Transcripts For CSPAN3 House Rules Committee On Short-Term Spending Bill 20171207

Come to order and good afternoon and welcome to another fun day at the rules committee. We have an exciting panel with two very experienced members who take time visit often. We well dhm young chairman of the Financial Services, the chairman from dallas, texas, as well as the gentlewoman, my dear friend, ms. Waters from los angeles and were delighted youre here. The rules committee today will be considering hr 3971. The Community Institution mortgage relief act of 2017 and hr 477 the Small Business merger, acquis igdss sales and brokeerage act and House Resolution act which will be the second part of the hearing today, the continued appropriations act of 2018. Brokers provide Necessary Services for small, private Companies Looking to merge and or to be acquired. But brokers can face substantial appliance costs associated with a onesize fits all regulatory scheme costs that ultimately once again get passed down to Small Private Companies and puts them in need of not only the services but having to pay those bills. It helps alleviate the most costly burdens on Small Companies by allowing them to have simper, more costly ledgeilation. And Small Businesses help preserve and ultimately create job. And i think save wealth for people who have worked hard as they make transitions associated with the life of their company. The committee today will also consider hr 3971. The relief act of 2017. Another piece of legislation out of the Financial Services committee. This legislation amends the truth and lending act and the real estate settlement procedures act to modify the requirements with respect to certain rules. This bill benefits small Financial Institutions by alowing Community Banks to serve the local economy through relationship banking and insures constituents continue to have access to various credit choices and allow community instushzs to enter the Mortgage Market without being deterred by the high cost of regulatory compliance. Once again remembering the cost get passed on to the consumer, the consumers that we want be to able to have not only housing, part of the American Dream but be able to get the cost in the house that they can sustain over the long run. And rules committee will be speaking about the appropriat n appropriations act of 2018. A piece of legislation that deals with the continuing resolution which will extend government funding through, as weve been told, september 22nd, 2018. I believe thats a friday night, mr. Chairman. So without objection i like to welcome the distinguished gentleman from texas as well as the distinguished gentlewoman from california, Ranking Members waters to the panel. Youve been here a lot. Youll remember without objection wed like you to have the awesome stenographer to complete the recrtd immediately. In aiding with your testimony. However, before we move forward id like to recognize the gentleman from florida, the Ranking Member for any Opening Statements hed like to make. Thank you very much, mr. Chairman. Im happy to see a bipartisan effort that addresses the concerns we have on both sides of the aisle. And i understand ms. Waters, the Ranking Member will support this bill if its made in order and ultimately adopted. As it contains to continuing resolution, i would ask the question of what you believe you can accomplish in the next two weeks you havent been able to complish in the last two months. But ill get a chance to answer that question. But two weeks from now well be here again discussing another fix and ive already heard well be back to another shortterm cr going through midjanuary and my belief is you ought to do that one now, rather than be bouncing back and forth in the holidays. We have two star witnesses that will work us through this legislation. The most immediate from Financial Services and the next isnt mch of a guy but it will be me but ill do my best so that we may have this on the floor and resolve at least for the short term these items. I thank you, mr. Chairman and members of the rules committee and as the chairman and Ranking Member of the House Services committee, we have many stars on both sides of the aisle and were happy to represent them today. Thank you for the opportunity to apeer before you yet again to testify on behalf of two bipartisan bills that have a strong track record of bipartisan support. Today well disdus hr 3971, the mortgage relief act and perhaps spend a little less time discussing, for the reasons articulated by the gentleman from florida, hr 477, the Small Business mergers, simplification act of 2017. Hr 3971 addresses concerns that cfpbs rules implementing daud frank add provisions on escros and Mortgage Servicing are overly burdensome and unfairly restrict consumers access to mortgage credit. All this bill would do is relieve small banks to provide escrow accounts. And hold the mortgages on their Balance Sheet for three years. Because consumers have every incentive to collect the collateral by making sure they are made and kept current. A large majority of Community Banks do not, do not currently escrow because of the cost and requiring them to do so will only stop them from making loans to many needy individuals. The cfb 20e8d us it has limited Residential Lending unquote and went on to say this is hurting the Housing Market in our community. A credded Union Official in pennsylvania told us this bureaucratic requirement has caused his Credit Union Members to become quote very upset and confuseds a to why they were able to pay their taxes how they always had and went on to write us quote these members had managed their tax and insurance payments for years without institution interference but suddenly feel the government told them they were not responsible enoughf to manage their own affairs, unquote. The corrections will give small Credit Unions and Community Banks more flexibility to insure more of their members and customers can get a loan to buy their home and stay in their homes to ultimately make credit more available and less expensive than it otherwise would be. I have further comments prepared on hr 477 but given the Ranking Member and i are recommending to the rules committee to make in order the sherman amendment, we will both support that amendment and if so, the Ranking Member i believe has informed us she is ready to support the underlying bill. That is a recommendation we make to rules committee. So unless there are questions, i will not make introductory comments on that and appreciate aagain to the opportunity to appear before the rules committee. We apreciate not only your testimony but bringing forward it bills that would not only allow listening to these Community Banks, bankers, Credit Unions, the needs that fulfill customer demands in the marketplace. Were delighted youre here and chairwoman is recognized. On hr 39721 this bill would alow a larger number of mortgage servicers to drop consumer proteksdss and return the harmful practices of the worst financial crisis since the great depression. Specifically the bill would harm consurms by raising the Consumer Bureaus exemption thresh hold on escrow account requirements. Mortgages are classified as higher priced if the annual Percentage Rate or apr, exceeds the prime offer rate by 1. 5 . Higher price loans often reflect riskier or subprime bars. Current rules require most higher price morgue lk loans, escrow their home owners insurance, property taxes and private mortgage insurance for at least the first five years of their mortgage. Escrow accounts are an important consumer mechanism because they insure home owners have funds for these expenses, thereby reducing mortgage defaults or loss of the property. They also keep home owners from being blind sided and provoids a moerb accurate cost when the loan is originated. Daud frank tasked the Consumer Bureau under the truth and lending act that would restrict the type ofs of practices that lead to financial crisis. That is why the Consumer Bureaus rules make sure they can meet the whole cost of ownership. The Consumer Bureau was care fool address the fact that large servicers and especially servicers that Service Loans they did not own for an extended period of time, often did not adequately communicate with customers or approximately track paperwork. Appropriately, im sorry. During the crisis this contributed to millions of unnecessary forclosures and later on several billion dollar settlements were abusive and fraudulent practices and provide relief from Small Services but currently banks with less than 2 billion in assets that serve rural or ntd served areas are already exempt from the escrow requirements, which reflects the bureaus commitment to balanced and taylored regulations. This bill would make a dramatic leap and exempt banks regardless of whether they are serving underserved borrowers and without any evidence it would inkreesz access to credit for those who need it. The Consumer Bureau also provides agistments from the Mortgage Loan service and Escrow Account Administration requirement requirements provided they service no more than 5,000 loans per year. It would increase this exemption by 500 from 5,000 loans to 30,000 loans allowing significantly larger bank service servic Services Services to avoid safeguards. Lets be clear home owners do not get to choose their own Mortgage Services and the least we can do is insure they are adequately protected as they navigate the system as we saw leading up to the 2008 financial crisis, servicers often choose profits over people and thats why we leave it Consumer Bureau to look out for the needs of consumers. Its continues to do its job in spite of the unrelenting Republican Campaign to slow it down or eliminate it completely. Simply put 3971 would enable larger servicers whose incentives are not aligned with owners of the loans or the borrowers to be able to revive the abusive practices involved with predatory lending that contributed to the 2008 financial crisis. This is the second time in less than two weeks that ive come before you to discuss a bill that would erode vital consumer protechs under the truth and lending act for borrowers with high priced Mortgage Loans. I cannot support legislation that would keep consumers looking at high cost mortgages from the vital protections and scrutiny they deserve. Although i understand mrmr. Mr. Sherman will offer an amendment. I continue to oppose the bill because it would erode the work of the consumer, bureau and undermine the Consumer Protection in home ownership. I must note this comes on the heels of the recent and unlawful take over of the Consumer Bureau by the new director. Mr. Mull veiny is in the process of unlawfully restricting the activities of the Consumer Bureau and will soon begin rolling back consumer protekdss. Wed the should not further erode the rights of consumers. I oppose hr 3971 and look forward to answering any questions you may have. Thank you, mr. Chairman. I yield back. There was a question about the illegality of an action by the president of the United States to actually point the gentleman as the acting director. Its my understanding this went to court and a court decided the remedy. Is that correct . Well, yes, mr. Chairman and in fact the cfpbs own Legal Counsel that was appointed by his predecessor, mr. Cord ray agrees the president gets to appoint the acting director. This is based on a 20yearold statu statute. It is the opinion of the justice department, the cfpb and the one Circuit Court a very liberal circuit that is opined on the matter. Of the vacancy reform act. And so the overwhelming legal precedent in this land says that president gets to apoint the acting director. And nobody debates that he has the authority to appoint the permanent director and we also know under the current conventions of the United States senate, that permanent director can be confirmed with 51 votes. Not 60 and they could undue anything that the interim director did. So regrettably this is not help fool democracy. It is not standing on firm, legal ground. Its not on good firm legal ground and very, very unfortunate it has hap rnd and keeping the work from going forward. Thank you very much. Yes, maam. Mr. Chairman, if i may. I would ask you the same question. The gentlewoman reiterated her opinion this was an unconstitutional use of direction. Gentle woman have an opinion about that . I do, mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, if you look at the dod frank reform act, you will find the language is the it Deputy Director shall serve as acting director. So mr. Cordray, in his role as director apoints the Deputy Director and that Deputy Director, according to seconds 1011 of dod frank would act as acting director in the event the director leaves, is not in a position to serve if something happens that keeps him from carrying out his or her duties. And its not may, its shell. I believe the intervention by the president and sending over mr. Mullveiny is in direct violation of section 1011 and the language that clearly indicates the Deputy Director shall serve as acting director. Mr. Chairman. Again, there are numerous statuet dialuish succession. The court have opined it is the president s option on which to avail himself of. Number wup, my friend the Ranking Member quoted or paraphrased from dod frank but if you look closely it speaks to the absence of or the unavailability of the director. Not the vacancy. In many other succession statutes, specifically mention the term vacancy and our former colleague and former chairman of this committee, barny frank was recently quited as saying perhaps i paraphrase, the statute could be more clearly written. So again you will not find the word vacancy in this question. The director is not absent, hes fought unavailable. He resigned his office and again the only court that is opined on this has opined in the president s faver. The Legal Counsel of the cfpb itself has obined in favor of the president. This is just an unsupportable position to take. I think its derived from people who still havent accepted the outcome of the last election and i think it kps from a realization that statute underlined the cfpb is a flawed statute. And so in some respect, we got to take this as a fight between President Trump and president obama and it shouldnt even be a fight between the right and left. It ought to be a fight between what is right and wrong. And we have an agency probably the single most powerful Unaccountable Agency ever written into law. One of that im aware of that have ever been found unconstitutional, at least in my lifetime and there are Serious Problems where this agency has eroded checks and balances, due process. And for anybody who is a democrat, lower case d i would think they would be absolutely agast at the power this agency has. And so now when they see this tool they created in the hands of President Trump and our former colleague it sends shivers down their spine. So i hope they will work with us to reform this agency so it really can engage in the true business of consumer protekds and do it in a way cumiserate with the our democratic values. Also we could add much about it problems existed including personnel problems that abound. How much time do you have . So it would be my hope the president of the United States appoint someone with the knowledge and desire to make sure theyre structurally constructed in a way that could confornl to the needs of the constitution and the agency would be conformed to present itself in better life in their decisions made by personnel and the success of the organization. I could think of a few people that might fill that bill and i will continue to hope that the president of the United States received input on that. Thank you, mr. Chairman. I bet we have the same person in mind. I dont doubt that. I know we have differences but its great to see the measure of bipartisanship as well. It would be nice to see a little bit more of it torbds it end of the year. But congratulate you both on the bipartisan measure you bring forward. Frrs i have just want to theres still a few days left where you can change your mind and file in texas. I wish him well. Thank him for his hard work and know hell continue to work hard on behalf of his people unless, unless we have that christmas miracle and you decide youre going to stay in congress, which i wish you would do. For that i yield back. He shares my remarks to a tee and i thank the gentleman for his comments. Judge hastings . I have no questions. Does the gentleman from colorado seek time . No. Gentleman does not seek time. Does the gentleman from georgia seek time . I do. Not only do we have a piece of Bipartisan Legislation but a piece on which folks genuinely and not politically disagree. I thought the Ranking Members comment said trying to protect home buyers from being blind sided by a tax bill were telling on how to protect people from losing their home j for folks not accustomed to buying a home, accustomed to seeing an annual tax bill. That could absolutely blind side them. I must confess it never crossed my mind that we would require more escrow as a tool to prevent folks from being surprised in that way. The chairman said for peats sakes were talking about small Community Banks not that are pawning these loans off into some pool but keeping these in their portfolio, who are trying to nurture these home buyers. Frrts so often we have a conversation on we agree fundamentally on the goal of the bill. To have the two of you together saying we have a real interest in protecting consumers, we could do that through a regulatory process or we could do that by putting consumers thane hands of their neighbors. I thought was a refreshing change for me as a rules committee member. I just want you to know you may not have come here to lift me up today but i thank you for it. Thank you, maxine. Or keep on going. Theres more space. We a tough day yesterday. I feel better about today, mr. Chairman. I thought just sitting beside tom coal was going to be hard but i found that to be more rewarding than i expected and i find this hearing more rewarding. Sooner or later those dogs will get a chance. The gentleman does not seek time . You did catch on to that . I know you did, mr. Chairman. The gentleman from the great state of washington, mr mr. Neuhouse. Thank you very much. Itsger to see you today, dan. Okay. I see that there are no further questions of the esteemed panel, i would remind you please we if you would please leave whatever you got and allow her to complete her record appropriately. Yes, maam. I want to make sure that we have are of the information of 477 on the record. Did you do 477 also . You did 39. Yeah, you did. We tended to take your testimony of hr 477 and 3971 in the same vein and it is true i do want to talk about appropriately if you leave, if you choose, what is called the cr bill. Continued resolution bill. Did you want to add any bit of testimony . I had questions about 477. But well make sure theyre entered into the record. Without objection as the gentlemanwoman has provided and we appreciate it. I hope you both have an awesome end of your day. And we have a member that would seek to give testimony, hr 477. Hr 3971. We would now move to close the hearing portion. Well move to the second seconds. Of the attempt that we have today that was discussed in my testimony. Furthder in consideration. Committee will now consider house joint resolution 1, 2, 3, the continued approp reations act of 2018. It will extend government funding through 2017. This will provide this body and the senate for more time reach a longterm spending resolution to insure there are troops that our military continue to have resources as well as the overall funding of the government to insure our interests in home and abroad are taken care of. Initially addresses chip, to make sure it has the necessary funds to help our children. Specifically the joint resolution waves a proaction rule in the current statutory formula to give the centers for medicaid and Medicare Services flexibility to allocate currently available redistribution dollars to any state that exhausts its federal chip funtding. It means they can make states whole or allow them to be whole even if a state has already reserved, received the original share under current proeration rule. This also extends the federal Fund Insurance program through december the 22nd. Insuring those in floodprone areas be able to continue to see pro. Gr gram. So this is as short as we have said bill that is very straight forward. Its a date change to december 22nd. Which is a couple weeks from now well fund the government and allow the house, the senate to continue their work on these important activities. So with that said, would anyone like to ask me any questions about this or would we move forward and end this seconds and move to resolution . I would open the floor up. No questions. About the cr, sir. Gentlemans recognized. So i first wanted to talk about the Bears National monument. This is important not just for utah but a precedent setting bill. I had it opportunity to mel meet with members of the ui tribe. It would return the barriers National Monument to its original boundaries. These changes proposed by the president would all but erase this iconic monument. And when this was established thrkts purpose was to preserve the sanctity of the land, to protect for future generations to enjoy and im worried that this is the beginning of a potentially slippery slope that could roll back protections if Congress Allows this to continue and we can begin by saving barriers. Squb would encourage allowing a vote on the amendment, mr. Chairman and i have one more if i may. Gentlemans recognized. My second resolution is the dream act. More of language introduced that im a proud co sponsor of. This important legislation would allow d. A. C. A. Residents to eventually earn citizenship. We know this is on the clock. Because President Trump has announced hes going to terminate the d. A. C. A. Program, which is a program created under executive order. So it will fall though congress to create a solution of law. The dream act, im confident would pass on the floor of the house if we can include an up or down vote as part of the continued res lugds. And allow leadership of the house to focus on other it has support from democrats and republicans. It would allow those today who came here to this country at young age and were brought here by their parents and know no other country to finally rest easier knowing theyre no longer in danger of deportation to a country they dont even remember or know or speak the language. Americans across it board believe the dreamers need to boo pro tected. I ask that we allow an up or down vote with sufficient debate on the floor. Im going to request an hour on each side for debate. I know we often do 10 minutes but i think allowing the hour would be good to debate each side of this. We can include a free up or down vote on the continued resolution and will insure millions of americans are allowed to work in the only country they know. I ask the committee to make the amendment for the dream act in order and i yield back. Thank you very much. The gentleman is actually providing testimony. This would be testimony as ive provided testimony on my portion. The gentleman was providing testimony to add to that. And so the gentleman has done that would the gentleman open him up up to questions . Covers. He would open up to questions concerning the amendments. Is the gentleman. I was looking for colleague rob bishop from his days up there. I heard my friends say this was important to protect the state of utah. I did not hear the name of the Utah Congress person co sponsoring this amendment with you. I think if we advance to the floor, we can see what utah members vote for and against. The congress hasnt been asked the question yet. I dont know but it only way to find out would be allow an up or down vote. Gentleman youve said you spoke with the ute tribe. Did they discuss with you the 100,000 or more Historic Sites or artifacts that are important. They did. And the grave concern, many tribal art facts had been looted before these protections were in place and they were concerned that would begin again if protekdss were removed and emphasized the importance of preserving the boundaries of the National Monument. And with reference to the dreamers do you have a thought as to what legal status they should achieve and how that should all work out . Yeah, and i know the gentleman joins me as a sponsor. That is not what democrats are proposing, not what republicans are proposing. It simply crit as way where people who have been here from a young age can get in a line that would created that would some day allow them to earn citizenship. Theres a provisional status, then they would become green card holders for a period of time and only after that would they even be eligible for the citizenship. I think its somewhere in the 10 to 12 yeartime frame before the very earliest any of them could take the citizenship test and become citizens. In practice it might be 15 years, 20 years. So it criate said a legal way where people legally able to work today would still legally be able to work after d. A. C. A. Is repealed and eventually eligible to take the test of citizenship and if they pass that, be able to become citizens in 10plus years. In my district three of my High School Valedictorians are dreamers and i think theyll pass the test pretty good. Not only meeting all of the requirements, but i think its even too long i agree there should be a line. But we need to address comprehensive immigration in this congress and with that, mr. Chairman, i have no further questions. But i would have a question of you with reference to the cr, if you would permit. Yes, sir. Im going to finish the yes. Were going to ask and allow the committee to ask any questions of his two amendments. Is there any member that would seek time . A seeing none mr. Chairman, thank you. Dont really have a question but to make a statement about the effort to add the dream act on to this continuing resolution and i would caution or throw out the fact that there are a large number of people on both sides of the aisle currently working on this particular issue. A lot of effort is going into finding a balanced slugds that people on both sides of the aisle can support. And i would submit in light of the work going on that to amend something as important to this tlarer outstanding members of our Community Around the country, are contributing a great deal to every one of our communities and we need to find a lasting legislative solution to that and i would submit this is an issue that can stand on its own merit, that a bill that would be able to come forward in front of the congress would be able to do that and add to a continuing resolution, at least in my mind today, is not the right move. That would be my statement, mr. Chairman. I do appreciate the gentleman s effort and agree with many of the things he said. But to me this is not the right vehicle. If i can respond, mr. Chairman. Thank you very much. I would view this amendment is part of that effort. And i think again it kwd be nice to get that taken care of. I think the dreamer has the votes to pass. I dont think thats rr been in question and i want to thank this was not said ahad head of time but it so happens i have a meeting with dreamers who came in the room and i want to welcome to our committee, katelyn, christian, maria, ana, adriana, and katelyn. Were so excited to have you here. We just offered the dream act as an amendment to the continuing resolution to allow a pathway to citizenship for young people that were brought here at a young age. And again the it efforts as the gentleman from washington nungted are ongoing. Not to pass into law but refer to the house. Where im confident it has it votes by reasonable margin to pass. Thanks again to the dreamers who continue to make sure members of congress are educated and aware about their everyday battle to work legally and remain in the only country that they know and i yield back. Thank you very much. Is there anyone else that would seek to offer questions to the gentleman . Seeing none, that will satisfy that side. Well now move to the section considered the cr. Before i do that, i would like to recognize we have a number of students who are here and have taken time to not only come to the rules committee but have come to congress to express their ideas. I want to acknowledge you have brought them here and before we go where i am, the Ranking Member would like to be recognized for the purpose of making recog nigds. Thank you very much, mr. Chairman. Ive got three of the most extraordinary interns today that are gefweeg leaoing to be leavi soon. Emma is a masters student in Strategic Communication at George Washington university. She grew up in the city of san francisco, received a bachelors degree in Political Science and a minor in art history from the university of california, los angeles. She has done extraordinary work in communecations. Samantha maston currently a senior studying international rels relgdss at american university. Is interested in foreign affairs. Has done amazing work on that. Specifically Transatlantic Relations and security and kevin orseeny. Kevins a recent graduate of the London School of economics with a masters in human right. Hes a rochester native. Received his bachelors in history in buffalo, new york. And i know that all of us, because of our wonderful internals, appreciate that all of you geon to do such extraordinary things. You give us so much. We hope you can take away something of value as well. Thank you very much for your work and best wishes for your future. Thank you, mr. Chairman. And welcome to the dreamers. Liwe do welcome the young ma kevin, London School of economics. Thats a pretty high standard. So we recognize that also. Theyve all done extremely well. I walked in here today and a chance to meet my son, bill, who is a third Year Medical School student at Texas Tech University and his beautiful girlfriend, fiance, im sure which it is entirely. Be careful now. I know something and i dont know it. Dont mess around. He left me a note saying dad, thank you, it was good to see you. We get reminded occasionally it was nicolas. I saw he was. A big old smile back there. But bill had to head back to medical school but were remi reminded of how special and kevins parents were proud of him too. Hen reetau or makes a difference. And im very proud and in the rules committee and then deserted us for appropriations. Sorry about that. Well, he come back here for good theater. Nice to have you. Good to see you aagain. So what were looking at now is the approximate, the end of the rules Committee Hearing but youre now going to get to see or they get to question me as im the witness mr. Poles chose to be there i now have told the members its a date change. Were going to at the chip funding necessary requirements and that it would go to december 22nd. Short bill, easy concepts. But i would open myself up to any question that members of the committee may have for me as ill be the Expert Witness on this. Mr. Chairman. The judge, youre recognized. Acknowledging there may be others. There might be. Well, in any event, mr. Chairman. Youve had three months to write your spending bill since the last last cr, which followed a different cr from april. And you control the majority does, the house, the senate, the white house, and yet youre here today seeking more time. Now earlier this week, and i said that in my opening remarks when we began, Ranking Member lowie of appropriations made this statement. Im eager to know what Republican Leadership believes they ucan accomplish in the next two weeks that they havent been able to accomplish in the last two months. And id like to pose that same question to you. Good, good. You have two members of Republican Leadership that are present right now. I, myself a sitting Republican Leadership, and the gentleman, mr. Collins from georgia sits in Republican Leadership. When did he get in . Well [ laughter ] the answer is he sneaked in. Nobody wants to talk about it. Thank you for telling me that. He sneaked in. Ill be nicer to him. I would start that would be a great thing. So do you have a question for myself or do you have a question for the gentleman, mr. Collins . Ill be glad to answer for us. Well, i pose that question to you. What are you going to do two weeks from now . Mr. Chairman, people dont complain all the time to the leadership, but we complain to each other. Its the holidays. And a lot of people dont like to say what is pretty obvious. Were going to leave here at some point, come back on the 22nd, and i guess what i need to know from you is can you assure us that this is going to be the last cr of the fiscal year . The gentleman asks a very good question, and i will tell the gentleman i wanted us to solve our funding issues on september 30th. I want and need this any organization, but especially the federal government to take its resources that this body decides, and we have been through the spending bills. We have been through the budget. Weve been through the Appropriations Bills. I believe its vitally important to offer any organization thats as large adds the federal government to tell them the rules of the game and the money, and let them manage what theyre supposed to do for the best interests of the country. This is in particular necessary as we deal with nonemergency, but issues with fema and the corp. Of engineers and a lot of other agencies that have a lot of work to do. More importantly, the pentagon needs a chance to run the military budget, the cia, their intelligence budget, and nsa. Those are important subjects. I would be the first to tell you i wish we were doing it. I wish we had done it several months ago. Is this going to be the last time when we move this to december 22nd . It is my hope and not my promise, but my hope that you have seen a good bit of conversations that had taken place. Not only among our members, but with our leadership. I have expressed my opinion several times. But were trying to do this also with the United States senate. And so were now trying to work through what would be one important bill, and that is the tax bill. And i think a lot of issues are now turning to this. So, yes, i would say in my opinion, it would be my best opinion that december 22nd wed better come up with an answer. Because i think after that and ive stated this publicly i think after that it presents problems for a number of people, including the United States military, unless we find a way to fund them completely. Well, let me tell you what i think, mr. Chairman. I think we are debating another cr. Because instead of working together to address the needs of our country, your party chose to ram through the partisan tax bill. And you did that without any hearings and with a process that was completely closed off to democrats. The senate bill wasnt even typed up in all of its particulars. It had notes scribbled on it, and people are still talking than. So no one in the senate can even say with honesty that they read it. In the end, the legacy of the tax bill will speak for itself. And it will speak to the values that your party has come to espouse. Now im looking ahead. It is fortuitous that the Young Persons who are here, i dont know that theyre all students, all students and working people i would believe. I have already indicated that three of my high schools are in the Congressional District that im privileged to serve had our young people that are dreamers as valedictorians. And i might add thats not the first time. The president has ended daca and said that its up to congress to pass a permanent fix. Now the lives of 800,000 or more young people needlessly hang in the balance. We also need to address temporary protected status for haitians, nicaraguans, el salvadorans and hondurans and other nationals taking refuge in our country can. Haiti is still not recovered from a hurricane and earthquake and an ongoing cholera outbreak, and it cannot absorb tens of thousands of people. Now, i have worked with our colleague, a republican carlo corelo who introduced a partisan fix. Can you assure me, mr. Chairman, that the dream act and the espera act will be moved in the coming weeks along with a longterm funding bill . Thank you very much for your question. And i would respond with a reminder that we heard the gentleman from washington, mr. Newhouse allude to that he believes that theyre within our party that i believe had been forthright about including regular interactions with media on the status of not only that working relationship, but towards the timing of that. I believe my party, going back some period of time, that we have brought up a number of times, including mr. Polis and yourself and the gentleman from massachusetts and the Ranking Member who have brought up a number of times a viewpoint that this is one of the highest priorities that you envision that the congress should be achieving. I felt like that when the president gave us a deadline, it was something that we as members of Congress Majority party, yes, were either going to adjust to and accept that challenge, or we were going to wimp out and not accept the challenge from article 2, the president of the United States. It is my intent, and i have satisfied myself in as much as the work that i have seen that is taking place from a working group that is very serious, that includes members that would be a fair representation of the differing viewpoints that people may have in the United States congress, yes, there the republican party. But viewpoints that i believe that would coincide with some of the ideas that might be shared by some of you on this committee. The facts of the case are there is an active working relationship that is expected to deliver a product, but i do not anticipate that will be by the end of the year that would be ready for us to move forward into a piece of legislation. But i do believe that the timing is that and i have to be careful here, because my words do matter. While i have no real control, i do have a vision and a voice myself. Im encouraging us to get this done, as the president had suggested. And the president suggested march as the drop dead date . I believe that is absolutely correct. And i believe that is what were aiming at. And as i say that, i would look out to the young people for letting us hear their ideas. I appreciate very much, mr. Chairman. Im sure you understand the agony not only of those young people, but the others that i mentioned, the nationals that are seeking refuge in our country as well. I would say just as an attribute, and i dont take advantage of you when i say this at all, at all, but there was a question as you as a cosponsor that the gentleman mr. Polis answered to remind us about what the legislation is. I think we all need to know what the legislation is that were going to be voting on. And i think all the body needs to focus on it, and i think we will have several weeks devoted to not only testimony, but understanding this so that we speak about this in terms of the knowledge of what would be expected in this session. Like i said today, mr. Chairman, about bump stocks. We dont need any study. We all know how many of these young people are here and the circumstances theyre confronted with. That might be. But im still engaging the gentleman, i would say to you were going to have to determine circumstances from those who may not have conducted themselves in such a manner of whether they would qualify. Whether if we had someone that was seeking admission to this country from another country, we would expect a background check in some circumstances. And i think that would still be appropriate, in my opinion, it would still be appropriate. So its not so easy to say we all know the right answer. You know something, mr. Chairman. Yes . You and i were here, not in congress, but you and i were active professionals when president reagan allowed amnesty for the persons that were in the United States at that time. And it created no added problems for this nation, not in any respect. Now we live in the western hemisphere where many of our citizens and citizens that would be come from. Nevertheless, let me move on. Flood insurance is something that i know you know is of critical import to a lot of us. And the Hurricane Season was particularly devastating. And it underscores the need for reauthorizing the National Flood Insurance Program. Now we have the extraordinary fires that are ongoing, and youve heard me, mr. Chairman, as well as other members here talk about the fact that the federal Emergency Management organization has been handling more than just hurricane relief. Theyve had tornadoes. Theyve had floods. And we continue to kick the can down the road on many of these things. Will you commit to including the longterm authorization of Flood Insurance in the common cr, or any longterm funding measure, mr. Chairman . And thats my final question. Yes, sir. And i thank the gentleman not only for his respectful but insightful and thoughtful answer. And the answer is that i believe it would be irresponsible for to say that we have taken care of funding the government without the resolution of those two important programs to understand as we not only turn to a new year, but as we turn on the tv to see the fires that are raging in ventura county. I believe its ventura county, california at this time. And i would say to you its caused quite a discussion, notwithstanding that im from dallas, texas. I know people that are from houston. I know people that serve in areas as members. And they represent people who need to know what next year is going to look like. Because they have to protect their homes. So i would think it would be irresponsible for me or my party to present a bill where we did not have some answer to address it. I appreciate, that mr. Chairman. Thats all have i. Thank you. Judge hastings, thank you very much. Okay. Is there yes, sir . Yeah, i just on the cr, i noted that im sorry, mr. Chairman, i noted that it continues the chip funding for states that have exhausted their federal chip. I would just like to point out that the situation in colorado. And i think many states is the chip money is not expired yet, but we are sure to expire early next year. I think that is where the majority of the states are, the state that mr. Buck and i hail from is in that category. So i just want to be clear that this cr for this twoweek period still leaves that uncertainty over what will happen next of the states that are going to run out of Childrens Health money early next year. And it is very important that we incorporate the funding into the full end of year funding bill for the coming year. Because otherwise, its my understanding that this funding makes no difference for when colorado and the majority of states will run out. Because its scheduled to be early next year anyway. So i just wanted to highlight that. Secondly, i just wanted to ask, the this goes through the 22nd. And does it maintain spending at the current levels of the existing across every agency . There is no changes . That is what a cr does, until its specifically specifies as it does in the chip program about a reallocation that may take place, and extends that through the end of the year, i believe. Great. That would be correct. And just in contrast, as the gentleman from florida indicated, i think members on both sides of the aisle have had time to study the dream act and other proposed solutions for years. In fact, a similar bill was even passed by congress in 2010. So its nothing new. It is the subject of a lot of legislative education efforts. And i think that all indications are it would have strong bipartisan support and pass, if were able to pass that along for a up or down vote. And i thank the gentleman for his testimony, and i yield back. Yes, sir, thank you very much. It is a question we can place before the gentleman . Michael burgess. I do feel obligated to make a statement about the funding for Childrens Health Insurance Program. Of course, you know, mr. Chairman, that bill, a fiveyear bill passed the floor of this house in a bipartisan fashion the first week in october. Yes, it is true that we did not meet the september 30th end of the fiscal year requirement. It had the work had been done in committee. It had we had waited because the senate had asked us to wait. We had waited because committee can democrats asked us to wait to see if we couldnt come to a complete agreement. We were not able. That was the Ranking Member of the energy and that is correct. So i hope the gentleman from colorado will discuss with his senators in his state that yes, the housepassed bill is awaiting activity. It is the five years that the senate asked for chip funding. I preferred a twoyear bill. I thought well, when you pass the Affordable Care act, you authorize the Childrens Health Insurance Program to the end of fiscal 2019. I thought a twoyear funding would make sense, and then we could work on a longer reauthorization. Because if youll recall, we were told when the Affordable Care act passed, we wouldnt need the Childrens Health Insurance Program any longer because everyone would have the Affordable Care act. It turns out we do need it. And i think it deserves a i thought it deserved a more thoughtful approach than trying to get it done during this year. But we conformed. What the senate requested. They passed in their committee a fiveyear bill. Two years at the Affordable Care act level of funding. One year at sort of a step down from that. And then two final years at standard traditional schip funding to give states a chance to ramp down their spending from the levels it had been bumped up to with the passage of the Affordable Care act. This bill was offset. It was offset responsibly. The offsets were not were not unreasonable. There could have been greater agreement, but for whatever reason, the negotiations broke down. Still, there were members on your side of the dais who voted for the schip bill when it passed the house, and it has languished in the senate. And i dont know why. I dont know why the majority leader in the senate will not allow that vote bill to come up for a vote. I think they should have the 60 votes to cut off debate, pass the bill and get the money to the states. Your state needs it. My state doesnt need it yet, but it will soon. Weve exhausted some funds because of paying for the hurricane. I suspect mr. Haste iings stats in a spectacular situation. I dont know what the situation is in massachusetts, but there are many states that are bumping up against their statutory limit on that. We have done our work on the house side. We have done our work. And it now is it is actually this time truly the senates move next. Thank you, mr. Chairman, to allow me to get that off my chest. We spent a lot of time in committee working on that this year. As the gentleman knows, the gentleman who serves as the subcommittee chairman for health in his detime job at the energy and commerce committee. And i thank the gentleman. Also the gentleman, mr. Buck has been interest ed in making sure were moving these things. The gentleman from colorado spoke to me about statespecific issues. The gentleman, mr. Buck, the gentleman for sure mr. Burgess has been intensely interested in this. And should it be noted that while it might appear we might be a bit frustrated, we believe we have done good work and are asking to be met by our colleagues in the senate. The gentleman from massachusetts. Since we all want to go on the record here, some of us do have a problem with the way the offsets for chip, going into the prevention fund, which means immunizations, which means funding and vote no. I did vote no on that. I thought that was a lousy offset. And what frustrates us, were spending time today on a stupid nra bill that doesnt do anything to enhance the security of people in this country, that is basically an attempt to get more money from a special interest group. Thats what were doing today when we should be finishing up appropriations. We should be finding a way to come together on the dream act, on the funding chip and so many other things. The frustration level is pretty high based on the priorities that have been put forward by this leadership. And i thank the chairman and yield back. Yes, sir, yes, sir. And with Great Respect as the gentleman, whether it be dr. Burgess or myself, we believe were addressing issues. We bring those bills to committee up here. And we believe were trying to forthrightly move them. And i appreciate that. The senator had another discussion he wanted to have concerning this cr . Okay. This closes the hearing portion of hjres 123. And the chairman will now be in receipt of a motion from the distinguished gentleman, from oklahoma. Small business mergers acquisition, sales and brokerage simplification act of 2017. The rules provides one hour debate equally controlled and divided by the Ranking Member of the committee. All points of order against consideration of the bill. Provides that an amendment in the nature of a institute consisting of the tax rules Committee Print 11543 shall be adopt and the bill as amended shall be considered as read. Provisions in the bill as amended. The bill makes an order. Only the further amendment in part a of the rules Committee Report if offered by the member designated in the report which shall will considered as read, shall be debatable for the times specified in the report, equally divided and controlled by the proponent and an opponent, shall not be subject to amendment,le that schall not be subject for demand for division of the question. Rules all way printed in part a of the report. The rule provides one motion to recommit with or without instructions. Section 2 of the rule provide for consideration of hr3971, the Community Institution mortgage relief act of 2017 under a structured rule. Provides one hour of debate. The rule waives all points of order against consideration of the bill, the rule provides that an amendment and the nature of a substitute consisting of the rules Committee Report 11544 shall be considered adopted and the rule as amenlded shall be considered read. The rule make answer order only the further amendment printed in part b of the rules Committee Report if offered by the member designated in the report, but shall be considered as read, shall be debatable for the time specified in the report equally divided and controlled by the proponent and opponent. Shall not be subject to amendment and shall not be subject to demand for a division of the question. The rule waives all points of order. The rule provides one motion to recommit with or without instructions. Section three of the rule provides for conversation of hj res 123 making further continuing appropriations for fiscal year 2018 and for other purposes under a closed rule, the rule provides one hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and the ranking minority member of the committee on appropriation. Rule waives all points of order against consideration of the joint resolution. Rule provides that the joint resolution shall be considered as read. The rule waives all points of order against provisions in the joint resolution. Finally, the rule provides one motion to recommit. I thank the gentleman from oklahoma. I would yield myself one minute. The gentleman that you have just heard, chairman cole, has offered the motion. The motion that is one rule, three members. Hr 477, Small Business mergers, acquisitions, sales and brokerage simplification act. Structured rule, one hour of debate. Next order one amendment is bipartisan motion recommit. Hr3971 committee institution mortgage relief act. Structure of rule, one hour debate, Financial Services. One amendment made in order that is a democratic amendment and motion to recommit hjres 123. Motion to recommit. There, now that we have heard the motion, is there amendment or discussion to that . The gentleman from colorado. Mr. Chairman, have i an amendment to the rule. I rule the committee make an order and waive the necessary orders to hjres 123. Number one, with 20 minutes at a time, allotted for debate. And number two, with two hours allotted for time in the debate, if i may, mr. Chairman. This would allow for full debate and passage of the dream act, and also for the bears ears National Monument expansion act. Again, they believe we owe it to the young people affected to provide some certainty with regard to being able to work legally and remain in this country and earn citizenship some day. Thats why the dream act has strong bipartisan support. I am confident if we pass it along to the floor of the house, should it be able to pass fairly overwhelmingly. I did because of member interest allow my amendment for two hours of debate. And i think that there will be a lot of people that want to, of course, speak for the amendment, perhaps even a few that want to speak on the other side. But if we can resolve this matter, i think it will make all the end of year issues easier. We know there needs to be a cr omnibus by the 22nd. There is a tax reform proposal that i know republicans are working on. I think it would be a great opportunity for this house to remove the dreamers out of this debate and simply address that issue in a bipartisan way, advancing this as an amendment to the cr along which President Trump for his signature. Im hopeful that well allow those two amendments, and look forward to if theyre allowed to debating them on the floor of the house. Yield back. Thank you very much. Youve heard the amendment from the gentleman from colorado in his discussion. Is there further discussion . Mr. Chairman . The gentleman from georgia is recognized. I know my friend is sincere in his efforts, and tries to add language such as this to so many different bills that come through this chamber. You will remember, mr. Chairman, we sat through hearing after hearing, produced all the Appropriations Bills on time. For the first time in a decade im sitting beside one of the cardinals who produced the first labor hhs bill that ive seen in my entire congressional career. We have put in the work to get this done. And this twoweek cr isnt supposed to be a major legislative initiative. Its supposed to answer the seemingly unanswerable question the gentleman from florida asked is if you couldnt get it done in three months in the senate, why in the world are you going to get it done in the next two weeks . I dont know what the answer to that is. But i know that we made more than we made almost 500 amendments in order on this package when it moves through this house, weve got three folks from ms. Slaughters team leaving us. I dont want folks to think we didnt invest time and hour and week and month into getting this package right. This is a continuing resolution for a spending bill. It is not an authorizing bill on any of these other bills that the gentleman wants. And im glad he made the effort to put more time in to these amendments be made in order. Thank you. Because it would be a disservice to the size of those issues to put them on a simple funding bill like this. But to put the issue on their associate all i would tell you, not only threatens the ability of this body to keep the government open, which i think is an important priority, but also threatened the quality of the debate that we have on the issue as well. Will the gentleman yield . I would oppose. Yield for question . Be happy to yield. Again, the reality that weve been living over here just doesnt seem to correspond well to your remarks. We have not done most of the major appropriation bills that this congress hasnt done them. I know we tried a couple of them. But most appropriation bills we didnt do. Secondly, i personally have had amendments blocked. I know that for sure. I had amendments i tried to offer to those Appropriations Bills, and they were not aloud out of this committee. Soy experience that. Reclaiming my time, i would share with the gentleman, and its been an incredibly busy and productive session. So i dont fault the gentleman for not seeing it all. But we in fact passed every single appropriations bill, not just every single bill, passed every single bill for the First Time Since ive been here. Thats why i voted are you referring to the week where we lumped most of them together into one bill . Well, as folks will recall, we did a National Security package and a domestic package. Okay. But it hasnt been done in ten years. If folks want to denigrate it as opposed to celebrate it, its okay with me. Im good either way. Ive been here, you know, nine years now. I do remember when we had an appropriations process. It was chairman obie at the time was the democratic chair. He would come down for each appropriations bill there would be amendments. I think what youre referring to, which is a very different process, and not one that ive, you know, is analogous to open package. It was almost 2 3 of all the Government Spending in a week. And then we didnt even allow most of the amendments. You can dress that up any way you want, but thats not somehow open normal appropriations process that congress has done historically. Happy to yield back. Again, reclaiming my time, i would say to my friend, he was able to vote on more amendments in this socalled perverted process that youve just described than he was able to vote on the entire four years of appropriations when democrats led this institution. I just want to make that clear. Well, the number of amendments depend on how many people offer amendments. I offered amendments that were not allowed. I assure you, i would be happy to reintroduce them. But i was very disappointed. I make no promise of resolving all our differences in this forum. Im only pointing out that this twoweek extension is only supposed to be that, a measure to get us to that more powerful bill that i know my friend would like i would like to be a part of. But i know his intentions are good. I just must oppose the gentleman. Will the gentleman yield . Be happy to. So we talk all about this wonderful process and all these amendments, but here we are doing a cr. And were going to be here in a couple of weeks doing another cr. So we can spin this all we want, and in the age of trump, up is down, black is white. Square is round, whatever. But the reality is that for whatever, however you want to do it, i would i dont think that this process is something can all be proud of. Its really quite a mess and here we are attend of the session. I agree with the gentleman. And under the issues he raised on the dream act, come on. The idea that this is too important to be able to deal with right now u . Weve been trying to deal with this for months. Years. For years. So whatever. You can have your spin. But i just wanted to say for the record this whole process has been a mess. And with that, i thank the gentleman for yielding and i yield back my time. I was happy to yield to my friend. I share my friend from floridas frustration. But particularly with all the young people in this room today, its doing a disservice to suggest that we have not gotten more done together in a collaborative way than weve gotten in a long time there is a simple way to get this appropriations bill across the floor of the senate. Its easy to do. All we need to do is have the republicans in the senate change the senate rule to completely eliminate the rights of the minority, and we can get this done tomorrow. Well get it done tomorrow. For my friend to suggest we have a majority would be accurate. To suggest we have control would not be accurate. We could abolish the rights of minority tomorrow in the senate and get this done, and weve chosen not to do it. Now candidly, there is some disagreement about whether we should do it that way or not. But lets just be clear about why were sitting here. Were sitting here because the house has gotten its job done and Senate Republicans have refused to shut out the minority on the senate side. And we can either be sad about that or celebrate that. But those are the facts as we sit here today. Would you yield to me . This idea that you could just shut the minority out completely as you have done here, and that you recommend being done in the senate, that really what you think we should do in this democracy . Well, reclaiming my time, my friend from massachusetts warned us about spin. As you heard me say very clearly, we did not do that in the senate. And i have not proposed that. But you have done that here. The rules have almost consistently every one of them been closed. We have not had amendments. I dont know what all these things are youre talk about. Again, the gentle lady was a very successful leader of this rules committee when she led this committee. But just understand our current chairman made more amendments in order on a single appropriations bill than you were able to do in an entire two years of final year as chairman of this committee. Its a hard job that the two of you have. And there is lots to be frustrated about. I just want to recognize successes when we have them. Perhaps we have them too seldomly. But we should celebrate them when we do. Well, i dont want to speak for my colleagues here. But i feel pretty shut out. Its been a long time since weve had amendments. Okay. Were ready to shut it out again, i guess. Yield back. Thank you very much. By the way, this is this part of making legislation. Im proud that our students are here to see this. We have an amendment on the flo floor, the polis amendment. Weve now debated that. I offer the information. Were on a vote that time is running out. And so were going to move forward. Those saying aye. Aye. Those saying no. Mr. Cole . No. No, woodal. No. Mr. Burgess . No. Mr. Byrne . Mr. Byrne north. Mr. Newhouse . No. Mr. Buck . Mr. Buck no. Ms. Slaughter . Aye. Mr. Mcgovern . Aye. Mr. Hastings . Mr. Hastings, aye. Mr. Polis, aye. Mr. Chairman . No. Clerk total . F4 ayes, 8 nays. Discussion . Seeing none, well move as we remember one rule, those in favor im sorry. Did the gentleman announce the vote . Yes, mr. Chair. I believe the gentleman did. Okay. I need help. Your help is welcome. Thats okay. Were now going to vote on the motion from the gentleman, distinguished young gentleman from oklahoma. Those in favor saying aye. Aye. Those pose no. No. The ayes visit. The ayes have it. The clerk will poll the question. Mr. Cole . Aye. Mr. Woodall . Aye, mr. Burgess aye. Mr. Byrne, aye. Mr. New house . Aye. Mr. Buck . Mr. Buck, aye. Ms. Cheney . Aye. Mr. Mcgovern, no. Mr. Hastings, no. Mr. Polis . No. Mr. Chairman, aye. Clerk will report the total, please. 8 yays, for ncaas. The motion is agreed to according to the gentleman. Mr. Woodall will be handling this for republicans. And i for the democrats. And ms. Slaughter for democrats. Before i ask the question, ill answer it that we do not anticipate any more meetings this week. The committee is done with its work for the week. Thank you very much. Cspans washington journal live every day with news and policy issues that impact you. Coming up thursday morning, washington republican congressman dan newhouse on fridays government funding jnand new York Democratic congressman eliot engel talks about using the u. S. Embassy to jerusalem. And Senior Editor david hawks on Sexual Misconduct on capitol hill. Be sure to watch cspans washington journal live at 7 00 a. M. Eastern thursday morning. Join the discussion. Thursday, fbi director Christopher Wray testifies at an oversight hearing for his agency. Well have live coverage from the House Judiciary Committee starting at 10 00 a. M. Eastern here on cspan3. Friday on cspan, at 8 00 eastern, this Weeks Supreme Court oral argument in the case of masterpiece cakeshop, the Colorado Civil Rights Commission on whether a baker can refuse to make a wedding cake for a samesex couple based on religious beliefs. And then interview with counselor to the president kellyanne conway. You have to subvert your ego to the greater good. And im not here to read about myself. Im not here to think about myself. Im here for something so much bigger than me. And that is a lesson that a lot of folks dont understand. Ive often said publicly and certainly privately that there are only two people who work here who were elected to anything, and their name are donald j. Trump and michael r. Pence. If youre not on the list you ought to get with the program or get out. Watch friday beginning at 8 00 p. M. Eastern on cspan, Critical Condition span. Org and with a cspan radio app. Cspan, where history unfolds daily. In 1979, cspan was created as a Public Service by americas Cable Television companies. And is brought to you today by your cable or satellite provider. Now a look at counterterrorism efforts in north africa. Two state Department Officials testified about issues, including isis activities and influence in the region, as well as efforts to come back cyberterrorism. This is 40 minutes