Bob Goodlatte

Mr. GOODLATTE

Mr. GOODLATTE. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 5135) to direct the Interagency Task Force to Monitor and Combat Trafficking to identify strategies to prevent children from becoming victims of trafficking and review trafficking prevention efforts, to protect and assist in the recovery of victims of trafficking, and for other purposes.

Mr. GOODLATTE

Mr. GOODLATTE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to introduce legislation to transfer land from the United States to Rockingham County, Virginia. The County has long managed this land and associated buildings and has been responsible for all upkeep. In 1989, the Department of the Interior deeded this land, which it no longer used, to Rockingham County for public good. The County approached then Rep. Jim Olin in the 101st Congress to allow the buildings on this land to be used for the particular use of a non- profit day care that serves the County. This resulted in PL 101-479. However, because of the narrow way this law was drafted, Rockingham County does not have true autonomy over the land and must check-in with the Department of the Interior when any repairs or upgrades of the facilities are needed. Given that the building is used for a child care facility, this added bureaucracy delays and impedes the ability of the day care to move efficiently to make any necessary upgrades. For over 25 years Rockingham County, Virginia has managed this land as if it belonged to the County. Although this land was already transferred to the county, it was not done effectively. This legislation will finalize the efforts of a previous Congress and fully transfer this land to the county. I ask all of my colleagues to join me in passing this legislation.

Mr. GOODLATTE

Mr. GOODLATTE. Mr. Speaker, this afternoon, the House is considering joint Judiciary and Energy and Commerce Committee legislation to ensure that our rural constituents continue to have access to network channels on America's two satellite carriers. Title II of the legislation extends the expiring section 119 copyright license for another 5 years, as this committee has done on previous occasions, most recently in 2010. This license ensures that when our constituents do not have access to a full complement of local network television stations, they can have access, through satellite television carriers, to distant network television stations. This helps ensure that consumers in rural areas, like my congressional district, have the same access to news and entertainment options that consumers in urban areas enjoy. Without enactment of this legislation, many of our constituents would potentially lose access to certain networks altogether on December 31 when the current license expires. I would like to point out that, although numerous stakeholders interested in video issues have contacted the Judiciary Committee on a variety of issues, they all agree that this license should not expire at the end of this year. Other issues of interest in this area will be the subject of further discussions as the Judiciary Committee continues its ongoing review of our Nation's copyright laws. I want to express my appreciation to the chairman of the Energy and Commerce Committee, Mr. Upton, and the chairman of the Telecommunications Subcommittee, Mr. Walden, for their efforts on this reauthorization as well, and I look forward to continuing to work with them on this issue that is important to all of our constituents.

Mr. GOODLATTE

Mr. GOODLATTE. Madam Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time. Madam Speaker, passing the permanent Internet Tax Freedom Act would increase access all across America for millions of Americans, especially lower-income Americans, increase growth and increase opportunity, increase jobs in this country. Now is the time to act. A permanent ban on taxation of Internet access is crucial for protecting the future of our digital economy. If the ban on Internet access taxes is not renewed by November 1, the potential tax burden on Americans will 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 ten times as much as high-income households as a share of income. The last thing that Americans need is another bill on their doorsteps. A tax on Internet access would burden millions of Americans who rely on the Internet to conduct business, communicate, educate, and live. Over the past 14 years, Congress has extended ban after ban on States taxing Internet access. The measures have been met with enormous bipartisan support. Only five ``no'' votes were cast in the history of these renewals in the House and the Senate. As price rises, demand falls. If the ban lapses, State telecommunications taxes could take effect, and those rates are already too high. Former White House Chief Economist Austan Goolsbee estimated that a tax that increased the price of Internet access by 1 percent would reduce demand for Internet access by 2.75 percent. The permanent Internet Tax Freedom Act merely prevents Internet access taxes and unfair multiple and discriminatory taxes on e- commerce. It does not tackle the issue of Internet sales taxes. Madam Speaker, this is a great issue for the Congress to move forward on in a bipartisan fashion that will help to create jobs and economic growth and foster continued greater access of the Internet. After all, isn't that what we want? We want every American to have opportunity to access this in the most affordable way so that they can have the educational opportunities, the employment opportunities, the recreational opportunities, the social opportunities that are created by the Internet. I urge my colleagues to support this legislation, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. GOODLATTE. Madam Speaker, at this time, it is my pleasure to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Collins), a member of the Judiciary Committee and a leader on technology issues.

Mr. GOODLATTE. Madam Speaker, I want to thank the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Eshoo) for her leadership on this issue. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Farenthold), a member of the Judiciary Committee.

Mr. GOODLATTE. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. The clock is ticking down on a key law that protects Internet freedom. On November 1, 2014, a temporary moratorium on State taxation of Internet access will expire. In 1998, Congress temporarily banned State and local governments from newly taxing Internet access or placing multiple or discriminatory taxes on Internet commerce. With minor modifications, this ban was extended three times with enormous bipartisan support. The most recent extension passed in 2007. If the moratorium is not renewed, the potential tax burden on consumers will be substantial. The average tax rate on communications services in 2007 was 13.5 percent, more than twice the average rate on all other goods and services. To make matters worse, this tax is regressive. Low-income households pay 10 times as much in communications taxes as high-income households as a share of income. The Permanent Internet Tax Freedom Act converts the moratorium into a permanent ban on which consumers, innovators, and investors can permanently rely by simply striking the 2014 end date. This legislation prevents a surprise tax hike on Americans' critical services this fall. It also maintains unfettered access to one of the most unique gateways to knowledge and engines of self- improvement in all of human history. This is not an exaggeration. During the 2007 renewal of the moratorium, the Judiciary Committee heard testimony that more than 75 percent of the remarkable productivity growth that increased jobs and income between 1995 and 2007 was due to investments in telecommunications networks technology and the information transported across them. Everyone in Silicon Valley knows Max Levchin's story. He came to America from the Soviet Union at age 16. His family had $300 in its pocket, and he learned English by watching an old TV set he hauled out of a dumpster and repaired. Ten years later, he sold PayPal, the well known Internet payments platform he cofounded, for $1.5 billion. That is the greatness of the Internet. It is a liberating technology that is a vast meritocracy. It does not care how you look or where you come from. It offers opportunity to anyone willing to invest time and effort. That is precisely why Congress has worked acidulously for 16 years to keep Internet access tax-free. Now we must act again once and for all. The Permanent Internet Tax Freedom Act has 228 cosponsors. The Judiciary Committee reported it favorably by a vote of 30-4. Nevertheless, small pockets of resistance remain. They argue that the Internet is no longer a fledgling technology in need of protection. But it is precisely the ubiquity of the Internet that counsels for a permanent extension. It has become an indispensable gateway to scientific, educational, and economic opportunities. It is the platform that turned Max Levchin from an impoverished immigrant into a billionaire. The case for permanent tax-free access to this gateway technology is stronger today than it ever has been. Opponents also claim that this legislation will lower State revenues. Seven States currently enjoy an exemption from the moratorium. This legislation lets these grandfather clauses expire. But these grandfathered States had no reasonable expectation of maintaining their special status. The original moratorium included a grandfather clause to give States that were then taxing Internet access some time to transition to other sources of revenue. Some discontinued taxing Internet access in support of a national broadband policy. For those that still haven't, it has been 16 years, time enough to change their tax codes. If the revenue grandfathered States now reap is truly essential, it should be straightforward for the State to recoup it through a different form of taxation. It is important to note that the Permanent Internet Tax Freedom Act does not address the issue of State taxes on remote sales made over the Internet. It merely prevents Internet access taxes and unfair multiple or discriminatory taxes on e-commerce, whether inside the taxing State or without. I would like to specifically thank Mr. Chabot, Ms. Eshoo, Subcommittee Chairman Bachus, and Subcommittee Ranking Member Cohen for their work on and support of this legislation. This bipartisan legislation is about giving every American unfettered access to the Internet, which is the modern gateway to the American Dream. I urge all of my colleagues to support it. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. GOODLATTE. Madam Speaker, at this time, it is my pleasure to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Chabot), a member of the Judiciary Committee.

Mr. GOODLATTE. Madam Speaker, I want to thank the gentlewoman from California and the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Chabot) for their leadership on this issue. Now I would like to yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Bucshon) for his statement and thank him for his leadership on this issue as well.

Mr. GOODLATTE. Madam Speaker, at this time, it is my pleasure to yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Barton).

Mr. GOODLATTE. First of all, I thank the gentleman for his question, and I and others have been clear that we think these grandfather clauses should expire. When they first were adopted 16 years ago, it was with the intention that they be phased out. Of course, they have had 16 years, and we would like to have them do that.

Mr. GOODLATTE. Madam Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 3086) to permanently extend the Internet Tax Freedom Act.

Mr. GOODLATTE. Madam 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. 3086, currently under consideration.

Mr. GOODLATTE. Madam Speaker, I yield myself an additional 30 seconds. Our goal is to have a clean, permanent moratorium signed into law as promptly as possible. If the gentleman from Texas can engineer a phaseout consistent with that goal, I am certainly willing to work with him in that objective.

Mr. GOODLATTE. I yield to the gentleman from Texas.

Mr. GOODLATTE. As this measure is considered in the Senate and then in conference between the House and Senate, we would look forward to working with you.

Mr. GOODLATTE. Madam Speaker, it is my pleasure to yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Utah (Mr. Chaffetz), who has been a steadfast proponent of Internet tax freedom.

Mr. GOODLATTE

Mr. GOODLATTE. Madam Speaker, the people of Virginia's Sixth District are hardworking, busy running small businesses, teaching, raising families, earning a living, and trying to make ends meet. It is Congress' duty to make their lives as uncomplicated by government as possible. Time and time again, however, we have seen ObamaCare doing the very opposite. Across my district, hourly employees are seeing cutbacks in their workweeks. Multiple employers are weighing the costs of offering health coverage to their employees. I have received countless complaints from folks whose insurance was canceled or whose premiums increased. It is offensive that the White House dismisses these experiences as ``anecdotal.'' The people in my district do not consider their lives, their businesses, and their health care to be anecdotal. Delays and exemptions have proven that this law is flawed and unworkable. ObamaCare has got to go and be replaced by patient-centered health care reform.

Mr. GOODLATTE

Mr. GOODLATTE. Mr. Speaker, energy is vital to every aspect of American life. Working families, retirees, and businesses--large and small--are all depending upon reliable and affordable energy. An unwelcome increase in the electric bill leaves many families no other option but to cut elsewhere. For businesses, higher energy costs mean less money to invest in jobs or expansion. As business costs increase, so does the price of goods down the line, triggering a chain reaction felt throughout the economy. Unfortunately, the Obama administration's policies are contributing to the rise in energy costs with policies that discourage exploration of domestic resources and attempt to bypass Congress to implement cap-and- trade. A major way to improve reliability and affordability is to produce more energy here at home. I am pleased to join my colleagues as we debate energy solutions and advance an all-of-the-above energy policy to power economic growth and job creation.

Mr. GOODLATTE

Mr. GOODLATTE. Mr. Speaker, I, along with House Judiciary Ranking Member John Conyers, Jr. of Michigan and Representative Zoe Lofgren of California, would like to thank David Shahoulian for more than seven years of service to the House of Representatives. Throughout this time, David has served as a dedicated counsel to the Judiciary Committee under three Chairmen, including myself, John Conyers, Jr., and Lamar Smith of Texas. For the last three years, he has served as the Minority Chief Counsel to the Judiciary's Committee's Immigration Subcommittee. A native of Miami, Florida, David initially pursued a career in the film industry after graduating summa cum laude from Florida State University. David eventually returned to school to earn a Master's Degree in creative writing from the University of Southern California before obtaining his law degree from the Yale Law School. It was in law school that David developed a passion for immigration law. Through his work in the Jerome N. Frank Legal Services Organization, David spent hundreds of hours representing clients at the Asylum Office all the way up to the Second Circuit Court of Appeals. After graduation, he worked for two years as a Chesterfield Smith Public Interest Fellow at the law firm of Holland & Knight LLP. Just two months into his fellowship, David looked out the window of his Miami apartment and saw dozens of Haitian refugees scrambling onto the Rickenbacker Causeway after their boat ran aground. David ultimately represented a number of these asylum seekers and worked to secure pro bono counsel for many more. As the child of refugee parents from Iran and Cuba, David is a tireless advocate for those who have fled persecution and torture in search of freedom and liberty. After three additional years at the law firm, David joined the Judiciary Committee in March 2007 and took on an ever-expanding portfolio of issues. Over time, his ability to master questions of law, policy, politics, and House procedure earned him the respect of Members and staff on both sides of the aisle. Throughout his tenure, David played a critical role in bipartisan negotiations over legislative topics large and small. He was the lead staff Democratic negotiator for the Judiciary Committee on the William Wilberforce Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2008, which made major reforms to immigration law regarding the victims of trafficking and unaccompanied children, and the James Zadroga 9/11 Health and Compensation Act of 2010, which established a program to provide health care to those injured during recovery and cleanup efforts at the September 11 terrorist-attack sites and by reopening the September 11 Victim Compensation Fund to provide compensation for such injured persons. David's affable demeanor and quick mind have frequently been on display and have earned him many friends on both sides of the aisle and in both chambers of Congress. David's absence will be felt for years to come on matters pertaining to immigration law and policy, but we know that he will continue to work in this area as Deputy General Counsel of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security. Mr. Speaker, we applaud David's tireless, principled and loyal public service to the U.S. House of Representatives and the American people and wish his every success in his future endeavors.

Mr. GOODLATTE

Mr. GOODLATTE. Mr. Speaker, I was unavoidably detained during the second vote series on June 18, 2014. Had I been present, I would have voted ``no'' on the Democrat Motion to Instruct Conferees on H.R. 3230--Veterans' Access to Care through Choice, Accountability, and Transparency Act of 2014.

Mr. GOODLATTE

Mr. GOODLATTE. Mr. Chairman, the bill passed by this House honors the Fourth Amendment and protects the rights of American citizens. At the same time, Islamic radical terrorists are on the march in Iraq, and the leader has publicly threatened to attack America, Syria has become a vortex of jihadists from across the globe, and the Director of National Intelligence and the Secretary of Homeland Security have warned of the growing threat these jihadists pose to our own homeland. State control has collapsed in Libya, and rival gangs of radical terrorists have established safe havens that rival those in Afghanistan prior to 2001. Meanwhile, in Afghanistan, the Taliban, Haqqani Network, and al Qaeda continue to fight. Moreover, the administration has released the Taliban Five from Guantanamo, emboldening the terrorists. The terrorist danger is grave and growing. The terrorist threat is not contained overseas. The U.S. homeland remains a prime aspiration and target. This amendment would create a blind spot for the intelligence community tracking terrorists with direct connections to the U.S. homeland. This amendment would impose greater restrictions on the intelligence community's ability to protect national security than constitutionally required and create an impediment to the government's ability to locate threat information already in its possession. Such an impediment would put American lives at risk of another terrorist attack I urge my colleagues to reject this amendment and stand by the legislation passed. It is also being considered in the Senate and there will be further negotiations, but this--this--contradicts the intent of the House and endangers America's national security.

Mr. GOODLATTE. Mr. Chairman, last month, the House passed H.R. 3361, the USA FREEDOM Act, with overwhelming bipartisan support. This amendment undoes the carefully crafted reforms that this body passed, with overwhelming support. A similar amendment regarding section 702 was offered and rejected by the House Judiciary Committee during its markup of H.R. 3361. The bipartisan legislation passed by the House last month was closely negotiated on a bipartisan basis with the House Intelligence Committee, House leadership, and the intelligence community--to create a product that provides real, meaningful reforms to intelligence-gathering programs, while ensuring that the operational capabilities of the intelligence community are protected. H.R. 3361 explicitly codifies existing minimization procedures for section 702 of the FISA Amendments Act that requires the intelligence community to minimize the collection and prohibit the retention and dissemination of wholly domestic communications. H.R. 3361 also prohibits the government from using communications to or from a United States person or a person who appears to be located in the United States, except where the communication relates to a target under section 702 or to protect against an immediate threat to human life. The intelligence community is strictly prohibited from using section 702 of the FISA Amendments Acts to target a U.S. person. If a U.S. person is the target of intelligence gathering under FISA, this must, at all times, be carried out pursuant to an individualized court order based upon probable cause.

Mr. GOODLATTE

Mr. GOODLATTE. Mr. Speaker, the diversity within our Nation's postsecondary education system is the envy of the world. Colleges and universities across the United States of America are preparing individuals to become doctors, teachers, scientists, counselors, entrepreneurs, artists, musicians, and hundreds of other occupations. While each student chooses a specific field of study, there is no doubt that postsecondary education has many benefits outside of training in a specified field. Institutions are cultivating individuals who are civically engaged and who are going into public service, the military, ministry, non-profit work, or are staying at home to care for family. We cannot measure the benefits associated with these types of life-long lessons, and yet that is what the Administration's proposed Postsecondary Institutions Ratings System will attempt to do. On December 17, 2013 the Department of Education solicited in the Federal Register a Request for Information on the Postsecondary Institution Ratings System (PIRS), suggesting that the Federal Government knows better than students and their families what makes a college or university valuable and appropriate for each individual. A rating system, administered by the Federal Government and potentially tied to Federal student aid, will drive postsecondary institutions to standardization, thereby decreasing choice, diversity, and innovation. I rise today in opposition to this proposal and instead stand in support of students and their families--they know best what will meet their educational needs. The House Resolution I offered today with my friend, Congressman Capuano, strongly supports the quality and value of diversity in our higher education system and strongly disagrees with the Administration's proposal to rate our Nation's colleges and universities. It is true that all taxpayer dollars, including those spent on Federal student aid, should be spent efficiently; however, it is also important that we trust students' free choices and allow for postsecondary institutions to be evaluated, not only by their accreditation and Federal eligibility for federal aid, but also by the free market choices of the students they are competing for. Our Nation's colleges and universities are as diverse as our students. Historically black colleges, women's colleges, faith-based colleges, research universities, career training schools, work colleges, land grant universities, institutes for the arts, and other specialized institutions all offer a world of opportunity and innovation in postsecondary education. We must protect this American tradition and reject any proposal that will intentionally, or unintentionally, destroy it.

Mr. GOODLATTE

Mr. GOODLATTE. Mr. Speaker, I, along with House Judiciary Ranking Member John Conyers, Jr. of Michigan and former Representative Melvin Watt of North Carolina would like to thank Stephanie Y. Moore for twelve years of service to the House of Representatives. Nine of those years were spent as a dedicated counsel to the Judiciary Committee under four Chairmen, including myself and Representatives Jim Sensenbrenner of Wisconsin, John Conyers, Jr. and Lamar Smith of Texas. She also served three years as General Counsel to Representative George Miller of California and the House Education and Labor Committee. A native of Birmingham, Alabama, Stephanie graduated with high honors from Oberlin College and went on to distinguish herself at Harvard Law School where she became only the second Black woman in the school's history to earn an invitation to become an editor of the venerable Harvard Law Review. After graduation, she clerked for the late Judge A. Leon Higginbotham, Jr. on the Third Circuit Court of Appeals and practiced law with the Center for Constitutional Rights. Immediately prior to joining the Judiciary Committee as Chief Counsel to Ranking Member Watt, Stephanie worked in the Administration of President Bill Clinton as General Counsel to the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights and Special Counsel at the U.S. Department of Education. She also served on the faculties of the District of Columbia School of Law and the Howard University Law School. Stephanie joined the Judiciary Committee during the August 2001 recess and sat as counsel on her first hearing on the morning of September 11. In the aftermath of the terrible terrorist attacks on that day, Stephanie served as the principal Democratic staff negotiator on measures to ensure the privacy and civil liberties of the American public in a post 9/11 world. Throughout her tenure, Stephanie consistently identified and focused on the fundamental policies implicated by legislative proposals. During her career with the Judiciary Committee, she exhibited a wide range of interests and considerable versatility in handling subjects as complex and diverse as administrative law, tax policy, privacy and civil liberties, antitrust, online commerce and piracy, trade and intellectual property. Stephanie's tenacity, passion and no-nonsense approach won her both admirers and critics. Her intellect and determination were instrumental in committee efforts to ensure that robust standards were established to fairly compensate the victims of the BP Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill in 2010 and again the following year as she sought to balance the interests of multiple stakeholders during the drafting of and debates on the Stop Online Piracy Act. Stephanie's ability to manage and contribute to a range of significant public policy initiatives was evident in the key role she played as the lead Democratic staffer on the Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005 and during passage of landmark, bipartisan legislation that included the Fannie Lou Hamer, Rosa Parks, and Coretta Scott King Voting Rights Act Reauthorization and Amendments Act of 2006, the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act of 2011 and the Foreign and Economic Espionage Penalty Enhancement Act of 2012. Mr. Speaker, we applaud Stephanie's tireless, principled and loyal public service to the U.S. House of Representatives and the American people and wish her every success in her future endeavors.