Bill Huizenga

Mr. HUIZENGA

Mr. HUIZENGA. Madam Speaker, I appreciate the ranking member doing that. Let me just wrap up. By using the Congressional Review Act to overturn this critical final rule, my colleagues on the other side of the aisle will only delay progress and harm the very communities that I know they want to protect. Those are the same communities that I serve as well. I urge all of my colleagues to vote against this partisan attempt to overturn much-needed reform and modernization of the Community Reinvestment Act, and I am hopeful that we are going to be able to come together and work on true, meaningful, actual reform in the long run.

Mr. HUIZENGA

Mr. HUIZENGA. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in opposition to this $3 trillion liberal, partisan wish list. With our Nation facing an unprecedented challenge, this bill erodes the American people's faith in government when the Speaker refuses to work in a bipartisan manner to move our Nation forward. Giving money to Planned Parenthood, creating marijuana diversity studies, and permanently rewriting our Nation's election laws have nothing to do with the challenges we are currently facing and certainly do not help west Michigan job creators or their employees. Sadly, provisions in this bill actually disincentivize small businesses from opening or helping people get back to work in a safe and responsible manner. What the manufacturer in Kentwood, the pizza shop owner in Muskegon, or the farmers and growers I have heard from across west Michigan expect is for Congress to take a reasonable and responsible approach. That is not what is happening here today. This mother-of-all Christmas tree bills isn't the HEROES Act. In fact, it should be called the cynical partisan act of 2020, and it has absolutely no chance of becoming law. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to reject this bill and turn our focus to helping our constituents, safely reopening our economy, and defeating this virus.

Mr. HUIZENGA

Mr. HUIZENGA. Madam Speaker, while we have many different approaches about restarting our economy, we should all agree the Paycheck Protection Program has provided a vital lifeline to small businesses and communities across America, including west Michigan. For example, media reports are that Macatawa Bank, a community bank based in Holland, Michigan, was able to process over $300 million in PPP loans. This will help keep paychecks coming to more than 27,000 hardworking people in west Michigan. In Wellington, Michigan, I heard from an owner of a bowling alley whose business was literally saved by the PPP. His employees are getting paid, he can pay his bills, and his business has avoided bankruptcy. Even with these successes, I have heard from employers across my district waiting to receive their loan. While I am glad that is happening today, it shouldn't have taken this long. Now, Madam Speaker, as we discuss the next steps the Federal Government can take, I encourage the Speaker and my colleagues to support H.R. 6433, a bill I introduced on April 3, the Heroes Act, as a way to say thank you to the first responders and medical professionals risking their lives on a daily basis to save the lives of others.

Mr. HUIZENGA

Mr. HUIZENGA. Mr. Speaker, I rise today on behalf of the people of west Michigan, for the individuals and families who have seen their world turned upside down by COVID-19. Our neighbors, friends, and family members are losing their income. Small businesses are closing their doors. Manufacturers, big and small, are shuttering their facilities. All this is happening not because of bad business decisions or personal choices but because of a virus. The CARES Act will deliver critical relief to west Michigan residents, small businesses, and our medical professionals. This package will help tens of thousands of constituents in my district stay employed. While I don't agree with every proposal included in this bill, the vast majority of it will work directly to provide relief to the people who need it most. Communities across the Nation expect this body to act today. Finally, I want to say thank you to the first responders, nurses, and doctors who are serving our communities on the front lines. Thank you to the farmers, the food processors, the truck drivers, and those stocking the shelves to make sure goods are available in this time of need. We are all in this together, Mr. Speaker. God bless America. Let's pass this bill.

Mr. HUIZENGA

Mr. HUIZENGA. Madam Speaker, I rise today to recognize the exemplary career of Joe Samuels, a pivotal member of the West Michigan Steelcase security team. I would like to express my appreciation to Mr. Samuels for over 33 years of dedicated service to Steelcase. Mr. Samuels' distinguished career at Steelcase began on August 11, 1986. Beginning in the Panel plant, he later continued his faithful work in both Systems 1 and Systems 2 in Materials and Paint. In 2004, Mr. Samuels transitioned to the security team and obtained his Emergency Medical Technician license. Since that time, he has diligently covered both Steelcase's Global Security Operations Center and its Grand Rapids Field Operations. Outside of work, Mr. Samuels is a dedicated and proud father of three--one of whom works alongside him in Steelcase Security. In 2018, in an incredible demonstration of his selfless character and his love for his children, Mr. Samuels donated one of his kidneys to his son. Having recovered well from the surgery, he looks forward to spending his well-earned retirement with his children and three grandchildren. It is because of the faithful hard work, sacrifice, and dedication of community members such as Joe Samuels that I am especially proud to serve Michigan's 2nd Congressional District. Madam Speaker, I would like to again formally congratulate Mr. Samuels on his well-deserved retirement.

Mr. HUIZENGA

Mr. HUIZENGA. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of continued preservation and restoration of the Great Lakes through the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative, a very important initiative for the Great Lakes system. For Michiganders, the Great Lakes are directly linked to our identity, our way of life, our history, and our future. The Great Lakes basin is home to more than 30 million people, and it contains 90 percent of the Nation's fresh surface water supply. Many know that, but they don't always understand the economic impact. That provides the backbone of a $6 trillion regional economy. The Great Lakes Restoration Initiative has a strong track record of success, specifically in west Michigan, where the work to clean up toxic hotspots in areas like Muskegon is estimated to have increased property values by nearly $12 million and generated $1 million in new recreational spending. This holds true across west Michigan and the entire region, as every dollar invested in the GLRI generates more than $3 in additional long-term economic activity. The GLRI is critical to our efforts to protect drinking water, prevent the spread of invasive species, and to accelerate the cleanup of areas of concern. With the threat of Asian carp inundating our waters, high water levels and erosion threatening our shorelines, and the ongoing threat of PFAS contamination contaminating our water, we must be committed to bipartisan solutions to protect this critical resource. Recently, my Republican colleagues and I had an opportunity to spend some time with the President, and he recommitted his support for the GLRI and towards the Great Lakes, as well as making sure that Brandon Road and other efforts to keep invasive species out are happening.

Mr. HUIZENGA. Mr. Speaker, the GLRI is a bipartisan example of an effective and efficient use of taxpayer dollars that protects, preserves, and strengthens the Great Lakes today and for future generations.

Mr. HUIZENGA

Mr. HUIZENGA. Madam Speaker, I rise today regarding missed votes. Had I been present for roll call vote number 33, on concurring in the Senate Amendment with the Rep. Khanna Amendment Specified in Section 4(a) of H. Res. 811, I would have voted ``nay.'' Had I been present for roll call vote number 34, on concurring in the Senate Amendment with the Rep. Lee Amendment Specified in Section 4(a) of H. Res. 811, I would have voted ``nay.''

Mr. HUIZENGA

Mr. HUIZENGA. Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor and celebrate the 100th Anniversary of the American Legion Auxiliary, the nation's largest wartime veterans service organization. The American Legion Auxiliary is a premier service organization that has been a vital asset to our community. By providing support for our veterans, our military, and their families, the American Legion Auxiliary shapes a positive future in an atmosphere of fellowship, patriotism, and peace. Founded in 1919, the American Legion Auxiliary boasts almost one million members from a range of different backgrounds. This past year, the organization oversaw more than 40 million volunteer hours and raised $37 million for charities across the U.S. Specifically, the American Legion Auxiliary's Gilbert D. Karsten Post 33, has been a pillar in our community through their support of veterans, sponsorship of local events, and extensive youth development programs. Their tireless work has dramatically increased the quality of life for veterans and their families across West Michigan. The post gets their name from the late Gilbert Dean Karsten, an American army Corporal who was killed on the battlefields of France on August 2, 1917. Gilbert D. Karsten was born in Zeeland, MI, on April 20, 1898, and joined the U.S. Army just days after the U.S. declared war on Germany. His death made him the first World War I casualty from Zeeland, and the community has continued to honor his sacrifice by using his name to help further their commitment to serving local veterans and their families. Madam Speaker, please join me in congratulating the American Legion Auxiliary and the Gilbert D. Karsten Post 33 for their 100 years of dedicated service to veterans throughout our country and in West Michigan.

Mr. HUIZENGA

Mr. HUIZENGA. Madam Speaker, I rise today to recognize the exemplary career of Daniel Steere, Chief of Police at the Grandville City Police Department. I would like to express my appreciation to Chief Steere for over 37 years of dedicated services to West Michigan and our nation. Chief Steere's career in law enforcement began in 1982 when he entered the Tampa Police Department Recruit Academy. After graduation, he quickly rose to become a Field Training Officer. Wanting to be closer to family, he moved back to Michigan in 1985, and soon after, found his professional home in the Grandville Police Department. In 1989, Chief Steere became the department's first vice detective and later would serve as the department's first officer assigned to a collaborative drug team. In 1993, Dan was promoted to Sergeant and was tasked with overseeing the training program for new officers. Beginning in 1996, he became the department's Detective Sergeant and served in that position until his elevation to Deputy Chief in 2008. He served with distinction as Deputy Chief until being promoted to Chief in 2012. Under Chief Steere's leadership, the department expanded to 26 sworn officers and added a second School Resource Officer position. Additionally, Chief Steere oversaw a department-wide rebrand, including new uniforms and patches for all officers. Exemplifying his successes, Chief Steere spent countless hours each year with the City Parks and Recreation Board to ensure the well-known July 4th celebrations occurred safely and successfully year after year. Throughout his distinguished career, Chief Steere served with impeccable integrity even when it proved difficult. Aside from dedicating his life to public service, Chief Steere has proudly served as an active participant in our West Michigan community. He gives back by volunteering his time with Rotary International, the YMCA, the Grand Rapids Community College Police Academy Advisory Board, and the Kent Country Corrections Board. None of the above would be possible without the support of his wife Julie, and now adult children Elizabeth, Adam and Emily. It is because of the leadership and dedication of community members such as Chief Daniel Steere that I am especially proud to serve Michigan's 2nd Congressional District. Madam Speaker, I would like to again formally congratulate Chief Steere on his well-deserved retirement and thank him for his service to West Michigan and our nation.

Mr. HUIZENGA

Mr. HUIZENGA. Madam Speaker, I rise in strong support of the United States-Mexico-Canada trade agreement negotiated by President Trump and his team, as well as the strong leadership here in the House. For more than a year, I have called on Speaker Pelosi to have this vote on this trade agreement. I am glad the day has arrived. The stakes for Michigan are extremely high. One estimate is 38.9 percent of Michigan's total GDP depends on trade, the highest in the Nation. A staggering 65 percent of the State's exports are bound for Canada and Mexico. Trade with our Nation's neighbors support more than 338,000 Michigan jobs. Ratifying the USMCA will lead to more than $30 billion in investment in new automotive manufacturing in the U.S. and create more than 75,000 jobs for American auto workers. Passing the USMCA is also vitally important to our agricultural community. Michigan's food and agricultural exports total approximately $1.98 billion annually and support roughly 805,000 food and agricultural jobs. This agreement will level the playing field for our farmers, growers, and producers, and expand market access for commodities such as dairy goods, poultry, and eggs. This is a win for Michigan workers, farmers, and job creators, and I support this bill.

Mr. HUIZENGA

Mr. HUIZENGA. Madam Speaker, in her own words, Speaker Pelosi said impeachment must be compelling, overwhelming, and bipartisan. These Articles of Impeachment being considered today by the House fail to meet Speaker Pelosi's own standards. Process matters, folks. Representing a good chunk of Gerald Ford's old district and being a staffer during the Clinton administration, I have an intimate understanding of the effects of impeachment on this Nation. I am stunned to see my Democratic colleagues whitewash, or maybe I should say ``Whitewater,'' Bill Clinton's cooperation with the House of Representatives. That is not exactly what was going on. This is the most partisan impeachment that we have seen in our Nation's history.

Mr. HUIZENGA

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

Mr. HUIZENGA. Mr. Chair, while I stand here today as I offer my amendment, residents across the Great Lakes are facing imminent threats to their property, their infrastructure, and the shorelines themselves due to historically high water levels. Great Lakes communities, including many in my own district along the shores of Lake Michigan, are in critical need of shoreline projects to protect against devastating erosion. For those of us who call the region home, the Great Lakes forever shape our way of life. It is where we recreate. It is where we do business. It is where we pass along the heritage of our region. The Great Lakes form the largest fresh surface water system on the Earth, holding nearly 20 percent of the world's freshwater supply. They directly generate more than 1.5 million jobs, provide the backbone of a $5 trillion regional economy, and are the home for more than 3,500 different plants and species. As I often say, we can and should protect and promote both the economy and the ecology of the Great Lakes. However, our communities are facing devastating consequences if we don't act to protect our shorelines now. The high water levels, combined with the effect of recent storms that brought even higher waves and strong winds, are threatening our communities. Public infrastructure, including roads, bridges, and docks, have been battered and, in some cases, actually lost. Recreational beaches have disappeared, and others are covered with dangerous debris now. Habitats have been destroyed. Numerous homes are teetering on the edge of dune cliffs or are threatened by the rising water level. This amendment, which would set aside just 10 percent of the spending in these particular projects, would ensure that communities within the Great Lakes system receive necessary funding through the living shoreline grant program to protect and preserve our shorelines. It is imperative that resources are provided through all available options to enhance the shorelines of the Great Lakes and to protect our homes and our communities. I understand the ranking member's position on this particular package of bills and Senate activity, or maybe lack thereof on this. Yet, I do have a responsibility to not only highlight this issue but to advocate for those who are in desperate need and in desperate situations. That is one of the reasons I will be supporting this package. I ask for consideration of my colleagues to help adopt this amendment. Whether it is going together as a package or whether it gets dealt with separately in the Senate, I know that this is something that we need to look at as a legislative body, and we need to act now. Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. HUIZENGA. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the chairman from Hawaii and his acknowledgment of what is going on in the Great Lakes. In fact, it was my own State representative who led that letter of State legislators requesting Governor Whitmer to declare this emergency declaration so that the Federal Government can look at that. Mr. Chair, I appreciate that support, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. HUIZENGA

Mr. HUIZENGA. Madam Chair, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam Chair, preventing fraud and abuse within our financial system and cracking down on bad actors for illegal insider trading is a nonpartisan priority. This kind of fraud and illegal activity hurts everyday investors, and it also makes our markets less efficient, accurate, and reliable. Current law prohibits trading on material insider information in breach of a fiduciary duty under the antifraud provisions of the Federal securities law. The Securities and Exchange Commission and the Department of Justice are the Federal agencies tasked with enforcing insider trading. Both agencies regularly use their authority by bringing insider trading cases against bad actors who violate our insider trading laws. The SEC has not asked for this bill, however, unlike other bills that Republicans have voted for out of this House in the past month. Moreover, Democrats have not fully identified a problem within the current body of the law that inhibits the prosecution of bad actors who illegally trade on material, nonpublic information. As it is written before us on the floor at this moment, this bill could potentially create more confusion and uncertainty within the law of insider trading. It could even expand liability for good faith traders, which would hurt the efficiencies of our markets, chill vital information gathering, and weaken investor confidence. Republican and Democrat SEC chairs alike, with vastly different approaches to enforcement matters, have expressed concern over Congress codifying a prohibition on insider trading into one single statute. Specifically, they voiced concerns that Congress would write a law that could be both overly broad and too narrow at the same time. I share their concerns with the bill as drafted before us today, and I am pleased to hear that the chair has indicated that the majority will be accepting the ranking member's amendment shortly. I am concerned that the current version of the bill, however, does not include an explicit personal benefit test, as set forth by the Supreme Court precedents. I am troubled that an unclear phrasing such as ``relating to the market'' is overbroad and will allow judges and prosecutors to expand the law. I am also concerned that the bill, as drafted, lacks an exclusivity provision that would make this bill the exclusive law of the land. Finally, the rule of construction section before us is troubling, because the Financial Services Committee has not even had a chance to debate this specific language. I fear that this language could add more confusion and uncertainty around insider trading laws, with rogue judges and prosecutors using the language to expand the bounds of insider trading law. I do believe that the ranking member's amendment goes a distance in clarifying that, but, as I will talk about, I will be having an amendment later on as well that I believe further clarifies that. Drafting a statute that appropriately and accurately captures the subtleties of insider trading case law and regulations that have been shaped and finessed over decades into one single statute isn't easy, to say the least. Achieving bipartisan support also isn't easy, especially when it involves nuanced and technical substance such as the body of insider trading law. My colleague, Ranking Member McHenry, will be offering his amendment momentarily that represents a bipartisan agreement with the author to improve the bill by including some Republican priorities and improving the bill to better track current insider trading law. As I had mentioned, I will be offering an amendment as well in an attempt to further clarify and improve this proposal. So, while we are unsure exactly what the final product is going to look like here, I do want to commend both Mr. Himes and Ranking Member McHenry for working together to attempt to reach a bipartisan agreement to improve this bill with the amendment and to make it clear that it is Congress' intent to codify existing law without broadening it into new areas. I hope that the author of the legislation will accept my amendment as well. Madam Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. HUIZENGA. Madam Chair, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Steil), the newest member of the Investor Protection, Entrepreneurship, and Capital Markets Subcommittee.

Mr. HUIZENGA. Madam Chair, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. McHenry), the distinguished ranking member.

Mr. HUIZENGA. Madam Chair, I yield myself the balance of my time. Madam Chair, I would like to take this time to, again, congratulate the work that has been done. I do believe that there is additional work that is before us. I will be having an amendment that I will be offering a little later on, and at this point, I think, as it is coming together, there still is not going to be total agreement or total unanimity. You will see with the ranking member's amendment a number of Republicans who will join this bill. I believe that with the adoption of my amendment you would see even further Republican support of the underlying bill. There will be some dissent. There is dissent within the industry. There is dissent within those prosecutors and the regulators. As I had noted, both Republican and Democrat chairs of the SEC and commissioners of the SEC have said that having Congress act on this particular issue will set off a new chain of events, a new set of legal challenges that will take years to settle in the courts, as well, and they are comfortable with the options that they have the way current law has settled. Having said that, again, as the ranking member had said, in an attempt to codify a number of those Supreme Court rulings is commendable. I tend to be one who believes that Congress has a responsibility to review and look at and examine whether they should codify precedent. I find it interesting that on both sides this happens and with the regulators, and that everyone seems to pick and choose a little bit as to what subject area they would like to codify and what subject area they would continue to like to have flexibility on, based on those lawsuits. At this time the ranking member and his work with the gentleman from Connecticut has made significant progress, and I look forward to adopting the gentleman from North Carolina's amendment and the potential adoption of my amendment, as well, as we move forward. Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

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

Mr. HUIZENGA. Mr. Chair, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chair, I will be brief. I am concerned that the bill before us today focuses specifically on awareness of information rather than the use of wrongful information in connection with security trading. Specifically, this bill defines trading while ``aware'' of material and nonpublic information or communicating material and nonpublic information as wrongful only if the information was obtained by way of, or its communication or use would constitute: theft, bribery, misrepresentation, espionage; a violation of Federal computer data and intellectual property protection and privacy laws; conversion, misappropriation, or other deceptive means; and any breach of a fiduciary duty, a contractual relationship, a code of conduct, or a personal confidence or trust. A person violates the bill's prohibitions on trading with and communicating material on nonpublic information so long as this person ``knew'' the information was wrongfully obtained, actively avoided gaining such knowledge, or recklessly disregarded the wrongful use, communication, or obtainment of this information. It does not matter, under the bill, whether they know the method by which the information was obtained or communicated or if any benefit actually came from communication of the information. In short, Mr. Chair, I believe that this would, in turn, allow activist judges and prosecutors to go after individuals regardless of their intention or actual profit from wrongful actions. That is why my amendment is very simple. It would strike all occurrences of the phrase ``aware of'' and insert the word ``using.'' In other words, you can be aware of something, but if you are not going to actually use that information, why would you be held to a criminal standard? My amendment would have the effect of limiting who can be prosecuted under this bill to people who actually use wrongful information to gain a profit. As we all know, in our lives, there are all kinds of rumors around us all the time, whether it is about our work life or our family or whatever might be going on, somebody in the neighborhood. It is hard to know what information is actually true or actually accurate. What we have currently is this assumption that being aware of something makes you criminally liable versus actually using that information. The current bill could allow prosecution of people who traded and are simply aware of information but perhaps would have traded regardless of their awareness of that information. I am prepared to support this underlying bill with the adoption of my amendment. I was pleased to see the adoption of the amendment from the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. McHenry). I believe these are perfecting amendments. I believe that these are issues that need to be further addressed. While I, too, have some concerns about exclusivity and some of the other things that the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. McHenry) discussed, I believe that this particular issue is of significance, and it is sufficient enough and significant enough to pull my support across the finish line as we move forward on this. Mr. Chair, I urge all of my colleagues to accept this perfecting amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. HUIZENGA. Mr. Chair, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. HUIZENGA

Mr. HUIZENGA. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 4344, the Investor Protection and Capital Markets Fairness Act. In June of 2017, as has been discussed, the Supreme Court ruled unanimously in the Kokesh v. Securities and Exchange Commission that the SEC's disgorgement remedy constitutes a penalty, and, as a result, the Supreme Court found that the SEC's disgorgement authority--in other words, their ability to go collect those dollars--was subject to a 5- year statute of limitations. That may be how the law is currently reads. That is why we are here today to try to change that. As a result of the Kokesh case, the Supreme Court decision has significantly limited the SEC's ability to obtain disgorgement in certain long-running frauds. According to the most recent SEC enforcement division's annual report, it is estimated that due to this Kokesh ruling, the SEC is forced to forgo more than $1.1 billion in ill-gotten gains from wrongdoers at the expense of Main Street investors. H.R. 4344 would grant the SEC the authority to seek and for Federal courts to grant disgorgement within 14 years. Additionally, the bill would further clarify that disgorgement may not be construed as a civil fine, penalty, or forfeiture. Lastly, the bill requires the SEC to submit a report to Congress on the length of certain fraud actions that they have encountered, including the 10 longest-running frauds that led to Commission action. So ideally, I would like to see a shorter statute of limitations. There was discussion about matching it with some other Federal statutes, but I also recognize that many securities frauds are complex and take significant time to uncover and investigate. For example, in this particular case, Charles Kokesh, over the course of nearly 14 years, quietly committed well concealed and elaborate fraud by misappropriating nearly $35 million. And to add insult to injury, because of the Supreme Court decision, Kokesh was allowed, the fraudster was allowed to keep nearly $30 million of what he stole from small-dollar Main Street investors. I don't think any of us can look at that and feel good about that current situation. This bipartisan bill attempts to strike a delicate balance by ensuring that the SEC has the necessary resources and tools to go after bad actors and to make sure that these sophisticated fraudsters may not keep any of the money that they have stolen from everyday investors like teachers and military service personnel, the elderly, and religious-affiliated groups. SEC Chairman, Jay Clayton stated, ``H.R. 4344 is an important response to real harms suffered by innocent victims of the worst types of securities frauds. These are frauds that undermine the public confidence in our markets that the 4,400 women and men of the SEC strive to preserve every day.'' I would like to thank my colleague, the gentleman from Utah (Mr. McAdams), for closely working with me on this important issue to help protect millions of Main Street investors. H.R. 4344 provides the SEC with the necessary tools to ensure sophisticated criminals who defraud everyday investors for long periods of time that they are prevented from keeping their victims' money. So I urge all of my colleagues to vote in favor of this overwhelmingly bipartisan investor protection legislation.

Mr. HUIZENGA

Mr. HUIZENGA. Mr. Chair, I appreciate Mr. McHenry yielding to me, and I rise today in opposition to H.R. 4863, the United States Export Finance Agency Act. According to its charter, the mission of the Export-Import Bank is to ``contribute to maintaining or increasing employment of United States workers'' by subsidizing the export of U.S. goods and services to foreign markets. Over the years, Congress has amended Ex-Im's charter to reflect numerous congressional interests regarding lending practices, transparency, and foreign policy objectives, so much so, that the Bank's charter has grown from four pages at its inception to more than 150 pages now, and with that expansion, we have seen the Bank expand its portfolio to a staggering $135 billion. Well, each reauthorization of the Export-Import Bank has afforded Congress the opportunity to revisit the charter and to work for reform and to modernize the Bank appropriately. However, this flawed partisan proposal that we have before us today fails to make any meaningful reforms to the Export-Import Bank. Now, despite the claims that you are hearing across the aisle about the company not being able to do business with China and Russia, this simply isn't the fact. In fact, I had an amendment, two amendments, that would have actually not allowed the bank to deal with state-owned enterprises in China and in Russia. Now, why? Because of this: the human rights record in China is deplorable. We are seeing it play out today in Hong Kong, literally, right now. We also know that we are battling the Belt and Road Initiative that has been a Chinese initiative that has gone around the world, and it has no business getting U.S. taxpayer dollars in support of it. Well, this initiative allows the Bank to provide taxpayer financing to entities owned and controlled by the Chinese Government, including Chinese state-owned enterprises involved in military activities, human rights abuses, and this Belt and Road Initiative. At a time when China is diverting massive subsidies to state-owned enterprises, specifically through the use of export subsidies, why would Congress authorize the use of taxpayer dollars to make the Chinese Communist Party's job easier? I am baffled by that. Now, claims of the opposite can be repeated and they can be repeated in louder and louder voices, but that still doesn't make it true. The simple fact is my amendment that was rejected by the other side of the aisle would have limited interaction with Chinese and Russian state-owned actors. Well, we all know that the primary goal of the Export-Import Bank is to support American jobs through exports. However, any Ex-Im reauthorization that doesn't address the strategic threat to our national interests posed by China's economic and military efforts is not in the best interests of American workers or jobs.

Mr. HUIZENGA. Mr. Chair, I will move quickly through this. Yes, it is true, I have been a sharp critic of the Export-Import Bank. I have been accused of wanting to do nothing more than shut it down by the other side, as much was said to the ranking member. However, I was also a part of a group trying to come up with a bipartisan agreement in 2012 and 2015, and I was willing to support the bipartisan bill that was introduced by the ranking member and the chair. I wasn't necessarily happy with all the provisions, but I felt that there was sufficient and significant progress made in those much-needed reforms. Well, unfortunately, this bipartisan agreement was abandoned by the other side. The bill that we have before us is a flawed bill, and I urge my colleagues to vote ``no.''