Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. McGovern) for yielding.

Mr. Speaker, I strongly support H. Res. 430, which authorizes litigation to compel Attorney General Barr to provide key evidence underlying the Mueller report and the unredacted report itself, authorizes a civil suit to compel Don McGahn to provide the Committee on the Judiciary with documents and testimony, and, prospectively, allows committee chairs to bring civil actions on behalf of their committees to enforce their subpoenas without a subsequent full House vote when authorized by the bipartisan legal advisory group.

H. Res. 430 is key to ensuring that Congress is able to efficiently exercise its constitutional responsibilities in light of the unprecedented stonewalling by the Trump administration and a President who has openly said such things as: ``We're fighting all the subpoenas,'' and, ``I don't want people testifying.''

Who does he think he is? A dictator?

The committees have requested information that we are constitutionally

entitled to, as a coequal branch of government, and that we need to fulfill our legislative and oversight responsibilities. In the Financial Services Committee, for example, we have subpoenaed documents from financial institutions, including Deutsche Bank and Capital One, as part of our investigation into the integrity of the United States financial system, bank safety and loan practices, and anti-money laundering policies, including as they apply to and involve the accounts of President Trump and family members. So, ladies and gentlemen, in another display of stonewalling, President Trump sued to prevent the banks from complying with the committee's valid subpoenas.

I will continue to support efforts to ensure that our critical oversight is not impeded.

Who does he think he is?

Madam Speaker, I send to the desk a concurrent resolution and ask unanimous consent 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 on H.R. 1500 and to insert extraneous material thereon.

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

Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of H.R. 1500, the Consumers First Act, which restores the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, so it can carry out its mission of protecting consumers from unfair, deceptive, or abusive acts or practices by financial institutions.

The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau was created by Congress following the financial crisis in order to ensure that there is an agency in place with the sole, dedicated purpose of protecting every consumer of financial products and services and holding bad actors fully accountable when consumers are harmed.

Under the leadership of its first Director, Richard Cordray, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau was a resounding success. During that time, the agency put nearly $12 billion back in the pockets of over 30 million consumers who were harmed by financial institutions. The agency put in place important new protections so that consumers no longer had to worry about exploding mortgages, hidden prepaid card fees, or unnecessary foreclosures due to weak servicing standards.

The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau also helped to take the confusing jargon out of various financial

products, such as student loans, by creating tools students can use to compare financial aid and costs when deciding where to go to college.

But Donald Trump and his appointees have made it their mission to destroy the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau from within. Mick Mulvaney, who was Trump's Director of the Office of Management and Budget before Trump inappropriately installed him as Acting Director of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, made it his mission to dismantle the agency from the inside. In fact, enforcement actions have fallen by 75 percent under Trump's appointees, there have been zero public fair lending enforcement actions, Mulvaney originally requested zero dollars from the Fed to fund the CFPB, and the number of employees at the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau has declined by 10 percent.

I introduced the Consumers First Act to fix the damage that Mulvaney caused at the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. For example, Mulvaney stripped the Office of Fair Lending and Equal Opportunity of its supervisory enforcement powers. The Consumers First Act restores those powers.

Mulvaney fired the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau's consumer advisory board. The Consumers First Act restores and strengthens the advisory panel to ensure consumers are heard by the agency's leadership.

Mulvaney stacked the senior leadership of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau with ideological political appointees. The Consumers First Act limits the number of political appointees at the agency.

Mulvaney stopped the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau from supervising its regulated entities for compliance with the Military Lending Act, which is in place to prevent servicemembers from being ripped off. The Consumers First Act directs the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau to promptly resume Military Lending Act exams.

Mulvaney worked to hide the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau's consumer complaint database from the public. The Consumers First Act requires that the consumer complaint database remain publicly accessible so that there is transparency about the complaints consumers are making about financial institutions.

H.R. 1500 puts consumers first by reversing the harmful actions Mulvaney took that we are aware of one by one. Over 50 consumer, civil rights, and labor organizations support the Consumers First Act.

The harm at the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau is continuing under Director Kathy Kraninger, who appears to be following Mulvaney's lead by rolling back payday lending protections and reducing the collection of the Home Mortgage Disclosure Act, or HMDA data, which is used to identify discrimination in lending. And she is just getting started. Following general debate on the bill, the House will debate several amendments to undo the harmful actions taken by Director Kraninger.

Congress will not tolerate the Trump administration's anticonsumer actions, and H.R. 1500 will ensure that the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau is able to fulfill its statutory mission to put consumers first.

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

Committee on Education and Labor, House of

Representatives,

Washington, DC, May 17, 2019.

Hon. Maxine Waters,

Chairwoman, House Committee on Financial Services,

Washington, DC.

Dear Chairwoman Waters: I write concerning H.R. 1500, the

``Consumers First Act.'' This bill was primarily referred to

the Committee on Financial Services, and secondarily to the

Committee on Education and Labor. As a result of your having

consulted with me concerning this bill generally, I agree to

forgo consideration of the bill, so the bill may proceed

expeditiously to the House floor.

The Committee takes this action with our mutual

understanding that by foregoing consideration of H.R. 1500,

we do not waive any jurisdiction over the subject matter

contained in this or similar legislation, and we will be

appropriately consulted and involved as the bill or similar

legislation moves forward so we may address any remaining

issue within our Rule X jurisdiction.

In agreeing to forgo consideration, I respectfully request

your support for the appointment of outside conferees from

the Committee on Education and Labor should this bill or

similar language be considered in a conference with the

Senate.

Finally, I would appreciate a response confirming this

understanding and ask that a copy of our exchange of letters

on this matter be included in the Congressional Record during

floor consideration thereof.

Very truly yours,

Rep. Bobby Scott,

Chairman.

Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Carolyn B. Maloney) the chair of the Subcommittee on Investor Protection, Entrepreneurship, and Capital Markets.

(Mrs. CAROLYN B. MALONEY of New York asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Mr. Chair, we have no regrets about how we organized the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, and the supervisory authority is already in law. All they have to do is implement it.

Mr. Chair, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Clay), the chair of the Subcommittee on Housing, Community Development and Insurance on the Financial Services Committee.

Mr. Chair, it is absolutely unbelievable that the Republicans on the opposite side of the aisle now talk about wanting to work with us after they have done everything possible to undermine the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.

We move ahead with restoring it from all the harm that has been done to it.

Mr. Chair, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. David Scott), a leading senior member of the Financial Services Committee.

Mr. Chair, this is a consumer bill. My friends on the opposite side of the aisle who would try to kill this bill evidently do not understand that the day is over when predatory lending will go forth in this body.

Mr. Chair, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Ohio (Mrs. Beatty), the chair of the Subcommittee on Diversity and Inclusion on the Financial Services Committee.

Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Garcia), a member of the Financial Services Committee.

Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Wisconsin (Ms. Moore), a member of the Ways and Means Committee and always a strong leader on consumer protection issues.

Mr. Chair, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Takano), a strong defender of consumers.

Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Doggett), a senior member of the Ways and Means Committee.

Madam Chair, I would like to inquire as to how much time is remaining.

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

Madam Chair, I am so proud of this legislation, I am so proud of the members of the Financial Services Committee, and I am so proud of our Democratic Caucus. We have strong support for this legislation. I am so proud of the over 50 consumer, labor, and civil rights organizations who strongly support H.R. 1500, the Consumers First Act.

It has been said more than once today that we went through a recession here in this country--almost a depression--in 2008 when predatory lending from the major financial institutions in America caused this recession and caused us to have communities that were devastated--boarded up homes--we had communities, not only where the homes were boarded up, but the weeds were growing up, in many instances animals had taken over the property, and many consumers and homeowners who lost these homes really did not know what had happened to them.

It was predatory lending. It was the tricks that were fostered on innocent people who simply wanted to live the American Dream and own a home. They signed on the dotted line for products and mortgages they didn't understand and could not afford. And they were led into signing on the bottom line because we had predatory lenders who wanted to get them into a situation where they could get some money, perhaps up front, and sell off the products that they were getting signed on up to Wall Street, et cetera, et cetera.

Of course, we worked for 2 years, and it was in 2010 that we were able to put the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau together, which is indeed the centerpiece of the Dodd-Frank reforms. So we had Mr. Cordray who was our first Director who did a magnificent job, and it has been cited here time and time again.

My friends on the opposite side of the aisle have done everything that they could do to dismantle the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, and, Madam Chair, none of them are going to vote for this bill today. None of them will criticize the big banks on Wall Street and others who took advantage of our consumers.

Madam Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

No, I am not prepared to close.

Madam Chair, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Green), who is the chair of the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations on the Financial Services Committee.

Madam Chairwoman, I yield myself such time as I may consume to just say that we send a message from this House today, and our message that we are sending out across this Nation is that we are now in a position to undo what has been done and the wreckage that has been caused with our Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.

We send a message that the day for predatory lending is over.

We send the message despite the fact that we have Members of this House who would dare not stand up for students and servicemembers and not criticize what has happened to consumers in the way that it has happened in this country. And so I want that message to be loud and clear.

I want those on Wall Street and the major banks who had the predatory products and who had the exotic loans, I want all those who mismanaged the way that they deal with our students when our students had complaints and they looked for someone to help them, I want all of them to know, well, I suppose, there is a new sheriff in town.

We are going to make sure that the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau is strong, that it is not simply made up of political appointees, and that they do not have to worry in the way that they are worrying now. We have personnel who have quit the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau because it was not carrying out the mission that was intended.

Again, I have said earlier how proud I am to have this bill on the floor and to have the support of the Democratic Caucus.

I would just ask my friends on the opposite side of the aisle to think about what is going on and to think about ways that they can begin to take into consideration their constituents who need protection, and prior to our legislation there was no protection for consumers.

Madam Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Chair, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Lynch).

Madam Chair, may I inquire how much time is remaining.

Madam Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Chair, I am so proud that, today, we are going to stand up for consumers on this side of the aisle. It is unfortunate that our friends on the opposite side of the aisle have not seen fit to support consumers. They will all vote against this bill. We will vote for this bill on this side of the aisle.

Madam Chair, again, I urge my colleagues to come to the floor quickly and vote for consumer financial protection, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Madam Chair, I claim the time in opposition to amendment No. 6.

Madam Chair, this amendment would take the widely successful consumer complaint database dark, hiding from the public how consumers report personally being harmed by financial institutions.

The Dodd-Frank Act required the CFPB to establish a consumer complaint database to provide consumers with the opportunity to report complaints about financial products and services.

A public database empowers consumers to seek redress when harmed and benefits the public by providing firsthand stories to help other consumers to avoid similar harms.

A public database also promotes market discipline and encourages financial firms to treat their consumers fairly. The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau has received over 1.5 million consumer submissions, with a 97 percent response rate by financial firms to the consumer complaints.

This means that the American people know, need, and use this function. Taking this away from the public only harms hardworking people in need of help and benefits the bad actors.

Through its research, education, market monitoring, and the much-used consumer complaint database, the CFPB has been able to directly address problems in the market and issues that directly harm hardworking families. This is especially useful for the millions of consumers who, unfortunately, do not have the financial means, time, or access to the judicial court system.

Mandating that the consumer complaint database remain transparent and publicly accessible is an important aspect of this bill and will promote better conduct from providers of financial services across this country. Thus, I urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment to H.R. 1500, the Consumers First Act.

Madam Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Chair, may I inquire as to how much time I have remaining.

Madam Chair, I yield myself the balance of my time.

Madam Chair, I would like to reiterate my strong opposition to this amendment.

Congress must ensure that consumer complaints to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau are available to the public to hold companies accountable to the American people for their actions or lack of actions.

Therefore, I urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment to H.R. 1500, the Consumers First Act, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Madam Chair, I demand a recorded vote.

Madam Chair, I claim the time in opposition.

Madam Chair, I oppose this amendment because it seeks to limit the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau by using the appropriations process to politicize and defund the agency.

All the bank regulators are independently funded. In addition to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, the Federal Reserve, the OCC, the FDIC, and the NCUA are all funded outside of the appropriations process. In fact, so is the FHFA, the FSOC, and OFR.

Congress provided the regulators with independence from the executive branch and the appropriations process to ensure that financial regulators focused on protecting the financial system from harm.

However, ever since it was created, Republicans have focused on the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau's funding because, more than any other agency, it has helped level the playing field between Wall Street on one side and families, communities of color, older Americans, servicemembers, and students on the other.

Under the guise of the appropriations process, Republicans are seeking to do by amendment what they were unable to do for the 8 years they were in power, eliminate the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau entirely.

To that end, Mulvaney's first request for funds to be transferred from the Federal Reserve to fund the CFPB's operations was zero. He later asked Congress to turn the CFPB, which he previously called a ``sick, sad'' joke of an agency, into an appropriated one.

In addition, Republicans often point to the Securities and Exchange Commission, which is subject to annual appropriations, as an example we should follow. What they seem to forget is that during Trump's 35-day shutdown, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau remained open while the SEC was effectively shuttered.

Advocacy groups like Americans for Financial Reform also point out that ``big banks would be able to use the politically charged appropriations process to deny funding for rule-writing or enforcement actions that Wall Street particularly dislikes. They could simply starve the agency of the basic funds it needs to do its job or threaten to do so in order to intimidate the agency out of taking actions to curb abuses by powerful companies.''

The difference with Mulvaney and the Trump administration is that they have purposely sought to ignore or disregard the law and the independence Congress tried to create. Mulvaney, who reports directly to Trump, clearly ignored the law when he directed the agency to stop supervising banks for violations of the Military Lending Act.

Nevertheless, I am not surprised that Republicans' efforts to reform the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau involve trying to starve the agency of funding.

Madam Chair, Democrats want to ensure the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau can do and is doing its jobs and puts consumers first. This amendment does exactly the opposite, and I urge my colleagues to oppose it.

Madam Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Chair, I yield myself the balance of my time.

Madam Chair, I would like to reiterate my strong opposition to this amendment.

Today, the House is trying to return the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau to its mission of putting consumers first. This amendment, instead, is meant to slow down and ultimately starve the agency by using the appropriations process.

Madam Chair, my friends on the opposite side of the aisle have tried everything they could try to dismantle the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. I think it is odd that they would spend their time opposing what is good for consumers and, yet, embracing the very institutions that caused us to have a recession in 2008 and to harm the American people.

Madam Chair, I ask that everyone oppose this amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

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

Mr. Chairman, my amendment requires the Department of Health and Human Services to submit to Congress a report on the extent to which increases on prescription drug prices may have caused Medicare beneficiaries to forego recommended treatment, including failing to fill their prescriptions.

Drug prices have increased significantly over the past year. The Center for American Progress reported that nearly 30 drug companies announced last year that price increases will take effect in January.

Pfizer alone announced that it would raise the prices of 41 different drugs. Critical medications, including insulin and opioid addiction treatments, have already seen dramatic price increases this year.

These price increases are taking a toll on patients. The Kaiser Family Foundation reported that among those currently taking prescription drugs, 24 percent of adults and 23 percent of seniors say it is difficult to afford their prescription drugs. This includes about one in ten respondents who say it is very difficult.

The Kaiser Family Foundation also found that certain groups are much more likely to report difficulty affording medication, including those who are spending $100 or more a month on their prescriptions, that is 58 percent; those who report being in fair or poor health, about 49 percent; those who take four or more prescription drugs, 35 percent; and those with incomes less

than $40,000 per year, representing 35 percent.

Furthermore, 29 percent of all adults report not taking their medicines as prescribed at some point in the past year because of the cost, and 8 percent say their condition got worse as a result of not taking their prescriptions as recommended.

Needless to say, when Medicare beneficiaries cannot afford their medications, their health will suffer.

My amendment requires HHS to study the impact of increases in prescription drug prices on Medicare beneficiaries and their health.

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

Mr. Chairman, we have had extensive discussions throughout this Congress about the plight of those who cannot afford prescription drugs.

We know what the statistics are. We know the harm that is being caused to families, and we know that there are preventable deaths if, in fact, people could afford their prescription drugs.

And so I would expect all of the Members of the House of Representatives, knowing this information, understanding all of the research that has been done, the data that has been collected, to simply support this amendment in order to save lives.

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

Madam Speaker, I rise in strong support and celebration of the 54th anniversary of the Head Start program and the 25th anniversary of the Early Head Start program.

As a former Head Start teacher, I know how vital the program is to over 100,000 low-income children in California and the more than 1 million families across the country who rely on its essential services.

I began my journey at Head Start as an assistant teacher and later became the supervisor of parent involvement and volunteer services, helping parents participate and contribute to their children's educational experiences.

Head Start services include health screenings, nutritional education, and social support for families with children in the program. Early Head Start provides services like home visits to children at birth. Head Start even funds research and functions as a laboratory for early learning innovation.

From the moment I became involved with Head Start, I saw the potential it had to empower and uplift children and their families. Since then, I have worked hard to improve and expand Head Start so that this potential is realized and more families have an opportunity for a better life.

My role as supervisor of parent involvement and volunteer services provided me with insights into the unique and pivotal role parents play in the Head Start community.

I am so appreciative of the Head Start and Early Head Start programs in my home district in California. These programs basically provide resources and referral services, and research innovative new programs in the areas of childcare, development, and family well-being.

These programs serve tens of thousands of low-income children and their families, usually in communities like South Los Angeles, Gardena, Hawthorne, Inglewood, and Lawndale, and demonstrate Head Start's transformative potential.

I will continue to strengthen Congress' relationship with Head Start and parents and encourage more Members and families to become involved.

Since President Johnson first announced Head Start in the spring of 1965, the program and its services have reached over 32 million children. Study after study shows that providing early childhood education to children is transformative to their future academic success.

Children who joined Head Start graduated high school and attended college at higher rates than their siblings who did not participate in the program. Head Start participants consistently show substantial improvements on test scores early in life. Adults who participated in Head Start in their youth are less likely to be charged with a crime or become a teenage parent.

These programs are so much more than federally funded preschool programs for the youngest Americans. They are a lifeline for vulnerable communities and provide future generations a chance to succeed.

This critical program is our national pledge that every child, regardless of circumstances at birth, has an opportunity to achieve and excel in school and in life. There is perhaps no greater purpose for an elected official than working toward the realization of that pledge. I will never stop.

In addition to my support here in making sure that the funding continues and that it grows, I also focus on the oversight, supervision, and management of Head Start programs.

In the greater Los Angeles community, many of our delegate agencies are overseen by LACOE. This is a county organization.

I want LACOE to get more involved in keeping Head Start programs rather than shutting them down. I believe there must be a strong component that works with compliance and works with training to make sure that the programs meet all the requirements because our teachers, our assistant teachers, and our volunteers are doing the very best job they can do. Many of them need that kind of support. I am not so sure they are getting all of it, but I am going to pay even more attention to LACOE in the greater Los Angeles area to ensure that they are providing the kinds of services that strengthen Head Start programs and do the kind of outreach in the communities to make sure that our families know the availability of the Head Start programs.

I believe that Head Start has been one of the most significant programs of the overall poverty program, and I am one of its greatest supporters.

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 2578) to reauthorize the National Flood Insurance Program, and for other purposes.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks on this legislation and to insert extraneous material thereon.

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of my bill, H.R. 2578, the National Flood Insurance Program Extension Act of 2019.

Since the National Flood Insurance Programs' multiyear authorization expired on September 30, 2017, ideological differences have led Congress to pass 10 short-term extensions and even allowed the program to briefly lapse twice during government shutdowns.

Unfortunately, the National Flood Insurance Program is currently set to expire May 31. My bill, which I have coauthored with Ranking Member McHenry, would extend the program to September 30 because we recognize that the NFIP is critical to ensuring access to flood insurance coverage across this country. This extension will afford the ranking member and me time to complete our work on a long-term, bipartisan compromise.

Mr. Speaker, the NFIP is much more than just an insurance program. The NFIP plays an important role in disaster preparedness and resiliency by providing flood maps, setting standards for floodplain management, and investing in mitigation for our homes, businesses, and infrastructure.

According to the Federal Emergency Management Agency, everyone is at risk of flooding. That means that this is not just a coastal issue. We all have an interest in ensuring a strong National Flood Insurance Program. We need a long-term reauthorization to provide certainty to homeowners and businesses, and we also need critical reforms to the program.

First and foremost, we must do more to address unaffordable premium costs for low-income households; address the program's debt, which is unfairly burdening policyholders with millions of dollars in interest; and lower costs and fees on policyholders.

Secondly, we need to invest more heavily in mapping, floodplain management, and mitigation, which will save taxpayer dollars in the long run by helping to reduce the damage that occurs when floods hit.

Finally, Superstorm Sandy exposed numerous issues related to claims processing, including findings of outright fraud. Going forward, we must work to ensure that we have safeguards in place and mechanisms for greater accountability and oversight to ensure that claims are handled fairly and efficiently to provide relief for policyholders.

Mr. Speaker, passing H.R. 2578 is not just a stopgap measure to kick the can down the road. I have every confidence that, with this extension, Democrats and Republicans will finally break the cycle of haphazard extensions. I intend to work in a bipartisan manner with Mr. McHenry to provide a long-term reauthorization to restore stability and confidence in the market. Through a thoughtful, bipartisan process, Congress can provide real relief to families, communities, and businesses.

Mr. Speaker, I urge the adoption of the bill, and I reserve the balance of my time.

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

Mr. Speaker, I am proud to stand with the millions of families across the country who rely on the National Flood Insurance Program by offering H.R. 2578 here today.

My bill will provide continuity for the NFIP without which these families would be left unprotected in the face of increasing flood risk. What is more, without the NFIP, the stability of the housing market would be put at risk.

My coauthor, Mr. McHenry, and I offer this bill today not as a permanent solution, but as a step towards a broader plan that will reauthorize the program for the long term and make reforms to ensure continued availability, affordability, and fairness in flood insurance.

Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased for the coming together of Mr. McHenry and myself to present a bipartisan bill on behalf of all of our citizens. I urge all of my colleagues to support H.R. 2578, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 389) to authorize the Secretary of the Treasury to pay rewards under an asset recovery rewards program to help identify and recover stolen assets linked to foreign government corruption and the proceeds of such corruption hidden behind complex financial structures in the United States and abroad, as amended.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks on this legislation and to insert extraneous material thereon.

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

Mr. Speaker, H.R. 389, the Kleptocracy Asset Recovery Rewards Act offered by Representatives Lynch and Budd, will help the United States Government identify and recover assets that corrupt foreign government officials have stolen from their countries. The act does this through a Treasury-based rewards program that incentivizes individuals to notify the U.S. Government of the location of stolen assets that are linked to foreign government corruption. These assets may be bank accounts as well as luxury items, such as mansions, jewelry, jet planes, and artwork.

Law enforcement already works hard to find these stolen assets. Since 2010, the United States has fought in courts to freeze, forfeit, and ultimately recover more than $3.2 billion in assets linked to foreign corruption to be returned to the victims of these financial crimes.

There are several recent examples of corrupt foreign funds making their way to the United States. The multibillion-dollar 1MDB scandal involving Goldman Sachs defrauded the people of Malaysia. To date, the FBI has identified $1.7 billion of the proceeds of that crime, which went to purchase a yacht, museum-quality paintings, and real estate. In fact, the government returned $57 million of recovered stolen funds to Malaysia following a settlement over the rights to the 2013 film, ``The Wolf of Wall Street,'' which was financed using corrupt 1MDB funds.

Similarly, the United States helped to recover over $30 million from the sale of real estate, a Ferrari, and rare music memorabilia, which were purchased by Equatorial Guinea's President Obiang and his son with corrupt funds.

H.R. 389 would direct the Treasury to pay whistleblowers rewards from the recovered assets for helping to uncover assets like these. Encouraging and incentivizing whistlblowers would strip the bad actors of the ill-gotten gains and help victims and their countries recover from the devastating effects of corruption.

So, Mr. Speaker, I want to thank Mr. Lynch and Mr. Budd for introducing this bill to help the U.S. punish kleptocrats. For these reasons, I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 389.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Lynch), the sponsor of this legislation and a member of the Financial Services Committee.

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

Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased that Mr. Lynch and Mr. Budd have presented this bipartisan bill to the House. We must not allow the United States financial system to be a haven for stolen assets that rightly belong to others.

By incentivizing individuals to come forward with information about where these stolen assets are hidden, we ensure the financial security of our system and can help send back recovered assets to where they belong.

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

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 1060) to provide regulatory relief to charitable organizations that provide housing assistance, 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 on this legislation and to insert extraneous material thereon.

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise to support H.R. 1060, the BUILD Act, which is bipartisan legislation authored by Representatives Loudermilk and Sherman that will allow nonprofit organizations like Habitat for Humanity, offering mortgage loans for charitable purposes

to use alternative forms to satisfy disclosure requirements.

Specifically, this bill would allow bona fide nonprofits which are eligible for tax-exempt charitable donations to have the option to use the Truth in Lending, Good Faith Estimate, and HUD-1 forms instead of TRID forms required by the TILA-RESPA Integrated Disclosure Rule. They may only do so in limited circumstances where they offer a zero percent interest loan.

Currently, financial institutions that make five or fewer mortgage loans a year are allowed to use these alternative disclosure forms, including the HUD-1 form, instead of the TRID form.

This bill simply extends this flexibility to eligible nonprofit charities in very limited circumstances, even if they make more than five mortgage loans a year.

Passing this bipartisan legislation will help nonprofits do their important work in helping families in our communities build and improve places to call home.

For example, the vast majority of the more than 1,200 local Habitat organizations in all 50 States are small, community-based organizations with very small mortgage portfolios and few, if any, full-time staff and rely on volunteers for much of their operations.

The BUILD Act will help charities like Habitat help families get a home of their own, but still ensures the material terms and costs of mortgage loans are clearly disclosed to the borrower.

Mr. Speaker, I thank Representatives Loudermilk and Sherman for their work on this bill, and I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 1060, the BUILD Act.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from California (Mr. Sherman), a senior member of the Financial Services Committee and lead cosponsor of this bill.

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

Mr. Speaker, I want to reiterate my thanks to the members of our committee, Representatives Loudermilk and Sherman, for working together to craft a narrow piece of legislation that will help nonprofit organizations like Habitat for Humanity have flexibility on which disclosure forms they use when they provide a zero-interest mortgage loan to a family getting a home of their own.

I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 1060, the BUILD Act, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 1037) to increase transparency with respect to financial services benefitting state sponsors of terrorism, human rights abusers, and corrupt officials, and for other purposes.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Member may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks on this legislation and to insert extraneous material thereon.

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 1037, the Banking Transparency for Sanctioned Persons Act.

This legislation requires the Secretary of the Treasury to report to Congress every 6 months a list of the licenses that it issues to financial institutions to provide services to countries and persons subject to certain U.S. sanctions. It also provides Congress with information about foreign financial firms that similarly provide

support to those same countries and persons.

I support this bill because I believe its disclosure requirements will serve as a useful oversight tool for Congress. Today, when the Office of Foreign Assets Control, or OFAC, issues a license to a company that allows them to engage in an activity that would otherwise be prohibited by U.S. sanctions, OFAC does not disclose those licenses.

I support the bill's other reporting requirement related to foreign financial firms. These lists of foreign financial institutions can provide a useful basis for Congress to review the administration's overall sanction strategy and to press the administration to impose restrictions on these institutions to change their behavior.

When a nearly identical version of this bill was considered by the Financial Services Committee last Congress, I supported the bill's disclosure requirements, but I thought it would be counterproductive to have the information revealed publicly.

For example, OFAC licenses often contain commercially sensitive information. If companies could no longer expect licenses to remain private, they would be less likely to apply for them, which would be detrimental to humanitarian efforts.

I didn't think the public identification of these foreign financial firms would serve a useful policy purpose and could otherwise move legal activity into a shade of gray. For these reasons, a Democratic amendment was adopted in committee by voice vote to allow for Congress to review the lists confidentially.

I believe H.R. 1037, which includes this critical change from last Congress, would increase congressional oversight of U.S. sanctions activity appropriately, and I urge my colleagues to support it.

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

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

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

Mr. Speaker, H.R. 1037, the Banking Transparency for Sanctioned Persons Act of 2019, will help ensure that Members of Congress have the information they need to provide more effective oversight of the decisions made by Treasury and OFAC and the impact that those decisions have on sanctioned persons.

Mr. Speaker, I thank Mr. Riggleman for bringing this bill forward, and I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this important piece of legislation.

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

Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.

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

Madam Chair, I rise in strong support of H.R. 1644, the Save the Internet Act. The Save the Internet Act is a simple and transparent piece of legislation that will restore the widely supported 2015 Open Internet Order rules and reinstate the consumer protections previously applied to industry by the Federal Communications Commission. I am proud to support the Save the Internet Act and thrilled to see Congress doing its job and protecting consumers once again.

Across the United States, more than 129 million people are limited to a single provider for broadband internet access. Of those 129 million Americans, about 52 million must obtain internet access from a company that has violated network neutrality protections in the past and continues to undermine the policy today. This leaves over 177 million Americans, in primarily underserved communities, left without any market protection following the repeal of the 2015 Open Internet Order.

The FCC's repeal of the 2015 Open Internet Order harmed all internet users, but it disproportionately hurt people of color in underserved communities. This is unacceptable, and Congress must fulfill its duty to represent and protect Americans' interests.

My amendment would call on the Comptroller General and the Government Accountability Office to conduct a study on the importance of net neutrality and what access to the internet means to those in vulnerable communities. Specifically, it will examine the importance of net neutrality on the socioeconomically disadvantaged, individuals with disabilities, the elderly, racial and ethnic minorities, and individuals from rural communities.

By mandating that the study be conducted by the GAO, we can ensure that the data collected is transparent and free of political motivation. With this report, Congress will be able to decide for itself what the best course for it will be for the vulnerable consumer.

Over 80 percent of Americans support net neutrality and agree that an open internet uplifts the voices of people of color, rural communities, socioeconomically disadvantaged, the elderly, and disabled. It is no coincidence that all these constituencies have joined together, alongside millions of individual internet users. An open internet levels the playing field and gives all Americans a better shot at prosperity and a better opportunity to achieve the American Dream.

Madam Chair, I urge all my colleagues to support gathering critical information to help us improve connectivity for our most vulnerable Americans and to vote in the affirmative for my amendment.

Madam Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Chair, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Michael F. Doyle).

Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.

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

Madam Chair, I rise in support of H.R. 1585, the Violence Against Women Reauthorization Act of 2019. This legislation is the result of the tireless work of advocates, Chairman Nadler, of the bill's original sponsor, my colleague from California, Congresswoman Karen Bass, and most especially, the women who survived domestic violence and sexual assault and bravely shared their stories. Without their courage, this legislation would not be on the floor today.

I also appreciate the title in this bill which helps victims of domestic violence access safe housing. Women who are in dangerous situations at home need to be able to quickly transfer to alternative housing, and that is precisely what Title 6 of this bill aims to do. I understand that there are some stakeholders who have raised some questions about how the implementation of this title would work, and I will continue to work with them as this bill moves through the Senate.

Though the Violence Against Women Act has led to widespread change in how our Nation understands and responds to domestic violence, sexual assault, and sexual harassment, much work remains to be done.

Twenty-five years after the original Violence Against Women Act passed in 1994, women who came forward are still too often disregarded, disgraced, and humiliated, all because those in power know that if the stories of the trauma and abuse suffered by women are true, then everything--including their power--would need to change. My amendment is another step toward ensuring that women who speak out and refuse to be silenced are supported and heard.

Section 303 of H.R. 1585 includes the grant program that provides funds to higher education institutions to combat violent crimes on campuses, including especially, domestic and sexual violence. My amendment would create a new purpose area for section 303 grants, which allows funding to be used by higher education institutions to train employees on how to conduct victim-centered, trauma-informed interviews with the students who report being a victim of sexual assault, domestic violence, stalking, or harassment. The employee would be trained to communicate in a manner which does not blame or judge the survivor for the crimes he or she reports.

My amendment stipulates that if a student requests to have a record of their conversations with college employees and administrators, then schools which accept funding for this purpose area must offer a recorded interview. Given the lengthy record of colleges suppressing reports of sexual or domestic violence on campus, recorded interviews can be incredibly important to survivors.

Only one in five female college students report their sexual assault, and many cite a fear of retaliation and not being believed as the primary reasons they stayed silent. Students who come forward and report an assault or other crime should never be made to feel that they are at fault, that they will be punished, or that they should feel shame. College administrators should never use their ignorance as to how trauma affects young women--which can often make it difficult for a victim to recall exactly what happened and when--as a reason to discredit those who report.

My amendment will help ensure that never happens by facilitating the training necessary for colleges to better support students as they navigate what is likely to be one of the most traumatic moments in their lives.

So, Madam Chair, I urge all of my colleagues to support training to promote more effective conversations between students and college employees and vote in the affirmative for my amendment.

Madam Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Chairman, I rise to continue to try and educate my colleagues on the opposite side of the aisle about the trauma that is faced by victims of sexual assault, and I am hopeful that they will agree with me, join in this amendment, and support this amendment so that we can create the opportunity to get these conversations going so that, indeed, these women can be supported and understood perhaps in ways this has never happened before.

Madam Chair, I yield to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Nadler) who is the chair of the Judiciary Committee.

Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I thank Chairman Nadler for yielding.

Mr. Speaker, I strongly support H. Con. Res. 24, which expresses the sense of Congress that the report of Special Counsel Robert Mueller should be available to the public and to Congress.

Special Counsel Mueller has been appointed to ensure a full and thorough investigation of the Russian Government's efforts to interfere in the 2016 Presidential election and to examine any links and/or coordination between the Russian Government and individuals associated with the campaign of President Donald Trump.

He has also been appointed with the authority to investigate and prosecute Federal crimes committed in the course of and with the intent to interfere with the investigation, including perjury, obstruction of justice, destruction of evidence, and intimidation of witnesses.

The gravity and magnitude of this investigation, given that it goes straight to the heart of our democracy and involves the President of the United States, requires the public release of the special counsel's findings.

This is an investigation that affects each and every American, whether it implicates or exonerates the President. Therefore, it must be brought to light so that the American people can see for themselves the findings and determinations made by an objective, impartial investigator who has a reputation for integrity.

In addition, the report will provide valuable insight and information for the important investigations being undertaken in the House, including the

investigation being conducted by the Committee on Financial Services on money laundering and the President's finances.

Special Counsel Mueller has been appropriately deliberate and discreet in conducting this investigation. It is clear from the manner in which the special counsel has approached this investigation that he has taken it seriously and has not conducted what President Trump refers to as a ``witch hunt.''

So far, the special counsel's investigation has resulted in 199 criminal charges, 37 indictments or guilty pleas, and five prison sentences.

Whatever his prosecutorial decisions may be going forward, it is in the public's interest to be given full transparency into those decisions and the explanations behind them.

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution (H. Res. 206) acknowledging that the lack of sunlight and transparency in financial transactions and corporate formation poses a threat to our national security and our economy's security and supporting efforts to close related loopholes, as amended.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks on this legislation and to insert extraneous material thereon.

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H. Res. 206, a resolution I have introduced to inform the Congress and the American people about the persistent

money laundering loopholes and problems that continue to plague the American financial system.

I am pleased to bring this resolution to the floor in recognition of Sunshine Week. As part of Sunshine Week, the Financial Services Committee is shining a bright light on money laundering and discussing ways to strengthen our country's anti-money laundering and counterterrorism finance efforts.

Criminals like drug traffickers, human traffickers, fraudsters, kleptocrats, rogue governments, and other corrupt individuals and organizations know our financial system well and work hard to find ways to circumvent our anti-money laundering laws.

Congress has enacted numerous laws to improve the transparency of financial transactions that touch institutions in the United States and those on each end of a financial transaction. We have created reporting mechanisms, strengthened law enforcement and intelligence capacities, and promoted responsible, privacy-protecting information regimes to ensure that both the industry and the government have the tools needed to rid the economy of these illicit funds. However, there are still glaring problems and loopholes in our system that Congress must address.

The resolution that I have introduced highlights two significant loopholes that remain: the lack of transparency in, number one, the arts and antiquities industry and, number two, the real estate industry.

First, we know that ethnic and cultural artifacts are stolen and traded to garner funds for bad actors. According to the Antiquities Coalition: ``The United States is the largest destination for archeological and ethnological objects from around the world.'' We know, too, that terror groups like ISIS have looted and sold these treasures to fund their operations, which the head of UNESCO, the United Nations' cultural heritage agency, said was worth millions of dollars and conducted on an ``industrial scale.'' However, today, dealers in arts and antiquities are exempt from the Bank Secrecy Act, creating a huge loophole for bad actors to launder funds.

Second, the significance of the real estate loophole in the United States was acknowledged in 2017 by the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network, FinCEN, when it issued Geographic Targeting Orders, GTOs, requiring limited ownership information to be disclosed and reported in some high-end real estate transactions. In fact, FinCEN has noted that ``about 30 percent of the transactions covered by the GTOs involve a beneficial owner or purchaser representative that is also the subject of a previous suspicious activity report.''

The movement of illicit funds throughout the global financial system raises numerous questions regarding the actors who are involved in these money laundering schemes and where the money is going. This is precisely why the Financial Services Committee is investigating the questionable financing provided to President Trump and The Trump Organization by banks like Deutsche Bank to finance its real estate properties. The committee is also concerned that Trump-branded and managed condo buildings, for example, have taken millions from suspect Russians or individuals from former Soviet states through cash transactions, some well above the market value and many through shell companies.

Congress must close these loopholes, and financial institutions, including the biggest banks, also must do their part and fully comply with our BSA/AML laws. Although most do, we can continue to see not only failures in compliance, but also egregious acts where money laundering and terror finance are facilitated.

Further, many of our largest financial institutions have facilitated money laundering through our U.S. financial system from abroad. One scheme was carried out in Deutsche Bank's Moscow and London branches using mirror trading, in which corrupt traders in Russia managed to move $10 billion in illicit funds out of Russia by buying blue chip stocks in rubles and selling them for U.S. dollars in London. Deutsche Bank was fined nearly $630 million for allowing this mirror trading scheme to take place.

Another scheme involved Danske Bank, wherein $230 billion in suspicious funds moved from Russia and other former Soviet states through one of Danske Bank's small Estonian branches to several U.S. financial institutions.

We also know that real estate is frequently used to launder dirty money. Bad actors like Russian oligarchs and kleptocrats often use anonymous shell companies and all-cash schemes to buy and sell commercial and residential real estate to hide and clean their money.

Today, these all-cash schemes are exempt from the Bank Secrecy Act. This must stop. In passing this resolution today, we also remind our colleagues in the banking industry of their responsibilities.

In closing, Mr. Speaker, this resolution has benefited from the comments of the ranking member of the Financial Services Committee, Mr. McHenry, and other members of the committee, and I thank them for their thoughtful consideration of this resolution.

Mr. Speaker, I urge all of my colleagues to support this resolution that recognizes the need to close these loopholes and to urge financial institutions to comply with the law.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. David Scott), who is a senior member of the Financial Services Committee.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Green), the chair of the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations on the Financial Services Committee.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Lynch), a longtime member of the Financial Services Committee.

Mr. Speaker, I cannot describe how pleased I am working with Mr. McHenry and the way that he has expressed to you in his presentation how we have worked together, and I thank him for that. I am very appreciative of that, and I will continue to work on those issues that the gentleman alluded to.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Carolyn B. Maloney), the chair of the Subcommittee on Investor Protection, Entrepreneurship, and Capital Markets.

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

I include in the Record the following letter of general support for H. Res. 206 from the Fraternal Order of Police.

National Fraternal

Order of Police

Washington, DC, March 13, 2019.

Hon. Maxine M. Waters,

Chairman, Committee on Financial Services,

House of Representatives, Washington, DC.

Hon. Emanuel Cleaver II,

Chairman, Subcommittee on National Security, International

Development and Monetary Policy, Committee on Financial

Services, House of Representatives, Washington, DC.

Hon. Patrick T. McHenry,

Ranking Member, Committee on Financial Services, House of

Representatives, Washington, DC.

Hon. Steven E. Stivers,

Ranking Member, Subcommittee on National Security,

International Development and Monetary Policy, Committee

on Financial Services, House of Representatives,

Washington, DC.

Dear Madam Chairman, Mr. Chairman and Representatives

McHenry and Stivers: I am writing on behalf of the members of

the Fraternal Order of Police to advise you of our continued

support for the collection of beneficial ownership

information to

combat terrorist financing, money laundering and other

criminal activities. We strongly agree with many of the

points raised in H. Res 206 as they pertain to the collection

of this information and we look forward to working with the

Committee on Financial Services and the Subcommittee on

National Security, International Development and Monetary

Policy to address these issues, in the months ahead.

For years, the FOP has supported the collection of

beneficial ownership information and we've been proud to

partner with Representatives Carolyn B. Maloney (D-NY) and

Peter T. King (R-NY) on legislation entitled the ``Corporate

Transparency Act `` A discussion draft sharing that same

title is being considered by the committee today and the FOP

is once again prepared to support this important legislation.

Transnational criminal organizations and terrorist

operations are using our banks, financial institutions and

other means to profit from their illegal activity This is a

well-documented problem for our financial institutions and

for law enforcement as we work together to shut down these

sophisticated criminal enterprises.

Congress and this committee have played a leadership role

in identifying the problem and working with law enforcement

to develop legislation like the ``Corporation Transparency

Act.'' In addition, this Administration also agrees with this

approach--last July U.S. Secretary of the Treasury Steven T.

Mnuchin testified before this committee and stated that there

is a real need to ``have access to beneficial ownership

information for law enforcement and for combating terrorist

financing.''

The Secretary's remarks were very clear that this is a

pressing issue and the vulnerability of our financial

institutions poses a genuine threat to public safety and

national security. Under current laws, shell corporations may

be used as front organizations by criminals conducting

illegal activity such as money laundering, fraud, and tax

evasion. Legislation like the ``Corporation Transparency

Act'' and other measures identified in H. Res. 206, propose

to combat this misuse of U.S. corporations by requiring the

U.S. Department of the Treasury, specifically the Financial

Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN), to collect beneficial

ownership information for corporations and limited liability

companies formed under State laws unless the State is already

collecting this information. It is vital that such

information, once collected, be available to law enforcement

at every level--local, State, tribal and Federal--upon a

lawful request. The sharing of this information will help

speed the ability of law enforcement to investigate any

possible connection between these corporations and terrorist

funding.

All too often, investigations will hit a dead end when we

encounter a company with hidden ownership. Just as robbers or

burglars wear masks to hide their faces and make identifying

them more difficult; the criminals we are chasing in these

cases use shell corporations as masks, concealing themselves

while still profiting from their crimes. When we are able to

expose the link between shell companies and drug trafficking,

corruption, organized crime and terrorist finance, law

enforcement will be able to bring these criminals to justice

and make our citizens and our nation safer.

We would also like to raise our concerns about proposals

that would increase the monetary threshold for filing

Currency Transaction Reports and Suspicious Activity Reports,

thereby reducing the information law enforcement currently

receives. It is not clear what policy or public safety aim

such a change is intended to accomplish. Organized criminal

enterprises are already aware of the current thresholds and

often take steps to avoid triggering these alerts and

bringing scrutiny to their operations. Increasing these

thresholds may negatively impact law enforcement and

investigations into money laundering and other financial

crimes.

On behalf of the more than 345,000 members of the Fraternal

Order of Police, I want to thank this committee for its

leadership on this issue and most of all, for its willingness

to engage and work with the law enforcement community on the

collection of beneficial ownership information. By working

together, I believe we can make our financial system and our

nation safer from criminal and terrorist organizations. If I

can provide any additional information on this matter, please

do not hesitate to contact me or my Executive Director, Jim

Pasco, in my Washington office.

Sincerely,

Chuck Canterbury,

National President.

Mr. Speaker, as we join together during this Sunshine Week to highlight the importance of transparency in our economy and our national security, and the preservation of our rule of law, we cannot ignore the insidious harm that is being done by institutions like Deutsche Bank, Danske Bank, and others that facilitate money laundering and financial crime.

Kleptocracy and corruption around the world and here at home, as the Trump family and its companies have proven, can only thrive with the cooperation or willful blindness from financial institutions that move, hide, and launder their ill-gotten money, money that can come in and out of the financial system through investments in real estate, art, and other luxury markets across America.

I hope my colleagues on both sides of the aisle would agree that we need to close loopholes that allow criminals and terrorists to hide from sunlight and scrutiny, and I urge the House to support H. Res. 206, as amended.

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

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 1122) to authorize the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development to carry out a housing choice voucher mobility demonstration to encourage families receiving such voucher assistance to move to lower-poverty areas and expand access to opportunity areas.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, rigorous studies have demonstrated that giving a low- income family an opportunity to move to a lower-poverty neighborhood can have a profound impact, particularly for children.

For example, one study found that young boys and girls in families that used a voucher to move to lower-poverty neighborhoods were 32 percent more likely to attend college and earned 31 percent more, or nearly $3,500 a year, compared to their counterparts in families who did not receive a voucher.

Unfortunately, families with housing choice vouchers who want to move to a better neighborhood can face significant challenges, particularly if it involves moving from one public housing agency jurisdiction to another. In fact, data shows that only one in eight families with children with a housing choice voucher use their vouchers to live in lower-poverty areas.

Mr. Speaker, H.R. 1122 would help reduce barriers to mobility by establishing a demonstration program that would enable and incentivize public housing agencies to come together to come up with a regional plan to increase mobility across their jurisdictions.

This is a bipartisan proposal that was included in HUD budget requests under the Obama administration. Further, $25 million in funding for this demonstration was included in fiscal year 2019 funding bill for HUD programs, and a version of this bill passed the House last Congress 368 to 19.

This demonstration will not only provide thousands of families with opportunities to move to better neighborhoods, but it will also lay the foundation for how successful outcomes can be replicated at a larger scale across the country.

I congratulate the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Cleaver) and the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Duffy) for introducing this initiative.

Mr. Speaker, I urge all Members to vote ``yes'' on H.R. 1122, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Cleaver), the chair of the Subcommittee on National Security, International Development and Monetary Policy.

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

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased that we were able to work in a bipartisan manner on this initiative. This bill shows that we can foster new ideas and help improve services and flexibility for our citizens who are receiving housing assistance.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Luetkemeyer) for his engagement on the bill, and I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this important piece of legislation.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 974) to amend the Federal Reserve Act to require the Vice Chairman for Supervision of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System to provide a written report, and for other purposes, as amended.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members

may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks on this legislation and to insert extraneous material thereon.

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

Mr. Speaker, this is a very straightforward piece of legislation.

It clarifies that the Vice Chairman for Supervision is required to provide testimony along with his appearance before the committee.

Additionally, if the position is vacant, the bill makes clear that the Chair of the Board shall appear and provide testimony on supervision and regulation efforts.

I think it makes good sense to codify who at the Board will testify before Congress on the status of the Fed's supervisory efforts regardless of whether there is a person confirmed for the Vice Chairman for Supervision or not.

When Congress passed the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, it created the position of Vice Chairman for Supervision so that there was one Fed Board Governor who was responsible for ensuring robust rules for the Nation's largest financial institutions.

We now have a Vice Chairman for Supervision at the Fed, but the position had previously been vacant since its creation in 2010, so it is helpful to clarify how Congress will continue to be informed about developments at the Fed.

This bill already passed the House last year on a voice vote.

I thank the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Gottheimer) and the gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Lucas) for introducing this legislation.

I urge all Members to vote ``yes'' on H.R. 974.

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

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased with the bipartisan cooperation shown by this legislation and fully support the efforts of the sponsors to increase accountability and transparency.

I want to thank the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Luetkemeyer) for his engagement on the bill and, again, urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this important legislation, H.R. 974.

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