Bill Huizenga

Mr. HUIZENGA

Mr. HUIZENGA. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of my amendment to better secure our advanced air mobility future. The Advanced Air Mobility Infrastructure Pilot Program that is currently in law provides grants to airport sponsors, transit agencies, or other government subdivisions to develop comprehensive plans to advanced air mobility infrastructure. Under current law, the Secretary of Transportation is required to prioritize awarding grants to eligible recipients that collaborate, with a few criteria. Here are those criteria: that they are a commercial advanced air mobility entity, that they are an institution of higher education, that they are a research institute, or that they are some other relevant stakeholder in this process. Mr. Chair, my amendment is very simple. It adds the Department of Defense and the National Guard to this list of eligible recipients. There are many qualified airports throughout the Nation that already have a DOD or National Guard presence that are ready to innovate and help develop drone and related infrastructure. This amendment is a small way to help ensure DOD and the National Guard have a voice in this important future-looking endeavor, especially given that our men and women in uniform likely have expertise in this area. Not only will they help develop this technology with their expertise, but they will literally be on the front lines of utilizing this technology. Mr. Chair, I am glad that the underlying legislation takes steps to extend this pilot program, and I urge my colleagues to support my amendment to add the Department of Defense and the National Guard to those lists of entities that are eligible. Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. HUIZENGA. Will the gentleman yield for a question? Mr. Chairman, I was trying to get the gentleman's attention to see if he would yield for a question about his opposition. So would the gentleman care to answer a question?

Mr. HUIZENGA

Mr. HUIZENGA. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.

Mr. HUIZENGA. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of my amendment to require the Secretary of Energy to disclose certain stakeholder meetings with any entity that has: one, ties to the People's Republic of China or the Chinese Communist Party; two, has produced studies regarding or has advocated for policies to limit, restrict, or ban the use of any type of energy; and, three, has applied for or received Federal funds. We have recently seen concerning examples of anti-energy, China- connected entities receiving not just elevated access to the White House and Federal agencies but granting of funds, as well. Literally, we have been using U.S. taxpayer dollars to help fund them. I introduced this amendment because the Biden administration has not been transparent about who it has been meeting with, and frankly, I believe this administration has not been honest with the American people about its desire to ban gas stoves. In February of this year, it was widely reported that a government watchdog group obtained information through the Freedom of Information Act revealing a private meeting between the Secretary of Energy and a group that would be covered by this amendment. In particular, this group has been on the forefront of the effort to ban gas stoves. Unsurprisingly, when I sent a letter to Secretary Granholm in February, inquiring whether she was aware of this group's ties to China and the extent of their influence on the Department, I received a letter back that was completely ignoring my questions and concerns. I have to give you a little bit of perspective, Mr. Chairman. My family has been involved in construction for over three generations, and I fully understand the needs that people have at various levels in their homes and their businesses. I mean, we are talking about gas stoves today. Don't get me wrong. There is nothing inherently wrong with electric stoves. That oftentimes fits very nicely--same thing with electric base heat or water heaters, et cetera. There are certain regions of the country, like in Michigan and the upper Midwest, where we are very dependent on propane and natural gas. We don't have the electric grid to support an expansion of that. I know the other side will say that nobody is going to pull your stove out of your house--yet. Nobody is doing anything other than just stoves--yet. We know that places like California, New York, and even in Michigan, the city of Ann Arbor, have gone in and literally banned the addition of and use of gas stoves. They are looking to expand that. They have talked about that. The real rub here, Mr. Chairman, is that we have a major problem with questionable groups with established connections to China. They have those established connections, but we are not sure what their unanswered intentions might be. They are succeeding in influencing policy to limit affordable appliance options for Americans. When President Biden or Senate Majority Leader Schumer are telling the American people that no one is going after their stoves, they may be technically correct today, Mr. Chairman. In the broader picture, we know that that may be coming. I have to say that it is one thing for elected officials to be going after a particular appliance or source of energy, but we have a real problem when Washington bureaucrats, unelected bureaucrats, aren't being honest about their end goal, and they are the ones making the rules and regulations. A ban on gas stoves is going to cost the taxpayers. It is going to cost hardworking, honest Americans more when they are already in an inflationary heightened situation. That is why I wanted to bring this amendment. I appreciate the author's acceptance of this and understanding of where we are trying to go with this. At the end of the day, Mr. Chairman, my amendment is simply to bring an added dose of transparency, expose connections to the CCP, which I truly, honestly believe that both sides of the aisle have concerns about the tentacles of the CCP and the Chinese Government and the influence that it has gained here in the United States. That is why, on the Financial Services Committee that I serve on, we have done CFIUS reviews, which is making sure that it is property and technology and other things that we are protecting from our adversaries like China. Why would we hand over the keys to this particular kingdom? I don't understand. We need to let the American people know who is truly influencing our government and that exposure is there. Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to support the amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. HUIZENGA

Mr. HUIZENGA. Mr. Speaker, I move that the House do now adjourn.

Mr. HUIZENGA

Mr. HUIZENGA. Mr. Speaker, this is an issue that is near and dear to me, having spent virtually my entire legislative career on the Capital Markets Subcommittee, including a time as the chair and ranking member, and this is something that many of us have been working on for a long time. Thanks also to Chairman McHenry for setting out an ambitious agenda to strengthen and expand access to our capital markets. The legislation being considered here today, both the previous bill, H.R. 835, and my bill, H.R. 1579, make good on this promise while increasing opportunity for small businesses, as well as investors in Michigan's Fourth Congressional District and across America. Under Gary Gensler, the Securities and Exchange Commission continues to blow past their longstanding three-part mission to protect investors; maintain fair, orderly, and efficient markets; and to facilitate capital formation with a number of other things that are well beyond that. We are here today to refocus the SEC on its core mission to help more Americans participate in our capital markets. During our bipartisan effort, we have heard uplifting stories from Americans who inspire a new generation of entrepreneurs. Look, we all know some very hardworking, middle-income folks who know how to manage their money and manage their money well. Frankly, we probably all also know stories of wealthy people who, frankly, don't have a clue financially, and I would never turn over our money to them to manage or to invest. So let's talk about a couple of those people in the first category. I start, first, with a woman named Omi Bell. Omi Bell founded Black Girl Ventures, an organization focused on providing women of color with access to community networks, capital, and capacity building to develop and grow their businesses. Omi does that right here in Washington, D.C. Omi testified before our Subcommittee on Capital Markets that her mother invested $10,000 of her own retirement to support Omi's first business venture. Yet her mom was not considered an accredited investor and, despite her desire to support her daughter's ambitions, she could have been disallowed from investing in that. We also heard testimony from David Olivencia. He is the CEO and cofounder of Angeles Investors, who, while earning his MBA from Notre Dame, learned about startups and how early-stage investments could lead to outsized returns. Unfortunately for David, as he told his story, he said he did not qualify as an accredited investor because his immigrant family did not have wealth that he could inherit. That is a horrible way, Mr. Speaker, to decide whether someone should or can invest in a dream and in something that they know about. I can tell you this: Both Omi and David are all too common in the investment world. While innovators often turn to their local communities for support, they often lack the ability to reach those investors, those truly accredited investors, who can make a huge impact. Mr. Speaker, under current law, accredited investors are allowed to purchase securities that have not been registered with the SEC. These types of offerings carry more risk than public offerings. In theory, individuals with enough financial sophistication or net worth--again, those are two different things--can bear the potential losses that may be associated with these types of securities. My bill, the Accredited Investor Definition Review Act, would require the SEC to incorporate ``certifications, designations, or credentials that further the purpose of accredited investor definition.'' The bill would expand investment opportunities for knowledgeable investors and provide small business job creators with additional sources of funding. The current definition the SEC uses to identify accredited investors is outdated and based solely and wrongly on wealth and net income. You shouldn't have to be a millionaire to be an accredited investor. The ability to participate in a private offering should not be limited to individuals that pass some sort of Federal Government assets test. Instead, participation should be expanded to include all individuals that can demonstrate they have sufficient understanding of the offering. Mr. Speaker, my legislation is about leveling the playing field. Do you see the theme, by the way? The theme from the Republicans and, I believe, many on the other side is this: We want to make sure that we allow all Americans to participate in our economic system. So whether it is in Kalamazoo or Portage, whether it is in Benton Harbor or St. Joe, or Battle Creek or in Springfield, investors should be able to support small business startups in their local community across southwest Michigan and around the Nation. I look forward to continued bipartisan support for this issue. I thank the chairwoman of the Subcommittee on Capital Markets and the ranking member, Mr. Sherman, as well as Representative Lawler, for their work. I look forward to getting this across the finish line and helping the American people and American small businesses.

Mr. HUIZENGA

Mr. HUIZENGA. Mr. Speaker, I rise today with a heavy heart, but to honor the life of a friend, retired United States Coast Guard Commander, Mike Smith. Mike is fondly remembered by many as the director of the annual Coast Guard Festival in Grand Haven, Michigan, also known as Coast Guard City USA, a cherished event where our west Michigan community comes together to celebrate the Coast Guard's service and sacrifice on the lakeshore and across the country. Mike lived a life of service, both in the Coast Guard and outside of it. In fact, in 2016, he received the Department of Defense's annual Spirit of Hope Award, an honor that is presented to individuals who embody Bob Hope's core values of serving and supporting our military members. He was so proud of that he actually put it on his own challenge coin. Mike exemplified the bold character of the Coast Guard and its motto, ``Semper Paratus,'' always prepared, and his influential impact will be forever felt. Mike is survived by his wife, Cathy, and their six children: Maxwell, Mollie, Moira, Maggie, Matteson, and McHale. I, and so many others, remember Mike for his service, but we cherish his friendship and his contribution to the Grand Haven community, to the U.S. Coast Guard, and to our Nation. Rest well, my friend. Rest well.

Mr. HUIZENGA

Mr. HUIZENGA. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the life and service of Lieutenant Ethan Quillen. On Wednesday, February 22, volunteer firefighter Ethan Quillen responded to a downed power line call during a severe ice storm that swept through his hometown of Paw Paw, Michigan. He acted like so many other volunteer firemen around the country. His incredible life of service was tragically ended in the line of duty when a falling tree struck a high voltage power line that he was standing under. Ethan had volunteered at the fire department since 2019, eventually working his way up to lieutenant. He was a father, a husband, a Marine Corps veteran, and a hero, a hero who for the well-being of his fellow Americans and Paw Paw neighbors consistently put service over self while asking for nothing in return. On behalf of the people of Paw Paw, Michigan, the Fourth Congressional District, the State of Michigan, and our Nation, I recognize and thank Ethan for his service and his sacrifice and pray for blessings and peace for his family.

Mr. HUIZENGA

Mr. HUIZENGA. Mr. Speaker, I thank Chairman McHenry for yielding me time this afternoon. I rise today in support of the Credit Union Board Modernization Act and ask for its immediate passage. Credit unions can play an important role in many of our local communities, often working with families and small business owners to gain access to credit. H.R. 582 will go a long way to providing reasonable regulatory relief for credit unions, especially in Michigan's Fourth Congressional District and across the Nation. Mr. Speaker, if signed into law, these commonsense, reasonable reforms will allow federally chartered credit unions in good standing in Michigan and across the country the same reasonable governance practices afforded to those at the State level. Currently, all federally chartered credit union boards must meet at least once month. This one-size-fits-all requirement often negatively impacts smaller rural credit unions, which ultimately impacts, frankly, which members are willing to even serve on those boards and therefore the services that they can and will be able to provide to their local community. The Credit Union Board Modernization Act rightly modernizes how often federally chartered credit union boards must meet, which the National Credit Union Administration currently mandates to be monthly. Nothing in this legislation prevents a credit union from meeting more than six times a year. It just gives them the flexibility and they are able to then decide. That is the idea of a credit union; member-driven, they will decide. Mr. Speaker, I thank the sponsor of this bill, the gentleman from California (Mr. Vargas) for working with Republicans, and specifically me, this last Congress to implement these reasonable safeguards. I do want to note, specifically, this legislation does not apply to new credit unions or those credit unions with low exam ratings, as the chair had indicated. Highly rated credit unions with high management ratings must hold at least six meetings annually, with at least one meeting held during each fiscal quarter. Alternatively, these lower-rated credit unions must continue to meet once a month, and there will be direction on that, as the chair has outlined. I want to be clear. This bill does not give credit unions an advantage over their community bank counterparts but brings parity to an outdated process. Again, I thank Congressman Vargas for his commitment to make this a bipartisan effort. I look forward to seeing these reforms, which will strengthen local economies across the Nation, enacted into law.

Mr. HUIZENGA

Mr. HUIZENGA. Mr. Chair, I was unreasonably detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yea'' on rollcall No. 64.

Mr. HUIZENGA

Mr. HUIZENGA. Mr. Speaker, as the 117th Congress comes to a close, I rise today to say it has been an absolute honor and privilege to serve Michiganders across Kent, Ottawa, Muskegon, Newaygo, Oceana, Lake, Mason, and Allegan Counties in the current Second District. West Michigan is blessed to have beautiful beaches, world-class manufacturing, and an incredible variety of top-notch agricultural produce. But what makes places like Muskegon, Grand Haven, Ludington, Pentwater, Fremont, Baldwin, and Grandville so special are the people who call these communities home. It is embracing servant leadership. It is emphasizing the value of hard work, and it is fostering the drive to go the extra mile that makes west Michigan such a wonderful place to live, work, and raise a family. Mr. Speaker, as I say goodbye to the current Second District, I will never forget the residents who have called the Second Congressional District home over the past 10 years or the memories we have shared. Please know that I will continue to be a champion for you and for Michigan. It has been an honor and a blessing to be your voice in Washington.

Mr. HUIZENGA

Mr. HUIZENGA. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize my hometown, the city of Zeeland, on its 175th anniversary. Throughout the first week of October, friends and residents of this small but vibrant city in west Michigan gathered together to celebrate and share memories of the community's storied history. The village of Zeeland was established in 1847 when nearly 500 Dutch citizens, led by James Van de Luyster, sailed from Zeeland in the Netherlands to pursue religious freedom and self-rule. I will note that my own family came in the second wave that same year of 1847 and has proudly been ensconced in the city of Zeeland since then. After settling on 16,000 acres of land, one of the first buildings established was a church. Here, Reverend Cornelius van der Meulen became the first spiritual leader and pastor to the Zeeland colonists, offering hope and courage as the settlers cleared thick forests and tackled this new land. As the center of the community, the church served as a place of worship on Sundays as well as a school on the weekdays, with instruction provided in both English and in Dutch. A burgeoning manufacturing and agriculture sector, as well as a post office helped Zeeland to grow, leading to incorporation as a city in 1907. Now, the 1900s were a time of growth in Zeeland. In fact, my own father served over 30 years on the city council from the late 1960s up until the 1990s. While the city has grown, one thing has remained a constant: The innovative, entrepreneurial, close-knit, and welcoming community continues to make Zeeland a special place to live, work, and raise a family. Mr. Speaker, let us join in recognizing all former and current residents of the city of Zeeland as they celebrate their 175th anniversary.

Mr. HUIZENGA

Mr. HUIZENGA. Madam Speaker, I rise today regarding missed votes. Had I been present for Roll Call vote No. 482, On Motion to Suspend the Rules and Pass S. 3369, I would have voted Yea. For Roll Call vote No. 483, On Motion to Suspend the Rules and Pass S. 4359, 1 would have voted Yea. For Roll Call vote No. 484, On Motion to Suspend the Rules and Pass, as Amended H.R. 2250, I would have voted Yea. For Roll Call vote No. 485, On Motion to Suspend the Rules and Pass, as Amended H.R. 3630, I would have voted Yea.

Mr. HUIZENGA

Mr. HUIZENGA. Madam Speaker, I rise today to recognize and congratulate Jane Clark on her exemplary career and decades of service to the West Michigan community. It is an honor to express my gratitude to Ms. Clark for her dedication, commitment, and hard work towards advancing West Michigan. In 1990, Ms. Clark began her West Michigan business career with the Holland Area Chamber of Commerce, before guiding its merger into the Michigan West Coast Chamber. Throughout her career, she has filled the critical roles of Membership Director, Vice President, and President of the organization. She has worked hard to shape the Chamber of Commerce into a pillar of the community. Under her leadership, the Chamber was named the Outstanding Chamber of the Year for Michigan in 2018 and, in multiple years, the Chamber received a 5-star accreditation from the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. On top of her many years at the Chamber of Commerce, Ms. Clark has also devoted her time to serving on the boards of several cherished West Michigan institutions, including the Holland Museum, Holland Hospital, and the Tulip Time Festival. Recently, her efforts were highlighted by the Grand Rapids Business Journal, who named her as one of the most influential women in West Michigan. Throughout her career, Ms. Clark has strived to help guide, mentor, and develop the 1,250 West Michigan businesses that she represents. Madam Speaker, please join me in thanking Jane Clark for her years of dedicated service to the West Michigan community. Her strong leadership has helped propel the West Michigan business community to where it is today.

Mr. HUIZENGA

Mr. HUIZENGA. Madam Speaker, I appreciate the gentleman yielding time and his leadership on this. Madam Speaker, every day capital markets are under attack here with this Securities and Exchange Commission. The climate disclosure rule, which was released in March of this year totals over 500 pages--over 500 pages--and includes over 1,000 technical footnotes. And oh, by the way, the SEC initially gave everybody 30 days to comment on that--30 days. Now, you can't even get through the analysis of the original 500 pages much less the 1,000 technical footnotes on that within those 30 days. But in reality the SEC doesn't really know what this far-reaching rule will cost small, independent, and nonpublic businesses across our country. In fact, very deep in the summary of the rule the SEC admits: In many cases, we are unable to reliably quantify the potential benefits and costs of the rule and, therefore, we encourage commenters to provide us with relevant data or empirical evidence that would allow us to do so. Let that sink in: We have no idea what the impact is, so why don't you just give us some data to help us work through this? Now, I remind you, this is not a study, and this is not research. This is a finalized proposed rule that the SEC is trying to jam through in 30 days. Oh, but they expanded that now, so thank you very much. Now, there are three basic rules on real estate. What is the most important part about real estate? Location, location, location. Well, for the SEC it should be materiality, materiality, materiality. How is this information material to a publicly traded company and to the investors who are investing and putting their hard-earned money into those companies. So materiality, materiality, materiality should be the battle cry. But it is not with this SEC. In fact, in recent months, the Commission has put forth a huge volume of additional proposals. At times it doesn't appear to be fully informed about the likely economic consequences of the proposed rules and that display significant misunderstandings of the activity the Commission seeks to regulate. So without proper economic analysis, mistakes and unintended consequences are going to be inevitable. Madam Speaker, since late last year, the SEC has embarked on a remarkable rulemaking agenda. In the 14 months since he was sworn into office, Chair Gensler has charted a path for the SEC unlike it has seen in its 88-year history. To be charitable, he is pushing the envelope.

Mr. HUIZENGA. To be charitable, this aggressive stance of the chair is unprecedented. The reality is they can't get their agenda done through the legislative process, so they are just going to regulate it. So the SEC is going to continue to push the boundaries of the statutory authority Congress has given them. Unfortunately, instead of protecting investors, maintaining fair, orderly, and efficient markets, and facilitating capital formation-- that is part of their three-part directive, facilitating capital formation--they are actually going to regulate small, privately held companies in your district right out of business. So Congress did not establish the SEC to set climate policy nor for it to be the final arbiter of businesses' strategies to combat climate change. In her recent dissent over the proposed rule, Commissioner Hester Peirce rightfully noted that the SEC is not the securities and environment commission. My colleagues and I have grave concerns that this rule will set a precedent that will allow regulators to expand their authorities far beyond the bounds of the law. In fact, we have seen some recent Supreme Court cases about that with the EPA. The proposed climate rule shifts the SEC's rulemaking authority--to be charitable--taking a novel, activist approach to climate policy. What is next? All of it. Frankly, that is what is on his agenda: all of it. They want all of it. That is their idea of how this economy ought to be running, not how to protect investors, not how to facilitate efficient markets, and certainly not how to build capital. That is not the job of the SEC that has been proposed here. Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support Mr. Hill's resolution and restore sanity to the rulemaking process.

Mr. HUIZENGA

Mr. HUIZENGA. Madam Speaker, I rise today to say thank you. Thank you to a chief of staff, a colleague, a confidante, and a special friend. Jon DeWitte has been my chief of staff for 11\1/2\ years. In fact, when I was elected in 2010, Jon was the first call that I made. He was my first hire, and we have been on this journey together the entire time. Now, Jon has had a great track record here in Washington, D.C., as well. He worked for the Education and Workforce Committee. He then went on to work with former Congressman Dave Camp. Then when I left the position of district director from my predecessor, Peter Hoekstra, Jon came and filled that role and filled that position for 8 years until I got elected, when I asked him to come back to Washington and act as my chief of staff. Well, Jon--two redistrictings, majority, minority, government shutdown, impeachments, war, peace--we have seen just about all of it and have lived that textbook of political science. I couldn't have done it without him, and I know he could not have done this without his family. I want to say a special thank you, as well, to Jodi, Nathan, Katie, and Josh for the sacrifices that they made--the sacrifices that they have made--for late nights and early mornings, for travel, for all the different things that go into being an excellent chief of staff. He has been one. Now, I know that there are great paths ahead for Jon, and great paths ahead for all of you, but I do know that our friendship will not end. Team Huizenga is always Team Huizenga, and Jon is a vital part of that. So once again, I thank Jon for his service, not only to me, but more importantly, to the constituents of the Second Congressional District back in Michigan and service to his country. A job well done and I thank him.

Mr. HUIZENGA

Mr. HUIZENGA. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate my colleague yielding. As we come to the floor to honor Matt, I know that Matt and his colleagues are watching right now. My colleague was able to run through the litany of his career, but I will note that, in 1987, I was just graduating from high school when Matt was hired. He has had an incredible tenure. I can tell you that throughout his career, Matt has put the staff and Grand Valley community at the center of it all, but most importantly, it was about the students for him. It was always about the students. Whether it was him looking out for who would be the next leader for the student council and the student body president or who would be a great intern in an office like mine or many others, whether it be in Lansing or in Washington, D.C., Matt was always there for the students. As was said, when he joined the university, it was a smaller college of 8,000 students literally in the middle of a cornfield, and it now is this juggernaut, powerhouse of a university in Michigan with five locations and 23,000 students. That is, in part, due to Matt's efforts. Mr. Speaker, I have had the privilege of knowing Matt personally for well over 25 years, and I, too, grew up listening to Matt on local television at first. I can tell you that his wisdom, his counsel, and his encouragement that he has to offer to friends, family, and colleagues is something that he is known for. I have never met anyone quite so positive as Matt when it comes to life. In addition to his time at Grand Valley and his time on television, he served the State in lots of various ways, on committees and commissions. One very notable one was the Public Service Commission as he was there serving and trying to help lead the direction of the State through multiple administrations and various Governors. I will tell you this though, Mr. Speaker, the thing that Matt is especially known for is his Michigan political trivia. Now, I can tell you that if you had been wondering who the Lieutenant Governor was in 1923, all you had to do was ask Matt. He would be able to tell you, and he is probably telling and saying the name right now to his colleagues as he is watching this. So here is what I need to say today: Congratulations, Matt, and thank you. Jane is going to enjoy that time together with you. I know that you have got more coming. Even though you may not have quite figured it out, I know you are fighting to the very end for Grand Valley and for that budget period that is in Lansing right now. But here is something that we all need to know: Matt is a Laker for life, and I thank him for his service.

Mr. HUIZENGA

Mr. HUIZENGA. Madam Speaker, I rise today to welcome home Corporal Laverne ``Dirk'' Van Dyke, who sacrificed his life during World War II, and was finally laid to rest in his and my hometown of Zeeland, Michigan, after nearly 80 years. U.S. Army Air Force Corporal Dirk Van Dyke served as a flight engineer on a B-25C aircraft in the Pacific theater when his plane went missing. Corporal Van Dyke and six other crewmembers were last seen departing an airport on the reconnaissance mission off the coast of New Guinea on January 18, 1943. Despite an extensive search, members of the Fifth Air Force were not able to locate the plane or the airmen. Many years later the wreckage was discovered in the mountains of Papua New Guinea, and the remains of Corporal Van Dyke and others were seemingly identified but were inconclusive. However, recently the Department of Defense officially considered Corporal Van Dyke accounted for. Madam Speaker, we will never forget the selfless actions, sacrifice, and dedication to our country by these servicemembers and what they displayed. To Corporal Van Dyke's family, our entire Nation holds you in our prayers as we get ready and prepare for Memorial Day, and as you welcome Dirk home as an American hero. Rest easy, Corporal Van Dyke. Rest easy.

Mr. HUIZENGA

Mr. HUIZENGA. Madam Speaker, I rise today in support of my legislation, H.R. 935, the Small Business Mergers, Acquisitions, Sales, and Brokerage Simplification Act of 2021. Madam Speaker, this bill isn't new, we have been here before. In fact, this will be the third instance that my legislation has actually come to the floor. Each time Members of this body have unanimously supported the legislation before us today. I certainly hope that the third time is the charm. Let's be clear. For small, privately-owned businesses, merger and acquisition advisers and business brokers perform crucial roles in preparing these privately held businesses for a sale or a merger by finding and screening potential business buyers or partners. These brokers play a vital role in navigating M&A transactions to successful outcomes. Unfortunately, Federal securities regulations technically require an M&A broker to be registered and regulated by the Securities and Exchange Commission, as well as FINRA, just like a Wall Street investment banker selling or buying publicly traded companies. This is a problem long identified by both practitioners and the regulators themselves. Whether it is a small, locally owned store in Holland, Michigan, my hometown, or a Fortune 500 company, today, the same rules apply, regardless of the size of the business, the size of the transaction, or whether they are publicly or privately held. Sadly, these last 2 years have only increased the need for my bill. Despite $5 trillion in COVID relief packages, which have often picked winners and losers, rising costs due to inflation are making it difficult for many small businesses to keep the lights on today. Recent data from the Federal Reserve itself showed that 85 percent of small businesses experienced financial hardships and difficulties in 2021. According to the Small Business Administration, 68 percent of small business owners say they are having a hard time keeping and hiring staff. Nevertheless, small businesses continue to be the backbone of all of our local economies. Just look at my home State of Michigan, which is the home of very large companies like the automakers, office furniture makers, chemical companies, and medical device companies. But it also is a place where 98 percent of businesses are small businesses--98 percent of them--and they employ literally half of the Michigan workforce. Just as important, for every $100 spent at a local business, roughly $68 stays in the local economy, according to studies. Small businesses need to grow and have to do a couple of different things to be successful. For some that means they need to consolidate; some may need to restructure and try to recover from the challenges that have been exacerbated by the pandemic or the economy or whatever it might be; and sometimes it may be a family succession plan that is happening within those small businesses. These innovators, entrepreneurs, and risk-takers are critical to our country's economic growth and prosperity. We need to level the playing field that gives an unfair advantage to those Wall Street big guys. So, how did we get here? As was discussed, in 2006 merger and acquisition brokers attempted to address their concerns with the Securities and Exchange Commission by developing a rule that would codify and simplify the ``broker-dealer'' regulation. Unfortunately, due to the fallout from the great financial crisis, the SEC could not make the time for this rulemaking and make it a priority, which sent groups then to Congress for a legislative fix. Along the way, this bill has enjoyed bipartisan and bicameral support. It passed the Committee on Financial Services, not once, not twice, but now four times, including this last summer. In 2014, the chief counsel of the Division of Trading of the Securities and Exchange Commission released the M&A broker no-action letter, which concluded that the SEC staff would not recommend enforcement against an unregistered person who was engaged in facilitating a securities transaction solely related to the purchase or sale of a privately held company--regardless of the size of the company--provided certain enumerated conditions were met. H.R. 935 is consistent with the no-action letter but will clarify and simplify the merger process for small businesses and M&A brokers. The bill codifies the extensive investor protections, while not affecting the SEC's jurisdiction over M&A brokers. However, a no-action letter is not legally binding. It cannot change securities laws. That is up to us, Congress. We must pass my legislation to provide legal clarity once and for all.

Mr. HUIZENGA. Madam Speaker, we have been on this journey for nearly 10 years, going back to the 113th Congress. While many of the Members who served with me back then no longer remain, the challenges small businesses face have not dimmed. Madam Speaker, I recognize my colleague, Representative Brian Higgins from New York, who has been the original cosponsor from day one, and he has been on this journey every step of the way, as well as Congresswoman Maloney and Chairwoman Waters and Ranking Member McHenry. Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to pass this commonsense bipartisan legislation.

Mr. HUIZENGA

Mr. HUIZENGA. Madam Speaker, I rise today to demand a vote on H.J. Res. 72, a Congressional Review Act resolution that would end the CDC's mask mandate for airlines, trains, buses, and other public transportation hubs. Tuesday night, the Senate voted in a rare bipartisan manner to end these mandates in what even CNN called a ``bipartisan rebuke of Biden administration policy.'' States and cities, big and small, across the country have ended or are in the process of ending their mask mandates at schools, basketball games, and even crowded restaurants. Thousands of fans will pack arenas in the coming days to cheer on their teams during March Madness. At these games, they rightly won't be required to wear a mask. But as soon as they step onto a plane, a bus, a train, or even a metro, unelected bureaucrats, at the direction of President Biden, have decreed that masks must be put on and must be worn. It is past time for this unscientific mask mandate to end. I am calling on Speaker Pelosi to hold a vote on repealing this mask mandate. Americans want their lives back, and it is time to vote.

Mr. HUIZENGA

Mr. HUIZENGA. Madam Speaker, I rise today regarding missed votes. Had I been present for Roll Call vote number 16, On Ordering the Previous Question, providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 3485) Global Respect Act; providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 4445) Ending Forced Arbitration of Sexual Assault and Sexual Harassment Act; and providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 4521) Bioeconomy Research and Development Act I would have voted Nay. Had I been present for Roll Call vote number 17, On Agreeing to the Resolution, providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 3485) Global Respect Act; providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 4445) Ending Forced Arbitration of Sexual Assault and Sexual Harassment Act; and providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 4521) Bioeconomy Research and Development Act I would have voted Nay.

Mr. HUIZENGA

Mr. HUIZENGA. Madam Speaker, I rise today regarding missed votes. Had I been present for roll call vote number 1, On the Call of the House, I would have voted ``Present.'' Had I been present for roll call vote number 2, On Ordering the Previous Question, providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 1836) Guard and Reserve GI Bill Parity Act; providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 4673) Ensuring Veterans' Smooth Transition Act; and for other purposes, I would have voted ``nay.'' Had I been present for roll call vote number 3, on Agreeing to the Resolution, providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 1836) Guard and Reserve GI Bill Parity Act; providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 4673) Ensuring Veterans' Smooth Transition Act; and for other purposes, I would have voted ``nay.''

Mr. HUIZENGA

Mr. HUIZENGA. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask the gentleman at this point to engage in a colloquy if he is so willing.