Mark Green

Mr. GREEN of Wisconsin

Mr. GREEN of Wisconsin. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, my time is limited, so I will focus on just two aspects of this amendment that come largely from my own legislation, H.R. 4942. First, this amendment recognizes that our enemy is not merely the terrorist who pulls the trigger or places the bomb or drives that rig truck, it is also those who through their material support make the violent act possible. They provide the training, they provide the shelter, the ID documents, the resources, the intelligence, the many dirty acts that help the chain of destruction. If we can break these links in the terrorist chain, then the chain will fall apart. The second thing these provisions do is common sense. It makes material support of terrorism, especially those who participate in military-style training, grounds for being inadmissible into this country and grounds for deportation. We are a welcoming country. I am the proud son of immigrants. But we cannot allow our welcoming arms to be a tool for terrorists who seek our downfall. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. GREEN of Wisconsin. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Sensenbrenner), the distinguished chairman of the Committee on the Judiciary who has produced so many of the important provisions of this legislation.

Mr. GREEN of Wisconsin. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Hostettler), chairman of the Subcommittee on Immigration, Border Security, and Claims. (Mr. HOSTETTLER asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. GREEN of Wisconsin. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, I think what is interesting to listen to today are the arguments on the other side. Where they cannot win on the merits, they choose to throw up a smoke screen of process, no matter how far off point it may be. This amendment stands for a very simple proposition, those who materially support terrorists, who make the terrorist act possible by providing training, intelligence, logistics, transportation, those who materially support terrorism should not be here. They should not be allowed in this country; and if they are in this country, they should be deported. We must have this tool. If we are truly going to make this country safe, if we are truly going to disrupt terrorism before the trigger is pulled or the bomb is set, before lives are lost, we must have these tools. Those who support terrorism intellectually through their training support and harboring terrorists, those who operate and move in the shadows of the terrorist operation, they do not belong here. They are every bit as dangerous as the one who would pull the trigger. I urge my colleagues to support this amendment. I think it is a vitally important tool in our overall effort in homeland security. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. GREEN of Wisconsin. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. GREEN of Wisconsin

Mr. GREEN of Wisconsin. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time. I would like to step back for a moment and just talk briefly about the situation we find ourselves in. In the months after 9/11, in fact, in the days after 9/11, we instantly heard certain names of terrorists, Osama bin Laden, obviously, and a few others. And I think we were misled into believing that somehow these were the only problems that we had, that these individuals were the extent of our terrorist problem. What we have learned in the months since then and what we have learned through the 9/11 Commission's work and its predecessor, the Joint Committee of Inquiry here in Congress, is that any terrorist operation is built upon a network. It is not one individual or even a couple of individuals, but there is a whole network of individuals who each plays a specific role, has a specific job, whether it be identity documents or scoping out buildings or providing training or providing intelligence or recruiting or whatever it may be. What we have learned, I think, in these months since the tragic days of September 11 is that if we are going to be successful in protecting this Nation, we cannot focus solely on the trigger man or the guy who plants the bomb or the guy who drives that rigged truck, because we can remove those individuals and more may pop up. Instead, we have to go over every link in the chain. We have to go after those who provide material support, who provide the shadows in which terrorists hide, who scope out the building and provide the intelligence and the diagrams, who provide the transportation, who provide the forged documents, who put the trigger men in place to do their terrible deeds. The 9/11 Commission was very clear in saying that its report was not legislation. It understood that its report would need to go through the legislative process, and it has. And I believe the legislation that this body produced, H.R. 10, not only carries the spirit and concepts of the 9/11 report, but based upon the experience that we have all had and all that we have learned, I think it adds a lot to it. It is only the House version of this bill that goes after every part in that network. It is only the House version of the bill and, in particular, the provisions that came out of the Committee on the Judiciary that are aimed at breaking each of the links in making sure that we go after the recruiters of terrorists, those who provide the military training, those who recruit and, as well, the ranks of terrorist organizations. We have to go after them as surely as we go after those who have placed that bomb. If we do not, we cannot win. And I think we also recognize that by the very nature of terrorist operations, we cannot wait until after the terrible act has occurred. We have to disrupt it. We have to prevent it. We have to break that chain. We have to disrupt that network. We have to find those who give material support to terrorism, whether it be the military training or the logistics. We have to remove them. Unless we remove those individuals, we cannot succeed. So the question I think we have before us today with this motion to instruct is whether or not we are going to take a very narrow approach, which is what some would suggest, and I would argue the Senate bill would do, which is incomplete, which does not get after every link in the chain, which does not really go after the network, which does not have the material support provisions in it; or whether or not we are going to be serious, whether or not we are going to take that comprehensive approach that I can, as a young father, be proud of because I know that it makes this country a safer place for my kids to grow up in. Make no mistake, when this legislation is signed by the President, there will be some time that passes before we are able to take up some of the new steps that the other side would have us remove. The clock is ticking. We have heard a number of terrorism experts refer to this as a race against time. I agree, it is. We have to get this right. We have to be bold. We have to go after that network. We have to go after every link in the chain. We have to remove them. We have to prevent them from coming into place. We have to send a signal to those who would recruit terrorists. We have to send a signal to those who would become recruits. They are our enemy just as surely as the man or the woman that pulls the trigger. That is the experience, I think, that this world has had in the sad months since September 11. I urge my colleagues to avoid the motion to instruct because it falls short. It does not do the job. It does not go after the network. It will not break the links in the chain. I have said it before. I think, as we all look back on the years leading up to 9/11, I think we have to agree that a storm was gathering in the terrorist world and too many of our leaders, and this is not a partisan comment, too many of our leaders looked the other way. The question is now whether, 10 years from now, 15 years from now, whether or not our successors will look back at this Congress and say either they did the right thing, they took a bold comprehensive approach, or, let us hope not, they looked the other way and they fell short. I urge my colleagues to vote against this motion to instruct.

Mr. GREEN of Wisconsin

Mr. GREEN of Wisconsin. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me time. Mr. Chairman, much of the attention on this bill has been focused on intelligence reforms, rightly so because they are absolutely necessary, but I would argue that the provisions under the jurisdiction of the Committee on the Judiciary are every bit as important and every bit as urgent. A few folks have tried to argue here that somehow these are extraneous. They are wrong. These provisions strike at the support network that makes a terrorist operation possible. They give us the tools to prevent the movement of those who would hide and move in the shadows, who offer support to terrorism, who provide training, logistical information, transportation and so on. Those who provide material support to terrorists are, in many ways, as dangerous as the evil figure who pulls the trigger. If we attack and remove those who provide such support, we yank at the links in the chain. We break those links, we break the chain of destruction. These are essential provisions to make this Nation safer. They are an essential part of the war on terrorism. I urge my colleagues to support the work of the Committee on the Judiciary.

Mr. GREEN of Wisconsin

Mr. GREEN of Wisconsin. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me time. I rise in support of the rule and the bill that the rule brings to the floor later today. Mr. Speaker, on a day like today a lot of Members will get up here and make political arguments and try to score political points. I trust that the public will see through all of that. As the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. LaHood) has said, and I think so, well, since 9/11 we have taken a number of very important steps in this body on a bipartisan basis. There are a lot of things that we have done. Perhaps that is one reason why the 9/11 report itself says very clearly we are safer today than we were 3 years ago. But it continues on to say, but we are not safe. It is that last part that brings us here today. I know that we are all grateful that the 9/11 Commission did not give in to the finger- pointing that we have heard so much of in the months leading up to its creation. But what the commission does make very clear, I think what the public understands instinctively is that for too many years a storm was growing in the terrorist world while too many of our leaders just turned and looked away. The question that we will answer over the next 2 days is, Will we look away once again? Will our successors 10 years from now, 15 years from now or more, will they look back and say that this Congress failed to act when we could have, when we should have, even when the signs of danger were unmistakable? Just as unmistakable in my view is what we need to do, and that is what the underlying bill is about. This legislation that we will take up today contains steps that will make us stronger, better, smarter, reforming our intelligence; destroying the lines of material support that make a terrorist operation possible; giving our officials from the Pentagon to our first responders the tools that they need to disrupt terrorists plans. There will be some good debate today, and there will be some foolish debate today. Some apparently are more interested in who gets the credit instead of what gets done, but the bottom line is simple. This time under our watch we must not look away. We cannot look away. I urge my colleagues to support this rule. It is a fair rule. I urge them to support this rule so that we can get to the debate on the underlying bill. I urge passage of this underlying bill as quickly as we can. It will offer important tools. It will help this Nation be safe once again.

Mr. GREEN of Wisconsin

Mr. GREEN of Wisconsin. Mr. Speaker, the Crime Prevention Foundation of Brown County is the first of its kind in the United States. Its sole purpose is to provide financial support for crime prevention programs in Brown County, Wisconsin, and is managed by the Greater Green Bay Community Foundation. It will support programs like DARE, Crimestoppers, School Liaison Officers and Teen Court--programs that keep our children safe. This program is completely privately funded, and will provide a stable, long-term funding source for these programs that face elimination because of state and local budget cuts. The Crime Prevention Foundation of Brown County is governed by a Board of Directors independent of any political body. The mission of the board is simply to support the most effective crime prevention activities in Brown County, Wisconsin. This program is an innovative way to help continue effective programs that help keep our communities and kids out of harms way. I am proud to recognize the innovative efforts of the Crime Prevention Foundation of Brown County, and wish them great success.

Mr. GREEN of Wisconsin

Mr. GREEN of Wisconsin. Mr. Speaker, let me begin by joining my voice with others in saluting the chairman. Without his tireless efforts, quite simply we would not be here today, and also, of course, the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Maloney), the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Delahunt), the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. LaHood), the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Chabot), and the gentleman from New York (Mr. Weiner). Their ideas have made this bill so much better, so much stronger and we are all in their debt. Mr. Speaker, over 300,000 women and 92,000 men are raped each year in this country, the United States. Those numbers represent lives destroyed and families shattered. Today we fight back. We will put an end to headlines like this one from CNN dated June 29, 2004: ``A suspected serial rapist on the street while his DNA sat in the police crime lab for years.'' The rapist in that case reported assaulting upwards of 50 women since 1988, and yet his DNA sat untested for 2\1/2\ years in an Ohio crime lab. I wish I could tell my colleagues that that case was unique. Hardly. There are thousands and thousands and thousands of untested crime scene DNA kits collecting dust on shelves. That means that there are likely innocent Americans wrongly sitting behind bars, and even more likely, guilty Americans still walking the streets. How can we not act and act today? This bill will help. This bill will save lives. Title II of the bill, the Debbie Smith Act, will provide grants to State and local authorities to get rid of their backlogs, to train more experts, to ensure better handling and processing of evidence. In fact, some estimate that it could quickly lead to solving as many as 66,000 open rape and murder cases. That is 66,000 victims and their families who would finally have a little justice and, perhaps, just perhaps, a little peace of mind. How can we not act on this measure? How can we not offer this lifeline to victims and their families? How can we not act to prevent future crimes by tracking down those who have already attacked and will most certainly attack again? This is good work. It is important work. I urge my colleagues' support. Let us get this done.

Mr. GREEN of Wisconsin

Mr. GREEN of Wisconsin. Mr. Speaker, it is my privilege to recognize before this House the courageous soldiers of the 32nd Military Police Company, who tomorrow will return home to Wisconsin after spending 16 months fighting for peace and stability in Iraq. In the face of constant danger, the members of the 32nd helped pave the way for Iraq's steady march toward democracy. Throughout their tour, these brave men and women provided vital security in and around Baghdad, and helped train the new civilian Iraqi police force. Their tireless efforts proved instrumental in helping the new Iraqi government take control of their fledgling democracy, and their sacrifice reminds us all that freedom is not free. Mr. Speaker, it is my distinct honor to pay tribute to the 32nd Military Police Company. With 23 Purple Hearts awarded, their unit suffered more injuries from hostile action than any Wisconsin National Guard unit since World War II. On behalf of the citizens of Wisconsin's Eighth Congressional District, and a grateful nation, it is my honor to recognize and welcome home these great Americans.

Mr. GREEN of Wisconsin

Mr. GREEN of Wisconsin. Mr. Speaker, it is my honor and privilege to recognize before this House, Wisconsin State Trooper Les Boldt, whose heroic efforts recently saved the life of a woman who tried to take her own life by leaping off a bridge in Green Bay. After receiving notice from dispatchers that an area resident suffering from depression was potentially suicidal, Trooper Boldt set out to find the woman and check on her welfare. Upon locating her car, a high-speed chase ensued that led the two to the top of the Leo Frigo Memorial Bridge, at which time the woman stepped out of her car and attempted to jump off the 200-foot tall span. Realizing what was about to occur, Boldt ran from his patrol car and caught the woman's arm just after she leaped off the bridge, saving her from almost certain death. After a struggle, Boldt and two other law enforcement officials were able to safely pull the woman back over the edge, giving her a second chance at life. Mr. Speaker, by selflessly putting his life on the line to save one of his fellow citizens, Trooper Les Boldt showed us all what it means to be truly courageous and heroic. His actions deserve our praise, and on behalf of the residents of Wisconsin's Eighth Congressional District, I say thank you and keep up the great work.

Mr. GREEN of Wisconsin

Mr. GREEN of Wisconsin. Mr. Speaker, today before this house I would like to honor and recognize Kathy McCarthy for her hard work and dedication to the citizens of Wisconsin's Eighth Congressional District. After serving 14 years in both my office and that of former Congressman Toby Roth, Kathy has chosen to retire and pursue new endeavors outside of federal service. Kathy McCarthy began her career in public service as a staff assistant and office manager with Congressman Roth, In that time she fulfilled a number of vital roles and coordinated numerous projects, including casework duties and student nominations to the United States Service Academies. During her tenure with Congressman Roth, Kathy earned the reputation of being a fierce advocate for constituents, and an indispensable member of the office. After joining my staff in 1999, Kathy's expertise and acute understanding of casework issues proved vital in getting my office up and running. She was able to successfully assist thousands of constituents in navigating the maze of federal agencies, helping folks receive all the benefits and services they deserve. Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure to recognize my friend Kathy McCarthy for her years of dedicated public service. My constituents, my staff and I are sad to see her go, but we are consoled by the fact that Kathy will soon be enjoying a long retirement with her family. From the bottom of my heart I say thank you, and wish her all the best in retirement.

Mr. GREEN of Wisconsin

Mr. GREEN of Wisconsin. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the Senate bill (S. 2238) to amend the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968 to reduce losses to properties for which repetitive flood insurance claim payments have been made.

Mr. GREEN of Wisconsin. 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. 2238.

Mr. GREEN of Wisconsin. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of S. 2238, the Bunning- Bereuter-Blumenauer Flood Insurance Reform Act, legislation to reauthorize and reform the National Flood Insurance Program. The legislation we are considering here today is a must-do bill. Currently, this program is set to expire on June 30 of this year; and without this program, the ability to close a loan and purchase a new home in literally thousands of communities all across this country will be placed in jeopardy. The NFIP was established by Congress with the passage of the National Insurance Act of 1968. The NFIP is a Federal program enabling property owners in participating companies to purchase insurance as a protection against flood losses in exchange for State and community floodplain management regulations that reduce future flood damages. Unfortunately, one of the authors of this important legislation, the gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Bereuter), is unable to be with us here today. However, we would be remiss if we did not recognize his tireless efforts on this bill. For over 14 years, the gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Bereuter) has worked hard to craft legislation that would reduce the cost of this program to the American taxpayer. Today, repetitive- loss properties cost the NFIP about $200 million each year. These properties account for only 1 percent of the currently insured properties across the country; yet they represent 25 to 30 percent of all claims paid. Under our current program, repetitive loss properties are eligible for subsidized flood insurance at rates far below the actuarial rate they should be paying. With the passage of this legislation, people living in flood-prone areas will be provided assistance to reduce their risk of flooding. If they choose not to reduce their risk of flooding, they will be required to pay higher premiums. In addition to reauthorizing the existing Flood Mitigation Assistance program through 2008, the bill establishes a new pilot program aimed at reducing the number of severe repetitive-loss properties and provides $40 million to help reach that goal. It is important to note that this fund will not be subject to a Federal appropriation. Instead, this level of funding will come from money that is transferred from the National Flood Insurance Fund, which is composed of policyholder premiums. S. 2238 is virtually identical to H.R. 253, the Flood Insurance Reform Act of 2003, authored by the gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Bereuter) and passed by this House on November 20, 2003. I want to take this opportunity to commend the gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Bereuter) for his hard work on this legislation and for his exemplary service to this body over the years. I urge my colleagues to support the passage of this bill. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. GREEN of Wisconsin. Mr. Speaker, I continue to reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. GREEN of Wisconsin

Mr. GREEN of Wisconsin. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. GREEN of Wisconsin. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 4363) to facilitate self-help housing homeownership opportunities, as amended.

Mr. GREEN of Wisconsin. 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 this legislation.

Mr. GREEN of Wisconsin. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 5 minutes. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 4363, the Helping Hands for Homeownership Act of 2004. I would like to begin by thanking the financial services chairman, the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Oxley), the ranking member, the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Frank), and the housing subcommittee chairman, the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Ney) for expeditiously considering this bill and, of course, my co-author, the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Ford). Mr. Speaker, it is very fitting that we are taking this measure up this week for three reasons. First, of course, June is Homeownership Month. A lot of things have changed in American culture over the years, but one thing has not, homeownership remains the cornerstone of the American dream. The chance to own, the chance to enhance and improve your own home to suit your needs and reflect your own values and personality is very much at the heart of the American ideal. But it is more than that. Homeownership can be the foundation of vibrant neighborhoods and communities. People take better care of their neighborhood when they have a direct stake, financially and otherwise in that neighborhood's future. I think one of the greatest responsibilities we have in Congress is to make it possible for more Americans from all backgrounds and all walks of life to grasp on to the dream of home ownership. In other words, we must work to make that dream come true, very true, and not just for the most affluent among us. The second reason it is so appropriate for us to take up and pass this measure today is that it re-enforces the role and the need for non profit and private organizations to help meet this challenge. Last year, the most famous of these organizations, Habitat For Humanity, dedicated its fifty-thousandth and fifty-thousand and first homes in the United States. In its 27-plus years of work, work that began in very modest, very humble ways, Habitat has provided affordable housing for some 750,000 people worldwide. In the U.S. alone, Habitat has more than 1,670 affiliates covering approximately 80 percent of our population. One of the top producing affiliates is in my home State of Wisconsin. The Milwaukee area Habitat For Humanity built 21 new homes in 2002 alone. That means 21 Milwaukee families realized the American dream. And many Milwaukee neighborhoods gained new stakeholders in the push for a brighter future. Habitat is the model for faith-based initiatives that Congress does and should support. It fulfills its mission not merely by preaching but by example, by putting its compassion to work. As one of its most recent publications states, ``Just as Jesus Christ healed the sick, fed the hungry and restored the soul sick one person at a time, Habitat's strength is in its commitment to eliminate substandard housing one family at a time.'' Now, most Americans have heard of Habitat for Humanity. They probably have not heard, however, of how Congress has helped Habitat enhance and expand its work. For example, in 1996, Congress created the Self-Help Home Ownership Opportunity program, called the SHOP program for short. This program offers competitive grants for non profit groups like habitat for humanity to help with land and infrastructure experiences, clearly the two big-ticket items that are necessary for home building. SHOP funds help fund local groups across the country, help them acquire sites for affordable home and community building. These funds help housing advocates leverage their precious resources and make them go much further, reaching more families and lifting more communities. However, recent legal interpretation of the 1996 law is jeopardizing the chance for some local groups like many of Habitat's affiliates, to participate in SHOP funded bills. In its 2004 notice of funds available, HUD has concluded that H.R. 4363, the SHOP program, the sweat equity hours that must be fulfilled by the benefiting homeowners, must be earned constructing their own home. The problem for groups like Habitat is that they are often built on a community building mission and model. Their programs allow folks to earn sweat equity hours on their homes but also the homes of others. For instance, many habitat affiliates run blitz builds where they build a house in one day. Clearly, 24 hours will not be enough for a homeowner to meet the sweat equity requirements under the SHOP interpretation. So Habitat allows for them to participate in other builds to gain additional hours. In fact, by working on other family's homes, the program has an even greater community development value. It helps build a sense of neighborhood. H.R. 4363, introduced by the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Ford), and myself, makes a technical correction to the SHOP Act and restores the original intent of Congress when it created this program. It allows for blitz build and other community building models to continue the access to precious seed money that SHOP offers. Finally, Mr. Speaker, the timing of today's action is appropriate because this bill also honors one of our most widely respected colleagues in the House. Have had the distinct pleasure of serving with the gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Bereuter) on both the Committee on Financial Services and Committee on International Relation. He is, as anyone here will attest, one of the brightest and most genuine individuals serving in Congress. My colleague from Nebraska has made his mark in many different areas, but perhaps one of his greatest legacies of the creation of the USDA section 502 single family housing loan guarantee program. Thousands of Americans living in rural parts of country have been able to achieve homeownership through this program. I am honored that this bill will rename the section 502 program after its founder, the gentleman from Nebraska (Congressman Bereuter). I cannot think of a more fitting tribute. I am honored to have had the chance to work with him for the past few years. I wish he and his family nothing but the best. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this bill. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. GREEN of Wisconsin. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Cantor). (Mr. CANTOR asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. GREEN of Wisconsin. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. GREEN of Wisconsin

Mr. GREEN of Wisconsin. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of my colleague, Mr. Renzi's bill, the Homeownership Opportunities for Native Americans Act. I would like to begin by commending the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Renzi) for the important work he is doing in the area of Native American housing. He is shining a light on the vital need for safe and affordable housing on Indian reservations all across this country, a need that runs deep, a need which our government has all too often failed to address. I was unable to attend the Housing Subcommittee hearing earlier this year that has been referenced in the district of the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Renzi), but I have several reservations in my district and my own State, and I know firsthand just how critical the need for housing is. H.R. 4471 amends the Native American Housing Assistance and Self- Determination Act of 1996 to provide statutory authority for the Title VI program to continue to operate at a 95 percent loan guarantee level. While the program has been operating at this level for some time, a recent decision by OMB to reduce the loan guarantee to 80 percent has put this program into jeopardy. Mr. Speaker, the Title VI guarantee program has issued over 77 million dollars in loan guarantees. It has never experienced a default. The Federal Government should not be in the business of making it harder for Indian tribes to access assistance in affordable housing. We must reach out to local tribal organizations and leaders and do more to help them meet their many pressing housing challenges. I urge my colleagues to support this legislation in order to ensure continued affordable housing opportunities for Native Americans all across this country. It is an excellent piece of legislation.

Mr. GREEN of Wisconsin

Mr. GREEN of Wisconsin. Mr. Speaker, I offer a concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 458) directing the Secretary of the Senate to make technical corrections in the enrollment of the bill S. 2238, and ask unanimous consent for its immediate consideration.