Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize Ellyn McKenzie, Vice President of Government Affairs for Sixteenth Street Community Health Centers. She is retiring on January 31, 2017. She has served the organization beginning in 1997 and retires exactly upon her 20th anniversary date.

Ellyn started with the agency as a grant writer and project director for the agency's first two grants to support Environmental Justice Activities. Sixteenth Street's Department of Environmental Health was formed based upon those two grant projects: 1) to support a community- based approach to lead poisoning prevention and 2) to collect information and catalog information about and features of the neighborhood that could pose a hazard to the health of children. In fact, the Department of Environmental Health continues its work to prevent lead poisoning, and has grown their environmental justice activities into successful sustainable re-development projects for Milwaukee's Menomonee Valley and Kinnickinnic River Corridor.

Ellyn transitioned to the position of Communications and Development Director as the agency expanded and upon her retirement held the title of Vice President of Government Affairs. She produced five successful fundraising events for Sixteenth Street's signature Celebrity Roast-- the agency's once a year fundraiser. Honorees for events on her watch were for Milwaukee Buck's Coach George Karl, Milwaukee Brewer's President and Chairman Wendy Selig-Prieb, former Wisconsin Governor Tommy Thompson, Milwaukee developer Gary Grunau and Wisconsin Governor Jim Doyle.

Ellyn produced 15 Annual Reports, a publication for donors, community partners and staff compiling successes, new challenges and strategic growth of the agency. She was also responsible for government relations activities for the agency over the years.

Prior to joining Sixteenth Street Community Health Centers, Ellyn held several positions in Wisconsin State government, serving as legislative assistant to the State Senate Organization Committee, as an aide to Wisconsin Governor Tony Earl and as coordinator for a state- wide Energy Conservation Plan in the Department of Administration.

I am grateful to have had the opportunity to know and work with Ellyn since her days in Wisconsin State Government. I join with friends and colleagues to congratulate her on her retirement. I wish her much success as she transitions into a different phase of her life. Mr. Speaker, I am proud to honor Ellyn McKenzie and I am proud to call her a friend. The citizens of the Fourth Congressional District and the State of Wisconsin are privileged to have someone of her ability and dedicated service working on their behalf for so many years. I am honored for these reasons to pay tribute to Ellyn McKenzie.

I thank the Delegate and the Congresswoman from the Virgin Islands and her counterpart, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Veasey), for really supporting this Congressional Black Caucus hour so that we can discuss the pledges and proposals that President Trump has made as the new deal within the Black community.

Mr. Speaker and Madam Chairwoman of this Special Order, I would like to engage in a kind of colloquy with the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Evans), who has been a State appropriator before he joined this body for some 25 years. I hate to date him. He has been a member of the prestigious appropriations committee. So, therefore, he was tasked with taking Federal funds and making those appropriations and those decisions at the State level. I wanted him to help evaluate some of the proposals that now President Trump has made regarding his new deal for Black America.

One of the proposals that President Trump has made is to allow the conversion of funds for poverty programs to be converted from those programs into microloans that he would then provide to the poor. I am feeling a little confused and perplexed as to how this would work. I fear that this is part of kind of the double speak or alternative facts about the roots of and the solutions to poverty.

As the gentleman now serves on the Committee on Small Business here in the House, and he has been an appropriator, I am wondering, number one, if converting funds from, say, the Temporary Assistance to Needy Families Act, which is comprised of mostly poor women and children or Social Security disability insurance, which is set aside for those folks with significant disabilities, or perhaps SNAP and food stamps, those people who are temporarily out of the workforce waiting to go back, find another job, but need to sort of eat that month--I am wondering how, in his experience, converting programs set aside for poor people would a poor person use a microloan.

I have two questions. I want the gentleman to sort of respond to what poor people would do. Presumably they would create their own jobs with these microloans. How big, perhaps, would these microloans have to be in order for them to establish their own businesses so that they would be off welfare?

In fact, on any given day, there are 3 million children who live in extreme poverty, off of less than $3 a day. So I guess I would wonder how converting those funds--what those children who are not capable and eligible to work would do with such a proposal.

I yield to the gentleman from Pennsylvania.

I thank the gentleman for that because I thought maybe it was just me who thought that. Here we are, we live in a country with the largest economy, with arguably the strongest, greatest technological economy, and I wonder what these poor women who are on welfare would do?

He says he wants to get them off of welfare. Would they sell fruit on the street? How would that work in Detroit or Milwaukee?

We are not talking about women who live in countries where microloans may work very well in those limited economies.

I am also wondering how those people who are structurally unemployed would benefit from these microloans.

What this does, Madam Chairperson of this initiative, is that what this really is saying is that this is really perpetuating the persistent myth of people who are poor as the shiftless, lazy welfare queens of poverty pimps, and that the solution is to take away the safety net and force them to do some kind of work, whether that work is sustainable enough for them.

And so I would say, as a member of the Congressional Black Caucus, that we ought to have welfare reform that really honors our commitment as Americans to make sure that we provide some kind of safety net for the majority of the poor who are, in fact, children. There are, in fact, people who are not capable, or should not be responsible, for providing for themselves through our very sophisticated economy.

I would say, Mr. Speaker, that if we really want to help get people off welfare, we should not start the debate by taking away reproductive freedom from women. One of the major reasons that women fall into poverty is the lack of access to birth control, health care, that would enable them to plan their families, plan their pregnancies. And to say that you are going to help people get off welfare and to snatch away funds from Planned Parenthood or their ability to control their reproduction is a nonstarter in truly helping the truly poor.

I think that President Trump's quest to help those who are truly poor will only come if the President and his team will actually listen to the voices of the poor, actually listen to solutions that have been tried and tested, like providing educational opportunity and upward mobility to poor people; by respecting women's reproductive rights to choose; by really creating a sense of Congress that any goal of welfare reform ought to be to protect children; that any welfare reform ought to make sure that women are free from domestic violence, sex trafficking, and human trafficking, and that they be protected; and that during these periods they not be cut off from public support.

Mr. Speaker, I thank Ms. Plaskett for this opportunity to speak to the American people.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to my friend Marlene Johnson-Odom. She served as alderwoman on the City of Milwaukee Common Council for the sixth aldermanic district for more than 24 years. Ms. Johnson-Odom passed away on January 9, 2017.

Marlene Johnson-Odom was a lifelong Milwaukee resident. She was a product of the public school system and a fellow graduate of North Division High School. Marlene received a Bachelor of Science degree from the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee.

Prior to becoming an elected official, Ms. Johnson-Odom worked for Milwaukee Public Schools and was TV Hostess at Channel 18, a local television station. Ms. Johnson-Odom succeeded her first husband Ben Johnson on the Common Council and was known as a quiet but effective leader. While serving on the Common Council, one of the achievements of which she was most proud was the renaming of 3rd Street to Martin Luther King Drive. Always approachable, Marlene provided outstanding service to her constituents.

Ms. Johnson-Odom was always extremely involved in the community and served on numerous boards and commissions including: Milwaukee Area Technical College Board, United Way Board of Directors, Black Women's Network and Pabst Theater Board.

Ms. Johnson-Odom leaves behind 3 children: Jan Johnson Carlyle, Paula Darling and Jay Johnson, 2 grandchildren: Amber Brown and Ellis Johnson, 8 great-grandchildren and a host of other relatives and friends to mourn her passing. She leaves a strong legacy of leadership for her children and grandchildren to model.

Mr. Speaker, Marlene was my friend and a Milwaukee and Wisconsin treasure and I valued her service to the 4th Congressional District. I urge you and my colleagues in the U.S. House of Representatives to join me in a salute to the late Marlene Johnson-Odom.

Mr. Speaker, on January 11, 2017, I missed three votes in order to attend the testimony of my colleagues Sen. Booker and Rep. Lewis in opposition to the confirmation of Sen. Sessions for Attorney General. Had I been present, I would have voted NO on the Motion on Ordering the Previous Question, NO on H. Res. 40, and YES on H.R. 39, the TALENT Act.

I thank the chairman. I really appreciate the gentleman, Mr. DeSaulnier, for bringing forth this amendment.

Disclosures of and divestment in conflicts are becoming increasingly important in this administration coming up. The conflicts that we know about and the conflicts that we suspect exist with President-elect Trump and his nominees have become a tremendous source of concern as not only do they undermine the faith and fairness of U.S. financial markets, as has been pointed out, but, quite frankly, they have become a matter of national security concern.

The amendments that were rejected by Ranking Member Waters and this amendment by Representative DeSaulnier together restore confidence that the U.S. financial system is not being manipulated for the gain of a few government officials.

Mr. Chairman, I urge all of my colleagues to support this amendment.

I thank Mr. Veasey so much, and I thank our new chair of the Congressional Black Caucus for his tremendous effort in putting this very important Special Order hour together.

Mr. Speaker, I rise this evening because I am extremely concerned about the nomination of Senator Jeff Sessions.

Certainly, President-elect Trump has a right to nominate people and have them be presented before our Senate, and, certainly, you don't expect a Republican to necessarily agree with all of your positions; but I am concerned about Senator Sessions because I think he has aligned himself with extreme ideological views that won't best serve all of the people of the United States.

During the last 7 years, the Department of Justice has investigated at least 23 law enforcement agencies in response to rampant civil rights abuses. I fear that, under an Attorney General Jeff Sessions, those consent decrees and that very important work in resolving the conflicts between, particularly, African American communities and police officers will be lost.

I am extremely concerned, as are at least 70 civil rights organizations and organizations that serve women, with an Attorney General Jeff Sessions. They are concerned about not just the anti- abortion views that Senator Sessions has displayed, but about the zealous anti-choice positions that he has taken--his association and alignment, again, with extreme anti-abortion organizations. They believe that he is not capable of fair and impartial action as Attorney General.

What is so chilling, as an example, is when Senator Sessions was asked about President-elect Trump's Access Hollywood scandal in that he said he didn't characterize the grabbing of a woman's genitals as necessarily a sexual assault. Very, very chilling and disturbing.

In being from Wisconsin, where we have fought egregious and unfair voter ID laws that were designed to disenfranchise, particularly, African Americans, Mr. Sessions has indicated that the gutting of the Voting Rights Act has actually had no impact and that no one has been denied the right to vote. He seems to be tone deaf to the cries of African Americans across this country to protect their voting rights.

I encourage the Senate to look very carefully at this nominee, because, in fact, the United States Attorney General's only charge is to protect the civil rights of all of the citizens. I don't know that he will be willing or able to do that.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize Thelma Sias, Vice President of Local Affairs for WE Energies, who is retiring on January 4, 2017. She has served the organization with distinction for over 31 years, beginning in 1986.

Thelma was born in rural Mayersville, Mississippi, growing up during the civil rights-era. Her father was a farmer. Her mother was a schoolteacher, farmer, and restauranteur. She is one of 11 children, all of whom graduated from college or technical college. Thelma Sias received an academic scholarship to Clark College in Atlanta where she ultimately received her degree. In 1976, Ms. Sias came to Wisconsin to work as the Supervisor of the Ethnic Heritage Recruitment Center for the University of Wisconsin-Green Bay, making the Badger State her new home.

Ms. Sias spent most of her career making an extraordinary impact on people in Wisconsin by seeking common ground and finding

solutions. Over the years, she has sat on at least a dozen boards, including the Zoological Society of Milwaukee, Children's Hospital and Health System Foundation, Milwaukee Public Library Foundation, and the Milwaukee Area Workforce Investment Board. Thelma was paid to do what naturally was a part of her core: making connections and fostering relationships. It is also why she has been such an asset to WE Energies in serving their interests in a manner that supports the communities dear to my heart. In her position, she was able to help establish connections between people in need and those who can help through the corporation's separate, nonprofit arm, Wisconsin Energy Foundation, which has invested $130 million into Wisconsin and Michigan communities since 1982.

Ms. Sias has a natural gift for connecting people, which she has to move the powerful to invest both financially and emotionally in economically distressed communities in a way that fosters sustainable solutions to problems. I am grateful to have had the opportunity to know and work with her for so many years. Thelma is political, but, more importantly, she is knowledgeable and she cares. She has remained an integral part of the community, maintaining her residence and remaining deeply committed to the Johnsons Park neighborhood community in central city Milwaukee. In addition to all her work with the Foundation and the community, she has found time to be a fixture in every presidential campaign from Carter to Obama. I join her friends and husband of over 30 years, Stephen Adams, in congratulating her on her well-earned retirement. I wish her much success as she transitions into a different phase of her life.

Mr. Speaker, I am proud to honor Thelma Sias and I am proud to call her friend. The citizens of the Fourth Congressional District and the State of Wisconsin are privileged to have someone of her ability and dedicated service working on their behalf for so many years. Thelma, I thank you for all that you have done. I am honored for these reasons to pay tribute to Thelma Sias.

I want to thank the gentlewoman from Texas and the gentleman from Wisconsin.

Madam Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 159, the Stop Exploitation Through Trafficking Act, which has been so diligently pushed through with the superb partnership of Congressman Erik Paulsen of Minnesota. It has been a thrill to partner with him throughout this process.

This is a bipartisan collaboration because, unfortunately, this is a bipartisan problem. Solving the problem of sexual exploitation of children will require work on all of our parts because it is a financial boom. People become multimillionaires in this illicit trade.

Also, the gentlewoman from Texas has worked so diligently to combat sex trafficking in places like Nigeria, and I joined with her on that initiative.

It is very disheartening to know that right here, within our own borders, the FBI estimates that at least 100,000 children in the United States of America are currently trafficked and another 200,000 are right on the cusp. They are at risk of sexual exploitation.

These victims are not ``women of the night'' or sexualized women who are doing it of their own free will--no. The average age of these victims is 13. It is an embarrassing statistic. It is embarrassing to report that my own hometown of Milwaukee, Wisconsin, has become known as a sex trafficking hub for both children and adults.

In 2013 alone, just on a random day, the FBI did a sweep and rescued 10 juvenile girls from sex traffickers in Milwaukee. Trafficking is all too common in communities across the Nation--from urban settings, rural settings, suburban settings, and from coast to coast.

Predators victimize vulnerable young people such as those in the foster care system. They prey upon those living in poverty; but what we do know is they also seek out higher-income children, going after those children who may have problems in their own homes. Some are LGBT identified.

There is no safe harbor for children unless we create it through laws such as this.

I am proud of this legislation, I am pleased to cosponsor it, and I urge all of my colleagues to support H.R. 159.

Madam Speaker, I have a motion to recommit at the desk.

Yes, Madam Speaker. I am opposed to it in its current form.

Madam Speaker, this is the final amendment to the bill, and it will not kill the bill or send it back to committee. If this amendment is adopted, the bill, as amended, will immediately proceed to final passage.

As the Clerk has indicated, Madam Speaker, this motion to recommit would merely protect the medical privacy of millions of women, including those women who are victims of rape and incest. It would ensure that nothing in H.R. 7, the underlying legislation, could be construed to allow any entity to violate the medical privacy of any woman, including these victims, when it comes to her choice of comprehensive health care services.

Madam Speaker, we have heard a great debate here today, and we have heard, Madam Speaker, the majority party insist that we need to codify the 1976 Hyde amendment prohibiting poor women from having abortions.

I can assure you that, as we have looked over the past 42 years here on the anniversary of Roe v. Wade, we have seen that low-income women-- particularly women of color--have been disproportionately impacted by the very successful implementation of the Hyde amendment. Women have been forced to choose between food and shelter. They have been forced to choose between the best interests of their health, and they have given birth, on many occasions, even despite their poor health status, their poor economic status, or their poor emotional status to children who are poor.

We have heard data and statistics about the number of unborn persons as a result of abortion. We have not heard one single statistic about the number of children who are born in dire poverty only, Madam Speaker, to be humiliated in this Chamber over and over again, being called ``products of the culture of dependency,'' who are killed by cuts, death by 1,000 cuts--cuts to food stamps, cuts to WIC, cuts to Head Start, cuts to educational opportunity. Death by 1,000 cuts. We have not heard anyone on the other side speak about that misalignment.

But with this legislation, it is not enough to stop low-income women, poor women, particularly women of color--African Americans, Asians, Native American women, Latinas--it is not enough to prevent them from abortions. Some of them have become pregnant because of rape and incest and forced trafficking who have diabetes and other underlying health problems. That is not enough.

This legislation is so nefarious as to try to prevent the women who have been lucky enough to get a job in a small business, lucky enough to be able to afford to buy insurance and use their own money to buy insurance--they have been lucky enough to do that--to prevent them, by some extraneous nexus--supposedly health care-funded payments through the Affordable Care Act--from seeking this health care. This is really, really a backdoor approach to really trying to undermine the law of the land, Roe v. Wade.

Many women, Madam Speaker, know on a personal level the history of shame and stigma that come forward when they are trying to seek the best remedy for their life at that time, for whatever reason that they need to have an abortion.

I know personally, Madam Speaker, of young women who have been 13 years old and who have become victims of statutory rape, and the best solution for their lives at that time and for their health is an abortion because their life is truly in danger. This is the kind of bill that would prevent them from having that opportunity.

Madam Speaker, I hope that you will accept this motion to recommit, and I yield back the balance of my time.

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

Mr. Speaker, on January 9, 2015, I underwent emergency surgery to repair a broken bone and, therefore, was unable to vote. Had I been present, I would have voted yes on the Motion to Recommit to H.R. 3, the Keystone XL Pipeline Act, and no on Final Passage of H.R. 3.

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

This bill, as has been indicated, is a bipartisan bill. We support the bill. I have no requests for time; therefore, I would urge my colleagues to support the bill.

I yield back the balance of my time.

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

I join my colleague, the gentleman from Missouri, in urging my colleagues to support H.R. 5471; however, before I get into why we should support the bill, I need to thank all of my partners in this effort.

As has been mentioned, Mr. Stivers has been fantastic throughout this entire process. I knew going into this that I had a great Republican partner. I can't say enough about Representative Stivers, but time will not allow me to do it.

I had another great bipartisan partner in Representative Gibson on the Agriculture Committee. Of course, it is always a joy to work with a good friend and colleague on the Ag Committee, Representative Marcia Fudge.

Mr. Speaker, H.R. 5471 is a true ``end users'' bill. The bill is targeted as it applies to centralized treasury centers, or CTUs, of nonfinancial end user companies.

The CTU model enables an end user corporation to efficiently centralize hedging risks for the entire consolidated corporate group, and it is, in fact, a corporate best practice. It permits companies to more efficiently hedge commercial business risk, which was always the intent of Dodd-Frank.

The CFTC agrees with the underlying policy of the bill as they have provided no-action relief on this point; however, H.R. 5471 is still needed because, as a practical matter, no-action relief is no substitute for statutory fixes as it creates legal uncertainty when deciding how to organize your global business structure.

Corporate boards may be hesitant to approve a decision, as they are required to do, that violates the law based only on an assurance that CFTC staff will not recommend enforcement. H.R. 5471 fixes the quirky result of treating companies that use a CTU model differently than companies that do not accomplish the same result.

The bill also solves another far more technical issue with the no- action relief that relates to CTUs issuing swaps as a principal, as opposed to as an agent.

There is simply no good reason to not address these issues. In fact, CTUs are considered a corporate best practice. I can offer you, Mr. Speaker, an example of one company in my district, MillerCoors. They summarized it best in written testimony before the House Financial Services Committee:

Though it may be tempting to view all derivatives as risky

financial products that were central to the credit crisis, we

must remember that these are important tools upon which

thousands of companies depend to manage risks in the real

economy.

Just remember that we all have companies in our districts that use swaps legitimately to mitigate risk. I urge all of my colleagues to support this important legislation.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as she may consume to the gentlewoman from California, Ms. Maxine Waters, the ranking member of the committee.

Mr. Speaker, I am so delighted to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Peterson), the ranking member of the Ag Committee.

Mr. Speaker, I would now like to place the second half of the CFTC letter into the Record.

No-Action Letter 13-22 contemplated the use of multiple

eligible treasury affiliates within a corporate family, but

the Division agrees with market participants that the third

condition does not accurately reflect this. The Division is

accordingly amending the third condition to clarify that the

restriction on related affiliates and eligible treasury

affiliates from entering into swap transactions with

financial entity affiliates does not preclude the

circumstance where the financial entity affiliate is an

eligible treasury affiliate.

vii. The requirement for the payment obligations of the

treasury affiliate to be guaranteed.

Market participants expressed concern with respect to the

fifth General Condition to the Swap Activity in No-Action

Letter 13-22. The fifth condition states that the payment

obligations of the eligible treasury affiliate on the

exempted swap must be guaranteed by: (i) its non-financial

parent; (ii) an entity that wholly-owns or is wholly-owned by

its non-financial parent; or (iii) the related affiliates for

which the swap hedges or mitigates commercial risk.

Market participants have explained that corporate parents

and structures may avail themselves of other types of support

arrangements, such as keepwell agreements, letters of credit,

or revolving credit facilities for example, which would not

satisfy the requirements of No-Action Letter 13-22. As a

result, the Division is removing the condition to accommodate

the additional support arrangements that may exist with

regard to the eligible treasury affiliate's payment

obligations.

Division No-Action Position

The Division recognizes the benefits that arise from the

use of treasury affiliates within corporate groups and has

determined to provide the following no-action relief;

described below.

For purposes of this no-action letter only, the following

definitions shall apply:

Eligible treasury affiliate means a person that meets each

of the following qualifications:

(i) The person is (A) directly, wholly-owned by a non-

financial entity or another eligible treasury affiliate (its

``non-financial parent''), and (B) is not indirectly

majority-owned by a financial entity, as defined in section

2(h)(7)(C)(i) of the CEA;

(ii) The person's ultimate parent is not a financial entity

as defined in section 2(h)(7)(C)(i) of the CEA;

(iii) The person is a financial entity as defined in

section 2(h)(7)(C)(i)(VIII) of the CEA solely as a result of

acting as principal to swaps with, or on behalf of, one or

more of its related affiliates, or providing other services

that are financial in nature to such related affiliates;

(iv) The person is not, and is not affiliated with, any of

the following:

(A) a swap dealer;

(B) a major swap participant;

(C) a security-based swap dealer; or

(D) a major security-based swap participant.

(v) The person is not any of the following:

(A) a private fund as defined in section 202(a) of the

Investment Advisors Act of 1940 (15 U.S.C. Sec. 80-b-2(a));

(B) a commodity pool;

(C) an employee benefit plan as defined in paragraphs (3)

and (32) of section 3 of the Employee Retirement Income

Security Act of 1974 (29 U.S.C. Sec. 1002);

(D) a bank holding company;

(E) an insured depository institution;

(F) a farm credit system institution;

(G) a credit union;

(H) a nonbank financial company that has been designated as

systemically important by the Financial Stability Oversight

Council; or

(I) an entity engaged in the business of insurance and

subject to capital requirements established by an insurance

governmental authority of a State, a territory of the United

States, the District of Columbia, a country other than the

United States, or a political subdivision of a country other

than the United States that is engaged in the supervision of

insurance companies under insurance law.

(vi) The person does not provide any services, financial or

otherwise, to any affiliate that is a nonbank financial

company that has been designated as systemically important by

the Financial Stability Oversight Council.

Non-financial entity means a person that is not a financial

entity as defined in section 2(h)(7)(C)(i) of the CEA.

Related affiliate means with respect to an eligible

treasury affiliate:

(i) A non-financial entity that is, or is directly or

indirectly wholly- or majority-owned by, the ultimate parent;

or

(ii) A person that is another eligible treasury affiliate.

The Division will not recommend that the Commission

commence an enforcement action against an eligible treasury

affiliate for its failure to comply with the requirements

under section 2(h)(1)(A) of the CEA and part 50 of the

Commission's regulations to clear a swap with an unaffiliated

counterparty or another eligible treasury affiliate (the

``exempted swap'') that is subject to required clearing

pursuant to Sec. 50.4 of the Commission's regulations,

subject to the following conditions:

General Conditions to the Swap Activity

(i) The eligible treasury affiliate enters into the

exempted swap for the sole purpose of hedging or mitigating

the commercial risk of one or more related affiliates that

was transferred to the eligible treasury affiliate;

(ii) The eligible treasury affiliate does not enter into

swaps with its related affiliates or unaffiliated

counterparties other than for the purpose of hedging or

mitigating its own commercial risk or the commercial risk of

one or more related affiliates;

(iii) Neither any related affiliate that enters into swaps

with the eligible treasury affiliate nor the eligible

treasury affiliate, enters into swaps with or on behalf of

any affiliate that is a financial entity (``financial

affiliate''), or otherwise assumes, nets, combines, or

consolidates the risk of swaps entered into by any financial

affiliate, except in the case of financial affiliates that

qualify as eligible treasury affiliates under this letter;

and

(iv) Each swap entered into by the eligible treasury

affiliate is subject to a centralized risk management program

that is reasonably designed (A) to monitor and manage the

risks associated with the swap, and (B) to identify the

related affiliate or affiliates on whose behalf each exempted

swap has been entered into by the eligible treasury

affiliate.

Reporting Conditions

With respect to each swap that an eligible treasury

affiliate (``electing counterparty'') elects not to clear in

reliance on the relief provided in this letter, the reporting

counterparty, as determined in accordance with Sec. 45.8 of

the Commission's regulations, shall provide or cause to be

provided the following information to a registered swap data

repository or, if no registered swap data repository is

available to receive the information from the reporting

counterparty, to the Commission, in the form and manner

specified by the Commission:

(i) Notice of the election of the relief and confirmation

that the electing counterparty satisfies the General

Conditions to the Swap Activity of this no-action relief

specified above;

(ii) How the electing counterparty generally meets its

financial obligations associated with entering into non-

cleared swaps by identifying one or more of the following

categories, as applicable:

(A) A written credit support agreement;

(B) Pledged or segregated assets (including posting or

receiving margin pursuant to a credit support agreement or

otherwise);

(C) A written guarantee from another party;

(D) The electing counterparty's available financial

resources; or

(E) Means other than those described in (A)-(D); and

(iii) If the electing counterparty is an entity that is an

issuer of securities registered under section 12 of, or is

required to file reports under section 15(d) of, the

Securities Exchange Act of 1934:

(A) The relevant SEC Central Index Key number for such

counterparty; and

(B) Acknowledgment that an appropriate committee of the

board of directors (or equivalent body) of the electing

counterparty has reviewed and approved the decision to enter

into swaps that are exempt from the requirements of section

2(h)(1), and if applicable, section 2(h)(8) of the CEA.

(iv) If there is more than one electing counterparty to a

swap, the information specified in the Reporting Conditions

of this no-action relief specified above shall be provided

with respect to each of the electing counterparties.

(v) An entity that qualifies for the relief provided in

this no-action letter may report the information listed in

paragraphs (ii) and (iii) above, annually in anticipation of

electing the relief for one or more swaps. Any such reporting

under this paragraph will be effective for purposes of

paragraphs (ii) and (iii) above for 365 days following the

date of such reporting. During the 365-day period, the entity

shall amend the report as necessary to reflect any material

changes to the information reported.

(vi) Each reporting counterparty shall have a reasonable

basis to believe that the electing counterparty meets the

General Conditions to the Swap Activity for the no-action

relief specified above.

This no-action letter, and the positions taken herein,

represent the view of the Division only, and do not

necessarily represent the position or view of the Commission

or of any other office or division of the Commission. The

relief issued by this letter does not excuse the affected

persons from compliance with any other applicable

requirements contained in the CEA or in the Commission's

regulations issued thereunder. Further, this letter, and the

relief contained herein, is based upon the information

available to the Division. Any different or changed material

facts or circumstances might render this letter void. As with

all no-action letters, the Division retains the authority to,

in its discretion, further condition, modify, suspend,

terminate or otherwise restrict the terms of the no-action

relief provided herein. This letter supersedes No-Action

Letter 13-22.

Sincerely,

Phyllis Dietz,

Acting Director.

Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time.

Again, I just want to thank everyone who was involved in this process. This is something that is going to protect thousands of jobs across our country. People often criticize us for not doing things in a bipartisan manner, but I think this is exemplary of what we can do when we really work at it, even though it has taken a couple of years.

I yield back the balance of my time.

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

I strongly, strongly support Representative Pittenger's Reg D Study Act. Again, as my colleague from Missouri has indicated, this is a technical bill, but it is extremely important.

Commentators have argued that the maintenance of these reserves imposes opportunity costs on depository institutions, namely, by requiring them to hold funds in abeyance that could otherwise be lent out, and I think that it is worth GAO studying the issue and reporting back to Congress.

I just want to make a point, Mr. Speaker, and to stress this: reserve requirements are separate and distinct from capital requirements, liquidity, and leverage rules, which protect the safety and soundness of the financial system. This bill does not take away those important protections.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I am absolutely delighted to yield such time as she might consume to the gentlelady from New York (Mrs. Carolyn B. Maloney), the Democratic cosponsor of this bill, who is the ranking member of the Capital Markets Subcommittee.

Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for speakers, so I yield back the balance of my time.

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

Mr. Speaker, this day is a culmination of a lot of time, a lot of work, and a lot of conversations back and forth, but, again, it is the best work that we have been able to produce in a bipartisan manner. It is not perfect, but I do want to thank all of our partners in this process. Representatives Cole, Hanabusa, Heck, Kildee, Pearce, and Young have really been just outstanding partners. I really want to thank Ranking Member Waters. She has been supportive, constructive, and, not to mention, exceedingly patient.

I also want to thank the Native American community. The National Congress of American Indians, the National American Indian Housing Council, and many individual tribes from across the country have provided their expertise, their comments, their education, and their energy every single step of the way. My very first meeting in the 112th Congress was with one of my Wisconsin tribes, and I assured them that I would keep fighting to get NAHASDA to the floor, this reauthorization that honors the unique needs and sovereignty of the Nations of the First People, and H.R. 4329 keeps that promise.

It is a model for how Congress can work. Of course, again, there is not 100 percent agreement on every provision. I am waiting for the perfect bill. But we cannot let the perfect stand in the way of the possible. We must do what is the best for our tribal communities at this time.

NAHASDA provides tribal governments the ability to provide safe and affordable housing to tribal communities consistent with their status as sovereign. And it is no small task. Some of the poorest and most remote communities in this country are Native American. In fact, the three poorest communities in the United States are Native American.

Improvements that this bill accomplishes include expediting certain Federal approvals, providing rental assistance for Native American veterans, and providing that all Native people are eligible for NAHASDA. Expediting approval ends costly administrative duplication and delays, which is important due to unique timing and building challenges on reservations.

I am hopeful that when I yield time to another one of my colleagues, Mr. Heck, that he will expand on the provisions that we are proud of in this bill regarding Native American veterans. We are going to have several speakers, Mr. Speaker, who are going to comment on how we, after much back and forth, have included all Native people in this bill.

With that, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Murphy), a member on the Financial Services Committee.

Mr. Speaker, I am so happy to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Kildee), who came here in his running shoes and really came here because of his relationship to his uncle who is one of our former retired colleagues, Mr. Kildee of Michigan, and the younger Mr. Kildee has been a tremendous asset in terms of putting this bill together.

Mr. Speaker, I am absolutely delighted to yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Hawaii (Ms. Hanabusa), who is not a member of the committee but weighed in heavily on the final draft that is before us today.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Hawaii (Ms. Gabbard), who is one of many people who participated in getting this bill to where it is today.

Mr. Speaker, I am delighted to yield such time as she may consume to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Waters), the ranking member of the Financial Services Committee, who has really put a lot of time into this bill.

As the ranking member, she serves on all of the subcommittees, but she has been particularly passionate about her stewardship over this bill.

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

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

Let me thank again all of the partners in getting this legislation to the floor.

I do want to make mention of someone who is not a part of this debate, the gentlewoman from Minnesota, Representative Betty McCollum, who is the cochair of the Native American Caucus. She wanted to make sure that she weighed in during this discussion about the extraordinary need to deal with Native American housing.

So many of us believe that Native Americans often are involved in gaming and that they are wealthy and rich, but as the ranking member mentioned, they are subjected to some of the poorest housing conditions in our country.

Although we are reauthorizing NAHASDA, none of us should be fooled at all that this will in any way deal with the tremendous need for affordable housing within Native American communities.

I, again, am very, very empathetic with the issues, particularly that the ranking member has raised, and I am really hopeful that many of these issues, particularly the issue of the Cherokee Freedmen, will be dealt with. It seems promising to me because of some of the decisions that have been made in courts so far.

We do seem to have a Cherokee chairman who is more open, it would seem, to providing membership and retaining membership of the Cherokee Freedmen.

I, again, am happy that the Native Hawaiians are in this bill. I think that as we move forward, we should be ever mindful to make sure that nothing that we have done here will preempt the Native Americans' sovereignty or sovereignty status.

Again, I want to thank all of my partners.

I yield back the balance of my time.

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

I really rise to congratulate and thank the gentleman from California (Mr. Peters) for championing this bill and bringing to our attention a real tremendous cost savings in this HUD program with H.R. 2790, and really providing, using the McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act to provide services to the homeless rather than just additional legal fees, operating costs, additional insurance issues, establishing new internal controls and tracking systems. This is really innovative in terms of how it maximizes the McKinney-Vento moneys. The bill does not include more money, Mr. Speaker. It just allows us to use the small ``c'' that we have more effectively.

I yield as much time as he might consume to the gentleman from California (Mr. Peters), the author of H.R. 2790.

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