Prevent Deceptive Census Look Alike Mailings Act

Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 1146 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. Speaker, for the purposes of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Lincoln Diaz-Balart). All time yielded during consideration of the rule is for debate only. I yield myself such time as I may consume.

General Leave

Mr. Speaker, I also ask unanimous consent that all Members be given 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks on House Resolution 1146.

Mr. Speaker, House Resolution 1146 provides for the consideration of H. Con. Res. 248, directing the President, pursuant to section 5(c) of the War Powers Resolution, to remove the United States Armed Forces from Afghanistan. The rule provides 3 hours of general debate in the House, with 90 minutes controlled by Representative Kucinich and 90 minutes controlled by the Committee on Foreign Affairs. The rule waives all points of order against consideration of the concurrent resolution and provides that the concurrent resolution shall be considered as read.

Mr. Speaker, this is an important day, and an important debate, in the House of representatives. Last summer, I had the privilege of traveling to Afghanistan and meeting with our brave troops. They are an incredible group of people, proud of their accomplishments, thoughtful and candid about the challenges that confront them. They deserve to know that we are thinking about them and do not take their lives or their fate for granted. It has been far too long since Congress had a full and open debate on the issue of U.S. policy in Afghanistan.

In 2001, I voted, along with the vast majority of my colleagues, to go after the terrorists who attacked us on September 11th. I believe we must have a comprehensive strategy to counter the global threat posed by al Qaeda and its affiliates, no matter where they are in the world-- Afghanistan, Pakistan, Somalia, Yemen, North Africa, and elsewhere. But I also believe that we have serious challenges right here at home. Millions of Americans are out of work. Our economy is just now beginning to emerge from the worst recession in decades. Our schools, our health care, our tax code, our infrastructure--all must be updated for the 21st century if we are to create a better America.

Mr. Speaker, the war in Afghanistan has cost U.S. taxpayers well over $200 billion--none of it paid for. None of it paid for. All of that money has been added on to our debt. And those costs will continue to rise as we fund increasing troop levels and provide the necessary care to our veterans when they return home. Our policy has drastically changed in those 8 years. We are no longer just going after the bad guys. We are engaged in a massive ``nation-building'' effort in Afghanistan.

Now, I certainly don't believe we should abandon the Afghan people. But instead of nation-building in Afghanistan, I'd like to do some more nation-building here at home.

Our allies in Afghanistan, the Karzai government, do not inspire confidence.

The recent election there was characterized by widespread fraud and corruption. Just 10 days ago, Mr. Karzai unilaterally rewrote the election law to ensure that he can handpick the members of the election monitoring commission that oversees voting irregularities. Talk about the fox guarding the chicken coop.

Over 1,000 U.S. servicemen and women have sacrificed their lives in Afghanistan. Over 670 more lives have been lost by our NATO military allies. Thousands more have been wounded, many severely, in ways that will affect the rest of their lives. Suicide and post-traumatic stress among our troops and veterans continue to increase at alarming rates.

Mr. Speaker, last summer I authored an amendment to require the administration to develop an exit strategy for our military involvement in Afghanistan. While my amendment did not carry the day, I believe it demonstrated to the administration that an open-ended commitment was not sustainable. As we know, President Obama outlined such a strategy in his speech at West Point. And I believe it is essential that we in the Congress work to keep the administration to its word. We must fulfill our constitutional responsibilities by making sure that taxpayer funds are spent wisely and with complete accountability and transparency for every dime and every dollar. No more Halliburton and Blackwater scandals. No more projects where fat-cat middlemen walk off with all the money while the Afghan people go without hospitals, schools, roads, or food.

Mr. Speaker, I hope that this is just the first--not the last--debate that we have on the House floor this year over our policy in Afghanistan. The issue is simply too important. The future at stake is too grave. We have sacrificed too much--in the lives and well-being of our soldiers, in the cost to our economy--to wait another year or 2 or 3 for Congress to do its job. We must continue to ask the hard questions and demand straight answers.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

I appreciated the gentleman from Florida's comments. He spent a great deal of time trying to compare Iraq to Afghanistan. I would remind my colleagues that Iraq and Afghanistan are very, very different countries, different cultures, different levels of education and a different history of centralized government. In Afghanistan, there is no tradition, there is no history of a centralized government. Comparing Iraq to Afghanistan is not comparing apples to oranges. It's like comparing apples to Volkswagens. There is no comparison. And we could have a debate about Iraq, but that should be on a separate day, and we could talk about whether there were any weapons of mass destruction; but today we're here talking about Afghanistan.

I think this is important, and it's an important discussion because this Congress, with the exception of a few amendments that got very little time, has not had a debate or a discussion in this Chamber on Afghanistan since after September 11, 2001. And our policy has changed in a number of different ways over those years, and we still have not had a debate or a discussion on Afghanistan.

So today, hopefully, we will. And my hope is that in this Chamber, where lots of Members talk all the time and very few Members listen, that this may be a day for Members to listen. It is important that we get this right, especially for the men and women who we have deployed over there.

At this time, Mr. Speaker, I would like to yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from Maine (Ms. Pingree), a member of the Rules Committee.

At this point, Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Polis), a member of the Rules Committee.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Doggett).

I yield the gentleman 1 additional minute.

Mr. Speaker, at this time I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Kucinich), the author of the resolution.

Mr. Speaker, at this time I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. Blumenauer).

Mr. Speaker, there is nothing wrong with demanding our troops come home, including forcing that debate by using the privileges of the war powers resolution. There is nothing unpatriotic in demanding that our troops and their families, their neighbors and their communities be told when they are coming home. And Mr. Speaker, there is every reason to debate how we go after al Qaeda and how we create a flexible, mobile, global strategy able to track, find, counter, and strike al Qaeda cells wherever they might be. And there is no reason to run away from a debate over whether 100,000 boots on the ground in Afghanistan is the best strategy to eliminating al Qaeda once and for all.

I do not doubt that our brave military men and women can and will achieve military successes in battle after battle after battle. But are Afghanistan's tribal disputes going to be solved on the battlefield or at the political negotiating table? And if it is going to take a political solution to resolve centuries of grievances, then who is willing to stand at the front of this Chamber and declare how many American lives that is worth?

Mr. Speaker, President Obama has said he will begin to bring our troops home next July, but he didn't say when the job will be complete. Representative Kucinich says let's bring them home by New Year's Eve, this year. We must continue to debate this issue, debate it today, debate it on the supplemental, debate it on defense bills.

Let's debate it when we are begging for resources so our kids can go to quality schools, when we are trying to find the money so every American has a decent job and affordable health care, so we can maintain our roads and our bridges and our waterways, so we can guard our ports and our borders, so we can keep our cops on the beat and our seniors safe in their homes. Let's debate the war in Afghanistan, how we will pay for it, how it will end, when it will end, and when our sons and daughters, husbands and wives, friends and neighbors will be able to come home.

Let us continue to ask the hard questions and demand straight answers until we get it right and all our troops are safely home.

Mr. Speaker, I urge a ``yes'' vote on the rule and on the previous question.

I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on the resolution.

The previous question was ordered.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

I rise in support of H.R. 5148. Not surprisingly, I'm the author of it. I insisted on being the author because it was the right thing to do and because there needed to be a message sent loud and clear. Deceptive advertising is already bad enough in America today. We often receive things that look like your credit card bill when, in fact, they're an offer to buy or to get something or, in fact, to apply for a credit card. We've all received cards that look like you're already getting a card when, in fact, it's John Doe on the card and it's only the opportunity to spend money to get the real card.

But when it comes to the census, there is no separation between Republicans and Democrats and Independents. There is no separation between the House and the Senate. The sanctity of this constitutional responsibility to get it right, to count everyone, cannot be allowed to be interfered with by anyone's attempt to raise money.

When the earlier bill was passed--authored by Carolyn Maloney and cosponsored by many of us--we thought we had ended this. As a matter of fact, for all of us on both sides of the aisle, we believed then that an independent agency, the post office, could have stopped that mail without the law. But we wanted to make the intent of Congress clear. By passing that bill, we made the intent of Congress clear. We all talked about deceptive advertising, about people seeing something, thinking it was from the Census Bureau, thinking that, in fact, it was a census form. We crafted it in a way, as the chairman said, that was intended not to cross over anyone's free speech rights, including that through the mail. We achieved that. But lawyers at the Republican National Committee made a decision that the language of the bill was such that they could continue having a piece of the successful mailing go on.

Let me make something very clear here today: You cannot say we are beyond the letter of the law when you truly are within the intent of the law and tell the American people it's okay. The four squares of the law may or may not have been violated by the

NRCC. Most of us believe, as I said before, the post office could have stopped it before the law and certainly could stop this after the law; and I have sent, along with my ranking subcommittee member, a letter to the Postmaster encouraging him to make that decision, as has Congresswoman Maloney.

Notwithstanding their eventual action, we're making it clear here today that we will plug any perceived loopholes or any questions about whether or not you can or you cannot. The RNC sent out mailings which certainly violated the spirit of H.R. 4621. The mailings contained text visible from outside the envelope--not printed on the envelope, but effectively the same as printed on the envelope.

I would say to people who raise money, whether it's the Republican National Committee, the Democratic National Committee, other political entities, or nonpolitical entities who simply want to have their envelopes opened for an opportunity to raise money or get a message out, don't use the census. Don't even think about using the census, because it's wrong. If something is deceptive, then it is wrong under the law that we already passed. It is wrong under the law that we expect this bill to represent.

So, Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the chairman, Congresswoman Maloney and Congressman Jason Chaffetz and, more importantly, the leadership of the House, both Mr. Boehner and Mr. Hoyer, because they made it possible for us to come to the floor quickly, get it to the Senate quickly, allow the Senate to deal with it quickly so the President can make a statement for the second time in less than a month. He shouldn't have to do it. He does have to do it. We're going to make sure that while the census is underway, that we not have anyone think that this is a time where they can continue to do fundraising that ultimately links itself to the ongoing census.

With that, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

I would like to thank the gentlelady from New York. Her words are our words; her thoughts are our thoughts. Perhaps as a proud Republican, I can do more than the thought she made.

Mr. Speaker, I want everyone to be counted in the census. I want everyone to open their envelopes from the census. As a Republican, I am particularly sensitive that I don't want Republicans to be undercounted. So I would advise, as I will do, if I receive anything and it looks like it's from the census, I'm going to open it. When I open it, if it's from the census, I'm going to fill it out. If it's not from the census, I'm going to throw it out because, ultimately, all of us, regardless of our party, should be indignant if we receive a request for money and we open it, believing it's from the census, only to find out that it is a request for money.

The census does not ask us for money. They ask us for sensitive information leading to a correct count of the American population, and from that, Congress does its work to allocate resources and, quite personally, to allocate representation here in the House. So I, for one, will open all the mail and encourage all to open all the mail. And when you open it, do the right thing if it's from the census; do the right thing if it's from somebody trying to fundraise. Let there be no doubt, this is important to us in the House. We speak with one voice. We speak today. I suspect that they will speak by tomorrow in the Senate, and we will make sure that this cannot be allowed.

In closing, I did join with the gentlelady from New York and Mr. Chaffetz, the gentleman from Utah, and the chairman in calling on the Postmaster to assert any jurisdiction he may believe he can, which we believe he has, to stop mailings even if they're going out today. But certainly within a matter of hours or days, we expect there will be new power without any question that would allow for the holding of that mail and its destruction.

So with that, Mr. Speaker, I encourage passage of the bill.

I yield back the balance of my time.

I'd like to thank the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. McGovern) for the time, and I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, on Sunday the Iraqi people went to the polls to vote in their latest national parliamentary elections. Millions of Iraqis voted at thousands of voting stations throughout the country. The democratic process is succeeding in Iraq. The people there, despite extraordinarily difficult challenges, are able to express themselves in free elections.

Sunday was a good day for the future of Iraq. Those elections would not have taken place but for the decision of President Bush in 2007 to send over 20,000 surge troops to Iraq in order to establish, ``a unified democratic federal Iraq that can govern itself, defend itself, and sustain itself.'' Those elections would not have been possible but for the sacrifices of our troops and their families. Just 4 months ago, Mr. Speaker, President Obama announced a surge strategy for Afghanistan. He committed 30,000 additional forces to a counterinsurgency strategy that I believe will help to strengthen the government in Afghanistan's security forces, as the surge did in Iraq.

Since President Obama's announcement, we've seen considerable results. For example, last month, our troops began what is known as the Marjah offensive. The joint offensive with the Afghan National Army and coalition partners has pushed the Taliban out of Marjah and has allowed the Afghan government to take control of significant areas that were previously controlled by the Taliban. This offensive is what General David Petraeus, the commander of the United States Central Command, has described as the ``initial salvo'' in a 12- to 18-month campaign to defeat the Taliban.

Now I have had and I continue to have, Mr. Speaker, disagreements with policies of President Obama, but I have said privately, I have said publicly, and I reiterate here today, that in the case of Afghanistan, President Obama has demonstrated great responsibility and a sense of the national security interest of the United States. He deserves our support.

Just as our military is making tangible progress, like the Marjah offensive demonstrates, just as this is occurring, many of our colleagues in the majority party now feel that it is time to withdraw from Afghanistan. The resolution that we are set to debate today would require the President to withdraw our troops in 30 days. I believe that that would be precipitous. I believe that precipitously withdrawing our troops would be reckless. I believe it would allow the Taliban to regain control of Afghanistan and thereby provide criminal groups such as al Qaeda with carte blanche to run terrorist training camps and plan terrorist attacks against the United States and our allies. I would remind my colleagues that it was the safe harbor and support that the Taliban gave bin Laden which allowed him to plan the September 11, 2001, attacks from Afghanistan against this country. A reconstituted Taliban will undoubtedly do the same and will pose a significant and grave risk to the national security of the United States.

I believe, Mr. Speaker, that we must never allow Afghanistan to once again fall into the hands of terrorists whose sole purpose is to destroy the United States and to kill innocent civilians. Precipitous withdrawal would not only be dangerous, I believe, to our national security, but would constitute a mortal blow to the Afghan people, who are relying on our support.

Although they have far to go, Afghanistan has made demonstrable progress. But if this resolution were to become U.S. policy, all the improvements made by the Afghan people would disappear. Afghans would no longer be given the chance to vote in elections. The Taliban would rule by the edict of terror. It would mean the return of a nightmarish tyranny to Afghanistan. Women would see the rights they have gained disappear as the Taliban once again made women noncitizens and banned young girls, who for the first time are learning to read, from schools.

Mr. Speaker, I believe that now is not the time to turn our backs on the Afghan people. It is not the time to counter the mission of our troops, especially when they are engaged in the first major offensive of President Obama's reaffirmed counterinsurgency strategy. Let us send a message to the terrorists that the United States is committed to our mission to prevent the return to power of the Taliban. Let us soundly defeat this resolution.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I think this has been a good discussion today. And I think it is appropriate to have it. I certainly hope that the result is clear, and that this Congress today strongly and in a bipartisan way rejects the resolution that is being brought forth. It would be a grave mistake for us to allow the Taliban to regain power in Afghanistan.

Sometimes the lessons of history may be a little bit more difficult to explain. In this case, when the Taliban was in power they opened the country up to training camps for terrorists to attack the United States. That was in 2001. It is not ancient history. So I hope we don't forget the lessons of history.

In addition, as I said before, Mr. Speaker, our Armed Forces with our coalition allies and the Afghan armed forces are in the midst of the first major offensive in President Obama's new strategy. So I think it would be a grave mistake if this Congress does not clearly and emphatically reject the resolution today.

Having said that, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 5148) to amend title 39, United States Code, to clarify the instances in which the term ``census'' may appear on mailable matter.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

I rise in support of H.R. 5148, the bill to further prohibit deceptive mailings using the word ``census.'' Only a few weeks ago, on March 10 to be exact, the House acted unanimously to deal with the misleading fundraising mail designed to look like it is from the Census Bureau. Congresswoman Maloney introduced H.R. 4621, the Prevent Deceptive Census Look Alike Mailing Act, which was originally cosponsored by me and Congressman Clay, chairman of the subcommittee with jurisdiction over the census. Congresswoman Maloney and Congressman Clay are longtime supporters of the census, and they have worked hard to make sure we have an accurate count in 2010.

H.R. 4621 was also cosponsored by the ranking member of the committee, Congressman Issa of California, as well as the ranking member of the subcommittee with jurisdiction over the postal service, Congressman Jason Chaffetz. I thank them for their support and for helping us to move it to the floor today.

The goal of the bill was simple. The United States Census, currently under way, is a critical source of information for America's future. Regrettably, scammers and con artists are trying to hijack the word ``census'' to confuse citizens into opening and responding to mail that is unrelated to the actual U.S. Census. We must protect the U.S. Census from this kind of fraud. H.R. 4621 simply requires mailings which have the term ``census'' on the envelope or cover to also include an accurate return address and the name of the sender on the envelope.

H.R. 4621 was drafted narrowly to avoid the First Amendment concerns and avoid interfering with the legitimate use of the mail by nonprofit organizations. The bill was intended to prevent the deceptive use of look-alike mailings by requiring transparency and disclosure. The House voted 416-0 to pass H.R. 4621. The Senate passed the same bill by unanimous consent. Not many bills pass this House unanimously, but this one did--both Houses. That's not something that happened real quick around here. You would think the message sent by that law was very clear.

Unfortunately, days after H.R. 4621 was signed into law, the RNC sent a new mailing which includes the same deceptive practices. The new mailing is also labeled a census, and it does not include a return address or identify the sender as the RNC, as required by law, Mr. Speaker. One of these offensive mailings is dated April 12, only 5 days after the President signed H.R. 4621 into law. Apparently, the RNC cannot even let 1 week go by without deceiving the American public.

Despite the unanimous action of Congress, the RNC continues to act in defiance of Congress and plain common sense and fairness. These mailings continue to mislead citizens, confuse voters, and annoy recipients.

On that note, Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentlewoman from New York, Carolyn Maloney, who has been very involved in this issue, of course, and to say to my colleague from California, I really appreciate his involvement in this as well, the ranking member of the committee, Congressman Issa.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to close by saying that we need to send the kind of message that will make certain this stops. However, I do believe the new RNC mailings are illegal under current law. That's number one. This bill will clarify that any use of the word ``census'' that is visible through the envelope would trigger a requirement to disclose the name and return address of the sender. Congress should not have to act twice to make it clear that it is wrong to imitate the census, which is mandated by our Constitution. Unfortunately, the foolishness of the RNC has forced us to act again.

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank all of my colleagues, especially the ranking member of the committee, Congresswoman Maloney, and Mr. Chaffetz and others, especially their staffs, who understand and recognize how important the census is and that we should

not get involved in any kind of trickery when it comes to the census because there are so many things that depend on the census. Therefore, to play around with it, to me, is so unfair when you're talking about, really, playing around with the lives of people, because so many things are based on the fact that the count, the count is so important. So it's my hope that the RNC will recognize this and stop this trickery, because there is no place, no time do we need that today.

We need to make certain that everybody fills out their census form, and gets it back in as soon as possible.

Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 4621) to protect the integrity of the constitutionally mandated United States census and prohibit deceptive mail practices that attempt to exploit the decennial census, as amended.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 4621, as amended. I would like to thank Chairman Towns and Ranking Member Issa of the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, and Congresswoman Maloney and Congressman Chaffetz for working with me on this legislation. As chairman of the Information Policy, Census, and National Archives Subcommittee, this legislation is of particular importance to me.

This legislation would require certain mailings which have the term ``census'' on the outside of the envelope to also include an accurate return address and the name of the sender on the envelope. H.R. 4621 would also mandate that such mailings follow existing legal requirements to include disclaimers making it clear that the mailing is not from the Federal Government.

H.R. 4621 was introduced on February 9, 2010, and referred to the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform. The committee approved the measure with a manager's amendment by voice vote on March 4, 2010.

In recent months, mailings which have the word ``census'' on the envelope and contents that resemble official census forms have been sent by the Republican National Committee and other nonprofit organizations to citizens in several States. The RNC mailings were marked ``DO NOT DESTROY. OFFICIAL DOCUMENT.'' The envelope used in these mailings did not include a return address or identify the sender. Using these terms on the outside of the envelope without a return address and the name of the sender creates an appearance of an official government document.

Later this month, the Census Bureau will begin conducting the decennial census through the U.S. mail. The decennial census is mandated by article I, section 2, of the U.S. Constitution. This official government function provides an accurate portrait of the American population. The decennial census serves as a basis for the distribution of hundreds of billions of dollars for schools, hospitals, job training centers, and transportation projects.

In addition to conducting the decennial census every 10 years, the Census Bureau conducts surveys throughout the decade. For example, under the previous administration, the Bureau started the American Community Survey, which is an annual survey sent to a sample of the public. This survey helps communities understand where and how their population lives and permits the community to allocate resources accordingly.

Because legitimate census mailings are used for such important purposes, it is critical that the Census Bureau is able to receive accurate information and that American citizens continue to have confidence in census mailings. Increased confidence in the census will save taxpayers money by improving the response rate.

The Director of the Census Bureau, Robert Groves, has said that the Bureau will save $85 million for every 1 percent increase in the mail- back response from recipients of the decennial census.

This bill is narrowly tailored to address the specific problems caused by census look-alike mailings. This bill would not prevent the use of the term ``census'' in mailings altogether; H.R. 4621 would merely require the sender to identify itself and include language clarifying that the mailing is not from the Federal Government.

Mailings by private organizations which appear to be from the Census Bureau, without a proper clarification or disclaimer, create a risk of confusion on the part of citizens who will be receiving actual census mailings this year. H.R. 4621 will help to prevent such confusion.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this legislation.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as she may consume to the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Maloney).

Mr. Speaker, again, I encourage my friends from both sides of the aisle to join me in supporting H.R. 4621, as amended, and again I thank the gentlewoman from New York for her leadership on this legislation.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.