K. Conaway

Mr. CONAWAY

Mr. CONAWAY. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on S. 764.

Mr. CONAWAY. Mr. Speaker, advances in biotechnology are key to the future of agriculture and to ensuring the world has an adequate and stable supply of food. Those advances can only be maintained if we preserve interstate commerce while turning the page on a debate that has unnecessarily maligned this lifesaving technology. I stand in support of this bill and encourage my colleagues to vote ``yes.'' Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. CONAWAY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Rodney Davis).

Mr. CONAWAY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Newhouse).

Mr. CONAWAY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Kansas (Mr. Pompeo), who has been involved with this process for a long time.

Mr. CONAWAY. Mr. Speaker, I certainly appreciate the previous speaker's comments. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. CONAWAY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 1 minute. I would point out to the gentleman, Mr. Speaker, that there are other options besides the QR code with respect to complying and getting the information for those few consumers that really, really want to know this information; they can get it. This bill requires that the Secretary, within 1 year--actually, the rule is already written--within 1 year to conduct a study to make sure that consumers are really, in fact, getting the information they want in the ways that they want to get it, and then the Secretary will have ways of proposing additional comparable options for this issue. The gentleman is misleading in the sense that there are other options to make this happen; and if it is not working, the Secretary of the Department of Agriculture will be able to complete that study. I reserve the balance of my time.

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

Mr. CONAWAY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, before I yield back, I want to thank everybody involved in this debate, particularly my team and the hard work they did. The bill that we passed a year ago with much labor and much work wound up not being the answer that we all wanted. I think we got 275 of our colleagues to vote for it a year ago. There have been a lot of efforts in this regard. I want to thank our team for doing that. I want to thank the ranking member and his team for the hard work they have been doing. I appreciate the civility of the debate this morning and look forward to passage of the bill shortly. Mr. Speaker, I encourage all of my colleagues to vote in favor of S. 764 when it comes to the floor later on. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. CONAWAY. Mr. Speaker, my good friend just spoke--and he is my friend, not the common ``my good friend'' nonsense we typically say around here, but the gentleman from Vermont is my friend. And his argument would be a bit more forceful if, in fact, the wisdom of the Vermont legislature that he touted hadn't exempted all those State- produced products, like Ben and Jerry's ice cream, from the important label that folks who eat ice cream, apparently, in Vermont don't need to know. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. CONAWAY. Yes. I have no further speakers.

Mr. CONAWAY

Mr. CONAWAY. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the question on adoption of the motion to concur on S. 764 be subject to postponement as though under clause 8 of rule XX.

Mr. CONAWAY

Mr. CONAWAY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize and congratulate the Institute of Internal Auditors (IIA) as they celebrate their 75th anniversary. The art of auditing goes back centuries, but 1941 marked the beginning of concerted efforts to make internal auditing a recognized practice and fixture amongst governing bodies and management. In late 1941, IIA was incorporated and shortly thereafter, 24 internal auditors gathered in New York City to begin what would become a growing success across the decades. Currently, IIA has more than 180,000 active members worldwide, with 63,000 members residing here in the United States. Although the professional association has expanded over the years, the IIA remains committed to their goal of promoting the core principles, best practices, and highest ethical standards of internal auditing. The words ``internal audit'' may sound strange and unfamiliar to most people. However, internal auditors play an important role in our society. As I have expressed in the past, auditors are required to tend ``the stream,'' protecting the people by ensuring pollutants--or poor standards and practices--do not corrupt the free-market system. While their work is often unnoticed by the public at large and little thanks come their way, internal auditors' work in public and private organizations throughout the U.S. is integral to a smooth-running, prosperous society that benefits everyone. It was this spirit of custodianship, dedication, and service that IIA has built and maintained over 75 years. As a CPA, I understand the vital role that internal auditors play in maintaining accountability and transparency within our federal, state, and public institutions. Internal auditors provide independent assurances that an organization's risk management, governance, and internal control practices are working effectively and ethically. The IIA plays a pivotal part in helping auditors craft these skills through a variety of educational and development opportunities. Mr. Speaker, I ask that my colleagues join me in recognizing the achievements and contributions of the Institute of Internal Auditors as they celebrate their 75th anniversary. I wish them continued success moving forward as they mold the next generation of internal auditors.

Mr. CONAWAY

Mr. CONAWAY. Reclaiming my time, is it also the gentleman's understanding that the ``notwithstanding authority'' granted to the Emergency Food Security Program will not in any way affect the existing requirements under the Food for Peace Act, including requirements relating to the purchase and shipment of U.S. agriculture commodities under this act? I yield to the gentleman.

Mr. CONAWAY. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding. The rule of construction under section 9 affirms that nothing in this act, or amendments made by this act, will supersede or otherwise affect the authority of a relevant Federal department or agency to carry out a number of vital international food aid programs, including Food for Peace, Food for Progress, USDA's Local and Regional Food Aid Procurement Program, the Bill Emerson Humanitarian Trust Program, the McGovern-Dole International Food for Education and Child Nutrition Program, or any other emergency or non-emergency food aid program of the U.S. Department of Agriculture. Is it the gentleman from California's understanding that this rule of construction applies equally to all parts of the bill, including section 7, which authorizes an Emergency Food Security Program, or EFSP? I yield to the gentleman from California for his response.

Mr. CONAWAY. Reclaiming my time, does the committee chairman agree that the Food for Peace program, which is wholly separate from the bill we are debating on the floor today, is vital to U.S. efforts to respond to emergencies and alleviate global hunger? Does the gentleman also agree that the provision of U.S. agriculture commodities through the Food for Peace program has saved millions of lives, and that the U.S. agriculture commodities must remain a significant part of U.S. international food aid programs? I yield to the gentleman.

Mr. CONAWAY. Reclaiming my time, I appreciate the gentleman from California for his continued work on this important matter, particularly his recognition of the crucial role that the Agriculture Committee must play in any global food security strategy. As he rightly points out, programs like EFSP should be used in tandem with the time-tested Food for Peace program. It should not serve as a step towards eliminating the donation of U.S. commodities abroad. I look forward to closely monitoring the progress of this strategy and developing a better understanding of how our foreign assistance dollars are being used. I thank the gentleman for his extended colloquy and patience with the Committee on Agriculture's concerns with the bill. I thank him for that consideration and I look forward to supporting this bill.

Mr. CONAWAY

Mr. CONAWAY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to submit into the Congressional Record an important document related to the ongoing work to finalize a position limits rulemaking at the U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC). The document, an unpublished draft literature review prepared by the CFTC's Office of the Chief Economist (OCE), is titled ``Analysis of the Various Economic Studies Cited in Comment Letters in the Position Limits Rulemaking.'' The House Committee on Agriculture (Committee) conducted oversight of research practices at OCE based on a report published by the CFTC's Office of Inspector General (CFTC OIG). As part of this oversight initiative, the Committee requested, obtained, and reviewed documents and information related to the CFTC OIG's report. As a result of its oversight efforts, the Committee obtained a literature review on position limits that was never finalized or circulated to the full commission. Having reviewed the draft literature review prepared by the CFTC's own economists, I believe it presents a comprehensive overview of the current state of economic research on excessive speculation and an objective analysis of the potential utility of position limits. The document discusses in detail the ongoing and vigorous debate among economists about what constitutes excessive speculation and what, if any, impact it might have on prices and volatility in the commodity futures markets. In addition, the document summarizes and provides a brief analysis of many of the most important academic studies cited by commenters and utilized by CFTC staff in drafting the proposed rule. On June 14, 2016, I requested that CFTC Chairman Massad make this document public because I believe the insights and information contained in this report will benefit the general public's understanding of and ability to comment on the proposed rule. On June 17, 2016, Chairman Massad declined on the grounds that (i) the document was a summary of studies submitted during the comment period and, (ii) it was never intended to be public. The document, however, is much more than a summary of studies submitted during the comment period; it also is a wide-ranging examination of how to define excessive speculation, how to measure it, and how it may impact markets. For reference, I have included the entirety of the conclusion section here: Economists debate whether ``excessive speculation,'' meaning a link between large speculation positions and unwarranted price changes or price volatility, exists in these regulated markets, and if so to what degree. The question presented is a surprisingly difficult one to answer. All the empirical studies on this question have drawbacks, and none is conclusive. This inconclusivity is not surprising. It is inevitable, given the economic uncertainties that inhere in the data and the complexity of the question. There are many theoretical and empirical assumptions, and often multiple leaps of faith, that are needed to transform and interpret raw market data into meaningful and persuasive results. There is no decisive statistical method for establishing evidence for or against position limits in the commodity. Those that use Granger causality methodology tend to conclude that there is no evidence of excessive speculation or its consequences on price returns and price volatility, and many industry commenters opposed to position limits used this methodology. But that methodology is peculiarly sensitive to model design choices, and above we have analyzed designed modelling decisions that may have affected the ultimate conclusions of these studies. Moreover, there are countervailing Granger studies showing a link between large speculative positions and price volatility. And studies such as Cheng, Kirilenko, and Xiong, Convective Risk Flows in Commodity Futures Markets (working paper 2012), indicate that some Granger studies may mask the impact of excessive speculation in times of financial stress. Those that use comovement and cointegration methods tend to conclude there is evidence of deleterious effects of ``excessive speculation.'' Yet comovement just tests for correlation, not causation, and a correlation between large financial trading in the commodity markets and price changes and volatility could be driven by a common causal agent such as macroeconomic factors. Those studies that use models of fundamental supply and demand reach a whole host of divergent opinions on the subject, each opinion only as strong as the many modelling choices. In this way, the economic literature is inconclusive. Even clearly written, well-respected papers often contain nuances. It is telling that Hamilton, Causes and Consequences of the Oil Shock of 2007-2008, Brookings Paper on Economic Activity (2009), has been cited by both proponents and opponents of position limits. What can be said with certainty is summarized in the Commission's NPRM: that large speculative positions and outsized market power pose risks to a well-functioning marketplace. These risks may very well differ depending on commodity market structure, but can in some markets cause real-world price impacts through a higher risk premium as a component of total price. There are also economic studies indicating some correlation between increased speculation and price volatility in times of financial stress, but this correlation does not imply causation. There are studies indicating that in certain markets, such as crude oil, or certain time periods, such as times of financial stress, the impact of excessive speculation may be greater. These findings are all exceptions to the general rule that increased participation of speculators should generally be expected to lead to better price discovery and less unwarranted price volatility. Comment letters on either side declaring that the matter is settled in their favor among respectable economists are simply incorrect. The best economists on both sides of the debate concede that there is a legitimate debate afoot. This analysis paper documents that the academic debate amongst economists about the magnitude, prevalence, and pervasiveness of the risk of outsized market positions has reputable and legitimate standard-bearers for opposing positions. While I have my own opinion about the utility of a position limits regime, my push to make this document public has nothing to do with a disagreement over the outcome of this specific policy debate. I believe that to make informed decisions it is important that lawmakers, policy makers, and the public have access to the best available information. This literature review, much like other whitepapers, studies, and analyses published by OCE, provides such information in a manner that is clear and understandable. It is my hope that this information will be used to continue to improve our understanding of derivatives markets and the regulatory rules we enact to govern them. For this reason, I am making this report public prior to the July 13 closing date of the comment period for the CFTC's position limits rulemaking. The cover memo, full literature review, and all of the correspondence between the CFTC and the Committee regarding this document are available on the Committee's website at http://agriculture.house.gov/ uploadedfiles/position_limits_analysis.pdf. I would like to also submit the following letters: House of Representatives, Committee on Agriculture, Washington, DC, June 14, 2016. Hon. Timothy G. Massad, Chairman, U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission, Washington, DC. Dear Chairman Massad: The House Committee on Agriculture is conducting oversight of research practices at the U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission's (CFTC) Office of the Chief Economist (OCE) based on a report published by the agency's Office of Inspector General (OIG). As part of this oversight initiative, the Committee requested documents and information related to the OIG's report and discovered the existence of a draft literature review on position limits that was never finalized or circulated to the full commission. I write to request that you direct CFTC staff to finalize and make public this report for use in the Commission's ongoing work on the position limits rulemaking. On February 18, 2016, the OIG published a report following up on a 2014 review of OCE research programs. After interviewing OCE economists, the OIG decided to expand its review of OCE to include research topic selection due to allegations that the Chief Economist has refused to permit research on topics relevant to the agency's mission, including position limits, and economists have begun limiting their research proposals to non-controversial topics based on a perception that the Chief Economist will not permit research that may conflict with the official positions of the

Mr. CONAWAY

Mr. CONAWAY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the Rose of Sharon Missionary Baptist Church as they celebrate their 65th anniversary. Over the last 65 years, Rose of Sharon has served as a place of worship for countless numbers of West Texans. Rose of Sharon was founded by Reverend A.H. Goings in 1951. After meeting in various homes for several years, the church finally found a permanent home on 300 Fitch St. in June of 1985 under the leadership of Reverend J.W. Hanson. From that point moving forward, the church was able to flourish as they made it their mission to spread the teachings of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. Tragically on June 25, 2014, the church burned down and was declared a total loss. But out of the ashes and through the power of prayer and the support of the First Baptist Church of Odessa, Rose of Sharon persevered and overcame the adversity that they were dealt. After many months of rebuilding, Rose of Sharon reopened the doors to their newly constructed house of worship in February 2016. Mr. Speaker, I ask that my colleagues join me in recognizing the Rose of Sharon Baptist Church as they celebrate their 65th anniversary. I wish them continued success moving forward. May God continue to bless the parishioners and the church leaders for many years to come.

Mr. CONAWAY

Mr. CONAWAY. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the amendment that would restore the funding for the directed energy weapons and rail gun. If this funding reduction is left in place, then contracts will have to be renegotiated. Generally, those result in higher funding later on. We will lose a workforce that has been built and crafted generally over a long period of time, and that would require additional years getting back to this. As my colleague from Connecticut said, this is about defending, in many instances, surface combatants. The current opportunities are very expensive with a laser or rail gun. The cost per shot is dramatically less than it will be under the way we currently try to defend these multibillion-dollar assets as they move forward. In my view, Mr. Chairman, these cuts are ill-timed and the program is mature to the point that it is ready to go that way. I understand we have a legitimate difference of opinion with my colleagues on our side of the aisle and the staff. This clearly may be one of those glass- half-full/glass-half-empty kind of scenarios. But many of us who look at this program--I am on the Seapower Subcommittee--believe that this program does, in fact, need to move forward. I would request a positive end result and an ``aye'' vote on this amendment.

Mr. CONAWAY

Mr. CONAWAY. Mr. Speaker, today, I rise to commend the Farm Credit System for 100 years of service to rural America and the agriculture industry. The importance of the Farm Credit System is largely unknown to those outside of agriculture, often leaving it prone to political attacks. However, its importance to those it serves has never been greater, as declining commodity prices have led to a sharp downturn in the farm economy. Thankfully, the Farm Credit System and its members have been there to help lessen the burden. To understand the Farm Credit System, it's important to look back to its roots. In the early 1900s, credit was largely unavailable or unaffordable in rural areas, and lenders avoided agricultural loans due to their associated risks. In 1908, President Theodore Roosevelt appointed a commission to explore the problem and ultimately found a need to develop more cooperatives and a cooperative credit system for farmers. From that idea, Congress passed the Federal Farm Loan Act of 1916, eventually resulting in the establishment of the Farm Credit System--a system created to provide a permanent, reliable source of credit to American agriculture. The Farm Credit System's mission has evolved over time. For example, in 1980, Congress empowered the Farm Credit System to provide valuable capital for infrastructure necessary for communities to thrive. But since its inception, the Farm Credit System has never wavered in its mission of providing lines of credit to our rural communities in good times and in bad. During the late 1980's, our farmers and ranchers faced particularly difficult times. Fortunately, the agriculture industry and the Farm Credit System were able to weather the storm together and emerged even more prepared for the years to come. Today, I believe that the Farm Credit System is fundamentally safe and sound and in a position to endure the challenges that it will inevitably face. To acknowledge and celebrate a century of dedicated service to rural America, I was proud to sponsor House Resolution 591, commemorating Farm Credit's 100th anniversary. Providing more than $237 billion in loans to more than 500,000 customers, the Farm Credit System has worked tirelessly in all 50 states to ensure a vibrant rural economy, and I am proud to congratulate them today.

Mr. CONAWAY

Mr. CONAWAY. I thank my fellow colleague on the Agriculture Committee for hosting tonight's Special Order hour and for yielding. Mr. Speaker, I rise to commend the Farm Credit System for 100 years of service to rural America and the agriculture industry. The importance of the Farm Credit System is largely unknown to those who are outside of agriculture, often leaving it prone to political attacks. However, its importance to those it serves has never been greater as declining commodity prices have led to a sharp downturn in the farm economy. Thankfully, the Farm Credit System and its members have been there to help lessen that burden. To understand the Farm Credit System, it is important to look back at its roots. In the early 1900s, credit was largely unavailable or unaffordable in many parts of rural America, and lenders avoided agriculture loans due to their associated risks. In 1908, President Theodore Roosevelt appointed a commission to explore the problem and, ultimately, found a need to develop more cooperatives and a cooperative credit system for farmers. From that idea, Congress passed the Federal Farm Loan Act of 1916, which eventually resulted in the establishment of the Farm Credit System, a system created to provide a permanent, reliable source of credit to American agriculture. The Farm Credit System's mission has evolved over time. For example, in 1980, Congress empowered the Farm Credit System to provide valuable capital for infrastructure that is necessary for communities to thrive. Since its inception, the Farm Credit System has never wavered in its mission of providing lines of credit to rural communities in good times and in bad. During the late 1980s, our farmers and ranchers faced particularly difficult times. Fortunately, the agriculture industry and the Farm Credit System were able to weather the storm together, and they emerged even more prepared for the years to come. Today, I believe that the Farm Credit System is fundamentally safe and sound and in a position to endure the challenges that it will inevitably face. To acknowledge and celebrate a century of dedicated service to rural America, I was proud to sponsor H. Res. 591, which commemorates Farm Credit's 100th anniversary. Providing more than $237 billion in loans to more than 500,000 customers, the Farm Credit System has worked tirelessly in all 50 States to ensure a vibrant rural economy, and I am proud to congratulate it on its 100 years of good work and the system we have in place today.

Mr. CONAWAY

Mr. CONAWAY. Mr. Speaker, I rise to recognize the 90 Veterans from West Texas who will be visiting our Washington D.C. this week, sponsored by the Permian Basin Honor Flight. On behalf of a grateful state and nation, we welcome these heroes to the nation's capital. The Veterans on this Honor Flight are: Richard Galloway, Darrell Sanders, Clinton Adams, Mike Barber, Jerry Pinkston, SFC Aaron Hernandez, Dennis Sever, Jimmy L. Fine, Benny B. Fine, Alejos Rios Lara, Ira E. Wilson, Larry J. Monroe, Helen A. Bird, Jackie Lee Voss, Gary Clayton Collinsworth, Charles R. Sessions, Jimmy G. George, James R. Priest, Lowell D. Wade Jr., Horace L. Bowden, Margaret Voisel Forster, Larry K. Bagley, Donald E. Gorden Jr., Domingo Carrizales, James Miller, Paul W. Janssen, David P. Brockman, Robert L. Neff, James H. Silvers, Robert S. Thames, Bobbie R. Kerrigan, Rolland L. Rose, Gary W. Ward, Roscoe C. Haynes, Leonard C. Martinez, Donald R. Price, Luis R. Lopez, Gene A. Roberts, Melvin M. Longwell Jr., James H. Shaw, Ricky A. Warnick, Curtis D. McClain, Billie G. Mathis, James F. Kemper, Billie Ray Norman, Willard C. Walker, Jerome J. Engler, Stephen L. McConnell, Dock R. Clark, David H. Box, John W. Calhoun, Garland D. Pearce, Charles R. McMillian, Thomas E. Mindling, John Gutierez Alderete, David A. Dixon, Robert L. Kasper, Warren J. Lange, James V. Yakshaw, Tom D. Dodd, William E. Halfmann, Donald E. McClure, Johnny A. Wright, Robert C. Schlagal, Steven D. Rea, Juan Tarin, David Madrid, John M. Williams, Ronnie M. Nunley, Richard Cotte, Mark D. Kator, Jimmie K. Matthews, Milton R. Williamson, James L. White, Robert L. Teters, Steven W. Wagner, Roberto Martinez, Michael G. Roquemore, Mark E. Webb, Harry A. Spannaus, James W. Huston, Michael D. Jackson, Kenneth D. Carte, Michael W. Griffis, John R. Hayes, Edward Comacho, and Duane Janssen. Mr. Speaker, I am humbled to have the opportunity to meet these brave men and women who exemplify the best of our country. Their sacrifice and commitment to the duty to our nation can never be fully repaid, and I hope that when they visit our nation's monuments in Washington D.C., the gratitude and respect we have for them will truly be reflected. Mr. Speaker, please join me in thanking these veterans and their families for their exemplary dedication and service to this great nation. I would also like to extend a special thank you to the local communities, all of the volunteers, and Mr. John West and Ms. Teresa Galloway for their extensive work in organizing this Honor Flight. This trip would not have been possible without all the financial and emotional support of the people who have put in so much hard work and personal time to make sure this trip could be possible.

Mr. CONAWAY

Mr. CONAWAY. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank Mr. Smith for yielding and the other colleagues for the work they have done on this issue. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 1567, the Global Food Security Act of 2016. With the world population rapidly increasing, particularly in some of the most impoverished and food-insecure regions, it is of critical importance that the United States maintain its position as the world leader in the effort to alleviate global hunger and enhance food security. The agricultural community is proud to have long played a crucial role in this effort. We are eager to continue doing our part. As chairman of the House Committee on Agriculture, I vow to ensure that the expertise of the agriculture community is fully leveraged in the global food security efforts that are moving forward. To fulfill that promise, I have worked closely with the Committee on Foreign Affairs to ensure that the bill before us today capitalizes on the wealth of knowledge and expertise within the U.S. Department of Agriculture and amongst agricultural businesses, commodity groups, agricultural producers, agricultural research institutions, land grant colleges and universities, and the agricultural extension system. Beyond requiring collaboration with key agricultural stakeholders, the bill will also improve the monitoring and reporting of the various programs and funds counted toward the success of the current Feed the Future initiative. USAID has been very vocal in its efforts to reduce and/or eliminate in-kind food assistance, yet it lauds the use of these very programs in selling the success of Feed the Future. It is my hope that the enhanced reporting accountability within the global food security strategy will ensure that all food aid programs and means of delivery are appropriately recognized for the role that they play in the strategy's success. Further, to ensure that this legislation does not provide USAID with unintended opportunity to overhaul time-tested food aid programs, the bill contains carefully crafted language protecting the funds and the authorities of these existing programs. As I have pointed out time and again, any changes should be explored in the context of future farm bill discussions. I greatly appreciate Congressman Smith's open-minded approach to achieving common ground on this legislation as well as the cooperation and support from the various agricultural organizations, commodity groups, and nongovernmental organizations, such as the ONE Campaign, who have been engaged in this process. I look forward to maintaining and building upon these positive relations as we move forward and carefully monitor the implementation of this strategy. I urge my colleagues to support this bill.

Mr. CONAWAY

Mr. CONAWAY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to bring attention to a wave of frivolous lawsuits flooding my district. These lawsuits use the Americans with Disabilities Act, a law that has done tremendous good in our Nation, as legal cover to sue small mom-and-pop businesses for often unnoticed and easily correctible ADA violations. Businesses that have passed local inspections are often unaware that any ADA violation exists until a lawsuit arrives in their mailbox. Instead of demanding the violation be fixed, these lawsuits try to make a quick buck by settling out of court. The businesses have little choice: pay the settlement or pay expensive business-ending attorney fees to fight the charge. Often these attorneys, as in my district, don't even live in the State. Some use Google Earth to find violations and then file these lawsuits remotely. This is wrong. It takes advantage of the ADA, those with disabilities, and small businesses that thought they were in compliance. That is why I have cosponsored the ADA Education and Reform Act, which we believe will fix this problem. I will work to get this bill passed so west Texans won't be abused by predatory attorneys who care more about money than helping those with disabilities.