Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 3395) to require the Comptroller General of the United States to carry out a study of the costs associated with small- and medium-sized companies to undertake initial public offerings, as amended.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 3395, the Middle Market IPO Cost Act. Currently, companies have two options for raising capital: an initial public offering, an IPO, or a private offering. Fewer companies are choosing to take the IPO path because of the up-front costs of going public, as well as the high operating costs public companies experience due to SEC reporting rules.

Before a company files for an IPO, they often spend tens of millions of dollars to gather and compile information to submit to the SEC. These mandatory information requirements exclude or dissuade many companies from even considering an initial public offering.

The study required by Mr. Himes' bill will help Congress and the market better understand the costs associated with small- and medium- sized companies going public through the IPO process.

I urge all my colleagues to join me in supporting this bill, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record the CBO estimate for this bill.

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

Mr. Speaker, I urge a ``yes'' vote from both sides of

the aisle, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 1764) to accord securities issued by the International Development Association the same exemption from the securities laws that applies to the securities of other multilateral development banks in which the United States is a member, as amended.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 1764, the Aligning SEC Regulations for the World Bank's International Development Association Act, the bill offered by the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Waters).

Mr. Speaker, this legislation classifies securities issued by the IDA as exempted securities, subject to appropriate reporting requirements as determined by the Securities and Exchange Commission.

This change would place the IDA on equal regulatory footing with the other World Bank divisions such as the Inter-American Development Bank, the Asian Development Bank, the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, and the African Development Bank.

Prior to 2018, the IDA did not issue debt in the securities markets. Its funding came primarily from donor contributions and repayments on past loans.

As the IDA evolves to meet the needs of the world's poorest nations, it has entered the capital markets to expand its resources and its impact.

It is only logical and fair that its securities receive the same exempted status consistent with previous treatment of multilateral development bank securities.

Supporting IDA's access to efficient financing would reflect the United States' leadership in global development and our commitment to the world's most vulnerable populations.

Ms. Waters' bill is bipartisan. It is practical. It is overdue. I urge all of my colleagues to join me in supporting this bill.

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

Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record the CBO estimate on this bill.

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

Mr. Speaker, I urge a ``yes'' vote on this very practical bill, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 1716) to deter Chinese aggression towards Taiwan by requiring the Secretary of the Treasury to publish a report on financial institutions and accounts connected to senior officials of the People's Republic of China, to restrict financial services for certain immediate family of such officials, and for other purposes, as amended.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 1716, the Taiwan Conflict Deterrence Act of 2025.

This excellent bill, introduced by our Conference chair, Mrs. McClain, demonstrates that the United States is a vital partner in supporting Taiwan. We must remain committed to supporting Taiwan as China continues to increase its military presence across the Taiwan Strait.

The U.S. and Taiwan have maintained a firm stance against any forceful efforts to change Taiwan's status for nearly five decades. That posture is as important now as ever.

A component of the Taiwan Relations Act mandates that the President inform Congress when China makes any attempt to threaten Taiwan's national security. Once that notification is made to Congress, Conference Chair McClain's bill would require the Secretary of the Treasury to disclose the estimated illicit funds of China's top officials in Beijing.

This bill is modeled after the Holding Iranian Leaders Accountable Act, a bipartisan bill that I was pleased to sponsor, which became law last year.

Congresswoman McClain's bill does exactly what the title says. It seeks to deter China from making a terrible mistake and promises financial penalties for senior Chinese officials should they make the wrong decision and choose to attack Taiwan.

Mr. Speaker, I urge all of my colleagues to join me in supporting this excellent bill, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record the CBO estimate on this bill.

Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as she may consume to the gentlewoman from Michigan (Mrs. McClain), our Conference chair and the author of this bill.

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

Mr. Speaker, I urge a ``yes'' vote on this important bill to deter China, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 1450) to require the Office of Foreign Assets Control to develop a program under which private-sector firms may receive a license to conduct nominal financial transactions in furtherance of the firms' investigations, and for other purposes.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 1450, the OFAC Licensure for Investigators Act.

When it comes to combating illicit finance, effective public-private partnerships are critical. Tracking and disrupting sophisticated crime networks requires cooperation between our government and private-sector experts.

These partnerships play an integral role in our ability to safeguard the U.S. financial system and our national security.

Mrs. Beatty's commonsense bill authorizes private-sector firms, operating under an OFAC license, to conduct nominal transactions with sanctioned entities, allowing them to more effectively trace funds and uncover illicit networks during financial crime investigations.

The gentlewoman and I agree that while the private sector can provide a helping hand in tracking down bad actors, it is ultimately the government's responsibility to provide clear legal guidance and guardrails to support their efforts.

Mr. Speaker, I urge all my colleagues to join me in supporting this bill, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I include the Congressional Budget Office estimate for this bill in the Record.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Iowa (Mr. Nunn) to talk about the aspects of this bill from his perspective of being a former intelligence officer.

Mr. Speaker, I urge a ``yes'' vote, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 580, I call up the bill (H.R. 3633) to provide for a system of regulation of the offer and sale of digital commodities by the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, and for other purposes, and ask for its immediate consideration in the House.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on this bill in the Record.

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

I rise in strong support this morning of the CLARITY Act. We have been here before, Mr. Speaker. Just last year, we passed landmark legislation, FIT21, with an overwhelming bipartisan majority to apply strong Federal standards to digital asset markets.

For more than 5 years, our committee has heard from dozens and dozens of experts, held numerous roundtables and hearings with market participants of all sizes in all segments of the market to learn more about the emerging digital asset ecosystem.

We learned about the value proposition and relevant risks associated with digital assets and the use of blockchain technology. We have heard time and time again from market participants and regulators about the need for clear regulatory guardrails.

We have talked about the need to fill those regulatory gaps that have left millions participating in crypto markets vulnerable. In fact, Mr. Speaker, both President Biden in his Executive Order 14067, and President Trump in his Executive Order 14178, identified those market regulatory gaps, asking Congress to act to fill those gaps.

In 2022, we certainly witnessed consumer harm when the Financial Services Committee heard unprecedented testimony from an expert called in to clean up the failed digital asset crypto firm FTX and the mess it left behind. In his words, never had he seen such an utter failure in corporate controls.

In its wake, then-Chairwoman Waters wisely stated: ``We need legislative action to ensure that digital assets entities cannot operate in the shadows outside of robust Federal oversight and clear rules of the road.''

If we needed actions then, we certainly need it now. We risk history repeating itself, and that is why we gather today on the House floor.

After years of bipartisan work and numerous iterations, this bill would apply rigorous rules to digital asset firms, prohibiting commingling of customer funds, and requiring capital recordkeeping and conflict of interest mitigation standards.

Importantly, the bill recognizes that decentralized finance, or DeFi, developers do not take custody of user assets nor do they control user assets. Therefore, we should not treat them in the same way that we treat centralized actors who do have custody and who do have control over assets.

It is important to note that in an Agriculture Committee hearing, the former general counsel of FTX USA himself testified: Had we the regulatory structure provided for in CLARITY applied to FTX, its story--and he goes on to say--would almost certainly have had a much different ending.

Let's ensure that we learn from the past, Mr. Speaker, the digital asset ecosystem is evolving at a remarkable pace, enabling real-time settlement of peer-to-peer transactions, initiating a renaissance in applied cryptography and laying the groundwork for the next generation of the internet.

The United States has long had the most innovative financial and technology sectors and the deepest and most liquid capital markets, but while other jurisdictions are building frameworks for the future of finance to be on-chain and digitally native, our great country, with those great characteristics, is lagging.

For too long our digital asset regime has been the worst of both worlds: regulation by enforcement, which has pushed good actors to leave the United States, and the regulatory gaps that I talked about identified in both President Biden and President Trump's executive orders that have left consumers unprotected from the bad actors.

Now, today, we have an opportunity to reverse course and reestablish the United States as the global hub for digital innovation. To do so, we must close the regulatory gaps with commonsense rules.

Mr. Speaker, the CLARITY Act does just that by leveraging the expertise of our two market regulators, the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, to ensure wraparound oversight of digital asset markets, from initial sales, raising capital, to daily trading, it provides clarity for banks engaging in this ecosystem.

As we said in the last Congress, Mr. Speaker, these rules need to be fit for purpose for the digital ecosystem. All of us on this House floor know that the status quo is simply unacceptable. We all know American consumers and innovators deserve this clarity. They deserve better. They deserve rules of the road.

The choice before us is whether to lead in the financial markets of the future or watch the next FTX fail while we are left saying once again: Well, we have been here before.

Mr. Speaker, I urge all my colleagues to join me on both sides of the aisle and support the CLARITY Act. Let's fill these regulatory gaps with the proper Federal oversight. Let's create a competitive digital ecosystem. I support this bill, and I urge my colleagues to.

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

Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record the CBO estimate for this bill.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Steil).

Mr. Speaker, the gentleman is an essential leader in our committee and also the chairman of our Subcommittee on Digital Assets, Financial Technology, and Artificial Intelligence.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Emmer), who is our majority whip and who has been an absolute, essential early focus policymaker in the digital asset space.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Huizenga), who is the

vice chairman of our full committee and who is a longtime advocate for reform in the digital markets.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Davidson), who is the chairman of our Subcommittee on National Security, Illicit Finance, and International Financial Institutions and a longtime policy advocate for reform in our digital markets.

Mr. Speaker, may I inquire as to the time remaining.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Flood), the chair of our Subcommittee on Housing and Insurance.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Fitzgerald).

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

We are here today, Mr. Speaker, because of the exceptional work by the House Financial Services Committee over a 5-year period, including under the leadership of then-Chairwoman Maxine Waters and former Chairman Patrick McHenry, gathering feedback from experts, looking at market participants, analyzing the markets, and talking to regulators. That is how we got the CLARITY Act on the floor today. It is built on the backs of that hard work.

This Chamber passed a similar bill in the last Congress with exceedingly strong, bipartisan support. Since then, the CLARITY Act has only been further refined and strengthened in terms of legal certainty and consumer protection.

This bill, Mr. Speaker, as we have demonstrated over that period of time, would prevent consumer harm like FTX.

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

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 580, I call up the bill (S. 1582) to provide for the regulation of payment stablecoins, and for other purposes, and ask for its immediate consideration in the House.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of the Senate GENIUS Act, and I thank my colleague and longtime friend, Senator Bill Hagerty of Tennessee, for his leadership in ushering this bipartisan bill through the United States Senate.

Around the world, payment systems are undergoing an evolution. New technologies are modernizing legacy infrastructure and unlocking innovative solutions to improve efficiency, reduce costs, and expand access to financial services.

Members of the House Financial Services Committee have long recognized the promise of payment stablecoins and have worked since 2022 to establish a legislative framework.

Last Congress, under the leadership of former Chairman Patrick McHenry of North Carolina, the committee passed the Clarity for Payment Stablecoins Act of 2023. This bill provided for bank and nonbank pathways for issuers to obtain regulatory approval, preserve State- level oversight, and set standards for reserve composition, audits, and sound risk management.

When the 119th Congress started in January, we picked up this effort. In close coordination with the Senate Banking Committee and our base legislation, our legislative work over the past 2 years has laid that foundation for the progress made in both the House and the Senate.

Today, we have an opportunity to send stablecoin legislation to President Trump's desk. This is a multi-Congress priority item, and it ensures American competitiveness and strong guardrails for our consumers. We should not, Mr. Speaker, squander that opportunity.

This priority has been agreed to by both President Biden, with his executive order, and President Trump in his Executive Order 14178.

Mr. Speaker, through multiple versions of stablecoin legislation, the House and Senate have shared ideas and crafted workable approaches. Our joint efforts before us helped enhance the legislation on the floor this morning.

I recognize the hard work of my friends in the Senate to get the core fundamentals of what payment stablecoin legislation demands.

I also recognize the diligence and thoughtful work of my colleagues here in the House, including the chairman of our Subcommittee on Digital Assets, Financial Technology, and Artificial Intelligence, Bryan Steil, who championed and worked through our committee through markup in successfully designing, writing, and passing in committee the STABLE Act.

I thank my House colleagues for their principled approach to key policies that guided and distinguished our efforts particularly around State regime oversight, the reserve composition, the anti-money laundering, and territorial integrity issues around stablecoins, and, finally, the corporate structure of issuers.

Furthermore, it is my firmly held belief that only by enacting payment stablecoin legislation and, Mr. Speaker, I repeat, and comprehensive market structure reform in this Congress, like we just debated a few minutes ago, the

CLARITY Act, only by passing both will this Congress fully usher in the era of digital finance and ensure that consumers are protected whenever they engage with digital assets.

Mr. Speaker, I urge all my colleagues to join me in supporting this bill and sending it forward to 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue for President Trump to sign into law.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I would like to address a few of those points.

One, I am so delighted to hear that it sounds as if my friend, the ranking member from California, in fact, will now vote for the CLARITY Act this afternoon on the House floor since she highlights some of my suggested changes to the GENIUS Act. I appreciate her remarks on that.

Here is the big picture, Mr. Speaker. These bills, the CLARITY and GENIUS Acts, are about protecting American consumers, protecting investments, bringing capital back to the United States, and making the U.S. a fintech leader in payments and digital assets.

Consumers are protected. The rules are straightforward. All issuers of a payment stablecoin are treated the same, with high standards and high regulatory oversight. I want to make sure that those at home following on C-SPAN get the record straight.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Thompson), who is the chair of the House Agriculture Committee and who, for years, has been a partner in crafting a digital asset approach that will make America more competitive.

Mr. Speaker, I really have to say that I believe the GENIUS Act is an important component for preserving and enhancing the United States dollar as the reserve currency around the world.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Emmer), who is our majority whip and who has been instrumental in our success in crafting digital asset legislation.

Mr. Speaker, I recognize the chair of our Subcommittee on Digital Assets, Financial Technology, and Artificial Intelligence, who crafted the STABLE Act, which is the base text that led to this joint, good work between the House and Senate.

I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Steil).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Huizenga), the vice chairman of our full committee.

Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 15 seconds to the gentleman from Michigan.

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

Mr. Speaker, this bill, the GENIUS Act, and the bill we debated a few minutes ago, the CLARITY Act, are all about consumer protection. There are no rules federally across the board in the digital asset space at all now. That is why we have seen consumers hurt by the lack of a regulatory framework. I have to say, Mr. Speaker, in total contrast to my friends on the other side of the aisle, that is what we are all here for today.

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate your continuing reminder to the Members in the Chamber to refrain from engaging

in personalities. Yet it has routinely become a part of our morning, so I have to inquire as to how long we are going to let this go on, Mr. Speaker. I want to make sure all the Members in the Chamber adhere to rule XVII.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. Barr), our distinguished chairman who leads our Subcommittee on Financial Institutions.

Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 15 seconds to the gentleman from Kentucky.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Meuser), the chairman of our Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Flood), who chairs our Subcommittee on Housing and Insurance.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Gottheimer), who is a distinguished member of the House Financial Services Committee.

Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 15 seconds to the gentleman from New Jersey.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Carter).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Vindman).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Haridopolos), our majority whip of the House Financial Services Committee.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, let me start by saying that we are here on the floor, where we have heard a vigorous debate about dollar-backed payment stablecoins. Our committee has worked under both Democratic leadership with Ms. Waters and Republican leadership to research this, talk about it, think about it, and have hearings about it for over 5 years now. We come to the House floor today with a bill before us that, while not perfect, is a good bill, as has been evidenced by our speakers on the floor.

S. 1582, the GENIUS Act, is a simple, bipartisan bill that is long overdue and is based on that bipartisan work in both Chambers. Wow, we are actually legislating. We are seeing bills passed in both Chambers. It is exciting for me to see the good work of my friend, Chairman Tim Scott of the Banking Committee, in leading a policy-driven effort to put America's financial leadership first. S. 1582, as written by Bill Hagerty, does exactly that.

Mr. Speaker, 68 Senators voted for this bill in the United States Senate. A cloture-proof margin is only 60, but here 68 Senators came together, including 18 Democrats. They vigorously debated this bill, worked on it, improved it, modified it, and sent it to us in the House.

Likewise, Chairman Steil here in the House worked with those Senators on both sides of the aisle all along the way to take the ideas that we had here in the House in our markup and our STABLE Act and improve the GENIUS Act.

With this legislation today, on a bipartisan basis, we are modernizing our financial infrastructure, streamlining transactions, lowering costs, and expanding financial tools for everyday Americans. This is about putting American innovation first. It is about creating a future where innovation is met with clarity, not confusion; where American ingenuity is empowered, not stifled, by an outdated, not-fit- for-purpose regulatory regime.

The GENIUS Act will help maintain U.S. global leadership in financial technology, digital innovation, and the power of the reserve currency-- the United States dollar--while reinforcing important consumer protections and critical regulatory oversight where it is needed most.

This is commonsense, forward-looking legislation that reminds me of the earliest days of this House Chamber agreeing in 1996 not to tax or regulate the internet, but to tax and regulate how people use the internet. This is a keen example of that principles-based legislation.

Mr. Speaker, I urge all my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to support the GENIUS Act, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 580, I call up the bill (H.R. 1919) to amend the Federal Reserve Act to prohibit the Federal reserve banks from offering certain products or services directly to an individual, to prohibit the use of central bank digital currency for monetary policy, and for other purposes, and ask for its immediate consideration in the House.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume in support of H.R. 1919.

This bill has been before us in this House Chamber. We debated it in the last Congress. It has had the outstanding leadership support and advocacy by our majority whip here in the House, Mr. Tom Emmer of Minnesota. I rise in strong support.

At stake is a fundamental choice about the future of money in America, a choice between freedom or government control. Central bank digital currencies, or CBDCs, put the government at the center of every financial transaction: monitoring, controlling, and possibly restricting how Americans could use their own hard-earned money. An American Government-controlled digital dollar threatens to open the door to government overreach here at home.

It would threaten individual privacy and stifle innovation by undermining progress that we have seen from private-sector solutions like we just talked about on the House floor, privately issued U.S. dollar-backed payment stablecoins.

That is a continuation of the evolution of the private-sector guiding the expanse of our money, how we use our money to make payments, formerly starting out with cash. We wrote checks. We use debit cards and ATM cards at the point of sale. We use credit cards. We can send money by wire transfer or by an electronic check. The private sector has innovated all along that continuum of financial technology, and that is why today we don't want the Fed to drive that, to potentially control it, to issue it, for individuals to bank at the Fed and be subject to these risks to privacy or surveillance. Let's stick with the approach of private-sector solutions.

We have already seen small glimpses of this possibility under the prior administration. The chair of the House Financial Services Subcommittee for Oversight and Investigations, Dan Meuser of Pennsylvania, has been having a robust discussion about the debanking policies of the prior administration for politically disfavored industries.

The capability for the government then to follow on and directly freeze or delete Americans' funds on a whim is not compatible with our values, our cherished freedoms, our way of life, or even the past approach to the evolution of payments in our country.

Moreover, a government-run digital dollar would put the Federal Reserve potentially in direct competition with the private sector. Further, a CBDC would create unnecessary risks by consolidating financial power within the Federal Government, limiting choice and threatening the very innovation that made American financial markets the strongest in the world.

For all these reasons, I am thankful that consistently my friend, our colleague, Majority Whip Tom Emmer, has been leading the charge to prohibit the implementation of a U.S. central bank digital currency. I thank him for the work he has done to elevate this issue in the Congress and bring this bill before us once again for a vote on this House floor.

I hope all my colleagues can recognize that Article I determines how we issue money and how we value it, that that is a power of the Congress, and that we are not delegating it to the executive. We control that in Article I. This bill says that you can't issue a CBDC without that specific explicit authority and direction from the Congress.

Mr. Speaker, I urge all my colleagues to join me in supporting Mr. Emmer's bill, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record the Congressional Budget Office estimate for this bill.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Steil), our distinguished chair of the Subcommittee on Digital Assets, Financial Technology, and Artificial Intelligence.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. Barr), who is the chair of our House Financial Institutions Subcommittee.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Davidson), who is the chair of our Subcommittee on National Security, Illicit Finance, and International Financial Institutions.

Mr. Speaker, I have the pleasure to introduce the author of this important legislation, and I yield 4\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Emmer), the majority whip of the U.S. House of Representatives.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Meuser), chairman of our Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Rose).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Stutzman), a returning member of the House Financial Services Committee.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from California (Mr. Kiley), who represents the prettiest district outside Arkansas.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. McDowell), our new Member.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, first, I will thank the members of the House Financial Services Committee and the members of the House Agriculture Committee for all the work that they have put in on both sides of the aisle. It was significant hours for multiple years, basically the last three Congresses, in thinking through what is the future of digital assets, how are they best regulated, what is the role of United States Government in oversight, what is the future of money in terms of the use of a blockchain.

Members in these committees have worked extensively. Likewise over in the Energy and Commerce Committee, the idea of blockchain technology at large outside financial institutions has garnered a tremendous amount of bipartisan work.

This House wants to make sure that we prepare this country for a prosperous, free, open Web3 technology as we go into seeing the benefits of writing applications on a blockchain. We will see competition in blockchains, just as we saw competition in operating systems in computing. I think that breeds a lot of excitement.

No one can actually do that if we don't have clear rules of the road. We have spent this morning debating those rules of the road.

The CLARITY Act that we debated on this House floor provides that market framework for the use of digital assets, custodying digital assets, investing in digital assets, or dealing or raising capital around them. It clearly defines what should be treated as a commodity versus what should be treated as a security.

We talked about that important payment device on a blockchain for use in that marketplace that is outlined in the CLARITY Act. That is a dollar-backed stablecoin.

We want the U.S. to dominate in financial technology and payments, just as we do for the vast majority of payments around the world in dollars. That is delivered by the bipartisan work in the Senate on the GENIUS Act.

I want to start by thanking those Members. I also recognize the incredibly hardworking staff members on the House Committee on Agriculture and the House Committee on Financial Services who have worked together unbelievably, capably, cooperatively, and effectively over these last two Congresses, as they did at the height of the cleanup from the financial crisis in 2008 when House Financial Services and the Agriculture Committee came together to write rules about the swap market.

I particularly thank Nick, Jack Jackson, Lindsey, and Paul on the staff at the House Agriculture Committee. They did great. I thank Nick, Allison, and our team at House Financial Services for their staff leadership.

Mr. Speaker, this bill we are debating today is essential. The ranking member seems to think that I am interested in the subject of a central bank digital currency, and I am. I have spent the better part of the last 5 years studying central bank digital currencies outside the United States and talking to officials inside the United States about whether that is a good idea or a bad idea.

Over those years, it is not out of ignorance that I have come to the conclusion that it is a bad idea. One of the contributing factors to my determining that I don't believe it is an idea whose time has come, to supplement private-sector innovation in this Nation, is actually Congressman Jim Himes' white paper that he shared with me years ago. I thought it was well-written, and it was another indication that this was not the direction to go in.

Since that time, I have visited with other central banks around the world, in Europe and other places, that make me even more certain that we should rely on private-sector innovation that, in turn, can create the tokenized money, which we have talked about all morning, but doesn't do it in a way that can surveil your work, take over your life, have outcomes that you heard from Congressman Davidson and Congressman Emmer, about the examples of debanking that we witnessed in Canada or the policy debanking we witnessed in the Obama administration and, to a degree, the Biden administration.

Americans have made it clear: We don't want the Federal Government controlling how we spend, save, or send our money in our personal lives. We have witnessed firsthand the dangers when government wields that power unchecked, and you heard examples of that this morning.

Americans want and deserve control over their own money, and we have tried to institutionalize that in all the work we have done in both of these committees in this digital assets innovation and reform space.

We believe in self-custody. I have self-custody in the analog world of cash and investments. Why can't I have that custody, that self- control, in my digital financial space? I don't understand why one can't recognize the authorities that we have on our person-- constitutionally guaranteed, guaranteed by law--in an analog context? Why can't we demand the same?

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this bill, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman for yielding time.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 1, the One Big Beautiful Bill Act. For too long, government spending has gone unchecked.

Last November, American voters sent a clear message. We need to rein in government spending. Our Financial Services title exceeds our $1 billion budget instruction by over $600 million. It caps the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau's budget authority by nearly half.

It rescinds unobligated and unused funds from the SEC's reserve fund and HUD's Green and Resilient Retrofit Program.

It targets $1 billion for strategic use under the Defense Production Act to ensure that America can meet its national security supply chain requirements for the 21st century.

Overall, this bill stops a huge tax increase for our working families in Arkansas. It spurs major investments for small businesses. It gives law enforcement the tools they need to secure our southwest border. It strengthens energy security. It reduces government spending.

Mr. Speaker, it delivers on the promises that we made to American voters. I strongly support this bill, and I urge a ``yes'' vote.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 275, the Special Interest Alien Reporting Act.

This bill requires the Secretary of Homeland Security to publish monthly reports on the number of special interest aliens attempting to unlawfully enter the U.S., including specifications on the encounter location and the alien's country of origin.

During President Biden's tenure, we saw an unprecedented number of special interest aliens from China, Iran, and Russia.

A special interest alien is a person who poses as a potential threat to the United States. This is alarming and a national security risk.

Last Congress, I asked the Biden Administration to be transparent about encounters with known or unknown terrorists entering our country. Their answers were unsatisfactory.

Publishing the number of special interest aliens who have been granted entry to the U.S. would educate the public on the risks the U.S. Government is subjecting its citizens to. It would also allow the public to hold the government accountable for its actions.

Border Patrol had produced small iterations on this data for 2016 to 2018 and it would be helpful to re-start this publication at a more frequent cadence.

I urge you to support H.R. 275.

Mr. Speaker, I certainly thank our distinguished chair of the subcommittee, Mrs. Wagner of Missouri, for her daily leadership of our agenda to make America more competitive by having the most liquid, competitive capital markets in the world. These bills certainly take a step in that direction to support that goal. I thank my friend from California (Mr. Sherman) for his comments in support of the bill.

The gentleman is right, Mr. Speaker. I think we have all learned in our lives that intelligence and wealth aren't directly correlated. This is another example of that, where people are held back from their ability to use their expertise and their knowledge just because they don't have a specific net worth. That is what H.R. 3394, the Fair Investment Opportunities for Professional Experts Act seeks to clarify.

Many individuals, whether through work, education, or other experience, have the knowledge to make an informed investment decision, but they are excluded simply because of an income or net worth test.

Before I was in Congress, I helped investors and founders start new companies and raise funds through regulation D private placements.

I witnessed firsthand on an annual basis routinely how the current accredited investor definition impaired talented, knowledgeable innovators from fully participating up front in their business formation dream.

This bill, with my good friend from California, Representative Vargas, would expand the definition of an ``accredited investor'' and allow Americans who can demonstrate education, professional experience, or other similar credentials the opportunity to invest in a private offer.

It passed out of our Financial Services Committee 45-1, Mr. Speaker, demonstrating clear, bipartisan support. I agree with my friend from California. This bill is a step in the right direction, offering more Americans a chance to participate in the American Dream, build capital, help start a business, and use their God-given talent, skills, ability, and professional expertise to help that company be successful.

Mr. Speaker, I urge a ``yes'' vote from all the Members on both sides of the aisle.

Mr. Speaker, I rise tonight in support of this reconciliation effort, and I thank my friend from west Texas, the home of national security, for supporting this bill and working hard to bring it to fruition, bringing it to the House floor.

Last month, the House Financial Services Committee completed our work assigned to us under the Budget Committee's reconciliation instruction. The resolution asked us to decrease the deficit by $1 billion during the planning period of 10 years. The Financial Services Committee exceeded that objective. We saved for the American taxpayers by cutting the deficit in our plan by $5.2 billion in savings.

During the markup, we spent 9 hours debating and considering 40 amendments from our friends on the other side of the aisle. After this exhaustive process, we favorably reported the Financial Services Committee's print to fulfill our obligations under this bill.

Mr. Speaker, we can't lose sight of the reason that we are here tonight on this House floor. In 2024, the American people voted for fiscal responsibility and real change.

Our country is currently $37 trillion in debt, paying billions of dollars in interest each day on that debt. Congress must act. Today, we start that process. For too long the government spending has been a one-way road in the wrong direction.

I am proud of the good work of the Financial Services Committee in doing our part to reduce this deficit.

Mr. Speaker, I ask all my colleagues to support this bill.

Mr. Speaker, while leading a delegation on behalf of the Speaker of the House to the Vatican, I was delayed by unavoidable mechanical issues with my aircraft and was not present for votes.

Had I been present, I would have voted YEA on Roll Call No. 132, and YEA on Roll Call No. 133.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to recognize my good friend, Tom Nichols, a longtime radio host and owner of KVRE, a beloved radio station in Hot Springs Village, Arkansas.

Through nearly seven decades on the radio, Tom has done more than inform and entertain. He has a trusted voice, a steady presence, and a true reflection of the character and kindness that define Arkansas at its best.

His show, ``Ask Your Neighbor,'' has been on the air for 45 years. It is a daily reminder of the value of connection, offering a place where neighbors can come together, share what matters, and strengthen the bonds of community.

Therefore, it is with great pride that we recognize Tom Nichols today for his induction in the Arkansas Walk of Fame, an honor that he has earned many times over for his outstanding contributions to our community.

Celebrating Raye Montague's Legacy

Madam Speaker, I rise today to recognize the late Raye Montague, whose creativity has earned her a place on the 2025 American Innovation $1 Coin, representing our State of Arkansas.

In 1972, Mrs. Montague made history by creating the first computer- generated rough draft of a naval ship, the USS Oliver Hazard Perry. This was a groundbreaking achievement that revolutionized ship design.

Mrs. Montague's work has not only reshaped the U.S. Navy's approach to engineering, but demonstrated the transformative power of technology in the defense of our country.

Ultimately, for Mrs. Montague's efforts, she was inducted into the Arkansas Black Hall of Fame and the Arkansas Women's Hall of Fame. In addition, she was awarded the Meritorious Civilian Service Award by the U.S. Navy.

Upon her return to Little Rock, I was pleased to meet Mrs. Montague and hear her inspirational story firsthand. Montague's visionary coin design was chosen by the Citizens Coinage Advisory Committee. The coin depicts Mrs. Montague and the ship that she crafted with her groundbreaking model.

It is fitting that we celebrate Mrs. Raye Montague's legacy. Years later,

her work continues to inspire creativity in the field of engineering and technology.

Commending Dr. Christina Drale

Madam Speaker, I rise today to commend Dr. Christina Drale, the chancellor of the University of Arkansas at Little Rock for receiving the E. Joseph Savoie Chief Executive Leadership award.

This prestigious honor recognizes presidents and chancellors who demonstrate exceptional leadership in advancing innovation and collaboration within their institutions. Dr. Drale is the first Arkansan in over a decade to receive and earn this recognition.

She became the chancellor 5 years ago after serving as the interim executive vice chancellor and provost at UA Little Rock.

From the beginning, she led with purpose, implementing significant changes to strengthen the university, such as implementing a partnership program with local businesses, offering employees scholarships for tuition, and other education opportunities at the university. Additionally, under her leadership, UA Little Rock has seen historic enrollment growth and improved retention rates.

These are just a few of the examples that highlight her outstanding service, accomplishments, and visionary leadership in higher education in central Arkansas. Madam Speaker, I offer congratulations to Dr. Drale.

Mr. Speaker, I thank my good friend, Mr. Westerman, and my colleagues in the House who serve on the Natural Resources Committee for working with me on the Flatside Wilderness Additions Act over the past 5 years.

I stand in strong support of H.R. 1612, which I think is a model for how to go about considering recreation conservation lands in our national forests.

The Ouachita Mountains and the surrounding forest sit in the southwest corner of Arkansas. It is the oldest and largest national forest in our southern region. It has origins in my district of central Arkansas and stretches some 220 miles west into eastern Oklahoma through my good friend, Mr. Westerman's district.

It encompasses nearly 10,000 acres of rugged terrain, and the most treasured views in the Ouachita region are in Flatside Wilderness. For those visitors that Congressman Westerman referenced, the area also includes the challenging and very popular Ouachita National Recreation Trail, which bisects Flatside Wilderness.

Back in 1984, under the leadership of former Arkansas Senator Dale Bumpers and my predecessor, Congressman Ed Bethune, the Arkansas Wilderness Act was passed and signed into law by President Reagan. This legislation designated Flatside as one of the first Arkansas wilderness areas to be added to the National Wilderness Preservation System. At the time of its passage, the Flatside area was intended to be larger than what was ultimately designated.

In 1984, the Forest Service and its Flatside advocates were not able to craft a strategy where all the studied and preferred acres of the forest could be included. As such, Mr. Speaker, when I joined Congress in 2015, I set out to complete that original designed 1984 plan for Flatside.

In 2019, with the help of Arkansas Senator John Boozman and Chairman Westerman, we were able to add 640 acres to Flatside, which was signed into law by President Trump.

That same year, Senator Boozman and I collaborated on an appropriation measure that directed the Forest Service to complete a study on which the surrounding lands that were eligible to be added to Flatside would be carefully studied.

Mr. Speaker, it is the results of that 2019 legislatively directed study that was published in 2021 that are the basis for the law proposal before us today.

With the help of my colleagues, this bill will finish the work started some four decades ago in which I have been personally dedicated since joining this House.

With this final addition, the Flatside Wilderness area can continue to serve central Arkansas as a place of economic, recreational, and historic importance.

First, as Chairman Westerman noted, this is not creating a new wilderness area but simply designating additional land. It has wide support, as noted by my friend, including our local county and city officials in the county where it is located: Governor Sarah Sanders, Arkansas Parks & Tourism, the leadership of our Game and Fish Commission, and many other local

leaders and outdoor recreation groups in our State.

Rest assured also, Mr. Speaker, the current forest management plan for Flatside already includes prescribed burns, fire suppression techniques, and reiterates the authority of management to protect the area from fire, insects, and disease.

So, I thank my friend, Mr. Westerman, for working with me on this. I think it should be supported by all the Members in the House. It is a model, as we have talked about before, for how we bring local officials, outdoor recreation, conservationists, and forest land management people together to advance something that is sought by our local leadership in the State.

So I thank Mr. Westerman, Speaker Johnson, Leader Scalise, and Representative Emmer, as well as all the members of the House Natural Resources Committee for working with me on this proposal.

As I conclude, Mr. Speaker, I have to say that for four decades this has been an important place in my life. It reminds me of John Muir's famous poem:

Climb the mountains and get their good tidings. Nature's

peace will flow into you as sunshine flows into trees.

The winds will blow their own freshness into you and

the storms their energy, while cares will drop off like

autumn leaves.

Mr. Speaker, I hope future generations of Arkansans and a lot of Texas visitors will enjoy those glad tidings from Flatside.

I include in the Record an article titled: ``Opposites Attract: How a Conservative Texan Helped a Liberal Arkansan Enact the Sweeping Arkansas Wilderness Act of 1984.''

Opposites Attract: How a Conservative Texan Helped a Liberal Arkansan

Enact the Sweeping Arkansas Wilderness Act of 1984

(By J. French Hill, April 25, 2009)

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 284, I call up the joint resolution (S.J. Res. 28) disapproving the rule submitted by the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection relating to ``Defining Larger Participants of a Market for General-Use Digital Consumer Payment Applications,'' and ask for its immediate consideration in the House.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of this resolution to overturn the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau's deeply flawed final rule on larger participants in general-use digital payment applications.

It sounds complicated, Mr. Speaker, but it is not. This is a midnight rule created by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. It is overly broad, and it is imprecise. It treats a wide variety of digital payment applications, peer-to-peer apps, digital wallets, and e-commerce tools, as though they are identical simply because they facilitate payments and serve a large numbers of users.

However, these products are not the same. They serve different models, operate under different rules, and pose different kinds of consumer risks.

This kind of regulatory overreach is bad enough on its own, but what makes this rule especially concerning is the process by which it was created. The CFPB's approach to carry out this rulemaking is a clear example of undemocratic and unjustified action. The CFPB gave the public just 30 days to comment on this proposal. That is 30 days for businesses across the country, Members of Congress, State regulators, and the public to weigh in on a rule that has potentially profound consequences for digital commerce, one of the most rapidly growing portions of Financial Services and FinTech.

In addition, the Bureau rushed to finalize the rule in the waning days of the Biden administration, ignoring much of the stakeholder feedback and pushing it through to try and insulate it from future scrutiny or reconsideration.

Now, this is not the first time that the CFPB has issued rules without sufficient transparency or process. In fact, Members on both sides of the aisle during my years in Congress have routinely criticized the CFPB for rushing matters, not following the process, not giving the public sufficient time to criticize and critique its proposals. However, Mr. Speaker, this needs to be the last time that the CFPB does this.

In a post-Chevron deference world, Congress must step in and assert our Article I authority over independent agencies that stray beyond their statutory authority, bypass the legislative process, and undermine the public trust.

Let's be clear: There is no apparent evidence of widespread consumer harm that justifies this rule. There is no demonstrated market failure here. What we have instead is an agency stretching its mandate in a way Congress never intended.

By allowing this final rule to remain intact, we are affirming that scale alone justifies the regulation, meaning size and scope alone justifies the regulation regardless of the conduct, the risk, or harm to a consumer.

This CFPB approach violates decades of balanced principles in assessing and implementing regulations in finance. It certainly is not the barometer that Congress intended for the CFPB to use when interpreting their authorities.

This is not responsible, risk-based regulation. It is a shortcut to control, applied without the justification that both consumers and innovators deserve.

Some may try to frame this argument as a gift to Big Tech. That is a distraction. This is not about defending large companies. This is about defending good governance, our legislative authority, and the public's right to be part of major and costly regulatory decisionmaking.

If we allow this rule to stand, we are setting a dangerous precedent, one where Federal agencies can bypass Congress, ignore public input, and rewrite rules largely behind closed doors. This is a precedent that we cannot afford to set, regardless of who is in the White House or who is in the crosshairs.

Mr. Speaker, the CFPB operated without accountability or transparency. It has undermined consumer protections, stifled innovation, and eroded public trust.

I encourage my colleagues to support this resolution and reassert the proper role of Congress in setting the regulatory agenda and shaping sound financial policy.

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

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

I absolutely think Members of this House should stand up for the rule of law starting with Article I, the legislative authority that we draft the statutes here and direct the independent agencies how to do their rulemakings, under what conditions to do their rulemakings, how to evaluate their rulemakings, and what is a reasonable amount of time to get public input.

We have the right, on behalf of the elected Representatives of the American people, to let our voices be known when a nonelected, to quote my good friend, the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Waters), unelected bureaucrat chooses to step beyond the bounds of the statute and do something not in keeping with process.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Flood), my good friend, who serves as the subcommittee chair for the Housing and Insurance Subcommittee.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Moore), the distinguished former speaker of the house of North Carolina, who is a new member of the House Committee on Financial Services.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, let me say that, again, we are talking about unelected bureaucrats in an agency that is not following the strict direction of Congress and have overreached in how they have proposed this rule at the last minute at the end of the Biden administration. It is truly a midnight rule with limited comment period.

Mr. Speaker, 30 days is the minimum under anybody's consideration of a fair-minded Administrative Procedure Act comment period. Yet, everything you read says that it should be extended if market participants feel like they haven't been heard, and 30 days at the end of an administration over the holiday period at the end of the year is not sufficient time for Members of Congress, market participants, consumers, and others to weigh in. I do have process concerns about how the former director of the CFPB carried on this particular proposal.

Secondly, my colleagues have talked about the substance of it and how it is confusing and steps beyond, again, the mission and the direction by Congress to the CFPB.

My good friend from California (Ms. Waters), the ranking member of the full committee, referenced several other large participant-type rules that had been proposed by the CFPB, but they were in discrete market segments.

Mr. Speaker, this is actually one of the biggest concerns about this proposal. It is a wide variety of digital payment services from peer- to-peer apps, to a digital wallet, to e-commerce tools, like the gentleman from Nebraska talked about, as if they are identical simply because they facilitate a certain number of payments, but they are not substantively the same. They can't be treated identically. That is a huge flaw in this rule.

Mr. Speaker, I reiterate my support for Mr. Flood's support of S.J. Res. 28. He has worked hard on this with Senator Ricketts from his home State of Nebraska. They stand on the facts that a vote for this resolution is a vote to prevent the CFPB from stifling financial innovation with its one-size-fits-all approach and limiting customers' access to increased access to financial payments.

Nonbank providers of digital payments are already being regulated at both the State and the Federal levels. American consumers did not petition us, Mr. Speaker, to intervene in this way at the last minute in the waning days of the Biden administration. Of all the CFPB's annual complaints that they collect year in and year out, less than 1 percent even touch on this market.

This Congressional Review Act will overturn last-minute rulemaking from the Biden-Harris administration and ensure that consumers have access to innovative financial products.

Mr. Speaker, I urge all my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to support S.J. Res. 28, and I yield back the balance of my time.

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