TALENT Act of 2017

Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 40 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Polis), my good friend, pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purpose of debate only.

General Leave

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

Mr. Speaker, on Tuesday, the Rules Committee met and reported a rule, House Resolution 40, providing for the consideration of two important pieces of legislation: H.R. 238, the Commodity End- User Relief Act, and H.R. 78, the SEC Regulatory Accountability Act.

The rule provides for the consideration of these measures under a structured rule and makes in order any amendment submitted to the House Rules Committee, including all five Democratic amendments to H.R. 78, as well as all eight amendments submitted for H.R. 238, allowing for a balanced debate on these very substantial issues.

H.R. 238 is essential to the smooth functioning of the American economy and is long overdue for enactment into law. This important legislation reauthorizes until 2021 the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, also known as the CFTC, which had its statutory authority lapse in 2013. The House passed the Commodity End-User Relief Act with bipartisan support in the 114th Congress, and a similar bill was also adopted in the 113th Congress, establishing a strong record of bipartisan support for this measure. Unfortunately, in both instances, the Senate failed to take up the legislation before the end of its respective Congress, which is why it is imperative that we pass this bill through both Chambers and send it to the President's desk.

After the financial crisis of 2008, practically everyone agreed that changes needed to be made to our financial services sector in order to protect families, farmers, small businesses, and our economy, as well as to prevent another crisis in the future. Like many of my colleagues, I have concerns with some of the reforms that were instituted in response to the crisis because they have put overly burdensome restrictions and regulations on our economy and our business communities. But like every major, comprehensive law, there are always unintended consequences that need to be addressed, and H.R. 238 does exactly that.

For example, the authors of Dodd-Frank argued the law's main purpose was to reduce systemic risk to our economy. However, I don't think anyone would argue that farmers who are simply trying to lock in a good price for their corn or their wheat are a systemic risk to the economy. Similarly, restaurant chains looking to make sure they have enough beef, enough pork, or enough potatoes to sell to their customers don't pose a systemic risk, just as utility companies seeking to ensure that they have adequate power supplies to meet the needs and demands of their ratepayers did not cause the financial crisis. Unfortunately, the current law imposes rules that treat all of these entities as major risks to our economy, and it imposes overly burdensome capital and paperwork requirements on them.

Mr. Speaker, critics may claim that this bill undermines consumer protections. However, this could not be further from the truth.

Title I of the legislation puts in place greater consumer protections, like requiring brokerage firms to notify investors before moving funds from one account to another in order to prevent abuses like those that occurred at MF Global prior to its bankruptcy.

Title II makes reforms to the CFTC and strengthens the cost-benefit analysis the Commission must perform when considering the impacts of its rules. Opponents have claimed that requiring cost-benefit analyses will open up the CFTC to lawsuits. However, H.R. 238 merely gives the CFTC a standard for writing good rules the first time, which will be a benefit for all of us.

Title III provides relief to the farmers, the restaurants, the manufacturers, the utilities, and other entities which rely on a steady supply of commodities and inherently want to avoid risk but have been caught up in the unintended consequences of the Dodd-Frank reforms. These users have a genuine need to use markets to hedge against bad weather, natural disasters, inflation, price shocks, and other unforeseen circumstances that could jeopardize their ability to serve their customers.

The rule also provides for the consideration of H.R. 78, the SEC Regulatory Accountability Act. This legislation replaces guidance adopted by the SEC in 2012 that currently governs the use of economic analysis in SEC rulemakings and requires the SEC to identify and assess the significance of problems prior to regulating. It directs the agency to conduct a review of existing regulations within 1 year of enactment--and then every 5 years thereafter--to determine the sufficiency, the effectiveness, and the burdens associated with their implementation. Further, H.R. 78 instructs the SEC's Chief Economist to conduct a cost-benefit analysis on regulations the agency is promulgating as well as to provide an explanation describing the SEC's decision-making process, including the implications of not taking the regulatory action.

Economic analysis is the cornerstone of prudent rulemaking and entails evaluating the qualitative and quantitative costs and benefits of proposed regulations as well as potential alternatives in order to determine the correct action an agency should take. We must ensure Federal regulators are thoroughly assessing both the need for the regulation and adequately evaluating its potential consequences-- intended as well as unintended--to prevent small businesses and job creators from being unnecessarily burdened by onerous Federal regulations.

Mr. Speaker, this is a good, straightforward rule, allowing for the consideration of two bills that will hold Federal agencies and their rulemaking processes accountable to the American people. Voters sent a clear message in November that they want a Federal Government that is smaller, less intrusive, and more discerning in its regulatory actions. House Republicans created our A Better Way agenda by listening to Americans about the ideas for our Nation, and the new, unified Republican government will continue our work to change the status quo and provide real progress for all Americans. The adoption of this rule and the passage of the underlying bills is yet another opportunity to show that we heard this message loud and clear and that we will reinforce our commitment to restoring the people's voice in our Federal Government.

I am proud to support the rule providing for the consideration of these measures, and I urge my colleagues to support the rule and the underlying bills.

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

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

First of all, in fact, if I could read from a letter I received this morning from over two dozen agricultural groups. In one sentence, it says: ``Thank you in advance for your support of this bill that is so important to U.S. farmers, ranchers, hedgers and futures customers.'' It is signed, like I said, by over two dozen organizations.

I include in the Record the letter I received this morning, I think, as did my colleague, Representative Polis, from over two dozen agricultural groups and associations located throughout the country in unanimous support of H.R. 238.

January 11, 2017.

Dear Member of the House of Representatives: The

undersigned organizations represent a very broad cross-

section of U.S. production agriculture and agribusiness. We

urge you to cast an affirmative vote on H.R. 238, the

``Commodity End-User Relief Act,'' when it moves to the floor

for consideration.

This legislation contains a number of important provisions

for agricultural and agribusiness hedgers who use futures and

swaps to manage their business and production risks. Some,

but certainly not all, of the bill's important provisions

include:

Sections 101-103--Codify important customer protections to

help prevent another MF Global situation.

Section 104--Provides a permanent solution to the residual

interest problem that would have put more customer funds at

risk--and potentially driven farmers, ranchers and small

hedgers out of futures markets--by forcing pre-margining of

their hedge accounts.

Section 306--Relief from burdensome and technologically

infeasible recordkeeping requirements in commodity markets.

Section 308--Requires the CFTC to conduct a study and issue

a rule before reducing the de minimis threshold for swap

dealer registration in order to make sure that doing so would

not harm market liquidity and end-user access to markets.

Section 311--Confirms the intent of Dodd-Frank that

anticipatory hedging is considered bona fide hedging

activity.

Thank you in advance for your support of this bill that is

so important to U.S. farmers, ranchers, hedgers and futures

customers.

Sincerely,

American Cotton Shippers Association, American Farm Bureau

Federation, American Feed Industry Association, American

Soybean Association, Grain and Feed Association of Illinois,

Kansas Grain and Feed Association, Michigan Agri-Business

Association, Michigan Bean Shippers, National Association of

Wheat Growers, National Cattlemen's Beef Association,

National Corn Growers Association, National Cotton Council.

National Council of Farmer Cooperatives, National Grain and

Feed Association, National Milk Producers Federation,

National Pork Producers Council, National Sorghum Producers,

Nebraska Grain and Feed Association, North American Millers

Association, Northeast Agribusiness and Feed Alliance, Ohio

AgriBusiness Association, South Dakota Grain and Feed

Association, USA Rice, Wisconsin Agri-Business Association.

Mr. Speaker, also, in response to just one of the points that my colleague brought up, in the first 2 weeks of this 115th Congress, the Speaker, as well as the chairman of the Rules Committee, Representative Sessions, has provided opportunity for all Members to appear before the Rules Committee, has invited all Members to submit amendments. In fact, I can gladly say and happily say that every amendment submitted on these two bills has been accepted, if they were proven to be germane.

In fact, one of the arguments made by my good friend is that the freshmen have not had an opportunity to weigh in on these two pieces of legislation. Actually, the young freshman from Maryland had an amendment brought forward, and it was accepted to bring for consideration on the floor. So I think the arguments fall hollow that Members have not had an opportunity to be heard.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Conaway), the good chairman of the Agriculture Committee.

Mr. Speaker, while I applaud the optimism and enthusiasm of the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Polis) about defeating the previous question, getting back to the debate on the rule, I have no further speakers, and I reserve the balance of my time.

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

Mr. Speaker, I certainly appreciate the discussion over the past few minutes. I believe that this rule and the underlying bills are strong measures that are important to the future of our country.

This rule provides for ample debate on the floor, the opportunity to consider and vote on both H.R. 238 and H.R. 78, as well as every amendment that was submitted to the House Rules Committee, which reflects the balanced, open, and deliberative process afforded by this rule.

H.R. 238 is a solid, substantial measure that will address several critical issues that the CFTC and end user are facing, while also addressing the CFTC's lapsed reauthorization with reauthorizing the Commission through 2021. While some opponents have called for an open rule, this structured rule makes all eight submitted amendments in order.

Mr. Speaker, no one wants to see complete deregulation of our financial services industries and our commodities and derivatives markets. However, it is critical that the regulations put in place are appropriate for our economy and our users. These rules have to provide safeguards and prevent systemic risk but should not hinder our entire economy with one-size-fits-all regulations.

As we have discussed today, the current rules place enormous compliance and financial burdens on small businesses, on farmers and ranchers, utilities, and manufacturers. They take these small, risk- averse entities and place them under the same regulatory scheme as large financial institutions and hedge funds. H.R. 238 will differentiate and exempt the end users who are not a cause of systemic risk--as these entities inherently want to avoid risk--and, thus, shouldn't be subject to the same rules and requirements as financial and investment firms that are less risk averse in nature.

The Commodity End-User Relief Act would make much-needed reforms at the CFTC to strengthen their rulemaking process and add commonsense consumer protections so these regulations are not a continual burden on our Nation's farmers and small businesses.

Mr. Speaker, the rule also provides for consideration of H.R. 78 under a structured rule and makes all five Democratic amendments in order. This legislation takes important steps to engrain a stronger commitment to economic analysis at the SEC, which will facilitate the promulgation of reasonable rules that do not unduly burden registered companies or negatively impact job creation. The measure will increase transparency and oversight, while facilitating additional analysis and reviews of existing regulations, which should be something that all Members of this body can support.

As elected Representatives, I believe we must ensure our regulatory framework is not politicized and that Federal regulators are thoroughly assessing both the need for the regulation as well as adequately evaluating its potential consequences. This bill takes important steps towards achieving all of these goals.

It is important to remember that the financial crisis was not caused by the farmer who grows the food you eat for dinner, or by the utility you buy electricity from, or by the people who provide the wood in your desk or the metal used in your car. I don't know of any reason why we should continue to treat them as if they were responsible, which is what the current law does and is what H.R. 238 seeks to correct.

Further, better informing the American people of the true impact of major regulations does nothing to diminish the ability of regulators to adequately address illegal or inappropriate activities but, rather, increases transparency and the efficacy of Federal rules, which is why passage of H.R. 78 is so critical both to our constituents and to our economy.

Mr. Speaker, this is a strong rule that provides for open and fair consideration of these vital pieces of legislation as well as every amendment that

was submitted to the House Rules Committee. I am proud to speak in favor of this rule, and I urge all of my colleagues to support House Resolution 40 and both of the underlying bills.

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

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

I thank the gentleman for the customary 30 minutes.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the rule and the underlying bills.

I start by, again, mentioning the fact that we have before us, under this rule, H.R. 238, the Commodity End-User Relief Act, and H.R. 78, the SEC Regulatory Accountability Act. I will talk about them in a minute.

There are 56 Members of this body who are new Members and who had no chance to participate in marking up

these bills in their committees of jurisdiction. Sure, I am back and Mr. Newhouse is back, but 56 people who were in that Congress in December are not here now, and there are 56 new people.

Again, a regular order process would allow these bills to go through committee and have ideas and the participation from Democrats and Republicans, who represent, collectively, tens of millions of people in this country, in improving these bills. We did not allow it. These bills just appeared fait accompli in the Rules Committee yesterday. Here we are on the floor. None of the new Members had a chance in their committees to offer them.

In fact, I am not sure where the Republicans are in their process, but Democrats are still finalizing our committee assignments. We have some of them, and the rest will be completed shortly.

For Congress to work well, we need to have regular order. And for regular order to work, we need to make sure that the 56 new Members who represent tens of millions of people are not disenfranchised in this process.

Now, getting to the bills. H.R. 238, the Commodities End-User Relief Act, has been brought to the floor even before the Agriculture Committee convened or held its organizing meeting. It reauthorizes the Commodities Futures Trading Commission through 2021. It makes a lot of changes to internal changes and modifies a number of provisions that were designed to prevent financial meltdowns.

Additionally, H.R. 238 includes language on issues that the Commodities Futures Trading Commission has already addressed through its own efforts. For example, the Commodities Future Trading Commission has acted on 16 of 22 provisions in titles I and III. Particularly, many of us are concerned by the cross-border language in the bill, which would undercut efforts already underway by the Commission to negotiate an international system of safe and robust derivative rules.

H.R. 238 would actually require the Commodities Futures Trading Commission to create a rule that would automatically allow U.S. banks and foreign banks conducting business in the U.S. to do so under the rules imposed by foreign jurisdictions, which can be substantially different than those of our own, removing the confidence in the marketplace that is needed for a commodity market to work.

Finally, as you know, Congress passed a number of reforms to enable regulators to respond quickly to changing markets. The provisions in title II would weaken the CFTC's ability to respond in a timely and effective manner.

The financial services industry continues to innovate. It is important that regulators keep pace and prevent systemic risks, prevent meltdowns, prevent bailouts. This bill would make it harder to do that.

An example of how the Commission is engaged with and talking about innovation is how to fully embrace emerging technologies like blockchain and decentralized distribution ledgers. They are doing that because many financial firms are focusing on how to incorporate this technology into their business models. Therefore, it is imperative the Commission is given the ability to stay involved and understand the implications of new technology and innovations and is not hamstrung by this overly prescriptive law.

Now, the Commission does need reauthorization, and I would love the opportunity to work with my colleagues on the other side to do so. It should be in a thoughtful, bipartisan manner that gives the agency the ability it needs to effectively look at incredibly complicated financial transactions, make sure that consumers and users of commodities that hedge their risks are not abused in the process. We do not want to hamstring the agency by unnecessary and counterproductive requirements as this bill does.

The other bill, H.R. 78, the SEC Regulatory Accountability Act, also was brought forward before the Financial Services Committee got organized. This bill was not even considered by the House last Congress, and it stalled in the Financial Services Committee. So you actually have a bill that didn't even clear committee last Congress. I was complaining about how the 56 Members that are new to this body didn't have a chance to put their imprint on the first bill. The second bill didn't even make it through the Financial Services Committee and didn't even pass the House floor last session. Yet, here it is without the appropriate committee consideration, depriving new Members representing tens of millions of Americans--Democratic and Republican-- the ability to improve this bill.

Under the guise of regulation changes, H.R. 78 would actually require the SEC to conduct enhanced cost-benefit analysis in order to ensure that benefits of their regulation justify the cost. In effect, the bill directs the SEC to look at things like market liquidity and small businesses, which, of course, it already does as part of its economic analysis. So, again, it is a bill that would bury the SEC in regulatory paperwork.

H.R. 78's cost-benefit analysis is weighted toward helping large financial institutions save money. I support reducing costs for financial institutions. Who wouldn't? But that is not the primary drive of our regulatory structure. We should put consumers and our systemic risks first and foremost and, of course, where we can reduce the unnecessary costs for our financial institutions in the hope that those would be passed along to those they serve.

I, therefore, oppose both of these bills. I oppose the rule that limits the opportunity for Members to offer amendments to these two pieces of legislation. I oppose this process that disenfranchises our new Members.

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

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

When we defeat the previous question, I will offer an amendment to the rule to bring up legislation that would require the President and Vice President of the United States, their spouses and dependent children to disclose and divest any personal financial holdings that could create a conflict of interest by placing them in a blind trust. This has been standard for previous Presidents, and this legislation ensures that that precedent continues.

In today's news conference moments ago, President-elect Trump said that he did not plan to follow with precedent and place his assets in a blind trust and would continue his direct ownership interest in them. President-elect Trump has refused to release his tax returns, refused to resolve conflicts of interest related to his business dealings. The American people expect the President to do what is best for the country and not what is best for his business or his pocket.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to insert the text of the amendment in the Record, along with extraneous material, immediately prior to the vote on the previous question.

Mr. Speaker, to discuss our proposal, I yield 5 minutes to the distinguished gentlewoman from Massachusetts (Ms. Clark), the lead sponsor of the bill that I am proud to cosponsor.

Mr. Speaker, I am prepared to close, and I yield myself the balance of my time.

I just want to emphasize how important it is that we defeat the previous question. There are so many questions that have been raised. Not only is it in keeping with longstanding precedent for the President to divest and place their assets in a blind trust, but it is more important than ever with this President who has a complex web of assets, nationally and internationally, which are rife with conflicts of interest for the incoming administration.

I truly hope we can act in a bipartisan way to defeat the previous question and bring forward Ms. Clark's simple, straightforward bill. It affects future Presidents, Republican and Democratic, and it is a very simple, commonsense piece of legislation simply saying that they will divest and place their assets in a blind trust, something that is important for both the appearance of propriety as well as for the sake of propriety.

And yet instead of focusing on legislation to investigate foreign powers undermining our recent election, instead of focusing on preventing conflicts of interest for the incoming administration, instead of focusing on legislation that would create jobs, reduce our deficit, or improve on health care, instead we have partisan legislation that hasn't gone through regular order. It has left 56 new Members representing tens of millions of Americans on the sideline.

The House passed a lot of legislation last Congress. That does not mean that we should bring every bill directly to the floor and skip the committee process, because there are 56 new Members who should also have a chance to put their imprint on legislation. The way the majority is bringing bills to the floor, it ignores the concerns of the American public; it ignores pressing issues related to the incoming President.

We have this window of time under the outgoing President to send a bill to his desk to require disclosure and divestment from the new President, but that window is rapidly closing. We will only have President Obama in the White House for another week, so time is running short.

If we act now and defeat the previous question, hopefully the Senate will act within a few days, and we can get the bill to President Obama. But the timeline is very, very short to do this. I do not expect that Mr. Trump would sign a bill that puts additional requirements on himself, although he would perhaps change that bill to affect future Presidents because it needs to be done. It is kind of shocking that we relied on precedents rather than law in this area.

I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' and defeat the previous question so I can bring forward Ms. Clark's bill as my amendment. I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on the rule, and I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on the underlying bill.

I yield back the balance of my time.

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

Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank Representative Hurd for his work, which has been an ongoing continuing work on this issue and on this particular program.

I rise in support of this bipartisan bill, which builds on the work that Majority Leader McCarthy and I and others in this House have been doing to modernize government technology and renew America's faith in government.

In 2016, exit polls showed that dissatisfaction with the government spanned the political spectrum. That is a shame because government is supposed to be a force for improving people's lives, keeping our country safe, and expanding opportunities for all Americans.

That is why I unveiled the House Democrats' Renewing Faith in Government agenda last summer. We must present bold solutions to reform our democracy and our government. Certainly, on both sides of the equation, that is what the American people were saying in the last election.

One of the goals of our agenda is modernizing government technology. Most Americans understand the transformative power of technology--the Majority Leader spoke of it in so many different aspects of our lives-- and how digitizing businesses makes them more efficient, transparent, and accountable. We have seen it in the private sector. Every day, millions of Americans shop on sites like Amazon or Etsy and catch a ride using Uber or Lyft.

Government technology is in terrible shape, and bringing the latest practices from Silicon Valley into government would make a huge difference in serving our citizens and streamlining the way government works for the American people.

Last year, I worked closely with the Obama administration and Tony Scott to advance one of its top priorities in this area: creating a technology modernization fund for the rapid upgrade of

the most outdated, costly, and insecure technology systems across the Federal Government. Mr. Hurd was involved deeply in that effort. The result was the Modernizing Government Technology Act, which the House passed overwhelmingly with the help of Chairman Chaffetz and Majority Leader McCarthy.

Last month, Majority Leader McCarthy and I expressed our bipartisan support for one of President Obama's most successful efforts at bringing Silicon Valley talent into the Federal workforce: the U.S. Digital Service and GSA's 18F program. In fact, I visited the 18F program in San Francisco and was extraordinarily impressed with the individuals who peopled that project and were giving of their time. I guess we were paying them a little bit, but, relatively speaking, they were giving their time.

Today's bill, the TALENT Act, would make permanent the precursor to both these programs: the Presidential Innovation Fellows. This program has a proven track record of bringing top talent from the innovation economy into the Federal workforce where it is sorely needed.

I hope the next administration will continue all of these innovative programs, which have begun to change the culture within our government.

I also hope that the talented individuals--many of whom, as I referenced, left high-paying jobs in the private sector--will stay on through the transition and continue to serve their country by improving government technology.

President Obama made real progress in this area, including with the launch of his Open Data Directive, his We the People petition platform, and his Cyber National Action Plan. More could have been achieved if Congress had agreed to his request to invest more in these areas. We have seen a dramatic example of why cybersecurity investment is so critically important for our country, not for Democrats, not for Republicans, but for all Americans. This is an effort toward that end.

I hope we can work together in this new Congress to unleash the transformative power of modern technology within government and help renew America's faith in our government. That is critical if we are to be successful as a Nation. I am sure it hopefully is what all of us want to do on a bipartisan basis.

I thank Representative DeSaulnier for his efforts, and I thank Representative Hurd for his leadership on this effort.

I am pleased to join with my counterpart, Majority Leader McCarthy, in strong support of this legislation.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the rule to provide consideration of H.R. 238, the Commodity End-User Relief Act.

I want to start by thanking Mr. Newhouse, Chairman Sessions, and the entire Rules Committee for the time and work that they spent preparing this rule. I appreciate the committee's time, attention, and interest in the work of the Agriculture Committee.

I am especially gratified by their support of my push to authorize all of the unauthorized agencies and programs under our committee's jurisdiction. Last Congress, we came very close, but we fell one agency short. The Commodities Future Trading Commission ended the year as it began it, unauthorized.

The Commission, in fact, has not been reauthorized since October 2013. And since that time, the House of Representatives have voted twice to fix that problem. The most recent effort was in June of 2015. Tomorrow, if we pass H.R. 238, will be the third time this House has done its work on this oversight business. Under this rule, we have the opportunity to pick up where we left off and resume the House's debate on the Commodity End-User Relief Act.

The text of H.R. 238 is identical to the legislation passed by this House last Congress, except for four changes:

First, we included a specific annual spending authorization level, and it is set at the same level as last year's appropriations. This ensures compliance with the majority leader's floor protocols on both specific authorization levels and discretionary CutGo.

Next, two sections were removed because they were already signed into law.

Finally, we removed a section that required the Commission to report to Congress on the status of a pending Board of Trade registration application. That application has been approved, so there is no longer a reason for the Commission to comply with that language.

Other than those four changes, the text of H.R. 238 includes every word passed by this House last Congress, including amendments offered by Mr. Gallego to encourage diversity in the Office of the Chief Economist, as well as Mr. Takai to identify information security vulnerabilities.

This bill does not just reauthorize the CFTC. It also makes important process reforms and targeted changes to help Main Street businesses continue to access the risk management tools that they need to serve their customers.

Over the past 4\1/2\ years, the House Committee on Agriculture has held almost two dozen hearings examining the Commission and investigating the impacts that the Dodd-Frank Act has had on derivatives markets. What we have found is that some of the rules have had unintended consequences for farmers, ranchers, manufacturers, and other businesses who use these markets to protect themselves from uncertainty.

Our witnesses, many of whom were market participants struggling to comply with burdensome rules and ambiguous portions of underlying statute, were consistent in their call for relief. To address their concerns, H.R. 238 makes reforms that fall into three broad categories: customer protections, commission reforms, and end-user relief.

The Commodity End-User Relief Act does not roll back any of the key reforms made under Dodd-Frank. What it does, however, is allow Congress to keep its promise to Main Street America: Main Street did not cause the financial crisis, so Main Street should not have to pay for it. They shouldn't have to pay for it with new fees. They shouldn't have to pay for it in new compliance obligations. They shouldn't have to pay for it in higher transactions costs. And they shouldn't have to pay for it in lost opportunities to manage their business risks.

I would like to close by thanking Chairman Austin Scott and Ranking Member David Scott for doing much of the heavy lifting on the committee's issues. The two of them got deep into the weeds of financial reform.

I would also like to thank Mr. Lucas, who is a sponsor emeritus of this bill. We have been working on this issue since he was chairman, and much of the bipartisan work he did remains in this bill.

I urge adoption of this rule and support for all the amendments that were made in order.

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 39) to amend title 5, United States Code, to codify the Presidential Innovation Fellows Program, and for other purposes.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and to include any extraneous material on the bill under consideration.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from California (Mr. McCarthy), the majority leader.

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

Today, I am urging my colleagues to support H.R. 39, the TALENT Act, introduced by Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy of California. This bill passed the House on a strong bipartisan vote in the 114th Congress, and I am glad to be part of the team working to enact this important legislation into law.

The TALENT Act makes permanent the Presidential Innovation Fellows program that was created in 2012. This highly competitive program recruits talented, private sector innovators and technologists from across the United States.

Presidential Innovation Fellows serve in the Washington, D.C., area for 12 months at an executive agency. These agencies include the Department of Energy, NASA, and the Department of Veterans Affairs.

Fellows bring with them their experience in the private sector to help government turn ideas into tangible results that ultimately benefit the American people. Since 2012, at least 96 top innovators have participated in the program.

Past and current fellows have come from companies large and small and hold degrees from top universities across the country. They have won a variety of awards, including Fulbright scholarships, Silicon Valley Business Journal's 40 Under 40 recognition, and Truman National Security Project fellowships. These fellows truly are the best and the brightest the United States has to offer, and they seek to utilize their skills for the American people.

Presidential Innovation Fellows are giving the Federal Government the tools it needs to successfully operate in the 21st century. Previous projects completed by fellows include Uncle Sam's List. Fellows created a database to offer a centralized information center in which agencies can forgo buying new commodity IT and support services in favor of existing services provided by the Federal agencies. This program has saved an estimated $2.5 billion, and it is helping government become more effective and efficient.

I commend Majority Leader McCarthy for the work to bring this innovation to the government. Again, I urge support for this bill.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to make the gentleman from California aware that I have no further speakers and I am prepared to close.

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

Mr. Speaker, I would like to take the opportunity to thank for their years of service on such an important issue Mr. DeSaulnier and Leader Hoyer and Leader McCarthy.

I would like to urge the adoption of this bill.

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

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