Providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 6237) to authorize appropriations for fiscal years 2018 and 2019 for intelligence and intelligence-related activities of the United States Government, the Community Management Account, and the Central Intelligence Agency Retirement and Disability System, and for other purposes.

Mr. Chair, I rise to speak on House consideration of H.R. 6237, the ``Matthew Young Pollard Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2018 and 2019.''

I thank Chairman Nunes, Ranking Member Schiff for their work to bring this bill before the full House of consideration.

Our nation's national security professionals require our support in words as well as deeds in the form of legislation like the authorization measure we are debating and sufficient funding to carry out the work of protecting our great nation from our enemies.

I offered several Jackson Lee Amendments for consideration under this bill.

I thank the Rules Committee for making in order Jackson Lee Amendment No. 3, designated as No. 33 on the Rules Committee roster for consideration for this bill.

This Jackson Lee Amendment, amends the Sense of Congress already in the bill on the importance of re-review of security clearances held by individuals by adding consideration of whether the security clearance holder's association or sympathy with persons or organizations that advocate, threaten, or use force or violence, or any other illegal or unconstitutional means, in an effort to prevent others from exercising their rights under the Constitution or laws of the United States or of any state, on account of race, religion, national origin, disability, or other impermissible factors.

In addition to this amendment, I offered three other Jackson Lee Amendments to H.R. 6237:

The first Jackson Lee Amendment is designated as No. 32 on the Rules Committee roster, and would have amended the Sense of Congress already in the bill that addresses the importance of conducting background checks for retention of security clearances or the issuance of new clearances to also consider an applicant's membership in a hate group and their participation in activities espoused by hate groups that involve violence or incitement of violence which disrupts civic life.

The second Jackson Lee Amendment is designated as No. 34, on the Rules Committee rosters, and would have amended the Sense of Congress already in the bill on the

importance of review of a security clearance by adding that a security clearance should not be held by an individual who actively engages in violent acts in the United States or its territories that target persons based upon their race, religion, ethnicity, national origin, sexual orientation, or gender identity for the purpose of inflicting physical harm or emotional distress with the objective of normalizing anti-social behavior towards vulnerable groups.

The third Jackson Lee Amendment is designated as No. 38 on the Rules Committee rosters, and would have required that the Director of National Intelligence conduct an assessment and report to Congress on the reliance of intelligence activities on civilian contractors to support Government activities, including intelligence analysis.

Each of these Jackson Lee Amendments sought to strengthen and improve the process of security clearance awards and oversight of contractors engaged in national security work.

The rights and dignity of all Americans must be held dear and protected from assaults that challenge the very freedom we value most.

It is our diversity and our capacity for tolerance of others who are different that is the essence of American exceptionalism.

As a nation we have come through many struggles and challenges to reach a point where we accept the diversity of our nation as a strength and not a weakness.

A period in our history that challenges the very foundation of our nation was framed by a speech given by Abraham Lincoln on the occasion of his nomination to become the Senator from the State of Illinois.

He said: ``A house divided against itself, cannot stand. I believe this government cannot endure, permanently, half slave and half free. I do not expect the Union to be dissolved--I do not expect the house to fall--but I do expect it will cease to be divided. It will become all one thing or all the other. Either the opponents of slavery will arrest the further spread of it, and place it where the public mind shall rest in the belief that it is in the course of ultimate extinction; or its advocates will push it forward, till it shall become lawful in all the States, old as well as new--North as well as South.''

He was speaking of the pernicious national shame of slavery that led ultimately to the Civil War that cost more than 600,00 lives over the very question of human rights and human dignity for all persons.

Although the question of equality and justice for all has been asked and answered during pivotal moments in our nation's history today we are facing another challenge to our core beliefs.

I offered these Jackson Lee Amendments to establish that this Congress is not wavering in its commitment to protect the lives, liberties or freedom of Americans from those who seek to do them harm.

Specifically, four of the Jackson Lee Amendments were prompted by the actions of Mr. Miselis who has a security clearance and worked for Northrup Grumman, a major defense contractor, at the time he engaged in physical violence against persons protesting racism and white supremacy in Charlottesville, Virginia.

In May 2018, Northrup Grumman was informed of Mr. Miselis' membership in RAM and the violent assaults he initiated while he was in Charlottesville participating in activities in support of white supremacy, which were captured on video and in photos.

Mr. Miselis worked for a government contractor and held a security clearance authorizing him to work on projects that were of vital interest to our nation and its defense.

Northrup Grumman did not dismiss him until the story broke earlier this month with media reports on the violence Mr. Miselis engaged in at the white supremacists' rally held in Charlottesville, Virginia.

The violence of RAM members has been a hallmark of the group and its members.

The Anti-Defamation League describes RAM as a white supremacist group whose members believe they are fighting against a ``modern world'' corrupted by the ``destructive cultural influences'' of liberals, Jews, Muslims and non-white immigrants.

They refer to themselves as the ``premier MMA (mixed martial arts) club of the Alt-Right.''

RAM is characterized as operating like a street-fighting club.

Members actively train to do physical battle with their ideological foes, and have been involved in violent clashes during political rallies and demonstrations.

RAM members consider themselves to be part of the ``Alt Right.''

RAM's membership has deep roots in California's racist skinhead movement, and includes individuals who have faced serious criminal charges, including assault, robbery and weapon offenses.

RAM consists of several dozen loosely affiliated neo-Nazis and racist skinheads who were formerly known as the DIY Division, but rebranded themselves as the Rise Above Movement in the spring of 2017.

The FBI has opened an informal investigation into this group because of the violence associated with its members.

The United States is a nation of laws, which gives us the freedom to agree and most importantly disagree with not only each other but with our government.

But the limitations to the right to disagree can be best described by the ancient wisdom: ``Your right to swing your arms ends just where the other person's nose begins.''

There is a limit to the expression of free speech and the freedom to assemble and that limit is violence.

I know that the work of our intelligence community is difficult and often goes without notice by the American public.

I firmly believe that the actions of those who hold security clearances as they go about their lives should reflect the higher goals and values of nation.

To engage in violent acts against persons engaged in constitutionally protected activity on account of race, religion, color, gender, sexual orientation, language of original, immigration status, or creed is an affront to the framers of the Constitution for this great nation.

The actions of Mr. Miselis put at risk not only his career, but also the reputation of people who hold national security clearances.

The awarding of security clearances to contractors must be better managed and the consequences for involvement in activities that would be cause for dismissal from the armed services or any federal agency should not go unnoticed.

I am committed to the task of building the capacity and resources of the intelligence community to ensure that our nation's national security and national defense are all that they need to be.

I ask that my colleagues support the Jackson Lee Amendment made in order for consideration of H.R. 6237, and support the underlying bill.

Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

Mr. Chair, I thank the ranking member and the chairman for bringing this bill to the floor and working on some very important items, including diversity, outreach, HBCUs, issues of which I have worked on as well. So I thank them very much, because bringing the expertise of diversity to the national security and intelligence community can only make us stronger.

Mr. Chairman, I have just left the Judiciary Committee where we have been spending a period of time dealing with questions that wrap themselves around the intelligence community and the importance of preserving confidential sources and as well the importance of the intelligence community as it relates to the ongoing Russian investigation.

Equally important, of course, is to ensure that we have a community that is well-recognized to have security clearances that are not impacted by actions or views that would do harm to the American people.

My amendment adds to the sense of Congress in the bill that a re- review of a security clearance holder's credentials can be triggered by his or her association or empathy with persons or organizations that advocate, threaten, or use force or violence or any other illegal or unconstitutional means in an effort to prevent others from exercising their rights under the Constitution or laws of the United States or of any State, on account of race, religion, national origin, disability, or other impermissible factors, which maybe include LGBTQ, and whether one is, in essence, considered different. That is the basis of I think a very positive addition to this legislation.

Mr. Chair, I include in the Record an article published on July 6, 2018, by PBS FRONTLINE about Michael Miselis, an active member of the California-based Rise Above Movement, RAM, as a well-known violent white supremacist group.

He Is a Member of a Violent White Supremacist Group; So Why Is He

Working for a Defense Contractor With a Security Clearance?

This story is part of an ongoing collaboration between

ProPublica and FRONTLINE that includes documentaries

scheduled to begin on PBS in August 2018.

If you've witnessed or experienced hate crimes, harassment

or incidents of bias, you can use this form to send

information to FRONTLINE, ProPublica and other partners in

the Documenting Hate project.

Update, July 6, 2018: One day after being exposed as a

member of a violent white supremacist group, Michael Miselis

has lost his job as an aerospace engineer. In an email,

company spokesman Tim Paynter told ProPublica and FRONTLINE

that Miselis ``is no longer an employee of Northrop

Grumman.'' Paynter did not say whether Miselis was fired or

resigned from his position.

There likely isn't such a thing as a ``typical'' violent

white extremist in America in 2018. Still, Michael Miselis--a

University of California, Los Angeles doctoral student with a

U.S. government security clearance to work on sensitive

research for a prominent defense contractor--makes for a

pretty unusual case.

For months, ProPublica and FRONTLINE have been working to

identify the white supremacists at the center of violent

demonstrations across the country, including the infamous

Unite the Right rally last August in Charlottesville,

Virginia. The Rise Above Movement, a Southern California

group that expresses contempt for Muslims, Jews, and

immigrants, became a focus of that effort. ProPublica and

FRONTLINE were able to quickly identify a number of the

group's leaders, and find evidence that put them in the

middle of violence in Charlottesville and Berkeley,

California, among other places.

But one seeming member of RAM was harder to nail down. In

video shot in Charlottesville, a bearded, husky man is seen

in a red Make America Great Again hat with his hands wrapped

in tape that came in handy for the brawling that occurred

that day. During one encounter, the unidentified man in the

red hat pushed an African-American protester to the ground

and began pounding on him, video of the episode shows;

moments later, a known RAM member choked and bloodied a pair

of female counter-protesters. The possible RAM member also

had turned up in video shot during hours of combat at a Trump

rally in Berkeley, as well. Wearing protective goggles to

ward off pepper spray, the man fought alongside RAM members,

wrestling one protester to the ground and punching others.

Ultimately, ProPublica and FRONTLINE determined the man in

the violent footage was Miselis, a 29-year-old pursuing a

Ph.D. in UCLA's aerospace engineering program. Miselis was

identified using video footage and social media posts, and

reporters confirmed his identity in an encounter with him

outside his home. In interviews, a number of California law

enforcement officials said Miselis was a member of RAM.

In addition to his scholarly pursuits, Miselis works as a

systems engineer for Northrop Grumman, the giant defense

contractor with a plant in Redondo Beach, California.

When approached by ProPublica and FRONTLINE in front of his

home in Lawndale, a small city south of Los Angeles, Miselis

said he ``didn't know anything'' about what happened in

Charlottesville.

``I think you got the wrong guy,'' he said before driving

off in his car.

Miselis did not respond to questions about his involvement

with RAM. He did not answer additional questions sent by

email.

Several current and former employees at Northrop Grumman

told ProPublica and FRONTLINE that Miselis has received a

security clearance to work in a computer modeling and

simulation group within Northrop's aerospace division. Such

security clearances are typically issued in a two-step

process. The federal Office of Personnel Management conducts

an investigation into the individual. The agency's findings

are then forwarded to a special unit within the Department of

Defense, which makes the final determination on whether the

person should receive a clearance, a status that often allows

the person access to classified or otherwise sensitive

information concerning national security.

Public affairs officers at the Defense Department declined

to comment about Miselis and his security clearance. The

federal personnel management office referred questions

regarding Miselis to Northrop Grumman.

Northrop Grumman did not respond to several requests for

comment. However, interviews with current and former Northrop

employees, as well as an internal email, make clear the

company knows of Miselis' actions in Charlottesville and

involvement with RAM. Miselis informed his superiors about

his contact with reporters from ProPublica and FRONTLINE, as

is required by any individual who holds a higher-level

security clearance, the people said.

So far, it seems, the company has taken no action against

Miselis, who remains employed.

Keegan Hankes, an analyst with the Southern Poverty Law

Center who follows RAM closely, said he was surprised that

nothing has been done about Miselis' employment and security

clearance.

``It's ridiculous,'' Hankes said.

``They're openly motivated by racism,'' he added of RAM.

As ProPublica has previously reported, RAM first surfaced

publicly last spring and has quickly established itself as

one of the violent groups in the resurgent white supremacist

scene; members, who regularly train in boxing and martial

arts, have been documented engaging in a string of melees.

Founded in early 2017 by Robert Rundo, a Queens, New York,

native who served an 18-month prison sentence for stabbing a

rival gang member six times during a 2009 street fight, the

group's core membership is small--15 to 20 young men--but

capable of real menace, ProPublica's reporting has shown.

Rundo has recruited followers from the Orange County and

San Diego chapters of the Hammerskin Nation, the country's

largest Nazi skinhead gang, and one the authorities say has

been behind at least nine murders. One of the Hammerskins who

joined up with RAM, Matthew Branstetter, went to prison in

California in 2011 on hate crime charges for robbing and

assaulting a Jewish man in an Orange County park. The attack

left the victim with ``a concussion, broken jaw, eye socket

fracture, broken nose, cracked ribs, severe facial bruising,

and cuts and bruises to his body and face,'' according to a

news release issued by county prosecutors at the time. Other

RAM members have spent time in prison and Los Angeles County

jail on charges for robbery, firearms possession and other

offenses.

The FBI has taken notice. Several law enforcement officials

familiar with the bureau's work said agents have opened a

formal investigation into RAM. In a statement, the FBI said:

``While the FBI neither confirms nor denies the existence of

an investigation, our agents investigate activity which may

constitute a federal crime or pose a threat to national

security. Our focus is not on membership in particular groups

but on criminal activity. The FBI cannot initiate an

investigation based solely on an individual's race,

ethnicity, national origin, religion, or the exercise of

their First Amendment rights, and we remain committed to

protecting those rights for all Americans.''

Since last August, local prosecutors have brought charges

against a handful of participants in the Charlottesville

rally, successfully convicting several men so far, including

activists on both sides of the clashes. Now federal

authorities are targeting neo-Nazi James Alex Fields, the man

accused of killing counter-protester Heather Heyer and

injuring more than two dozen others. Federal prosecutors

recently filed 30 charges against Fields, including 28 hate

crime charges.

A native of Stockton, California, Miselis earned a

bachelor's of science degree in mechanical engineering from

UCLA in 2011. UCLA's website today lists Miselis as a Ph.D.

candidate in the engineering department's hypersonics and

computational aero-dynamics group. After FRONTLINE and

ProPublica began making inquiries about Miselis, the school

issued a brief statement saying only that he is technically

on leave from the doctoral program.

Miselis was clearly prepared for the unrest in Berkeley in

the spring of 2017. At the Trump rally he wore protective

goggles to ward off pepper spray or tear gas, taped his hands

up like a boxer, and wore a gray active-wear uniform, as did

several other RAM members that day. In video footage reviewed

by ProPublica and FRONTLINE, Miselis can be seen fighting

alongside other RAM members.

The event turned into a multi-hour street battle pitting

Trump supporters, including fascists and extreme-right

activists, against counter-protesters, some of them militant

anti-fascists. Police made 20 arrests, confiscating knives,

pepper spray, a stun gun, an axe-handle and many wooden dowel

rods, which were used as clubs by participants. At least

seven people were transported to the hospital for their

injuries. Rundo, RAM's founder, was arrested and detained for

assault on a police officer, but Alameda County District

Attorney Nancy O'Malley declined to file charges. ``We

determined we didn't have enough evidence to prove the

charges beyond a reasonable doubt,'' said Teresa Drenick, an

Alameda County deputy district attorney.

After the Berkeley rally, Miselis traveled across the

country to take part in the massive white supremacist

convergence in Charlottesville, where his activities were

photographed and recorded on video, both by professional

journalists and other people equipped with smart phones. At

the rally on Aug. 12, pictures taken by photojournalist Jason

Andrew show Miselis walking alongside two other RAM members

previously identified by ProPublica, Tom Gillen and Ben

Daley.

At roughly 10 a.m., Miselis and the other RAM members

confronted counter-protesters a few steps away from

Emancipation Park, where white supremacists had gathered

beneath a statue of Confederate Gen. Robert E. Lee.

Daley attacked two female counter-protesters, kicking and

punching them, a scene captured in video obtained by

ProPublica and FRONTLINE. He wrapped both hands around the

throat of one woman, throttling her until she fell to the

ground, blood seeping from a gash on her temple. The other

woman emerged from the incident with a laceration across her

forehead. On video, she screams as blood drips across her

face.

Miselis jumped into the fracas. In addition to FRONTLINE

and ProPublica, National Geographic produced video

documenting the brawl.

A sequence of pictures shot by photojournalist Edu Bayer,

who was on assignment for The New York Times, show Miselis

hurling what appears to be a can of soda at counter-

protesters. In one photo he flexes his biceps muscles in

celebration.

It's this sort of street combat that worries the SPLC's

Hankes. In his view, such brazen

criminal activity should be a red flag for both Northrop

Grumman and the Pentagon.

``I can't believe that participation in an organized white

supremacist group focused on street-level violence wouldn't

jeopardize your security clearance,'' Hankes said.

Mr. Chair, this gentleman was at Charlottesville speaking loudly, intimidating my fellow alumni and students, having gone to the University of Virginia School of Law. I spoke to the president and officers there, and the students were patently and conspicuously intimidated and frightened. But more importantly, this individual had a security clearance, and he worked for a defense contractor.

My amendment would ensure that the American people have strong national security, a strong intelligence community, but individuals who receive a clearance can receive it appropriately and that they themselves will not be a jeopardy to the citizens of the United States.

Mr. Chair, the Jackson Lee Amendment No. 3, designated as No. 33 on the Rules Committee rosters, amends the Sense of Congress already in the bill on the importance of re-review of security clearances held by individuals by adding consideration of whether the security clearance holder's association or sympathy with persons or organizations that advocate, threaten, or use force or violence, or any other illegal or unconstitutional means, in an effort to prevent others from exercising their rights under the Constitution or laws of the United States or of any state, on account of race, religion, national origin, disability, or other impermissible factors.

Mr. Miselis has a security clearance and worked for Northrup Grumman, a major defense contractor, at the time he engaged in physical violence against persons protesting racism and white supremacy in Charlottesville, Virginia.

In May 2018, Northrup Grumman was informed of Mr. Miselis' membership in RAM and the violent assaults he initiated while he was in Charlottesville participating in activities in support of white supremancy, which were captured on video and in photos.

Mr. Miselis worked for a government contractor and held a security clearance authorizing him to work on projects that were of vital interest to our nation and its defense.

Northrup Grumman did not dismiss him until the story broke earlier this month with media reports on the violence Mr. Miselis engaged in at white supremacists' rally held in Charlottesville, Virginia.

The violence of RAM members has been a hallmark of the group and its members.

The Anti-Defamation League describes RAM as a white supremacist group whose members believe they are fighting against a ``modern world'' corrupted by the ``destructive cultural influences'' of liberals, Jews, Muslims and non-white immigrants.

They refer to themselves as the ``premier MMA (mixed martial arts) club of the Alt-Right.''

RAM is characterized as operating like a street-fighting club.

Members actively train to do physical battle with their ideological foes, and have been involved in violent clashes during political rallies and demonstrations.

RAM members consider themselves to be part of the ``Alt-Right.''

RAM's membership has deep roots in California's racist skinhead movement, and includes individuals who have faced serious criminal charges, including assault, robbery and weapon offenses.

RAM consists of several dozen loosely affiliated neo-Nazis and racist skinheads who were formerly known as the DIY Division, but rebranded themselves as the Rise Above Movement in the spring of 2017.

The FBI has opened an informal investigation into this group because of the violence associated with its members.

The United States is a nation of laws, which gives us the freedom to agree and most importantly disagree with not only each other but with our government.

But the limitations to the right to disagree can be best described by the ancient wisdom: ``Your right to swing your arms ends just where the other person's nose begins.''

There is a limit to the expression of free speech and the freedom to assemble and that limit is violence.

The awarding of security clearances to contractors must be better managed and the consequences for involvement in activities that would be cause for dismissal from the armed services or any federal agency should not go unnoticed.

This Jackson Lee Amendment is an opportunity to make a clear statement to government contractors that the awarding of contracts that involve the security of our nation should not be taken lightly and that Congress will not tolerate the allocation of federal funds to contractors who employ persons who advocate or participate in acts against persons on account of their race, creed, religious beliefs, or gender who engage in constitutionally protected activities.

I ask that my colleagues support this Jackson Lee Amendment to H.R. 6237.

Mr. Chair, I ask my colleagues to support this amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, how much time do I have remaining?

Mr. Chairman, I yield 1\1/4\ minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Schiff), the ranking member of the Intelligence Committee.

Mr. Chairman, RAM, the group that I have indicated in the letter I submitted for the Record, of which the gentleman in the article was a member of, is characterized as operating like a street fighting club. Members actively train to do physical battle with their ideological foes and have been involved in violent clashes during political rallies and demonstrations.

RAM members consider themselves a part of the alt-right. RAM's membership has deep roots in California, with the Skinheads and other individuals who face serious criminal charges. But more importantly, RAM consists of several dozen loosely affiliated neo-Nazi racist Skinheads.

It is not an emphasis on that group. This amendment is broadly structured to deal with protecting the security clearance process and the American people. I join with my colleagues in hoping and helping the intelligence community to be able to have the resources for the backlog of thousands and thousands of those seeking security clearance, so that they can be particular and astute to ensure that for the people who receive it, it is a benefit. It is, in essence, a gift. It is an honor to receive a security clearance.

The clearance that I and Members of Congress have, we hold with the highest respect and dignity. Therefore, if it is given to anyone, it should be given in that manner.

Mr. Chairman, I ask my colleagues to support the Jackson Lee amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

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

Mr. Chairman, I join the chairman in urging support for the combined 2018 and 2019 Intelligence Authorization Act, which has been named in honor of Matthew Young Pollard, a Senate Intelligence Committee staffer who recently passed away, leaving behind a young son and bereaved colleagues both in the Senate and here in the House.

For well over a year now, considerable attention has been focused on the House Intelligence Committee and the profound disagreements that we have had about the Russia investigation. Those differences remain, and the American people should know that my Democratic colleagues on the Intelligence Committee and I continue the important work of investigating Russia's interference in the 2016 Presidential election.

Despite our disagreements over Russia with the majority, however, I have consistently and publicly maintained that the committee must seek to cordon off our disagreements over the Russia investigation and continue with our other work on as bipartisan a basis as possible. We owe the tens of thousands of men and women in the intelligence community nothing less, not only because they put themselves at personal risk every day, but also because their work is so important to the country that it demands the shared responsibility and oversight of the Congress.

The Intelligence Committee has a history of producing bipartisan bills even under the most difficult political circumstances.

I am pleased that our staffs have worked to reach a mutually acceptable final text, and have been able to weed out provisions that would have made it impossible to move forward jointly.

Much of the committee's oversight work is reflected in the bill as classified, but we can discuss some of the 2018-2019 IAA's elements openly, including the fact that the bill helps to better ensure that our elections are free from interference or manipulation.

This is essential to our democracy, and the bill includes important provisions that continue the work that we have been doing in the committee during the course of the work on the Russia investigation, and as a part of our normal oversight to maintain the integrity of our election system.

The bill also provides funding to our intelligence community in order to meet all threats from terrorism to nation-state actors. The bill authorizes funding across a wide range of endeavors that will allow the intelligence community and the Department of Defense to not only respond to threats, but to preempt them.

The bill takes steps to prevent a repeat of the Russian active measures campaign that targeted our 2016 election, by including a minority-authored provision requiring a briefing to key congressional leaders, including members of the intelligence community and committee, if the United States faces a significant foreign cyber intrusion or active measures campaign directed at a federal election.

The bill also ensures that America's technological advantage remains a priority for our intelligence services. As such, the bill resources and directs efforts that will promote our advantages across a range of cutting-edge domains, from space to artificial intelligence.

It enhances transparency and allows public access to certain work of the IC. The bill reauthorizes for 10 years the Public Interest Declassification Board which advises the President and executive branch agencies on the review and declassification of IC records of historical importance.

The bill also includes minority provisions related to parental leave, student loan repayment, and diversity and inclusiveness that are intended to make an exceptional workforce even better.

In the end, the men and women who serve in the intelligence community and the Defense Department are the most important factor in the success of our national security.

There are many other provisions in the bill that will build on the work of past years and move us further along technical and other pathways to meet new challenges and those still on the horizon.

This bill advances our national security, reinforces the principle of congressional oversight, and honors our values as a Nation.

Mr. Chair, I urge the support of the House, and look forward to considering amendments that will make a good bill even better. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, it gives me great pleasure to yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Carson). He is the ranking member on the Emerging Threats Subcommittee and brings a wealth of experience in homeland security to the Congress.

Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from Alabama (Ms. Sewell). She is the ranking member on the Department of Defense Intelligence and Overhead Architecture Subcommittee and does a fabulous job for our committee.

Mr. Chair, I yield an additional 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Alabama.

Mr. Chair, it is now my pleasure to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Heck), someone who we have come to rely on in our committee in a great many areas, but, in particular, the threat posed by foreign actors investing in American technologies, with an eye toward either appropriating our intellectual property, or making use of those

technologies for the purpose of spying on Americans.

Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Ruppersberger), who is the former ranking member of the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence and a great stalwart for the men and women who work within the IC.

Mr. Chairman, might I inquire of the gentleman whether he has any further speakers?

Mr. Chairman, I will take this opportunity to close, and I yield myself the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, 1 month ago, the CIA held its annual memorial ceremony to honor its fallen. This year, the agency added four stars to the memorial wall, signifying four officers killed in the line of duty but who cannot be publicly named even in death. That, Mr. Chairman, is the sacrifice that we ask of our intelligence professionals, and it is one that they are prepared to make.

In exchange for that fidelity, it is our job to provide the intelligence community with the tools and authorities that it needs to keep us safe, all while exercising our constitutional authority of oversight and direction. This bill meets that responsibility, and I urge its passage by the House.

I would also like to take this opportunity to thank my colleagues on the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence and our incredible staff. In particular, I thank Shannon Stuart, Carly Blake, Alan Souza, Mark Stewart, Wells Bennett, Scott Glabe, Rheanne Wirkkala, Amanda Rogers Thorpe, Thomas Eager, Kris Breaux, Christine Bocchino, Maher Bitar, Shannon Green, Linda Cohen, Patrick Boland, and Tim Bergreen.

These staff members labor three floors below the Capitol in a space we affectionately call--and sometimes unaffectionately call--the bunker. They do so for long hours and without daylight. We are very grateful to them and for their service.

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

Mr. Chairman, as the designee of the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Keating), I offer amendment No. 1.

Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to offer this amendment on behalf of its author, Mr. Keating of Massachusetts, who is one of our fine members who has great experience in public safety prior to coming to the Congress.

This amendment builds on an initiative from Chairman Nunes to extend tour lengths of deployed U.S. Government personnel, particularly those who are proficient in difficult languages such as Arabic, Farsi, Chinese, and Korean. Specifically, the amendment adds the Russian language to that list.

In view of the continuing threat to our national security posed by the aggressive action of the Russian Government, the U.S. Government must fully engage its cadre of personnel proficient in the Russian language.

I am a slow talker. I am talking even more slowly, and my colleague has arrived. I want to thank my colleague for his work.

Mr. Chairman, I urge support of this amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Keating), who is the author of the amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I urge passage of the amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Chair, I thank the gentleman for offering this amendment.

I am pleased to rise in support. This amendment clarifies section 1503 of the bill dealing with foreign counterintelligence and cybersecurity threats to Federal election campaigns.

The current provision directs that, for each Federal election, the Director of National Intelligence, the Under Secretary of Homeland Security, and the FBI will make publicly available a report on foreign counterintelligence and cybersecurity threats to our elections.

Section 1503 strengthens our elections by providing information to the public about these threats by providing information about best practices and resources which may be used to counter these threats.

Mr. Schneider's amendment adds to the publicly available report the identification of the foreign actor, when possible. This public attribution can be very powerful, not only in terms of protecting the public, but also in deterring any foreign intervention in our democratic affairs.

I want to thank my colleague again for his work, and I am happy to support the amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the amendment offered by my friend and colleague, the gentlewoman from Texas, Congresswoman Sheila Jackson Lee.

This amendment complements other provisions in the bill focused on improving the security clearance process in the Intelligence Committee. Specifically, Ms. Jackson Lee's amendment recognizes that an immediate review may be called for when a security clearance holder is reported to have engaged in certain violent acts against individuals, property, or public spaces based on an association or sympathy with persons or organizations seeking to prevent others from exercising their constitutional rights. Such rights include those related to race, religion, national origin, or disability.

I thank the gentlewoman for offering this amendment. I am pleased to support it, and I urge my colleagues to do the same.

Mr. Chair, I thank the gentleman for yielding.

It is a great pleasure to team up with the gentleman again in pursuit of important priorities for the intelligence community and for our committee.

Enhancing diversity in the intelligence community is a continuing priority for the House and, unfortunately, remains a continuing challenge for the IC. While there are many intelligence professionals who are sincerely working to create a culture of inclusion, they acknowledge that progress is slow.

Mr. Hastings' amendment, together with initiatives championed by committee colleagues, Representatives Terri Sewell and Andre Carson, will help ensure that the Director of National Intelligence increases geographic outreach in IC recruitment efforts.

As coordinator of the IC, the DNI and his team are well postured to consolidate the separate recruitment activities of each IC entity into a comprehensive recruitment campaign that reaches every corner of our Nation, especially underserved regions that have had little interaction with the intelligence community.

With the DNI's leadership, smart division of labor among IC agencies, and innovative use of virtual communications vehicles, I am confident that a comprehensive recruitment campaign can cover the Nation more effectively and attract a workforce that is more representative of America.

Once again, I want to thank my colleague, Mr. Hastings, as well as my HPSCI colleagues for their commitment to diversity, and I encourage my colleagues to support the amendment.

Mr. Chair, I thank the gentleman for yielding, and I am proud to support the amendment offered by Representatives Schneider, Meadows, Torres, and Sinema.

Mr. Chair, it is imperative that our Intelligence, Armed Services, and Foreign Affairs Committees with oversight of Iran's role in Syria and Lebanon stay informed of proxy forces operating there and the strategic threat posed to

Israel, our other allies, and our Nation's interests in the region.

Requiring that the Director of National Intelligence report on areas such as arms transfers from Iran to Hezbollah and other militias, weapons facilities, supply chains, and financial capabilities will help us gain greater understanding of nuclear, biological, and chemical weapon proliferation in the region.

I thank my colleagues for offering the amendment. I appreciate Mr. Schneider's leadership on this issue, and I urge the House to support it.

Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding.

One hundred years ago, the great influenza pandemic, often called the Spanish flu, caused about 50 million deaths worldwide, between 3 to 6 percent of the global population, and far more than the deaths from combat casualties in World War I. Public health officials have warned that we are overdue for another pandemic that will likely spread even more virulently in our globalized world.

While global health may not be a topic that leaps to mind when thinking of the roles and missions of the intelligence community, the IC does play a pivotal role in defending us from microscopic threats. The IC's unique capabilities can be as valuable in combating disease as the other threats we face.

During the Ebola crisis, NGA and other IC agencies provided geospatial and other intelligence to health workers battling the outbreak. Ensuring

that we are prepared for any potential pandemic will be essential to saving American lives.

I wholeheartedly support the bipartisan amendment by my colleagues from California, Virginia, and Washington, and I thank them for working with the committee staff to refine and perfect it.

Mr. Chairman, I thank my colleague for yielding, and I rise in support of the amendment offered by the Representatives from New York, Rice and King.

This amendment requires that the Director of National Intelligence, with the Department of the Treasury, submit to Congress a report on the possible exploitation of virtual currencies by terrorist actors, including state sponsors of terrorism.

It has long been said that if you wish to uncover the truth about malign activity, then follow the money. This remains true with the development and use of virtual currencies.

The IC must always remain one step ahead of our adversaries, and this amendment will help ensure that they continue to do just that.

Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding.

Mr. Chairman, I am proud to rise in support of the amendment offered by my colleague from Illinois, Congressman Lipinski.

This amendment requires that the Director of National Intelligence submit a report to Congress describing spending by Iran on military and terrorist activities outside of the country, including spending to support Hezbollah, Houthi rebels in Yemen, Hamas, and proxy forces elsewhere.

The intelligence community rightly remains focused on Iran's support for malign foreign military and terrorist activities abroad.

This amendment helps ensure that Congress has full visibility into the judgments and assessments of the IC

on Iran's spending to support these groups, and for that reason I support the amendment.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume, and I thank the gentleman, my friend from Georgia, for yielding me the customary 30 minutes for debate.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to debate the rule for this measure, the Matthew Young Pollard Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal Years 2018 and 2019.

Today's bill comes to us through a process that is marginally better than that which we saw last year. As many of you may remember, last year, it took my friends on the other side a couple of tries to get the Intelligence Authorization Act to the floor.

Though that one was, unlike today's bill, cosponsored by the ranking member, Republicans raised the ire of many of us on this side of the aisle by trying to move this bill under suspension of the rules. After that move fell flat, the Republican-led Rules Committee reported the bill under a closed rule, blocking no fewer than 13 amendments. That bill, though passed, never saw sunlight in the Senate.

Today's bill avoids some of those avoidable self-inflicted wounds and is indeed better for it. But unfortunately, drama of some kind or another seems to follow Intelligence Authorization Acts, no matter what.

Last night at the Rules Committee, we witnessed, in my view, the unprecedented silencing of one of our colleagues. Congresswoman Norma Torres had just begun her first question of the chairman of the Intelligence Committee, Mr. Nunes, when she was gaveled down by the chairman of the House Rules Committee. Subsequently, he abruptly recessed the meeting.

It is, in my view, Congresswoman Torres' unquestionable right, based on longstanding committee practice, to question a witness. And it is absolutely unbelievable and, in my view, a great shame that she was not able to continue her line of questioning.

When the hearing reconvened after a near 20-minute recess, rather than answering questions, Chairman Nunes was permitted to leave. He had made the request, indicating that he had matters before the Ways and Means Committee.

This was not just unfortunate for Mrs. Torres, but also for the rest of us on the committee, because during that short recess, the Trump administration issued its Statement of Administration Policy on today's underlying bill. Frankly, the administration's statement raised more questions than it answered.

It would have been helpful to have Mr. Nunes at the hearing so that we could ask him important and relevant questions about the administration's statement and what that statement meant for his bill.

Now, I look forward to our meetings returning to normal next week, and I look forward to them being run as they have been in the past, with witnesses staying before the committee until all of our members have been able to ask all of their questions.

Mr. Speaker, the bill is also not without its laudatory provisions. As my friend from Georgia has mentioned several of them, let me proceed to add to that particular observation of his.

It increases pay for professionals in the intelligence community who have expertise in the cyber arena or have extensive knowledge in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics--all areas that are crucial to the success of the intelligence community's core mission.

Footnote there: I served for 8 years on the Intelligence Committee, and I know full well, firsthand, the importance of this particular aspect of the committee's duties and the agency's duties.

The bill, at the insistence of Democrats on the committee, addresses Russian meddling in our elections by requiring the intelligence community to brief key congressional leaders and committees on threat assessments related to foreign meddling in our Federal elections. The bill also requires the Director of Intelligence to publicly post a report on foreign counterintelligence and cybersecurity threats to Federal election campaigns.

Although these provisions are welcomed, it is beyond any doubt that more must be done to strengthen our defenses against any foreign interference in our Federal and State elections and to rebuild Americans' confidence in the democratic process and in its institutions.

Mr. Speaker, there has also been good bipartisan work on a matter that has been, for years, as it is today, near and dear to my heart, and that is increasing diversity hires and promotions within the intelligence community. Indeed, I have not stopped championing these twin causes since leaving the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence as its vice chair.

Diversity is a mission imperative for the intelligence community. Three of my predecessors, two of whom are deceased--Lou Stokes from Ohio and Julian Dixon from California--as well as my classmate and colleague Sanford Bishop, who served on the committee as well, worked assiduously in an effort to increase minorities and give them opportunities to climb the ranks.

We also, in my view, now need to recruit who will be able to blend in, speak foreign languages, and understand the cultures in countries that are now central to our foreign policy interests. At the end of the day, such diversity is achieved through the hiring process; and, therefore, we need to ensure that we are hiring more Arab Americans, Iranian Americans, Pakistani Americans, Chinese Americans, Korean Americans, and many other Americans from diverse backgrounds as we confront a myriad of threats and work hard to better understand our adversaries wherever they may lurk. We do not seek this diversity in the name of political correctness but, rather, in the name of national security.

Mr. Speaker, even with these sensible additions, I can understand why some of my colleagues are reluctant to support today's bill.

When we live in the shadow of a President who is bent on denigrating the brave men and women of the intelligence community in a brazen attempt to undermine the crucial work they do on a daily basis; when we live under the shadow of a President who has, as a candidate for the highest office in the land, compared those in the intelligence community to Nazis; when we live under the shadow of a President who is quicker to take the word of an authoritarian dictator like Vladimir Putin over the studied and sober word of his own intelligence community--all positions, by the way, that not only undermine our own intelligence community, but also the relationships that we have with allies and the world over--one would be right to pause and consider whether he or she should vote in favor of handing over immense and powerful authorities to such a person.

I certainly understand the great cause for concern in handing such authorities over to this administration. In fact, last night at the Rules Committee, I offered a sensible amendment, in my view, that would have reinstated the cybersecurity coordinator on the National Security Council.

As many may remember, in the not too distant past we had such a coordinator. Why? Because this country faces, on an hourly and, indeed, minute-by-minute, second-by-second basis, attempted and sometimes successful attacks on our Nation's cyber infrastructure, both private and public. It made sense to President Bush's and President Obama's administrations to have a person who could coordinate the complicated responses to these myriad attacks.

The now-President and his national security adviser, on the other hand, had the inspired idea to jettison the position of cybersecurity coordinator from the ranks of the National Security Council. Now, the optics alone of the current administration canning a cybersecurity coordinator are enough to make one shake one's head, but the real-world effects of such a misguided and reckless action should be cause for great concern.

My friends on the other side of the aisle will tell us that sacking the cybersecurity coordinator was done in the name of bureaucratic efficiency, when what the Trump administration has really done, in yet another misguided decision, is make protecting our country more difficult and more cumbersome.

It is time that Republicans take these threats seriously and stop aiding and abetting an administration that puts its own personal interests ahead of those of the American people.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Mrs. Torres), who is my and Mr. Collins' distinguished colleague on the Rules Committee.

Mr. Speaker, I yield the gentlewoman an additional 1 minute.

Mr. Speaker, I yield the gentlewoman an additional 30 seconds.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume, and I invite, Mr. Speaker, my colleague from Georgia to show me an example of where we shut down a Member that was asking a question.

And I might add, Chairman Nunes did not send a designee. He came to the committee himself, and then Mr. LoBiondo, which is not unprecedented, as you have outlined the numbers, took his position at that time.

But I know of no time that we have failed to allow a Member of the committee to ask questions. Can the gentleman give me such an example?

Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Georgia.

Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, I will take that as my colleague doesn't have an answer. I will take that as my colleague's nonresponse to my question with reference to show me a precedent in that regard. There was none.

I have been on that committee for 16 years, and we talk all over each other all the time and back and forth, but in an orderly manner, and yesterday's example was not orderly.

If we defeat the previous question, I am going to offer an amendment to the rule to bring up Representative Nadler's bill, H.R. 6135, the Keep Families Together Act. This important proposal would prohibit the Department of Homeland Security from separating children from their parents, except in extraordinary circumstances, and limit the criminal prosecution of asylum seekers.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from Washington (Ms. Jayapal), a member of the Judiciary Committee, to discuss our proposal.

Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 15 seconds to the gentlewoman from Washington.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Nevada (Mr. Kihuen), who is a member of the Financial Services Committee, to further discuss our proposal for the previous question, and I apologize for botching his last name.

Mr. Speaker, may I ask how much time is left on both sides of the aisle?

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Espaillat), who is a member of the Foreign Affairs Committee, Education and the Workforce, and the Committee on Small Business, to further discuss our proposal for the previous question.

Mr. Speaker, I have no further speakers, and I yield myself the balance of my time to close.

Mr. Speaker, we consider today's important bill as we approach the hour of our President, Donald John Trump's, private sit down with President Vladimir Putin in Russia. We don't know what will come of this meeting, but if past is indeed prologue and we look to the President's handling of his negotiations with North Korean dictator Kim Jong-un, or his steadfast denial of the obvious, namely Russia's meddling in our elections, or his policy of tearing toddlers away from their mothers and fathers, then we can assume that nothing good will come from this upcoming get together.

And I would urge those traveling with him to sweep the room with Vladimir Putin because he will certainly be being listened to.

We can assume that there will be further concessions that benefit Russian interests. We can assume that the President will further insult our friends and allies, as he did yesterday morning in Brussels. We can assume that he will further erode the institutions created by the greatest generation, institutions that have made and kept the United States the dominant power in an uncertain world, institutions that have kept war off of western European soil for more than a generation, institutions that have kept at bay those nation-states that champion oppression and fear rather than freedom and the rule of law.

Finally, I will say this. In the current environment, it is more important than ever to stand united against those forces that wish to see us divided. It is more important than ever that we support the difficult and brave work of those individuals who make up our intelligence community. And the latter can be achieved, quite simply, by Republicans in this Chamber taking a note from our Republican friends on the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence and learn how to call a spade a spade.

The assessment that the Russians meddled in our election; that the Russians concertedly attempted to undermine Secretary Clinton's chances to be elected the first female President of the United States; that the Russians did this work to favor the election of the current President are all trustworthy and well-founded assessments.

And remember, that it is not Alcee Lamar Hastings saying that, though I do. That is the assessment of the entire Republican-led Senate Select Committee on Intelligence. That is the assessment of the intelligence agencies of this community.

Mr. Speaker, I urge a ``no'' vote on the rule, and 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 ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the bill.

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

Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of H.R. 6237, the Matthew Young Pollard Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal Years 2018 and 2019.

Passing an annual intelligence authorization bill is the most important tool Congress has to conduct effective oversight of the intelligence activities of the United States Government.

Today, the Intelligence Committee is bringing its annual intelligence authorization bill to the floor. Once again, the bill is a bipartisan product that reflects contributions from all committee members. It was reported out of the committee by a unanimous voice vote.

The legislation provides the intelligence community the necessary resources and authorities to protect and defend the United States. For example, this bill authorizes a committee initiative to streamline defense intelligence related to the Defense Intelligence Agency. It enhances congressional oversight of intelligence activities by mandating intelligence community reports on threats to Federal elections, leaks of classified information, security clearance processing, and other vital activities. Furthermore, the bill increases pay for employees with unique cyber skills and creates a security center at the Department of Energy to protect our energy infrastructure.

Mr. Chairman, the bill authorizes enhanced injury benefits to CIA employees injured overseas due to hostile acts of terrorist activities. Moreover, it reauthorizes the Public Interest Declassification Board, aligns the reporting structure of the intelligence community chief financial officer and chief intelligence officer with statutes that govern other Federal agencies, and codifies longstanding congressional reporting requirements regarding the intelligence community information technology environment.

Mr. Chairman, the intelligence community comprises thousands of patriotic Americans who do difficult jobs, sometimes at great personal risk, to keep Americans safe from foreign threats. Today, these threats take many different forms and emanate from various parts of the world.

In the Middle East, the threat from ISIS has not ceased, despite its dramatic loss of territory. In fact, our intelligence professionals now face the daunting task of tracking ISIS fighters fleeing Syria for countries throughout the region and beyond.

Meanwhile, Iran is solidifying its influence, often through armed proxy militias, in its quest to control a Shiite Crescent across a wide swath of the Middle East.

In Asia, China poses numerous security challenges related to its expanding military capabilities, its growing international force projection, and its extensive extraterritorial claims. Additionally, the Chinese regime is engaged in widespread efforts, including licit and illicit means, to acquire critical U.S. national security technologies and intellectual property.

Furthermore, Russia continues to pose a pressing threat to the United States and many of our allies.

This is just a small snapshot of the threats the intelligence community addresses every day.

Additionally, our intelligence professionals confront an array of challenges posed by failed states, cyber warfare, nuclear proliferation, and many other matters.

This bill will ensure that the dedicated men and women of our intelligence community have the funding authorities and support they need to carry out the mission to keep the United States safe, while providing Congress with the tools it needs to provide robust oversight over their actions.

I would like to thank the men and women of this country who serve in our intelligence community. I am honored to get to know so many of them in the course of the committee's oversight work.

I would also like to thank all of the committee's members for their contributions to our oversight over the past year, and especially to our subcommittee chairmen and ranking members for their time and their efforts. The many hearings, briefings, and oversight visits our members carry out during the year provide the input for this authorization and the direction of this bill.

Finally, I would like to thank all the committee staff for their hard work and for their daily oversight of the intelligence community.

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

House of Representatives,

Committee on Homeland Security,

Washington, DC, July 11, 2018.

Hon. Devin Nunes,

Chairman, Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence,

Washington, DC.

Dear Chairman Nunes: I am writing to you regarding H.R.

6237, the ``Matthew Young Pollard Intelligence Authorization

Act for Fiscal Years 2018 and 2019.'' The bill includes

provisions that fall within the jurisdiction of the Committee

on Homeland Security.

I recognize and appreciate the desire to bring this

legislation before the House of Representatives in an

expeditious manner, and accordingly, the Committee on

Homeland Security will forego action on this bill. However,

this is conditional based on our mutual understanding that by

foregoing consideration of H.R. 6237 at this time does not

prejudice the Committee on Homeland Security with respect to

the appointment of conferees or to any future jurisdictional

claim over the subject matter contained in this bill or

similar legislation.

This waiver is also given with the understanding that the

Committee on Homeland Security reserves its authority to seek

conferees on any provision within its jurisdiction during any

House-Senate conference that may be convened on this or

similar legislation, and requests your support for such a

request.

I would appreciate your response to this letter confirming

this understanding with respect to H.R. 6237, and ask that a

copy of this letter and your response be included in the

Congressional Record during consideration of this bill on the

House floor. I look forward to working with the Permanent

Select Committee on Intelligence as this bill moves through

the legislative process.

Sincerely,

Michael T. McCaul,

Chairman.

Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Conaway), the chairman of the Agriculture Committee.

Mr. Chairman, I continue to reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Chair, I will briefly say that the former ranking member, Mr. Ruppersberger, who has many intelligence professionals in his district, is highly regarded in our committee, and I respect and am thankful for his support of the bill.

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

Mr. Chairman, I have no further speakers.

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

I thank the staffs on both the majority and minority sides. They do put in a lot of effort. It is one of the smallest staffs in the Capitol of any committee, so we are thankful that we were able to get this bill done in a bipartisan manner. We look for its passage on the floor this afternoon.

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

Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition to the amendment, although I am not opposed to the amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I strongly support the amendment, and I strongly encourage Members to support this amendment.

I have no further comments at this time, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I urge passage also, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Chair, I claim the time in opposition to the amendment, though I am not opposed.

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

Mr. Chairman, I urge support of the amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition to the amendment, though I am not opposed.

Mr. Chair, I am prepared to accept the amendment, and I continue to reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I will just close by saying that the security clearance process needs a lot of work. So we support this amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I urge passage of this amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Chair, I claim the time in opposition to the amendment, even though I am not opposed to it.

Mr. Chair, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Missouri (Mrs. Wagner).

Mr. Chairman, I support this amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition to the amendment, even though I am not opposed to it.

Mr. Chairman, I strongly support this amendment. I think we should expand more capabilities into rural areas and do more recruitment in rural areas. I appreciate this amendment. It has my full support.

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

Mr. Chair, I urge support of the amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I support the amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I claim time in opposition to the amendment, even though I am not opposed to it.

Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentlewoman from New York for working in a bipartisan manner with a longtime member of our committee, Mr. King, and I urge passage of this amendment.

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

Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for working with our committee to get support from both sides of the aisle for this amendment, I urge its passage, and I yield back the balance of my time.

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

Mr. Chairman, I thank all of the Members who offered amendments today. This is a critical piece of legislation, and I look forward to working with the Senate to send this bill to the President.

This year's bill is named after Matthew Young Pollard, who passed away earlier this year while carrying out the work of the Senate Intelligence Committee. Matt was a friend to many on both sides of the aisle of our committee, a dedicated staff member, and a member of the Army National Guard. While his loss is devastating to us, we honor his service to the United States by naming this bill in his memory.

I thank the ranking member for his support on this bill, I urge passage of the amendment, and urge passage of H.R. 6237, the Matthew Young Pollard Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal Years 2018 and 2019.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 989 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Hastings), 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 may have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on House Resolution 989, currently under consideration.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to bring forward this rule on behalf of the Rules Committee.

The rule provides for consideration of H.R. 6237, the Matthew Young Pollard Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscals Years 2018 and 2019. The rule provides for 1 hour of debate, equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking member of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence.

The rule also provides for a motion to recommit. Additionally, the rule makes in order 12 amendments from Members on both sides of the aisle.

Yesterday, the Rules Committee heard testimony from numerous Members, including Intelligence Committee Chairman Nunes and Ranking Member Schiff, as well as Mr. LoBiondo from New Jersey and Ms. Jackson Lee from Texas.

In addition to the vigorous debate on this legislation before the Rules Committee, the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence held a markup of this legislation on June 27, 2018, where the committee voted unanimously to report the bill to the House floor for consideration.

Mr. Speaker, I thank Chairman Nunes and Ranking Member Schiff for their important work on this legislation, and I commend them for the strong demonstration of bipartisanship in moving it forward.

The Intelligence Reauthorization Act is among the most important pieces of legislation we consider in this Chamber. It provides the intelligence community, a community that spans 17 different agencies, with the resources it needs to protect our great country.

Chairman Nunes and Ranking Member Schiff approached the task of writing this bill constructively and with a clear understanding of its importance, and their work is evident in the support for this bill we have already seen displayed at the Intelligence Committee markup.

As a result of Mr. Nunes' and Mr. Schiff's work, and of the Intelligence Committee, the legislation provided for by this rule will not only reauthorize programs crucial to the intelligence community, but it will also make a number of critical improvements to the law in support of that community and our national security.

The underlying bill represents an opportunity to pass an important piece of legislation that will enhance our national security in an age of increasingly sophisticated adversaries.

Its provisions include critical functions like deterring nation-state adversaries like Russia and China, countering and defeating ISIS and other terrorist groups, and defending America against cyberattacks, to name a few.

In addition to the critical missions I have listed above, the bill will improve our ability to recruit and retain top cybersecurity professionals, and will provide better benefits to CIA employees injured by acts of terrorism overseas.

Further, the underlying bill will strengthen both internal and congressional oversight over the various components of the intelligence community.

Our government's most fundamental responsibilities are to defend the American people from harm and to protect their liberty. To grasp the weight of these duties, one need only review the preamble of the Constitution.

Mr. Speaker, the reality is that Americans continue to face increasingly sophisticated cyber threats from foreign states and nonstate actors alike. This legislation recognizes the need to ensure that the United States maintains a tactical advantage in the cyber dimension by giving the intelligence community the ability to recruit the very best talent in the field.

This legislation gives the intelligence community the ability to provide increased pay for certain employees who have unique skills to lend to critical cyber missions.

Cyber criminals and other foreign intelligence agencies have increasingly focused on two critical areas of U.S. national security: our energy infrastructure and our election systems. Thanks to the work of the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, this legislation will bolster our defense of both areas.

Specifically, this legislation will require the Director of National Intelligence to electronically publish an unclassified advisory report on foreign counterintelligence and cybersecurity threats to election campaigns for Federal office. It will also create an Infrastructure Security Center within the Department of Energy to coordinate intelligence on significant threats.

We must have the tools to combat these threats, and that includes skilled personnel who know how to navigate these challenges. Whether bad actors hone in on our energy resources, election systems, or other strengths, this legislation takes steps to ensure we have the people we need fighting the forces menacing our Nation.

With these improvements in place, those responsible for our Nation's critical infrastructure will have better intelligence with which to protect it.

To provide for our common defense, the dedicated men and women of the intelligence community work tirelessly to thwart the efforts of our foreign adversaries, which range from terrorists to foreign states to nuclear proliferators.

Many in the intelligence community have seen their work in furtherance of the global war on terror and other missions around the world land them in harm's way. This bill recognizes the commitment of these brave men and women, many whose names we will never know.

Finally, the importance of the intelligence community's work and the inherently secretive nature of its mission necessitate vigilant oversight of these activities. This bill will increase the intelligence community's accountability to Congress by requiring reports on numerous issues, including investigations of leaks of classified information and security clearance processing timelines.

Importantly, it will further bolster intelligence oversight by requiring the intelligence community and the Department of Defense to develop a framework for assessing the numerous roles, missions, and functions of the Defense Intelligence Agency. It will also require the FBI to provide quarterly counterintelligence briefings to the congressional intelligence committees.

This legislation will ensure that America remains safe, and it will ensure that American liberties are protected in the process.

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

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

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

Mr. Speaker, there are several issues here. And to clarify, in being one of the members there yesterday and one spoken of, I think there is an issue of when there is a concern by a member. This has been beyond Mrs. Torres coming to the committee, and has been before and when Mr. Hastings and I have been there, many times, when we have issues with the question, the procedure is to stop and to ask the chairman to suspend the question.

This is what was happening yesterday, because there was a concern that the question was impugning the integrity of the chairman. There needed to be clarification. That was a simple--no matter what member may have asked it. That was the discussion that then continued from there.

Also, though, in the past 4 months, there have been 16 times that the chairman has sent a designee from their committee to testify before the Rules Committee and 14 times that the ranking member has sent a designee. Sending a designee from the committee of jurisdiction is common practice, and the chairman stated at the top of the meeting that that was what was going to be taking place.

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

Mr. Speaker, the understanding was not--and my intention at that point in discussing this was not to stop the questioning, but it is in the concern for the integrity of the question.

You and I have talked before in our committee, and when we have said--and you have asked the chairman for clarification, that was my intention in that and that was my entire intention in that, and from there, the chairman took action from there.

I think the interesting thing in here is the chairman did, at the start of the meeting, say that Mr. Nunes would be leaving. That was stated up front and there was no objection at that point for him doing so.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, this is a time when we come to the floor and debate great things. Sometimes, Mr. Speaker, you actually find out things that you did not know, and I now found out that my friend from Florida's middle name is Lamar as we go forward.

Mr. Speaker, this rule provides for legislation that does what we came here to do, and that is to protect our Nation and preserve our civil liberties. The underlying legislation goes a step further than simply reauthorizing critical programs. It takes a hard look, and a smart look, at how we can strengthen programs, better respond to new and existing threats, and conduct vigorous, effective oversight of the intelligence community, while ensuring it has the resources it needs to serve American citizens well.

Mr. Speaker, I look forward to supporting this rule and the underlying bill to strengthen public safety, protect our Nation and the American people, and to guard our civil liberties.

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