Bob Goodlatte

Mr. GOODLATTE

Mr. GOODLATTE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. As we begin 2016, we face the same difficulty we have faced since the beginning of the Obama administration. Because the administration and the entrenched Washington regulatory bureaucracy insist on piling burden upon burden on the backs of workers, Main Street families, and small-business owners, America is still struggling to create enough new jobs and economic growth to produce the prosperity we need. To turn this problem around, we must not only stem the tide of unnecessarily costly new regulations; we must also get rid of the deadwood in the accumulated, existing regulations that impose almost $2 trillion in annual costs on our economy. How can America's job creators create enough new jobs while Washington regulations divert so many of their resources in other directions? The SCRUB Act addresses this problem head-on with new, innovative ways to clear away the clutter of outdated and unnecessarily burdensome regulations. For years, there has been a bipartisan consensus that this is an important task that must be performed. But, as with so many things, the hard part has always been the details. Different approaches have been tried by different Presidential administrations, and some solutions have been offered by Congress. But, to date, no sufficiently meaningful results have been produced. In many ways, this is because past approaches never fully aligned the incentives and tools of all the relevant actors--regulatory agencies, regulated entities, the President, the Congress, and others--to identify and cut the regulations that can and should be cut. On their own, regulators have little incentive to shine a spotlight on their errors or on regulations that are no longer needed. Regulated entities, meanwhile, may fear retaliation by regulators if they suggest ways to trim the regulators' authority. And the sheer volume of the Code of Federal Regulations, which now contains roughly 175,000 pages of regulations, presents a daunting task for any Congress or President to address. The SCRUB Act represents a real step forward in our attempts to eliminate obsolete and unnecessarily burdensome Federal regulations without compromising needed regulatory objectives. By establishing an expert commission with the resources and authority to assess independently where and how regulations are outdated and unnecessarily burdensome, it overcomes the disincentives for agencies and even regulated entities to identify problem regulations. In addition, by providing a legislative method to immediately repeal the most problematic regulations, the SCRUB Act assures that we will take care of the biggest problems quickly. Further, by instituting regulatory CutGo measures for the remaining regulations the commission identifies for repeal--when Congress approves the repeal--the bill assures that the rest of the work of cutting regulations will finally happen. I urge my colleagues to support the SCRUB Act. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. GOODLATTE. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous materials on H.R. 1155.

Mr. GOODLATTE

Mr. GOODLATTE. Mr. Speaker, the Homestead Resort is a piece of American history nestled in the Allegheny Mountains of Virginia-- surrounded by the natural beauty of the landscape, permeated by healing mineral waters, and displaying the quintessential Southern charm for which it has become so well known. For 250 years, The Homestead Resort has served as a respite for weary travelers. From presidents and celebrities to families and visitors from around the globe, The Homestead has been a place where generations have come to rest, relax, and rejuvenate--all while enjoying the hospitality of our region. Located in Virginia's Sixth Congressional District in the village of Hot Springs, the history of The Homestead begins more than a decade before the founding of our nation. A young George Washington visited the area, and later granted the land on which The Homestead was built to Captain Thomas Bullitt. In 1766, The Homestead saw its start as an 18-room lodge. In 1818, former President Thomas Jefferson spent three weeks soaking in the mineral pools. To date, 23 U.S. presidents have visited the resort, including former President George W. Bush in 2015. Under the ownership of the Ingalls family for roughly 100 years until 1993, The Homestead saw many additions and improvements to shape the property as we know it today. Now known as The Omni Homestead Resort, over the past 200-plus years it has grown to encompass 2,300 acres with 483 guest rooms, numerous dining outlets, and more than 30 recreational activities. Today, this iconic resort continues to play a critical role in the economy of Bath County as a leading employer. Annually, the resort employs upwards of 1,000 workers, and is a significant source of tourism for surrounding communities and attractions. The success of The Homestead is a testament to its hardworking and dedicated employees, like Woody Pettus, the long-time maitre d' in the main dining room. Woody is an institution at The Homestead and is one of five generations of his family who have worked there over the years. For many guests, the staff at The Homestead has become an extended family. If you have not been to The Homestead, you are truly missing out on a little slice of heaven. From the columns flanking the main entrance and the welcoming expanse of the Great Hall to the beautifully designed gardens and miles of trails, a visit to The Homestead is certainly a unique experience. Over the years, this resort has become a special place for my family and many others. The people of Bath County are proud to call this landmark their own, and it is an honor to represent them and America's First Resort in the U.S. House of Representatives. Throughout 2016, The Homestead will honor the past, present and future of America's First Resort. I congratulate The Homestead on this 250th anniversary, and wish them many more milestone anniversaries to come.

Mr. GOODLATTE

Mr. GOODLATTE. Mr. Speaker, the cybersecurity measures in the legislation before us today results from a bill passed unanimously by the House Homeland Security Committee and the House Select Committee on Intelligence, who both worked closely with the Judiciary Committee to craft the liability provisions included in the House-passed bill, and in the bill before us today. I rise to discuss its liability provisions in particular. It is increasingly clear that government at all levels must rely on the private sector to help counter more and varied threats to its citizens by those who would do them harm. Those threats can come in the form of terrorist mass shootings, suicide bombers, and cyber-attacks that steal people's personal identification, money, and credit. At the same time, abusive lawsuits have made the private sector less and less willing to take action to reduce public risks because of the fear of frivolous lawsuits. To date, Congress has enacted two federal statutes, the SAFETY Act and the PREP Act, to provide private entities that are on the front lines in the war with terrorists with protection from debilitating litigation that would otherwise deter them from acting at all. The legislation before us today is a logical extension of those vital efforts. Soon after the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, the federal government appealed directly to the private sector for help in combating terrorism. Shortly thereafter, a team of the nation's leading scientists called for a comprehensive rethinking of our anti-terrorism infrastructure, underscoring the need to encourage private activity so existing technologies could be quickly brought into use. According to their report, conducted under the auspices of the National Academies, ``Research performed but not exploited, and technologies invented but not manufactured and deployed, do not help the nation protect itself.'' As part of the Homeland Security Act of 2002, Congress enacted liability protections that the Department of Homeland Security could extend to providers of effective anti-terrorism technologies. The SAFETY Act has resulted in the deployment of tens of thousands of anti- terrorism technologies to protect innocent Americans that would not have been deployed absent the Act's lawsuit protections. The SAFETY Act was initially opposed by the trial lawyers and their allies. But it soon came to enjoy broad bipartisan support. So much so that in January, 2007, just after the Democrats took control the House, a bill directing the Secretary of Homeland Security to streamline the SAFETY Act and anti-terrorism technology procurement processes passed by a vote of 427 to zero. During the debate on that legislation, the Democratic Chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee, Bennie Thompson, said during debate on the bill: ``Today I rise to support a bill that reaffirms our commitment to ensuring that safe and effective antiterrorism technologies are being deployed . . . In order to generate revolutionary breakthroughs in antiterrorism technologies, the Department must actively promote awareness of SAFETY Act protections not only among private sector, but across government procurement agencies . . . We must enable the private sector to deliver the revolutionary, breakthrough technologies that will help win the Nation's fight against terrorism.'' In 2005, Congress enacted the Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act, the ``PREP Act.'' Under the PREP Act, covered entities are protected from lawsuits when they engage in federally approved efforts to create vaccines and other means of stopping the spread of pandemics and other biological threats, including biological attacks by terrorists. Again, the PREP Act was initially opposed by the trial lawyers and their allies. But after it became law, President Obama, along with his predecessor, applied the PREP Act's protections many times, including to cover those making and administering influenza vaccines. Just last December, President Obama's Secretary of Health and Human Services applied the PREP Act's lawsuit protections to those manufacturing and distributing vaccines to help prevent the spread of the Ebola virus. In a press release announcing the application of the liability protections to those companies, the Secretary of Health and Human Services stated, and I quote, ``The PREP Act was designed to facilitate the development of medical countermeasures to respond to urgent public health needs, including the development of critical vaccines like those to prevent the spread of Ebola . . . My strong hope . . . is that other nations will also enact appropriate liability protection . . .'' Indeed, one of the vaccines the President protected from excessive liability under the PREP Act was able to quickly advance through its testing phases such that, by this August, it was declared ``highly effective.'' Today, I am proud to continue the bipartisan tradition of protecting the private sector from lawsuits when it's necessary to help the federal government do its job in protecting our nation's citizens from attack.

Mr. GOODLATTE

Mr. GOODLATTE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Every day at home and abroad, uniformed men and women risk their lives to protect our freedom and way of life. Among those brave souls are military reservists and members of the National Guard, who have been called to duty in Iraq, Afghanistan, and in many other places across the globe. We are eternally grateful for their service to our country. The Federal Government has a responsibility to ease the transition of reservists and guardsmen back into civilian life upon their return home. Some may return home with physical handicaps. For others, psychological challenges face them and their families. Some of these veterans and their families have suffered financial hardships, and, occasionally, bankruptcy is the unfortunate last resort. In a chapter 7 bankruptcy, debtors surrender virtually all of their assets to the bankruptcy trustee and receive a discharge from their debts at the end of the short case. In 2005, Congress made a number of reforms to the Bankruptcy Code under the Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act. A significant policy goal of that Act was to address abuses of the chapter 7 bankruptcy process. To that end, Congress inserted into the Bankruptcy Code a threshold test to gauge whether debtors have disposable income that can be used to pay their debts. This is commonly referred to as the ``means test.'' If debtors are able to pay some portion of their debts from their disposable monthly incomes, then the filing of a chapter 7 bankruptcy case is presumed to be an abuse of the bankruptcy system. Debtors can contest that presumption or can seek relief under other bankruptcy chapters, including chapter 13, under which they can restructure how to pay for their debts over time from their disposable incomes. In 2008, Congress recognized that military reservists and National Guardsmen sometimes confront unique financial challenges as a consequence of their military service. For instance, if these military members receive hazard pay during their service, that could actually inflate the results of the disposable income calculation under the means test, lifting them out of chapter 7 eligibility. So Congress enacted the National Guard and Reservist Debt Relief Act, which President Bush signed into law in October of 2008. This Act allows reservists and National Guardsmen to bypass the means test, making it easier for them to file a chapter 7 case. The original Act expired in 2011, but it was extended for an additional 4 years. The exemption is, once again, set to expire on December 19. H.R. 4246, introduced by Mr. Cohen and Mr. Forbes, further extends the existing exemption to 2019. We continue to call on our guardsmen and reservists to serve our country. We should ensure that those military members who fall on hard times are not denied access to bankruptcy because of their service to their country. The bill before us today extends the sunset date by 4 years, at which time Congress will have the opportunity to reexamine whether this exception to the means test continues to be necessary. I thank the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Cohen) and the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Forbes) for introducing this legislation; and I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on the bill. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. GOODLATTE. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this important legislation that continues a very good practice that benefits our Guard and Reserve members. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. GOODLATTE. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and to include extraneous material on H.R. 4246, currently under consideration.

Mr. GOODLATTE. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 4246) to exempt for an additional 4-year period, from the application of the means-test presumption of abuse under chapter 7, qualifying members of reserve components of the Armed Forces and members of the National Guard who, after September 11, 2001, are called to active duty or to perform a homeland defense activity for not less than 90 days.

Mr. GOODLATTE

Mr. GOODLATTE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman for yielding and for his and other members of the Ways and Means Committee's outstanding work on this legislation. I am here to talk about another aspect of it. Time is short. A temporary ban on State taxation of Internet access is expiring. Section 922 of the conference report aids taxpayers by making this ban permanent. If the ban on Internet access taxes is not renewed, the potential tax burden on Americans would be substantial. It is estimated that Internet access tax rates could be more than twice the average rate of all other goods and services. Low-income households could pay 10 times as much as high-income households as a share of income. Congress has passed numerous temporary bans with enormous bipartisan support. Earlier this year a permanent ban passed the House by voice vote. Section 922 merely prevents Internet access taxes and unfair multiple or discriminatory taxes on e-commerce. It does not tackle the issue of Internet sales taxes. My committee is working assiduously on that issue and making progress. Studies show that taxes affect Internet adoption rates. As price rises, demand falls. The Internet has become an indispensable gateway to scientific, educational, and economic opportunities. Section 922 preserves unfettered access to one of the most unique gateways to knowledge and engines of self-improvement in all of human history. I thank the conferees for including this protaxpayer collision. I urge my colleagues' support.

Mr. GOODLATTE

Mr. GOODLATTE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Katko), the chairman of our Foreign Fighter Task Force.

Mr. GOODLATTE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Arizona (Ms. McSally), the chairman of the Subcommittee on Emergency Preparedness, Response, and Communications of the Homeland Security Committee.

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

Mr. GOODLATTE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Iowa (Mr. King), a member of the Judiciary Committee.

Mr. GOODLATTE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Indiana (Mrs. Walorski).

Mr. GOODLATTE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I support H.R. 158, the Visa Waiver Program Improvement and Terrorist Travel Prevention Act of 2015. The Visa Waiver Program allows nationals of 38 countries to travel to the United States for a maximum of 90 days for business or tourism purposes without obtaining a visa. The travelers must present a valid machine-readable passport and meet certain other immigration and security requirements. In order to be designated a VWP country, a nation must offer reciprocal visa-free travel to U.S. citizens, agree to share security- related information such as whether citizens of that country traveling to the U.S. represent a threat to U.S. security or welfare, agree to timely report lost and stolen passports, and have less than a 3 percent visa refusal rate in the year prior to designation years, among other requirements. The VWP was created in 1986 as a way to promote and facilitate travel and tourism to the United States. It has done just that, with hundreds of millions of foreign nationals traveling to the U.S. since the program's implementation. So the positive effects of the VWP on the U.S. economy should not be understated. Yet no amount of economic stimulation is worth risking the lives of our constituents, and recent events around the world necessitate changes to the VWP in order to help ensure its safety. Of particular concern is the rise of ISIS in the Middle East and the large number of Europeans and other nationalities who have gone to Syria, Iraq, and other countries of concern in order to train and fight alongside ISIS and the radical Islamist terrorists. With their VWP country passports, those terrorists can board a plane bound for the U.S. and can reach U.S. shores with relative ease. In VWP cases, there is no in-person interview with a U.S. consular officer, and there is no pretravel enhanced screening. So we must help make sure that the VWP is as secure as possible. H.R. 158 takes constructive steps in this direction with provisions preventing dual nationals of, or those who have recently traveled to, Iraq, Syria, or other countries of concern, from visa-free travel to the U.S. Among other security enhancements, the bill requires VWP countries to issue e-Passports to their nationals and continuously share terrorism and foreign traveler data with us. The VWP is only one part of the national discussion that we should be having. There are Islamist terrorists looking at all aspects of our immigration policy to find any way possible to exploit it. We learned that lesson on 9/11, and we learned that lesson last week in San Bernardino. Mr. Speaker, I hope this body continues to address deficiencies in U.S. immigration policy by taking up and passing additional House Judiciary Committee bills, including those reported out of the Judiciary Committee to reform the U.S. asylum process, to change the way unaccompanied alien minors are treated when they cross the U.S. border so that there is no longer an incentive to run across the border, and to finally prevent the interior immigration enforcement switch from being turned off at the whim of whoever resides at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from Michigan (Mrs. Miller) and the chairman of the Homeland Security Committee, as well as their staff members, for their work on the bill. Much more needs to be done to prevent exploitation of U.S. immigration policy by terrorists, but H.R. 158 is another good step in helping to ensure the safety of Americans, and I support it. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. GOODLATTE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. McCaul), the chairman of the Homeland Security Committee.

Mr. GOODLATTE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Poe), a member of the Judiciary Committee.

Mr. GOODLATTE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Lance).

Mr. GOODLATTE. Mr. Speaker, may I inquire how much time is remaining on each side.

Mr. GOODLATTE. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 158) to clarify the grounds for ineligibility for travel to the United States regarding terrorism risk, to expand the criteria by which a country may be removed from the Visa Waiver Program, to require the Secretary of Homeland Security to submit a report on strengthening the Electronic System for Travel Authorization to better secure the international borders of the United States and prevent terrorists and instruments of terrorism from entering the United States, and for other purposes, as amended.

Mr. GOODLATTE. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous materials on H.R. 158 currently under consideration.

Mr. GOODLATTE. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that debate on this motion be extended by 10 minutes on each side.

Mr. GOODLATTE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Duncan).

Mr. GOODLATTE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentlewoman from Michigan (Mrs. Miller), the chief sponsor of this legislation, who is also the chairman of the House Administration Committee.

Mr. GOODLATTE. I am the only remaining speaker.