Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I move that the House do now adjourn.

The motion was agreed to; accordingly (at 1 o'clock and 36 minutes p.m.), under its previous order and pursuant to House Resolution 759, the House adjourned until Monday, March 5, 2018, at noon for morning- hour debate, as a mark of respect to the memory of the late Billy Graham.

Mr. Speaker, it is not every day that I get to speak on behalf of someone who has changed the lives of millions of people across the globe, but today, I do.

Billy Graham, who passed away last week, was known as America's pastor, and rightly so.

When I was spending time this week in the district, someone who is a baseball fan came up to me and said: Do you know who's got the most saves in Yankee Stadium?

I said: ``Sorry, I don't know my baseball history that well.''

He said: It was Billy Graham, in 1957.

I had to laugh to think that it was truly God who did the saving.

But let's think for a minute about Billy Graham. He was born in 1918 on a dairy farm in Charlotte, North Carolina, just south of my district. His crusades in the 1950s attracted thousands of people and shaped the beliefs of a generation by introducing many to the evangelical faith.

In July of 1957, Graham invited Martin Luther, King., Jr., to preach in front of his audience at Madison Square Garden on the issue of racial justice. This was just months after the Montgomery Bus Boycott.

Graham was a White pastor from North Carolina, and King was an African American pastor from Alabama. But both of them knew that the Lord doesn't see skin color and that the love of Christ could heal any racial division. Mr. Speaker, in today's polarized political culture, we could learn a thing or two from their friendship.

Throughout his life, he met with 12 Presidents, dating back to Harry Truman. President Eisenhower called Graham ``one of the best ambassadors our country has,'' and John F. Kennedy brought Graham in before his inauguration to express his worry over the moral and spiritual condition of the Nation.

Aside from his role in the civil rights movement and vocal opposition to communism, he uplifted the souls of millions of Americans. By introducing them to the love of Christ, Graham gave hope to the hopeless and love to those who were in need.

Mr. Speaker, while our economy now is growing and wages are rising, Americans have still become increasingly more isolated, more lonely, and more depressed. This social crisis needs to be addressed but can't be solved by a bill that we pass in Congress or an executive action by any President.

We have gotten to a point in our country where too many people put their hope in elected officials. These people will most certainly be let down, because elected officials, like everyone else, are fallen, imperfect, sinful people.

Graham knew this, and he knew that the only person who would not let us down is Christ himself, and that we should trust in him for the forgiveness of our sins and have everlasting life. This is now the life Billy Graham will enjoy forever.

Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend and colleague from Virginia for yielding. I really thank him for his leadership on this issue.

The last time I spoke on this floor on immigration, I talked about three principles: One, Americans have the right to determine who becomes citizens through laws; two, the people who do come here should be in the best interest of American citizens; and three, that we have the right to enforce those choices.

The people who do come here should be in the best interest of American citizens. That is key. What we are doing now isn't there yet. We allow, today, one individual to get a green card. Then he is able to sponsor his immediate family and relatives. And then the relatives can sponsor their relatives. Then the relatives of those relatives can sponsor their relatives and so on, until there is no one in the family left to sponsor or no one left who

even wants to come to the United States.

Potentially, this could go on forever. This is called chain migration, and 65 percent of our green cards are awarded through this chain migration. That is about 700,000 people every year gaining permanent residence in our country through no other criteria than that they happen to be related to someone who lives here.

We have no idea whether these individuals are going to be economically successful. We have no idea whether they will contribute to our country. We don't even look at those characteristics for chain migration. The important question is who the immigrant is related to, not whether or not he might help America be a safer or a more prosperous country. Chain migration does not meet that key principle. American immigration should be in the best interest of Americans.

The Securing America's Future Act ends this chain migration. It stops it for everyone except the children and spouses of immigrants. But those relatives cannot bring in additional immigrants, so the chain is broken. The Securing America's Future Act, in turn, replaces those immigrants with skilled workers, workers who could help us build a better future.

I think about it this way: there are 150 million people around the world who would say that they would emigrate to the United States if they were just given the opportunity. What a great country. We could do what we do now and let those people enter on the basis of who they are related to. That is what we are doing. Or we could let in the best engineers, doctors, nurses, teachers, and businessmen. We can let in those who could speak English well, who know our system of government, who have gone to university. But that can only happen if we end chain migration.

The chain migration proposal in the Securing America's Future Act becomes even more crucial when we look at the DACA issue. If we allow DACA recipients to get some form of residency, past history tells us that they will potentially sponsor around 3\1/2\ immigrants each. That is a 2- to 3-million-person increase in the immigrant population. That is a huge incentive for future immigrants to come here illegally.

The notion that you will get to bring your whole family over here if you manage to enter illegally is part of what led to the 2013-2014 border crisis. When the previous administration was rumored to be granting amnesty, tens of thousands of Latin American families sent their minor children north.

It was a national emergency, and it overwhelmed the Border Patrol and the immigrant processing facilities there in the Southwest. We had to pass emergency appropriations just to process these individuals. Any DACA fix that does not also include additional border security and protections against those migrating this way, they could really see a similar crisis.

Madam Speaker, the Securing America's Future Act is an incredible piece of legislation. And while I have dwelt on its chain migration provisions--and there are many more worthy reforms--this bill cracks down on sanctuary cities, which my colleague mentioned earlier. It includes Kate's Law to toughen penalties against those who are deported, come back to the United States, and commit crimes. It includes mandatory E-Verify to crack down on businesses that break the law. It ends the diversity visa lottery, one of the most senseless Federal policies that I can think of.

I thank Chairman Goodlatte for his efforts on this; I thank Representative Labrador, one of our staunchest conservative leaders in the House, for his leadership in crafting this bill; and I thank Representative Garrett for organizing this opportunity to discuss the bill.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman and my friend and colleague from North Carolina, the deputy whip, for his leadership on this very important issue.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of this bipartisan legislation, the Protecting Consumers' Access to Credit Act of 2017.

Mr. Speaker, we are on the verge of something special in the financial services space with financial technology

opening the industry up to amazing innovation. However, as many of us gathered here today know, the Second Circuit's decision in the Madden v. Midland Funding case has put this innovation and movement in jeopardy. It has done so by undermining a long-held principle which has left fintech lenders and the secondary credit market with issues that need to be addressed.

Luckily, Mr. McHenry's legislation provides a much-needed fix to the Second Circuit's decision by codifying the valid-when-made legal doctrine. This common law principle has been around and accepted in the financial services space for some time now. This bill will ensure that innovative lending practices remain intact, allowing creative and innovative sources of capital to reach the consumer and small businesses. This is important because it will help to preserve the relationship between banks and fintech firms.

I am thankful this legislation is coming up for a vote today because it is greatly needed and, if enacted, will help our economy continue to grow. This body must continue to serve as an advocate for innovation in the credit and financial technology space because, ultimately, it will benefit community development, job creation, and, most importantly, the consumer.

Mr. Speaker, I urge adoption of this bipartisan and commonsense piece of legislation.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize Jerry Myers and congratulate him on his retirement.

Since 1988, Jerry Myers has been a tireless servant of the people and impacted countless individuals throughout his community. He proudly worked for the Davie County Emergency Medical Services and has overseen countless safety initiatives and plans. Jerry has accomplished much in his career from securing grant funding from the Department of Homeland Security, successfully leading fire safety improvement efforts, and training countless individuals to impact their community in a positive way.

When Hurricane Matthew devastated hundreds of thousands of North Carolinians in October 2016, Jerry responded without hesitation. Along with a few other men from Davie county, he traveled to Raleigh to rescue citizens from rising waters. He led one of the first rescue teams in the Raleigh area, rescuing people from trees, homes, and the rising water levels. His actions saved countless lives during Hurricane Matthew and helped local emergency response teams.

Residing in Davie County, he has two children and has shown himself to be a consummate family man. Jerry is a proud member of Bear Creek Baptist Church and remains an active member in the community. I am extremely grateful for Jerry's contributions and service and I wish him continued success. As you can tell, it will be hard to replace Jerry Myers, a gentleman that has always striven to help others first.

Mr. Speaker, please join me today in honoring Jerry Myers for his service to Davie County and wish him well in his retirement.

Madam Speaker, while many of us in this body disagree on the issue of abortion, we should all be able to agree that, once a child is born, he or she deserves protection.

If a doctor attempts to perform an abortion, sometimes a baby actually escapes and emerges from the womb still living. If this real- life scenario isn't terrible enough, sometimes these babies, who are breathing the same air as you and I, are left to die and their lives are terminated right there in the medical facility.

Madam Speaker, these surviving children from this terrible procedure need our protection.

Back in 2002, President Bush signed a bill that said if an abortion results in the live birth of an infant, that infant

is a legal person for all purposes under our laws. However, this law didn't create additional protections for these surviving children.

That is why I am urging my colleagues to support Mrs. Blackburn's bill that would add additional protections. Whether it is making sure an infant is immediately taken to a hospital or mandating these doctors do everything they can to save their life, these survivors need our protection.

Madam Speaker, last year, we voted on a bill to ban abortions after 20 weeks. While I supported that bill, many of my colleagues chose not to, but I urge them to at least support this commonsense bill to protect the lives of abortion survivors.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize High Point native Heather Richardson-Bergsma for qualifying for the 2018 Winter Olympics in speed skating. Holding multiple world records, she will be competing for her first Olympic medal this year.

Heather's hunger for speed skating began at an early age. Growing up just a few minutes from our local High Point roller rink, Heather's talents were recognized by a local coach who suggested she start taking inline speed skating classes.

Although she was told she must wait a full year before she could compete, her passion and dedication for the sport did not waiver, and a year later she competed in her first race.

The Olympics mark crowning achievements in every Olympian's career. The many years, hours, minutes, and seconds they have devoted to training all come down to fulfilled dreams and broken records.

Heather's dedication, passion, and perseverance demonstrate the characteristics found in every great athlete. I am proud to recognize Heather today and I wish her the best of luck next month.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Garrett) for organizing this in support of those protesters in Iran. It is the ongoing protests that started late last month in Iran that are significant not just for their people, but also for the world.

While these protests started because of a dire economic situation in Iran, with upwards of 40 percent of its youth unemployed, it has grown to be a nationwide movement that is about much more than just the economy.

Over the past couple of weeks, we have seen the Iranian people flood the streets in favor of fundamental freedoms, economic opportunity, and a government that represents their interests, not Hezbollah's. There are even reports of people chanting, ``We don't want an Islamic Republic,'' or, ``We will die, but we will take Iran back.''

This has been a long time coming. A State Department report in 2016 found that Iran is the top state sponsor of terrorism in the whole world. Whether it is providing financial support to Hezbollah or providing arms to Islamic rebel groups in Yemen, the Iranian Government's priorities are obviously more focused on wreaking international havoc than they are on addressing the pressing issues within their own country.

And while we are talking about issues with Iran, the protesters are pleading for fundamental freedoms. For example, married women aren't even allowed to travel outside the country without permission from their husbands. They also risk being put in jail or even to death if they take off their hijab in public.

But brave women throughout Iran have been unmasking themselves during the last couple of weeks in protest. To many in our country, this may seem insignificant, but videos of these women and their courage have been shared millions and millions of times around the globe.

Mr. Speaker, those who dislike President Trump have criticized his approach to foreign policy, but these same people fail to praise his strong defense for freedom when it comes to Iran.

As soon as the protests started, President Trump put out a statement that said the Iranian people are hungry for food and for freedom. He also said that it is time for a change, and I couldn't agree with him more.

This is the opposite of the Obama administration that preached moral authority and, yet, sided with the corrupt Iranian regime and the corrupt Iranian Government when anti-regime protesters took to the streets back in 2009.

So now that President Trump has proven his credibility on the global stage by siding with the protesters, the question is: Now, where do we go from here?

Well, Mr. Speaker, first we should increase the sanctions on the Iranian Government in response to their crackdown on protesters for freedom in recent weeks.

President Trump should also strongly consider pulling out of the nuclear deal that was struck by President Obama in 2015.

We have already seen the Iranian Government break parts of the agreement, and we should have a zero tolerance for these breaks because the consequences are just too grave.

Mr. Speaker, the people of Iran are bravely speaking out against their government and they are calling for change. For the United States to continue to be a shining example of freedom and liberty, we must continue to vocalize our support for these protesters in Iran and make sure that they know that we have their back.

Again, I thank my colleague, Mr. Garrett from Virginia.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the undefeated MEAC and 2017 Celebration Bowl Champions. I'm speaking of course of the North Carolina A&T Aggie football team.

Last week, as time expired in the Celebration Bowl, the Aggies made their nation proud with a last second touchdown to secure their second Celebration Bowl victory in just three years. And with that win, the Aggies became the first MEAC team to go undefeated as they won their second HBCU national title under head coach Rod Broadway.

Mr. Speaker, `A Champion Has Risen' indeed, and that champion, is the A&T Aggie Football Team.

Congratulations to the esteemed Dr. Harold Martin, Sr., to Coach Broadway and his team, and also to the offensive and defensive MVP's of the game, Marquell Cartwright and Mac McCain for their performances.

I am honored to represent this historic and honored institution in Washington, and they have made me, their community, and most importantly, the `Aggie nation' proud with their win.

Mr. Speaker, please join me today in honoring North Carolina A&T for their historic season and national championship win.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 4015. I thank Chairman Duffy for his leadership on this bipartisan piece of legislation, which will improve our country's shareholder proxy system.

Since the early 2000s, we have seen market share and the shareholder proxy system consolidate, essentially, into a duopoly, as two firms control 97 percent of the market, so, under the current system, potential conflicts of interest abound.

For example, proxy advisory firms that provide voting recommendations to advisers often provide consulting services to those same public companies. So wouldn't it make sense that they at least notify their shareholders of this potential conflict of interest?

Well, right now, while the SEC has offered guidance on this problem, the proxy firm wouldn't be required to do so. We need to get this bill on the books just to address this problem.

This bill is also timely because we have seen proxy firms align themselves with political causes, unions, and interest groups that do not always represent their shareholders' best interests. Shareholders oftentimes aren't even aware of these conflicts. Again, reform is needed.

So it should go without saying, Mr. Speaker, that the two problems outlined above pose problems for the shareholder and for the average investor. We cannot continue to allow the security laws and processes to be wrapped in a service of political agenda.

Mr. Speaker, we have dealt with this issue in the Financial Services Committee on a number of fronts with regard to disclosure of information that is being weaponized against public companies, from mining to conflict minerals. It is time to deal with the proxy issue today.

The number of public companies has fallen in recent years. It was never easy to be public, to be subject to the financial markets and the pressures that come from being accountable to your shareholders. This issue, the proxy issue, is part of a larger tapestry of challenges that public companies face. They are increasingly choosing not to play the game. They are getting capital from dark pools; they are getting capital from hedge funds; and they are just staying private. That puts investment opportunities in the hands of the 1 percent, and that leaves retail investors out in the cold.

Mr. Speaker, my constituents and North Carolina shareholders are from the part-time trader to the full-time trader. They deserve better than this. Luckily, this body can do something to address these problems, and that is where Chairman Duffy's bipartisanship legislation comes into play. His bill will bring about much-needed accountability, competition, and, most importantly, transparency in the proxy advisory firm industry.

This bill also protects clients and their financial future from being influenced by activists and outside interest groups. His legislation accomplishes this by mandating that proxy advisory firms register with the SEC, disclose potential conflicts of interest to the shareholders, and make their methods for coming up with proxy recommendations available to the public.

Two proxy advisory firms should not have this much control of the marketplace and the power to disproportionately affect fundamental corporate transactions. This bill is a win for the consumer, a win for the free market, and should be a bipartisan priority for this body.

A number of outside commentators have been clear that the proxy industry has gained a worrisome degree of authority over companies. In fact, Columbia Law Professor Jeffrey Gordon said that the burden of annual voting would lead investors, particularly institutional investors, to farm out evaluation of most pay plans to a handful of proxy advisory firms who, themselves, will seek to economize on those very proxy review costs. There are a host of others who are saying these same things about the way things are today in proxy voting.

Ultimately, the shareholder is the one who suffers. We should put a stop to it.

Mr. Speaker, once again, I want to thank Chairman Duffy for leading the fight on this issue, and I urge adoption of his legislation.

Mr. Speaker, our policemen and -women wake up every day and do a job that is dangerous and often thankless. They are truly servants of the public and protectors of those who cannot help themselves. If that weren't enough, I wanted to speak briefly today to highlight officers who have gone even further.

Mr. Speaker, the Iredell County Fraternal Order of Police recently held a Cops and Kids event in Mooresville, North Carolina. Through their generosity, more than two dozen families got around $100 worth of toys, clothes, and gifts for their loved ones. The stories of struggle for these families, brightened by a moment of generosity, are the stories we see around the country this Christmas.

I am awed and humbled by the efforts of these officers. I want to especially congratulate Tommy Chipman, president of the Iredell County Fraternal Order of Police; Duck Wyatt, the second vice president; and all those who participated to help make this Christmas a better one for families in the community.

Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of Mr. Poliquin's bill, the Iranian Leadership Asset Transparency Act, and I thank him for his leadership on this issue.

It is not uncommon these days to see Iranian fingerprints all over the instability and unrest that plague the Middle East. That is why our own State

Department classifies Iran as a country of primary concern for money laundering and international terror financing.

Just this weekend, Mr. Chair, we saw their handiwork yet again. This time, it was Lebanon, where the now largely Iranian-backed Hezbollah influenced government called for economic sanctions on the United States. Why?

Simply for recognizing Jerusalem as the capital of Israel.

Just a few at the top in this corrupt Iranian regime are flush with cash, but they support illicit causes and terror in the Middle East, all the while the average Iranian gets by on an average salary of $15,000 a year.

Accountability for those profiting at the top, at the expense of those suffering at the bottom, is long overdue. Luckily, Mr. Poliquin's bill helps us to achieve this goal by requiring that the Treasury Department provide a report to Congress on the financial assets of these senior Iranian officials involved in corruption and illicit finance.

Also, if enacted, this bill will shed light on Iranian terror activities and let the Iranian people know how their leaders actually operate. This is a key aspect of the bill, since most news is disseminated through government-controlled outlets. True information is hard to come by.

The bottom line is this: This is an important piece of legislation that I believe will help disrupt the Iranian terror network. I urge all my Democrat colleagues to support this measure. Let's send a message to this regime that this body, the people's House, is united on this front, and let's send a message to the Iranian people that we are with them as well.

I again thank my friend, Mr. Poliquin from Maine, for his leadership on this issue, and I urge adoption of his legislation.

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of Mr. Williams' legislation, H.R. 4324. I want to thank him for his leadership on this front.

Mr. Speaker, it is no secret that much of the terror funding and the civil unrest that we see in the Middle East can be traced directly back to Iran.

Since we have lifted sanctions on that regime--and, in particular, against state-owned entities like Iran Air--we have opened up ourselves to potentially financing Iran's destabilizing activity in the region.

Congress has a right to know if banks are linked to financing or doing business with Iran, again, the world's largest state sponsor of terror.

This bill is significant, considering what we have recently seen with Iran Air. As recently as 2011, Iran Air was transporting weapons and missiles on behalf of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps; and even this year--not 2011, but this year--we have seen Iran Air continue to fly well-known weapons resupply routes to pro-Assad-controlled areas of Syria.

Iran will always continue to find new and creative ways to bypass sanctions and to fund their worldwide terror network. We have to be on constant alert. Mr. Williams' legislation gives us the tools to do exactly that.

His bill gives the people's House, this House, more oversight on business that the Treasury Department authorizes with Iran. This is important because it conveys the importance of staying alert about our financial institutions when they get involved financially with Iran.

Mr. Speaker, once again, I thank my colleague and my friend, Mr. Williams, for his leadership on this issue, and I urge adoption of this bill.

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the gentlewoman from New York's legislation, H.R. 3971, and I thank her for her leadership on this very important issue.

As many of my friends here today know, Dodd-Frank and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau have made life very difficult for many. Luckily, the Community Institution Mortgage Relief Act will, once again, solve a problem that they created, this time regarding escrow and mortgage servicing requirements.

The CFPB rule regarding these accounts has done nothing more than accelerate industry consolidation in this space, particularly causing harm to rural consumers, leaving them with even less financing options.

This bill reverses that problem, though, and will help bring local banks and financial institutions back into the picture. This bill simply lets them reenter the mortgage market and directs the CFPB to exempt them from the escrow account requirement of Dodd-Frank.

Now, though this is a bipartisan bill, some of my friends on the other side of the aisle may claim that this bill removes consumer safeguards, but I would argue that this CFPB rule that they support creates an unnecessary burden on local banks and credit unions, which, in the end, hurts local communities and people that they claim to protect with this very rule.

Mr. Speaker, I am glad this bill remains largely bipartisan and, as I said, returns power back to the community financial institutions and ensures that consumers have credit through various credit choices.

I want to thank Representative Tenney for her steadfast leadership on this issue, and I urge adoption of her legislation.

Mr. Speaker, on July 1 of 2015, Kate Steinle was walking with her father on a pier in San Francisco. While she was on the pier, she was shot to death by an illegal immigrant who had been deported five times. He had been convicted of seven felonies.

Before he murdered Kate Steinle, the Federal Government had asked the city to turn him over so that he could be deported again. The city, following its policy of not cooperating with Federal immigration officials, released him from jail. He murdered Kate Steinle 3 months later. A few days ago, her killer was declared not guilty by a San Francisco jury. For now, there is no justice for Kate Steinle.

There is a question in this, though, for all of us. It is a question we should ask when we are confronted by a terrorist attack conducted by the asylees like the Boston bombing or the San Bernardino massacre, where one of the attackers was in the United States on a K-1 visa.

The question is: Why was this person in our country? In the case of Kate Steinle, we now know exactly why: the city of San Francisco's policy. The city is an accomplice to Kate Steinle's death. It is pure and simple.

They have defied and continue to defy Federal law. They defied it in general by refusing to cooperate with Federal immigration authorities as a blanket policy, and they defied it in the specific case that led to the death of Kate Steinle.

This is a radical policy, and I don't use that word lightly. You have an illegal immigrant convicted of multiple crimes, in addition to coming here illegally five times. The Federal Government tries to send the guy home a sixth time, and the city lets him go because they ignore the law, and then he murders someone.

The results of this city's extremism is a shattered family. The result is a

father who will never see his daughter again. The result is a mother who has to face the worst nightmare of every parent. These are the terrible facts of this tragedy, Mr. Speaker, and there is nothing we can do in this body to change them.

What we can do is move forward towards an immigration policy that is based on sound principles. For the radicals, this will be a radical change. For everyday Americans, this is just common sense.

On this front, there are three fundamental principles to a sane immigration policy. First, Americans have the right to determine who becomes citizens through laws. It is right there in the Constitution. Article I, section 8, provides Congress with the explicit authority to regulate naturalization. A country without borders is not a country. It is just a geographic destination.

Second, who comes here should be in the best interest of Americans. The number of known criminals we need to be letting in is zero. The number of people who cannot read and cannot speak English we need to be admitting is zero. The number of radical Islamists and of drug addicts we need to be letting in--zero. We are ready and willing to welcome hardworking immigrants who are ready to pay taxes, to follow our laws, and to build our country together.

Third, we have the right to enforce our choices through immigration laws. We should stop sanctuary cities and enforce sanctions against those who hire illegal labor. We should build President Trump's border wall, a policy that has worked unbelievably well in Israel. Most people agree that law enforcement is an effective deterrent against committing crimes. Illegal immigration is no different.

Mr. Speaker, according to the Pew Research Center, the population of illegal immigrants in my State of North Carolina has gone up 1,400 percent from 25,000 people in 1990 to 350,000 in the year 2014. We have got to get this under control. Any country where the Kate Steinle tragedy can happen is not a country with a sane immigration policy.

I hope we never again have to ask the question after a tragedy: Why is this person in our country? Because I hope the answer will be widely known, that we have a reasonable immigration system that benefits all Americans and does everything within reason not to bring in people who will hurt us. Kate Steinle proves that we are not there yet. But I believe that we can get there one day.