year, and for other purposes:
Mr. POSEY. Mr. Chair, I’m pleased to rise
today in support of my bipartisan bill, the De-
ployed Troops Support Act, which has been
accepted as an Amendment to H.R. 1960, the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year 2014.
I would like to thank House Armed Services
Committee Chairman MCKEON and Ranking
Member SMITH for their support in helping this
important Amendment to move forward. I
would also like to thank the cosponsors of
H.R. 1756, the Deployed Troops Support Act
for their support: FREDERICA WILSON of Florida,
DENNIS ROSS of Florida, LOUIS GOHMERT of
Texas, WILLIAM ENYART of Illinois, CHRIS-
TOPHER GIBSON of New York, KERRY
BENTIVOLIO of Mississippi, DONNA
CHRISTENSEN of the U.S. Virgin Islands, LARRY
BUCSHON of Indiana, and DEREK KILMER of
Washington.
Mr. Chairman, when our soldiers are de-
ployed to defend our Nation, many patriotic
Americans show their support for our brave
men and women in uniform by putting together
care packages. This Amendment simply al-
lows the Department of Defense to transport,
on a space available basis, goods supplied by
nonprofit organizations to members of the
Armed Services who are deployed overseas.
This Amendment gives veterans’ nonprofits
and other private charitable organizations that
support our troops the same consideration that
organizations are already given for trans-
porting humanitarian goods to foreign nation-
als overseas. In this Amendment, we extend
the same courtesy for our own troops that we
have granted to foreigners under the ‘‘Denton
Program’’ since 1985.
We also ensure that the Secretary has the
authority to determine that there is a legitimate
need for the goods being shipped, that sup-
plies are suitable for distribution, and that ade-
quate arrangements have been made for dis-
tribution.
This legislative idea was brought to my at-
tention by veterans in my congressional dis-
trict, specifically AVET Project in Brevard
County. I especially commend Garren and Kim
Cone and the members of AVET for their
service to our Nation and their support for our
soldiers. Again, thanks to everyone involved
for helping to advance this common sense
Amendment.
f
NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZA-
TION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2014
SPEECH OF
HON. GERALD E. CONNOLLY
OF VIRGINIA
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Thursday, June 13, 2013
The House in Committee of the Whole
House on the state of the Union had under
consideration the bill (H.R. 1960) to authorize
appropriations for fiscal year 2014 for mili-
tary activities of the Department of Defense
and for military construction, to prescribe
military personnel strengths for such fiscal
year, and for other purposes:
Mr. CONNOLLY. Madam Chair, I am
pleased to offer this bipartisan amendment on
behalf of my fellow co-chairs of the Congres-
sional Taiwan Caucus: Reps. DIAZ-BALART,
CARTER, and SIRES. We also have two other
notable cosponsors: Rep. GINGREY, the former
co-chair of the Caucus, and Rep. GRANGER.
Our amendment would affirm the United
States’ longstanding economic and defensive
partnership with Taiwan, which dates back to
the 1940s.
This amendment reflects the same language
adopted by voice vote in the House during
consideration of the FY13 National Defense
Authorization Act. In the 112th Congress, 181
Members of the House of Representatives
sent a letter to the Administration citing the
‘‘critical’’ need for the United States ‘‘to sell
the government of Taiwan all the F–16 C/D
[aircraft] it requires.’’ The letter urged the Ad-
ministration to ‘‘move quickly’’ on this matter
and cited the Taiwan Relations Act of 1979
(TRA) as the statutory basis for such a sale.
The Administration’s announcement to sell
only a retrofit package for Taiwan’s older fight-
er jets disappointed Taiwan’s supporters. After
all, U.S. policy with regard to the defensive ca-
pabilities of Taiwan is clearly outlined in the
TRA, which states it is the policy of the U.S.
‘‘to provide Taiwan with arms of a defensive
character.’’
Moreover, three joint communique´ s between
the U.S. and the People’s Republic of China
(PRC), and the ‘‘Six Assurances’’ to Taipei of-
fered by President Reagan, add additional
context to the U.S.-Taiwan relationship. The
defensive weapons provision in the TRA has
been an irritant in the relationship with Beijing,
but this provision is necessary for Taiwan’s
defense.
It should be no surprise that advocates for
Taipei’s defensive needs continue to push for
the sale of the 66 F–16 C/D planes. It is im-
portant that U.S. obligations to provide for Tai-
wan’s defenses—codified in and by the TRA—
be dictated by our assessments of Taiwan’s
needs and not by the threat, implied or other-
wise, of Taiwan’s big neighbor. Beyond this
defense relationship, the United States has
strong economic ties with Taiwan. In 2010
total U.S. trade with Taiwan was $61.9 billion,
making it the 9th largest U.S. trading partner.
I encourage my colleagues to vote for this
bipartisan amendment directing the President
to sell 66 F–16 C/D aircraft to Taiwan.
f
HONORING SAL CASTRO
HON. LUCILLE ROYBAL-ALLARD
OF CALIFORNIA
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Friday, June 14, 2013
Ms. ROYBAL-ALLARD. Mr. Speaker, Sal
Castro (October 25, 1933–April 15, 2013) was
a Mexican-American educator and activist. He
was most well-known for his role in the stu-
dent walkouts at East Los Angeles high
schools in 1968. With Sal’s assistance and
guidance, the students protested against un-
equal conditions in the Los Angeles Unified
School District schools.
Long after he retired from teaching, Sal con-
tinued his lectures that shared his experiences
and the importance of education, particularly
in Mexican American communities. After a
seven month battle with cancer, Sal Castro
passed away in his sleep on April 15, 2013.
A funeral mass was celebrated for Sal at
the Cathedral of Our Lady of the Angels in
Los Angeles on April 25, 2013. In tribute to
Mr. Castro’s life efforts, I would like to submit
into the CONGRESSIONAL RECORD the eulogy
honoring him which was delivered by Mario T.
Garcia, Professor of Chicano Studies and His-
tory at the University of California, Santa Bar-
bara.
EULOGY FOR: SAL CASTRO
Cathedral of Our Lady of the Angels
Los Angeles, CA, April 25, 2013
About fifteen years ago, I invited Sal Cas-
tro to speak to my Chicano History class at
UC Santa Barbara. My students and I were
enthralled with the power of his voice, the
humanity that he projected, and that won-
derful humor. I knew then that I had to
write his story. That story testifies to Sal’s
place in history and it is an honored place.
Very few of us have the opportunity to
make history that affects others’ lives. Sal
Castro did that. He did that by first of all
dedicating his career to being a teacher.
There is nothing Sal would not do for his
students. He did this for four decades and
touched the lives of countless young people.
Sal made history by the inspirational and
courageous leadership that he provided his
kids as he called them in the 1968 Blowouts
or walkouts in the East Los Angeles schools
the largest high school student strike in
American history. I do not believe that the
Blowouts would have occurred without Sal’s
leadership. He put his career and perhaps
even his life on the line for the students in
this movement. He didn’t do it because he
personally wanted publicity or rewards. He
did it because of the injustices of an edu-
cational system that for decades had denied
Mexican American students a quality edu-
cation and an opportunity to go to college.
Sal Castro took on the entire educational es-
tablishment because they did not care about
his kids.
VerDate Mar 15 2010 03:59 Jun 18, 2013 Jkt 029060 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 0626 Sfmt 0634 E:\CR\FM\K14JN8.009 E17JNPT1
s
m
a
r
t
i
n
e
z

o
n

D
S
K
6
T
P
T
V
N
1
P
R
O
D

w
i
t
h

R
E
M
A
R
K
S
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—Extensions of Remarks E890 June 17, 2013
He knew that real change does not come
from on top from the elite but from the bot-
tom, from the people. In 1968 it was senior
and junior high school students who through
Sal came to recognize that they were not the
problem nor were their parents the problem
for their lack of educational achievement.
Sal helped open their eyes that it was the
schools, too many teachers, too many prin-
cipals, and too many members of the board
of education who were the problem. Sal
taught them that there was no ‘‘Mexican
problem’’ but instead a racist problem as it
affected the schools and the Mexican Amer-
ican community. Because of Sal, the stu-
dents—the Blowout generation as Sal called
them—empowered themselves. They were
not going to accept anything now but a good
education so that they could advance as far
as their personal talents would take them.
Sal knew he had achieved this change in con-
sciousness as he saw hundreds of students
walk out of Lincoln High School and Roo-
sevelt High School and Garfield High School
and Wilson High School, and Belmont High
School and other high schools in other parts
of Los Angeles. He knew that it would never
be the same and he was right. With tears in
his eyes and pride in his very being many
years later he said of that day in 1968:
‘‘As the bell rang, out they went, out into
the streets. With their heads held high, with
dignity. It was beautiful to be a Chicano that
day.’’
In that first week of March, 1968 with thou-
sands of high school students on strike, the
students, the college students who helped,
the brown berets who provided defense, and
Sal made history. They brought the edu-
cational establishment to its knees. They
showed what Chicano power meant.
Various reforms followed but they were
never enough and still not enough even
today. But Sal and the students showed that
week that major social change can only hap-
pen when the people themselves realize that
only they can make the changes that will
improve their lives. This was the lesson of
the Blowouts and the lessons of the Chicano
movement. It was the lesson that Sal as a
teacher taught that generation and con-
tinues to teach us today and in the future.
Sal Castro was first and foremost a teacher
but as a teacher he made history not only
through the Blowouts but by year after year
producing students who would dedicate their
lives in whatever profession they pursued to
go out and fulfill the legacy of his blowout
kids—to change the world. Sal never rested
on his laurels. There were still too many
kids that he needed to reach and which he
did not only in his classes but through his
unselfish work in inspiring new generations
of future Chicano/Latino leaders by his Chi-
cano Youth Leadership Conference.
Sal Castro is a giant in Chicano history
and also needs to be recognized as a giant in
American history. He showed us that real
education is different from schooling.
Schooling produces students who accept the
status quo and never ask ‘‘why?’’ Education
produces students who not only ask ‘‘why’’
but act on their question.
I personally will miss a colleague, a fellow
teacher, and a dear friend. I will miss him
coming to my classes as he did for many
years never asking for compensation but al-
ways with the same passion wanting to share
his story with students. I often joked that if
Sal couldn’t show up I could give Sal’s talk
because I had heard it so often. And now I
will give that talk by myself but I also re-
dedicate myself today to his mission in life
and will teach others about Sal Castro and
his place in history.
The last question I asked Sal is how do you
wish to be remembered. He simply said: ‘‘I
want my tombstone to read—Sal Castro a
teacher’’ and he added in concluding his
story and he is saying this to us today:
‘‘Que Dios les Bendiga y que La Virgen
Morena les proteja’’
f
SEXUAL ASSAULT IN THE
MILITARY
HON. JANICE D. SCHAKOWSKY
OF ILLINOIS
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Friday, June 14, 2013
Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Mr. Speaker, I rise
today in strong support of efforts to fight sex-
ual assault in the military. Sexual assault and
rape are violent and horrific crimes, and they
must be treated as serious offense, not—as
Senator SAXBY CHAMBLISS of Georgia has sug-
gested—as a byproduct of ‘‘hormones.’’
According to Pentagon estimates, last year,
over 70 service women and men were sexu-
ally assaulted every single day. The Depart-
ment of Defense estimates that 26,000 sexual
assaults occurred last year, an increase from
the estimated 19,300 assaults in 2010. Yet
only a fraction of those crimes are referred to
courts martial.
We face an epidemic of sexual assault in
the military. Because of a culture of intimida-
tion and retaliation against victims, coupled
with the low rate of prosecution and punish-
ment, the vast majority of these crimes go un-
reported. In some instances, the victim seeks
help but opts not to file a formal complaint.
The men and women of the armed services
risk their lives to defend our country. Our mili-
tary is built on the values of trust, discipline,
and respect.
Despite growing discussion and awareness
of the fact that sexual assault has become en-
trenched in our military culture, we’ve seen
limited progress toward a solution. That’s why
I am proud to support provisions in the Na-
tional Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) that
make progress toward combating military sex-
ual assault. As currently written, the NDAA
strips commanders of their ability to dismiss
court martial convictions for serious offenders,
and it prohibits commanders from reducing
guilty findings for serious offenses. The NDAA
requires that servicemembers found guilty of
rape or sexual assault be punitively dis-
charged from the military.
Among other provisions, the Defense Au-
thorization bill we’re considering today also
lays out the rights of victims. It allows them to
apply for a permanent change of station or
unit transfer, ensuring they are not forced to
continue to serve next to their assaulter.
However, I believe we need to go further. I
am a cosponsor of Congresswoman JACKIE
SPEIER’s legislation H.R. 1593, the Sexual As-
sault Training Oversight and Prevention
(STOP) Act. The STOP Act would take the re-
porting, oversight, investigation and victim
care of sexual assaults out of the hands of the
military’s normal chain of command and place
jurisdiction in the newly-created, autonomous
Sexual Assault Oversight and Response Of-
fice comprised of civilian and military experts.
In addition to the STOP Act, Congress-
woman SPEIER has introduced an amend-
ment—which I am proud to cosponsor—to the
Defense Authorization bill taking the decision-
making of whether to prosecute out of the
chain of command and give discretion to
trained prosecutors.
Mr. Speaker, service women and men who
survive sexual violence should not have to
choose between their careers and justice.
They should not be afraid to report crimes per-
petrated against them, and they should not
face intimidation when seeking treatment and
other services. I strongly believe we need to
take action now to fundamentally change the
way sexual assault is handled in the military
by passing legislation to prevent and punish
sexual assault and rape.
f
IN CELEBRATION OF JUNETEENTH
IN MACON, GEORGIA
HON. SANFORD D. BISHOP, JR.
OF GEORGIA
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Friday, June 14, 2013
Mr. BISHOP of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I rise
today to salute a longstanding tradition in
Macon, Georgia, the 21st Annual Juneteenth
Freedom Festival. Georgia Juneteenth Week
spans from June 8, 2013 to June 15, 2013,
culminating in the Juneteenth Freedom Fes-
tival on Saturday, June 15, 2013 from noon to
sundown at Historic Tattnall Square Park in
Macon, Georgia.
On June 19, 1865 in Galveston, Texas, two
years after President Abraham Lincoln issued
the Emancipation Proclamation, Union Troops
seized control of the area and declared all
slaves free. Since then, Juneteenth has been
nationally and internationally observed as
Emancipation Day and the end of slavery in
the United States for those who did not re-
ceive the news that the Emancipation Procla-
mation was signed by President Lincoln on
January 1, 1863 until June, 1865.
Whether it is a day, week, or month-long
celebration, Juneteenth brings people of all
walks of life together for remembrance of a
dark period in our Nation’s history, to rejoice
at how far we have come as a society, and to
reflect upon how far we have yet to go.
For the past 21 years, Torchlight Academy,
Inc. and Kwanzaa Cultural Access Center
have partnered to organize the Juneteenth
celebrations in Macon, Georgia. The
Juneteenth Freedom Festival has been one of
the most innovative, vibrant and enjoyable dis-
plays of Afro-centric art, talent and culture in
Middle Georgia. With agricultural education
exhibits; live jazz, soul and hip hop music;
modern and African dance; delicious food; live
history exhibits; children’s games; and story-
telling, this partnership has fostered the spirit
of community that is so deeply anchored in
our ancestral roots.
Macon’s oldest continuous African-American
community-based festival, the Juneteenth
celebrations and annual Freedom Festival
unite Middle Georgians to honor the struggle,
sacrifice and success of our ancestors.
This year’s local Juneteenth festivities in-
cluded a ‘‘Salute to Freedom’’ 5k Run/Walk for
Health and Peace, the Pleasant Hill Neighbor-
hood Reunion, Heritage Discovery Walk,
Macon Black Heritage Tours, and the Real
Talk Hip Hop Summit of Youth Awareness and
Responsibility.
Mr. Speaker, I ask that my colleagues join
me in saluting Mr. George A. Fadil Muham-
mad, Torchlight Academy, Inc., Kwanzaa Cul-
tural Access Center, the residents of Macon,
Georgia and the surrounding communities as
VerDate Mar 15 2010 03:59 Jun 18, 2013 Jkt 029060 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 0626 Sfmt 9920 E:\CR\FM\A14JN8.040 E17JNPT1
s
m
a
r
t
i
n
e
z

o
n

D
S
K
6
T
P
T
V
N
1
P
R
O
D

w
i
t
h

R
E
M
A
R
K
S
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—Extensions of Remarks E891 June 17, 2013
they come together to celebrate Juneteenth.
This spirited celebration is an annual reminder
of the valiant souls of our Nation’s history to
whom we owe so much. Let us also use this
occasion to reflect upon ourselves and how
we can each lead a life that honors the sac-
rifice of our ancestors.
f
RECOGNIZING DIEGO ARENCO
´
N ON
FATHER’S DAY
HON. MICHELLE LUJAN GRISHAM
OF NEW MEXICO
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Friday, June 14, 2013
Ms. MICHELLE LUJAN GRISHAM of New
Mexico. Mr. Speaker, I rise today with a heavy
heart. Father’s Day is a time for families to
come together, a time to honor the role of fa-
thers in our lives, and a time to count our
blessings. But for many Americans, this Sun-
day will be the first Father’s Day where they
won’t be able to hug their dad tight. And for
fathers who have lost a child in the past year,
this will be the first Father’s Day where they
can’t look into their son’s or daughter’s eyes
and tell them how much joy they bring them
every day.
This Father’s Day, I would like to honor one
of my constituents, Diego Arenco´ n, who has
sadly lost both his father and his son in the
past year. A dedicated public servant, Diego is
a member of the Albuquerque Fire Depart-
ment and is President of the Albuquerque
Area Fire Fighters, IAFF Local 244. He has
selflessly risked his life to keep the residents
of Albuquerque safe. He is an effective advo-
cate for his fellow firefighters, an accom-
plished jazz drummer, and I’m proud to be
counted among those who call Diego a friend.
Diego and his continued commitment to his
wife, Lupe, and to his surviving children,
Santiago, Loliana and Diego, is an inspiration
to all who know him.
In early January of this year, Diego’s father,
Jose ‘‘Pelete’’ Arenco´ n, passed away. A
prominent gypsy flamenco singer, Jose was
known for his compelling voice. He began
singing as a child, and became a professional
singer as a teenager. Born in Spain, he
moved to Albuquerque with his wife in 1975,
bringing the traditional roots of flamenco to the
Duke City.
Diego’s son, Nikolas Ventura-Arenco´ n, was
only 14 when he tragically passed away the
day before Thanksgiving last year. Even at his
young age, Nikolas had ambitions to serve his
community and his country just like his father.
Nikolas was a member of the Los Alamos
High School ROTC and had dreams of attend-
ing the New Mexico Military Institute to be-
come a Marine. He also wanted to follow in
his father’s footsteps by becoming a firefighter.
Within their ranks, New Mexico firefighters say
Nikolas Ventura-Arenco´ n was ‘‘one of us.’’
f
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SE-
CURITY APPROPRIATIONS ACT
OF 2013 H.R. 2217
HON. BETTY McCOLLUM
OF MINNESOTA
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Friday, June 14, 2013
Ms. MCCOLLUM. Mr. Speaker, I rise in
strong opposition to the Department of Home-
land Security Appropriations Act of 2013 (H.R.
2217).
As a member of the Appropriations Com-
mittee, we passed a bipartisan Homeland Se-
curity appropriations bill. I believe, that legisla-
tion would have passed the House by an over-
whelming margin.
Unfortunately, an amendment offered by
Representative STEVE KING of Iowa was
added to the bill on the floor; it is a poison pill
for any member who cares about advancing
comprehensive immigration reform. The King
amendment terminates specific Obama Ad-
ministration policies on immigration, including
deferred action for childhood arrivals, sup-
porting prosecutor discretion for victims of
crimes, and prioritizing the deportation of vio-
lent criminals. The King amendment was
adopted in a highly partisan vote of 224–201,
with 221 Republicans voting for this anti-immi-
grant measure.
Specifically, the King amendment would
mean that young people, who were brought
here as children by their parents and grew up
in America, will face deportation from the
country they consider their own. It means vic-
tims of domestic abuse and human trafficking
could face deportation for reporting their abus-
ers.
Prioritizing public safety is only common
sense. Immigration officials should be focused
on deporting dangerous individuals, not work-
ing families or victims of domestic violence
and human trafficking. Denying law enforce-
ment officials the ability to use their discretion
is not only a foolish and ineffective method of
directing our resources, but inhumane.
I strongly support the Obama Administration
policies that the King amendment eliminates.
As a co-sponsor of the DREAM Act in the
111th and 112th Congress, I am appalled that
House Republicans would support eliminating
this policy and forcing these young people to
live with the fear of being deported. Dreamers
want and deserve the chance to earn Amer-
ican citizenship so they can fully contribute to
the country they have always viewed as their
own.
The King amendment will have a chilling ef-
fect on the movement for comprehensive im-
migration reform. The Senate is making real
progress in negotiations, but this anti-immi-
grant amendment suggests that House Re-
publicans have no interest in the real reform
needed to fix our broken immigration system.
f
OUR UNCONSCIONABLE NATIONAL
DEBT
HON. MIKE COFFMAN
OF COLORADO
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Friday, June 14, 2013
Mr. COFFMAN. Mr. Speaker, on January
20, 2009, the day President Obama took of-
fice, the national debt was
$10,626,877,048,913.08.
Today, it is $16,738,708,293,971.53. We’ve
added $6,111,831,245,058.45 to our debt in 4
and a half years. This is $6 trillion in debt our
nation, our economy, and our children could
have avoided with a balanced budget amend-
ment.
NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZA-
TION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2014
SPEECH OF
HON. BETO O’ROURKE
OF TEXAS
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Thursday, June 13, 2013
The House in Committee of the Whole
House on the state of the Union had under
consideration the bill (H.R. 1960) to authorize
appropriations for fiscal year 2014 for mili-
tary activities of the Department of Defense
and for military construction, to prescribe
military personnel strengths for such fiscal
year, and for other purposes:
Mr. O’ROURKE. Mr. Chair, the Federal
Government is facing some of the most com-
plex challenges in our Nation’s history and
dealing with serious budget constraints. In
order to do more with less, it is critical that we
have a first class Federal workforce. The gov-
ernment must make the proper investments in
its employees and take the steps necessary to
recruit, retain, and develop its talent.
The media often focuses on what goes
wrong in government, but today I want to take
a moment to recognize the important work of
the more than 800,000 Department of Defense
of Defense (DoD) civil servants who provide
essential services to help keep our country
safe. DoD civilians are partners in our national
defense and integral to the success of DoD
military operations.
I represent Fort Bliss in El Paso, Texas and
to echo the words of Former Secretary of De-
fense Leon Panetta when he visited the instal-
lation, ‘‘let me be clear—Fort Bliss is the pre-
mier post in America.’’ The critical role this
post plays in our national defense is supported
by more than 11,000 full-time civilian employ-
ees. We live in a world where the threats to
our freedoms are diverse and we must ensure
that our civilian workforce is up to the task of
protecting the American people. To succeed in
carrying out the complex tasks of the Depart-
ment, Congress must enable all these employ-
ees to excel in their jobs. We must com-
pensate them commensurate with their re-
sponsibilities; provide them with a quality of
work life that fosters long-term growth; and
work to ensure that labor-management rela-
tionships remain strong.
This year Congress debated multiple
amendments to the National Defense Author-
ization Act for Fiscal Year 2014 that aimed to
weaken the civilian workforce at DoD. These
amendments would greatly expand the A–76
process and direct the Department to contract
out any function not considered to be ‘‘inher-
ently governmental’’—regardless of policy,
risk, or cost to DoD. The Congress outlawed
the use of the A–76 process during the Bush
Administration after the finding by DoD Inspec-
tor General that it was biased against federal
employees, and by the Government Account-
ability Office that the costs of associated with
the process often exceeded estimated sav-
ings. Additionally, in testimony before the Sen-
ate Defense Appropriations Subcommittee,
DoD Comptroller Robert Hale acknowledged
that contractors are twice as expensive as ci-
vilian employees stating that ‘‘if you’re going to
have a job over a long period of time . . . it’s
probably cheaper to have a civilian govern-
ment employee to do it.’’ For these reasons, I
voted against these amendments.
VerDate Mar 15 2010 03:59 Jun 18, 2013 Jkt 029060 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 0626 Sfmt 9920 E:\CR\FM\A14JN8.042 E17JNPT1
s
m
a
r
t
i
n
e
z

o
n

D
S
K
6
T
P
T
V
N
1
P
R
O
D

w
i
t
h

R
E
M
A
R
K
S
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—Extensions of Remarks E892 June 17, 2013
As the Nation’s largest employer, I believe
that the federal government has a responsi-
bility to lead by example to be a model em-
ployer. This is especially true for the Depart-
ment of Defense. Since being elected to Con-
gress, I have met and worked with many civil-
ian employees at DoD and am inspired by
their dedication. Our military and country are
stronger because of them, and I will continue
to support efforts that strengthen our federal
workforce.
f
THE HOMELAND SECURITY
APPROPRIATIONS ACT OF FY2014
HON. CHRIS VAN HOLLEN
OF MARYLAND
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Friday, June 14, 2013
Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. Speaker, I rise in op-
position to H.R. 2217, the FY14 Homeland Se-
curity Appropriations bill. I appreciate the bi-
partisan effort put into crafting H.R. 2217 and
commend the members of the Appropriations
Committee for encouraging a collaborative and
open process. It’s unfortunate that at the last
minute an anti-immigration amendment offered
by Representative STEVE KING of Iowa upset
the delicate bipartisan balance established in
the bill.
Recent events emphasize the importance of
ensuring the availability of the resources our
country needs to address national emer-
gencies. The tornadoes in Oklahoma, the
bombings at the Boston Marathon, forest fires
in California and Colorado are just a few ex-
amples of why funding for homeland security
should always be considered a national pri-
ority. This bill provides resources to address
these and other critical needs by directing
funding to protect the country’s transportation
infrastructure and cybernetworks, and equally
important, to our first responders who help to
protect our communities and who play a vital
role in helping keep the nation safe and se-
cure. In total, the bill appropriates $38.9 billion
for the Department in FY 2014 for these and
other critical national priorities.
While I support the level of funding set for
Homeland Security in this bill, I strongly op-
pose the funding levels set in the Republican
budget plan for other key priorities. For exam-
ple, the Republican budget recklessly cuts the
category of funding for our kids’ education and
medical research by 20 percent below the se-
quester level. Consequently, I strongly support
the President’s position that the funding levels
for Homeland Security must ultimately be con-
sidered in the context of an overall agreement
on the budget. Unfortunately, our Republican
colleagues in the House and Senate continue
to refuse to convene a conference to negotiate
a budget agreement.
Additionally, I share the President’s concern
about the bill’s failure to fund the request for
the Department of Homeland Security head-
quarters consolidation project, which will only
delay the project further; the bill’s failure to
fully fund the request for new Customs and
Borders Protection officers; and the bill’s con-
tinued funding of the unnecessary 287 (g) pro-
gram when the Secure Communities program
is a more efficient and cost-effective alter-
native.
In that same vein, this year I again opposed
the anti-immigration amendment offered by
Representative KING that prohibits the use of
funds in the bill from being used to implement
the so called ‘‘Morton Memos.’’ These memos
were written by ICE Director Morton and pro-
vide a plan to deploy ICE resources to the
most cost effective priorities and provide guid-
ance to ensure that limited resources are fo-
cused on criminals and other individuals who
pose a genuine threat to national security or
public safety. I am disappointed that the
House chose to again include this provision
and it is for that reason that I will oppose this
bill.
f
RECOGNIZING THE PUBLIC
SERVICE OF MARC JOHNSON
HON. JIM COSTA
OF CALIFORNIA
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Friday, June 14, 2013
Mr. COSTA. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to
recognize Marcus Johnson as he prepares to
retire from his position as Superintendent of
the Sanger Unified School District. Marc will
be leaving after more than 35 years in public
education in the Central Valley.
As Superintendent of Sanger Unified, Marc
transformed some of California’s lowest per-
forming schools into some of our best. The
education reforms that he spearheaded are
now considered a model for schools across
the country. Marc’s dedication and commit-
ment to improving education standards in the
Central Valley have been nationally recog-
nized including by the American Association of
Student Administrators who named him the
2011 National Superintendent of the Year.
A California native, Marc lives in the small
community of Reedley, where at age four he
moved with his parents and where his wife of
37 years, Penni, taught at Thomas Law Reed
Elementary, before retiring last year. He is a
graduate of Reedley Community College, Cali-
fornia State University, Fresno and Fresno Pa-
cific University, where he received his Masters
in Education. Marc began his career in edu-
cation at American Union Elementary, where
he taught for 16 years and later served as the
district’s superintendent and principal. In 1999,
Marc was named the Assistant Superintendent
of Human Resources for the Sanger Unified
School District, before assuming the role of
Superintendent of the district in the fall of
2003.
When Marc took over as Superintendent,
Sanger Unified was struggling. A year into his
tenure, the district was designated for program
improvement by the State of California. Under
Marc’s leadership and guidance, Sanger Uni-
fied implemented education reforms including
adopting the professional learning community
model focused on student learning, high qual-
ity instruction, and teacher collaboration. With-
in two years Sanger Unified exited program
improvement status and its schools have since
gone on to win many accolades and awards.
Recently, Sanger Unified became only the
second school district in the country to have
every one of its middle schools named to the
Department of Education’s prestigious
‘‘Schools to Watch’’ list.
Although Marc is retiring as Superintendent
of Sanger Unified, he will continue the fight to
improve education standards in the Central
Valley as the interim co-director of the John D.
Welty Center for Educational Policy and Lead-
ership. In addition, Marc is retiring to spend
much needed time with his wife, his three chil-
dren, and his four grandchildren.
Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues to join me
in recognizing the distinguished educational
leadership of Mr. Marc Johnson. The work he
has done for the Sanger Unified School Dis-
trict will have a lasting impact on our children
in Fresno County and in the entire State of
California.
f
RECOGNIZING FALLEN OWEGO
FIREFIGHTER CAPTAIN MATT
PORCARI
HON. TOM REED
OF NEW YORK
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Friday, June 14, 2013
Mr. REED. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to rec-
ognize fallen Owego Firefighter Captain Matt
Porcari. Captain Porcari belonged to the
Owego Fire Department for 18 years before
his tragic death while actively responding to a
mutual aid fire call in Newark Valley, New
York. He was 34 years old and leaves behind
a wife Christina, two children and three step-
children.
Captain Porcari was a dedicated volunteer
in the department who began his service at
age 16, serving as a mentor and friend to
newer members. His caring nature extended
beyond the Owego community, demonstrated
by his assistance to the Long Beach Fire Sta-
tion following Hurricane Sandy and by his ef-
forts to organize a trip to pay tribute to the fall-
en firefighters in Webster, New York. In addi-
tion, Captain Porcari led the Croton Hose
Company #3 in the Central New York Hose
Racing Championships and was a member of
the youngest team to win a CNY Champion-
ship in 1995.
Captain Porcari’s legacy was honored this
June at the Owego Fallen Firefighters Memo-
rial Golf Tournament, which was held in honor
of Captain Porcari and other fallen Owego fire-
fighters. The monies raised at the tournament
will support scholarships for Owego Free
Academy’s graduating seniors pursuing ca-
reers as first responders. Additional monies
will go to the development and maintenance of
an Owego Fire Department training facility.
Today we honor Matt Porcari’s sacrifice. Let
us remember every day the price paid by true
heroes such as Matt.
f
INTRODUCTION OF THE YOUTH
JOBS ACT
HON. JOHN CONYERS, JR.
OF MICHIGAN
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Friday, June 14, 2013
Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to
introduce the Youth Jobs Act.
We are facing a jobs crisis in this country,
and even our youth are not exempt from its ef-
fects. Five years after the Great Recession hit,
27 million workers are either unemployed or
underemployed—roughly one out of every six
U.S. workers. This is completely unacceptable.
Even worse though, is the impact this crisis
is leaving on the next generation of workers.
VerDate Mar 15 2010 03:59 Jun 18, 2013 Jkt 029060 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 0626 Sfmt 9920 E:\CR\FM\A14JN8.046 E17JNPT1
s
m
a
r
t
i
n
e
z

o
n

D
S
K
6
T
P
T
V
N
1
P
R
O
D

w
i
t
h

R
E
M
A
R
K
S
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—Extensions of Remarks E893 June 17, 2013
America’s young adults and teens are cur-
rently facing unemployment rates of 16 and 24
percent respectfully. The ramifications of these
young Americans not being able to find work
are troubling and far reaching.
We must do everything we can to make
sure young Americans have the jobs they
need to pay for higher education and to learn
skills that will prepare them for careers and
professions. If we do not create employment
opportunities for all young Americans, we in-
hibit the ability and opportunity for them to
move up the economic ladder, and to improve
their conditions.
For this reason, I am introducing the ‘‘Youth
Jobs Act’’ with Senator BERNIE SANDERS of
Vermont.
This Act directs the U.S. Department of
Labor to provide $1.5 billion in grants for
states to provide summer and year-round em-
ployment opportunities for low-income youth.
States could then use these funds to identify
employment opportunities in emerging occupa-
tions and in the public and nonprofit sector to
meet their community’s needs.
An additional $1.5 billion would be distrib-
uted through competitive grants to states and
local communities to provide on-the-job train-
ing and apprenticeship programs for low-in-
come youth and disadvantaged young adults.
The grant recipients would be strongly encour-
aged to develop partnerships with employers,
community colleges, community organizations
and join labor-management committees.
At minimum, every state would receive $15
million to implement summer and year round
job opportunities and training programs, with
the remainder being targeted to areas of par-
ticularly high youth unemployment and pov-
erty.
Ensuring there are adequate jobs for every
American should be Congress’ number one
focus. I encourage my colleagues to support
this measure to put America’s youth to work.
FACT SHEET ON REP. CONYERS’ YOUTH JOBS
ACT
At a time when the youth unemployment
rate is over 16 percent, and the teen unem-
ployment rate is over 24 percent, we have got
to do everything we can to make sure that
young Americans have the jobs they need to
pay for a college education and to move up
the economic ladder.
The Youth Jobs Act that will be intro-
duced in the Senate by Sen. Sanders will pro-
vide $3 billion in immediate funding to em-
ploy hundreds of thousands of low-income
youth and economically disadvantaged
young adults in summer and year round jobs;
and to provide young Americans with the job
training and skills they need for the jobs of
the future.
This legislation is modeled on the youth
jobs and training programs included in Presi-
dent Obama’s American Jobs Act.
The Youth Jobs Act would build on the
success of the American Recovery and Rein-
vestment Act which created over 374,000
summer job opportunities during 2009 and
2010 to young Americans through $1.2 billion
for the Youth Jobs Workforce Investment
Act program.
Under the Youth Jobs Act, the U.S. De-
partment of Labor (DOL) would provide $1.5
billion in grants to states to:
Provide summer and year round employ-
ment opportunities for low-income youth,
with direct links to academic and occupa-
tional learning; and
Provide important services such as trans-
portation or child care, necessary to enable
young Americans to participate in job oppor-
tunities.
Each state that would like to participate
in this program would have to submit a plan
to DOL that must include:
Strategies and activities to provide sum-
mer employment opportunities and year-
round employment opportunities for low-in-
come youth, including links to educational
activities;
Identifying employment opportunities in
emerging or in-demand occupations;
Identifying employment opportunities in
the public or nonprofit sector that meet
community needs; and
An estimate of the number of youth ex-
pected to be placed in employment opportu-
nities.
Under this legislation, DOL would also
award $1.5 billion in competitive grants to
local areas to provide work-based training to
low-income youth and disadvantaged young
adults.
Through this bill, DOL will award grant
applications to local areas that have the
ability to:
Implement effective strategies and activi-
ties to provide unemployed, low-income
youth and disadvantaged young adults with
the skills needed for employment;
Provide opportunities for on-the-job train-
ing, and registered apprenticeship programs;
Provide connections to immediate work
opportunities; paid internships; enrollment
in community colleges; or basic education
and training for low-income young adults;
and
Develop partnerships with employers and
employer associations, community colleges,
and other postsecondary education institu-
tions; community-based organizations; joint
labor-management committees; and work-re-
lated intermediaries.
All states would receive a minimum of $15
million to implement summer and year
round job opportunities and job-training pro-
grams under this bill.
The remainder of the funding would be tar-
geted to areas of high youth unemployment
and poverty.
f
PERSONAL EXPLANATION
HON. BILL PASCRELL, JR.
OF NEW JERSEY
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Friday, June 14, 2013
Mr. PASCRELL. Mr. Speaker, I want to
state for the record that yesterday, June 13th,
I was not recorded on one rollcall vote. I
would like to state for the record that I would
have voted ‘‘nay’’ on rollcall Vote number 221:
On Agreeing to the Resolution on H. Res.
260—Providing for further consideration of the
bill (H.R. 1960) to authorize appropriations for
fiscal year 2014 for military activities of the
Department of Defense and for military con-
struction, to prescribe military personnel
strengths for such fiscal year, and for other
purposes.
f
REMEMBERING GEORGIA STATE
SENATOR NATHAN DEAN
HON. PHIL GINGREY
OF GEORGIA
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Friday, June 14, 2013
Mr. GINGREY of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I
rise today to celebrate the life of State Senator
Nathan Dean, and thank him for his dedicated
service to Georgia and his community.
Last Saturday our state lost one of the finest
public officials it has ever seen, as Dean
passed away at the age of 79.
Senator Dean was born in the town of
Rockmart, which he called home throughout
his entire life. After graduating from Rockmart
High School in 1952, he attended Shorter Col-
lege and then joined the U.S. Army. There-
after, he answered the call to public service.
Before his election to the Georgia Senate in
1974, Dean served for a total of 16 years on
the Rockwall City Council and in the Georgia
House of Representatives.
During his tenure in the State Legislature,
he was named ‘‘Man of the Year for Civic Af-
fairs’’ and ‘‘Senator of the Year.’’ In addition to
his responsibilities as a Senator, he was ac-
tive in community organizations such as Pied-
mont Avenue Baptist Church of Rockmart;
Rockmart-Aragon Little League; Rockmart,
Cedartown, and Cartersville Chambers of
Commerce; Polk and Bartow County Farm Bu-
reaus; the Masons, Shriners, and Odd Fel-
lows; the Northwest Council for Boy Scouts;
Cedartown, Haralson, and Bartow County His-
torical societies; and mental disability pro-
grams.
I had the pleasure of working with Senator
Dean on many occasions during my own time
in the Georgia Senate, and came to know him
as a very hardworking and effective advocate.
Nathan was a role model for all public officials:
he truly loved the people of his district and
Georgia, and worked tirelessly to represent his
constituents to the best of his ability.
Mr. Speaker, I extend my deepest condo-
lences to Senator Dean’s wife Ann; his two
sons and daughters-in-law, Aland and Durand
Dean and Scot and Keri Dean; his grand-
children Seven, Ana Scott, and Mason; his
brother, four sisters; and his many nieces,
nephews, great-nieces, and great-nephews
during these most difficult of times. Although
we are now without this honorable man, hus-
band, and citizen, we can take comfort in
knowing that he made Georgia a better place
to live.
f
CENTRALIA SENTINEL
SESQUICENTENNIAL
HON. JOHN SHIMKUS
OF ILLINOIS
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Friday, June 14, 2013
Mr. SHIMKUS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to
acknowledge the sesquicentennial of the
Centralia Sentinel. For 150 years, the news-
paper has chronicled events large and small in
and around the southern Illinois town of
Centralia. It holds a special place in my heart,
as the hometown paper of my namesake and
grandfather, John Shimkus. His clothing store
advertised for years in the Sentinel.
History tells us that the regional term ‘‘Little
Egypt’’ arose from the poor harvest of the
1830s. Citizens of the North had to travel
south to buy grain, reminiscent of the Biblical
story of Joseph being brought ‘‘down to
Egypt.’’ A visitor walking into the reception
area of the Sentinel is greeted with hiero-
glyphics on the wall, evoking images of an
Egyptian tomb. However, those who have
worked there know that the Sentinel is any-
thing but tomb-like, frequently noting the family
atmosphere, something long promoted by the
newspaper’s leadership.
VerDate Mar 15 2010 03:59 Jun 18, 2013 Jkt 029060 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 0626 Sfmt 9920 E:\CR\FM\A14JN8.050 E17JNPT1
s
m
a
r
t
i
n
e
z

o
n

D
S
K
6
T
P
T
V
N
1
P
R
O
D

w
i
t
h

R
E
M
A
R
K
S
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—Extensions of Remarks E894 June 17, 2013
I would like to congratulate owner Judith
Joy, Publisher and co-owner John Perrine, As-
sociate Publisher Thomas Joy, General Man-
ager Dan Nichols, Senior Editor LuAnn
Droege, Lifestyles Editor Michelle Pennington,
Sports Editor Mike McManus, Office Manager
Julie Copple, Circulation Director Ray Albert,
Prepress Supervisor Terri Kelly, Mailroom
Manager Cindy Estes, Pressroom Manager
Mike Bell, and all associated with the Sentinel
now and over the last 15 decades.
Mr. Speaker, I salute the Centralia Sentinel
and offer my best wishes for the next 150
years.
f
CONGRATULATING SAINTS PETER
AND PAUL MACEDONIAN ORTHO-
DOX CATHEDRAL ON ITS 50TH
ANNIVERSARY
HON. PETER J. VISCLOSKY
OF INDIANA
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Friday, June 14, 2013
Mr. VISCLOSKY. Mr. Speaker, it is with
great pleasure and admiration that I congratu-
late Saints Peter and Paul Macedonian Ortho-
dox Cathedral as its congregation and church
leaders join together in celebration of its 50th
Anniversary. The congregation, along with
Parish Priest, Very Reverend Tome Stamatov,
and the Church Executive Board, including
President Thomas Traycoff, Vice President
Alex Kutanovski, Vice President Dejan
Ristevski, Treasurer Naumce Pejoski, Finan-
cial Secretary Stojan Trajkovski, Secretary
Dimce Alekovski, and Diocese Delegate Nick
Nochevich, will be celebrating with a weekend
of events from July 12 to July 14, 2013 at the
cathedral in Crown Point, Indiana.
Saints Peter and Paul Macedonian Ortho-
dox Cathedral was consecrated on July 14,
1963 in Gary, Indiana, when a group of immi-
grants from Macedonia came together with the
goal of preserving Macedonian culture and re-
ligious tradition. Saints Peter and Paul is
known throughout the United States and Can-
ada as the first official Macedonian church
built in North America. The founders pro-
claimed the mission of their new church before
the Indiana Secretary of State in Indianapolis,
Indiana: ‘‘The purpose of this parish is to
preach the word of God and take spiritual care
of its members; to spread goodness, justice,
brotherly love, and respect among its mem-
bers.’’
The cathedral in Gary flourished for many
years, and the congregation continued to
grow. Due to an increase in membership, a
new cathedral and cultural center were built in
Crown Point, Indiana, in 1989, and are still in
existence today. The members and leaders of
Saints Peter and Paul Macedonian Orthodox
Cathedral played a major role in the establish-
ment of additional churches throughout the
United States and in Canada. Their determina-
tion, focus, and commitment laid the founda-
tion for other Macedonian churches to come to
life.
Mr. Speaker, I ask that you and my other
distinguished colleagues join me in honoring
and congratulating Saints Peter and Paul Mac-
edonian Orthodox Cathedral on its 50th Anni-
versary. Throughout many hardships and
trials, the congregation and leaders of Saints
Peter and Paul have dedicated themselves to
preserving Macedonian heritage, tradition, and
spiritual beliefs. Their constant dedication and
commitment is worthy of the highest com-
mendation.
f
RECOGNIZING THE HOWARD COUN-
TY LIBRARY SYSTEM FOR BEING
NAMED LIBRARY OF THE YEAR
AND MR. MATTHEW WINNER OF
COLUMBIA, MARYLAND, FOR
BEING HONORED BY THE PRESI-
DENT AS ONE OF TWELVE MU-
SEUM AND LIBRARY ‘‘CHAM-
PIONS OF CHANGE’’
HON. JOHN P. SARBANES
OF MARYLAND
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Friday, June 14, 2013
Mr. SARBANES. Mr. Speaker, I rise today
to recognize the Howard County Library Sys-
tem for being named Library of the Year, and
Mr. Matthew Winner of Columbia, Maryland,
for being honored by the President as one of
twelve museum and library ‘‘Champions of
Change.’’
Each year, one of the 21,000 public and
academic libraries in the United States, Can-
ada and Mexico is awarded this prestigious
honor. The winning library is one that ‘‘most
profoundly demonstrates creativity, leadership
and innovation in developing signature events
and initiatives, particularly those that can be
emulated by others.’’ I extend my congratula-
tions to CEO and President, Valerie Gross,
and to her remarkable team of educators and
support staff at the Howard County libraries. It
is the first library system in the entire mid-At-
lantic region to receive this award.
My parents always stressed the value of li-
braries as a tool for learning and enrichment.
Now, as a parent myself, I have tried to do the
same with my children. In this regard, the
Howard County Library System and its patrons
truly set an example for communities and fam-
ilies throughout our country. It is comprised of
six branches that serve over 280,000 resi-
dents. Remarkably, 90 percent of those resi-
dents have and use library cards. The library
system has the highest borrowing rate per
capita in the United States, with over 7 million
items checked out annually. The library is at
the center of the educational, cultural and so-
cial network of Howard County.
The success of the Howard County Library
System is a testament to the dedicated staff
and administrators of the library system, but
also the commitment of the people of Howard
County to the value of education and lifelong
learning. Congratulations to the Howard Coun-
ty Public Library System, a 21st-century library
system worthy of this distinguished honor.
I would also like to congratulate Howard
County resident and public school teacher and
librarian, Matthew Winner of Columbia, Mary-
land, for being honored by the President as
one of twelve museum and library ‘‘Cham-
pions of Change.’’ Winner is the co-author of
the forthcoming book, Teaching Math with the
Wii, the ‘‘Busy Librarian’’ blog, and he was re-
cently named a 2013 Library Journal ‘‘Mover &
Shaker’’ in the category of Tech Leaders.
Through his innovative thinking and dedication
to captivating the attention and potential of our
students through gaming and other popular
technologies, Mr. Winner is a leader in his
field and making a real difference in his com-
munity. He is fully deserving of this recogni-
tion, and I offer him my thanks and congratu-
lations.
f
HONORING THE ACHIEVEMENT OF
ADAM LEEMANS
HON. CHERI BUSTOS
OF ILLINOIS
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Friday, June 14, 2013
Mrs. BUSTOS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to
congratulate Adam Leemans of Port Byron, Il-
linois on his recent achievement as valedic-
torian of his class at the United States Military
Academy at West Point.
Adam completed his course of study at
West Point with an emphasis on mechanical
engineering and earned a 4.2 grade-point av-
erage. He also attained nine post-graduate
honors for both academic and athletic excel-
lence. In addition to his classroom success,
Adam was the captain of the West Point
triathlon team for two years.
After graduation, Adam will spend one
month working at the Rock Island Arsenal, fol-
lowed by one year working towards a master’s
degree in the United Kingdom. Following the
completion of his studies he will report to Fort
Leonard Wood for training and will eventually
take over command of his own unit.
Mr. Speaker, I want to applaud Adam for his
momentous achievement. His parents, Bonnie
and David, along with his community should
be extremely proud of this fine young man,
and I wish him luck with his future endeavors.
f
IN RECOGNITION OF THE PASSAGE
OF THE TBI TREATMENT ACT
AMENDMENT
HON. PETE SESSIONS
OF TEXAS
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Friday, June 14, 2013
Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, thousands of
our brave servicemen and women are return-
ing from combat with severe cases of Trau-
matic Brain Injury (TBI) and Post-Traumatic
Stress Disorder (PTSD), resulting in an inabil-
ity to hold a job, properly care for their fami-
lies, or in some cases, to overcome suicidal
tendencies. As a nation, we have the respon-
sibility for their care and recovery.
Currently, private healthcare providers
across the United States are helping brain in-
jury patients with new and innovative treat-
ments, some of which have not yet been
made available in Department of Defense
(DoD) treatment facilities. In an effort to fix this
delinquency, I introduced H.R. 2344, the TBI
Treatment Act, in the House of Representa-
tives.
The TBI Treatment Act would establish a 5-
year ‘‘pay-for-performance’’ pilot program, not
to exceed $10 million per year, which would
help expedite some of the new and
groundbreaking treatments to our nations’ ac-
tive duty soldiers suffering from TBI and
PTSD. Healthcare providers would be able to
treat active-duty soldiers at no cost to the pa-
tient. The healthcare provider would be reim-
bursed by the DoD for providing the treat-
ments, but only if the treatment is proven suc-
cessful based on independent pre- and post-
VerDate Mar 15 2010 03:59 Jun 18, 2013 Jkt 029060 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 0626 Sfmt 9920 E:\CR\FM\K14JN8.011 E17JNPT1
s
m
a
r
t
i
n
e
z

o
n

D
S
K
6
T
P
T
V
N
1
P
R
O
D

w
i
t
h

R
E
M
A
R
K
S
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—Extensions of Remarks E895 June 17, 2013
treatment neuropsychological testing, accept-
ed survey instruments, neurological imaging,
or clinical examinations. Currently, soldiers
and veterans suffering from TBI and PTSD are
paying out-of-pocket for these innovative treat-
ments. Lastly, treatments must be approved
by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA),
the Secretary of Defense, and by an institu-
tional review board operating in accordance
with regulations issued by the Secretary of
Health and Human Services.
In light of House consideration this week of
H.R. 1960, The National Defense Authoriza-
tion Act (NDAA) for fiscal year (FY) 2014, I
was proud to offer the TBI Treatment Act as
an amendment to the NDAA along with my
friend and colleague from California, Con-
gressman Mike Thompson. I am pleased to
report that last night; the House of Represent-
atives approved by voice vote the TBI Treat-
ment Act amendment. This is a great victory
for those suffering from TBI and PTSD and is
an important step towards ensuring that our
nation’s soldiers receive the care and treat-
ments they have earned and deserve. I hope
that my colleagues in the Senate will also in-
clude the TBI Treatment Act when they con-
sider defense authorization legislation.
f
COMBATING SEXUAL ASSAULT IN
THE MILITARY
HON. ALLYSON Y. SCHWARTZ
OF PENNSYLVANIA
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Friday, June 14, 2013
Ms. SCHWARTZ. Mr. Speaker, for the past
year, my office has worked with a young fe-
male soldier who was raped while serving her
country. Active US Army, she says that when
she reported the crime, she was threatened
and harassed.
The military’s solution was to direct her as-
sailant to stay away from her, which he ig-
nored.
This woman acted bravely by reporting the
assault—only about 10 percent of victims do—
and the military failed her.
She is now AWOL: lost, afraid, without pay,
without prospects—and without her justice.
Her situation is far too common. And it’s unac-
ceptable.
This year’s National Defense Authorization
includes important reforms. It strips com-
manders of their authority to change or dis-
miss convictions and it expands legal assist-
ance to victims.
The military must fully implement these
changes and do all it can to ensure that its
culture no longer tolerates sexual violence.
The military must prosecute sexual abuse of-
fenders and ensure victims have protection
and support and the assurance of justice that
all victims deserve.
End this shame on America and ensure that
women ‘‘can be all they can be’’ in the U.S.
military, without discrimination, harassment or
fear of sexual assault.
HONORING CLARK BOYD FOR HIS
SERVICE AS PRESIDENT OF RO-
TARY CLUB OF LEBANON
HON. DIANE BLACK
OF TENNESSEE
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Monday, June 17, 2013
Mrs. BLACK. Mr. Speaker, for more than
one hundred years Rotary International has
made it their mission to provide service to oth-
ers, promote integrity, and advance world un-
derstanding, goodwill, and peace. Today, it is
my honor to recognize one of Rotary’s distin-
guished club presidents, Mr. Clark Boyd from
Lebanon, Tennessee.
A graduate of East Tennessee State Univer-
sity, Clark served his country for more than a
decade in the Army National Guard and U.S.
Army Reserve. Today, Clark makes good on
the promise to be a ‘‘good neighbor’’ to the
customers entrusted to his care as a State
Farm Insurance agent in Lebanon, where he
also serves as chairman of the Wilson County
Republican Party and president of his local
Habitat for Humanity.
Under Clark’s leadership, the Rotary Club of
Lebanon generously donated $6,000 to local
and international non–profits, gave $8,000 to
the noble work of Rotary International and
joined members of the local Kiwanis club to
create a Lebanon youth baseball league. Addi-
tionally, the club was awarded the prestigious
‘‘STAR Club Award’’ and ‘‘Globe Club Award.’’
Apart from his service to Rotary, Clark
evinces his devout Christian faith as chairman
of the men’s ministry at Immanuel Baptist
Church, where he also serves as a deacon
and Sunday school teacher. Most importantly,
Clark is the loving husband to his wife of elev-
en years, Jana, and a proud father to his two
children: Wilson and Blair.
While Clark’s tenure as president of Rotary
Club of Lebanon will end this year, his passion
for investing in the lives of others and serving
his community will not. I congratulate Clark on
an exceptional year as president of Rotary
Club of Lebanon and honor him for his self-
less example of service to others.
f
HONORING THE RETIREMENT OF
MARK BURTON
HON. JOHN GARAMENDI
OF CALIFORNIA
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Monday, June 17, 2013
Mr. GARAMENDI. Mr. Speaker, I rise today
to honor Mark Burton, who has served North-
ern California labor, specifically, Napa and So-
lano Counties, since 1978. I ask all my col-
leagues to join me in recognizing the many
outstanding achievements of Mark during his
lifetime.
Mark Burton has touched the lives of many
with dedication and grace. Evidenced since
his early childhood; Mark’s driven and com-
passionate nature laid the foundation for a leg-
acy of inspiration to all who know him.
Mark was born in Richmond, California, on
June 11, 1957; and Mark graduated from
Pinole Valley High School in 1976, where he
met the love of his life, Becky, who Mark later
married and raised their two sons, Andrew
and Adam, with.
Mark is committed to making the world a
better place and his grace and ability to effec-
tively communicate with people from all dif-
ferent backgrounds, he courageously stands
up for what he believes is both fair and right
not only in the workplace, but in life as well.
Mark’s reputation for being dependable, fair,
and loyal propelled Mark to become a foreman
for Bechtel before joining the Local 3 staff as
a Business Agent in 2000. Mark was pro-
moted to District Representative for Napa and
Solano Counties in 2006 and has dedicated
his time to improving working conditions
throughout organized labor.
Mr. Speaker, we are truly honored to pay
tribute to our friend and dedicated public serv-
ant Mark Burton. We ask our colleagues to
join with us in thanking Mr. Burton for his long
and dedicated service to the citizens of Solano
and Napa counties and wishing him continued
success in all his future endeavors along with
a happy retirement.
f
HONORING THE RETIREMENT OF
DR. JIM TEDFORD
HON. LOIS CAPPS
OF CALIFORNIA
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Monday, June 17, 2013
Mrs. CAPPS. Mr. Speaker, today I rise to
honor the retirement of Dr. Jim Tedford from
San Luis Obispo, CA, who is a beloved pedia-
trician in the community.
Dr. Jim Tedford has resided in San Luis
Obispo County for over 30 years. He grad-
uated from UCLA Medical School in 1969
where he completed his residency at the Chil-
dren’s Hospital of Los Angeles. He then
worked as a pediatrician at the Fairchild Air
Force Base in Spokane, Washington, before
opening his private practice in San Luis
Obispo in 1975.
Beyond his medical practice, Dr. Tedford
has a strong history of community engage-
ment. He has participated in several prominent
medical organizations including: the SLO
County Medical Society, California Medical As-
sociation, Sierra Cascade Trauma Society,
California Chapter 2 of the American Academy
of Pediatrics, and the SLO Medical Founda-
tion. Moreover, the First 5 of San Luis Obispo
County has recognized him as a ‘‘Champion
of Health’’ for his dedicated service.
On a personal note, Jim has always ex-
tended a gracious hand when working to-
gether on issues of importance to our commu-
nity. I am pleased to honor Dr. Tedford as we
recognize his contributions to pediatric medi-
cine and wish him nothing but continued suc-
cess in his retirement.
f
IN RECOGNITION OF JUNE AS NA-
TIONAL SCOLIOSIS AWARENESS
MONTH
HON. WILLIAM R. KEATING
OF MASSACHUSETTS
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Monday, June 17, 2013
Mr. KEATING. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to
recognize June as National Scoliosis Aware-
ness Month, and to reaffirm our commitment
to fighting a potentially debilitating medical
condition that afflicts over 7 million Americans.
VerDate Mar 15 2010 03:59 Jun 18, 2013 Jkt 029060 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 0626 Sfmt 9920 E:\CR\FM\K14JN8.015 E17JNPT1
s
m
a
r
t
i
n
e
z

o
n

D
S
K
6
T
P
T
V
N
1
P
R
O
D

w
i
t
h

R
E
M
A
R
K
S
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—Extensions of Remarks E896 June 17, 2013
National Scoliosis Awareness Month brings
together all members of the scoliosis commu-
nity, including physicians, patients, families,
and businesspeople to raise awareness about
this condition. Diagnosing scoliosis is a simple
procedure that takes less than 30 seconds,
and early detection allows physicians to mon-
itor the condition and, if necessary, begin
treatment before serious complications—in-
cluding chronic back pain and impacted heart
and lung function—even begin. Raising aware-
ness is therefore crucial to the fight against
scoliosis.
Between two and three percent of the Amer-
ican population suffers from scoliosis, and the
number of family and friends who are im-
pacted by this condition numbers many mil-
lions more. While serious complications of
scoliosis are largely preventable, affordable
care and public awareness are necessary in
order to maximize the effectiveness of treat-
ment. National Scoliosis Awareness Month
promotes a positive public awareness mes-
sage that elevates the visibility of scoliosis and
empowers those individuals whose lives have
been touched by this condition. It is a time for
us to recommit ourselves to reducing its im-
pact in the future.
Mr. Speaker, please join me in recognizing
June as National Scoliosis Awareness Month,
and in thanking organizations such as the Na-
tional Scoliosis Foundation and the Scoliosis
Research Society, as well as their many sup-
porters, for making it all possible.
f
A TRIBUTE TO ARTHUR PILACHAI
HON. TOM LATHAM
OF IOWA
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Monday, June 17, 2013
Mr. LATHAM. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to
recognize and congratulate Arthur Pilachai of
Boy Scout Troop 249 in Council Bluffs, Iowa
for achieving the rank of Eagle Scout.
The Eagle Scout rank is the highest ad-
vancement rank in scouting. Only about five
percent of Boy Scouts earn the Eagle Scout
Award. The award is a performance-based
achievement with high standards that have
been well-maintained for more than a century.
To earn the Eagle Scout rank, a Boy Scout
is obligated to pass specific tests that are or-
ganized by requirements and merit badges, as
well as completing an Eagle Project to benefit
the community. The work ethic Arthur has
shown in his Eagle Project and every other
project leading up to his Eagle Scout rank
speaks volumes of his commitment to serving
a cause greater than himself and assisting his
community.
Mr. Speaker, the example set by this young
man and his supportive family demonstrates
the rewards of hard work, dedication and per-
severance. I am honored to represent Arthur
and his family in the United States Congress.
I know that all of my colleagues in the House
will join me in congratulating him on obtaining
the Eagle Scout ranking, and I wish him con-
tinued success in his future education and ca-
reer.
TRIBUTE TO HEDGESVILLE HIGH
SCHOOL BASEBALL TEAM
HON. SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO
OF WEST VIRGINIA
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Monday, June 17, 2013
Mrs. CAPITO. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to
recognize the 2013 Hedgesville High School
baseball team. The Eagles defeated Cabell
Midland High School 4–2 to win the West Vir-
ginia Class AAA State Baseball Championship
on Saturday, June 1, 2013.
Hedgesville High School is located in a rural
part of Berkeley County, West Virginia, which
is part of the district I represent. The school
has claimed many state titles over the years,
but one always seemed to slip away. The Ea-
gles earned their first trip to the West Virginia
State Tournament since 1974 by defeating
Hampshire High School 4–3 in the regional
final. They moved on to face Parkersburg
South in the Class AAA semifinal game and
defeated that team 6–3. This launched the Ea-
gles into the title game for the first time in
school history.
The Eagles found themselves trailing Cabell
Midland at the beginning of the game, but
soon rallied to a 4–2 lead and never looked
back. The Eagles brought home the first base-
ball championship in Hedgesville High School
history.
Mr. Speaker, on behalf of the State of West
Virginia, I would like to congratulate the 2013
Hedgesville High School Eagle baseball team
on their state championship. They have made
their hometown extremely proud.
f
HONORING JANELLE BEDEL
HON. LUKE MESSER
OF INDIANA
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Monday, June 17, 2013
Mr. MESSER. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to
honor and recognize the powerful voice of
Janelle Bedel of Rushville, Indiana.
Janelle Bedel was diagnosed with Pleural
Mesothelioma on May 1st of 2007. Since her
diagnosis, and throughout her treatments,
Janelle has been a tireless and strong mes-
senger for mesothelioma and asbestos aware-
ness. Mesothelioma is a cancer most com-
monly caused by exposure to asbestos fibers.
In recognition for Janelle’s advocacy efforts
in the community, the City of Rushville des-
ignated June 6th, 2013 as Janelle Bedel
‘‘Wonder Woman’’ Day. The city will also em-
brace Janelle’s message on the urgent need
for additional asbestos awareness by recog-
nizing September 26th as Mesothelioma
Awareness Day, which will coincide with the
National Mesothelioma Awareness Day.
In addition, the Asbestos Disease Aware-
ness Organization is joining in the recognition
for Janelle’s online and community awareness
efforts by awarding her with the organization’s
Alan Reinstein Award, which is the highest
honor ADAO presents. The ADAO works to
eliminate asbestos disease through national
education and advocacy efforts.
I ask the 6th Congressional District and en-
tire State of Indiana to join me in keeping
Janelle and her family in our thoughts and
prayers and in celebration of her continued ef-
forts to raise awareness among our commu-
nities about the impact of this disease.
f
RECOGNIZING THE 50TH ANNIVER-
SARY OF THE SBA’S NATIONAL
SMALL BUSINESS WEEK
HON. PATRICK MURPHY
OF FLORIDA
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Monday, June 17, 2013
Mr. MURPHY of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I rise
today to recognize the small businesses
across our nation on the 50th anniversary of
National Small Business Week. Small busi-
nesses are the backbone of our country—
making up 50 percent of American jobs—and
are essential to our economic recovery. It is
our job as Members of Congress to provide
support from Washington to small businesses
by reducing unnecessary regulations and im-
proving access to credit and small business
assistance programs.
As a former small businessman, I am proud
to serve on the House Small Business Com-
mittee and to use my prior experience to pro-
mote the interests of this vital sector of our
economy. There is so much work to be done
to help small businesses prosper. That is why
I support legislation to create a stable busi-
ness environment by passing a budget that re-
duces the deficit, simplifying the tax code for
all Americans, and continuing to support es-
sential small business assistance programs.
To that end, the first bill I introduced was the
Partnering with American Manufacturers for
Efficiency and Competitiveness Act to foster
more efficient manufacturing capabilities in
small businesses, to promote competitiveness,
and to create jobs. Having seen firsthand the
havoc hurricanes can cause for small busi-
nesses, I also recently introduced the Small
Business Disaster Reform Act to help small
business owners recover more quickly in the
wake of natural disasters.
Since coming to Congress, I have met with
several small business groups, and recently
hosted a small business roundtable in my dis-
trict. I also have met staff from Small Business
Development Centers (SBDCs) and SCORE,
and I will continue to push for full funding for
both of these organizations that play a crucial
role in supporting small business growth. I ask
my colleagues to recognize the significance of
these organizations and the importance of pre-
venting proposed cuts to SBDCs in the budg-
et. We must also immediately consider legisla-
tion that creates jobs and those that help pro-
vide America’s small businesses with new in-
centives to grow and hire.
This week represents half a century of rec-
ognition of the importance of small businesses
and I am proud to join in commemorating Na-
tional Small Business Week and thanking
small businesses across the nation for the im-
portant work they do. They create jobs and
stimulate the economy, all in the face of tre-
mendous personal risk. I urge my colleagues
to stand with me in support of small busi-
nesses and in creating an economic climate
where they can thrive.
Mr. Speaker, on the 50th Anniversary of
Small Business Week, it is clear that Con-
gress still has much more work to do to help
small businesses, but by working together we
can better support the backbone of our econ-
omy to create jobs and continue on the path
to economic recovery.
VerDate Mar 15 2010 03:59 Jun 18, 2013 Jkt 029060 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 0626 Sfmt 0634 E:\CR\FM\K17JN8.004 E17JNPT1
s
m
a
r
t
i
n
e
z

o
n

D
S
K
6
T
P
T
V
N
1
P
R
O
D

w
i
t
h

R
E
M
A
R
K
S
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—Extensions of Remarks E897 June 17, 2013
SNAP CUTS IN THE FARM BILL
HON. JOHN CONYERS, JR.
OF MICHIGAN
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Monday, June 17, 2013
Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I am deeply
concerned about the $20 billion cut over the
next decade to the Supplemental Nutrition As-
sistance Program, formerly known as the Food
Stamp Program, included in the reauthoriza-
tion of the Farm bill and supported by some of
my colleagues on the House Committee on
Agriculture. SNAP is the cornerstone of our
nation’s nutrition assistance safety net and
touches the lives of over one in seven Ameri-
cans. To highlight the importance of this crit-
ical safety net, last week I participated in a
one day SNAP Challenge by limiting my total
daily food budget to $4.50—the equivalent of
the daily benefits received by individuals living
in Michigan.
If these cuts are enacted into law, nearly 2
million low-income Americans will lose benefits
and 210,000 children from low-income families
will lose free school meals, which may be their
only meal of the day. My colleagues claim that
cuts are needed to reduce the federal debt.
However, every major deficit reduction pack-
aged signed into law over the last thirty years
has always been negotiated according to the
principle of not increasing poverty or inequal-
ity.
Moreover, families are already facing cuts to
SNAP benefits. Under current law, the tem-
porary boost in benefits provided in April of
2009 by the American Recovery and Reinvest-
ment Act are scheduled to end on November
1. This expiration of enhanced benefits will
cause a family of three to experience a $20–
$25 month deduction in benefits, which
amounts to a cut of $1.40 per person per
meal. This reduction, coupled with the draco-
nian $20 billion cut proposed in the Farm Bill,
is simply cruel.
In 2007, 26.3 million Americans participated
in SNAP nationally. In 2012, more than 46.2
million people received benefits—doubling of
the number of participants in 2007. This is a
testament to the fact that when people strug-
gle to put food on their tables during an eco-
nomic downturn, SNAP is able to respond to
meet their needs. SNAP is our nation’s most
important anti-hunger program and we must
protect it for the future sake of vulnerable chil-
dren and families. I encourage my colleagues
to stand up for low-income Americans and
fight for this vital safety net.
f
HONORING JUNETEENTH,
VALLEJO, CALIFORNIA
HON. MIKE THOMPSON
OF CALIFORNIA
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Monday, June 17, 2013
Mr. THOMPSON of California. Mr. Speaker,
I rise today to recognize the Vallejo
Juneteenth Celebration.
On Saturday, June 15, 2013, the Solano
County African Family Celebration Committee
marks the City of Vallejo’s 25th anniversary of
the Juneteenth Celebration. Juneteenth is the
national observance of African American free-
dom from slavery in June of 1865. Juneteenth
is also a time to also celebrate the positive
contributions of African Americans nationally
and locally, and to promote a cultural connec-
tion of the observance as an opportunity to
build strong communities through access to
health services and education resources.
For over two decades the Solano County
African Family Reunion Celebration Com-
mittee has served the community with its net-
work of volunteers serving as the African
American Family Reunion Committee, AAFRC.
The AAFRC has partnered with local non-
profit and for-profit health care organizations
to provide free health services to community.
The Juneteenth celebration also emphasizes
education as the key to a successful future
and includes participation by local educational
institutions and after school programs that
seek to increase the number of African Amer-
ican students enrolling in college.
Mr. Speaker, on this occasion it is my dis-
tinct pleasure to recognize the Juneteenth
Celebration in Vallejo, California on the 25th
anniversary of their momentous event. I join
our colleagues in celebrating the African
American Community of Solano County’s rich
history and wishing them a successful 25th
year with many more to come.
f
HONORING HAROLD A. PETERSON
III
HON. JEFF DENHAM
OF CALIFORNIA
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Monday, June 17, 2013
Mr. DENHAM. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to
acknowledge and honor Mr. Harold A. Peter-
son III, President/Chief Executive Officer of
Community Hospice, Inc. who is retiring after
18 years of outstanding service to the Central
Valley.
Community Hospice, Inc. is a non-profit,
standalone Medicare Certified hospice
headquartered in Modesto, with a branch of-
fice in Stockton, and a 16 bed inpatient facility;
the Alexander Cohen Hospice House is lo-
cated in Hughson, California. Community Hos-
pice provided compassionate care to over
1800 patients last year and 260 patients on a
daily basis. Beyond medical and nursing care;
the organization provides bereavement sup-
port to those in the community who have lost
a loved one. Additionally, Community Hospice
operates six Hope Chest Thrift Stores, a logis-
tics and recycling center, a durable medical
equipment division, and the Community Hos-
pice Foundation, which raises additional funds
to support the hospice mission.
Prior to coming to Community Hospice, Mr.
Peterson worked for 23 years in a Fortune
500 food manufacturing company. Harold has
held positions from front line supervision to
Senior Vice President of Distribution; a posi-
tion he had held the last seven years.
In addition to a busy work schedule, Harold
has a history of active involvement in the com-
munity. Following is a partial list of his partici-
pation: 17 year member of Modesto Rotary,
Past Chair of the Stanislaus County Economic
Development Company, Past Chair of the
Stanislaus County Private Industry Council,
Past Vice-Chair of the Board of Directors of
the Second Harvest Food Bank of Stanislaus
and San Joaquin Counties, Past member of
the Board of Directors for the Hughson Cham-
ber of Commerce, Past Vice-Chair of the
Board of Directors of the United Way of
Stanislaus County, Past member of the Board
of Directors of the California Hospice and Pal-
liative Care Association (CHAPCA), Past Chair
of the Tri Valley Credit Union, and graduate of
the 1990 Modesto Chamber of Commerce
Leadership Modesto. Most recently, Harold
has been a Supervisory Committee Member of
the Community Trust Credit Union.
Harold has received many acknowledg-
ments for his volunteer work, which include re-
ceiving the Hughson Business Man of the
Year award in 2008, J.C. Penney Golden Rule
Award in 1995 and the United Way Presi-
dent’s Award in 1994.
Harold and his wife, Kathy of 42 years have
three grown sons, and with their wives, five
grandchildren. The Peterson family lives in
Modesto, California. They enjoy playing golf
and travelling in their motor home to visit fam-
ily and friends. Harold is a decorated veteran
of the Vietnam War and holds a Bachelors
Degree from the University of San Francisco
in Organizational Behavior.
Mr. Speaker, please join me in honoring and
commending Harold A. Peterson III after nu-
merous years of selfless service to the better-
ment of our community.
f
HONORING LEHMAN COLLEGE
HON. ELIOT L. ENGEL
OF NEW YORK
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Monday, June 17, 2013
Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, I am a graduate
of Lehman College and I am proud of that. I
have a Bachelors degree and a Masters de-
gree and the education I received at Lehman
College has served me well. I am proud of my
Bronx roots and have had the honor of rep-
resenting the Bronx for many years, first in the
New York State Assembly and now in the U.S.
House of Representatives. I was a member of
the first graduating class of Lehman College in
1969 and in 1994 I was honored to give the
commencement speech to the school’s 25th
graduating class.
The first office for which I ever ran was the
Student Government at Lehman and the skills
I honed there and as president of my fraternity
laid a strong foundation for me as in my life
in public service.
For four generations, Lehman College, and
its predecessor, the Bronx branch of Hunter
College, have given students a first-rate liberal
arts education in preparing them for careers in
teaching, business, social work, the health
sciences and other areas. The school’s more
than 360 full-time faculty members represent a
broad spectrum of scholarship in over 30
fields and includes seven Distinguished Pro-
fessors, the highest rank attainable within City
University of New York.
Lehman’s more than 63,000 alumni are
making important contributions to industry and
organizations both professionally and within
their communities here, and across the nation
and the world.
Lehman has more than 90 graduate and un-
dergraduate programs for the more than
12,000 students who enjoy some of the finest
academic and athletic facilities available.
These include state-of-the-art labs in biology,
geographic information science, and new
VerDate Mar 15 2010 03:59 Jun 18, 2013 Jkt 029060 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 0626 Sfmt 9920 E:\CR\FM\A17JN8.003 E17JNPT1
s
m
a
r
t
i
n
e
z

o
n

D
S
K
6
T
P
T
V
N
1
P
R
O
D

w
i
t
h

R
E
M
A
R
K
S
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—Extensions of Remarks E898 June 17, 2013
media, and a world-class sports and recre-
ation center on a 37-acre, tree-lined campus,
which houses splendid examples of both
Gothic and contemporary architecture.
Lehman College was established on July 1,
1968, as a senior college with its own faculty,
curriculum, and administration. The College
took over the campus that, since 1931, had
served as the Bronx branch of Hunter College
and is named after Herbert H. Lehman, the
four-time governor of New York who later be-
came a U.S. Senator.
On the undergraduate level, Lehman’s Gen-
eral Education Curriculum provides a broad
appreciation of the liberal arts and sciences in
developing student abilities of both public and
personal concern.
Dr. Ricardo R. Fernandez was named presi-
dent of Lehman in 1990 and I have been
proud to work with him during his tenure. He
has expanded the College’s commitment both
to educational excellence and to access to
higher education for the economically dis-
advantaged and he encouraged the develop-
ment of new majors and degree programs.
Under his leadership Lehman extended its
educational partnerships into the international
arena, and has become a major resource for
the economic, cultural, and educational devel-
opment of the Bronx.
As a graduate of Lehman College I am
proud to acknowledge its contributions to the
betterment of its students and its community.
It is truly a treasure of educational develop-
ment and innovation. When I needed a quality
education at a rate that my family could afford,
Lehman was there for me. Today its mission
remains the same and I am proud that Leh-
man has been a part of my life.
f
OUR UNCONSCIONABLE NATIONAL
DEBT
HON. MIKE COFFMAN
OF COLORADO
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Monday, June 17, 2013
Mr. COFFMAN. Mr. Speaker, on January
20, 2009, the day President Obama took of-
fice, the national debt was
$10,626,877,048,913.08.
Today, it is $16,738,697,370,019.81. We’ve
added $6,111,820,312,106.73 to our debt in 4
and a half years. This is $6 trillion in debt our
nation, our economy, and our children could
have avoided with a balanced budget amend-
ment.
f
HONORING THE REPUBLIC
HON. LUKE MESSER
OF INDIANA
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Monday, June 17, 2013
Mr. MESSER. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to
recognize the newest addition to the Hoosier
roster of designated National Historic Land-
mark sites, The Republic building in Colum-
bus, Indiana.
The Republic building, which houses the
city’s local newspaper The Republic, was des-
ignated as the City of Columbus’ seventh Na-
tional Historic Landmark on October 16, 2012
by Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar. In the
designation, the Interior Department noted the
significance of the building as ‘‘an exceptional
work of modern architecture and one of the
best examples of the work of Myron Gold-
smith, a general partner in the firm Skidmore,
Owings & Merrill, and a highly respected ar-
chitect, architectural theorist, writer and educa-
tor.’’
In the application for the National Historic
Landmark designation, it was noted that ‘‘The
Republic was a model for many of the ideas
that shaped Columbus’ downtown over the
next several years . . . Forty years after it
was completed, it remains a simple, simulta-
neously strong and elegant representation of
the Modern style.’’
Columbus enjoys a rich history of significant
works of architecture. The Republic joins six
other instances of contemporary architecture
designated as National Historic Landmarks, in-
cluding the First Christian Church, the North
Christian Church, the First Baptist Church, the
McDowell Adult Education Center, the Miller
House, and the former Irwin Union Bank and
Trust building. With only 2,500 historic land-
marks in the country, Columbus is notable for
its unique concentration of nationally important
landmarks.
I ask the 6th Congressional District to join
me in congratulating the leadership, busi-
nesses, and citizens of the city of Columbus
for their visionary leadership in architectural
design and dedication to keeping these na-
tional landmarks living monuments to a shared
history and prosperous future.
f
PERSONAL EXPLANATION
HON. GWEN MOORE
OF WISCONSIN
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Monday, June 17, 2013
Ms. MOORE. Mr. Speaker, I am recorded
as voting ‘‘aye’’ on rollcall vote No. 231, an
amendment by Congresswoman MCCOLLUM to
the FY 2014 Defense Authorization bill to pro-
hibit funds from being used for certain profes-
sional sports sponsorships. This was inad-
vertent. I intended to vote ‘‘no.’’
On rollcall No. 231, I intended to vote ‘‘no.’’
McCollum Amendment to H.R. 1960.
f
HONORING THE LIFE AND SERVICE
OF JOHN D. KIMBROUGH
HON. JEFF MILLER
OF FLORIDA
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Monday, June 17, 2013
Mr. MILLER of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I rise
today to recognize the life and service of John
D. Kimbrough, who passed away on June 12,
2013. During his distinguished career in edu-
cation and his military service, John
Kimbrough served as a mentor and an inspira-
tion to countless individuals throughout the
Gulf Coast. The loss of this great man is felt
across the entire northwest Florida community.
Mr. Kimbrough was born February 17, 1945
in Chumuckla, Florida. In a true testament to
his love of country, Mr. Kimbrough chose to
serve in the United States Army. While serv-
ing, Mr. Kimbrough was part of the Reinforce-
ment Control Group based in St. Louis, Mis-
souri and also served in Korea. After returning
from his tour of duty, Mr. Kimbrough attended
the University of West Florida. A born teacher,
he used his degree to educate students in
math and science and also served as a coach
to further nurture and inspire the students of
northwest Florida.
Many students and teachers whose lives
were touched by Mr. Kimbrough mourn the
loss of a man of devotion and unwavering
compassion. Perhaps the greatest mark he left
was his persistent service to his fellow man;
when it came to repairing things, there was
never a problem he could not solve. His con-
tributions and service to our community along
with his selfless and dedicated service to our
great Nation will forever be remembered.
Mr. Speaker, on behalf of the United States
Congress, I am privileged to honor the exem-
plary life of Mr. John D. Kimbrough. My wife
Vicki and I offer our prayers and sincerest
condolences to his wife, Addie; son, JJ;
daughter-in-law, Kendra; grandson, Lucas;
and all of his family and friends. He will be
truly missed.
f
CELEBRATING THE CAREER OF
EDWARD V. ROCHFORD
HON. LEONARD LANCE
OF NEW JERSEY
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Monday, June 17, 2013
Mr. LANCE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to
honor Morris County Sheriff Edward V.
Rochford for being awarded the 2013 Distin-
guished Citizen Award by the Boy Scouts of
America and the Patriots Path Council. After
twenty-seven years of distinguished public
service this recognition is well earned.
Sheriff Rochford is the top law enforcement
official in Morris County, New Jersey, re-
garded as one of the safest counties in the
country. He oversees the operation of the
Morris County Correctional Facility which has
been lauded as one of the ‘‘cleanest, quietest,
most well run’’ correctional facilities according
to the American Correctional Association. His
office received the Triple Crown Award from
the National Sheriffs’ Association for being a
fully accredited agency—becoming one of only
thirty-four to earn this national distinction.
Sheriff Rochford’s community service in-
cludes President and Executive Director of the
Sheriffs’ Association of New Jersey and mem-
ber of the advisory board of the Dean and
Betty Gallo Prostate Cancer Center at the
Cancer Institute of New Jersey. Sheriff
Rochford’s continued involvement in fund-
raising to help minimize medical costs to fami-
lies of children suffering from cancer recently
earned him a commendation from the Amer-
ican Cancer Society. He was also the recipient
of the Lifetime Achievement Award from the
New Jersey State Troopers Coalition in 2012.
Sheriff Rochford is an outstanding public
servant who has continually demonstrated
leadership. I congratulate him on his achieve-
ments and on his award as 2013 Distin-
guished Citizen of the Boy Scouts of America.
VerDate Mar 15 2010 03:59 Jun 18, 2013 Jkt 029060 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 0626 Sfmt 0634 E:\CR\FM\A17JN8.006 E17JNPT1
s
m
a
r
t
i
n
e
z

o
n

D
S
K
6
T
P
T
V
N
1
P
R
O
D

w
i
t
h

R
E
M
A
R
K
S
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—Extensions of Remarks E899 June 17, 2013
IN RECOGNITION OF THE RETIRE-
MENT OF ROBERT HOUSTON
HON. MIKE ROGERS
OF ALABAMA
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Monday, June 17, 2013
Mr. ROGERS of Alabama. Mr. Speaker, I
would like to ask for the House’s attention
today to recognize Mr. Robert Houston, who
will be retiring from BAE Systems after 35
years of service.
Robert began his career in 1977 with FMC
Corporation as a manufacturing analyst. Since
then, Robert has traveled the United States
and globe—from Iowa to South Carolina to
Iraq. He first held positions like welder, shop
floor supervisor and operations and human re-
sources manager. After much hard work, he
rose into line management roles. Prior to his
current position, Mr. Houston served as the
vice president and general manager for the
legacy Steel Products and Readiness &
Sustainment businesses. During this time, he
also acted as the Anniston site executive.
In addition to working for BAE, Robert has
been extremely involved in his community.
Robert served as the first African American
president of the Aiken Rotary Club and the
first African American chairman of the Calhoun
County Chamber of Commerce. Robert also
dedicated time to working with Anniston
schools on STEM programs and reading initia-
tives.
After his retirement, Robert plans to spend
time with his family, including his grandson,
Cameron. He also plans to vacation with his
wife of 35 years.
Mr. Speaker, please join Mr. Houston’s fam-
ily, his colleagues and myself in both thanking
Robert Houston for his dedication to the com-
munity and wishing him the best of luck in all
of his future pursuits.
f
HONORING MS. TERRY LONGORIA
HON. MIKE THOMPSON
OF CALIFORNIA
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Monday, June 17, 2013
Mr. THOMPSON of California. Mr. Speaker,
I rise today to honor Terry Longoria of Napa
County, California on the occasion of her re-
tirement.
In 2002, Ms. Longoria concluded twenty-
seven years of hard work and service to her
community as Director of Napa County’s De-
partment of Health and Human Services. In
that capacity she led 350 and employees
managed a $45 million annual budget, ensur-
ing smooth operations within the agency.
Ms. Longoria also served as a founding
Board Member of Napa Valley Coalition of Pri-
vate Non-Profit Agencies, the founding Com-
missioner from Napa in the Partnership Health
Plan of California, and the founding Commis-
sioner from Napa in the Children and Families
First Commission, working hard to promote
wellness in the Napa Valley and deliver impor-
tant services to our community.
Since her departure from Health and Human
Services, Terry has worked with the Napa
County Office of Education, NCOE, as the Di-
rector of Safe Schools Healthy Students
where she oversaw comprehensive projects
aimed at addressing the needs of Napa stu-
dents and their families.
Ms. Longoria has served on the Board of
Directors for Child Start Incorporated, and as
Chair of the Parents Council for the Boys and
Girls Club. She is a member of the Bay Area
Social Services Consortium, and the Board of
Directors for Napa County Council for Eco-
nomic Opportunity.
Terry has dedicated her life to providing
services and support to her Napa community,
especially to children and the disadvantaged.
Terry has always looked for ways to help oth-
ers and even her retirement party, which
should be her moment in the sun, is at
VOICES, so she can use her event as a fund-
raiser for this great organization.
Mr. Speaker, Terry Longoria has a long and
distinguished career of service to others. It is
therefore appropriate that we acknowledge her
today and wish her well in her retirement.
f
HONORING THE INDIANA FEVER
HON. LUKE MESSER
OF INDIANA
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Monday, June 17, 2013
Mr. MESSER. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to
honor the accomplishments of the Indiana
Fever, my home-state WNBA team.
The Indiana Fever won the 2012 WNBA
championship over the Minnesota Lynx, the
first in the history of the franchise. This Fever
team embodied the best of Hoosier basketball
with a toughness and team effort that won
fans over across the State. I was thrilled to
join the team on June 14th as President
Obama welcomed the newest champions in
professional basketball to the White House.
Led on the court by Finals MVP Tamika
Catchings and All-Star and Purdue University
graduate Katie Douglas, the Fever won in
postseason play with a strong defense and a
never say quit mentality that helped them
overcome adversity. These players overcame
significant injuries and came together as a
team to win the title after a regular season
record of 22–12. Credit for this outstanding
leadership goes to Head Coach Lin Dunn, a
great ambassador of the game.
Owner Herb Simon, President Jim Morris,
Chief Operating Officer Rick Fuson, and Presi-
dent and General Manager of Fever Basket-
ball Kelly Krauskopf deserve special recogni-
tion for their leadership of this franchise from
expansion team to WNBA Champions. We are
lucky to have these leaders, coaches, and
players so highly invested in our community.
I join the entire 6th district and Hoosiers
across the State in congratulating the Indiana
Fever for a fantastic and thrilling 2012 cham-
pionship season. Fever fans statewide are
looking forward to what this talented team will
achieve this season.
f
CELEBRATING THE CAREER OF
BETTY ANN BENTON
HON. LEONARD LANCE
OF NEW JERSEY
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Monday, June 17, 2013
Mr. LANCE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to cel-
ebrate the work of Mrs. Betty Ann Benton of
Pennington, New Jersey for her accomplished
career in education. Betty Ann has taught for
over thirty years as an elementary school
teacher spending many years in Hopewell
Township. There she introduced innovative
programming and community outreach.
Betty Ann showed leadership in the class-
room and her dedication led her to become
the first Certified Reading Recovery teacher in
the Hopewell Valley School System. Her nota-
ble service and accomplishments led to her
recognition as Teacher of the Year in Hope-
well Elementary School in 1994. Since that
recognition she has been a role model to
young educators. Betty Ann also introduced
Hank, the Reading Therapy Dog, to the dis-
trict, an idea acclaimed by students and par-
ents that encouraged young, shy students to
be engaged.
In addition to her distinguished work as an
educator, Betty Ann has also demonstrated
great commitment to her community through
her involvement in the Healthy Communities
Program and her time as a volunteer profes-
sional development instructor.
Betty Ann serves as an outstanding role
model who has continually shown her dedica-
tion to her community through her students. I
congratulate her on a long and distinguished
career and congratulate her on her retirement.
f
THE ‘‘LIMITING INTERNET AND
BLANKET ELECTRONIC REVIEW
OF TELECOMMUNICATIONS AND
EMAIL (LIBERT–E) ACT’’
HON. JOHN CONYERS, JR.
OF MICHIGAN
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Monday, June 17, 2013
Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, in light of the
recent public revelations about the National
Security Agency’s extensive surveillance pro-
grams, today we are introducing bipartisan
legislation that will curtail the excesses of
these programs and protect our privacy rights.
The ‘‘Limiting Internet and Blanket Electronic
Review of Telecommunications and Email
(LIBERT-E) Act’’ contains commonsense pro-
posals to strengthen our civil liberties and hold
our government accountable.
Specifically, the LIBERT–E Act provides for
the following legislative changes:
The legislation reforms access to certain
business records for foreign intelligence and
international terrorism investigations. Section 2
of the LIBERT–E Act changes Section 215 of
the USA PATRIOT Act in order to prevent the
mass collection of business records that are
not material to an authorized foreign intel-
ligence investigation, an international terrorism
investigation, or clandestine intelligence activi-
ties.
Currently, in order to obtain a Section 215
court order, the government need only show
that the records are ‘‘relevant’’ to such an in-
vestigation. Recent reports suggest that the
government’s view of the ‘‘relevance’’ standard
includes records of every telephone call on a
given network. Section 2 of the LIBERT–E Act
would also require that the government show
that the relevance of these records to the in-
vestigation is based on ‘‘specific and
articulable’’ facts, that the records are material
to the investigation, and that the records ‘‘per-
tain only to individuals under such investiga-
tion.’’ In addition, the section removes a list of
VerDate Mar 15 2010 03:59 Jun 18, 2013 Jkt 029060 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 0626 Sfmt 9920 E:\CR\FM\A17JN8.012 E17JNPT1
s
m
a
r
t
i
n
e
z

o
n

D
S
K
6
T
P
T
V
N
1
P
R
O
D

w
i
t
h

R
E
M
A
R
K
S
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—Extensions of Remarks E900 June 17, 2013
‘‘presumptively relevant’’ records. The govern-
ment should be required to show that the
records it seeks are, in fact, material to a par-
ticular concern. The section also guarantees
the recipient of a Section 215 order the right
to challenge an accompanying gag order, and
ensures notice and due process for any such
challenger.
The LIBERT–E Act also requires additional
disclosures to Congress and the public in Sec-
tion 3 of the legislation. This section provides
for greater accountability and transparency in
the implementation of the USA PATRIOT Act
and the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act.
This section amends existing reporting re-
quirements contained in Section 601 of the
Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978
(50 U.S.C. 1871) by requiring the Attorney
General to make available to all Members of
Congress the information currently provided to
the House and Senate intelligence and judici-
ary committees. It also requires that the Attor-
ney General make unclassified summaries of
each ‘‘significant’’ decision, order, or opinion of
the FISA Court available to the public within
180 days of their submission to Congress.
Further, this section requires the Inspectors
General of the Department of Justice and the
Intelligence Community to report on the impact
that acquisition of foreign intelligence has had
on the privacy of persons located in the United
States.
Lastly, the fourth section of the LIBERT–E
Act requires that each assessment or review
required under Title VII of FISA be submitted
in unclassified form, with an unclassified index
if necessary.
I urge my colleagues to support this bipar-
tisan measure, which protects our privacy and
increases transparency in the government’s
use of these authorities.
f
H.R. 2217
HON. ALAN GRAYSON
OF FLORIDA
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Monday, June 17, 2013
Mr. GRAYSON. Mr. Speaker, I rise to ex-
tend my earlier remarks describing the intent
of Congress with regard to H. AMDT. 124 to
H.R. 2217, the Department of Homeland Se-
curity Appropriations Act, 2014. My amend-
ment reads as follows: ‘‘None of the funds
made available by this Act may be used in
contravention of the First, Second, or Fourth
Amendments to the Constitution of the United
States.’’
The Department of Homeland Security, all
of its officials, and all contractors and sub-
contractors working on its behalf or operating
under inherently governmental functions shall
respect anonymous speech. No funds shall be
used to attempt the unmasking of anonymous
speakers, unless two conditions are met. One,
there must be probable cause that an anony-
mous speaker is engaged in criminal activities
and two, a warrant from a court with jurisdic-
tion over domestic matters must be issued.
Warrants from the FISA court do not serve
this purpose, as those courts have jurisdiction
over foreign and not domestic matters.
It is the intent of Congress that the Depart-
ment of Homeland Security, all of its officials,
and all contractors and subcontractors working
on its behalf or operating under inherently
governmental functions respect the freedom of
the press, defining press as ‘‘every sort of
publication which affords a vehicle of informa-
tion and opinion’’ (per Justice Charles Evans
Hughes). In any granting of press privileges,
DHS is prohibited from distinguishing between
media businesses with established track
records and citizen publishing vehicles or
blogs with partisan, noncommercial, or advo-
cacy missions. DHS shall under no cir-
cumstances engage in prior restraint and shall
respect the precedential value of New York
Times Co. v. United States (1971). No citizen
exercising first amendment rights shall be pro-
hibited from publishing information by the use
of funds appropriated in this bill.
It is the intent of Congress that a search
under the Fourth Amendment is neither rea-
sonable nor constitutional if, as the Supreme
Court noted in Katz v. United States, (1) a
person expects privacy in the thing searched
and (2) society believes that expectation is
reasonable. Considering the advances in elec-
tronic storage and retrieval technology, as well
as the general trail of electronic residue left by
any citizen using email, search engines, most
forms of banking and commerce, VoIP, or use
of the internet or mobile phones, it is the intent
of Congress that the Department of Homeland
Security, all of its officials, and all contractors
and subcontractors working on its behalf or
operating under inherently governmental func-
tions should go beyond the so-called ‘‘third
party doctrine’’ in protecting fourth amendment
rights. Any examination without a person’s
consent to the Government (not a private
party) of search engine records, e-mail, inter-
net records, phone records, or information pro-
duced in the course of ordinary business is
considered a search of that person’s ‘‘papers
and effects.’’ The Department of Homeland
Security, all of its officials, and all contractors
and subcontractors working on its behalf or
operating under inherently governmental func-
tions are prohibited from using appropriated
funds to engage in such searches.
It is not the intent of Congress that every
form of surveillance that is technically feasible
should be performed. Nor is it the intent of
Congress that every form of surveillance that
is somehow arguably within court precedent or
some strained interpretation of a relevant stat-
ute should be performed. On the contrary,
statutory authority for surveillance is to be
construed narrowly, because all forms of gov-
ernment surveillance implicate and potentially
impair or even destroy our privacy rights. It is
never the intention of Congress that security
concerns override constitutional rights—on the
contrary, we take an oath of office to defend
those rights. The Fourth Amendment makes it
clear, not only by its wording but by its very
existence, that the right to privacy is a funda-
mental part of the American experience. We
cannot protect our liberty by snuffing it out—
we cannot destroy our village in order to save
it.
HONORING CAPTAIN WILLIAM J.
MILNE
HON. ROBERT J. WITTMAN
OF VIRGINIA
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Monday, June 17, 2013
Mr. WITTMAN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to
recognize a true leader for his extraordinary
service in the United States Coast Guard,
Captain William J. Milne. Captain Milne served
his country for 38 years in the Coast Guard
and on June 14, he will retire as the Director
of Law Enforcement, Maritime Security, and
Defense Operations Policy at Coast Guard
Headquarters in Washington DC. We all owe
him a debt of gratitude for his commitment to
service and to our country.
A native of Seattle, WA, Captain Milne grad-
uated from Coast Guard Recruit Basic Train-
ing in 1975. His first assignment was as a
Search and Rescue communications
watchstander at Coast Guard Station Umpqua
River in Winchester Bay, OR. During this as-
signment, he not only earned the distinguished
SURFMAN designation, but was quickly pro-
moted to Boatswain’s Mate First Class in the
Coast Guard and assumed the duties as Ex-
ecutive Petty Officer of the Station. Continuing
his rapid promotion through the ranks, CAPT
Milne was commissioned as an Ensign after
completing Officer Candidate School in 1986.
As an officer, Captain Milne served on six
Coast Guard cutters including serving as the
commanding officer of the cutters Cape
Corwin, Redwood and Juniper. He also served
in numerous shore-based leadership positions
including Coast Guard Liaison to the United
States House of Representatives, and com-
manding officer of one of the Coast Guard’s
largest training commands in Yorktown, Vir-
ginia. In addition to completing some of the
most challenging and demanding assignments
in the Coast Guard, Captain Milne also earned
a Bachelor of Arts in Business Administration,
an MBA and a Masters Degree in National Se-
curity and Strategic Studies.
Captain Milne is finishing his distinguished
career as the Director of Law Enforcement,
Maritime Security, and Defense Operations
Policy. In this assignment, as well as his pre-
vious position as the Program Director for
Maritime Counter-Terrorism, Captain Milne
oversaw the development of Coast Guard
strategic and operational policy vital to our Na-
tion’s maritime safety and security. In addition,
he was a key leader in the development and
management of the Coast Guard’s Deployable
Specialized Forces. His foresight, experience
and judgment ensured these highly special-
ized forces were not only ready to deploy in
response to national security threats, but were
also prepared to protect the environment and
provide humanitarian assistance to those in
need. Most recently, CAPT Milne led the
Coast Guard’s response to the tragic terrorist
bombings at the Boston Marathon, ensuring
the Port of Boston was well-protected during
the vulnerable days following the attack.
A highly decorated officer, Captain Milne’s
awards include the Legion of Merit, three Meri-
torious Service Medals, five Coast Guard
Commendation Medals, the Department of
Transportation 9/11 Medal for his service in
New York City in the aftermath of the Sep-
tember 11, 2001 attacks, and several other
personal and unit awards.
Mr. Speaker, on behalf of my constituents
and a grateful Nation, I ask all my distin-
guished colleagues to join me in recognizing
the extraordinary career of Captain William J.
Milne. There are few opportunities for us to
recognize the accomplishments of those who
selflessly dedicate their lives to the service of
our country, and I cannot thank Captain Milne,
his wife Martina, their two children, Dean and
Lacey, and their eight grandchildren, with
VerDate Mar 15 2010 03:59 Jun 18, 2013 Jkt 029060 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 0626 Sfmt 9920 E:\CR\FM\A17JN8.016 E17JNPT1
s
m
a
r
t
i
n
e
z

o
n

D
S
K
6
T
P
T
V
N
1
P
R
O
D

w
i
t
h

R
E
M
A
R
K
S
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—Extensions of Remarks E901 June 17, 2013
three more on the way, enough for everything
they have done and sacrificed to protect our
Nation.
THE TRUE COST OF COAL ACT OF
2013
HON. JIM McDERMOTT
OF WASHINGTON
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Monday, June 17, 2013
Mr. MCDERMOTT. Mr. Speaker, I rise today
to re-introduce the True Cost of Coal Act, a
bill that would address the negative impacts of
coal transportation on both the local commu-
nities and American taxpayers.
Currently, plans are underway to develop
coal export facilities in the Pacific Northwest
that would exponentially increase the volume
of coal being exported out of the region. The
three proposed terminals—Gateway Pacific
and Millennium Bulk Terminals in Washington
and Morrow Pacific Project in Oregon—would
export over 100 million tons of additional coal
per year. For a sense of scale, the U.S. coal
exports in their entirety totaled 125 million tons
in 2012. The new terminals would nearly dou-
ble that total.
With these new plans come considerable
burdens on the rail communities through which
the coal would be transported, including envi-
ronmental and public health considerations,
worsening traffic congestion, and noise pollu-
tion, among others. However, without legisla-
tion like this, the taxpayers will be largely re-
sponsible for these costs. After all, coal and
train companies are currently under no obliga-
tion to pay for mitigating the effects of trans-
porting coal. That’s why I am once again intro-
ducing legislation to hold them accountable for
the costs that their activities incur.
According to the U.S. Energy Information
Agency (EIA), the average price per ton of
coal exports in 2012 was $118 per ton; the
EIA also estimates that in 2012 the cost to
ship coal from the Powder River Basin to the
Pacific Northwest was only about $20 per ton.
The True Cost of Coal Act of 2013 will im-
pose a 10 dollar per ton excise tax on all ex-
tracted coal. This money will be used to miti-
gate the negative impacts of coal transpor-
tation and ensure the true cost of coal is paid
for by the responsible parties—not the local
communities and American taxpayers. The
money is allocated to the affected States, who
are in the best position to determine how best
to use their funds. The Act also requires that
trains transporting coal be covered or treated
to ensure that no coal dust is released during
transportation.
I have long been a champion of preserving
the clean air and water that Washingtonians
cherish. I am pleased to be continuing that
work and hope my colleagues will join me in
supporting this legislation.
VerDate Mar 15 2010 03:59 Jun 18, 2013 Jkt 029060 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 0626 Sfmt 0634 E:\CR\FM\K17JN8.007 E17JNPT1
s
m
a
r
t
i
n
e
z

o
n

D
S
K
6
T
P
T
V
N
1
P
R
O
D

w
i
t
h

R
E
M
A
R
K
S
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—Extensions of Remarks E902 June 17, 2013
SENATE COMMITTEE MEETINGS
Title IV of Senate Resolution 4,
agreed to by the Senate of February 4,
1977, calls for establishment of a sys-
tem for a computerized schedule of all
meetings and hearings of Senate com-
mittees, subcommittees, joint commit-
tees, and committees of conference.
This title requires all such committees
to notify the Office of the Senate Daily
Digest—designated by the Rules Com-
mittee—of the time, place and purpose
of the meetings, when scheduled and
any cancellations or changes in the
meetings as they occur.
As an additional procedure along
with the computerization of this infor-
mation, the Office of the Senate Daily
Digest will prepare this information for
printing in the Extensions of Remarks
section of the CONGRESSIONAL RECORD
on Monday and Wednesday of each
week.
Meetings scheduled for Tuesday,
June 18, 2013 may be found in the Daily
Digest of today’s record.
MEETINGS SCHEDULED
JUNE 19
9:30 a.m.
Committee on Appropriations
Subcommittee on Department of Defense
To hold hearings to examine proposed
budget estimates for fiscal year 2014 for
Joint Strike Fighter.
SD–192
10 a.m.
Committee on Commerce, Science, and
Transportation
To hold hearings to examine next steps
in improving passenger and freight rail
safety.
SR–253
Committee on Health, Education, Labor,
and Pensions
Subcommittee on Primary Health and
Aging
To hold hearings to examine reducing
senior poverty and hunger, focusing on
the role of the ‘‘Older Americans Act’’.
SD–430
Committee on the Judiciary
To hold an oversight hearing to examine
the Federal Bureau of Investigation.
SD–106
2 p.m.
Committee on Foreign Relations
To hold hearings to examine the nomina-
tions of Geoffrey R. Pyatt, of Cali-
fornia, to be Ambassador to Ukraine,
and Tulinabo Salama Mushingi, of Vir-
ginia, to be Ambassador to Burkina
Faso, both of the Department of State.
SD–419
Special Committee on Aging
To hold hearings to examine paperless
Social Security payments, focusing on
protecting seniors from fraud and con-
fusion.
SD–366
2:30 p.m.
Committee on Commerce, Science, and
Transportation
Subcommittee on Aviation Operations,
Safety, and Security
To hold hearings to examine airline in-
dustry consolidation.
SR–253
Committee on the Judiciary
To hold hearings to examine the nomina-
tions of Todd M. Hughes, of the Dis-
trict of Columbia, to be United States
Circuit Judge for the Federal Circuit,
Colin Stirling Bruce, to be United
States District Judge for the Central
District of Illinois, Sara Lee Ellis, and
Andrea R. Wood, both to be a United
States District Judge for the Northern
District of Illinois, and Madeline
Hughes Haikala, to be United States
District Judge for the Northern Dis-
trict of Alabama.
SD–226
JUNE 20
9:30 a.m.
Committee on Energy and Natural Re-
sources
To hold an oversight hearing to examine
water resource issues in the Klamath
River Basin.
SD–366
10 a.m.
Committee on the Judiciary
Business meeting to consider S. 162, to
reauthorize and improve the Mentally
Ill Offender Treatment and Crime Re-
duction Act of 2004.
SD–226
Committee on Small Business and Entre-
preneurship
To hold hearings to examine sequestra-
tion, focusing on small business con-
tractors.
SR–428A
10:30 a.m.
Committee on Appropriations
Business meeting to markup proposed
budget estimates for fiscal year 2014 for
Military Construction and Veterans Af-
fairs, and Related Agencies, and Agri-
cultural, Rural Development, Food and
Drug Administration, and Related
Agencies.
SD–106
2:15 p.m.
Committee on Foreign Relations
To hold hearings to examine the nomina-
tion of Daniel R. Russel, of New York,
to be Assistant Secretary of State for
East Asian and Pacific Affairs.
SD–419
2:30 p.m.
Committee on Health, Education, Labor,
and Pensions
To hold hearings to examine developing a
skilled workforce for a competitive
economy, focusing on reauthorizing the
‘‘Workforce Investment Act’’.
SD–430
Committee on Homeland Security and
Governmental Affairs
Subcommittee on the Efficiency and Effec-
tiveness of Federal Programs and the
Federal Workforce
To hold joint hearings to examine the
workforce of the United States Intel-
ligence Community and the role of pri-
vate contractors.
SD–342
Select Committee on Intelligence
To hold closed hearings to examine cer-
tain intelligence matters.
SH–219
JUNE 24
3 p.m.
Committee on Homeland Security and
Governmental Affairs
To hold hearings to examine curbing
drug abuse in Medicare.
SD–342
5:30 p.m.
Committee on Homeland Security and
Governmental Affairs
Business meeting to consider the nomi-
nations of Howard A. Shelanski, of
Pennsylvania, to be Administrator of
the Office of Information and Regu-
latory Affairs, Office of Management
and Budget, and Daniel M. Tangherlini,
of the District of Columbia, to be Ad-
ministrator of General Services.
S–216
JUNE 25
10 a.m.
Committee on Energy and Natural Re-
sources
To hold an oversight hearing to examine
the challenges and opportunities for
improving forest management on Fed-
eral lands.
SD–366
JUNE 27
10:30 a.m.
Committee on Homeland Security and
Governmental Affairs
Subcommittee on Financial and Con-
tracting Oversight
To hold hearings to examine contract
management by the Department of En-
ergy.
SD–342
POSTPONEMENTS
JUNE 19
10 a.m.
Committee on Homeland Security and
Governmental Affairs
To hold hearings to examine extreme
weather events, focusing on the costs
of not being prepared.
SD–342
VerDate Mar 15 2010 03:59 Jun 18, 2013 Jkt 029060 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 0626 Sfmt 0634 E:\CR\FM\M17JN8.000 E17JNPT1
s
m
a
r
t
i
n
e
z

o
n

D
S
K
6
T
P
T
V
N
1
P
R
O
D

w
i
t
h

R
E
M
A
R
K
S
D581
Monday, June 17, 2013
Daily Digest
Senate
Chamber Action
Routine Proceedings, pages S4497–S4534
Measures Introduced: One bill and one resolution
were introduced, as follows: S. 1171, and S. Res.
172. Page S4521
Measures Reported:
S. 394, to prohibit and deter the theft of metal,
with an amendment in the nature of a substitute.
Page S4521
Measures Passed:
HIV Organ Policy Equity Act: Senate passed S.
330, to amend the Public Health Service Act to es-
tablish safeguards and standards of quality for re-
search and transplantation of organs infected with
human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), after agreeing
to the committee amendment in the nature of a sub-
stitute, and the following amendment proposed
thereto: Pages S4533–34
King (for Grassley) Amendment No. 1315, of a
perfecting nature. Page S4534
Measures Considered:
Border Security, Economic Opportunity, and Im-
migration Modernization Act—Agreement: Sen-
ate resumed consideration of S. 744, to provide for
comprehensive immigration reform, taking action on
the following amendments proposed thereto:
Pages S4518–20
Pending:
Leahy/Hatch Amendment No. 1183, to encourage
and facilitate international participation in the per-
forming arts. Page S4519
Thune Amendment No. 1197, to require the
completion of the 350 miles of reinforced, double-
layered fencing described in section 102(b)(1)(A) of
the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Re-
sponsibility Act of 1996 before registered provisional
immigrant status may be granted and to required
the completion of 700 miles of such fencing before
the status of registered provisional immigrants may
be adjusted to permanent resident status. Page S4519
Landrieu Amendment No. 1222, to apply the
amendments made by the Child Citizenship Act of
2000 retroactively to all individuals adopted by a
citizen of the United States in an international adop-
tion and to repeal the pre-adoption parental visita-
tion requirement for automatic citizenship and to
amend section 320 of the Immigration and Nation-
ality Act relating to automatic citizenship for chil-
dren born outside of the United States who have a
United States citizen parent. Page S4519
Tester Amendment No. 1198, to modify the Bor-
der Oversight Task Force to include tribal govern-
ment officials. Page S4519
Vitter Amendment No. 1228, to prohibit the
temporary grant of legal status to, or adjustment to
citizenship status of, any individual who is unlaw-
fully present in the United States until the Secretary
of Homeland Security certifies that the US–VISIT
System (a biometric border check-in and check-out
system first required by Congress in 1996) has been
fully implemented at every land, sea, and air port of
entry and Congress passes a joint resolution, under
fast track procedures, stating that such integrated
entry and exit data system has been sufficiently im-
plemented. Page S4519
A unanimous-consent-time agreement was reached
providing that when the Senate continues consider-
ation of the bill on Tuesday, June 18, 2013, the
time until 12:30 p.m. and the time from 2:15 p.m.
to 3 p.m. be equally divided, between the two Lead-
ers, or their designees, for debate on the pending
amendments; that at 3 p.m., Senate vote on or in re-
lation to the amendments listed in the following
order: Thune Amendment No. 1197 (listed above);
Landrieu Amendment No. 1222 (listed above); Vit-
ter Amendment No. 1228 (listed above); Tester
Amendment No. 1198 (listed above); that there be
no second-degree amendments in order prior to the
votes; that all the amendments be subject to a 60
affirmative vote threshold; that there be two minutes
equally divided in between the votes; and all after
the first vote be ten minute votes. Page S4518
A unanimous-consent agreement was reached pro-
viding for further consideration of the bill at ap-
proximately 11 a.m. on Tuesday, June 18, 2013.
Page S4534
VerDate Mar 15 2010 04:37 Jun 18, 2013 Jkt 029060 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 0627 Sfmt 0627 E:\CR\FM\D17JN3.REC D17JNPT1
s
m
a
r
t
i
n
e
z

o
n

D
S
K
6
T
P
T
V
N
1
P
R
O
D

w
i
t
h

D
I
G
E
S
T
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—DAILY DIGEST D582 June 17, 2013
Appointment:
Health Information Technology Policy Com-
mittee: The Chair, on behalf of the Majority Leader,
pursuant to Public Law 111–5, appointed the fol-
lowing individual to the Health Information Tech-
nology Policy Committee: Dr. Aury Nagy of Ne-
vada, vice Dr. Frank Nemec of Nevada. Page S4534
Message from the President: Senate received the
following message from the President of the United
States:
Transmitting, pursuant to law, a report on the
continuation of the national emergency that was
originally declared in Executive Order 13219 of June
26, 2001, with respect to the Western Balkans;
which was referred to the Committee on Banking,
Housing, and Urban Affairs. (PM–13) Page S4521
Nominations Confirmed: Senate confirmed the fol-
lowing nominations:
Luis Felipe Restrepo, of Pennsylvania, to be
United States District Judge for the Eastern District
of Pennsylvania. Pages S4511–15
By a unanimous vote of 89 yeas (Vote No. EX.
150), Kenneth John Gonzales, of New Mexico, to be
United States District Judge for the District of New
Mexico. Pages S4511–16
Nominations Received: Senate received the fol-
lowing nominations:
Liliana Ayalde, of Maryland, to be Ambassador to
the Federative Republic of Brazil.
James Costos, of California, to be Ambassador to
Spain.
John B. Emerson, of California, to be Ambassador
to the Federal Republic of Germany.
John Rufus Gifford, of Massachusetts, to be Am-
bassador to Denmark.
Kenneth Francis Hackett, of Maryland, to be Am-
bassador to the Holy See.
Patricia Marie Haslach, of Oregon, to be Ambas-
sador to the Federal Democratic Republic of Ethi-
opia.
Additional Cosponsors: Pages S4521–23
Statements on Introduced Bills/Resolutions:
Pages S4523–24
Additional Statements: Page S4520
Amendments Submitted: Pages S4524–33
Notices of Hearings/Meetings: Page S4533
Authorities for Committees to Meet: Page S4533
Record Votes: One record vote was taken today.
(Total—150) Page S4516
Adjournment: Senate convened at 2 p.m. and ad-
journed at 7:15 p.m., until 10 a.m. on Tuesday,
June 18, 2013. (For Senate’s program, see the re-
marks of the Acting Majority Leader in today’s
Record on page S4534.)
Committee Meetings
(Committees not listed did not meet)
BUSINESS MEETING
Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship: Com-
mittee ordered favorably reported the following busi-
ness items:
S. 511, to amend the Small Business Investment
Act of 1958 to enhance the Small Business Invest-
ment Company Program, with amendments;
S. 289, to extend the low-interest refinancing pro-
visions under the Local Development Business Loan
Program of the Small Business Administration, with
amendments;
S. 537, to require the Small Business Administra-
tion to make information relating to lenders making
covered loans publicly available, with amendments;
and
S. 415, to clarify the collateral requirement for
certain loans under section 7(d) of the Small Busi-
ness Act, to address assistance to out-of-State small
business concerns, with amendments.
h
House of Representatives
Chamber Action
Public Bills and Resolutions Introduced: 12 pub-
lic bills, H.R. 2393–2396, 2398–2405; 1 private
bills, H.R. 2406; and 5 resolutions, H. Res.
265–268, were introduced. Pages H3686–87
Additional Cosponsors: Pages H3688–89
Reports Filed: Reports were filed today as follows:
H.R. 85, to create the Office of Chief Financial
Officer of the Government of the Virgin Islands, and
for other purposes (H. Rept. 113–110);
H.R. 1169, to direct the Secretary of the Interior
to transfer to the Secretary of the Navy certain Fed-
eral land in Churchill County, Nevada, with an
amendment (H. Rept. 113–111);
VerDate Mar 15 2010 04:37 Jun 18, 2013 Jkt 029060 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 0627 Sfmt 0627 E:\CR\FM\D17JN3.REC D17JNPT1
s
m
a
r
t
i
n
e
z

o
n

D
S
K
6
T
P
T
V
N
1
P
R
O
D

w
i
t
h

D
I
G
E
S
T
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—DAILY DIGEST D583 June 17, 2013
H.R. 1300, to amend the Fish and Wildlife Act
of 1956 to reauthorize the volunteer programs and
community partnerships for the benefit of national
wildlife refuges, and for other purposes, with an
amendment (H. Rept. 113–112);
H.R. 2397, making appropriations for the Depart-
ment of Defense for the fiscal year ending September
30, 2014, and for other purposes (H. Rept.
113–113); and
H. Res. 266, providing for consideration of the
bill (H.R. 1947) to provide for the reform and con-
tinuation of agricultural and other programs of the
Department of Agriculture through fiscal year 2018,
and for other purposes; and providing for consider-
ation of the bill (H.R. 1797) to amend title 18,
United States Code, to protect pain-capable unborn
children in the District of Columbia, and for other
purposes (H. Rept. 113–114); and
H.R. 1080, to amend the Sikes Act to promote
the use of cooperative agreements under such Act for
land management related to Department of Defense
readiness activities and to amend title 10, United
States Code, to facilitate interagency cooperation in
conservation programs to avoid or reduce adverse im-
pacts on military readiness activities, with an amend-
ment (H. Rept. 113–115, Pt. 1). Page H3686
Speaker: Read a letter from the Speaker wherein he
appointed Representative Bentivolio to act as Speak-
er pro tempore for today. Page H3657
Recess: The House recessed at 12:07 p.m. and re-
convened at 2 p.m. Page H3658
Recess: The House recessed at 2:09 p.m. and recon-
vened at 5 p.m. Page H3659
Suspensions: The House agreed to suspend the rules
and pass the following measures:
Idaho Wilderness Water Resources Protection
Act: H.R. 876, to authorize the continued use of
certain water diversions located on National Forest
System land in the Frank Church-River of No Re-
turn Wilderness and the Selway-Bitterroot Wilder-
ness in the State of Idaho, by a
2
?3 yea-and-nay vote
of 398 yeas with none voting ‘‘nay’’, Roll No. 245;
Pages H3659–60, H3667
Providing for the concurrence by the House in
the Senate amendment to H.R. 588, with an
amendment: H. Res. 264, to provide for the concur-
rence by the House in the Senate amendment to
H.R. 588, with an amendment; Pages H3660–61
Y Mountain Access Enhancement Act: H.R. 253,
amended, to provide for the conveyance of a small
parcel of National Forest System land in the Uinta-
Wasatch-Cache National Forest in Utah to Brigham
Young University, by a
2
?3 yea-and-nay vote of 397
yeas to 1 nay, Roll No. 246; Pages H3661–63, H3667–68
Agreed to amend the title so as to read: ‘‘To pro-
vide for the conveyance of approximately 80 acres of
National Forest System land in the Uinta-Wasatch-
Cache National Forest in Utah to Brigham Young
University, and for other purposes.’’. Page H3668
Rota Cultural and Natural Resources Study
Act: H.R. 674, to authorize the Secretary of the In-
terior to study the suitability and feasibility of des-
ignating prehistoric, historic, and limestone forest
sites on Rota, Commonwealth of the Northern Mar-
iana Islands, as a unit of the National Park System;
Pages H3663–64
Authorizing the conveyance of two small parcels
of land within the boundaries of the Coconino Na-
tional Forest: H.R. 862, to authorize the conveyance
of two small parcels of land within the boundaries
of the Coconino National Forest containing private
improvements that were developed based upon the
reliance of the landowners in an erroneous survey
conducted in May 1960, by a
2
?3 yea-and-nay vote
of 395 yeas with 1 voting ‘‘nay’’, Roll No. 247; and
Pages H3664–65, H3668–69
Buffalo Soldiers in the National Parks Study
Act: H.R. 520, to authorize the Secretary of the In-
terior to conduct a study of alternatives for com-
memorating and interpreting the role of the Buffalo
Soldiers in the early years of the National Parks.
Pages H3665–66
Recess: The House recessed at 5:48 p.m. and recon-
vened at 6:30 p.m. Page H3667
Presidential Message: Read a message from the
President wherein he notified Congress that the na-
tional emergency declared with respect to the West-
ern Balkans is to continue in effect beyond June 26,
2013—referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs
and ordered to be printed (H. Doc. 113–37).
Pages H3666–67
Quorum Calls—Votes: Three yea-and-nay votes de-
veloped during the proceedings of today and appear
on pages H3667, H3667–68, and H3668–69. There
were no quorum calls.
Adjournment: The House met at 12 noon and ad-
journed at 9:46 p.m.
Committee Meetings
FEDERAL AGRICULTURE REFORM AND
RISK MANAGEMENT ACT OF 2013; AND
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA PAIN-CAPABLE
UNBORN CHILD PROTECTION ACT
Committee on Rules: Full Committee held a hearing on
H.R. 1947, the ‘‘Federal Agriculture Reform and
Risk Management Act of 2013’’; and H.R. 1797,
the ‘‘District of Columbia Pain-Capable Unborn
VerDate Mar 15 2010 04:37 Jun 18, 2013 Jkt 029060 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 0627 Sfmt 0627 E:\CR\FM\D17JN3.REC D17JNPT1
s
m
a
r
t
i
n
e
z

o
n

D
S
K
6
T
P
T
V
N
1
P
R
O
D

w
i
t
h

D
I
G
E
S
T
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—DAILY DIGEST D584 June 17, 2013
Child Protection Act’’. The Committee granted, by
voice vote, a general debate rule for H.R. 1947. The
rule provides one hour of general debate equally di-
vided and controlled by the chair and ranking mi-
nority member of the Committee on Agriculture.
The rule waives all points of order against consider-
ation of the bill. The rule provides that no further
consideration of the bill shall be in order except pur-
suant to a subsequent order of the House. Addition-
ally, the rule provides a closed rule for H.R. 1797.
The rule provides one hour of debate equally divided
and controlled by the chair and ranking minority
member of the Committee on the Judiciary. The rule
waives all points of order against consideration of the
bill. The rule provides that an amendment in the na-
ture of a substitute consisting of the text of Rules
Committee print 113–15 shall be considered as
adopted and the bill, as amended, shall be consid-
ered as read. The rule waives all points of order
against provisions in the bill, as amended. The rule
provides one motion to recommit with or without
instructions. Testimony was heard from Chairman
Lucas and Representatives Peterson, Goodlatte, and
Nadler.
Joint Meetings
No joint committee meetings were held.
f
NEW PUBLIC LAWS
(For last listing of Public Laws, see DAILY DIGEST, p. D508)
S. 622, to amend the Federal Food, Drug, and
Cosmetic Act to reauthorize user fee programs relat-
ing to new animal drugs and generic new animal
drugs. Signed on June 13, 2013. (Public Law
113–14)
f
COMMITTEE MEETINGS FOR TUESDAY,
JUNE 18, 2013
(Committee meetings are open unless otherwise indicated)
Senate
Committee on Appropriations: Subcommittee on Agri-
culture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administra-
tion, and Related Agencies, business meeting to mark up
proposed legislation making appropriations for fiscal year
2014 for Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and
Drug Administration, and Related Agencies, 10 a.m.,
SD–192.
Subcommittee on Military Construction and Veterans
Affairs, and Related Agencies, business meeting to mark
up proposed legislation making appropriations for fiscal
year 2014 for Military Construction and Veterans Affairs,
and Related Agencies, 10 a.m., SD–124.
Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs: Sub-
committee on Housing, Transportation, and Community
Development, to hold hearings to examine long term sus-
tainability for reverse mortgages, focusing on the Home
Equity Conversion Mortgage’s (HECM) impact on the
mutual mortgage insurance fund, 10 a.m., SD–538.
Committee on the Budget: To hold hearings to examine
the President’s proposed budget request for fiscal year
2014 for education, 10:30 a.m., SD–608.
Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation: to
hold hearings to examine the nomination of Thomas
Edgar Wheeler, of the District of Columbia, to be a
Member of the Federal Communications Commission,
2:30 p.m., SR–253.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources: business
meeting to consider pending calendar business, 10 a.m.,
SD–366.
Committee on Finance: to hold hearings to examine
health care costs, 10 a.m., SD–215.
Committee on Foreign Relations: Subcommittee on African
Affairs, to hold hearings to examine prospects for demo-
cratic reform and economic recovery in Zimbabwe, 10
a.m., SD–419.
Subcommittee on Western Hemisphere and Global
Narcotics Affairs, to hold hearings to examine security
cooperation in Mexico, focusing on the next steps in the
United States-Mexico security relationship, 2:30 p.m.,
SD–419.
Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs:
to hold hearings to examine the nomination of Daniel M.
Tangherlini, of the District of Columbia, to be Adminis-
trator of General Services, 10:30 a.m., SD–342.
Select Committee on Intelligence: to hold closed hearings to
examine certain intelligence matters, 2:30 p.m., SH–219.
House
Committee on Appropriations: Subcommittee on Energy
and Water Development, markup on Energy and Water
Development Appropriations Bill, Fiscal Year 2014,
10:30 a.m., 2362–B Rayburn.
Committee on Education and the Workforce: Subcommittee
on Workforce Protections, hearing entitled ‘‘Promoting
the Accuracy and Accountability of the Davis-Bacon
Act’’, 10 a.m., 2175 Rayburn.
Committee on Energy and Commerce: Subcommittee on
Oversight and Investigations, hearing entitled ‘‘Con-
tinuing Concerns Over BioWatch and the Surveillance of
Bioterrorism’’, 10 a.m., 2322 Rayburn.
Subcommittee on Energy and Power, hearing entitled
‘‘U.S. Energy Abundance: Regulatory, Market, and Legal
Barriers to Export’’, 10:15 a.m., 2123 Rayburn.
Full Committee, markup on H.R. 2218, the ‘‘Coal Re-
siduals Reuse and Management Act of 2013’’; H.R. 2226,
the ‘‘Federal and State Partnership for Environmental Pro-
tection Act of 2013’’; H.R. 2279 the ‘‘Reducing Exces-
sive Deadline Obligations Act of 2013’’; and H.R. 2318,
the ‘‘Federal Facility Accountability Act’’, 4 p.m., 2123
Rayburn.
Committee on Financial Services: Subcommittee on Finan-
cial Institutions and Consumer Credit, hearing entitled
VerDate Mar 15 2010 04:37 Jun 18, 2013 Jkt 029060 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 0627 Sfmt 0627 E:\CR\FM\D17JN3.REC D17JNPT1
s
m
a
r
t
i
n
e
z

o
n

D
S
K
6
T
P
T
V
N
1
P
R
O
D

w
i
t
h

D
I
G
E
S
T
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—DAILY DIGEST D585 June 17, 2013
‘‘Examining How the Dodd-Frank Act Hampers Home
Ownership’’, 10 a.m., 2128 Rayburn.
Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations, hearing
entitled ‘‘CFPB Budget Review’’, 2 p.m., 2128 Rayburn.
Committee on Foreign Affairs: Subcommittee on the Mid-
dle East and North Africa, hearing entitled ‘‘Elections in
Iran: The Regime Cementing its Control’’, 10:30 a.m.,
2172 Rayburn.
Committee on Homeland Security: Subcommittee on Bor-
der and Maritime Security, hearing entitled ‘‘Threat, Risk
and Vulnerability: The Future of the TWIC Program’’,
10 a.m., 311 Cannon.
Committee on the Judiciary: Full Committee, markup on
H.R. 2278, the ‘‘Strengthen and Fortify Enforcement
Act’’, 10:15 a.m., 2141 Rayburn.
Committee on Natural Resources: Subcommittee on Public
Lands and Environmental Regulation, hearing entitled
‘‘Citizen and Agency Perspectives on the Federal Land
Recreation Enhancement Act’’, 10 a.m., 1324 Longworth.
Subcommittee on Indian and Alaska Native Affairs,
hearing entitled ‘‘Update from tribal leaders and tribal
telecommunications providers on the implementation of
the Federal Communications Commission’s rule on the
Universal Service Fund’’, 11 a.m., 1334 Longworth.
Committee on Oversight and Government Reform: Full Com-
mittee, hearing entitled ‘‘Reinventing Government’’, 9
a.m., 2154 Rayburn.
Committee on Rules: Full Committee, hearing on H.R.
1947, the ‘‘Federal Agriculture Reform and Risk Manage-
ment Act of 2013’’ (amendment consideration), 2 p.m.,
H–313 Capitol.
Committee on Science, Space, and Technology: Full Com-
mittee, business meeting, to consider amendment to
Committee Rules, approval of amended Majority Sub-
committee Roster and approval of amended Minority
Subcommittee Roster, 10 a.m., 2318 Rayburn.
Full Committee, hearing entitled ‘‘Department of En-
ergy Science & Technology Priorities’’, 10:15 a.m., 2318
Rayburn.
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure: Sub-
committee on Highways and Transit, hearing entitled
‘‘The Impacts of DOT’s Commercial Driver Hours of
Service Regulations’’, 10 a.m., 2167 Rayburn.
Committee on Veterans’ Affairs: Subcommittee on Dis-
ability Assistance and Memorial Affairs, hearing entitled
‘‘Why Are Veterans Waiting Years on Appeal?: A Re-
view of the Post-Decision Process for Appealed Veterans’
Disability Benefits Claims’’, 2:30 p.m., 334 Cannon.
Committee on Ways and Means: Subcommittee on
Human Resources, hearing entitled ‘‘Reviewing How To-
day’s Fragmented Welfare System Fails to Lift Up Poor
Families’’, 2 p.m., 1100 Longworth.
House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence: Full
Committee, hearing entitled ‘‘How Disclosed NSA Pro-
grams Protect Americans, and Why Disclosure Aids Our
Adversaries’’, 10 a.m., HVC–210.
CONGRESSIONAL PROGRAM AHEAD
Week of June 18 through June 21, 2013
Senate Chamber
On Tuesday, at approximately 11 a.m., Senate will
continue consideration of S. 744, Border Security,
Economic Opportunity, and Immigration Moderniza-
tion Act, with votes on or in relation to Thune
Amendment No. 1197; Landrieu Amendment No.
1222; Vitter Amendment No. 1228; and Tester
Amendment No. 1198 at 3 p.m.
During the balance of the week, Senate may con-
sider any cleared legislative and executive business.
Senate Committees
(Committee meetings are open unless otherwise indicated)
Committee on Appropriations: June 18, Subcommittee on
Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Admin-
istration, and Related Agencies, business meeting to mark
up proposed legislation making appropriations for fiscal
year 2014 for Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and
Drug Administration, and Related Agencies, 10 a.m.,
SD–192.
June 18, Subcommittee on Military Construction and
Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies, business meeting
to mark up proposed legislation making appropriations
for fiscal year 2014 for Military Construction and Vet-
erans Affairs, and Related Agencies, 10 a.m., SD–124.
June 19, Subcommittee on Department of Defense, to
hold hearings to examine proposed budget estimates for
fiscal year 2014 for Joint Strike Fighter, 9:30 a.m.,
SD–192.
June 20, Full Committee, business meeting to mark up
proposed budget estimates for fiscal year 2014 for Mili-
tary Construction and Veterans Affairs, and Related
Agencies, and Agricultural, Rural Development, Food
and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies, 10:30
a.m., SD–106.
Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs: June
18, Subcommittee on Housing, Transportation, and Com-
munity Development, to hold hearings to examine long
term sustainability for reverse mortgages, focusing on the
Home Equity Conversion Mortgage’s (HECM) impact on
the mutual mortgage insurance fund, 10 a.m., SD–538.
Committee on the Budget: June 18, To hold hearings to
examine the President’s proposed budget request for fiscal
year 2014 for education, 10:30 a.m., SD–608.
Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation: June
18, to hold hearings to examine the nomination of
Thomas Edgar Wheeler, of the District of Columbia, to
be a Member of the Federal Communications Commis-
sion, 2:30 p.m., SR–253.
June 19, Full Committee, to hold hearings to examine
next steps in improving passenger and freight rail safety,
10 a.m., SR–253.
June 19, Subcommittee on Aviation Operations, Safety,
and Security, to hold hearings to examine airline industry
consolidation, 2:30 p.m., SR–253.
VerDate Mar 15 2010 04:37 Jun 18, 2013 Jkt 029060 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 0627 Sfmt 0627 E:\CR\FM\D17JN3.REC D17JNPT1
s
m
a
r
t
i
n
e
z

o
n

D
S
K
6
T
P
T
V
N
1
P
R
O
D

w
i
t
h

D
I
G
E
S
T
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—DAILY DIGEST D586 June 17, 2013
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources: June 18,
business meeting to consider pending calendar business,
10 a.m., SD–366.
June 20, Full Committee, to hold an oversight hearing
to examine water resource issues in the Klamath River
Basin, 9:30 a.m., SD–366.
Committee on Finance: June 18, to hold hearings to ex-
amine health care costs, 10 a.m., SD–215.
Committee on Foreign Relations: June 18, Subcommittee
on African Affairs, to hold hearings to examine prospects
for democratic reform and economic recovery in
Zimbabwe, 10 a.m., SD–419.
June 18, Subcommittee on Western Hemisphere and
Global Narcotics Affairs, to hold hearings to examine se-
curity cooperation in Mexico, focusing on the next steps
in the United States-Mexico security relationship, 2:30
p.m., SD–419.
June 19, Full Committee, to hold hearings to examine
the nominations of Geoffrey R. Pyatt, of California, to be
Ambassador to Ukraine, and Tulinabo Salama Mushingi,
of Virginia, to be Ambassador to Burkina Faso, both of
the Department of State, 2 p.m., SD–419.
June 20, Full Committee, to hold hearings to examine
the nomination of Daniel R. Russel, of New York, to be
Assistant Secretary of State for East Asian and Pacific Af-
fairs, 2:15 p.m., SD–419.
Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions: June
19, Subcommittee on Primary Health and Aging, to hold
hearings to examine reducing senior poverty and hunger,
focusing on the role of the ‘‘Older Americans Act’’, 10
a.m., SD–430.
June 20, Full Committee, to hold hearings to examine
developing a skilled workforce for a competitive economy,
focusing on reauthorizing the ‘‘Workforce Investment
Act’’, 2:30 p.m., SD–430.
Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs:
June 18, to hold hearings to examine the nomination of
Daniel M. Tangherlini, of the District of Columbia, to be
Administrator of General Services, 10:30 a.m., SD–342.
June 20, Subcommittee on Financial and Contracting
Oversight, with the Subcommittee on the Efficiency and
Effectiveness of Federal Programs and the Federal Work-
force, to hold joint hearings to examine the workforce of
the United States Intelligence Community and the role of
private contractors, 2:30 p.m., SD–342.
Committee on the Judiciary: June 19, to hold an oversight
hearing to examine the Federal Bureau of Investigation,
10 a.m., SD–106.
June 19, Full Committee, to hold hearings to examine
the nominations of Todd M. Hughes, of the District of
Columbia, to be United States Circuit Judge for the Fed-
eral Circuit, Colin Stirling Bruce, to be United States
District Judge for the Central District of Illinois, Sara Lee
Ellis, and Andrea R. Wood, both to be a United States
District Judge for the Northern District of Illinois, and
Madeline Hughes Haikala, to be United States District
Judge for the Northern District of Alabama, 2:30 p.m.,
SD–226.
June 20, Full Committee, business meeting to consider
S. 162, to reauthorize and improve the Mentally Ill Of-
fender Treatment and Crime Reduction Act of 2004, 10
a.m., SD–226.
Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship: June
20, to hold hearings to examine sequestration, focusing
on small business contractors, 10 a.m., SR–428A.
Select Committee on Intelligence: June 18, to hold closed
hearings to examine certain intelligence matters, 2:30
p.m., SH–219.
June 20, Full Committee, to hold closed hearings to
examine certain intelligence matters, 2:30 p.m., SH–219.
Special Committee on Aging: June 19, to hold hearings to
examine paperless Social Security payments, focusing on
protecting seniors from fraud and confusion, 2 p.m.,
SD–366.
House Committees
Committee on Appropriations, June 19, Subcommittee on
Transportation, Housing and Urban Development and
Related Agencies, markup on Transportation, Housing
and Urban Development and Related Agencies Appro-
priations Bill Fiscal Year 2014, 11 a.m., 2358–A Ray-
burn.
Committee on the Budget, June 19, Full Committee,
markup of H.R. 1871, the ‘‘Baseline Reform Act of
2013’’; and H.R. 1874, the ‘‘Pro-Growth Budgeting Act
of 2013’’, 10 a.m., 210 Cannon.
Committee on Education and the Workforce, June 19, Full
Committee, markup on H.R. 5, the ‘‘Student Success
Act’’, 9 a.m., 2175 Rayburn.
Committee on Energy and Commerce, June 19, Full Com-
mittee, markup on H.R. 2218, the ‘‘Coal Residuals Reuse
and Management Act of 2013’’; H.R. 2226, the ‘‘Federal
and State Partnership for Environmental Protection Act of
2013’’; H.R. 2279, the ‘‘Reducing Excessive Deadline
Obligations Act of 2013’’; and H.R. 2318, the ‘‘Federal
Facility Accountability Act’’, 10 a.m., 2123 Rayburn.
June 20, Subcommittee on Energy and Power; and
Subcommittee on Commerce, Manufacturing, and Trade,
hearing entitled ‘‘U.S. Energy Abundance: Manufacturing
Competitiveness and America’s Energy Advantage’’, 10
a.m., 2123 Rayburn.
Committee on Financial Services, June 19, Full Com-
mittee, markup on H.R. 1564, the ‘‘Audit Integrity and
Job Protection Act’’; H.R. 1105, the ‘‘Small Business
Capital Access and Job Preservation Act’’; H.R. 1135, the
‘‘Burdensome Data Collection Relief Act’’; and H.R.
2374, the ‘‘Retail Investor Protection Act’’, 10 a.m.,
2128 Rayburn.
Committee on Foreign Affairs, June 19, Subcommittee on
the Western Hemisphere, hearing entitled ‘‘Regional Se-
curity Cooperation: An Examination of the Central Amer-
ican Regional Security Initiative and the Caribbean Basin
Security Initiative’’, 2 p.m., 2172 Rayburn.
June 20, Subcommittee on Africa, Global Health,
Global Human Rights, and International Organizations,
hearing entitled ‘‘Ethiopia After Meles: The Future of
Democracy and Human Rights’’, 10 a.m., 2172 Rayburn.
Committee on the Judiciary, June 19, Full Committee,
markup on H.R. 1773, the ‘‘Agricultural Guestworker
Act’’, 10 a.m., 2141 Rayburn.
VerDate Mar 15 2010 04:37 Jun 18, 2013 Jkt 029060 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 0627 Sfmt 0627 E:\CR\FM\D17JN3.REC D17JNPT1
s
m
a
r
t
i
n
e
z

o
n

D
S
K
6
T
P
T
V
N
1
P
R
O
D

w
i
t
h

D
I
G
E
S
T
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—DAILY DIGEST D587 June 17, 2013
Committee on Natural Resources, June 20, Subcommittee
on Fisheries, Wildlife, Oceans and Insular Affairs, hearing
entitled ‘‘Why Does the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Want to Expand the Boundaries of the Chickasaw and
Lower Hatchie National Wildlife Refuges in Tennessee
and at What Cost?’’, 9:30 a.m., 1324 Longworth.
Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, June 19,
Subcommittee on Government Operations hearing enti-
tled ‘‘Federal Government Approaches to Issuing Bio-
metrics IDs: Part II’’, 9:30 a.m., 2154 Rayburn.
Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, June 19, Sub-
committee on Space, hearing entitled ‘‘NASA Authoriza-
tion Act of 2013’’, 10 a.m., 2318 Rayburn.
Committee on Small Business, June 19, Full Committee,
hearing entitled ‘‘Made in the USA: Stories of American
Manufacturers’’, 1 p.m., 2360 Rayburn.
June 20, Subcommittee on Agriculture, Energy and
Trade, hearing entitled ‘‘The New Domestic Energy Para-
digm: Potential Benefits for Small Businesses and the
Economy’’, 10 a.m., 2360 Rayburn.
Committee on Veterans’ Affairs, June 19, Subcommittee
on Oversight and Investigations, hearing on H.R. 1490,
the ‘‘Veterans’ Privacy Act’’; H.R. 1792, the ‘‘Infectious
Disease Reporting Act’’; and H.R. 1804, the ‘‘Foreign
Travel Accountability Act’’, 1:30 p.m., 334 Cannon.
June 20, Subcommittee on Economic Opportunity,
hearing entitled ‘‘The Value of Education for Veterans at
Public, Private and For-Profit Colleges and Universities’’,
10 a.m., 334 Cannon.
Committee on Ways and Means, June 19, Subcommittee
on Social Security, hearing on encouraging work through
the Social Security Disability Insurance Program, 10 a.m.,
B–318 Rayburn.
June 20, Subcommittee on Health, hearing on the
2013 Medicare Trustee Report, 9:30 a.m., 1100 Long-
worth.
House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, June 20,
Full Committee, hearing entitled ‘‘Ongoing Intelligence
Activities’’, 9 a.m., HVC–304. This is a closed hearing.
VerDate Mar 15 2010 04:37 Jun 18, 2013 Jkt 029060 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 0627 Sfmt 0627 E:\CR\FM\D17JN3.REC D17JNPT1
s
m
a
r
t
i
n
e
z

o
n

D
S
K
6
T
P
T
V
N
1
P
R
O
D

w
i
t
h

D
I
G
E
S
T
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—DAILY DIGEST
Congressional Record
The Congressional Record (USPS 087–390). The Periodicals postage
is paid at Washington, D.C. The public proceedings of each House
of Congress, as reported by the Official Reporters thereof, are
printed pursuant to directions of the Joint Committee on Printing as authorized by appropriate provisions of Title 44, United
States Code, and published for each day that one or both Houses are in session, excepting very infrequent instances when
two or more unusually small consecutive issues are printed one time. ¶ Public access to the Congressional Record is available online through
the U.S. Government Printing Office, at www.fdsys.gov, free of charge to the user. The information is updated online each day the
Congressional Record is published. For more information, contact the GPO Customer Contact Center, U.S. Government Printing Office.
Phone 202–512–1800, or 866–512–1800 (toll-free). E-Mail, [email protected]. ¶ To place an order for any of these products, visit the U.S.
Government Online Bookstore at: bookstore.gpo.gov. Mail orders to: Superintendent of Documents, P.O. Box 979050, St. Louis, MO
63197–9000, or phone orders to 866–512–1800 (toll-free), 202–512–1800 (D.C. area), or fax to 202–512–2104. Remit check or money order, made
payable to the Superintendent of Documents, or use VISA, MasterCard, Discover, American Express, or GPO Deposit Account. ¶ Following
each session of Congress, the daily Congressional Record is revised, printed, permanently bound and sold by the Superintendent of Documents
in individual parts or by sets. ¶ With the exception of copyrighted articles, there are no restrictions on the republication of material from
the Congressional Record.
POSTMASTER: Send address changes to the Superintendent of Documents, Congressional Record, U.S. Government Printing Office,
Washington, D.C. 20402, along with the entire mailing label from the last issue received.
UNUM
E PLURIBUS
D588 June 17, 2013
Next Meeting of the SENATE
10 a.m., Tuesday, June 18
Senate Chamber
Program for Tuesday: After the transaction of any
morning business (not to extend beyond one hour), Senate
will continue consideration of S. 744, Border Security,
Economic Opportunity, and Immigration Modernization
Act, with votes on or in relation to Thune Amendment
No. 1197; Landrieu Amendment No. 1222; Vitter
Amendment No. 1228; and Tester Amendment No.
1198 at 3 p.m.
(Senate will recess from 12:30 p.m. until 2:15 p.m. for their
respective party conferences.)
Next Meeting of the HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
10 a.m., Tuesday, June 18
House Chamber
Program for Tuesday: Consideration of H.R. 1797—
Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act (Subject to a
Rule). Begin consideration of H.R. 1947—Federal Agri-
culture Reform and Risk Management Act of 2013 (Sub-
ject to a Rule).
Extensions of Remarks, as inserted in this issue
HOUSE
Barr, Andy, Ky., E886
Bishop, Sanford D., Jr., Ga., E890
Black, Diane, Tenn., E895
Bustos, Cheri, Ill., E894
Capito, Shelley Moore, W.Va., E896
Capps, Lois, Calif., E895
Coffman, Mike, Colo., E891, E898
Connolly, Gerald E., Va., E884, E889
Conyers, John, Jr., Mich., E883, E892, E897, E899
Costa, Jim, Calif., E885, E892
Denham, Jeff, Calif., E897
Engel, Eliot L., N.Y., E897
Garamendi, John, Calif., E895
Gingrey, Phil, Ga., E888, E893
Grayson, Alan, Fla., E900
Holt, Rush, N.J., E883
Jackson Lee, Sheila, Tex., E887
Johnson, Sam, Tex., E886
Keating, William R., Mass., E895
Lance, Leonard, N.J., E898, E899
Latham, Tom, Iowa, E896
Lujan Grisham, Michelle, N.M., E891
McCollum, Betty, Minn., E891
McDermott, Jim, Wash., E901
Maloney, Carolyn B., N.Y., E886
Marchant, Kenny, Tex., E886
Messer, Luke, Ind., E896, E898, E899
Michaud, Michael H., Me., E883
Miller, Jeff, Fla., E898
Moore, Gwen, Wisc., E885, E898
Murphy, Patrick, Fla., E896
Beto O’Rourke, Tex., E891
Pascrell, Bill, Jr., N.J., E885, E893
Posey, Bill, Fla., E889
Reed, Tom, N.Y., E892
Rogers, Mike, Ala., E899
Rohrabacher, Dana, Calif., E885
Roybal-Allard, Lucille, Calif., E889
Ryan, Tim, Ohio, E885, E888
Sarbanes, John P., Md., E894
Schakowsky, Janice D., Ill., E884, E890
Schneider, Bradley S., Ill., E883
Schwartz, Allyson Y., Pa., E895
Sessions, Pete, Tex., E894
Shimkus, John, Ill., E893
Thompson, Mike, Calif., E897, E899
Van Hollen, Chris, Md., E892
Visclosky, Peter J., Ind., E894
Wittman, Robert J., Va., E900
VerDate Mar 15 2010 04:37 Jun 18, 2013 Jkt 029060 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 0664 Sfmt 0664 E:\CR\FM\D17JN3.REC D17JNPT1
s
m
a
r
t
i
n
e
z

o
n

D
S
K
6
T
P
T
V
N
1
P
R
O
D

w
i
t
h

D
I
G
E
S
T

doc_761718697.pdf