Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Texas. I rise in support of S. 2170, the Hatch Act Modernization Act of 2012. I'd also like to thank and commend Ranking Member Cummings and his work with Chairman Issa for bringing this bill to the floor on a bipartisan and a bicameral basis.

I also want to commend Senator Mike Lee for his tireless work on this, his concern, particularly on what happened in Utah, and his good work with Senator Akaka. The bill wouldn't be here today without their good work, and I commend them both for working, again, in a bipartisan way.

I am also a proud cosponsor of H.R. 4152, sponsored by Ranking Member Cummings--I'm glad to come together with him--which is the House companion to S. 2170. S. 2170 makes commonsense, long overdue reforms to the Hatch Act, which became law nearly 75 years ago. While the numerous reforms this legislation includes are all important, I'd like to highlight the critical reform made by section 2 of this bill.

In May of this year, the Oversight and Government Reform Subcommittee with jurisdiction over the Federal workforce held a hearing where members heard of the ongoing problems with the Hatch Act and options for reform. At the hearing, the subcommittee heard from my fellow Utahn Jon Greiner, an individual whose experience with the Hatch Act has become far too common and is the reason why we're here today.

In 2006, Mr. Greiner, while serving as the chief of the Ogden City Utah Police Department, was elected to the Utah State Senate. While this occasion would presumably be joyous, unfortunately for Chief Greiner, it was the beginning of a 5-year legal battle with the Federal entities charged with the enforcing of the Hatch Act. At the end of the long and costly legal battle, Chief Greiner was ultimately found by these Federal entities to have violated the Hatch Act in December 2011. Chief Greiner was not only fired by Ogden City for his violation, but was also banned by the Federal Government from serving as a law enforcement officer in Utah for 18 months.

And what did Chief Greiner do to deserve such punishment? He simply signed a required quarterly report for a Federal technology grant awarded to upgrade the Weber and Morgan County, Utah, emergency dispatch center--a Federal grant that didn't even directly benefit the Ogden City Police Department but, instead, was designed to enhance the dispatch capabilities for the entire county. Chief Greiner didn't receive a cent of the money in his paycheck nor did his department. He was simply the department and city's point of contact after one pen stroke ended an exemplary career of nearly four decades of distinguished public service.

Thankfully, Mr. Speaker, section 2 of S. 2170 will now make it possible for State and local public servants whose job is connected to Federal funding to be able to run for office--while still preventing those who are paid completely by the Federal Government from running for office.

Sadly, Mr. Speaker, Chief Greiner's Hatch Act violation, while absurd, has occurred all over the country. I'm happy to say, after this legislation is passed, it should never, ever happen again. I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this bipartisan, bicameral piece of legislation.

Again, I thank Chairman Issa for making this happen and for the work of Ranking Member Cummings.

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 4053) to intensify efforts to identify, prevent, and recover payment error, waste, fraud, and abuse within Federal spending, as amended.

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

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

Federal agencies made an estimated $108 billion in improper payments in fiscal year 2012, and that is the estimate from the Office of Management and Budget. Many programs maintain an alarming rate of improper payments--some programs above 8 percent. This is an unacceptable waste of taxpayer dollars.

I appreciate my colleague, the departing gentleman from New York (Mr. Towns), for sponsoring this piece of legislation because here we are fighting for fiscal sanity in this country, and we have $108 billion estimated in improper payments.

These improper payments occur when Federal funds are paid out that should not be paid out. In many instances, Federal funds are going out to ineligible recipients. Last year, the Inspector General of the Office of Personnel Management found that Federal retirement and disability benefits totaling $600 million were paid out to deceased individuals over a 5-year period.

The Oversight Committee and its subcommittees have held a series of hearings in this Congress on the issuance of improper payments, and I thank Chairman Issa for his leadership in holding these hearings and in encouraging this piece of legislation to be brought to the floor. The legislation introduced by Mr. Towns will help to address the concerns identified at those hearings. H.R. 4053 builds on prior legislation to reduce and prevent improper payments.

A decade ago, the Improper Payments Information Act of 2002 was signed into law, compelling agencies to identify payment errors in specific programs. That 2002 law was updated again in 2010 by the Improper Payments Elimination and Recovery Act, which required the better identification and estimation of improper payments. The bill before us today goes even further, primarily by harnessing improved information technology to reduce improper payments. It requires the administration to implement a do-not-pay initiative, and it enables Federal agencies to enter into multilateral data-sharing agreements.

I commend Mr. Towns for offering this important piece of legislation and for helping to advance the effort to reduce waste in the Federal Government.

I urge the passage of H.R. 4053, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I have no additional speakers, but I continue to reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, in closing, first let me just thank and commend my colleague Mr. Towns. This very well might be the final bill that he will introduce and that will pass this body. He is a good and decent gentleman. When I came here 4 years ago as a freshman, he was one of the most gracious and great people to work with. He was the chairman of our committee. I was a fresh newbie there; yet he helped me in every way while showing a great deal of respect across the aisle.

I congratulate him on an amazing experience here in the Congress. This is another example of a good bill that this gentleman is putting forward. I wish him nothing but the best with the rest of his career and life and everything else. We need more good people like Mr. Towns participating in this Congress. So I congratulate him on this bill, urge the passage of this bill, and thank him for his great work.

I yield to the gentleman from New York.

Reclaiming my time, again I commend the gentleman for this bill and his great career, and I urge passage of this bill.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (S. 3315) to repeal or modify certain mandates of the Government Accountability Office.

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

I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, as you know, the Government Accountability Office is a great aide to the United States Congress. They help by auditing and examining government programs and reporting its findings to Congress. They serve a valuable position in the work that we do.

The GAO is responsible for 102 recurring annual statutory mandates and receives over 700 additional requests each year. It's quite a demand on the resources that we've given them.

This bill eliminates or decreases the recurrence of several GAO reports and auditing requirements for eight Federal programs or commissions. In recent years, we've been asking GAO to do more with less, as we should; but GAO will become more efficient by reducing obligations that once served an important purpose but now needlessly consume its limited resources. Eliminating these mandates will also allow GAO to more quickly respond to Congressional requests for assistance. GAO handpicked these reports as overly burdensome with modest benefits, and the related committees of jurisdiction concur.

Senator Carper introduced Senate bill S. 3315, the GAO Mandates Revision Act, in June of this year, and the measure passed the United States Senate by unanimous consent in September. We urge all of our colleagues to support this measure.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, we urge passage of S. 3315 introduced by Senator Carper. It is a good, commonsense piece of legislation. The committees of jurisdiction concur. It is bipartisan in its approach. We urge its passage.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (S. 1379) to amend title 11, District of Columbia Official Code, to revise certain administrative authorities of the District of Columbia courts, and to authorize the District of Columbia Public Defender Service to provide professional liability insurance for officers and employees of the Service for claims relating to services furnished within the scope of employment with the Service.

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

I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, S. 1379 would grant the District of Columbia courts and Public Defender Service greater administrative flexibility in several areas.

First, it authorizes the D.C. Superior Court and the Court of Appeals to hold judicial conferences either annually or biennially, eliminating the current mandate that they always hold such conferences each and every year.

It requires magistrate judges to attend these judicial conferences.

It authorizes the D.C. courts to delay judicial deadlines in certain emergency situations such as a natural disaster.

It also allows the D.C. courts to be reimbursed by the D.C. government for certain office expenses, and it gives the D.C. Public Defender Service authority to purchase liability insurance for its attorneys, and changes the term for family court judges from 5 years to 3 years.

Nearly identical legislation was approved unanimously by the House in the 111th Congress. There is no expected cost associated with the legislation.

I would like to thank Senator Akaka for sponsoring this bill and guiding its passage in the other body. I would also like to thank our colleague, Ms. Norton, for her work in getting this legislation to the floor today. She cares passionately about D.C. and has nothing but its best interests at heart. We listen to that, we hear that, and in part, because of that, we support this legislation and encourage our colleagues to do the same.

With that, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, we urge passage, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 6364) to establish a commission to ensure a suitable observance of the centennial of World War I, to designate memorials to the service of members of the United States Armed Forces in World War I, including a National World War I Memorial on the National Mall in the District of Columbia, and for other purposes, as amended.

Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous materials on the bill under consideration.

Madam Speaker, we're about to come up on a very important date regarding World War I, and this bill, sponsored by the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Poe), H.R. 6364, is a very worthy undertaking that the Congress, I believe, should enact.

So in the spirit of that, I would like to actually recognize and yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Poe).

Madam Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Huizenga).

I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I would like to yield such time as he may consume to the distinguished gentleman from Kansas (Mr. Yoder), one of the cosponsors of the bill.

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

I appreciate Ms. Norton and Mr. Cleaver for this very bipartisan approach to something that should live in the memories of all Americans, the sacrifices that were given in this country to provide so much for us. As you know, the United States entered World War I in April of 1917 to support Great Britain, France, Belgium, and other allies. It was the first time that American soldiers went abroad in defense of liberty against foreign aggression. More than 4 million men and women served in uniform during the Great War. There were 375,000 American casualties during World War I, including 116,516 fatalities.

The upcoming centennial is an opportunity for the United States to honor the sacrifices of these great Americans. H.R. 6364 creates a World War I commission to commemorate the upcoming centennial. The bill would establish a memorial in the District of Columbia to honor those who fought during the Great War. I would also note that there are no Federal funds that are attached to the building of this. H.R. 6364 was favorably reported by unanimous consent in the Committee on Natural Resources last week, and I again want to thank Congressman Poe from the State of Texas for introducing this piece of legislation and the numerous individuals on both sides of the aisle. It is a very bipartisan approach, and I urge all of my colleagues to support this piece of legislation.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor a dedicated Border Patrol Agent and American hero who died tragically while working to keep America's southern border secure. In the early morning hours of October 2, 2012, 30-year-old Border Patrol Agent Nicholas J. Ivie died near Bisbee, Arizona, while responding to a sensor in a remote border region. He died in the line of duty of injuries sustained from a gunshot wound. We honor his service and sacrifice to the security and safety of the American people.

Born in Charleston, South Carolina on October 31, 1981, Agent Ivie later moved to Provo, Utah, where he graduated from Timpview High School. He subsequently spent two years in Mexico serving as a full- time missionary for The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. In Mexico, he not only developed a fluency in Spanish, but a great love of the people of Mexico. He eventually became certified as a firefighter and EMT because he felt it was the right thing to do. At the time of his death, Agent Ivie was living and serving near Naco, Arizona with his brother Joel, who was also a Border Patrol Agent. He died in a beautiful place among rugged terrain which he had frequently patrolled on his beloved horse and companion, Mouse.

After joining the Border Patrol's horse patrol, Agent Ivie was assigned a new mustang that had been captured in the wild, according to his brother Joel. The horse's ears were rounded because the tips had frozen off in the cold, so he named it Mouse. Nick loved horses and had a special relationship with Mouse, the horse who rode riderless in Ivie's 5-mile funeral procession ahead of dozens of agents on horseback.

Agent Ivie was an outstanding agent and, according to his family, a compassionate man. He once carried a pregnant woman with bare, badly- blistered feet for a mile and a half after she and her group of illegal border crossers became lost in the desert. He took his obligations to his family, friends and to his church, very seriously. He is remembered for his selflessness and his absolute commitment to family, country and faith. He also distinguished himself as a dedicated and accomplished agent who loved his job, his coworkers and his service to his fellow man.

We honor the tremendous personal sacrifice of Agent Ivie's family. He leaves behind his wife, Christy Lyn and two daughters, 3-year-old Raigan and 22-month-old Presley. Those around him knew he had a deep love for his wife and called his daughters his pride and joy. We also recognize his mother, Cheryl, father, Doug, four siblings: Chris, Andrea, Rick and Joel, and his stepmother Donetta. Agent Ivie was the youngest of his five siblings.

The United States of America is a beacon for freedom and liberty around the world because of the honorable and dedicated service

of agents like Nicholas Ivie and his brother, Joel. The Ivie family has endured a terrible tragedy and made an extraordinary sacrifice on behalf of all Americans and we are forever thankful.

Today, I ask all Members of Congress to join me as we honor the life and legacy of Border Patrol Agent Nicholas J. Ivie, as well as each man and woman in our Border Patrol, and all of those in harm's way supporting their efforts, who toil daily to secure our borders and maintain our safety. I also ask that we recognize the sacrifice and burdens these families endure in support of this great country. We owe them all our eternal gratitude.

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 6324) to reduce the number of nonessential vehicles purchased and leased by the Federal Government, and for other purposes.

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

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

H.R. 6324, the Cutting Federal Unnecessary and Expensive Leasing Act, or Cutting FUEL Act, of 2012 is a bipartisan piece of legislation introduced by Mr. Hanna of New York and Mr. Barrow of Georgia.

With a $16 trillion debt, Congress and the Federal Government need to spend taxpayer dollars more efficiently and help reduce costs. Federal agencies currently own or lease roughly 660,000 cars, vans, sport utility vehicles, trucks, buses, and ambulances; and I'm sure there are a host of other items as well. During fiscal year 2011, the Federal Government spent roughly $4.4 billion to maintain and operate these vehicles, including $1.3 billion in fuel costs alone. During the last 5 years, Federal agencies purchased an average of approximately 68,000 new vehicles annually at a cost of roughly $1.5 billion per year.

The Bowles-Simpson National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform recommended reducing the number of nonessential vehicles owned or leased by Federal agencies, other than the Department of Defense or the postal service, by 20 percent. According to some estimates, this proposal could save up to $500 million over the next 10 years.

The Cutting FUEL Act would reduce the government's spending on civilian vehicle purchases and leases by 20 percent and would maintain that reduced level of spending for 5 years. This reduction would not apply to military or postal vehicles, and there is an exception provided for national security vehicles as well.

Mr. Speaker, I think this is a good, commonsense piece of legislation, and we want to encourage Members to support this bill.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the chief sponsor of this legislation, the gentleman from New York (Mr. Hanna).

Mr. Speaker, I have no additional speakers, but I will continue to reserve the balance of my time.

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

Mr. Speaker, I would hope we would be very bipartisan, at least here in the House of Representatives, in criticizing the United States Senate for not acting on what has passed in this House of Representatives.

It is crystal clear from the record that it has been more than 1,200 days since the United States Senate has addressed and passed a budget. We have passed more than 30 bills that are directly related to jobs and the economy out of the House of Representatives, sit directly in the United States Senate and continue to not be addressed.

I would hope that my colleague would join me in this bipartisan chorus to say this is ridiculous. We can't do the work of the people if the United States Senate doesn't actually do their job. I think I would agree in concept that, yes, there is work to do. Unfortunately, I don't see much of that happening over in the United States Senate.

This bill, H.R. 6324, happens to be a good, bipartisan piece of legislation that reduces spending, something called for in Simpson- Bowles. It is a responsible thing to do. It sets the goal in the framework the agencies would need to comply with. It would save hundreds of millions of dollars, and yet we hear that, well, it's not a time to do this because we need to think about it more.

We're paying more than $600 million a day in interest on our national debt. If you spent a million dollars a day every day, it would take you almost 3,000 years to get to 1 trillion. Since this President took office when we had $10 trillion in debt, we're now at $16 trillion in debt, and all they're concerned about is, well, you know, we've got to talk.

We don't have time. We've got to act now. We've got to pass bills like this. It's irresponsible not to. We need to continue to call upon the Senate to actually do their job and engage in the people's work. The country will be better off.

I encourage my colleagues to join in support of Representative Hanna's bill. It's a good, commonsense, bipartisan piece of legislation with broad support. It's H.R. 6324, and I urge my colleagues to vote ``yea.''

I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (S. 679) to reduce the number of executive positions subject to Senate confirmation.

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

I yield myself such time as I may consume.

The need for reforms in the Federal appointments process is not a new topic. There is little dispute that the current nominations process has grown too cumbersome and complicated, in some cases, discouraging qualified individuals from seeking leadership positions. On average in recent administrations, only 35 of the 100 most needed leadership roles were filled within the first 100 days of the new administration, and 200 days into a new administration, only 50 percent of key national security officials are actually in place.

Nine special commissions have called for fixing the broken Presidential appointments process by starting the Presidential transition and personnel planning earlier, streamlining background investigations, and reducing the number of appointments requiring Senate confirmation.

S. 679 provides a commonsense solution that preserves the important role of the Senate in confirming key nominees but unburdens the process by relieving the advice and consent requirement for less critical positions. The bill is based on a bipartisan Senate working group commissioned to improve the nominations process, which was led by Senators Alexander and Schumer.

S. 679 eliminates the requirement for Senate confirmation for a number of executive branch positions, many of which are: one, below the assistant secretary level and report to a Senate-confirmed individual; two, do not make policy; or three, are members of part-time advisory boards or commissions.

S. 679 also establishes an executive branch working group to study and report on streamlining the paperwork required for nominations.

In addition, S. 679 requires a fixed 5-year term for the Director of the Census Bureau to coincide with the planning and operational phases of the census. The Director of the Census Bureau remains subject to Senate confirmation.

S. 679 provides a mechanism to allow the Senate to focus its efforts on installing qualified leaders to key positions in order to meet the many challenges facing our Nation.

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

Mr. Speaker, I would like to yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Gohmert).

I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, I will be, under the general leave, inserting a couple of letters. One is from Frank Carlucci, former Secretary of Defense under President Reagan, who wrote us a letter saying:

Leaving positions vacant indefinitely as appointees wait to

be confirmed is not smart management and is frankly a threat

to our national security.

Also in support of this piece of legislation, a noted conservative Senator, former Senator Fred Thompson, took a position on this and said:

I believe that this will result in an increasingly narrow

pool of potential public servants who are more likely to be

wealthy and already live in the Washington, D.C. area.

That is if we don't pass this piece of legislation. He went on to say:

In 1960, President Kennedy had 286 positions to fill in the

ranks of Secretary, deputy secretary, under secretary,

Assistant Secretary, and administrator; and by the end of the

Clinton administration, there were 914 positions with these

titles.

As was noted by the gentleman from Texas, there is an argument to say a lot of these positions shouldn't even be in the Federal Government. But nevertheless, under the Constitution, the Constitution says under article II, section 2, the appointments clause--I'll cut right to the phrase I would like to refer to which is:

Congress may by law vest the appointment of such inferior

officers, as they think proper.

Therefore, as I read the Constitution, we have a duty and a responsibility to review this and look at this. So here you have a situation where 79 Senators in a very bipartisan way came together after nine different commissions and looking at things and decided to trim it back a little bit. There will still be over a thousand Senate- confirmed positions. But if we want proper oversight, if we want to go through this process in a swift and timely manner, if we want oversight, let's focus on what's most important.

What's most important probably doesn't require Senate confirmation for the Assistant Secretary for Public Affairs. How about the administrator of St. Lawrence Seaway Development Corporation, or the National Council on Disability, or the Office of Navaho and Hopi Relocation? These are positions that, while are important to our Nation, and some would argue are vital, probably don't necessarily rise to the level that requires Senate confirmation. These should not just be used as political tools. This Nation has business at hand, and we should focus on what's important.

Again, there are still more than a thousand appointments that will require Senate confirmation. But let's listen to our colleagues in the Senate. Seventy-nine of them came here and said we think this is good. There have

been nine different commissions looking at this. I think it's a valid recommendation. It still allows for the advice and consent within the Senate. It is a duty under the Constitution to do this.

I would encourage adoption of this. I think it is common sense. It is what our friends in the Senate are asking us to do with 79 Senators coming together to urge the adoption of this.

And with that, I yield back the balance of my time.

Frank C. Carlucci,

McLean, Virginia, June 1, 2011.

Hon. Harry Reid,

U.S. Senate, Hart Senate Office Bldg., Washington, DC.

Hon. Mitch McConnell,

U.S. Senate, Russell Senate Office Bldg., Washington, DC.

Hon. Charles Schumer,

U.S. Senate, Hart Senate Office Bldg., Washington, DC.

Hon. Lamar Alexander,

U.S. Senate, Dirksen Senate Office Bldg., Washington, DC.

Dear Senators Reid, McConnell, Schumer and Alexander: I am

writing to commend you for your leadership and bipartisan

approach to tackling one of the great challenges facing our

government--presidential appointments and nominations reform.

There is little dispute that the current nominations process

has grown too cumbersome and complicated, and the number of

political appointees is too large. S. 679, the Presidential

Appointment Efficiency and Streamlining Act, and S. Res. 116

are a promising show of progress, and I encourage all

Senators to support this bipartisan legislation.

As former Secretary of Defense (under President Reagan), I

know the importance of having high quality leaders in place

within an agency. Leaving positions vacant indefinitely as

appointees wait to be confirmed is not smart management, and

is frankly a threat to our national security. We need strong

leaders installed quickly in agencies to ensure our

government is ready to meet the many challenges it faces. S.

679 and S. Res. 116 together present a common-sense solution

that preserves the important role of the Senate in confirming

key nominees, but unburdens the process by relieving the

advice and consent requirement for less critical positions.

Congress would be wise to act now, before the politics of

the next election cycle get in the way of practical reforms

to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of our federal

government. I urge the Senate to swiftly pass both S. 679 and

S. Res. 116 to ensure our government has its senior leaders

in place within agencies to carry out critical missions.

Sincerely,

Frank Carlucci.

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 4365) to amend title 5, United States Code, to make clear that accounts in the Thrift Savings Fund are subject to certain Federal tax levies, as amended.

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

I yield such time as she may consume to the gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Buerkle), the prime sponsor and author of this piece of legislation.

Mr. Speaker, this is a good, commonsense piece of legislation, and I urge its adoption.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (S. 300) to prevent abuse of Government charge cards, as amended.

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

General Leave

I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the bill under consideration.

S. 300 puts commonsense controls on the users of government charge cards which allow Federal workers to purchase goods and to travel in a timely and cost-efficient manner. In any economy, but especially the one we're in now, there is no room for waste, much less fraud and abuse. These safeguards will make all users of Federal charge cards accountable for their use.

While the use of charge cards has saved the Federal Government both time and money when compared to a paper reimbursement system, some Federal employees have abused their purchase and travel card privileges, resulting in unnecessary and sometimes fraudulent expenses.

Numerous GAO reports over the last decade have called for additional controls to prevent waste, fraud, and abuse in the government charge card program. In 2008, GAO estimated that nearly 41 percent of purchase card transactions failed to meet basic internal control standards.

Senator Grassley has put the spotlight on the problematic use of government charge cards for more than a decade, and the GAO has documented fraudulent purchases made by Federal workers with these cards, including jewelry, gambling, cruises, and even the tab at gentlemen's clubs. Government charge cards were used to pay for the infamous GSA 2010 Western Regional Conference.

The Oversight Committee was able to work on a bipartisan basis with the Armed Services Committee to bring Senator Grassley's bill, S. 300, to the floor today. The bill brings needed accountability to the process by which the Federal Government manages charge cards used by Federal employees.

S. 300 requires agencies to improve their internal controls for government charge cards. It is based largely on GAO's recommendations for preventing waste, fraud, and abuse. The additional safeguards resulting from the bill will avoid the waste of millions of dollars of taxpayer money on fraudulent or questionable purposes. The controls also help ensure the Federal Government benefits from rebates available from charge card vendors for prompt payment.

S. 300 requires agency inspectors general to periodically conduct risk assessments and perform audits to identify potential abuse of government charge cards. The bill also requires agencies to take appropriate disciplinary action, including removal, for Federal employees who misuse charge cards. This provision responds to GAO investigations that found inconsistent or nonexistent consequences for Federal employees who abuse these charge card privileges.

I will be placing into the Record a jurisdictional exchange of letters between the Committee on Armed Services and the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.

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

Committee on Armed Services,

House of Representatives,

Washington, DC, February 14, 2012.

Hon. Darrell E. Issa,

Chairman, Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, House

of Representatives, Washington, DC.

Dear Chairman Issa: I am writing to you concerning the bill

S. 300, Government Charge Card Abuse Prevention Act of 2011,

as amended. This legislation includes provisions that deal

with the Department of Defense policies regarding government

charge cards which fall within the Rule X jurisdiction of the

Committee on Armed Services.

Our committee recognizes the importance of S. 300, and the

need for the legislation to move expeditiously. Therefore,

while we have a valid claim to jurisdiction over this

legislation, the Committee on Armed Services will waive

further consideration of S. 300. I do so with the

understanding that by waiving consideration of the bill, the

Committee on Armed Services does not waive any future

jurisdictional claim over the subject matters contained in

the bill which fall within its Rule X jurisdiction. I

appreciate your willingness to work with the Committee on

Armed Services to incorporate modifications requested by the

Office of the Secretary of Defense to the legislation to be

considered in the House. I request that you urge the Speaker

to name members of this committee to any conference committee

which is named to consider these provisions.

Please place this letter and your committee's response into

the Congressional Record during consideration of the measure

on the House floor. Thank you for the cooperative spirit in

which you have worked regarding this matter and others

between our respective committees.

Sincerely,

Howard P. ``Buck'' McKeon,

Chairman.

I appreciate the great work Senator Grassley has done on this bill. I urge its adoption. I think

we can do so in a bipartisan way, and I urge a ``yes'' vote.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 828) to amend title 5, United States Code, to provide that persons having seriously delinquent tax debts shall be ineligible for Federal employment, as amended.

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

I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, almost every Federal employee that I have run into, they're good, hardworking, patriotic people trying to do the right thing; but unfortunately we have a few that really aren't doing the right thing.

I want to highlight a problem that we see out there. There are those Federal employees that are delinquent on their Federal taxes. Now, this becomes egregious, I think, because of the nature of their employment-- they're working for the Federal Government, they're being paid by the Federal taxpayers, and yet they're not paying their own Federal taxes.

Unfortunately, over the course of time this situation has not gotten better. People are dealing with very difficult situations, they have adopted something or somehow in their life they've gotten upside down. The nature and the spirit of this bill, the bill that I am the chief sponsor on, is to find those people who are trying to do the right thing--they're trying to rectify it, they're trying to come up with a plan--we're not going after those people. But for the other group of people who are just totally ignoring the law

and they're not living up to their obligation, they're not paying their Federal taxes, there ought to be more of a consequence.

The number of delinquent employees has remained fairly consistent since the year 2004. Remarkably, there were 102,794 employees who were delinquent with their Federal taxes back in 2004. Fast forward to 2010, that number is still 98,291. In fact, nearly 700 people on Capitol Hill are delinquent on their Federal taxes. Unfortunately, the dollar amount of these delinquencies from 2004, which was $599.8 million, has grown to over $1 billion--in fact, it's $1.034 billion unpaid taxes from Federal employees.

So, employees who consciously ignore the channels and processes in place to fulfill their tax obligations must be held accountable. The Federal Employee Tax Accountability Act addresses noncompliance with our tax laws by prohibiting individuals with seriously delinquent tax debt from Federal civilian employment. This should be common sense, and I hope it's bipartisan.

Most taxpayers, including government employees, file accurate tax returns and pay the taxes they owe on time, regardless of their income. Federal employees and individuals applying for Federal employment should do the same--always.

In 2010, the most recent year for which the IRS data is available, more than 98,000 civilian Federal employees owed more than $1 billion in taxes. The average delinquency rate for Federal civilian employees was 3.33 percent, up from 2.29 percent in 2008.

The vast majority of Federal workers who owe taxes owe them from income that they earned. The intent of this bill is simple. If you're a Federal employee or an applicant for Federal employment, you should be making a good faith effort to pay your taxes or to dispute them, as taxpayers have the right to do.

Under this bill, H.R. 828, individuals having seriously delinquent tax debts are ineligible for Federal civilian employment in the executive and legislative branch. ``Serious tax delinquent'' is defined as an outstanding Federal debt for which the notice of lien has been filed publicly.

H.R. 828 exempts employees who are working to settle tax liabilities by excluding Federal tax debts that are being paid in accordance with an installment agreement, offer of compromise, or wage garnishment; for which a due process hearing or request for relief from joint and several liability is requested or pending; or for which relief has been granted. So, there are exceptions. We're not trying to cut somebody off at the knees if they're trying to do the right thing.

The bill requires individuals applying for Federal jobs to certify that they are not seriously delinquent in their taxes. Agencies will also conduct periodic reviews of public records for tax liens. And individuals with seriously delinquent tax debt may avail themselves of existing due process rights, including before the Merit Systems Protection Board. In addition, individuals will have 6 months to demonstrate that their tax debt is not ``seriously delinquent.''

The bill also provides a financial hardship exemption for employees. Federal employees are called to account for paying taxes by the code of ethics for the executive branch. The code of ethics dictates that Federal employees must ``satisfy in good faith their obligations as citizens, including all just financial obligations, especially those such as Federal, State or local taxes that are imposed by law.'' Thus, the necessity of this situation. Unfortunately, it's getting worse, it's not getting better.

We have an obligation, I think, to the American taxpayers and to the overwhelming majority, the 96-plus percent of Federal workers, who are doing the right thing. Thus, I urge the adoption of this bill.

I reserve the balance of my time.

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

There is a need for this. I wish there wasn't a need for this. There are other more pressing things that we should be focused on. But this is $1 billion in uncollected taxes, taxes that are due by Federal workers.

Again, I don't want to disparage the reputation of all Federal employees, but this small group--in excess now of 3 percent of our Federal workers--is putting tarnishment on those other employees.

I want to point to a January 23, 2012, Federal Eye article--Ed O'Keefe is the author. Let me read a paragraph from his article. He said:

But on Capitol Hill, 684 employees, or almost 4 percent, of

the 18,000 congressional staffers owed taxes in 2010, a jump

of 46 workers from 2009. Four percent of House staffers owed

$8.5 million, and 3 percent of Senate employees owed $2.1

million, the IRS said.

We actually get a report from the IRS, and it has a breakdown of the number of employees by department who aren't paying their Federal taxes. The Department of Treasury, they have one of the lowest percentages. Less than 1 percent of their employees don't pay their taxes, but they still have 1,181 employees at the Department of Treasury who aren't paying it. There's an uncollected $9.3 million.

At the Federal Reserve, the Board of Governors, smaller in terms of their numbers, but you still had 91 employees at the Federal Reserve not paying their taxes--4.86 percent of their employees not paying over $1.2 million in taxes.

If you go on and look here, this one is my personal favorite. The U.S. Office of Government Ethics has the worst compliance rate of our Federal workers. If you put that in a movie, you wouldn't believe it. But nearly 6.5 percent of their employees don't pay their Federal taxes, the U.S. Office of Government Ethics.

Unfortunately, there is a need for this.

I would like to highlight, we did this in a very bipartisan way within committee. There was an amendment offered by Mr. Lynch of Massachusetts, who I have the greatest respect for. He offered an amendment. We accepted that. When we accepted that, he was quoted as saying, and I quote from Mr. Lynch:

With that refinement here, a friendly amendment, I

certainly would vote for the bill if the amendment were

included.

I hope we can do this in a bipartisan way. We have an obligation, a duty to do this.

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

Mr. Speaker, let me say, in conclusion here, look, if Federal workers aren't paying their Federal taxes, they should be fired. If they're

not paying their Federal taxes and they want employment here, they should not be employed as Federal workers.

We have a duty and an obligation. This is a billion dollar problem in search of a solution. This is the solution. We should do so in a bipartisan way.

And with that, I urge the adoption of this bill.

I yield back the balance of my time.

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

I thank the chairman.

I also want to appreciate and congratulate Dr. Ron Paul for his tireless pursuit of this openness and transparency. Without his leadership, we wouldn't be at this point today, and I applaud him and thank him for that.

Some would say that the Fed is already audited, but there are some key points where it is not. These include transactions with foreign central banks, discussion and actions on monetary policy, and transactions made under the direction of the Federal Open Market Committee.

If we are truly about openness and transparency in this Nation, which distinguishes us above and beyond so many others, we deserve and need to know this information.

We need also understand the imperative that is before us because the Federal Reserve balance sheet has exploded in recent years. In fact, since 2008, it has literally tripled. It's gone from $908 billion on its balance sheet to over $2.8 trillion, nearly a 33 percent annualized increase since January 2008.

The Federal Reserve ownership of Treasuries has also increased substantially in recent years, having more than doubled from January of 2008 to January of 2012, where it went from $741 billion to $1.66 trillion.

Let's understand also that in fiscal year 2011, the Federal Reserve purchased 76 percent of new Treasuries. Certainly the American people and this Congress deserves more openness, transparency, and at the very least an audit. I encourage my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to support this commonsense piece of legislation, and again congratulate Dr. Paul, and continue to hope for his pursuit of this issue.

Mr. Speaker, I am proud to introduce this piece of legislation. It's common sense. I think it's something that should be widely accepted.

I also appreciate the bipartisan nature in which we introduce this bill. Mr. Faleomavaega was important to this, Mr. Flake and Mr. McKeon, and I appreciate the bipartisan nature in which we introduced this bill.

As you go into Utah County, up on the eastern side of the valley there, there's this big Y representing Brigham Young University. It's a mainstay in our community and something that we're all proud of. It's also something that is easily accessible to hikers. Year-round, people will hike up this trail as they pass up and go up to enjoy a day up on the side of the mountain.

And really, in an effort to make sure that this is properly maintained, there's continuity of maintenance. This really does make sense. It's interesting, because that portion, that 80 acres that we talk about today was once owned by Brigham Young University, and that was then transferred into a trust and, over the course of time, many decades ago it was actually transferred to the Forest Service. And so, now, to actually sell it back, have that money deposited back into the Treasury to help reduce our deficit, Brigham Young University paying fair market value for that, makes sense in terms of keeping the continuity in place, making sure that the trail is well-maintained, that it's clean. It's something that people in Utah and other people coming to our State like to enjoy on a regular basis.

So the bill would restore ownership to Brigham Young University, provide long-term certainty by removing any questions about who owns the land and who is responsible for maintaining the trail, and I look forward to the passage of this.

It's important to our community, and I think a good win-win for the Federal Government as well as the residents there, particularly in Utah County.

Mr. Speaker, today I would like to celebrate and honor the life of a great American who recently passed away--Dr. Stephen R. Covey, who lived in my district and was a dear friend. He died this past week at the age of 79 with his family at his side.

Dr. Covey received a bachelor's degree from the University of Utah, a master's in business from Harvard, and a doctorate from Brigham Young University. He began his career as a university professor and then later became a world-renowned author and leadership consultant. He is the author of many international bestsellers, including The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People, which has sold over 20 million copies and has been translated into 40 languages. In 2002, Forbes named it one of the 10 most influential management books ever written, and Chief Executive magazine called it one of the two most influential books of the 20th Century. His other bestsellers include First Things First, Principle- Centered Leadership, The 7 Habits of Highly Effective Families, and The 8th Habit. In 1996, Dr. Covey was named one of Time magazine's 25 most influential Americans.

Dr. Covey founded Covey Leadership Center, a leadership training company which later merged to become FranklinCovey in 1997. Since that time, FranklinCovey has grown to operate in over 125 countries throughout the world. Whether it was with Fortune 100 CEOs, heads of state, or university and grade school students, Dr. Covey devoted his life to spreading principle-centered leadership and influenced the lives of millions.

Despite his astounding professional career, Dr. Covey always considered his family to be his most important work and greatest accomplishment. He was a devoted husband and father, and was beloved by his nine children, 52 grandchildren, and six great-grandchildren. In 2003, he received one of his most meaningful awards--the Fatherhood Award from the National Fatherhood Initiative. Dr. Covey truly exemplified the principles he taught, balancing his family and personal priorities with an extraordinary professional career.

I invite my colleagues to join me in celebrating the life of one of the world's best--Dr. Stephen R. Covey. He left a legacy to the world and his influence will be felt for generations to come.

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 4155) to treat relevant military training as sufficient to satisfy training or certification requirements for Federal licenses, as amended.

I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the bill under consideration.

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

We are here today to discuss H.R. 4155, the Veteran Skills to Jobs Act, introduced by Mr. Denham of California. I really appreciate the approach that this is taking with jobs and the economic environment as such. This is a commonsense, good measure. I think it is widely supported on both sides of the aisle, and I would urge my colleagues to pass it.

Essentially, H.R. 4155 ensures that applicants for Federal licenses receive credit for relevant training completed while serving as a member of the Armed Forces. While most licenses are issued by the States, the Federal Government does grant a number of licenses, most notably in the aerospace, communications, and maritime sectors.

After 40 months with the unemployment rate above 8 percent, we must do more to help create jobs; and with the unemployment rate for post-9/ 11 veterans at 12.7 percent, we must better support our veterans as they transition to the civilian workforce.

In April, the Defense Business Board issued a report recommending Federal agencies review military training as a qualification for their respective program requirements. H.R. 4155 is in line with this recommendation.

The bill provides some certainty to veterans during their transition from the military by ensuring their training is taken into account when applying for Federal licenses. The bill does not infringe on the jurisdiction of the licensing agency. Instead, it leaves the agency free to determine whether military training is sufficient to meet license requirements.

H.R. 4155 will reduce the licensing burden for qualified veterans, enabling them to more quickly re-enter the workforce and ease their transition to civilian life.

Again, I appreciate the work of Mr. Denham, Mr. Walz, and others in a bipartisan way to introduce this bill, and I would urge my colleagues to support it.

With that, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to yield as much time as he may consume to the distinguished gentleman from California, the sponsor of the bill, Mr. Denham.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, this is a good, commonsense, bipartisan bill. I appreciate both these gentlemen who spoke here earlier for their work on this, Mr. Denham and Mr. Walz.

The Veteran Skills to Jobs Act, H.R. 4155, it makes sense, it's good government, it's what our troops deserve; and I encourage all of my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to support this and send a strong message to the military and to the private sector to let them know that we support them, that the work they do, the skills that they learn are a value, and that they are needed within the workforce as a whole, and that the skills and the training they get--the best in the world--mean something. And we can bypass this licensing issue and get them back to work sooner rather than later.

With that, I yield back the balance of my time.

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