Floor Statements

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this measure.

Mr. Speaker, I thank Representative Lieu of southern California, a very valued member of the Committee on Foreign Affairs, for his hard work on this bill.

It is important, Mr. Speaker, that we modernize our agencies across government to better deal with 21st century challenges.

The State Department is under constant threat of cyberattacks from foreign actors bent on stealing our secrets, disrupting our foreign policy, and undermining our security.

Just 8 days ago, it was reported that the State Department's email system was breached. This time, whoever was behind the attack got ahold of private information about State Department personnel. Who knows what they will get their hands on next time.

Mr. Lieu's bill will help shore up the State Department against this sort of intrusion. First of all, it requires the Secretary of State to get out ahead of this problem. Instead of waiting for the next attack to happen, this bill would mandate a plan for researchers to actively seek out and report vulnerabilities.

Secondly, this bill launches a new initiative, a so-called bug bounty program. This seeks to tap the expertise of everyday Americans by rewarding citizens who uncover and report security risks in the Department's computer system. It will also allow security researchers and friendly hackers to find the cracks in the system so that the Department can patch them.

This effort is modeled after a very successful program at the Defense Department, which got off the ground in 2016. Since then, 1,400 people have registered to participate, and they have found roughly 140 vulnerabilities.

Our Federal agencies should learn from one another. It is just common sense to put this tested practice to work at the State Department and elsewhere.

Mr. Speaker, I commend Mr. Lieu. I am glad to support this bill, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure to yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Ted Lieu), the author of the bill.

Mr. Speaker, I am prepared to close.

In closing, I want to again thank Mr. Lieu and Chairman Royce.

It seems to me, Mr. Speaker, that we have been caught flatfooted before a range of new threats, including cyber attacks. Our agencies have not done enough to root out vulnerabilities, and, frankly, Congress hasn't done enough either to make sure our agencies across the government have the tools they need to tackle these challenges.

I hope going forward we will be able to take a comprehensive look at cyber threats and make sure the State Department, and all our departments and agencies, are up to the task.

For now, this bill is a good step in the right direction. It replicates an approach that has worked well over the last few years.

Mr. Speaker, I urge all Members to support it, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, it is with a heavy heart that I honor today a dedicated member of the Hastings on Hudson community, Lizabeth Liebeskind, a woman who brought art, beauty and insight to all she encountered. Lizabeth passed away on July 26, 2018 at her home surrounded by her loving family after a valiant battle with cancer. But for those who knew her, the legacy Lizabeth has left will last forever.

Lizabeth graduated from Syracuse University, BFA, and devoted her life to developing the arts in Tribeca, Woodstock, Hastings on Hudson and Brooklyn. As Co-Founder and Creative Director of 12 Miles North, Liz founded the wonderful ``Take Me to The River Festival'' for which she was awarded a Key to the City on September 9, 2017. That day from here forth will forever be ``Lizabeth Sipes-Liebeskind Day'' in Hastings on Hudson. Liz wrote and performed plays, most recently her own one woman play about her battle with breast cancer in the Edinburgh Fringe Festival.

Born in Tulsa, Oklahoma to a loving family of seven, Lizabeth is survived by her mother, Beverly Sipes and siblings: Terry, John, and Scott Sipes and Marianne Brown. Liz leaves behind her beloved husband, Hank Liebeskind and her adored children, Samantha, Charlee and Lila Liebeskind.

Mr. Speaker, Lizabeth was a wonderful, warm individual who did so much to better our community. Her contributions were many, as were all the different lives she touched. Lizabeth will be deeply missed, and I am humbled to be able to honor her legacy as a Member of Congress.

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this measure. We are taking up a bill from the Senate that I fully support, with a couple of small amendments.

One of these amendments is to rename the legislation after a Member of this House. I find myself experiencing a little bit of denial, because it reminds me that one of our most able and valued colleagues is about to wrap up her distinguished career. I can't imagine what it is going to be like without Ileana Ros-Lehtinen around here. She came to Congress the year after I did, and we have been close friends ever since.

The gentlewoman from Florida has been a dear friend and an exceptional colleague, and there has been no fiercer champion of the U.S.-Israel relationship than Ileana Ros-Lehtinen. So it is entirely fitting that we amend this bill to name it in her honor, the Ileana Ros-Lehtinen U.S.-Israel Security Assistance Authorization Act.

Let me also thank the chief Democratic sponsor of this legislation, Mr.

Deutch, also of Florida, who has worked tirelessly to shape this legislation and to reaffirm the unshakable bond between the United States and Israel.

This bill, like the House version passed by the Foreign Affairs Committee, fully authorizes the historic memorandum of understanding, or MOU, between the United States and Israel, which President Obama signed and which will go into effect next year.

This MOU provides for a 10-year agreement at $3.3 billion per year and a $500 million missile defense pledge, the largest single pledge of military assistance in our country's history. The MOU is a concrete example of something I often say; while prime ministers may come and go, Presidents come and go, members of Knesset come and go, and Members of Congress come and go, the U.S.-Israel relationship is here to stay.

Our relationship with Israel benefits both our countries. For both of us, it strengthens security and stability, and advances our shared values. This is the bedrock of our friendship. This bill moves us forward in new areas of cooperation.

For example, Mr. Kilmer of Washington wrote a provision that will spur closer cooperation on space issues. Mr. Crist of Florida wrote a section dealing with unmanned aerial vehicles that threaten the United States or Israel. Mr. Schneider's work will help ensure Israel's qualitative military edge. Mr. Boyle included a measure that will increase Israel's access to precision-guided munitions.

I would like to point out a couple of issues, which I hope we can address through additional legislation. This bill was originally intended to include Mr. Langevin's legislation to enhance U.S.-Israel cooperation on cybersecurity. This is an area where we should be working together. So I was disappointed that it was struck from this, and I hope that it soon crosses the finish line as a standalone bill.

Additionally, Mr. Boyle's bill to allow Israel to purchase precision- guided weapons was included in the Senate bill. The Armed Services Committee majority objected. So this version waters down the authorization for these purchases to a sense of Congress, which is considerably weaker.

While I wish Armed Services Republicans would reconsider their objection, I won't stand in the way of moving this critical bill forward at this time. I am told that their concern is jurisdictional, and I hope they will remain sensitive to this issue the next time a defense authorization comes to the floor loaded down with provisions that fall in the jurisdiction of the Foreign Affairs Committee.

Let me finish by saying that this bill is very timely. The threats facing the United States and Israel are becoming more urgent and more complex. ISIS is growing in the Sinai; Israel's neighbors are shouldering new burdens from refugees, causing further instability; and Iran's behavior in the region has, unfortunately become even more dangerous. The United States has been there by Israel's side throughout this dangerous time. And that is the way it should be.

Today, we put that into law. I urge my colleagues to support this legislation, and I congratulate my good friend, Ileana Ros-Lehtinen.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Deutch), the lead Democratic author on the House version of the bill. He is also a member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee and the ranking member of the Middle East Subcommittee.

Mr. Speaker, I yield the gentleman from Florida an additional 1 minute.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Frankel), a very valued member of the Foreign Affairs Committee and a cosponsor of this bill.

Mr. Speaker, I yield for such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Hastings).

(Mr. HASTINGS asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

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

Let me again applaud the chief sponsors of this legislation, Representatives Ros-Lehtinen and Deutch, along with their Senate counterparts, for their tremendous work.

Let me also, again, as I have many times, thank our chairman. We have worked very closely together on the Foreign Affairs Committee, and this is proof of that kind of collaboration where we have both sides of the aisle doing things that are good for the United States of America.

This legislation and the MOU that it puts into law represents the unbreakable bond between the United States and Israel and the shared interests and values that have been the hallmark of this relationship.

As Chairman Royce mentioned before, he and I have been there together many times. We have seen those terror tunnels. We have seen all kinds of things. The people of Israel need the United States, and we need the people of Israel.

The United States has stood up for democracy through all these glorious years of our being a republic, and we

cannot stop now. That is why legislation such as this bipartisan legislation is so important for us to pass.

This, in law, represents the unbreakable bond between the United States and Israel and the shared interests and values that have been the hallmark of this relationship.

The Middle East is a very dangerous neighborhood. We here in the United States have the benefit of stepping back a bit, but we are not on the front line day in and day out the way the beleaguered people of Israel are with one country after another vowing to try to destroy it.

This Congress, in a bipartisan fashion, stands together and says that the United States stands with the people of Israel, and that makes me very proud of this Congress, proud of our Foreign Affairs Committee, proud of our chairman, and proud of all the people who have spoken, particularly Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, who deserves all the accolades you can think of. Whatever I said wouldn't be dramatic enough to explain the force that she has been for the past 30 years on the Foreign Affairs Committee doing good things, particularly with the State of Israel.

It is going to be difficult to not see her here, but I know she will be doing everything that she can continue to do to enhance the U.S.- Israel relationship.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this measure, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume, and I rise in support of H.R. 1911.

Mr. Speaker, I am a proud original cosponsor of this bill, and I am pleased that we are considering it today.

I want to start by thanking my colleagues for their hard work on this bill and their hard work on this effort: Congressman Chris Smith, the author of this legislation, and my fellow co-chairs of the Bipartisan Task Force to Combat Anti-Semitism. I am proud to stand with a group of legislators committed to fighting intolerance and hatred.

Mr. Speaker, every day, more and more alarming anti-Semitic attacks shock the world: Holocaust survivors violently assaulted, rallies and parades glorifying Nazi leaders, swastikas graffitied to incite fear and terror. The list goes on and on.

And let's be clear, Mr. Speaker, this isn't just happening in faraway places. We have seen a sickening increase of anti-Semitic acts in our country as well. We have seen people who embrace hatred and bigotry given a loud new megaphone to spread their poison.

As a country, we need to come together to say enough is enough. We need to say there are not good people on both sides. We need to confront evil, call it by its name, and say there is no place for it anywhere in the United States or around the world.

We all need to do it as citizens. We need to do so in our laws and in our policies. And the very least that we could do is have the administration fill the positions that are supposed to be dealing with this issue. The Special Envoy to Monitor and Combat Anti-Semitism position at the State Department is still vacant. That is really unacceptable.

We must have a senior official to push back against the intolerance and hatred of anti-Semitism. American leadership is desperately needed in the fight against this ancient form of hatred. I am fed up with the administration dragging its feet on filling this crucial position. It should happen now.

That is why I am glad we are moving this bill forward. This legislation would elevate the Special Envoy position and require the President to put forward a nominee no more than 120 days after a vacancy. That is 4 months.

This is essential for making sure that a prolonged vacancy like we have right now never happens again.

We must have a senior State Department official dedicated to coordinating U.S. Government efforts to combat anti-Semitism abroad. So I strongly support this measure, and I ask my colleagues to join me doing so.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Hastings).

(Mr. HASTINGS asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Deutch), one of the chairs of the Task Force to Combat Anti-Semitism, and, again, a very esteemed member of the Foreign Affairs Committee, and an original cosponsor of this bill.

Mr. Speaker, if there are no other speakers on the other side, I am prepared to close.

I reserve the balance of my time.

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

In closing, I want to, again, strongly support this bipartisan bill. I want to thank all the people who have worked hard on it, particularly Mr. Smith of New Jersey, who always, for years, has been battling the scourge of anti-Semitism; our chairman, Chairman Royce, and people on both sides of the Foreign Affairs Committee.

We can never become complacent when we see anti-Semitism, or anti- anything rear its ugly head. We need to reject it. We need to fight it. We need to shine a light in all the dark corners so it has no place to hide and fester.

What does it look like when it comes to foreign policy? It starts by appointing a senior diplomat, someone we can point to with confidence and say, ``You're leading America's effort to grapple with this problem around the world.''

This bill would make sure that that seat can't stay vacant the way it has been for the last 18 months. I am proud to be an original cosponsor of this legislation. I, again, thank Mr. Smith, Chairman Royce, and all the people who have worked so hard for this.

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

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

I too rise in support of this measure.

Let me, first of all, thank my friend from Florida, Mr. Hastings, for his work on this resolution, and thank Chairman Royce for moving it forward.

This is one of those issues that certainly stirs the emotions of anyone who learns about it. The horrible abuse of dogs and cats crammed into cages, driven across borders, slaughtered and sold in meat markets, it just seems so cruel and needless.

The animal rights community has come together around this issue, pleading for an end to these inhumane practices, particularly in the markets in Asia where this takes place the most.

There are broader concerns as well. The trade of dog and cat meat is associated with health risks, including the spread of disease. And an illegal market for this meat has sprung up in places where governments have failed to step in and enforce their own laws against these practices.

So I think it is important that the House go on record saying we oppose this practice. I am glad to support this measure, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the esteemed gentleman from Florida (Mr. Hastings).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Nevada (Ms. Titus), a cosponsor of this bill, and a valuable member of the Foreign Affairs Committee.

Mr. Speaker, let me say in closing, I am, again, grateful to Mr. Hastings and to all the people who have helped elevate this issue. Actually, I have gotten many calls from people who are very, very concerned about this bill and who want to see it passed.

I have been a dog lover all my life, had the wonderful time to have dogs, and to me, it is just unfathomable that they are suffering like this in the trade to eat dogs and cats. It is really just something that is awful.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to support this measure. It is a bipartisan bill.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 6197, the Rescuing Animals With Rewards Act of 2018.

I would like to begin by thanking Mr. Donovan and Mr. Castro for introducing this important legislation, and I would also like to thank Chairman Royce for his incredible efforts over many, many years to promote the conservation of wildlife and wild places.

In recent years, Congress has taken a number of important steps to combat wildlife trafficking, but the situation remains dire. Over the last 10 years, one-third of African elephants have been slaughtered for their tusks.

Let me say that again. Over the last 10 years, one-third of African elephants have been slaughtered for their tusks. That is a shocking statistic.

Rhino populations have also been decimated, and many other species are at risk.

Protecting wildlife is the right thing to do. I know the Wildlife Conservation Society does a really good job. My good friend John Calvelli is leading the charge there, and so I am very aware of what we need to do to protect our wildlife.

But not only is it the right thing to do, it also serves American national security interests. Wildlife trafficking feeds corruption, undermines the rule of law, threatens economic prosperity, and drives instability, and it is carried out by many of the same international criminal syndicates engaged in the trafficking of drugs, weapons, and people.

This bipartisan, commonsense legislation before us today provides our government with a tool it can use to tackle the illegal trade in wildlife. Specifically, it authorizes rewards under the State Department's Rewards for Justice program for information leading to the arrest or conviction of those engaged in wildlife trafficking. This can provide a powerful financial incentive for people to turn in those responsible for this appalling activity.

Mr. Speaker, I urge all of our colleagues to support this bipartisan legislation, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Nevada (Ms. Titus), a cosponsor of this bill and, as I said before, a very valued House Foreign Affairs Committee member.

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

Mr. Speaker, let me say in closing, I want to again thank Mr. Donovan and Mr. Castro for authoring this bill and Chairman Royce for his extraordinary leadership in efforts to combat wildlife trafficking.

It is shocking to me that in the year 2018 people still want to kill majestic animals like elephants and rhinos for their body parts. It is just disgusting.

We need to continue our support of a multipronged effort to address the poaching crisis, going after the international criminal networks that drive this illicit trade, working with other governments to establish and enforce tough laws against wildlife trafficking, partnering with local communities in the countries where animals live to make sure they have a stake in protecting wildlife, and educating consumers about the consequences of their decisions to purchase illegal wildlife products, because we really need to hit them in their pocketbooks. If people are purchasing these things, the illicit trafficking is going to continue.

The bipartisan legislation before us today will provide one additional tool in the fight against wildlife trafficking, and I urge my colleagues from both sides of the aisle to join me in supporting it.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 5576, the Cyber Deterrence and Response Act of 2018. I am proud to be an original cosponsor of this legislation authored by Congressman Yoho, who did great work with this bill, along with Chairman Royce and other members of our committee.

Mr. Speaker, every day, America faces cyber threats from around the world. Countries, including Russia, China, Iran, and North Korea, have attacked our companies, our infrastructure, our government, and even the very heart of our democracy, our elections.

The Cyber Deterrence and Response Act is a step in responding to these threats. This bill requires the President to impose sanctions on those who participate in a state-sponsored cyber attack against the United States.

These far-reaching sanctions could be targeted to individuals, entities, and states themselves that perpetrate these attacks. These include attacks against critical infrastructure, public and private computer networks, and any sector that would jeopardize America's national security, foreign policy, economic health, or financial stability.

This is a bipartisan, good bill, and I urge all Members to support it. But let me be clear: This bill does not do nearly enough to respond to Putin's attack on our democracy. We must continue to do this, but this is an important step and a very good step, and is indicative of the bipartisan cooperation that we have in the Foreign Affairs Committee, which is very, very important when we are dealing with foreign affairs.

Our adversaries need to know that we are united, and that is what a bill like this does. So I congratulate Mr. Yoho for his hard work on this bill. It is a welcome effort to enhance our response to cyber attacks, but it is a Band-Aid on a bullet wound, if we don't do anything else.

We need to keep doing these kinds of things. Those countries that would wish us ill, we have to let them know that we are not going to just stand idly by and be a target.

In 2016, our Nation was attacked. The very core of our democratic process was hit by Russian cyber forces, and our government has been woefully negligent to adequately respond.

I thank Republican leadership for bringing this bill forward, but we really need to address the critical issue of our vulnerability to these cyber attacks. If we do that, they will bring forward one of the many other stronger bills on this matter as well, for example, my bill that I introduced with Mr. Connolly, the SECURE Our Democracy Act; or the Secure America from Russian Interference Act, which includes my bill; and more than a dozen others. These bills constitute a strong, decisive response that matches the gravity of the threat we face.

These bills would require the President to impose sanctions on those who attacked our elections in 2016 and would do much, much more to shore up our election system. For over a year, I have been pushing and pleading that the bill moves forward. I hope it will move forward as well.

We need to go on record now and say whether we will do everything in our power to stop another attack on American democracy, or whether we will

just step to the side with rhetoric and let it happen again. That is, again, why I am so happy to support this bill, because it shows that we are working together.

But the point I want to make in collaboration with that is that we still have much more work to do. I know the committee, in a couple of weeks, is going to hold a very important hearing on Russia, and I think it is very important that we do that.

Mr. Speaker, I again urge my colleagues to support this very good piece of legislation, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Rhode Island (Mr. Langevin), an original cosponsor of this legislation and a strong leader on cyber policy in Congress.

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

Mr. Speaker, I am prepared to close. I yield myself such time as I may consume.

In closing, I urge all my colleagues once again to support this measure. The scope of the cyber threat that we are facing is immense. This is a good bill, and moves us in the right direction, and I urge all our colleagues to support it.

I want to thank Chairman Royce. As usual, I want to thank Chairman Royce and Congressman Yoho for their friendship and their hard work on this critical issue.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to celebrate one of my constituents who is larger than life itself, Mr. Frank E. Marra. I want to wish you the happiest of birthdays as you turn 100, just the latest amazing milestone in an amazing life.

The son of Italian immigrants, Frank, was the first of Arthur (Arturo) and Mary's (Carmelina) three sons born in New York City, just before the Armistice which ended World War I. Frank attended PS 57 Theodore Roosevelt High in the Bronx before answering the call to service. Frank would join the National Guard for a short period of time before enlisting in the U.S. Military in 1941.

As a member of the U.S. Army's 258th Field Artillery, Frank trained for several months in the United Kingdom before his deployment in Europe. Frank fought the Axis powers in Normandy, through Northern France, Belgium in Ardennes, at the Battle of the Bulge, in Lichtenstein, Austria, and Germany. It has been said that Frank was the first soldier to fire an artillery shell into Nazi Germany, as our forces pushed forward to victory.

Following WWII, Frank returned home, and married Cecilia Genovese, who had sent him care packages during his time in Europe. The two honeymooned across the country and settled in San Bruno, California. In late 1947, Frank and Cecilia returned to New York, and had their two sons, Albert, and Eugene. Frank and Cecilia had a remarkable romance, and were married an incredible 70 years, until Cecilia's passing 2 years ago at the age of 97.

Mr. Speaker, Frank Marra has lived quite a life. He saw the stock market crash of 1929, the resulting Great Depression, and served during World War II. He saw the Yankees greats such as Babe Ruth, Joe DiMaggio and Mickey Mantle play baseball, and witnessed the first men walk on the moon. He held down two jobs, which allowed him to send both his children to college and grad school, and he volunteered for many years at St. Bart's Church and the Jewish Home for the Blind. He danced with his wife at the weddings of two of his grandchildren and he has held in his arms three young great-grandchildren: Margaret, Cecilia, and Dominick. Frank Marra has experienced and achieved the American Dream, and his distinguished life deserves our honor and recognition. Happy birthday Frank, I wish you many more happy and healthy years to come.

Mr. Speaker, the United States-Turkey relationship continues to deteriorate. Turkey has long been an important American ally and key NATO member. However, this relationship has frayed in recent years, and I increasingly question whether Turkey's autocratic ruler, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, is truly committed to his country's relationship with the United States.

I must first express my profound disappointment in the Turkish court's verdict last week against American Pastor Andrew Brunson. While yesterday's step to move him from a Turkish prison to house arrest is a step in the right direction, it is still not enough. I call on Turkey to release Mr. Brunson, who has committed no crime, and return him to his family. I make the same call in support of NASA scientist Serkan Golge as well as other United States citizens and U.S. Mission local employees who are wrongly held.

Two years ago, this month, a failed military coup took place in Turkey. This was a traumatic experience for the Turkish people, as it would have been for the citizens of any country. There is no doubt that it has been a challenge to effectively deal with this situation. Nevertheless, I remain deeply concerned about the Turkish government's response which has led to curtailing personal liberty and press freedoms and, in many cases, suspending or ignoring the rule of law. While the State of Emergency has expired, President Erdogan continues to crackdown on suspected opponents. Such actions are inconsistent with Turkey's international commitments to organizations such as NATO and with its aspiring European Union membership.

In my experience, America's partnerships are strongest when our friends and allies are fully committed to democratic values. Among the challenges in our relationship with Turkey are the Turkish government's constraints on freedom and democracy. I believe that removing these constraints will substantially benefit both the United States and Turkey.

I've heard the argument that because Turkey lives in a dangerous neighborhood, it must take bold actions to preserve its own security. There is no doubt that Turkey faces threats from an array of terrorist groups, a murderous Syrian regime headed by Bashar al-Assad, and other destabilizing influences across the region. But the best way for Turkey to meet these challenges is in partnership with the United States and other NATO allies.

This is why I am supremely alarmed that Turkey is considering purchasing a Russian air-defense system rather than a NATO air-defense system. The operation of a non-NATO system puts the security of NATO members at serious risk and is inconsistent with the spirit of the alliance, not to mention interoperability among NATO member states. The Alliance understands Turkey's desire for air defense and wants to help, but Ankara's continued stated intention to acquire the S-400 is an obstacle to NATO's ability to assist and sends a signal that Ankara wants to break away on core defense issues.

In the time left before Turkey potentially makes a serious miscalculation, there is a key fact to highlight: the United States has offered Turkey two air and missile defense systems, including the Patriot PAC-3 system, which would fulfill Turkey's defense needs, but ultimate receipt and delivery of the Patriot is contingent on Turkey cancelling the S-400 deal. For these reasons, I, like many of my colleagues, remain willing to work with Turkey in order to support its purchase of a NATO air defense system.

But, I want to be clear: Turkey must demonstrate its commitment to its relationship with the United States and NATO. It can do so by taking the steps I previously noted, including releasing Mr. Brunson, Mr. Golge, and others; enhancing Turkish personal freedoms and promoting the rule of law; and acquiring a NATO, rather than Russian, air-defense system. No doubt, the United States has other important differences with Ankara, including its difficult relations with Israel, its occupation of Cyprus, and its improving ties with Moscow. But, should Turkey pursue the course I've outlined, it would represent an important step toward patching up some of our key differences.

Like many of my colleagues, I wish that our relationship with Turkey were on better footing. Turkey has been a strong NATO partner for decades. For the good of both the United States and Turkey, NATO, and the region, we must work to improve this relationship.

Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend for yielding.

Mr. Speaker, I rise because we will soon have a chance to vote on legislation that would punish those who attacked American democracy in 2016

and would deter anyone who tries to do so in the future.

The bill I introduced with Mr. Connolly, the SECURE Our Democracy Act, would slap tough sanctions on anyone found to interfere with an American election from overseas. It goes back to 2015, so it would include those who tried to put their thumb on the scale in favor of Donald Trump.

We first introduced this bill in January of 2017, when it was becoming clear that Russia had waged a cyber warfare campaign against our election. Our updated version of this bill includes new congressional oversight provisions.

Why?

Because even if this bill passes, we don't trust the President to do the right thing, quite frankly. We don't believe he will do what it takes to protect our democracy, even after his own administration has told us over and over that Russia is at it again. After standing next to Vladimir Putin and accepting his lies over the unanimous conclusion of our intelligence community, how could we?

So when the next vote is called, my friends on the other side of the aisle have a choice to make. Will they vote to say to Putin, to our chief adversary, that we won't tolerate his attacks on our democracy, or will they again cede Congress' oversight role and continue to cover up for the President, who cozies up to Putin, who sides with him over our allies, and who continues to deny what everyone else knows is a fact?

Make no mistake: The next vote is our opportunity to punish the criminals who interfered in our election, to send a message that there will be consequences for anyone who does so in the future. After this vote, every Member will be on the record, letting the world know where they stand.

So I urge all of my colleagues on both sides of the aisle: vote to defeat the previous question. Vote to show Russia and Putin that we won't stand by while they continue to attack American democracy.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to discuss the Conference Report on the National Defense Authorization Act for 2019. I support the NDAA legislation and will vote for its adoption on the House Floor today, but I have serious reservations about how the Speaker's protocol on outside conferees was implemented for the conference on this bill. As a response to this problem, I chose not to sign the conference report.

The Speaker's protocol is not new, but it has become increasingly problematic for the Foreign Affairs Committee, on which I serve as the Ranking Member. Every year, the NDAA includes more than a hundred provisions that affect the jurisdiction of our committee. I take our responsibilities to review and negotiate these provisions extremely seriously. Unfortunately, under the Speaker's protocol, we are not appointed as outside conferees on provisions the Speaker or parliamentarians consider to be minor.

I understand the motivation behind this protocol. The conference process has to operate efficiently. However, many provisions that are deemed minor under the protocol are in fact far from minor. They extend major programs or mandate congressional oversight of critical issues. The Foreign Affairs Committee brings an important perspective that is distinct from the perspective of the Armed Services Committee, and we should have a formal role in all provisions under our jurisdiction.

If the committee of jurisdiction on foreign policy matters is not allowed to have conferees on important areas of the bill, then our only alternative is to claim sequential jurisdiction over the committee- reported NDAA and act on it prior to House consideration.

I want to thank Ranking Member Smith, and his staff, for working closely with us during the conference this year. They included us fully in the process, and we are deeply grateful for this cooperation. But we need to ensure we are not just consulted, but also named as outside conferees on the entire range of provisions that fall into our jurisdiction. I strongly support the goals of the National Defense Authorization Act, and I look forward to working with the Speaker and the Office of the Parliamentarian next year to ensure that the Foreign Affairs Committee is a full participant.

Mr. DeFazio. Mr. Speaker, today, I will vote against the Conference Report for H.R. 5515, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year (FY) 2019.

The legislation includes several provisions that I strongly support, including giving servicemen and women a well-deserved raise of 2.6 percent. Those who serve in uniform have made extraordinary sacrifices for our country and have earned and deserve a pay raise. It also includes $6.3 billion, the largest amount ever, for the European Deterrence Initiative to help protect Eastern Europe from further Russian aggression.

Despite these important initiatives, I have strong concerns with a number of provisions included in the Conference Report. This legislation authorizes more than $708 billion, including $69 billion to the Overseas Contingency Operations (OCO) fund, an account which is not counted in the budget and is not paid for. It adds to the deficit and is used as a slush fund by the Pentagon.

Unlike every other federal agency, the Department of Defense (DOD) has yet to complete a financial audit; taxpayers deserve to know how the biggest bureaucracy in the federal government spends their money. In fact, a shocking report released in December 2016 exposed $125 billion in waste that the Pentagon tried to hide from the public.

I refuse to support increased bureaucratic waste at the expense of American taxpayers and our men and women in uniform. A more accountable and transparent department would ensure taxpayer dollars are directed towards the needs of our troops and the benefits they deserve, rather than buying unnecessary weapon systems and giving the president a blank check to fund wars Congress hasn't authorized.

I have always advocated for maintaining Congress's constitutionally- confirmed prerogative to declare war under the War Powers Act and limiting the President's authority to engage in armed conflict without the consent of Congress. I strongly oppose the NDAA's continued authorization of spending for wars that are not congressionally approved. The Pentagon uses the 2001 Authorization of Use of Military Force (AUMF) to continue to justify the 17 years our troops have been fighting in the Middle East. President Trump has sent troops to Syria, Yemen, and elsewhere without seeking a new AUMF, a violation of the War Powers Act.

Additionally, the bill prohibits the closing of Guantanamo Bay, which costs more than $100 million each year to house 41 prisoners and has been used as a top recruiting tool by terrorists. The prison at Guantanamo Bay has been a black eye for the United States, has eroded relationships with our allies, undermined U.S. missions abroad, and put U.S. citizens and our troops at risk of retaliation.

Congress can make responsible cuts to our defense budget without jeopardizing the safety of our troops or undermining our national security. Fiscal responsibility and accountability at the Pentagon would allow for funds to be better spent supporting the basic needs of our troops, meeting our obligations to veterans of past wars, and ensuring our true defense needs are prioritized.

Mr. Speaker, a few hundred feet north of here in the Senate, Secretary of State Pompeo will soon testify about President Trump's disastrous performance at the recent NATO summit and, worse, at his meeting in Helsinki with Russia's dictator, Vladimir Putin.

Now, if you are a Member of this body and you are interested in what Mr. Pompeo has to say on these topics, you had better turn on your television, because he isn't coming over here.

Secretary Pompeo is ignoring the House, despite our request that he come testify or brief our Members. He is blowing off half of the legislative branch. This is outrageous, and I bet if Secretary Pompeo were still a Member of this House, he would think so too.

We have too many unanswered questions, Mr. Speaker. What happened in President Trump's secret meeting with Putin? They sat together for 2 hours with no one else aside from interpreters.

What deals were made? What agreements were reached? The Russians are claiming that a great deal was discussed, but so far, we have heard nothing from this administration.

President Trump's actions in Helsinki were a betrayal of his duties. He had already insulted our closest friends and allies, and with the world watching, he sided with Putin over our own intelligence and law enforcement communities about Russia's attack on our democracy.

So we need to see Secretary Pompeo and Secretary Mattis and Director Coats. I recently joined with my fellow ranking members, Mr. Smith on the Armed Services Committee and Mr. Schiff on the Intelligence Committee, demanding that these senior officials come to the Hill and shed light on what took place. We don't know, and the Secretary of State is not coming to the House to tell us.

We have gotten no response to our requests. With Secretary Pompeo set to appear in the Senate, that is really a slap in the face to this body. Every Member of this body should object to the fact that this administration won't give us the time of day. I object, and I will keep pushing until we get the answers we need.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding to me. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleagues on both sides of the aisle. This is clearly a bipartisan collaboration.

I am proud to be the main sponsor of H.R. 1676, the Palliative Care and Hospice Education and Training Act, and I urge my colleagues to support this important bill.

The goal of palliative care is to alleviate suffering for patients and their loved ones, accompanying efforts to treat or cure illness. So while the illness is being treated, there is support being given to the person who is sick and for their loved ones as well.

It entails support from a team of doctors, nurses, social workers, physician assistants, clergy persons, and other specialists who provide an extra layer of assistance, including help with medical decisionmaking and coordination of care across multiple settings. It is appropriate at any age and at any stage in a serious illness.

Palliative and hospice care have been associated with enhanced quality of life for patients, but too many people simply don't know about these benefits. On top of that, there is a shortage of educated providers who can offer quality palliative and hospice care.

That is where this bill comes in.

The Palliative Care and Hospice Education and Training Act addresses these issues by expanding opportunities for training in palliative and hospice care.

This bill also aims to better educate patients, families, and health professionals about palliative care's benefits, and encourages NIH to expand research around this topic.

Ultimately, this bill will help us ensure that there is a well- trained palliative care workforce available to care for patients, a goal that I believe will also be critical to turning the tide of the ongoing opioid epidemic.

One of the goals of palliative care is to provide relief from the pain of a serious illness. By creating the infrastructure needed to better educate health professionals on palliative care, this legislation will also help ensure health professionals are able to properly manage patients' pain and practice appropriate evidence-based prescribing, a space where, as the opioid crisis has shown, we need to do much better.

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank Chairman Walden, Ranking Member Pallone, Chairman Burgess, and Ranking Member Green for helping to move this bill forward. I also want to thank Congressman Tom Reed and Congressman Buddy Carter, who coauthored the bill, and all of its 285 bipartisan cosponsors. This is about as bipartisan as you can get.

We are dealing with issues that people sometimes don't like to talk about, end of life issues, issues of that nature, but it is something that must be talked about, because families need help. This will give the families the help that they need.

I think every one of us has felt the pain and stress of a serious illness either personally or standing alongside a loved one. By passing this bill, we will take an important step to bring much, much needed relief to both patients and their loved ones.

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleagues on the committee and all the people who worked to make this bill bipartisan. We can all be proud of this when it becomes law.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this legislation.

Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend from Massachusetts for yielding to me, and I want to strongly identify with his remarks.

Mr. Speaker, I led the Foreign Affairs Committee Democrats last week urging President Trump to cancel his meeting with Vladimir Putin because I knew this was going to turn out badly, but, frankly, I didn't know how bad it would be. It turns out President Trump embarrassed himself and disgraced our Nation.

Standing on foreign soil, the President of the United States questioned America's intelligence community; he attacked America's law enforcement with bizarre conspiracy theories; he lobbed petty political insults; and he did it all while standing next to America's chief rival, Vladimir Putin.

When faced head-on with the question, ``Who do you believe?'' President Trump sided with Putin and affirmed Putin's brazen lies. This is the tyrant who directed attacks on America's democracy in an effort to elect Donald Trump and hurt Hillary Clinton. And, as Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats said, these attacks are still ongoing.

As we all know, Putin is a ruthless leader who seeks to tear down our alliances, undermine Western unity, and destroy democracy. With the eyes of the world on them, it is plain that the President of the United States is now Putin's willing accomplice, Putin's poodle. It is outrageous; it is disgusting; it is dangerous; and it has been met with near universal condemnation.

Here is what Speaker Ryan said just yesterday, and I agree with the Speaker:

There is no question that Russia interfered in our election

and continues attempts to undermine democracy here and around

the world. The President needs to understand that Russia is

not our ally. There is no moral equivalency between the

United States and Russia, which remains hostile to our most

basic values and ideals, and that Russia must be held

accountable.

That is what our Republican Speaker said, and I agree with him.

I have introduced this resolution so that the entire House can go on record agreeing with the Speaker, affirming that we stand with the Speaker. I deeply regret that a member of the Speaker's own party just blocked the House from speaking with one voice and taking up this resolution by unanimous consent.

We must reject the President's capitulation to Putin; we must stand up for American leadership on the global stage; and we must demand that this administration treat Russia like the enemy it is.

How can you treat Putin better than U.S. intelligence? It just boggles my mind.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent for the immediate consideration of the resolution I have just introduced, which is H. Res. 999.

Mr. Speaker, I urge Members to defeat the previous question.

Mr. Speaker, it is with my great pleasure to honor, and to celebrate the Bethesda Baptist Church of New Rochelle on their 130th anniversary. The Bethesda Baptist Church of New Rochelle is the oldest African-American Church in lower Westchester County, and they are a cornerstone of the New Rochelle community.

In May 1888, there were only a few African-American Baptists living in the village of New Rochelle, and even though they were permitted to worship at the Salem Baptist Church, the community strived to create a church for themselves. Jesses Owns, Israel King, William Fountain, Richard Painter, and others in the village received help from Reverend Guy Powell of Mt. Baptist Church, in Virginia, to raise funds and find a location for the congregation to call their own. The community would soon find their building on North Avenue, and on July 5, 1888, the first sermon was delivered by Reverend Isaac Newton Phelps to 15 members at the Bethesda Baptist Church of New Rochelle's first home.

Throughout the long history of the Bethesda Baptist Church, each pastorate has established new programs to aid and serve the New Rochelle community. Reverend Boddie was instrumental to finding the church's permanent location, in 1918, on Lincoln Avenue. Reverend Dr. Henderson instituted a sermonette for children, and opened the church's first office.

Reverend Dr. Long Sr., who was also the first African-American on the New Rochelle Board of Education, began the youth ministry at Bethesda Baptist Church. Reverend Wanamaker continued to expand the church's outreach to New Rochelle's youth by organizing the Youth Fellowship. Reverend Thompson was the next pastor who led the successful ``Debt Free in '73,'' which eliminated all of the church's debt. The Youth Fellowship program also became more active during his pastorate, which allowed for the group to attend cultural, education, and religious conventions. After Reverend Thompson, Reverend Dr. Allen Paul Weaver Jr. began his pastorate and has remained the Pastor for almost 4 decades.

Reverend Weaver has not only grown the membership of the church, but ensured the core values of the Church: Exalting, Equipping, Evangelizing, Encouraging, Edifying and Exemplifying Christian Evangelism, Reclaiming our Youth, Mission (both home and foreign), and Christian Education.

Mr. Speaker, Bethesda Baptist Church of New Rochelle has a long, and rich history of serving the community. I want to congratulate them on their 130th anniversary, and look forward to their continued works over the coming years.