the speaker pro tempore: the house will be in order. the chair lays before the house a communication from the speaker. the clerk: the speaker's room washington, d.c. april 13 2015. i hereby appoint the honorable luke messer to act as speaker pro tempore on this day. signed john a. boehner, speaker of the house of representatives. the speaker pro tempore: the prayer will be offered by our chaplain, father conroy. chaplain conroy: let us pray. gracious god, we give you thanks for giving us another day. the work of the congress resumes after time spent by millions of americans celebrating high holy days and spring comes to our nation's capital. it is the season of hope. in this chamber where the people's house gathers we pause to offer you gratitude for the gift of this good land on which we live and for this great nation which you have inspired and -- in developing so many years. continue to inspire the american people that through the difficulties of these days we might keep liberty and justice alive in our nation and in the world. give to us and all people a vivid sense of your presence that we may learn to understand each other, to respect each other, to work with each other to live with each other and to do good to each other. so shall we make our nation great in goodness and good in its greatness. may all that is done this day be for your greater honor and glory. amen. the speaker pro tempore: the chair has examined the journal of the last day's proceedings and announces to the house his approval thereof. pursuant to clause 1 of rule 1 the journal stands approved. the pledge of allegiance will be led by the gentleman from california mr. takano. mr. takano: i pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under god, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. the speaker pro tempore: under clause 5-d of rule 20, the chair anoubses to the house that in light of the reds ig nation of the gentleman from illinois mr. schock, the whole number of the house is 432. the chair lays before the house a communication. the clerk: the honorable the speaker, house of representatives, sir pursuant to the permission granted in clause 2-h of rule 2 of the rules of the u.s. house of representatives, the clerk received the following message from the secretary of the senate on march 27, 2015, at 12:02 p.m. that the senate passed without amendment h.r. 1092, h.r. 1527. that the senate agreed to without amendment house joint resolution 10, house concurrent resolution 32, house concurrent resolution 31. that the senate passed senate 535 appointments dwight d. eisenhower memorial commission advisory commission on the record of congress, commission to study the potential creation of a women's history museum, potential to study the creation of a national women's museum, signed sincerely, karen l. haas. the speaker pro tempore: the chair lays before the house a communication. the clerk: the honorable the speaker, house of representatives, sir pursuant to the permission granted in clause 2-h of rule 2 of the rules of the u.s. house of representatives, the clerk received the following message from the secretary of the senate on march 27 2015, at 1:13 p.m., appointments advisory committee on the records of congress, signed sincerely, karen l. haas. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to clause 4 of rule 1, the following enrolled bills and joint resolutions were signed by speaker pro tempore comstock on monday, march 30, 2015. the clerk: h.r. 1092, to designate the federal building located at 2030 southwest 145th avenue in miramar, florida, as the benjamin p. growingan and jerry l. dove federal building. h.r. 1527 to accelerate the income tax benefits for charitable cash contributions for the relief of the families of new york police department detectives, juan lu and rafael ramos and for other purposes. house joint resolution 10, providing the reappointment of david m. rubenstein of a citizen regent of the board of regents of the smithsonian institution. the speaker pro tempore: the chair will now enter tan requests for one-minute speeches. for what purpose does the gentlewoman from north carolina seek recognition? ms. foxx: i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute, mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentlewoman is recognized for one minute. ms. foxx: thank you, mr. speaker. we're only two days away from april 15, also known as tax day. it's a day we all dread every year. between mountains of paperwork complicated codes and the fear fines, paying taxes every year is a huge burden for hardworking americans. in fact u.s. taxpayers and businesses spend about 7.6 billion hours a year complying with the filing requirements of the i.r.s. but if you listen to the political discussion our country very long you'll hear some lawmakers repeat one of their favorite lines, that all of our country's budget problems would be solved if only we increased taxes except increases taxes crowds out private sector investment, diminishing our prosperity. instead, it's past time to simplify the tax code and decrease the tax burden that americans currently spend close to a third of the year bearing. it's vital that we enact policies that strengthen and stabilize our economy as well as give individuals and businesses long-term certainty. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does -- the gentlelady yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from california seek recognition? mr. takano: i seek unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. takano: mr. speaker, i rise today to -- in support of the house resolution declaring that gay lesbian and transgendered people should be propected from discrimination -- protected from discrimination under the law. every day lgbt americans are denied housing and public accommodations. in 29 states someone can be fired because they are gay, and in 32 states someone can be fired because of their gender identity. and in several states there is an organized push to deny lgbt americans their rights. however, dozens of states have taken action and passed nondiscrimination laws, as have hundreds of cities. yet, this body has not. congress is sworn to uphold the constitution. this -- the same constitution that says no state shall, quote, deny any person within its jurisdiction equal protection of the laws, end quote. it is time for congress to uphold the constitution and take action. support this legislation and protect these americans, all americans. thank you and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from pennsylvania seek recognition? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> mr. speaker, at the heart of my congressional district lies chester county. a community that relies on groundbreaking, thoughtful, probe tiff reporting for its residents, a responsibility that the daily local news has filled for generations. for 20 years jim callahan has served the daily local news and chester county as a newsman. he calls himself an adjustable wrench in the news business. which means he served a multitude of functions to make sure our republic as locally constituted in chester county is well informed. indeed, the hallmark of an engaged, robust democracy requires a well-informed citizenry, and to my constituents, as a journalist jim callahan has served this function in exemplary fashion. one of his colleagues calls jim an old scule journalist who enjoys teaching and working with young reporters, a political nut. i add that jim possesses a great sense of humor. at his core, mr. speaker, jim callahan greatly values local journalism and for that chester county is better off for it. in this people's house of representatives and people across chester county, we say thank you, jim. stay strong, my friend. i yield back mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from georgia seek recognition? mr. johnson: to address this body for one minute and to revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. johnson: thank you, mr. speaker. it feels like open season on black men in america and i'm outraged. in fact, all americans are at risk when bad actors in law enforcement use their guns instead of their heads. are despite nationwide calls for action and despite my bills to reform the broken grand jury process, hold police accountable and end militarization and despite my colleagues' bills to encourage body cameras, this congress does nothing, no hearings, no blue ribbon commissions, no nothing. i would like unanimous consent to enter this list of people killed by the police into the record so my colleagues will no longer ignore this crisis. mr. speaker, here are just a few names of our colleagues and neighbors. and relatives. walter scott from north carolina. michael brown from missouri. anthony hill from georgia. tony robinson from wisconsin. kevin davis from georgia. nicholas thomas georgia. daniel elrod nebraska. antonio zambrono montez, washington. david of pennsylvania. jessica hernandez, colorado. kevin davis, georgia. dennis grigsby, texas. romaine brisbon, phoenix. tamir rice, ohio. akai gurley, new york. carlos perez, nevada. kajimi powell, missouri. ezeal ford. dillon taylor, utah. nahisis of colorado. charlie landeaux and the list goes on and on. thank you, mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from texas seek recognition? mr. burgess: mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. burgess: i thank you, mr. speaker. april 1, just a few days ago, most people don't realize it but the center for medicare and medicaid services reduced physician reimbursement for medicare patients by 21%. this occurred as a matter of law. this is a deadline that we've been up against before, a drama we've seen played out in this house multiple times during my tenure here. this time it's different because the house of representatives right before the end of march, chose to act and passed by vote of 392 individuals to repeal this formula that crops up every year and threatens our medicare patients and those that provide care for them. this bill is sitting over in the other body. the chaplain talked about this being a season for renewal and indeed it is. it is my hope that in the other body that spirit of renewal will take hold, they will take up and pass the bill that passed this house with an overwhelming majority some two weeks ago. it's time to do it. the other body can act. i yield back my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from arkansas seek recognition? >> mr. speaker i seek unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> mr. speaker, i rise today to acknowledge the outstanding work of dr. merlin augustine and his wife beverly of fayetteville, arkansas, and the event his foundation has sponsored for 22 years, the annual easter feed, held the saturday before easter. mr. womack: this year a record 6,741 people enjoyed a meal fit for kings, served by men and women of all walks, including a number of local, state and federal officials and scores of volunteers. . their son established a foundation for the purpose of helping the less fortunate. the easter feed is its signature event. it's the kind of event that warms the heart reminding all of us of our duty to care for those around us. i want the nation to know how much i appreciate this beautiful couple for their kindness and their decency. and their dedication to our community. my wife terry, and i always look forward to helping at the event. few things in life give us more pleasure than the easter feed. thanks, merlin and beverly. can't wait till next year. i yield back. shira: the gentleman yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from seek recognition? >> mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. >> instead of exporting excess oil like other nation, the united states oil producers are forced to leave oil in the ground. mr. poe: the solution is clear, lift the crude oil ban. we should follow the blue bell ice cream philosophy, use what you can and sell the rest. here in this case abroad. exsprts will improve our national security by increasing united states influence around the world. we can make middle eastern oil politics and their turmoil irrelevant. europe gets 40% of its oil from russia and our exports will give europeans and alternative to putin's monopoly. japan and south korea rely on crude oil from iran to' their -- to satisfy their growing consumption. because of the deal it is now the u.s. government policy to eventually allow iran to export crude oil, but it's the u.s. policy to prohibit u.s. producers to do the same. how nutty is that? lifting the ban will create thousands of jobs, inject billions of dollars in the economy, and help advance our national interest abroad. make the same deal with america the government gave with iran. allow oil exports. and that's just the way it is. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. pursuant to clause 12-a of rule 1, the chair declares the house in recess until approximately 4:00 p.m. today. become progress. host: congress returns from their two-week spring recess. we are joined by lauren fox from "national journal." a look think they have a lot to do in the coming weeks. guest: they certainly do. i think one of the first thing that congressmen and senators will deal with is they are clamoring around this deal with iran. they are concerned about that. it is something the senate foreign relations committee will turn to this week. house members are looking to the senate to pass the medicare doc fix. we are also seeing here -- you know, house republicans have a series of bills on taxes that they prepared ahead of the filing on april 15. host: on the issue of the doc fix, this headline -- senate wrangles over medicare payments fix. certainly, among the items to get fixed is a budget resolution moving forward on 2016 spending. what do we know about that? guest: i think we should note that this budget is very important for republicans. this is what they ran on in 2014. it is important that they prove they can govern with his budget document. i think one of the sticking points here will be brought to the -- broad disagreement on military spending items. moving forward, i think that will be a sticking point. certainly, there are other differences between the senate budget and the house budget that will need to be worked out. that will be on top of the agenda. republicans note that this is a must pass piece of legislation for them. host: it is tax week. tax deadline on wednesday, the 50. the house focusing this week on tax legislation. broadly, will any of that have any trackstion in the u.s. senate? what will we see? guest: one of them that six out to me is legislation to prohibit irs employees from using personal e-mail accounts to conduct official business. this harkens back to the scandal a couple of years ago for special application to certain groups that wanted special status. it is certainly not something that will pass without any democrat votes, and i don't see democrats willing to get on board with something like that. host: on the issue of personal e-mail accounts. the issue of hillary clinton's e-mail server came up. as congress is going intoo recess, what is the status of the benghazi committee andy status of their request to interview hillary clinton? guest: i think we will have to see what trey gowdy is saying moving forward. something to remember is they have to be very careful. they are walking a fine line here between investigating benghazi which is what their jurisdiction to do and waiting into presidential politics. i think trey gowdy is very careful to make sure republicans aren't seen on capitol hill as using this as a political statement ahead of the 2016 presidential election. host: you can see more of lauren fox is reporting oni do not think he's making it to the finish line. host: more of your calls coming up. we are joined by mark com caputo. tell us about the expected themes that marco rubio is going to talk about today. guest: got to give credit to marco rubio announcing at the freedom tower. a mediterranean-style building built in the 1920's in the miami. in the 1960's it was used as what became called the ellis island of the south to process cuban refugees freeing -- fleeing from cuba. use using this as a launchpad to announce he is running for president. it fits within his history and within his narrative of being "the american dream candidate." whether the campaign craft is going to be good enough to get him across the finish line is going to be another matter. host: how is he going to position himself early against the announced candidates? rand paul? ted cruz? even hillary clinton? guest: rubio up to now has been largely a candidate of ideas and biography. in many respects he has echoes to president obama back in 2008. his campaign strategy and tactics will not necessarily say . i've heard the speech but nevertheless it is effective. he talks about how he is the son of a maid and a bartender and what a ghost of fundraisers he will see a bartender and think back to his father's struggles. expected here more of that. a similar speech he gave at the rnc. as for where he positions himself, it almost seems like all lanes. he has a little bit of tea party, a little bit of establishment. i would not say much of a libertarian lane. in many respects, his campaign success is premised on the idea that jeb bush has too many structural deficiencies within the republican party. scott walker might not be able to make it either. he almost rises by default. we will see how that plays out. host: your piece in political.com is headlined "why marco rubio could not say no." guest: we've been writing these pieces about how candidate got to yes. when rubio's advisors look at his history, it was more like, what is the reason not to run. they could not find one. the best reason would be to stay in the u.s. senate and run for reelection in 2016. florida does not allow you to run for two offices in the same ballot. rubio is not a fan of the u.s. senate. he likes the prestige but does not do anything. this is not necessarily the most attractive place for him to stay. rubio has his main residence in west miami unlike a lot of senators and congressmen. he did not move to washington. if he does move to washington he wants to move to the white house. host: mark caputo, covering the story. you can follow reporting on politico.com >> senator rubio's views on immigration are a part of the discussion on the issue with the archbishop of miami and other immigrants' rights activists. the panel has criticized congress, the bush, and obama administration it's for not doing more to address the situation faced by millions of undocumented immigrants in america. they also talk about potential 2016 presidential candidates and their views on immigration. florida international university in miami is the host of this event. >> thank you, michael, for inviting us to participate in this event as co-sponsors of the panel today. pleased to introduce our four guest speakers. we have three right now but hopefully the fourth in a few minutes. and then after the interventions, will i moderate the question and answer period. i think we are going to change the order of the presentations according to professor gillespie who is the boss here. let me introduce our first speaker. abaward winning bilingal journalist. and moderator weekly public affairs series issues on wpb 2. i could say more but i'll be brief. secondly we'll have far thomas -- father thomas who has been since 2010 the fourth archbishop of miami and previously served as bishop of orlando and has a very long record working with various immigrant groups, including cubans and haitians here in miami. our third speaker will be dailya walker huntington, an attorney and principal of the law offices in hollywood, florida, and council to hamilton and miller in miami. she practices in the area of immigration family and criminal law, a native of gentleman makea. our fourth speaker, who will hopefully, she's just here, will be jesse who is a co-foundor and executive director, a strong advocate of the haitian community in south florida especially women and refugees. without further ado. a identified' like to thank f.i.u. for hosting this conversation and i like it that it's branded as a conversation because i think we have too few conversations in our country in general. we shout a lot but we don't talk a lot. i think this is one of those that really deserves meaningful conversation. i love it that this conversation's also occurring the day after st. patrick's day where we celebrate something that is so fascinating which is the irish tradition which seems so foreign to us here in south florida, and yet is such a central core. there are many hispanics and african-american and blacks who were exporting green yesterday in recognition of st. patrick's day. it's interesting because obviously that is part of the immigrant phenomena which is so much a part of the fiber of our country. we've always had a struggle with immigration and anyone who is irish for a few generations back could tell you that being irish was not always an easy experience. hispanics today will tell you, perhaps then we are the ones who have replaced the irish. and we are the ones who are experiencing. of course the haitian american community could also speak to that but i will leave that for yesterday as well as others to address that issue. it seems odd to me that we are even talking about immigration reform at this point in time. a country that is -- we consider the number one leader in the world. a country that is the largest -- not the largest but one of the greatest democracies in the world. world leader on so many fronts can't get this issue right. it's one of those things that keeps us stalled in the policy debates as if this was pardon the fun, a foreign conversation when it's not. it's something that's so basic and elemental and part of the fiber of our contry. and -- country. yet we see it stalled regardless of who is in power and where the majority lies in washington, d.c. when the democrats were in absolute power in 2008, from 2008 and 2010, one would have thought that they would have taken the happy opportunity to pass immigration reform at that point in time. and they chose not to. they passed other legislation, including health care reform, and the one promise that was made to the hispanic community was squandered. something that has been reminded of the democratic community and president obama in particular time and time again. the republicanses complain about illegal immigration -- republicans complain about illegal immigration and do the same. nothing. they stop all discussion and all conversation as if doing nothing is an answer or a solution to the problem. border security is an important part of the conversation and republicans will tell you that it's the first thing that needs to be addressed. many would agree. but go ahead and address it. and yet they don't. and when you do have border legislation, it's scuttled because there's this desire to have a majority republican voice in this thought or in approving this piece of legislation. when it really isn't necessary. and one would wish that leadership on both sides of the aisle would reach out to each other and say what can we do to make this happen, to bring the country together. and who would disagree that we do not need to bring the country together on this very important issue? what to do with the undocumented immigrants that are here. here's a news flash. being undocumented ultimately end up becoming citizens. why? because they have american-born children who when they become of age ultimately claim their parents. not the case for all as dreamers will attest. but certainly it is a reality for very many. in very short period of time, 40% of the work force will be hispanic. non-hispanic age -- non-hispanic working age men and women, their growth in the job market will be almost zero. minority communities are having more children than white non-hispanics. from an economic perspective, it makes all the sense in the world. from a religious perspective, and i'm going to leave that for the man who saves souls to discuss, but out of humanity, out of history, out of a sense of community and understanding of our history immigration reform should be resolved. in 2016, if this is not a resolved issue, it will further divide the country in ways that will be more than unfortunate. thank you. >> archbishop -- worked many years in the haitian community, 18 years. ghing in the 1970's all through the 1980's and into the 1990's when i became auxiliary bishop of miami and bishop of orlando and now archbishop of miami. immigration has been part of my life all those years. the last major immigration reform was accomplished in 1986. under president reagan. and that included an amnesty. amnesty that certainly benefited this community to the good and many, many ways. by the end -- by the mid 1990's, towards the end of the 1990's, we realized that that legislation did not address all the issues that needed to be addressed, and it was clear that we were facing a broken immigration system. so since that time we have been trying to advocate for a fix a reform of immigration system. the united states catholic bishops in the year 2001 issued a pastoral letter that was also signed on to by the bishops of mexico. it was entitled strangers no longer. in which we sent out our priorities on immigration reform and what shape it should take. we were lucky in that both the staff of senator ted kennedy and senator mccain used that document to put forth an immigration reform proposal that was on the table in the early part of the 2000s. i remember i went up to washington d.c., in september -- i think it was september 9 and 10 of 2001. i think on the 9th the president had addressed a joint session of congress which he also underlined the need for immigration reform. the next day i and another bishop, we went to see the head of i.n.s. at that time and he said bishops, we are going to get it fixed. it's going to be a fix pretty soon. i got on my plane, flew back to miami, went to bed. when i got up the next morning i was going to work. on the radio 9/11 happened. and 9/11 basically changed the equation. america went into a bad mood and we have since -- we have yet to emerge from that bad mood and that bad mood has been stymiing our efforts to initiate immigration reform. so we had the senator mccain bill which was cliss basically should be the gold standard the kennedy-mccain bill that came out in twufpblet it was going to provide a very good and very reasonable and very humane and just immigration reform. it didn't make it partly because of the bad mood resulting from the 9/11 attacks. later on senator martinez from florida attempted another iteration of immigration reform bill that was about 2005 maybe 2006. he and senator hagel. it wasn't as good as the kennedy-mccain bill in my eyes, it was acceptable. and that wasn't able to get through partly because by that time president bush had lost his political capital because he supported both the kennedy-mccain bill and supported the martinez-hagel bill, but he lost the political capital to twist elbows and twist arms and get the necessary votes in the house and the senate. at the same time, it was interesting to note that the democrats who generally have been usually at least publicly in favor of immigration reform decided to let president bush out alone on this issue. in fact, rahm emanuel, the mayor of chicago, was a great influential guy in the house at that time, congressman, he went around to democrats in the house and said don't you dare vote for immigration reform now. if you do, the party will not give you any money for your campaign. why did he do that? basically because he wanted -- they wanted to make sure that immigration reform would not pass while there was a republican in the white house. so they were going to wait for a democratic white house when they could do immigration reform and also use that to their political advantage. as you already heard, when the democrats had both the white house and the majority in both the senate and the house, they didn't act on it. we still are struggling. we still are advocating for immigration reform. we were happy for daca, which was a relief for the dreamers. we were happy for it because it wasn't what we wanted. we wanted the dream act. we couldn't get it. so we applauded administrative resolution. not a solution but band-aid that provided relief for thousands of -- hundreds of thousands of young people. we supported dapa, the latest administrative action of president obama to provide relief to parents of u.s. -- who have children that are u.s. citizens or u.s. residents. that was going to perhaps help out maybe five million of the 11 or so million undocumented in our country today. the president announced it. and in doing so he angered republicans and of course they initiated some action in the house to defund it, to derail it in one way or the other. before they had a chance to do that some judge in texas basically ruled it unconstitutional and it's on hold until it's appeal to a higher court and hopefully that will be overturned. unfortunately, even if it's overturned it's only a temporary fix because it doesn't provide legalization. it doesn't provide a path to citizenship. it just says that for x amount of months you can get a work permit and you can get a driver's license and you can be in the country without legal status. that's not a solution. that's not a permanent solution. but we support it and we think that the president did have the authority to do it. and we think it's a good temporary stopgap measure. but what we do need and we can't do it without congress, we do need a fix to a broken immigration system. and the catholic bishops have been saying for the past 10-plus years that an immigration reform should have three legs. like a three legged stool. one leg is a path to citizenship for the 11 million or so that are here in this country already. these people are already part of our american society even though they are not -- they don't enjoy legal status. they have american citizens who are their children, they might have spouses that are american citizens, their neighbors. they are already integrated into the fabric of our society. and even the republicans admit that we are not going to be able to deport 11 million people. so we are not going to deport them. then we should give them a path to legalization. that path to legalization really is not only in their interest. it's in our own self-interest as the american society. by leaving 11 million people outside a legal status, we are basically recreating in our nation a new sanctioned underclass that's exploitable because they don't have legal protection. the last time we did this as a nation we called it jim crow. we haven't been able to overcome the effects of jim crow even to date. so why would we want to do it again for 11 million people? that's the first leg. given the 11 million in this country -- giving the 11 million in this country a path to citizenship. the other leg would be family reunification. one of the reasons why we have this trouble at the border of people being smuggled in, people like the children that came in or still coming in over the south -- southwest texas border is many of these people are looking for reunification with their families who are already here. in the 1990's our government started to to increase security on the border by militarizing the border. a lot of people that used to go back and forth from mexico and go work in apples in seattle area, they thought it was harder to get back and forth so they stayed in the united states. and they didn't have the vocation to celibacy so they wanted to have their wives with them and children with them. and that's -- that create add whole new business of coyotes smuggling women and children across the border. and we have more than one case of women and children dying on the back of trucks suffocated because they were being brought across the border in a desperate attempt to reunite with family members. right now if you're a mexican and you are a legal u.s. resident or citizen, and you have a wife or a child in mexico, you have to wait 10 years before that person can get a visa to come to this country. the same is true if you're in the philippines and many other countries. when people say why don't you stand in line, well, many cases there is no line or the line has no end. so family unification visas have to be rationalized and the backlogs eliminated so that there is an incentive for illegal gration for people just wanting to unite their families to live as a family. that's the second leg. the third leg is a worker program. we have to assure our american businesses a supply of legal work force. i think most people working in service industry, working in the agricultural industry would prefer to have a legal work force. and right now you have agribusiness they are very nervous, they tend to vote republicans, but they are in favor of immigration reform, because they have a very narrow profit margin. and their ability to harvest crops and to get chickens to market and all that can be blown out in the water by some crazy enforcement measures taken by immigration authorities, etc., etc. right now we have a system where you survive a dangerous gauntlet going across the border you'll find a job someplace. and immigrants have gone into every one of the 50 stites. they have done it without any federal program directing them. but they go to where there are jobs. if you look around our communities throughout the united states, the immigrants are now sleeping under bridges. they are not the ones sleeping under bridges. they go to where the jobs are and they find jobs. so you find several americans and mexicans working in unions in new york state. milking cows in new hampshire. working in alaska, everywhere. why don't we rationalize this and allow these people to work legally? that's immigration reform. those three legs. take care of the ill lease that are here undocumented that are here by providing them with a path to citizenship. work out the kinks and the family unification program. and assure a legal work force for our industries that require workers, especially those on the low end of the economic scale. back to 1986 when we did immigration reform. it was a tough lift back then, too. if it was interesting because what we are seeing today in the united states, all this anti-immigrant feeling expressed in different areas, we lived it here in south florida in the early 1980's. it was mostly focused on the haitians. in fact, we had an indefinite detention policy for haitians. there's now detention policy for everybody. and i got to shut up soon because i'm exceeding my time. let me just say this is that -- what was a local problem here has now become pretty much a national issue. however, let's look at south florida. we survived it. our experience of immigration in the 1970's and 1980's have shown us we have nothing to fear from immigration. immigrants are not problems. they are opportunities because they bring gifts that -- and they bring possibilities and dreams and determination etc., etc. we can see how -- we should be able to say that our south florida experience should show to the country that there is no reason to fear immigration. that it is a positive for american society. let me just end with a -- the cuban adjustment act. the cuban american congresspeople were advocating that now is the time to do away with it. i thought that was a foolish thing. for them to say. because that's what the castro government has been saying for over 20 years. here we go, politics makes strange bedfellows doesn't it? that we have the hard lining cuban americans basically advocating for a position that the cuban government has been advocating for two decades to do away with the cuban adjustment act. i think the cuban adjustment act should be a template of how we should treat immigrants. because the cubans have been the most successful immigrant group in american history. one of the reasons for their success sure they have their own talents and genius, etc., etc., one of the reasons cubans succeeded was because it was a cuban adjustment act. which meant that one year after they were here, they had a green card, and five years later, six years late they were u.s. citizens. i remember in the 1980's, too, there was always a lot of comparisons made between the treatment of cubans and the treatment of haitians. cubans were treated better than the haitians. but the haitians were not treated much worse than the mexicans or the hon curians or people. -- hon cureans. -- hon doorans. we should treat the cubans as bad as we were treating everybody else. i think what we should argue for is we should treat everybody else as good as we have been 2r50e9ing the cubans because that cuban adjustment act works. and if it worked for the cubans can can work for everybody else. with that i'll be silent. >> my answer as attorneys we have to do both. lawyers are advocates. we represent clients in the courtroom. we problem solve. we negotiate. and we also advocate. most terns who -- are members of the national organization called the american immigration laurps association or. it has over 13,000 members much the mission established in 1946 is to promote justice and to advocate for fair and reasonable immigration reform. the process and we are the ones who see the day-to-day impasse of immigration laws on individuals and families both inside and outside of the united states. we see with when parents are separated from sons and daughters for seven to 10 years and in the mexican context 21 years if you're filing for a son or a daughter who is over 21 years of age. and siblings who are separated for up to 13 years. alya has a national day of add vow can says, april 16 in washington this year, where attorneys and representatives from all across the united states converge on d.c. to lobby congress for meaningful immigration laws. not just immigration reform. because while we do know about the -- the numbers vary between 10 to 15 million people who are undocumented. there are also laws on the books that separate families. i'll give you one example. if you are the parents much an american citizen and your son or daughter is over 21, you have remarried and you now have a few family, if you remarried after that son or daughter was 18, that stepchild cannot file for their step parent. and also if they file for their sibling, the sibling goes into a category that says they have to wait 13 years. so you have once again the separation of families. and as helen said earlier, although america has a history of immigrants, we also have a bad history of limiting immigration. as each group assimilates they turn, it seems against the next wave of immigrants. the irish, german polish, italians eastern europeans were not always welcomed to america, but now they are established. and the newest immigrants, the latinos, africans and caribbean people are being resisted. it's up to lawyers to partner with other groups such as the church and n.g.o.'s to make and help document the contribution that immigrants have made and continue to make to this great contry. and while on that -- country. and while on that subject, it's not uncommon to hear people with the last names of rubio and cruz who are also anti-immigrants. as lawyers we have to show the american people how they benefit from reunification of families. which is supposed to be the hallmark of u.s. immigration. and in today's america, how america can benefit from keeping students who are educated in the united states in institutions such as f.i.u. that are forced to leave with their knowledge because they have no past, no clear path to residency or entrepreneurship. the 12 million to 15 million undocumented in this country definitely need a path to legislation -- legalization, and it should not take 13 years as was proposed in the senate bill that passed in 2013. the people need to come out of the shadows. they need to obtain driver's license. make it safer for all of us on the streets. they need to pay their back taxes. pass a criminal background check. and become permanent members of the society to which they contribute on a daily basis. many are already paying their taxes, but even if they are not, they are part of the economy that contributes to the way in which we are able to live in this country, whether we want to believe it or not. now, as lawyers, as an advocate for your client, we have a duty as lawyers to be knowledgeable of existing laws and find ways to use the laws that exist to help our clients. immigration law is complex. it's second in complexity only to the internal revenue code, and it's not uncommon to have different applications of the law. and to receive different answers from different u.s. agents. you call the 800 number today you get one answer. you call tomorrow you ask the same question you get a different answer. the immigration lawyer has a responsibility to daily update themselves on what is happening in immigration law. in the criminal law context defendants are entitled to council. even deportation which is the most severe of penalties, the separation of families, is not considered a criminal matter. it's considered civil proceedings. so there is no right to have counsel appointed to you in immigration law. you have the right to counsel only if you can afford it. and we saw last year with all those children who were coming in, many of whom were 5, 6, 7 years old who were sitting at stables such as these in front of immigration judges not speaking the language and not having any representation. so n.g.o.'s and churches do try to provide flee or reduced fee counsel, but the need outweighs the availability. because of that many immigrants including adults, appear without counsel. as lawyers we also have an ethical duty to take on case that is are within our competence and knowing immigration law and giving the correct advice is a matter between remaining in the united states and being forever separated from your families. we have a responsibility to be at the forefront of advocacy as far as i'm concerned because of the knowledge that we possess where sometimes accused of not wanting nonlawyers to quote-unquote, benefit from the business of immigration. and it's mind-boggling to me because even after practicing law for 17 years, my colleagues and i, we still call each other and bounce cases off each other because a whole study and maintaining of immigration law is so complex. and we are very overwhelmed in our heavily immigrant community in south florida, which is so unique, to have so many different countries represented here and some pockets of heavy different nations. we are overwhelmed with people who believe they know more about immigration law than practitioners who are submerging themselves in the practice every day. so i do join with my two prior panelists in advocating that we need immigration reform in this united states. not only did president bush expend his political capital by not pushing, but president obama also expends his political capital by not moving within the first 100 days as he promised to pass immigration law. and as a practitioner who is out there and also an advocate every day, i don't see it happening in the next two years, within this before the 2016 election. i hope to be proven wrong but i don't see it happening. what has happened in texas is 26 states including the state of florida, joined a lawsuit to stop the president's execive action he signed in november of last year and it's interesting that the judge who issued the injunction against the enactment of the executive action didn't do it on the merits of the executive action but chose to do so on procedure saying that the president did not follow the procedure of putting it out there for certain number of days and it was a procedural or technicality, as the nonlawyer would say that has caused this executive action, not to be implemented. which was going to have widespread results not just the five million people who are expected to benefit from daca -- from dapa, deferred action for parents, but the whole revamping of immigration, looking at it and the president has the -- and the president, as the executive of the country, has the authority to decide how his agencies, in this case the department of homeland security how homeland security is going to implement the laws that are already on the books and there is a law on the books right now so technically someone in homeland security, and this is done every day, that a person comes up for deportation and that deportation is deferred and they're allowed to apply for a work permit. so what the president did in that regard was nothing that is not being done on a daily basis but what he was saying is, apply it across the board, invite people to come in and apply come out of the shadows, get this monkey off your back and continue to contribute to the united states. thank you. >> thank you. thank you so very much. it's wonder to feel actually benefit from all that you've heard if the previous speakers. so let me just add a few more elements. let me remind us of what the imperative interest today, in terms of seeking to achieve immigration reform. first and foremost, the heritage, the legacy, the values of our country clearly demonstrate that this is something -- immigration is something we embrace in spite of the times where we have been not too welcoming to significant numbers of immigrants. ms. metellus: it remains in our moral authority that we live up to our values. i think no american disagrees with this, even those who appear to be today's anti-immigration reform voices. all right. second thing is that, look we all agree that immigration reform requires that we secure the border requires that all of the people the 11 million-plus people who are here in this country who seek to be legalized who seek to have their status adjustment they must learn to speak english and generally they do, they must pay their taxes, and they actively try to do this today even if not through a social security number but through an identity number. they want to be participatory, they want to contribute to the growth of the economy. the children are in school and want to take every opportunity that this country offers and everyone seeks to live the american dream right? so i don't think that in the immigration reform advocacy corner, no one i don't think anyone disagrees with the principles i just cited. and so today what's going on? you heard them reference the post-9/11 mood of this country, right. and i think there's some other elements, too, that explain the partisanship, the hyper partisanship, the rancor, the nastiness the gridlock, and all of the things that we know about congress today. and i'm going to tell you the truth, i believe clearly there's a black man in the white house, i think that's an element. i think the anti-immigration forces and voices in this country have taken over and have drowned out the voices of the silent majority which is many of us right. those of white house do nothing, say nothing, because we don't think that our voices matter, we don't think we can in fact figure out ways to amplify those voices such that collectively we make an impact, right. so when you've got this kind of mood in this country and got a very minute, i wouldn't say minority but a minute group of people who are holding the rest of us hostage, holding this process hostage and of course are finding their voices through some elements that they're elected to congress that are then participating in this gridlock and rulling in us being the laughingstock of the world. where sour moral authority? where is our authority to preach to others? where is our authority to say to other countries, other people and other areas of the -- and in other areas of the world that they must do x y, and z to live up to democratic values and ideals, to live up to human rights values and ideal live up to the standards we are known to be identified with. hererer trampling on those very same standards where i think large segments of our immigrants are concerned. you heard archbishop mention they the fact that haitian immigrants in this country and this community in particular, were treated very, very badly. there was probably some unwritten policy that suggested haitian immigrants within to locked up. haitian immigrants were to be detained indefinitely. haitian immigrants were to be discouraged from come into this country indefinitely, whether that meant sending them back. even when morally we could not withstand the public and worldwide criticism, i think we came up, what was it, some sort of policy to sort of say yes, we understand that, it doesn't look good that we would treat up with group of immigrants a certain way which is in particular the cubans, and yet treat haitians or others under the same circumstances and yet they're turned back. i'll tell you this story very quickly. a boat on high seas, haitians on it, happened to meet a group of cuban rafters whose i don't know, transport mechanism was disintegrating picked them up, they all arrive here together. guess what happened? haitians are sent back, cubans are welcomed. so we saw and lived through a number of similar experiences and so i leave it to you to make the final judgment. what i want to take this opportunity remind you of, in spite of everything you've heard you know what we agree with. you know what every advocate, whether or not we are republican or democrat, at the end of the day, we all want the same things i mentioned, we need all of you to not be, not grow the sector of bystanders who are those silent majority who say nothing when your voice are so powerful. we need you to urge your elected represents to act on this, yes, some of us think 2017 is possible. some people say not, some people say yes, but still we recognize that our country our economy cannot sustain this. we will not be able to deport all these people. we know that business sectors that are important to our economy need this labor force, need this work force, so they're on board system of what is it we're waiting for? clearly we recognize that there are some who favor providing visas to those individual whors considered investors, who are going to invest in the economy, who are going to create jobs, who are going to help us in terms of our economic outlook. i don't disagree with that totally but i do also think that we need to make room for family reunification and the -- as the archbishop mentioned because clearly all the individual whors already in this country, already doing the work that none of us would do today, right, the work that none of us would do today, these vimmings are here doing this striving to deserve a place as part of this great country, striving to live this american dream and are having their dreams their aspirations derailed by some individuals who seem to not understand what time it is. so let me just close with reminding off of us, this is something i love to say but i'm careful in the way i say it, because i don't want anyone to misquote me. i like to think that the american immigration system is probably the only ponzi scheme that works. right? to the extent that right you come to this country as an immigrant you apply for other relatives who come new york they apply for successive numbers of relatives who come in and all of us keep growing this economy, keep contribute, keep the country moving forward prorkvide our talent and do all we can to make this country what it is today. is that map a scheme -- is that not a scheme that works? it's in our interest to get it right, get it done and get it done right away. i'm going to stop right here. >> thank you to our guest speakers for a wonderful presentation, help me to recognize them. [applause] now we have some time for questions and answers. i would like to remind you to please be brief and use the microphone over here. we might try to group several questions together to have more time for responses and so on. so whoever wants to start with the first question, please. also identify yourself, if you will. >> my name is alberto, i am a journalist, i am not sure we have the majority silent i am not sure, believe me. however, how we can move the heart of this nation to understand this problem, because this is a big problem you know, very big problem, and obviously if we should have the majority of the public opinion the final going to be different but right now, i don't think we have, how we can change this course. >> polling indicates that the majority of people are in favor of an immigration reform, a fix to our broken immigration system. what happens though is in the house of representatives, the congressmen do not have to respond to the majority of opinion in the united states. they only respond to the majority of opinion within their districts. and so the districts have been gerrymandered and -- in certain ways that most -- you know, most congressmen are coming from pretty comfortable districts and tend to vote either democratic or vote republican and therefore you know, some of the you know the restriction us that are anti-immigration reform in their district the pro-immigration reform people are, perhaps, the minority while to around -- while around the country, the pro-immigration reform people are the majority. that's one of the problems that is keeping it from happening in congress. however, and you know, i'd like to be an optimist and the lawyer here says no immigration reform before 2017 and that's probably right. but i would hope that maybe some enlightenment might reach congress the republicans in congress and that they would think about it and see that it would be to their advantage to give the immigration -- to get the immigration issue off think table before the primary season hits us after the summer. you know. because it certainly would help jeb bush if immigration wupt going to be a hot button issue, if it was resolved by some immigration reform coming from congress now rather than later. so -- and of course then you could also say on the other side, well the democrats, it might be to their advantage not to solve immigration now. because they would use it as a wedge issue in the next election. and so what we have to appeal to is both parties' better angels that they don't look for the partisan advantage but look for the common good and the common good would be served by fixing this problem sooner rather than later because the longer we wait to fix it, the longer we are seeing i see it in parishes around the archdiocese and beyond, of people suffering, families being broken up. of dreams being dashed. >> if i could, i'd like to say in the work i did with univision radio, and i am not with univision america at this point right now but in the work i did it was a political show and a talk show and people would call in from all over the country and there were a lot of hispanics who would also call and say, i played by the rules and i came here in the right way and i applied and i have been waiting five or six or seven years for my child to be able to come to the country, family reunification and now i have, i find out if i had brought them in illegally they'd have the benefit dreamers have today. it is not an easy issue. it's very complicated. part of the struggle that many republicans in congress who are in favor of immigration reform try to find a platform so that there is no preferential treatment for those who are in the pipeline in order come here is an issue. i think that there is an understanding as well that even though a republican congress can pass what they consider immigration reform it might not meet the approval of the white house and it could be vetoed. and we live in a time today where politically both sides are saying it's my way or the highway. and that is the unfortunate nature of the process today. >> to give credit where it's due. last year, around may, i met with congressman boehner, speaker of the house. i met with mario diaz-balart, one of our local congressmen. and diaz-balart was leading among the republicans in the house, a charge to secure a vote on that senate bill that marco rubio got passed in the senate for immigration reform. it wasn't the greatest bill around because as you heard it required a 13-year wait to get citizenship, but at least it would be, you'd have legal status and the ability to work etc., etc. he was working on that and what blew it out of the water was the cry soins the border with the unaccompanied minors. that crisis was going on for a while but it hit the media in the summer and that was the time that that was going to be voted on and basically, you know, the votes that mario was trying to line up to get it through, it all fell apart. not only that crisis but also cantor's loss in virginia. that loss and the crisis took the wind out of the sails of attempts of republicans in the house to push the immigration forward. but hopefully you know, we always say let's keep on going, we continue to advocate, you know. >> another question. >> hi, laney gomez, a student here and research assistant. why is immigration reform so important, specifically for nonimmigrants? >> immigration reform is important because you, right now, there's an estimated 12 million to 15 million people living undocumented in the united states. after the 9/11 attacks, when those persons who took part in the attacks were here primarily on student visas and driver's license, and this is just one issue. ms. walker-huntington: the ability of an alien to get a driver's license became difficult, nearly impossible. so you have people driving on the streets of miami, fort lauderdale across this country who have jobs, as the archbishop said they have to get to, they have children to take to school and they have no choice but to get into a car and drive. they have no insurance and they're putting you and i at risk. that's number one. number two these are people who have been here for 10, 20, 30 years in this country. they own property, they are working in all sorts of different fields. they are doctors, they're nurses, they're bankers. they own businesses, they employ people. but they don't have a green card. they don't have residency. so they're contributing to the economy every day. they're also the people who are doing the jobs as has been said, that we don't want to do. my husband is here an executive housekeeper at a hotel. every time they place an ad far housekeeper, a maid, to get someone who is an american sint or a resident who are born in america, not with an immediate immigrant pass, to come in and do that work. there are industries out there who want to have employees to work. and as the archbishop said, it's always amazing to me and i said it in my office somebody who will -- somebody will walk in who is an undocumented alien who are working. there are people who are born here who tell me they can't find a job. it's important to get these people to come out of the shadows, to pay the taxes undergo a background check and be able to remain here and be part of the fabric of what make this is country great. the president's administrative action was not about the -- was not about deporting families. certainly we are not arguing for people with heavy criminal backgrounds to be able to remain in the country and that's a whole separate issue. but the issue that the president put forward is that he wants to keep families here. to keep families together. to perpetuate the american dream. because unless you are a member of the mikus -- mikusuki tribe or other tribe, your ancestors came from somewhere else. i'm a new immigrant because i'm from the caribbean. i'm a new face to america. i may not be from eastern europe or from northern europe but i am an american. as well. and so we have to embrace the new american whors here. who we live among down in south florida more than other parts of the country. >> an undocumented alien, you get married and they find out he's going to get deported you can't fix it because he falls under the 10-year ban. he'll be deported and won't be able to apply to come back to the united states for 10 years. that's one reason they might be concerned about it if you're not an immigrant but you, you know why should i care about the undocumented. it could come to affect you in a very personal way. so it's good to fix it, you know, to do right by everybody because they'll end up doing right by you. >> and the cost of fruits and vegetables in our community would be unbearable. >> it's also a matter of national security. when we talk about 9/11 and where we are today we are talking about issues of great national concern and we're act knowledging that we have approximately 11 million people who live in the shadows, to say the least. and we say in the shadows because we don't have proper documentation or organized documentation. we know who they are. they go to school with our kids. we -- sometimes they're neighbors and we're more familiar with who they are than not but in other communities, that may not be the case because here we're very open to immigration. south florida is an exception to the rule to a great degree. but from a perspective of national security, why would you not want to have a better sense of who is here, why you're here what are you doing. i don't want that big brother type of government to be -- i don't want a government that also is going to be knocking on doors and asking for papers. many people are here because of governments like that. that's not what this is about at all. but we do have to have a better sense and better control of who is coming in and out of the country. and with the issue of family reunification, i would say the issue of family reunification would be diminished if there was an opportunity for people to have work permit, to come in and out of the country. many do not want to bring their children here if they could avoid it because they think the united states is way too liberal. certainly by standards of other countries. and there isn't enough parental control, right? so the idea of bringing the kids here is kind of frightening. and if you look at the news sometimes it is frightening. >> we have a few more -- questions. why don't we take all three and then ask the panel to address them. go ahead please. >> good afternoon. i'm a representative of the haitian student organization here on campus as well as the catholic panthers. my question has to do with cuban adjustment act. has there been an attempt to implement an act similar to the cuban adjustment act by the haitian community? >> and the next question? >> my name is julio, i'm an undocumented student, i come here to f.i.u. i came here when i was 16, i came here 30 days after my 16th birthday. my question has to do with unaccompanied minors, i'm one of them, and the question is, a lot of them are now actually getting auto removals because they're not going to court. what would it take for the government to realize there's a crisis right now? and what if we applied the cuban adjustment act to these minors. we have had the same amount of cubans arriving to miami every year and when we talk about the minors, we call it an invasion. and it's not even that -- and it's even with cubans coming to the united states. >> and the next question. >> good afternoon. i have too many questions in my mind to pin down one but there's one thing i've always always wondered. in the vast majority, what exactly is it all these immigrants are running away from? i mean, all these countries i mean every country have their glory but i can't help but notice that unfortunately those in the higher power, like, the perfect example would be cuba, i mean, castro he has really done so so much to just demolish a culture that was once way more presentable but i just wonder sometimes, why won't, maybe perhaps we can encourage the immigrants that are here with us, teach them, you know, ways that they might be able to go back to their countries and try to establish a new idea for their people, for the government. i know that in these concerns of these countries, they're not given the chance to learn about the beauty of democracy and such and they are basically blindfolded throughout -- in their lifetimes. they don't know that there's a better world they could live in. it could be their own world, we just need to stand up and say whoever is up there guiding us, for better, i mean, investing for a better outcome please prove yourself or else i'm sorry, you're not being well enough i mean, i live in one nation under god, god wants us all, he loves us all, he wants us to help each other, unfortunately, some of these people in higher power, they'll put on their bright sunny faces but unfortunately in the background it's the pretty different story. they want to hypnotize the crowd into thinking, listen, you have enough. this is more than enough, and it didn't. and we've been given the chance to know that we've learn sod so much. maybe all i'm trying to say is how may we help immigrants help spread the knowledge, the wealth of what we know here to those who have not been given the chance or opportunity to learn it could be a better place for them if they were to take control, as a majority? >> thank you. we'll let the panel respond. >> there's -- we advocate for immigrant rights, we think there is a right to migrate. if you're a human being, as a human being, you have a right to live in conditions worthy of human life. so no one should be condemned to live in less than human conditions. if you cant find those conditions in your homeland, that presumes a right to look for them elsewhere. but that right to migrate is balanced by the right not to migrate. people should not be forced to leave their homelands. and many times, they are being forced to leave their homelands by, you know, by political policies, by gang warfare, by history and poverty. so that's, you know, those are the -- there's push and pull factors about immigration. but the new reality in the world today which is called globalization. our world has shrunk because of technological innovation, because of communications innovation, just think. products made in china are sold in miami. so merchandise products, across borders -- cross -- merchandise and products cross borders every day. money crosses borders in an instant through electronic banking. the only -- you know, so do people, cross borders. and you know, what we're discussing is, the dramatic ways in which people m people cross borders. people that cross borders all the time and for a fortunate number of them they can come with the proper documents etc., etc. but there is a number that are left out and refugees, another issue. you know. people forced to leave because of politics or because of economic reasons system of, you know migration is a real ality that is part of our globalized world and we're trying to respond to it in a human way. and one way to respond to it is by constructing laws that are just and human that serve the common good. i think immigration reform serves the common good. as far as the cuban adjustment act, i think it's a template that should serve as a model of how we should treat other groups of immigrants because it's work sod very well with the cubans. we don't see anything like that happening yet although in the late 1980's or early 1990's, there was something in the nicaraguan community which was kind of a cuban adjustment act for nicaraguans. it helped that population -- i remember as soon as obama took office we were pushing for t.p.s. for haitian immigrants. we were rebuffed. napolitano refused us, how many times? but then the earthquake came and because of the earthquake, then it was granted to the haitians here. t.p.s. temporary protective status. there are hon durants -- hondurans in this clint since hurricane mitch because of temporary protective status. that's 20-plus years now. salvadorans around washington, d.c. a good number of them have t.p.s. because of earthquakes or issues in central america. right now, the haitians are being -- haitians that have family members that are approved can come to the united states at least if they're approved within the next two year, they can come here and wait in the united states for their green card rather than staying in haiti because the situation in haiti is dee dooror ating. that's a humanitarian gesture. they don't get the green card ahead of anybody else but they can come to the united states, join their families, get a work permit and wait for their green card. some type of -- something. it's better than nothing but could have been a lot more generous. so there's -- so cubans really have the gold standard as far as the adjustment act and again, i think it's one way to look at it as a let's treat everybody else as well as we treated the cubans. and i think it would have the positive effect. but i don't think that's going to be much of a chance and i say let's work on immigration reform and get it done for everybody. >> you have to remember the context of the creation of the cuban adjustment act as well. this is immediately after bay of pigs. disappointment. people feeling left out. the american administration not being there to spro provide support. a number of things sort of collided, or converged, to sort of compel the congress create this to pass this law. but in addition to the law, there was so much support that's built into the cuban adjustment act in the form of help to help people reconstruct and rebuild their lives. i think that cubans, probably by far, correct me if i'm wrong, the only immigrant group in the history of the united states, i would say, to have benefited from this kind of reach support not just in terms of the law and the ability to arrive and be eligible for the green card a year into your arrival, five years later citizenship but all the support, support to help you pick up yourself and figure out the way that this country works. i don't think that's extended to other groups unless of course they're designated assignees rr refugees. and then -- assignees or refugees. and then in terms of people leaving their country new york matter where they're going or where they're headed, i want to remind us, no one taking this -- takes this kind of decision likely. you're not going on a cruise when you jump in a raft and decide to come to the united states. that's not a cruise. the ship is barely sea worthy, or not i call it ship, maybe my vocabulary is escaping me for a second. the thing they're traveling in is not sea worthy, right? generally, we don't know the numbers of people who have drowned at sea. we don't know the numbers of people who have become dinners for the sharks. and so i just want to remind us that no one makes this decision lightly. next time you're on a cruise, i invite you to go up on deck top at night and look at what you see out there you see nothing but pitch blackness, right? so that is -- that's the climate, that's back drop of the travel that someone knows when they come to the united states through a makeshift raft or whatever it is they create to try to cross other. that's not a decision people make lightly. it's also important to take note that we sometimes only think of people who are here undocumented as those who came on boats. in actuality the majority of undocumented people here have actually come on visas and overstayed. so even having said that that decision to get on a plane and to leave everything you know, there has to be a push, as archbishop says, factor, that's causing you to want to leave and a pull. the pull factor to come to america is everybody wants to live the american dream, or want to get the education, want to have the opportunity to be whoever we can be. it's the only country in the world where you can be born in a shelter and know that if you put your mind to it, and you work hard every day you can become the president of this university. or you can become the head of a hospital. while there are other countries in the world with opportunities the opportunities that are here, let me qualify that, is more than it is anywhere else. so you find people from all over the world who want to come to america for that opportunity. we happen to live in south florida which is the gateway to latin america and the caribbean. but if you go to other states throughout the united states, you're going to find other pockets of immigrants. you're going to find pockets of africans, pockets of indians, pacts of russians, yukeslavians, and they're all going through the same type of immigration battles that we go through here in south florida. but we know the plight of the haitians and cubans and nicaraguans and jamaicans because that's the majority of who we have here. and so why don't people go back to their countries? that's kind of a political answer. you've hosted your political show. is what -- what can be done from a government perspective to help other countries to build their economies so that less people will want to come here from an economic perspective? now the state department, under hillary clinton's leadership, saw the importance of what is called the diaspora. i'm a member of the jamaican diaspora. i'm no longer living in my country. gypsy is a member of the haitian diaspora living here. the state department under ms. clinton's leadership, has seen the importance of the diaspora. so there have been programs that have been put in place for different members of the diaspora to come together to see how they can benefit their home countries and as jamaicans we do that. the haitian community also has a very vie grant diaspora. that's one way you can help to stop the pull factor. the push factor, rather. put e-- but the pull factor is always going to be there where people are always goint to -- going to want to come to america because this is the shining beacon of everything you can achieve. to the young man who missed the daca by 30 day, you certainly would have been, you're an example of somebody who would have benefited from the president's executive action. because the executive action changed the date. it moved it up. >> [inaudible]. >> you came within the time frame but 30 days too old. too old. you are an example of somebody who needs overall immigration reform. >> if you have a kid -- and hopefully you don't at your age, you'd qualify for d pambings a. >> to be an unaccompanied minor must be a frightening experience. even though you are a young man you come -- and your journey may not have been an easy one, we don't know, be by -- but i can only nadge not having, you don't have family here, how difficult it is to be able to face the trials and tribulation of coming to a different country which is foreign on multiple levels. it's frightening. part of the problem of trying to assist with unaccompanied minors particularly the many who are under the age of 12, is, you know, who propelled them to come here? were they really unaccompanied? do they have parents that are here? many of them are not going to courts. it's a very complex system but there's something that i find very interesting and we talk -- we danced a little bit over the 2016 presidential election. some of the things i find absolutely gratifying is that two possible republican candidates who come from florida, marco rubio and jeb bush have both talked about understanding of the opportunities here and if they were in similar situations they would do the same thing. for the benefit of their families would come over here and break the laws. the struggle that somebody has is that there's this misunderstanding of breaking the laws, all laws is felonies. they're not. being here illegally is zale -- is a civil offense, it's not a felony. but unfortunately, there is a huge misunderstanding given that issue and i -- marco rubio gets heckled a lot and gets criticized a lot because he was on the forefront of immigration reform on the senate side and then he pushed back because he didn't like the bill at the end of it. so he gets no -- he doesn't get -- he doesn't get the credit for bringing it forward and having it approved and he doesn't get credit then after for trying to walk it back. but i will tell you something about marco rubio and that was that before the president, six months before the president did deferred action, i called his office and i asked if i could take a number of undocumented students to him so that he could get a sense of who they were and speak to them and see if there was something we could do with immigration reform and he accepted and there were maybe eight or nine students who went. some gave their full names, some only gave a first name because they were mistrustful. senator rubio at that point in time was only in office six months or so. and maybe less, and he had a very frank conversation with these students of what could be done and what could not be done and they -- he allowed them new york approximately a two-hour meet, he allowed them to speak. and they asked if we are -- i think they spoke about legalization but it was really not to fear deportation. what does that imply? do we get social security numbers? do we get an opportunity to have a driver's license? we need that. what happens to our parents? that was a big concern because we live with our parents. will they be kept whole? and it was a fascinating process and it started what i think is an important conversation and gabbie pacheko was part of that group. when gabbie, for those who may not know was one of the leaders who really started the dream act from miami-dade college. in that conversation, it was obvious that gabbie, because of her age, was not going to be included in what was being proposed at that time and indeed is aged out for daca as well. you're not alone in missing it because of age but that's not to say you can't contribute and that you aren't an important part of this conversation in the community. i just wanted you to know that. i find it ironic that we struggle with this conversation today and yet tell me if this isn't strange. we're allowing people to pay for visas to come in here. we've even dropped the threshold which i'm not saying having half a million dollars is easy but if you have $500,000 you can get a visa to come to miami and you can promise 10 jobs you'll create with this investigation. , you don't have to prove they occur. we are selling visas to this country and we have people of value here who deserve the right to not fear deportation. i'm not -- not a right to not fear deportation but who deserve the benefit to be here and to not fear deportation. >> we need immigration reform, comprehensive immigration reform. we've got to get -- we shouldn't just give up on this congress. we have to keep asking people in this congress and i think that dambings pa willem -- dapa will come up on the table. the judge issued a stay, that will take some time but could be overruled. when it's overruled it'll be in effect and this time right now for those that could be potential beneficiaries of it, it's time for them to gather up their documentation, there's going to be a lot of paperwork, rent receipts, all these types of things that the lawyers will be asking. and you've got to save up your money. the u.s. government will charge you about $500 to partake in that. and then a lawyer might ask you for a few collars -- dollars more too. i think for those that are potential beneficiaries of this band-aid, and it's only a band-aid they should start preparing their documentation and their money to participate in it in the eventuality of the stay being overturned and in the meantime, since that's only a temporary solution, we all have to work for comprehensive immigration reform, not only for the beneficiaries of daca and dapa but for everybody like our friend here. >> i think we have time for maybe a couple more questions. anyone else? >> i'm professor milbar of the english department, despite of my accent. i have a question. everything you were saying is very pertinent, very interesting, and very important in terms of trying to resolve issues. the media is important, the church is important, lawyers important, communal activism is important, but i haven't heard one element which i think might be also significant, of major importance that is education. you are talking about putting a face to the problem. you talked about -- who talks about people here. you talk about the law, about different procedures you talk about a lot of technical things, which are very important. i do not deny the significance of it. but how about education? is there a role for education to play in advancing the cause that you are so eloquently javo kating? thank you. >> obviously education has been on the forefront of this debate all along. and educational -- and educational institutions have been the primary proponents of the dream act in particular. but to show you how complicated it is, we do not get state tuition waiver for undocumented students on state due tueigs. we didn't get our form of dream act until last year. it was absolutely astounding, a state where the hispanic population is so significant. i mean it's been there, but for some reason or other, it gets -- educational institutions push for so many different things. at the end of the day i think they end up pulling back on some things because they have in legislatures they have budget interests they need to push more strongly than other issues. but i would say that education has been at the forefront of this debate as have been hospitals as well. >> and the human faces, i see them in my pews every sunday. you see them in the desks in front of you every day. so that's the human face system of education, like the churches, can put a human face on this issue because really, we're not talking about statistics. we're talking about human beings. men, women, and children that are -- whose lives, whose futures are affected by a broken system. somebody said, you know, as i like to say, immigration law is not criminal law, it's civil law system of being out of status is not a criminal offense it's a civil offense system of to call undocumented aliens law breaks is -- lawbreakers is a bit of a misnomer. in reality, they're not breaking the law as much as the law is breaking them. that's why the law is unjust and that's why the law has to be changed. >> and the f.i.u., the panel being done here today, i'm sure i speak for everybody when i say thank you for hosting us and for providing an opportunity for many others to see this discussion and this could just be one of many that is held. but certainly there's a certain amount of fear in the community. you talked about the one, some of the students not giving their last name. there's this fear of deportation that is very real and from time to time ala national in washington will send an email. there's a reporter doing a story and they want to see a particular person who fits this demographic and you can't find anybody because nobody wants to come forward to put a face on it. and so that becomes a little difficult -- >> the hospitality industry a few years ago, they would just go, the feds would come in and clear everybody out and so that's where the fear and -- we didn't have this kind of fear 10 years ago. we have this fear now. >> it was always there. the fear was always there. >> it's more than a fear it's a reality. >> it is. >> in the past six years more people have been deported than in the past 10, 15 years. >> but to address, i think, another element of your comment i think in the advocacy community, we need to step up the education that i think i'm hear you speak of through maybe create manager opportunities to share the success stories of immigrants to this country on the one hand and the other, to remind our american brothers and sisters, to remind our country of our history and heritage as a land of immigrants. a lot, you know, whose riches today, whose reaches we enjoy and benefit from today are created and built upon continuously by imgrans. yes, we have a lot more work to do in terms of that community education. >> the role of humanity. >> you're absolutely right about that. just a thought to throw out there, it's going to be interesting also to see if jeb bush were to run for president, he married a mexican. he's not talking about -- and he did peace corps. that's where he met her new york mexico city. he's -- it's not one of -- it'll be interesting to see how that plays. i was fascinated to see how he presented at cpac, it's a conservative group in the republican party and 25 or 30 people walked out but the rest stayed and he got a very big applause. and he has been pro-immigration reform. and that to me says something that i think we've reached a tipping point and things are beginning to change in a positive way for this country. now it needs political will. and i know -- you have every right to be like, oh, really? but i will tell you something. a couple of weeks ago, what did john boehner do? he passed the department of homeland security bill, said forget the hastert rule, just vote this up or down and it passed. and the world as we know it continued. and i think that's a lesson that maybe others are going to notice that the bread still continues to be sliced. >> it's interesting that you talk about jeb bush because his name cannot be mentioned on any of the national media circuits in conjunction with his possible run for presidency without talking about, we don't know how his stance on immigration is going to fall out. i would hope that we would step up to the plate and that's a problem people have with politicians in general and particular coe -- and marrow rubio in general, because of his wishy-washy, i'm off the fence, on the fence, i introduced the bill but i'm not going to back it, but you're not coming up with an alternative, now you're hands off in immigration as if your family came over on the mayflower. it's a problem. and if politicians will stand up for what they believe in, i think people will have a lot more respect for them. i certainly would respect jeb bush if he stepped up to the plate. i mean, i'm not going to vote for him but i'll certainly respect him for stepping up and taking on immigration and putting where he stands. >> absolutely. >> they say that making laws are like making sausage. it's a very -- >> not pretty. >> not a pretty process. but i think there is, you know, there's got to be a way to get beyond the logjam. i don't think the republican party is completely restrictionist as there are certainly some restrictionists in that party. you know, very strong anti-immigration. there are some on the democratic side as well. but i think we have to appeal to the good angels on everybody's side and again remind people that politics is a noble vowation and -- vocation and it's about the common good. one of the areas that touches on the common good of everyone this country today is our broken immigration system and it needs to be fixed. >> thank you for a wonderful panel and thank you all for being here. [applause] and good afternoon. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2015] >> on this monday, the house is about to gavel in to begin legislative work. this would be the first day back since members began a spring recess two weeks ago. we'll have live coverage when the session gets under way. while we wait, here's a look at the week ahead in the house. returns from their two-week spring recess. we are joined by lauren fox from "national journal." a look think they have a lot to do in the coming weeks. guest: they certainly do. i think one of the first thing that congressmen and senators will deal with is they are clamoring around this deal with iran. they are concerned about that. it is something the senate foreign relations committee will turn to this week. house members are looking to the senate to pass the medicare doc fix. we are also seeing here -- you know, house republicans have a series of bills on taxes that they prepared ahead of the filing on april 15. host: on the issue of the doc fix, this headline -- senate wrangles over medicare payments fix. certainly, among the items to get fixed is a budget resolution moving forward on 2016 spending. what do we know about that? guest: i think we should note that this budget is very important for republicans. this is what they ran on in 2014. it is important that they prove they can govern with his budget document. i think one of the sticking points here will be brought to the -- broad disagreement on military spending items. moving forward, i think that will be a sticking point. certainly, there are other differences between the senate budget and the house budget that will need to be worked out. that will be on top of the agenda. republicans note that this is a must pass piece of legislation for them. host: it is tax week. tax deadline on wednesday, the 50. the house focusing this week on tax legislation. broadly, will any of that have any trackstion in the u.s. senate? what will we see? guest: one of them that six out to me is legislation to prohibit irs employees from using personal e-mail accounts to conduct official business. this harkens back to the scandal a couple of years ago for special application to certain groups that wanted special status. it is certainly not something that will pass without any democrat votes, and i don't see democrats willing to get on board with something like that. host: on the issue of personal e-mail accounts. the issue of hillary clinton's e-mail server came up. as congress is going intoo recess, what is the status of the benghazi committee andy status of their request to interview hillary clinton? guest: i think we will have to see what trey gowdy is saying moving forward. something to remember is they have to be very careful. they are walking a fine line here between investigating benghazi clerk: the honorable, the sp >> we'll leave the discussion at this point as the house gavels back in to begin legislative work this afternoon, working on bills deal twheg tax code. votes at 6:30. e from the secretary of the senate on april 13, 2015 at 2:42 p.m., that the senate agreed to, senate concurrent resolution 11. signed sincerey karen l. haas. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to clause 8, rule 20 the chair pill postponefurther 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, rule 20. recorded votes on postponed questions will be taken later. for what purpose does the gentleman from texas seek recognition? >> i move to suspend the rules and pass the bill h.r. 299, the capital access for small community financial institutions act of 2015. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: h.r. 299, a bill to amend the federal home loan bank act to authorize private insured to become a home loan bank. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule mr. neugebauer and the gentleman from massachusetts, mr. capuano each will control 20 minutes. mr. neugebauer: i ask unanimous consent that all members have five legislative days to resize and extend their remarks and add extraneous material on this bill. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. neugebauer: mr. speaker, i would like to yield to the gentleman from ohio, the sponsor of this bill, mr. stivers, for five minutes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. stivers: i would like to thank the gentleman from texas for yielding me time. i rise in support of h.r. 299 the capital access for small community financial institutions act. i would like to thank the chairman and the other bill sponsors, mrs. beatty and mr. carson from indiana. i lost my voice last night, but i am the voice of 1.2 million people who are currently denied access and the liquidity that the home loan bank has inside financial transactions. this would make a small statutory change that would allow nonfederally-insured credit unions to apply for membership in the federal home loan bank system. it would not guarantee their membership. they would go through the normal underwriting process like any other applicant. the irony here is every other credit union can join the federal home loan bank system and many nonbank entities like insurance entities are allowed to join. only privately insured private credit unions are denied. there are 128 small credit unions in nine states representing 1.2 million people, including firefighters and teachers and church workers and small business people with a total assets of $13 billion. they are not insured by the federal government, who are insured by a mutual private insurance company that are denied to the federal home loan bank system. this bill would simply change that and fix it. some important pointsr number one, there's no risk to the federal home loan bank system. number two, no more than $4 billion of that $13 billion could be pledged to the bank system at any one time and that's 128 credit unions. so there is no concentration risk, there is no disproportionate risk with these institutions and i think it's really important that we give these people the access to the liquidity that the federal home loan bank system would offer them. i would ask my colleagues to support this legislation which would give community financial institutions the ability to apply for membership in the federal home loan bank system and provide liquidity to these people. i want to thank my co-sponsor that helped so hard to get this bill done. i thank chairman neugebauer and chairman hensarling and i yield back. mr. neugebauer: i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas reserves. the gentleman from massachusetts is recognized. mr. capuano: i yield to the gentlelady from ohio, the co-sponsor of this bill. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized. mrs. beatty: thank you, mr. capuano for yielding me time. thank you mr. neugebauer and mr. stivers. i rise in strong support of the capital access for small community financial institutions act of 2015, h.r. 299. i join congressman stivers in support of h.r. 299. my colleagues on both sides of the aisle supported this bill in a bipartisan fashion, which i'm very proud to be the lead democrat on. we have worked together to h.r. 299 reported out of the house financial services committee with a vote of 56-1. in fact last year, mr. speaker, the same bill passed unanimously on this house floor 395-0. mr. speaker, as you have heard h.r. 299 would permit privately insured credit unions to apply for membership in the federal home loan bank system. a primary belief of the federal home loan bank membership is access to low-cost secured funding, which is a tremendous benefit to consumers. h.r. 299 would not however mandate the privately insured credit unions to become members of the federal home loan bank. therefore, under this legislation, the federal home loan bank would maintain discretion to accept or reject a privately insured credit union's application for membership based on their risk and underwriting guidelines. so why do we need this bill? h.r. 299 is an extremely important piece of legislation for these privately insured credit unions because it would help give members and businesses greater access to credit in a tight credit market. currently, there are approximately 6,400 credit unions across the country, including some 128, 130 privately insured credit unions. of that number of those privately insured credit unions, mr. speaker, 57 of them are actually in ohio. both mr. stivers and i, mr. stivers, the sponsor of the bill from the great state of ohio. these 57 privately insured credit unions 333,000 members in ohio and roughly 145,000 of those members are actually in my district. indeed, the capital access for small communities financial institution act of 2015 or h.r. 299, comes to the floor today because of the very important role we believe that credit unions play in consumer lending and home ownership across this country. for instance this bill would improve access to home mortgage loans for members of three privately insured credit unions that are actually based in my district, the 3rd congressional district of ohio. white haul credit union and the central credit union. additionally, this legislation has garnered support from exclusive insurers of privately insured credit unions across the country, american shared insurance or a.f.i. it is based in central ohio just north of my district, continues to provide employment for the people of my district and never had previously insured credit union depositors to lose money. therefore, i urge support of h.r. 299 because this bipartisan legislation is good policy, it's good for small credit unions and may spur growth of small credit unions that serve the needs of its members, both individuals and businesses. importantly 299 has bipartisan nationwide support for local communities and businesses. mr. speaker, i believe this legislation is a perfect example of the types of regular order, committee-driven actions that we should use as a template for bipartisan cooperation in the house and which if enacted would bring real benefit to the national housing market. i urge members to vote yes on h.r. 299. and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman yields back her time. the gentleman from texas. mr. neugebauer: i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from massachusetts. mr. capuano: i would like to add my voice to support this bill. it's a commonsense bill and i'm proud to support it. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas is recognized. mr. neugebauer: i want to echo the remarks that have been made. this is a commonsense bill and helps main steet and helps consumers. there is a glitch where these privately-insured credit unions weren't not able to access, but this bill passed out of our committee 56-1. and i urge my colleagues to pass this bill and i yield become. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the question is will the house suspend the rules and pass the bill, h.r. 299. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, 2/3 being in the affirmative, the rules are suspended, the bill is passed and without objection, the motion to reconsider is laid on the table. for what purpose does the gentleman from texas seek recognition? mr. neugebauer: i move to suspend the rules and pass h.r. 601 eliminate privacy notice confusion act. the clerk: h.r. 601, a bill to amend the gram leach bliley lact. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule the gentleman from texas, mr. neugebauer, and the gentleman from massachusetts, mr. capuano each will control 20 minutes. mr. neugebauer: i ask unanimous consent that all members have five legislative days to revied and extend their remarks and add extraneous materials on this bill. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. mr. neugebauer: it's my pleasure to yield to the gentleman from missouri, mr. lute luetkemeyer. and i yield to him. mr. luetkemeyer: millions of dollars are spent on privacy notice that are either disregarded or confusing to consumers. think about the cost of this. this outdated requirement doesn't cost in postage alone, but also adds to compliance costs, cost of supplies, printing fees and man hours. financial institutions are required to provide annual privacy notice explaining information-sharing practices. banks and credit unions have given these each year even if the policy hasn't changed. this not only is waste but confusion and increased costs to consumers. i talked to one community bank that said they spend roughly 70 cents for disclosure with a minimum of 250,000 accounts this one bank spends $175,000 on this one requirement. may not seem a lot of money, but $175,000 is a lot of money for a small institution for the one in my district. this is an institution with less than $10 billion assets and will not be helped in the recent changes. i want to be clear on what this bill will do. this legislation will only remove the annual privacy notice requirement if an institution has not in any way changed its privacy policies or procedures. this legislation does not exempt an institution from an initial privacy notice, nor does it allow loopholes for an institution to avoid using an updated notice. the language is not controversial and does not jeopardize consumer privacy and does not exempt any institution to produce an initial privacy notice. this legislation does eliminate millions of costly, confusing and often ignored mailings and this bill information included in these mailings will be more significant to the consumer because it comes when there is a change when the policy is changed. similar language passed the house by a voice vote in the 111th, 1 is h 112th and 113th congresses. in march, this legislation passed by a voice vote of 57-0. this legislation is supported by trade associations representing banks and credit unions and i thank the gentleman from california mr. sherman, for his bipartisan work on this bill and i ask my colleagues for the support and i yield back. . the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california is recognized. mr. sherman: i thank the gentleman for yielding. i thank the gentleman from missouri for his tireless work on this bill. this bill has passed virtuously unanimously in the 11th, 112th 113th congresses. now it's passed our committees 57-0. i want to comment administrator or director chord ray of the consumer financial protection bureau for moving in the direction of this bill. as far as they could. but now it's time to codify this important change. this will not only save money for the small and medium-sized institutions and the entire financial services industry, it's going to get the consumer to focus on changes that are important. there is no better way to hide a tree than to put it in the forest, and there is no better way to trivialize and cause consumers to ignore important legally required notification than to deluge them with unnecessary meaningless and repetitive notifications. and so that's why this bill will not only make our system more efficient, it's not only consistent, i believe, with what the regulators would like to do. it has passed overwhelmingly every time members of the house have had a chance to deal with it. i commend the gentleman from missouri and i yield back my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back his time. the gentleman from texas is recognized. >> i -- mr. neugebauer: i don't have nurt speakers so i'll reserve. mr. capuano: i'd like to add my voice to those who support this bill. another commonsense bill. hopefully it doesn't get three congresses to get our friends on the other side to take action that is something that's relatively simple, straightforward and i personally throw out six or seven of these notifications every month so i would assume that millions of people are doing the same. with that i'd yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from texas is recognized. mr. neugebauer: mr. speaker, i just want to add my support as well to this bill. this is a common sense. as mentioned this bill passed 57-0 in our committee. it ends a lot of confusion. you get those privacy notices when you open those accounts and then all of a sudden next year you get another one and you're trying to figure out if you should read that. what we found out is a lot of people aren't reading those. it's a commonsense bill. i urge people to support it and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the question is will the house suspend the rules and pass the bill h.r. 601. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, 2/3 having responded in the affirmative, the rules are suspended the bill is passed, and without objection, the motion to reconsider is laid on the table. for what purpose does the gentleman from texas seek recognition? mr. neugebauer: mr. speaker, i move to suspend the rules and pass the bill h.r. 1259 helping expand lending practices in rural communities act. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: h.r. 1259, a bill to provide for an application process for interested parties to apply for an area to be designated as a rural area, and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from texas, mr. neugebauer, and the gentleman from massachusetts, mr. capuano, each will control 20 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from texas. mr. neugebauer: mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and add extraneous materials on this bill. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. mr. neugebauer: mr. speaker, it's my honor now to yield to the gentleman from kentucky, one of the primary authors of this bill, mr. barr, for seven minutes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from kentucky is recognized for seven minutes. mr. barletta: i thank the chairman -- mr. barr: i thank the chairman for yielding and for support of this legislation. i also want to thank my colleagues on both sides of the aisle of the aisle who have joined together to support this bipartisan legislation that makes a small but sensible legislative correction to a regulatory policy that we have all heard from our constituents does not work as intended. mr. speaker, i'm pleased to have worked with congressman hinojosa to reintroduce h.r. 1259, the helping expand lending practices in rural communities act, or help rural communities act, in this congress. this legislation has now cleared the financial services committee in two consecutive congresses with overwhelming bipartisan support. furthermore, this chamber approved identical legislation just 11 months ago by voice vote under suspension of the rules. our federal system of limited government enshrines into law the idea that state and local entities know their communities better than any centralized bureaucracy in washington. the help rural communities act reaffirms this commitment by addressing a bizarre situation resulting from the imposition of a one-size-fits-all government regulation that fails to consider the diversity of the cities, towns and rural areas across america. the genesis of this legislation was a conversation that i had with a constituent, a third-generation banker in rural bath county, kentucky. this constituent, thomas richards, was bewildered to learn that consumer financial protection bureau had designated bath county population 11,591 -- yes, that's the entire county -- as nonrural. his family's bank had survived the great depression, the stag flakes of the late 1970's and early 1980's and the great recession of 2008. and yet his testimony, thomas richard's testimony, this third generation kentucky community banker, was that his small community bank in rural kentucky was being imperiled by an avalanche of red tape coming out of washington bureaucracy. there are similar stories from rural communities across this country. this nonrural designation matters because the dodd-frank act acknowledges that rural areas may be underserved credit markets and so should be treated differently under financial regulations. thus an improper nonrural designation by the bureau such as bath county, puts constraints on financial products, specifically responsibly underwritten balloon loans that a bank or credit union can offer in its community, reducing access to credit in rural america. balloon loans are common throughout rural america because they offer flexibility to consumers whose incomes are often cyclical and dependent on commodities. while helping small community banks and credit unions mitigate interest rate risk. h.r. 1259 fixes the problem by ensuring that rural areas are treated under the law as intended by allowing entities that feel they have been improperly designated to appeal that decision. here's what the bill does. h.r. 1259 creates a petition process in which individuals within a state could petition the consumer financial protection bureau to have that area redesignated and to have the bureau reconsider its improper designation of quote, nonrural for the area that is plainly rural. the legislation specifies a number of commonsense factors that the bureau must consider when evaluating an application. upon receiving an application, the bureau is to provide for a 90-day public comment period and then grant or deny such an application within additional 90 days. whatever the outcome, the bureau shall publish in the federal register an speculation of the factors it relied on in -- an expla nation of factors it relied -- exproliferation of factors it relied on. we don't want to lock people into using ggets or ill-fitting census tracks at that don't represent the boundaries of their communities. and i want to thank the gentleman from texas, congressman hinojosa for his important contribution to this feature of the legislation. this element is important because county sizes and census definitions of statistical areas can vary significantly throughout the country, particularly in western states. recognizing the issue with its designation process, on january 29 the bureau proposes a rule to expand its formula to include census tracks in addition to county lines in its rural designation process. unfortunately, this correction, this administrative correction that was prompted by this legislation is still inadequate because census tracks are only updated once every 10 years and were designed for demographic data collection, not regulatory purposes. the result is that the bureau's formula may now consider most of the rural county, primarily farmland or wilderness, to be rural but the small town that would be home to the actual community bank or credit union may remain nonrural. i've already heard from kentucky bankers in rural counties who would not be covered by this expanded designation. there are plenty of similar examples throughout the country of the bureau oddly designating manifestly rural areas as quote, nonrural. furthermore, the bureau still has not implemented an appeals process for improperly designated communities. so mr. speaker, in summary, this legislation is about inviting individuals, the american people to participate in their government and provide input on matters of local knowledge. it's about making the federal government more accessible, more accountable and more responsive to the people who know their local communities best. i am pleased that this legislation enjoys bipartisan support and, again want to thank representative hinojosa for joining me as a co-sponsor of this legislation. and i want to thank chairman neugebauer for his co-sponsorship and stewardship of the legislation in committee as well as my friend, congressman french hill, for joining as a co-sponsor. this legislation is endorsed by a broad coalition, including the u.s. chamber of commerce, the conference of state bank supervisors, the national association of realtors the independent community bankers of america, the credit union national association and the national association of federal credit unions. this is a commonsense and narrowly focused bill to address a real problem imposed by washington on rural america. and i appreciate the opportunity to present it here today. and i urge my colleagues to support this simple bipartisan reform. with that i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from massachusetts is recognized. mr. capuano: thank you mr. speaker. i'd like to yield as much time as he may consume to the gentleman from texas, my friend mr. hinojosa. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas is recognized. mr. hinojosa: i want to thank congressman mike capuano for yielding time to me on this important bill. mr. speaker, i rise today in support of h.r. 1259, the helping expand lending practices in rural communities act. this commonsense legislation would provide much-needed relief to rural americans, not just in my district but in districts all over the country. i especially want to -- would like to thank my esteemed colleague from kentucky representative andy barr, for introducing this very important piece of legislation once again. i fully agree with congressman barr's examples which he gave affecting his district and all of the state of kentucky because in the great state of texas we have examples that will mirror those that you gave us. all across my district -- and i represent approximately 80 communities in my congressional district that expands 250 miles geographically. many rural communities are having trouble getting access to credit while banks are having -- finding to difficult to give money to their consumers. especially the credit products they can offer. for example, under the new qualified mortgage rules, balloon mortgage payments, which are a common credit product offered in rural communities would expos small creditors to -- expose small creditors to increased legal liabilities. because of this, the consumer financial protection bureau established a safe harbor to allow for small creditors in counties as i've described designated as rural to continue offering this financial product which serves so many of the people in those areas. but if not designated as rural, many of those communities i mentioned will not qualify for the safe harbor exemption. that's why we are here today trying to fix something that needs to be fixed in terms of home mortgage lending. this bill gives those who do business in rural communities all over the country the ability to petition the cfpb to reverse an improper designation of rural -- excuse me -- designation of nonrural for a county that is clearly rural. it will give lenders in many areas throughout my district the flexibility they need to offer the credit products that their members depend on while still keeping in place the very important consumer protections established under the new q.m. rules. i'd like to once again thank representative barr for his outstanding work on this bill and in our committee. it has been wonderful collaborating with him to bring the concerns of rural communities to the forefront. i respectfully request that my colleagues on both sides of the aisle vote yes on passage of h.r. 1259. and with that i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from texas is recognized. mr. neugebauer: mr. speaker i don't have any other speakers at this time so i'll reserve my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from massachusetts is recognized. mr. capuano: thank you, mr. speaker. we have no further speakers on this bill. i'd like to add my voice to support this bill as well. and i'll tell you uniequivocally, my definition of rural is whatever andy barr and ruben hinojosa says it is. 11,591 people in a county, i have that on a street. i had that in a building. and i will tell you that i understand fully well there are undisturbed communities in rural areas as well as the most urban areas in the country. i thank the gentleman for this bill and i will tell he my definition of rural is anyplace that will take me more than 15 minutes to drive to some good italian food. if you can't do that it must be rural. i'm glad that this bill is about to pass and i thank the gentleman for offering it and with that i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from texas is recognized. . mr. neugebauer: i appreciate their work on this very important issue. one of the reasons we are here in bringing these bills today is we have had a tremendous reduction in the number of community-based financial institutions that serve rural america. in the last four, five years, we lost over 1,000 community banks and over 1,000 credit unions and that's a real problem for our smaller communities and one of the things this bill helps to do in one bank and without the ability to have the flexibility to make these kinds of mortgages, in many cases, there wouldn't be mortgages available in these communities. this is a commonsense bill and passed 56-2 out of our committee and i urge our coal etion and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the question is will the house suspend the rules and pass the bill h.r. 1259. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. 2/3 being in the affirmative, the rules are suspended and bill is passed and the motion to reconsider is laid on the table. mr. neugebauer: i ask for the yeas and nays. the speaker pro tempore: the yeas and nays are requested. all those in favor of taking this vote by the yeas and nays will rise and remain standing until counted. a sufficient number having arisen. for what purpose does the gentleman from texas seek recognition? mr. neugebauer: i move to suspend the rules and pass h.r. 1265. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report. the clerk: h.r. 1265 a bill to apply the requirements of the federal advisory committee act through to the bureau of consumer financial protection. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas and the gentleman from massachusetts each will control 20 minutes. the chair reckfieses the gentleman from texas. mr. neugebauer: i ask unanimous consent that all members have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and add extraneous material under this bill. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. . mr. neugebauer: it's my pleasure to yield to the gentleman from wisconsin, mr. duffy, the author of this bill who has worked to make sure these advisory committees have transparency. with that i yield the gentleman five minutes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from wisconsin is recognized for five minutes. mr. duffy: i appreciate the chairman for recognizing me and i thank him for his support and for the work he does on the financial services as well as the support from the chairman and ranking member of financial services. i'm grateful to them as well. as we gather in this chamber, i don't think it's very often that we come in in regard to the consumer financial protection bureau. those who follow our committee, there are a few differences how it is structured and how it should move forward. and we had that debate. but all of us agree that consumers should be protected and they should have a strong advocate in that protection. though we have disagreed on some elements of the cfpb, we have a very bipartisan group coming in talking about straightforward reforms that make some of the rules from the cfpb and help consumers and americans out and our constituents out. in regard to my bill in the last congress tried to go to one of the advisory committees at the cfpb. these are usually open in government. there is only a couple of exceptions. the c.i.a. doesn't open up their advisory committee meetings for obvious reasons. but when i try to go to a cfpb meeting i was told they would not accommodate my request because their meetings were closed and that concerned me because they said transparency is at the core of our agenda and key part of how we operate. and on the website they say, you deserve to know what we are doing for the american public and how we're doing it. so i have some concern when the rest of government opens up their meetings, the cfpb wouldn't allow the public to hear the conversation and the dialogue that was going on. and i highly doubt the information is as sensitive as what is taking place at the c.i.a. or study monetary policy. that should be an open conversation debate. and when i introduced a similar bill in the last congress, i actually received a phone call from the director who said, this is a good bill. we have had some disagreement on how it is run, but we'll open up our meetings. well, i don't know in that phone call, -- we weren't on the same page or i'm not going to say it was trick erie on the director's part but they only opened up a small portion of their meetings about an hour and a half and they moved into subcommittee and they wouldn't be open. i want to make sure these meetings are open to the public. that we as a community, american public get to see the conversation that is taking place of the cfpb. makes compleet sense and i'm proud and honored my friends across the aisle were supportive of this measure. the ranking member, ms. waters, kind of in favor of my proposal and recommended a vote in favor of it and i appreciate her bipartisan. but this is about making it work, accountable and making it transparent and that can start at least in the advisory meetings that our government takes part in. so i'm grateful for the support and grateful for the time and i urge my colleagues to support this great piece of bipartisan transparent legislation. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from massachusetts is recognized. mr. capuano: i rise in support of this bill. on occasion, we can come to an agreement. this is the second cfpb bill we have done in a row. some of the members of the financial services would come down and work with us, but these two bills are very good bills. the cfpb already does but they should do them all. there is no question. this is why this is an easy bill to support. and i thank mr. duffy. and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from texas is recognized. mr. neugebauer: i appreciate the gentleman from wisconsin's work on this. some of the points he made, this is about transparency and why that's important is because this agency, the consumer protection financial bureau is making decisions about the terms of financial products that american families can access to and in many ways, the actions of this agency have been beginning reducing the vaket of some of those financial products and it's important to have these advisory groups and i commend the agency for having those. but it's important for the american people to hear the comments and the discussions that are going on that could inevitably affect the kinds of financial products that they are going to be able to access in the future. the fact that many of the other agencies have to fall under the faca, but this -- because this agency is tucked inside the federal reserve, the federal reserve is exempt, but the only other agencies that are exempt are the c.i.a. and the federal reserve as they talk about monetary policy. i hardly believe that they fall in the same category of any of these other agencies that are exempt. so this is a commonsense piece of legislation and allows the transparency that is available in all other agencies across the government and allows the american people to hear those important discussions about their future and the financial products that they are going to be able to access in the future. so, again, i want to remind everybody, this was a bipartisan bill. it passed 56-2 out of our committee. and i would -- with that, mr. speaker, i urge my colleagues to support passage of this bill. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the question is, will the house suspend the rules and pass the bill h.r. 126 . those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, 2/3 being in the affirmative, the rules are suspended, the bill is passed without objection, the motion to reconsider is laid on the table. mr. neugebauer: mr. speaker. i ask for a recorded vote. the speaker pro tempore: the yeas and nays are requested. all those in favor of taking this vote by the yeas and nays will rise and remain standing until counted. a sufficient number having arisen the yeas and nays are ordered. pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20 further proceedings on this question will be postponed. for what purpose does the gentleman from texas seek recognition? mr. neugebauer: i move to suspend the rules and pass the bill h.r. 1367 to amend the expedited funds vaket act to clarify the application to american samoa and the northern mariana islands. the clerk: union calendar number 42 h.r. 1367, a bill to amend the expedited funds vaket act to clarify the application of that act to american samoa and the northern mariana islands. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas and the gentleman from massachusetts each will control 20 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from texas. mr. neugebauer: i ask unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days to extend their remarks and add extraneous materials to the bill. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. . mr. neugebauer: this is a noncontroversial bipartisan bill carried by the american representative in the last congress. this would improve the check clearing wait times in american samoa and northern mariana islands. other noncontiguous states and territories are subject to this act and helps improve financial services in american samoa and northern mariana islands. this bill passed under suspension last congress. i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from massachusetts. mr. capuano: i rise in support of this bill as well. again a simple, straightforward bill and says that american samoa and northern mariana islands is part of america. they should be treated the same. this bill corrects the situation. and should be passed immediately and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: janet. the gentleman from texas. mr. neugebauer: i would like at this time to read a statement that american samoa submitted to me. mr. speaker i rise today in support of h.r. 1367 to amend the expedited funds vaket act to clarify the application of that act to american samoa and the northern mariana islands. i thank the chairman and ranking member as well as the house financial services committee staff who worked so hard to get this bill on the floor. i appreciate their dedication as do the people of america ca samoa. as you know, the ossillings both geographicically lends itself to difficulties in financial transactions that take place. many times you are our citizens and businesses must wait an exorbitant amount of time before they can receive funds. these delays often cause hardships that are both unnecessary and unfounded. h.r. 1367 will eliminate the excessive delays that the people of american samoa must deal with in order to receive funds. i would like to thank chairman hensarling and ranking member waters that will improve the lives of the people of american samoa. i ask all members of the house of representatives vote in favor of this bill and regards to all filing transactions. i urge passage of this bill and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the question is, will the house suspend the rules and pass the bill, h.r. 1367. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, 2/3 being in the affirmative, the rules are suspended, the bill is passed and without objection, motion to reconsider is laid on the table. for what purpose does the gentleman from texas seek recognition? mr. neugebauer: i move to suspend the rules and pass the bill h.r. 1480 the safe act confidentiality and privilege enhancement act. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: union calendar number 4 , a bill to ensure access to certain information for financial services, industry regulators and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from texas, mr. neugebauer, and the gentleman from massachusetts, mr. capuano, each will control 20 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from texas. mr. neugebauer: i ask unanimous consent for members to resize and extend their remarks and add extraneous material under this bill. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. mr. neugebauer: i yield myself such time as i may consume. . this bill ensures the confidentiality of the information provided to the national mortgage lending licensing system encouraging its use which better protects consumers from bad actors prevents states from invading scrutiny. it provides an assurance -- excuse me -- for financial institutions that privilege information shared between federal banking regulators and state regulatory agencies will be protected and remain confidential. this will encourage a greater amount of sharing between institutions and their regulators and will allow our nation's financial regulators to do their jobs to ensure that our financial institutions are operating lawfully while at the same time able to offer consumer credit products that are critical to americans to finance their everyday purchases and start small businesses. the mls is used by regulators in all 50 states and is supported by the state banking supervisors. this bill passed the house by suspension last congress. with that, mr. speaker, i reserve my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from massachusetts is recognized. mr. capuano: thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker on most social issues i consider myself a liberal. on most fiscal matters i consider myself a conservative in the true sense of the word, not the new sense of the word, meaning you should pay for those things you want. when it comes to privacy matters i consider myself a proud libertarian. there is no reason that there is a reason for them to get my information. period. it's my information to share only with those to whom i wish to share it. this bill takes this one step further in keeping my information private and confidential between me and those i seek to share it with. it's a great bill. i look forward to voting for it. this is to keep our financial systems going but there's no reason whatsoever to allow it to be non-- nonconfidential and to be spread around and be available to anybody who might want to look at it. with that i support the passage of the bill. i congratulate mr. dold for putting this forward -- before us to vote on and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from texas is recognized. mr. neugebauer: yeah, mr. speaker, it's my honor to yield to the gentleman from illinois, mr. dold, the primary author of this bill, who worked tirelessly in this area. i yield him as much time as he might consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from illinois is recognized. mr. dold: thank you, mr. speaker. i certainly want to thank the chairman for his leadership. i want to thank my good friend from massachusetts. i also want to -- also comment on the fact that we're delighted that you're a libertarian on some of these things. as we look, mr. speaker, of h.r. 1480, the safe act, and confidentiality and privileged enhancement act it preserves the ability of the state and federal financial regulators to share information regarding consumer financial service businesses that are licensed at the state in the national mortgage licensing system. without losing the privilege and confidentiality protections provided by state and federal law. this is a bipartisan bill that promotes smart and efficient regulation among state regulators. it ensures that state regulators can talk to their colleagues across state lights regarding multistate financial entities without losing constitutionality protections. these amendments are needed due to the unintended gap in the existing national mortgage licensing system statute. as state regulators have expanded their use of the m.l.s. in order to enhance consumer protections to combat fraud, increased uniformity and reduce regulatory burdens in licensing processes, privacy protections have not kept up. this is a commonsense bill that provides regulators with the certainty that they can continue to share information and collaborate with their colleagues across state lines. protecting the integrity of the national mortgage licensing system is important because it uses better -- it -- because it better protects consumers from bad actors who switch from states for licensing purposes to evade scrutiny. this is ensuring mr. speaker, smart regulations. again, i talk to people all around my district the fact that we're not against regulations. we just want our regulations to be smart and tail ord and this is one of these -- tailored and this is one of these things, working across the aisle and trying to find common ground this is one i believe we can agree on. h.r. 1480 does not create any new privilege or accountality rights. it merely ensures that existing rights, confidentiality protections are retained when information is shared through the national mortgage licensing system. so that regulators can share information and communicate. h.r. 1480 has received support from the conference of state bank supervisors, the credit union association and the illinois department of financial and professional regulation, my home state. the safe act accountality and privilege enhancement act, passed out of this committee, out of the financial services committee 58-0. i certainly urge my colleagues to support this bill and look forward to its passage. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from texas is recognized. mr. neugebauer: mr. speaker, this truly is a bipartisan bill. it's a commonsense bill. i think the whole group of bills that we've seen this afternoon will go a long way to helping, you know, keeping commonsense regulation at the same time making sure that consumers are protected. and so i urge my colleagues to support passage of this bill and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the question is will the house suspend the rules and pass the bill, h.r. 1480. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, 2/3 having responded in the affirmative, the rules are suspended, the bill is passed, and without objection the motion to reconsider is laid on the table. mr. neugebauer: mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. neugebauer: on that i ask for the answers. the speaker pro tempore: the yeas and nays are requested. those in favor, say aye -- those in support of taking this vote by the yeas and nays will rise and remain standing until counted. a sufficient number having arisen, the yeas and nays are ordered. pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20, further proceedings will be postponed. pursuant to clause 12-a of rule 1, the chair declares the house in recess until approximately earn earn going to be doing interviews with reporters from ohio, south and dakota and maine. tomorrow, the president will mark equal pay day at the house and will call on congress to pass the pay check fairness act which will strengthen the act of 1963 and give women additional tools. on wednesday the president will travel to north carolina and will discuss the plan that he has laid out in his budget proposal to help those women who are both working in the workplace, but trying to raise a family. on thursday, the president will make a special appearance at the white house where he will honor working families and recognize efforts to fight for things like workplace flexibility and end to pregnancy discrimination. mr. earnest: the president will have the opportunity to sit down with the prime minister and discuss the partnership. the united states has been very encouraging and supportive of the prime minister's efforts to unite the nation of iraq and confront the threat that is posed by isil. he took office promising to govern that country. iraq is a diverse country and the prime minister has ensured that the diversity is reflected in the diversity of the government. and that will be critical to their success in fighting the threat that is posed by isil. the united states has been very supportive of his efforts both diplomaticically and in temperatures of providing assistance and support and we anticipate that support will continue. reporter: there have been some reports he is prepared to ask the president for drone aircraft attack helicopters and ammunition. can you characterize the willingness of the president and/or administration to fulfill the request. mr. earnest: we are engaged in regular, even daily conversations about steps that the united states and the international community can take to support the iraqi people, the iraqi government and security forces as they face down the isil threat. there is intensive coordination between our militaries. the u.s. military has a presence inside of iraq where we can coordinate our efforts and make sure we are leveraging all of the capabilities that our military has. that is part of the strategy that the president has laid out for degrading and destroying isil. we are implementing that strategy by working with other countries. and if there are specific ideas that the prime minister has for stepped-up assistance, we will consider them seriously. reporter: what can you tell us about the press coverage tomorrow? mr. earnest: we are working down to pin down the details. reporter: one question on cuba, the president said he read the state department recommendation on whether to remove cuba from the list of terrorism. has he begun to read that recommendation and time line for when he would want to announce what would be a foregone conclusion. mr. earnest: it has gotten a lot of attention in the last few days this is a significant policy decision that the president and his team will have to make. i don't have an update of where the process stands. the president was looking forward to the opportunity for reading the recommendation from the state department and input that was provided through other relevant agencies. i don't have a specific time line to offer you, but i would anticipate that given that the processes advanced so far, that you can expect a decision in the coming days. reporter: when and if sanctions are lifted, is the president knowing what his response? mr. earnest: we see those reports as those missile systems to iran. the united states has previously made known our objections to that sale. and i understand that secretary kerry. -- ok, i'm going out -- and decision making process that are russia is engaged in right now. but it's safe to say that russia

Related Keywords

Arkansas , United States , Honduras , Nevada , Smithsonian Institution , District Of Columbia , Chester County , Pennsylvania , Alaska , China , California , Jamaica , Northern Mariana Islands , Russia , Washington , Nicaragua , Mexico , Massachusetts , Hollywood , Erie , Illinois , El Salvador , Ireland , South Korea , Cuba , Chicago , Miami , Florida , New York , Haiti , Japan , Philippines , New Hampshire , Germany , North Carolina , Ellis Island , Missouri , Texas , Iran , Kentucky , Indiana , French Hill , Virginia , Wisconsin , Georgia , American Samoa , Fayetteville , Fort Lauderdale , Maine , Iraq , Colorado , Phoenix , Arizona , Ohio , Capitol Hill , Orlando , West Miami , Italy , Utah , Italian , Americans , Mexicans , America , Jamaican , Mexican , Cubans , Hondurans , Iraqi , Italians , Haitians , Russians , American , Haitian , Salvadorans , Jamaicans , German , Nicaraguan , Nicaraguans , Irish , Cuban , Marco Rubio , Pa Willem Dapa , Scott Walker , Michael Brown , Tony Robinson , Walter Scott , Merlin Augustine , Mike Capuano , Carlos Perez , Mario Diaz Balart , Andy Barr , Thomas Richards , John A Boehner , Trey Gowdy , Jim Callahan , Dillon Taylor , Jessica Hernandez , States Catholic , Thomas Richard , Karen L Haas , Jeb Bush , Dennis Grigsby , Walker Huntington , Rafael Ramos , Lauren Fox , Rahm Emanuel , Ruben Hinojosa , Dwight D Eisenhower , Kevin Davis , David M Rubenstein , Hillary Clinton , Ted Cruz , Ted Kennedy ,