Andy Barr

Mr. BARR

Mr. BARR. Madam Speaker, I have no further speakers at this time, and I am prepared to close.

Mr. BARR

Mr. BARR. Mr. Speaker, after enactment of five bipartisan COVID relief bills last year totaling $4 trillion in assistance for healthcare workers, businesses, schools, testing, and vaccines, with over $1 trillion in already appropriated funds still unspent, with an unprecedented level of monetary stimulus from the Fed already in the pipeline with no end in sight, with massive pent-up demand and an economy poised for full recovery, with the success of Operation Warp Speed delivering multiple safe and effective vaccines in record time, with literally millions of Americans benefiting from the mass distribution of those vaccines every single day, with all of these heroic efforts to defeat this virus already in place, why is it that Democrats in Congress are so determined at all costs to ram through this hyperpartisan $2 trillion spending spree with zero bipartisan support? The answer is that they are exploiting this pandemic as an excuse: An excuse to force passage of this budget-busting monstrosity, 90 percent of which is totally unrelated to COVID-19: An excuse to bail out mismanaged State and local governments for liabilities unrelated to COVID. An excuse to use taxpayer funds to fund Planned Parenthood. An excuse to send stimulus checks to prisoners and illegal immigrants. An excuse to expand the welfare state and pay people not to work. In sum, an excuse to advance an unrelated liberal agenda Democrats call the ``most progressive bill in American history'' that will lead to huge tax increases. I urge all my colleagues to vote ``no.''

Mr. BARR

Mr. BARR. Mr. Speaker, after a divisive election season, allegations of election fraud, objections to the electoral college, and impeachment, a friend of mine on the other side of the aisle recently asked what it would take to unify our country. My answer is that it is certainly not this legislation which, from my standpoint, is the most divisive, unconstitutional, and destructive piece of legislation in my time in Congress. They call it the For the People Act, but it should be called the for the politicians act because it would force taxpayers to fund political campaigns, including the campaigns of politicians with whom those taxpayers disagree. Maybe a better name would be the election power grab act because it would normalize the chaos, uncertainty, and irregularities surrounding mail-in voting in the 2020 election by centralizing the administration of elections in Washington, D.C., commandeering States to permanently expand mail-in voting without safeguards, legalize ballot harvesting, disregard voter ID laws, permit same-day voter registration without citizenship verification, among other egregious measures. Mr. Speaker, election laws should make it easy to vote and hard to cheat. This bill would not only make it easy to cheat, but it would also effectively make it legal to cheat. At a time when half of Americans have lost confidence in the integrity of our elections, this bill will only drive distrust and division higher. Mr. Speaker, for the sake of ending division in our country, I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on this power grab of our elections.

Mr. BARR

Mr. BARR. Mr. Speaker, my friends on the other side of the aisle should be embarrassed. This massive, $1.9 trillion spending spree is nothing more than a fiscally irresponsible, liberal wish list. Less than 10 percent of this bill actually responds to the pandemic in the form of vaccine distribution and other public health needs. The vast majority of this funding goes to misplaced priorities, such as bailing out mismanaged State and local governments for pre-COVID liabilities, paying people to not work, expanding ObamaCare, providing stimulus checks to illegal immigrants, and allowing taxpayer funds to pay for abortion. It is true that the legislation appropriates $130 billion on top of the $110 billion already provided to schools, but it does so without any stipulation that schools actually reopen. This is despite overwhelming evidence that it is safe for our children to go back to in-person learning. And 95 percent of the money allocated to schools will not be spent until after 2022, which means this bill does almost nothing to get our kids back in the classroom. Meanwhile, approximately $1 trillion in COVID relief already appropriated by Congress remains unspent. Mr. Speaker, I am voting ``no'' for my children, I am voting ``no'' to protect taxpayers, and I encourage all of my colleagues to vote ``no.''

Mr. BARR

Mr. BARR. Madam Speaker, I rise today in support of long-delayed legislation to deliver more resources to the American people to defeat the COVID-19 virus and provide much-needed relief from government-imposed lockdowns of the economy. Ultimately, no amount of government spending can substitute for a fully functioning, open economy free of government lockdowns. But I am confident this relief package, which provides over $284 billion to reload and strengthen the Paycheck Protection Program, will help bridge the gap until COVID-19 vaccines are widely distributed. It does so in a fiscally responsible way by rescinding and reallocating $429 billion in Federal Reserve emergency lending authority, and it repurposes unused PPP funds. Importantly, this bill provides effective, targeted relief, with a net price tag of approximately $325 billion in new outlays. It does not include the liberal wish list that was the centerpiece of the Speaker's originally $3.4 trillion Heroes Act, a fiscally reckless proposal that needlessly delayed this reasonable bipartisan compromise. For months, I have called on Congress and the administration to simplify the PPP forgiveness application for small businesses to ease their burdens and ensure lender participation. Today, that goal becomes a reality. I also support the bill's extension of troubled debt restructuring relief, which allows lenders to work with their borrowers to modify loans. And I strongly support its provision to ensure small businesses can deduct expenses covered by PPP loans. While it has taken far too long to get to this point, the bill we are passing today will bring much-needed help to American workers, families, and small businesses, without putting more massive amounts of debt on the American people. Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on this bill.

Mr. BARR

Mr. BARR. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to express concern with a trend that could harm our financial system, crush jobs, and have lasting negative impacts on American competitiveness and economic exceptionalism. Many on the other side of the aisle are calling for financial regulators to inject climate risk scenarios into bank supervision, and a new administration will likely prioritize weaponizing financial regulation to achieve unrelated climate goals. Radical climate activists are incapable of passing the Green New Deal through Congress because most Americans understand it will destroy jobs, increase energy costs, and destabilize our economy at a time of immense fragility and volatility, so they will undoubtedly turn to financial regulation and supervision as a backdoor to implement their climate agenda. Earlier this year, a group of Democrat Senators put these ideas to paper in a partisan report, calling on all Federal financial regulators to infuse ill-defined climate scenarios into their supervision of banks and to discourage financial firms from lending to industries that ``amplify climate risk,'' such as coal or oil and natural gas. Lost on these Senators is the impact that this would have on American jobs and cost of living amid a pandemic or the fact that financial supervision should rely on risk-based metrics rather than pie-in-the-sky sustainability goals. This week, the Federal Reserve announced that it joined the Network for Greening the Financial System, a consortium of central banks intent on weaving climate risk into bank supervision. To those of us closely tracking this issue, the decision by the Fed raises many red flags. I take no issue with the Fed participating in multilateral deliberative bodies. My concern comes from some of the ideas being discussed by other members of the NGFS and whether the Fed plans to import them. The NGFS has made a series of recommendations that are particularly troubling. First, it suggests supervisors elevate their regulated entities based on sustainability metrics in their portfolios. Unfortunately, there is no clear definition of what ``sustainability'' means, but you can bet that the climate activists will push it all the way to the brink. We do not need European regulators to tell our banks how sustainable their portfolios should be. Portfolio strength should be measured objectively, based on credit risk, not on poorly defined sustainability goals. Second, the NGFS urges regulators to integrate climate risks into financial stability monitoring. Unfortunately, climate stress scenarios are plagued with methodological challenges. Material impacts from changing weather patterns occur over the course of decades; whereas, current stress tests look at a period of nine quarters. It would be difficult for a bank to accurately forecast stresses over that length of time, and regulators can't account for a bank's dynamic operational and risk management practices over that period. Further, there is a lack of historical data on the relationship between changing weather patterns and financial stress, and the available data may have gaps or a disqualifying level of subjectivity. Last week, I led a group of 47 House Republicans in a letter to Federal Reserve Chairman Powell and Vice Chair Quarles requesting that they proceed cautiously in their deliberations on whether to incorporate climate change scenarios into financial stress tests. The letter highlights many of the methodological challenges I just raised and encourages them to consider the negative impact this would have on U.S. industry and American jobs. As we mentioned in our letter, it is important that the Fed commit to not accepting any international climate standards that are not appropriately tailored to the U.S. financial system or that would adversely impact U.S. competitiveness. We expect U.S. regulators to make similar commitments when adopting other international standards, such as the Basel Accords and insurance standards from the International Association of Insurance Supervisors. This should be no different. Mr. Speaker, this effort to pressure financial regulators to inject climate scenarios into bank stress tests is not about predicting financial stress. It is about causing financial stress, causing financial stress for an entire segment of the U.S. economy: the energy sector. Far from promoting financial stability, this dangerous movement, right at a time of a global pandemic, to politicize access to capital would undermine economic stability by denying American families and businesses access to affordable and reliable energy. Mr. Speaker, I call on the Federal Reserve to keep this in mind, to keep in mind the millions of jobs that are on the line, as Congress exercises oversight over the Federal Reserve's mandate to maximize employment.

Mr. BARR

Mr. BARR. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 7105, the Johnny Isakson and David P. Roe, M.D. Veterans Health Care and Benefits Improvement Act of 2020. Let me start by thanking my good friend, the ranking member of the Veterans' Affairs Committee, a former chairman of this committee, for his service to this country, not just as a veteran himself, but also leading this committee and being a tireless champion of the men and women who have served our country in uniform, through all of his accomplishments on this committee. I am so grateful for what you have done for our veterans and, on a personal note, as a mentor to me and so many others, leading the way, showing your patriotism. You are going to be missed here, but we appreciate your friendship. I am grateful, Mr. Speaker, that the two bipartisan bills I introduced this Congress are included in this comprehensive veterans package: an amended version of my bill, H.R. 7795, the Veterans Benefits Fairness and Transparency Act of 2020, which I introduced with my Democratic colleague, Representative Elaine Luria from Virginia; and H.R. 5772, the Veteran STEM Scholarship Enhancement Act, which I introduced and later worked on with Representative Lauren Underwood from Illinois. My bill, the Veterans Benefits Fairness and Transparency Act of 2020 will make it easier for veterans to file their disability claims by requiring the VA to restore the availability of disability benefits questionnaires, or DBQs, to their publicly available website so that a veteran can use their own personal healthcare provider when filing for benefits. This bill also cuts red tape and bureaucracy by preventing a veteran's claim from being rejected just because the VA changed a line on a form. Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my constituent, retired Master Gunnery Sergeant Kenneth Gilliam, a 30-year Marine Corps veteran, and Kentucky Sixth District Veterans Coalition member retired Chief Warrant Officer Denny Hart, who were the inspiration for this legislation. My other bill, the Veteran STEM Scholarship Enhancement Act allows the VA to more quickly process veteran scholarship applications for the Edith Nourse Rogers STEM Scholarship by lifting the requirement for priority groups among eligible veterans applying for the scholarship unless the VA determines that it is nearing the scholarship's yearly funding limit. This bill also prevents the Rogers STEM scholarship from counting toward the 48-month limit a veteran can--

Mr. BARR. Mr. Speaker, this bill also prevents the Rogers STEM scholarship from counting toward the 48-month limit a veteran can receive GI benefits. I have seen veterans in my district in central and eastern Kentucky, especially at Eastern Kentucky University, take advantage of this important scholarship. Mr. Speaker, I am proud of my vote for this package that delivers for our Nation's veterans. I thank, again, my colleagues for working in a bipartisan way to shepherd this very important package of veteran advocacy legislation to fruition. Once again, I thank my good friend for his distinguished service in this body, Dr. Phil Roe. Thank you, sir. It has been an honor serving with you on this subcommittee especially.

Mr. BARR

Mr. BARR. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to once again sound the alarm about an increasing danger to retail investors and retirement savers across the country. We have seen in recent years a trend of asset managers, banks, and other financial institutions prioritizing political and social causes over investment returns, potentially compromising the long-term financial security of their customers. We have seen companies cede the primacy of shareholders to so-called stakeholders, endangering the longstanding corporate governance principle of directors' and officers' fiduciary duty. Corporate leaders continue to accede to the calls from the extreme left to shun certain industries, deprioritize financial growth, and comply with a radical corporate governance reform agenda out of fear of being publicly shamed. I fear that, if left unchecked, this trend will accelerate in the coming years, as government continues to pressure financial institutions to be agents of social change at the expense of savers, customers, and shareholders. Without a strong defense of free and fair market principles, we risk witnessing a decline in American economic exceptionalism that will have long-term material impacts on our constituents. Earlier this month, former Vice President Biden announced that he would appoint Brian Deese as the chairman of the National Economic Council. Mr. Deese will join the administration from his current post as the head of sustainable investing at BlackRock. In that capacity, he serves as a leading proponent of BlackRock's environmental, social, and governance, or ESG, investing strategy. BlackRock has been perhaps the most vocal asset manager on restricting access to capital for legally operating fossil energy businesses and limiting choices for their investors based on misguided public relations goals. This, in part, is attributable to the efforts of Mr. Deese, who has orchestrated the curious investment strategy of actively alienating an entire sector of the American economy, the U.S. energy sector, and the millions of jobs it supports, while at the same time enthusiastically providing access to capital to Chinese businesses which threaten American competitiveness and national security. The appointment of Mr. Deese is a harbinger of things to come. It showcases that, unless we act, we will be on the path to socialism, where the primary goal of a corporation is not long-term growth or hiring more people or providing products and services to the American people, but instead to satisfy the most vocal detractors of corporate America. So-called stakeholder capitalism, or the left's ideals for it, takes for granted the laws of supply and demand and discounts the market forces that govern businesses' success or failure. Shareholder primacy is not about elevating the select few. It is about establishing metric-based accountability for corporate leaders to ensure that they are operating efficiently and effectively. That efficacy and productivity then, in turn, benefits employees, communities, and suppliers. In today's market, a company cannot be successful without a focus on these other constituencies. But it must, first and foremost, make a profit to be viable. Caring about broader social concerns, treating employees, suppliers, and customers well and ethically, and engaging in philanthropy within the community may all engender social support for a corporation, and in that sense, it may advance long-term shareholder value maximization. But that is not the paradigm those on the far left are urging the business community to adopt. Instead, they want a new paradigm, a paradigm that subordinates the interests of shareholders to the whims of stakeholders who have no ownership interest in the corporation whatsoever. Replacing the focus on shareholder value with a focus on stakeholder interests unrelated to the core business of the corporation would not only authorize officers and directors to breach their fiduciary duties to the owners of the corporation, it would, in the long-term, undermine the corporation's ability to advance the interests of employees, suppliers, customers, and other stakeholders. The socialists think that shareholder value maximization is always inconsistent with other stakeholder interests. The opposite is often true. I believe we are only scratching the surface of how the radical left hopes to remake corporate America in its socialist image. We must act diligently to preserve the spirit of free enterprise, promote healthy economic growth, and protect the long-term interests of investors. With Brian Deese departing from BlackRock, perhaps that firm can reevaluate its obligation to the investors who entrust their assets to them to prioritize returns over political errands, to focus on maximizing shareholder value, instead of groveling before radical environmentalists, socialists, and the extreme far left.

Mr. BARR

Mr. BARR. Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record a letter from the Judicial Conference of the United States. Judicial Conference of the United States, Washington, DC, December 7, 2020. Hon. Steny Hoyer, Majority Leader, House of Representatives, Washington, DC. Dear Mr. Leader: I write on behalf of the Judicial Conference of the United States, the policy-making body of the federal Judiciary, to express our continued strong opposition to H.R. 8235, the Open Courts Act of 2020 (``OCA''), which is scheduled for floor action on Tuesday, December 8, 2020. This legislation--which will take years to implement--rushes forward without appropriate and necessary assurances and provisions regarding the budget for such an enormous undertaking. The bill as drafted will have devastating budgetary and operational impact on the Judiciary and our ability to serve the public. We very much appreciate that you, along with House Judiciary Courts Subcommittee Chairman Hank Johnson, intervened last week after my helpful conversation with Chairman Johnson to prompt more dialogue between the branches. The many hours of staff conversations, through the weekend, that followed your encouragement led to some significant textual changes to the bill. We are grateful for those efforts which addressed some of our concerns with the previous version of the bill. Very serious concerns remain, however, and further dialogue is much needed. The fact is that our preliminary estimates for the cost of this bill is orders of magnitude higher than the bill's proponents have presumed--currently we are $2 billion apart-- and CBO's hurried and preliminary estimates of the cost of developing and implementing a new electronic filing and public access system, in our view, vastly underestimates the cost of the bill. Critically, some of the bill's revenue streams are also untested, difficult to administer and/or impossible to estimate reliably in advance. In our cost estimates are correct--or even marginally closer to correct than the bill's proponents'--there is no scenario in which the revenue generated by the bill could be sufficient to cover those costs. This will force the Judiciary to slash funding for staff and other critical operations. Moreover, the Judiciary's backbone case management system, and therefore the Judiciary itself, could grind to a halt. In anticipation of a funding shortfall, the bill now provides for an emergency pause in the transition to the new system required by the bill. This might be preferable to the forced accommodation of significant unbudgeted costs, but such a pause in the middle of a massive transition of systems would result in its own substantial disruptions. Better information on the costs of this bill and the revenues it would generate is needed to ensure that the Judiciary and public users of this system avoid devastating consequences. We believe we will have a much clearer picture of cost projections in early Spring 2021, at the conclusion of the first phase of a study for a replacement case management system to be performed by GSA. The Judiciary has other major concerns with the bill, including issues of technological feasibility, security, and governance, but the threat of devastating budget consequences for the Third Branch simply cannot be overemphasized. The Judiciary is committed to working collaboratively with the next Congress to improve our systems for filing, storing, managing, and making available to the public all relevant court records. We recognize and share Congress' bipartisan interest in a modern, effective, fair and successfully funded system. The current version of the Open Courts Act, however, is not the way to accomplish those goals. We look forward to working through these shared goals with you in the future. Sincerely, James C. Duff, Secretary.

Mr. BARR. Mr. Speaker, let me first just acknowledge the well- intentioned goals of this legislation and my colleagues from Georgia in a bipartisan way working together. I applaud their efforts to attempt to modernize the judicial branch and make judicial records more accessible to the American people. Nevertheless, I regrettably rise with reservations, as a former practitioner in Federal court, regarding H.R. 8235, the Open Courts Act of 2020. According to the Judicial Conference of the United States, the bill, as drafted, would have devastating budgetary and operational impacts on the judiciary's ability to serve the public. Current estimates for the cost of the bill from the Judicial Conference are currently $2 billion apart from the Congressional Budget Office's preliminary estimates of the cost to develop and implement a new electronic filing and public access system. Should these cost estimates be correct, there is no scenario in which the revenue generated by the bill would cover costs, forcing the judiciary to slash funding for staff and other critical operations. This bill has a $2 billion price tag, and the entire budget of the Federal judiciary is only $8 billion, annually. Additionally, despite the bill's cap on increases to filing fees, it authorizes the judiciary to raise filing fees if the other revenue sources in the bill prove insufficient to cover costs. I know my colleagues do not want to deny access to the Federal courts. Ultimately, this bill does not resolve some of the judiciary's most fundamental concerns, and, as a result, I regrettably urge my colleagues to consider these issues and the bill's impact on the judiciary. I know the Judicial Conference is willing to work with Congress to resolve some of these outstanding issues and to get at the sponsors' goals--which are very laudable, indeed--and that is to modernize the judicial branch and to make judicial records more accessible to the American people. I will say that, under current law, low-income Americans can access many of these records without cost, and the vast majority of those organizations and individuals that are paying for these records and underwriting the costs are institutions that have the means to do so. So, Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to consider these issues and the bill's potential impact on the judiciary, and I encourage my colleagues on the other side of the Capitol to work with the Judicial Conference to resolve these outstanding concerns.

Mr. BARR

Mr. BARR. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency's recently proposed rule to ensure fair access to banking services. The fair access rule is a welcomed development in a time when political correctness and public relations pressure are driving the Nation's largest banks' lending decisions rather than risk metrics associated with an underlying loan. Banks are deciding to cut off access to capital, divest their holdings, or otherwise limit financing to legally operating businesses just because those businesses are politically unpopular with outspoken critics on the far extreme left. Politicizing access to capital needs to end, and the Fair Access rule is a step in the right direction. Mr. Speaker, the proposed rulemaking codifies longstanding principles and OCC guidance that banks should provide access to capital and credit based on the assessment of an individual borrower's risk as opposed to making broad-based decisions impacting entire industries. It is guided by fundamental principles of nondiscrimination and would ensure that banks can't pick winners and losers in the marketplace. This rule will have meaningful impacts on some of America's strongest industries and the Americans they serve. The prohibition against redlining based on race, ethnicity, or neighborhood, regardless of an individual's qualifications and creditworthiness, is a well-established principle in Federal law. That prohibition and that principle should be extended to lawful creditworthy businesses as well. Mr. Speaker, over the last several years, we have witnessed many cases of banks publicly committing not to do business with certain legal companies. Some banks refuse to finance new coal-fired plants; others have refused to provide credit for legally permissible drilling operations; others boycotted firearms manufacturers. But these decisions were not based on the creditworthiness of the borrowers; they were based purely on politics. Coal keeps the lights on. Oil and gas heat our homes and fuel our vehicles. Should coal or oil or gas companies be subjected to a different lending standard just because of their public perception by a select few? Of course not. These industries should not be penalized simply because of the nature of their business and private lenders' desire to placate the far left. In fact, these are companies that provide the most affordable and reliable forms of energy to the American people. They are being punished only because they are politically unpopular. Under the rule, banks can no longer make these qualitative decisions to redline entire industries. Industries that play crucial roles in the everyday lives of Americans deserve fair access to America's financial system and should not be demonized as pawns in the politics of the day. Banks are in the business of assessing, measuring, and managing risks. Banks should be making lending decisions based on quantifiable risks associated with a loan. If a legally operating business is a sound credit risk by objective standards, banks should not be permitted to cut off financing simply because the business isn't in the good graces of certain politicians. Many of the rule's detractors say it is an overreach by the OCC or somehow motivated by partisan goals; but, in reality, the rule simply implements directives under Dodd-Frank to promote fair access to financial services and fair treatment of customers. It codifies in regulation statements and guidance from financial regulators under President Obama. In 2014, then-Comptroller Tom Curry said to regulated banks: You shouldn't feel that you can't bank a customer just because they fall into a category that, on its face, appears to carry an elevated level of risk. Higher risk categories of customers call for stronger risk management and controls, not a strategy of total avoidance. Now, some critics of the OCC's rule have made the argument that it would compromise financial stability to force lenders to extend credit to dying industries, such as the fossil energy industry, that have no future under leftwing policies like the Green New Deal. Has it ever occurred to these politicians that the reason why these fossil energy companies might face a challenging future is because of their own policies and because of their unrelenting desire to deny them the credit that they need to continue to operate. Mr. Speaker, the debanking of certain legally operating industries is one in a series of examples of corporate leaders succumbing to the pressure of activists and far-left politicians. They have ceded the primacy of shareholders and are now letting politics drive their financing decisions. Mr. Speaker, I commend Acting Comptroller Brooks on proposing this thoughtful and timely rule of nondiscrimination. This rule will ensure that all legal American companies have full access to the robust U.S. financial system and the economic freedom they deserve, and it will put an end to the misguided practice of banks playing politics with American jobs.

Mr. BARR

Mr. BARR. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of S. 945. The United States has the most robust and advanced capital markets in the world. They provide access to capital for some of the most innovative businesses, and create an avenue for investors of all levels to save for retirement and plan for their futures. It follows that companies from around the globe flock to the U.S. capital markets to fund their businesses; and the U.S. is happy to be the destination for these firms. However, to play in our markets, companies need to play by our rules; and Chinese firms listed on American exchanges are the worst and most frequent offenders. Gone are the days when we can sit idly by and let Chinese firms, many with strong ties to the Chinese Communist Party, participate in our markets at the expense of protection for everyday investors. Most publicly traded firms are audited by public accounting firms, which, in turn, are overseen by the PCAOB. This gives investors confidence that the books are accurate. China, however, refuses to let the PCAOB review its auditors. The result? At best, investors lack confidence in the validity and reliability of a company's financial data. Even worse, thousands of investors are downright defrauded. The worst case scenario--American savers are unwittingly funding efforts by Chinese SOEs to usurp America's global supremacy and compromise U.S. national security. I was proud to serve on the House China Task Force, where we closely examined, among other things, China's participation in U.S. capital markets. Earlier this year, we published a report with over 130 recommendations--most of which are bipartisan. Passage of the House companion to S. 945, sponsored by Mr. Sherman, was among the recommendations. Also among the recommendations was passage of my bill, the Transparency in Chinese Government Investment Act, which would direct the SEC to investigate whether disclosure of a business's ties to the CCP or other malign Chinese initiatives is material for investors; and, if so, require companies to report. We can no longer allow China to take advantage of our rules, defraud our investors, and challenge the spirit of free enterprise. I urge support of S. 945.

Mr. BARR

Mr. BARR. Madam Speaker, I rise in strong support of S. 945, the Holding Foreign Companies Accountable Act. The United States has the most robust, liquid, and advanced capital markets in the world. Companies from around the globe flock to the U.S. capital markets to fund their businesses. However, to participate in our markets, companies need to play by our rules, and Chinese firms listed on American exchanges are the worst and most frequent violators of the rules. Gone are the days when we can sit idly by and let Chinese firms, many with strong ties to the Chinese Communist Party, participate in our markets at the expense of protection for everyday investors. Most publicly traded firms are audited by public accounting firms which, in turn, are overseen by the PCAOB. This gives investors confidence that the books are accurate. China, however, refuses to let the PCAOB review its auditors. The results are that investors lack confidence in the validity and reliability of a company's financial data. Worse, thousands of investors are defrauded. And the worst case scenario, American savers are funding Chinese state-owned enterprises which are fueling China's civil-military fusion and, in some cases, directly financing China's military space and cyberspace buildup, threatening U.S. national security. As a member of the China Task Force, I strongly support this legislation. I urge this body to pass it. And we can no longer allow China to take advantage of our rules and defraud our investors.

Mr. BARR

Mr. BARR. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in defense of mom-and-pop retail investors who benefit from sound corporate governance to promote free enterprise and to warn against the risks of politicizing corporate leaders' responsibilities to their shareholders. The primary job of a corporation is to maximize shareholder value, not to engage in social engineering or politically correct causes simply to satisfy detractors of corporate America. Corporate leaders have a fiduciary responsibility to their owners which, I fear, is getting lost as leaders try to play the politics of the day. Last year, leaders of America's largest corporations, through the Business Roundtable, issued an updated ``Statement on the Purpose of a Corporation'' in which they elevated so-called stakeholders above shareholders in their responsibilities. I take issue with this change because it dilutes the accountability leaders have to their owners and reflects an empty gesture intended only to surrender to the pressures of political correctness. In order to do right by its employees, customers, suppliers, and communities, a business must first be successful and profitable. A business that mistreats its employees or shuns its responsibilities to its communities would not survive in today's market environment. So why the change? This is nothing more than a public relations exercise designed to preempt any charges from the opponents of free enterprise who suggest businesses should be advancing specific partisan causes. Unfortunately, the changes resulted only in more ire and attention from officials it was likely intended to satisfy. Charges from the far left suggest that businesses haven't done enough to help their communities. One Senator even used the restatement of a corporation to suggest that she ``expects'' business leaders to support her far-left corporate governance bill that would take our free-enterprise system on a path toward socialism. The lesson here is this: If you give them an inch, they will take a mile. Recent developments suggest this remains true. In September, the Business Roundtable called for ``market-based solutions'' to fight climate change and urged businesses to work together on the issue. Mr. Speaker, I have no issues with businesses setting public goals that mitigate risk and promote long-term growth if they are in the best interest of their shareholders and business goals, but it wasn't enough for the business community's strongest opponents. Earlier this month, the senior Senator from Massachusetts, Elizabeth Warren, sent a letter to the chairman of the Business Roundtable and the chair of its Energy & Environment Committee. The letter alleged that they were not doing enough and suggested that they should be required to publicly document how companies are supporting emissions- reducing public policy. Instead of prioritizing their firms' response to the economic and health crisis, keeping their employees safe during the pandemic, and ensuring their customers' needs are met, these CEOs of major U.S. corporations must allocate time and resources to responding to calls from politicians on the far left to be more green. Mr. Speaker, I am reminded of the classic children's book, ``If You Give a Mouse a Cookie,'' in which a boy gives a mouse a cookie and the mouse keeps asking for more and more and more and more. In this analogy, the radical left is the mouse, never satisfied, and corporate America is the young boy, bleeding resources to fulfill the mouse's ever-expanding demands. By ceding shareholder primacy, the Nation's business leaders began down a slippery slope. The radical left will not be placated until they remake free enterprise to align with their misguided, socialist goals. Mr. Speaker, the business leaders of this country would be well served to heed the admonishment of Nobel Laureate Milton Friedman when he wrote: ``When I hear businessmen speak eloquently about the `social responsibilities of business in a free-enterprise system,' I am reminded of the wonderful line about the Frenchman who discovered, at the age of 70, that he had been speaking prose all his life. The businessmen believe that they are defending free enterprise when they declaim that business is not concerned `merely' with profit but also with promoting desirable `social' ends; that business has a `social conscience' and takes seriously its responsibilities for providing employment, eliminating discrimination, avoiding pollution and whatever else may be the catchwords of the contemporary crop of reformers. In fact, they are--or would be if they or anyone else took them seriously--preaching pure and unadulterated socialism. Businessmen who talk this way are unwitting puppets of the intellectual forces that have been undermining the basis of a free society these past decades.'' Mr. Speaker, this is a stark warning to those who lead America's largest companies that attempts to appease socialists and radical environmentalists are on a fool's errand. The agenda of the far left is fundamentally incompatible with free enterprise and a free society. The sooner that America's CEOs realize this and the sooner they return to a focus on shareholder value maximization, the sooner we will liberate the American people from the dangerous and morally bankrupt ideas of the socialist far left. I will conclude, Mr. Speaker, with a final admonishment from Milton Friedman, when he said: ``There is one and only one social responsibility of business--to use its resources and engage in activities designed to increase its profits so long as it stays within the rules of the game, which is to say, engages in open and free competition without deception or fraud.'' Profitable businesses help society. Profitable businesses increase employment. Profitable businesses are good for America.

Mr. BARR

Mr. BARR. Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor the life of a special man, Mr. Thomas Reed Haun. Mr. Haun is part of a special group of heroes that served our nation during World War II. He passed away on November 14, 2020. Mr. Haun was born on July 27, 1924. He grew up in Sweetwater, Tennessee, where he lived until moving to Nicholasville, Kentucky for his final years. On August 3, 1943, he entered service in the United States Army. He served in the United States Army's 34th Division, 168th Infantry Regiment, under the command of Lt. Gen. Mark W. Clark. Mr. Haun earned the rank of Staff Sergeant and served in the European- African-Middle Eastern Theater. He was wounded in the Po Valley in northern Italy on September 29, 1944. He was shot 9 times, from shoulder to ankle. Mr. Haun was hospitalized for a year, first in Italy, then transported on a hospital ship to New York and then Florida. He was given an experimental drug called penicillin. Mr. Haun was honorably discharged on July 2, 1945. For his brave service to our country, he was awarded the Purple Heart, the Silver Star, and the Bronze Star. Upon returning from military service, Mr. Haun married Betty Ruth Ramey on October 6, 1946. They were married for 67 years. He worked as a manager at Sweetwater Hosiery Mill and then as a Deputy Clerk in the General Sessions Court. He served the people of Sweetwater and Monroe County on the City Commission, as a Trustee for 32 years, and as Fire Department Commissioner. He was a lifelong member of First Baptist Church. Mr. Haun was a loving husband, father, grandfather, and great- grandfather. Mr. Haun and his fellow veterans are true heroes. As members of the ``Greatest Generation'', they willingly served and sacrificed to protect and defend the freedoms that we enjoy today. I am humbled to honor the service of Mr. Thomas Reed Haun before the United States Congress.

Mr. BARR

Mr. BARR. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding. Madam Speaker, I rise in strong support of the majestic and time- honored sport of thoroughbred racing, a beloved tradition in the United States since the early days of the Republic and the signature industry of my home State, the Commonwealth of Kentucky. Sometimes referred to as the sport of kings, Americans--and I would dare to say, especially Kentuckians--have made this the sport of all Americans through the inspiring stories of amazing athletes with names like Sir Barton, Man o' War, War Admiral, Secretariat, Seattle Slew, Affirmed, American Pharaoh, and Justify in recent years. To that end, I further rise in favor of H.R. 1754, the Horseracing Integrity and Safety Act, bipartisan legislation that I introduced in one form or another during the last three terms of Congress with my colleague and good friend, the gentleman from New York, Paul Tonko. I thank Paul for his partnership in this long, tireless effort. After many years of negotiation and deliberation, today I stand proud to finally bring this legislation to the House floor for a vote. Throughout my time in Congress, I have worked diligently to enact policies that will promote economic growth and investment in this key Kentucky industry. My district, Kentucky's Sixth Congressional District, well-known as the Horse Capital of the World, is home to more than 400 horse farms and the world-famous Keeneland Race Course in Lexington, Kentucky, which not only serves as the global leader in breeding stock sales, but also hosts many notable races, including the great Toyota Blue Grass Stakes and Breeders' Cup, which will be, once again, held at the racetrack this November. Many of my constituents have a close connection to and an affinity for both Keeneland and thoroughbred racing. My own grandfather, J.B. Faulconer, was Keeneland's first publicist and later the vice president of the Thoroughbred Racing Associations in New York, where he was credited with naming the Eclipse Awards. Several years ago, as I reviewed the minutes of the Jockey Club roundtable meetings when my grandfather was active in the industry, I noticed that, even then, four and five decades ago, leaders in the industry lamented the lack of unity among the various constituencies within the industry. They regretted the fact that there wasn't uniformity in the rules of racing, and particularly in medication rules. Thoroughbred racing is not just about our culture and heritage. There has always been immense pride in the enormous contributions of this great sport to American culture. But it is also a major source of jobs and economic opportunity for our people. In fact, the industry is responsible for 44,100 direct jobs and over 16,000 indirect jobs in Kentucky alone. With the privilege of representing this unique industry comes the responsibility of fighting for its future. This sport is not solely relevant in those States that are home to the Triple Crown, like Kentucky, Maryland, and New York. Horseracing is very much a national sport, prominent in places like California, Florida, Arkansas, New Jersey, Illinois, and Louisiana. The horse industry contributes approximately $26 billion, as my friend, Paul Tonko, pointed out, but in some estimates, up to $50 billion in direct economic impact to the U.S. economy; and it has a direct employment impact of 988,394 jobs. Therefore, advocating for this industry requires more than just celebrating its proud heritage. I have always believed that the future prosperity of this sport depends on uniformity of the rules of racing. Currently, as has been noted, regulated by 38 separate racing jurisdictions, the thoroughbred horseracing industry labors under a patchwork of conflicting and inconsistent State-based rules governing prohibited substances, lab accreditation, testing, and penalties for violations. This lack of uniformity has impeded interstate commerce; it has compromised the international competitiveness of the industry; it has undermined public confidence in the safety and integrity of the sport; and the industry is in desperate need of certainty. As a conservative who believes in federalism and States' rights, I, nevertheless, understand that the Constitution gives Congress the power to regulate interstate commerce precisely for the purpose of eliminating these kinds of impediments to interstate exchange. As I have said many times, as a limited government conservative, this legislative effort is not about more regulation. It is about creating a single, nationwide set of rules that will result in smarter, more effective, and streamlined regulation for the industry. The Horseracing Integrity and Safety Act will remedy this lack of uniformity, the issue central to maintaining the integrity of the sport, by authorizing the creation of a nongovernmental regulatory safety authority and fairness, governed by representatives of all major constituencies of the industry and responsible for implementing a national uniform medication and track safety program. Specifically, the legislation would recognize the horseracing integrity and safety authority, which will be tasked with creating uniform national standards regarding prohibited and permitted substances for use in race horses, establishing an accreditation system for laboratories to test drug samples, and developing regional standards for racetrack safety. As I have said, this legislation builds on the bipartisan legislation Representative Tonko and I have introduced in previous Congresses and incorporates feedback from an expanded group of industry stakeholders to enact these much-needed reforms that will protect the safety of our equine and human athletes. I want to thank the coalition of organizations that have supported this legislation from the very beginning, including the Water Hay Oats Alliance; a special thanks goes to Arthur and Staci Hancock, my constituents, of Stone Farm in Bourbon County, Kentucky, for their tireless and relentless persistence and advocacy; the Jockey Club; Breeders' Cup International, headquartered in my district; Keeneland, Kentucky Thoroughbred Association; the Thoroughbred Owners and Breeders Association; and the Jockeys' Guild, because the jockeys know how important safety is, with a special mention of Chris McCarron, for advocating for their fellow jockeys and their safety. I also want to thank members of our expanded coalition, including CEO Bill Carstanjen and the board of directors of Churchill Downs International and prominent trainer Dale Romans. I want to thank Ed Whitfield, former Member of Congress from Kentucky, who really trailblazed on this issue. I want to thank Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell for his leadership in not only introducing companion legislation, but legislation that I believe materially improves on our previous versions by adding a focus on track surface safety and by making reasonable minor changes that have enabled us to enlarge our coalition of support and bring more organizations within the industry together in support of our legislation. Madam Speaker, the Horseracing Integrity and Safety Act was developed through a highly deliberative and bipartisan process and takes into consideration a diversity of perspectives from all parts of the industry. I appreciate the willingness of all constituencies within the industry to compromise and to forge a consensus product. This was not easy, but it was necessary to get us to this historic day for this great sport. The result is support from the majority of Members of this House and Senator McConnell's bipartisan companion legislation in the Senate. Today's vote is a vitally important step in advancing reforms to protect our equine athletes and jockeys, to ensure confidence in the safety and integrity of the sport within the majority of the wagering public, and enable the industry to attract a new generation of fans and investors to strengthen the thoroughbred breed. And because this is truly an international sport and industry, this bill will make American thoroughbred racing and breeding stronger and more internationally competitive. And it will also secure thousands of both direct and indirect jobs in the Sixth Congressional District and beyond that depend on a thriving thoroughbred horseracing and breeding industry. Madam Speaker, I thank Chairman Pallone for his leadership on this issue, Ranking Member Walden for joining to help shepherd this legislation through the process, and especially, again, my good friend, Paul Tonko, who represents a great American racecourse in Saratoga Springs. I really appreciate, in this time of admitted partisanship and polarization, an opportunity for this country to come together and unite behind a great cause. Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support the Horseracing Integrity and Safety Act.

Mr. BARR

Mr. BARR. Mr. Speaker, I rise today as the chairman of the Republican Study Committee's American Worker Task Force. This task force was established to provide policy recommendations to empower millions of American workers to reclaim their version of the American Dream. This task force, really, Mr. Speaker, is all about the American Dream, which is the idea that the condition of your birth should not determine the outcome of your life and that, in America, because of the blessings of freedom that we are given, anyone, regardless of race, color, creed, gender, or any station in life, through hard work, persistence, and determination, can achieve upward mobility, can achieve his or her God-given potential, and can realize that American Dream. This afternoon, the American Worker Task Force will unveil its report to change flawed policies from Washington, D.C., to unleash the spirit of the American Dream and to give workers their opportunity at upward mobility. First, we are going to propose policy changes that will refocus labor policy to unleash American workers and allow them to realize their God- given potential. This includes increasing opportunities for apprenticeships, not just Department of Labor, Washington-directed, centrally planned registered apprenticeships, apprenticeships that may or may not yield fruitful careers in in-demand jobs in the labor market, in the real world, but, instead, also recognizing apprenticeships that are industry-recognized, industry-driven, and that meet the jobs that are actually available in the labor market. We are going to be proposing ideas about eliminating overly restrictive occupational licensing requirements and giving workers greater flexibility in the way they are compensated, to choose comp time as opposed to just overtime. Secondly, we want to reimagine our failed welfare policies to remove the trap of government dependency and, instead, create a system that propels American individuals and families to extraordinary success and prosperity. This includes providing alternatives to the failed Housing First policies: to provide Americans access in housing assistance with wraparound services to actually meet those individuals where they are; to provide them with career counseling and perhaps, if needed, addiction recovery services and financial literacy. We want second-chance employees to have access to the labor market. Whether they have been incarcerated before, whether they are struggling with an addiction, whether they have failed to get the skills that they need, we believe that second-chance and third-chance employees are desperately needed in America's economy today. We also want work incentives for able-bodied, work-capable adults, especially those without dependents, because we know that work is a blessing; work is not a punishment. And, third, we want to refine our education system to debunk the bachelors- or-bust mentality, to encourage innovative careers and better equip American workers with the skills they need to adapt and thrive in the ever-changing 21st century economy. That means in preparing people for higher education, it is not just about a 4-year degree; it is also about career and technical education, skills-based education. We believe that there should be deductibility for up-skilling so that employers can give workers the skills that are needed for them to move and advance in their careers. We think there should be transparency outcomes in higher education. And we think, to deal with the student loan debt crisis, we need to recognize that the return on investment is very important, and career and technical education can provide that opportunity. We believe in income-sharing agreements as an alternative to the debt trap of Federal student loans. The policies that constitute these three key policy platforms are the result of over a year and a half of deliberations by task force members. We conducted listening sessions with think tanks and policy experts, small business owners, and workers from across our districts. Mr. Speaker, in the Sixth Congressional District of Kentucky, which I represent in Congress, I have already seen the benefits of investing in career and technical education and job training. The Kentucky Welding Institute in Fleming County, Kentucky, graduates students in less than 6 months, readying them for careers in welding that can earn them over $100,000 a year. In Estill County, Kentucky, the Estill County Area Technical Center, currently under construction, will be a state-of-the-art job training facility that is scheduled to open in August of 2021. Kentuckians will train for jobs in advanced manufacturing, in diesel mechanics, health sciences, information technology and science technology, engineering and math, in addition to many other industries. I am proud to have supported a $4 million grant from the Economic Development Administration that will yield a return on investment in just a few months, graduating taxpayers. Mr. Speaker, this report could not be a more timely endeavor in the face of the COVID-19 pandemic and the ensuing economic uncertainty that has followed. Although progrowth tax, regulatory, and trade policies have enabled unemployment to come back down to single digits and the stock market to rebound, Americans still need Congress to take up a bold, comprehensive agenda to pave the way for more jobs. Mr. Speaker, I encourage everyone to consider these very important proworker recommendations.

Mr. BARR

Mr. BARR. Mr. Speaker, I am grateful to have my bill, H.R. 7795, the Veterans Benefits Fairness and Transparency Act of 2020 before the House of Representatives today. I would like to thank my good friend, Ranking Member Roe, for his support of this legislation, and would especially like to thank my colleague across the aisle and chair of the Disability and Memorial Affairs Subcommittee, Representative Elaine Luria, for co-leading this bipartisan legislation with me. I appreciate Representative Luria's leadership on this issue. This bill is vitally important because it will restore access for veterans and their representatives to the disability benefits questionnaires forms previously available on the VA's public website. Our veterans used these forms to submit evidence to the VA for their disability claims until the VA removed them in April of this year in the middle of a pandemic, making it harder for veterans to submit their evidence and get the benefits owed to them. The idea for this legislation was brought to me by a member of Kentucky's Sixth Congressional District Veterans' Coalition, Chief Warrant Officer Denny Hart. I know Mr. Hart, he is a good patriotic man, and he continues to serve our country by helping other veterans file their disability claims with the VA. However, after the VA removed these forms from being publicly available, they effectively shut out Mr. Hart and others from assisting our veterans. There were only 11 VA contract examiners in the Sixth District of Kentucky in January of this year. Now, to their credit, the VA has increased the number of those contract examiners, probably because of this legislation. But until we have the assurances that a sufficient number of VA contract examiners are able to assist all of the veterans with their disability claims, we need public-facing DBQs. My legislation gives the VA additional manpower to process a veteran's DBQ by maintaining the ability of a veteran's own provider to fill out the form. This is something vital to veterans in rural communities who may be far from a VA medical center or contract examiner. Furthermore, our proposal prevents veterans from having their disability claim delayed or denied because the VA changed their DBQ form during the application process without the veteran knowing. During this pandemic, we must ensure our veterans' disability claims process is not paused or compromised solely due to a change in a bureaucratic form. We must protect veterans from unnecessary burdens while securing benefits owed to them. No veteran should be denied the disability benefits to which he or she is justly entitled solely because a DBQ is not publicly available or because the VA changed the form in the middle of the process. This is commonsense legislation supported by multiple veteran service organizations, such as the Disabled American Veterans, the Paralyzed Veterans of America, Minority Veterans of America, Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America, and more. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this bipartisan legislation and restore this vital resource for our Nation's heroes.

Mr. BARR

Mr. BARR. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Coleman Crest Farm in Lexington, Kentucky. This farm is one of Lexington's oldest African- American-owned family farms with a remarkable legacy. James Coleman, the farm's first owner, was born into slavery in 1845 in Uttingertown, Kentucky. Incredibly, in March of 1888, James Coleman purchased the land he and his parents had worked on for years as slaves. The farm has passed through four generations of Colemans since that time, all while enduring and prevailing over racial discrimination, the Great Depression, and two world wars. In 2001, James Coleman's great-grandson, Jim, and his late wife, Cathy, purchased the farm. Tomorrow on September 15, Cathy Coleman's birthday, a groundbreaking of a new house at the farm will take place dedicated to Cathy's memory. The farm will be used to help shape the future for Black farmers as Lexington youth are exposed to the agricultural opportunity as a means to realize the American Dream. I am honored to pay tribute to the entire Coleman family today in the people's House.

Mr. BARR

Mr. BARR. Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor Ms. Anna Mac Clarke. Ms. Clarke was a native of Anderson County, Kentucky and worked to desegregate our nation's armed forces during WWII. Today she is honored with the renaming of her hometown Main Street in her honor. Ms. Clarke grew up in Anderson County and was a 1937 graduate of Lawrenceburg High School. She then furthered her education at Kentucky State College where she participated in athletics, wrote for the school newspaper, and joined Delta Sigma Theta sorority before graduating with a bachelor's degree in sociology and economics in 1941. Following the Attack on Pearl Harbor, Ms. Clarke decided to join the all-female Women's Army Auxiliary Corps (WAAC). Upon completion of WAAC officer training at Fort Des Moines, Iowa, Third Officer Anna Mac Clarke became the first African-American WAAC assigned to a command that was otherwise an all-white unit. Ms. Clarke went on to lead a unit of 144 African-American women in service at Wakeman General Hospital at Camp Atterbury, Indiana before also serving at the WAAC Headquarters in Washington, D.C. After the WAAC auxiliary units became a part of the regular army, Ms. Clarke let the first Women's Army Corps (WAC) unit onto base at Douglas Army Air Field in Arizona. When she and her unit first arrived, the base was segregated. However, Ms. Clarke stood against this injustice, refused to sit in the colored section, and raised this issue with commanding officers. In response, the commanding officer issued the following order, ``Educate properly all enlisted and civilian personnel in your respective departments to accept any colored WACs assigned as you would any white man or woman in the Army of the United States. Every consideration, respect, courtesy, and toleration will be afforded every colored WAC. No discrimination will be condoned.'' Ms. Anna Mac Clarke sadly passed away on April 19, 1944 at the age of 24 following complications from surgery. Yet, her steadfast contributions to the desegregation of our armed forces serve as an extraordinary example of courage and patriotism in service to one's country. It is my honor to recognize Ms. Clarke, as a street is renamed today in her honor in her hometown of Lawrenceburg, Kentucky. I am forever grateful for brave Americans like Anna Mac Clarke.

Mr. BARR

Mr. BARR. Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor Mrs. Sara Noland. Mrs. Noland lives in Irvine, Kentucky and celebrates her 100th birthday on August 17th. Mrs. Noland grew up in Woodford County, Kentucky. As a junior in high school she began working in her school's library. She went on to the University of Kentucky, where she earned a degree in library science. Her first job in 1941 was at Estill County High School, where she earned $90 a month. She married during World War II and traveled across the country, working at several libraries along the way. In 1949, she was rehired as librarian of Estill County High School. While working there, she helped get the Estill County Public Library started and volunteered there for many years. Mrs. Noland retired in 1991 with 42 years of dedicated service. Mrs. Noland has been an involved member of her community for many years in a variety of ways. She has taught Sunday School, led church youth groups, served as a 4-H leader, and was a Girl Scout leader. At the high school, she led a reading club, worked with the Academic Team, and helped with Project Graduation. She also volunteered with adult literacy. Mrs. Noland was commissioned as a Kentucky Colonel for her work in literacy. In 1996 she became the first recipient of the Governor's Lifetime Achievement Award for Volunteer Service. It is my honor to recognize Mrs. Sara Noland, celebrate her 100th birthday, and thank her for her many contributions to her community, particularly in the important area of literacy.

Mr. BARR

Mr. BARR. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of my amendment to this appropriations package that highlights the need to use all the tools in America's tool kit to counter the Chinese Communist Party and the totalitarian government in Beijing. My amendment shows bipartisan support for the United States International Development Finance Corporation and its important work to counter China's Belt and Road Initiative. As a member of the House's China Task Force and former chair of the House Financial Service's Subcommittee on Monetary Policy and Trade with jurisdiction over the Treasury Department's national security portfolio, I am keenly aware of the threat that China poses through its Belt and Road Initiative and direct foreign investment internationally. While we will never match China dollar for dollar in government subsidies, agencies like DFC can leverage the unlimited potential of the private sector to counter China's model of debt-trap diplomacy and colonialism. I am proud to support DFC in promoting private investment in developing countries, its role in advancing U.S. global development goals and economic interests, and offering an alternative to China's malign investment overseas. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to adopt this amendment.

Mr. BARR

Mr. BARR. Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor Mr. Frank John Hendricks, Jr. Mr. Hendricks lives in Lexington, Kentucky and celebrates his 101st birthday on July 6th. Mr. Hendricks joined the United States Army during World War II. He served with the 550th Army Airborne Glider Battalion and attained the rank of Sergeant First Class. He flew gliders and fought in battles in North Africa, Sicily, Burma, Normandy, and all across Europe. He was a part of the D-Day invasion. He participated in the Battle of the Bulge and the invasion of Germany, leading to the end of the war in Europe. As a glider pilot, he flew and fought behind enemy lines to drive the enemy into the U. S. Army front lines. He led a reconnaissance team to identify the enemy positions and determine the terrain for future glider missions. It is my honor to recognize Mr. Hendricks, celebrate his 101st birthday, and thank him for his service and sacrifice to our nation during World War II. As a part of ``The Greatest Generation'', Mr. Hendricks and his fellow soldiers fought to preserve the freedoms that we enjoy today, and we can never thank them enough. I am forever grateful for Americans like Frank John Hendricks, Jr.

Mr. BARR

Mr. BARR. Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor Mrs. Helen Horlacher Evans. Mrs. Evans was born in Fortville, Indiana on June 11, 1920 and will soon be celebrating her 100th birthday. Mrs. Evans graduated from the University of Kentucky and began teaching home economics at Versailles High School. After conversations with fellow teachers about the newly formed Women's Army Auxiliary Corps, she joined the Army on a dare in 1942. She was in the first group of Kentucky women accepted for the WAC and at 21 years of age she was one of the youngest. She was accepted for the Officer Candidate School at Fort Des Moines, Iowa. Mrs. Evans was trained in army food service and served as the Office of the Quartermaster General inspector for stateside WAC mess halls. In early 1945 she was assigned to the European Theatre of Operations with the Office of the Quartermaster General outside Paris, France. At the end of the war she was working along the banks of the Rhine feeding German prisoners of war. Mrs. Evans earned the rank of Captain. Her experience as a WAC is documented as part of the Veterans History Project in the Library of Congress. Upon returning to civilian life, Mrs. Evans began work at the Veterans Administration in Louisville, KY, where she served as a senior training officer until 1951. She has served as a volunteer on many projects related to veterans, including serving as Kentucky's representative on the committee to establish the National Women's Memorial at Arlington National Cemetery. She received the Spirit of Kentucky Award for Patriotism from the Kentucky Daughters of the American Revolution. In 2018, she was inducted into the Kentucky Veterans Hall of Fame. It is my honor to recognize this amazing patriot, celebrate her 100th birthday, and thank her for her service and sacrifice to our nation during World War II. As a part of ``The Greatest Generation'', Mrs. Evans was an important part of the war effort to preserve the freedoms that we enjoy today. I am forever grateful for Americans like Helen Horlacher Evans. Thank you, Madam Speaker. I yield back the remaining balance of my time.