J. Hill

Mr. HILL of Arkansas

Mr. HILL of Arkansas. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I rise in support of Congresswoman Joyce Beatty's bill, the Advancing the Mentor-Protege Program for Small Financial Institutions. Small financial institutions, as we have discussed this afternoon, play a vital role in providing financial services to our families and our small businesses across our communities that often lack robust access to financial products and services, particularly outside our urban areas. Yet, over the last few decades, we have seen a steady decline in the number of these vital smaller institutions threatening access to mortgages for American families and important capital access for small business development or agricultural loans for our family farmers. Representative Beatty's bipartisan legislation helps ensure that smaller banks and credit unions remain viable by formally codifying the Financial Agent Mentor-Protege Program within the United States Department of the Treasury. Since 2018, the Department of the Treasury has launched the program to strengthen partnerships between the Nation's largest banks and some of our smallest financial institutions across our land. This program pairs small and rural financial institutions with larger banks and credit unions, giving them access to resources, training, and technical assistance so that they can better serve their communities and better position themselves to qualify to serve as financial agents to the Treasury. By codifying this initiative, we strengthen community banks, credit unions, and rural banks, expanding access to responsible financial services and ensuring that more small institutions have the capacity to partner with the Federal Government on crucial financial operations. I thank the gentlewoman from Ohio (Mrs. Beatty), for her leadership on this critical issue. I would encourage Members on both sides of the aisle to support this bill, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. HILL of Arkansas. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. HILL of Arkansas. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time. Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record the CBO estimate for this bill.

Mr. HILL of Arkansas. Mr. Speaker, I urge all Members on both sides of the aisle to support Congresswoman Beatty's good bill. It really helps so many of these small institutions that just don't have the capacity building to cope with some of the things that we have talked about on the House floor today in terms of the compliance burden and requirements they have to be successful. If we really want to help our smallest institutions do that, they have to have a peer network. They have to have expertise in some select areas to enhance their ability to serve not only the Department of the Treasury's needs but just to run a more successful financial institution and to be able to grow it and serve their communities. This peer mentorship program is one that, since 2018, we have seen support for and seen success with. I thank the gentlewoman from Ohio (Mrs. Beatty) for urging that it be codified. Mr. Speaker, I encourage Members on both sides to pass Mrs. Beatty's bill, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. HILL of Arkansas

Mr. HILL of Arkansas. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 4478) to amend the Federal Deposit Insurance Act to permit Federal banking agencies to examine qualifying insured depository institutions with under $6 billion in total assets not less than once during each 18-month period, and for other purposes.

Mr. HILL of Arkansas. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on this bill.

Mr. HILL of Arkansas. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the bill introduced by the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Moore), H.R. 4478, the TRUST Act. For many community banks across the country, the challenge is not a lack of demand for loans. It is the growing weight of compliance costs and administrative burden that has steadily increased over time-- dramatically in the years since the global financial crisis. These institutions play an essential role in our local communities by providing capital to help local farmers expand operations, support entrepreneurs, and allow families to meet their goals of building a house or doing a renovation. Overly frequent exam schedules for well-performing, low-risk banks take significant time and resources away from the customers and communities they are meant to serve. The TRUST Act recognizes that regulatory oversight should reflect the level of risk that an institution actually presents to its shareholders, its depositors, and the economy, obviously, at large. This bill raises the threshold for the 18-month exam cycle from $3 billion to $6 billion for those institutions that are well capitalized and well managed under the definitions of Federal regulators. It is critical that we modernize outdated thresholds to prevent inflation and economic growth from unnecessarily increasing burdens on our community institutions. By expanding access to an extended exam cycle, these well-managed community banks with a strong track record can focus more time and resources on lending and serving their customers rather than just being caught up in an endless cycle of repetitive paperwork. At the same time, the TRUST Act maintains robust oversight, with Federal regulators retaining their full authority to examine institutions and ensure the safety and soundness of our banking system. By balancing effective oversight with reduced burden for well-managed institutions, this bill allows community banks to better serve families, farmers, and small businesses that rely on them every single day. Mr. Moore's TRUST Act is a targeted reform that promotes efficiency without sacrificing accountability and ensures that our regulatory framework keeps pace with the needs of our communities and the financial institutions that serve them. Mr. Speaker, I urge all of my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to support Mr. Moore's bill, H.R. 4478, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. HILL of Arkansas. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Moore), one of our newest members on the House Financial Services Committee and the former speaker of the statehouse of North Carolina. Mr. Moore is the author of this bill and has given great thought to how we advance the ability of our Main Street institutions to serve our customers.

Mr. HILL of Arkansas. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time. I want to echo the compliments of the ranking member on this bill as well as the bill that we discussed a few minutes ago by Mr. Timmons of South Carolina and Mr. Foster of Illinois. These bills speak to the heart of how to let a Main Street community bank under $6 billion that is well-managed and well-capitalized and let them do what they do best, which is grow their business, serve their customers, innovate new products, and serve those customers in the best way they know how. Maybe they can even grow their loan pipeline. I can assure you, Mr. Speaker, having worked in an institution of that size, the number of personnel deviated from the tasks I just outlined about better customer service, growing your business, serving your community, attending the hospital board meeting, sponsoring the local little league, that is all put to the side when you are in one after another bank exam, which are frequently uncoordinated as in the case of Mr. Timmons' and Mr. Foster's bill, or again the benefit of having a predictable cycle, a tailored cycle based on the size of the institution, as the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Moore) proposes. These have practical impacts every day for the American economy. A bank under $1 billion in size of assets, Mr. Speaker, probably has 100 to 150 employees. In any exam you are going to pull off, I would say, at least 10 percent of that total employment base with hours focused on exam prep, exam service, and exam follow-up. These have practical implications, and I want to thank the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Moore) for speaking out on smaller financial institutions across this country to see the practical hands-on benefits of this strong bipartisan bill that he has brought to the House floor today. I urge all my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on the TRUST Act. Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record the CBO estimate on this bill.

Mr. HILL of Arkansas. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. HILL of Arkansas

Mr. HILL of Arkansas. Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman and Mr. Himes, too, for their joint leadership on this important task that we have before us today. Mr. Speaker, here on the eve of 25 years since September 11, we come to this House floor to, once again, ensure that we have the tools in place to protect the homeland from foreign attacks. Section 702 sets out these very specific boundaries and process where the United States Government collects the electronic communications from foreign nationals outside the U.S. It allows the U.S. to collect that intelligence on bad actors to prevent the reoccurrence of 9/11, but there is a lot of misinformation about section 702, Mr. Speaker. First, it is used to surveil foreign nationals abroad. It is not targeted at Americans. Secondly, it is not warrantless surveillance. There is a fundamental misunderstanding of this program. Warrant requirements are created under the Fourth Amendment. They apply inside the United States. This is not a program that operates within the boundaries of the United States. It targets foreign nationals outside of the United States. This is so important, as demonstrated by Mr. Hoyer, that we have clear, active protections on how this program is used to target foreign nationals with those protections to protect Americans' privacy under the Fourth Amendment. This bill is that balance, as described by the gentleman from Connecticut and my colleague from Arkansas. Mr. Speaker, let's put America's safety first. Let's keep the homeland security paramount. It is critical. Let's support and pass S. 1318. I urge my colleagues to join me in that effort.

Mr. HILL of Arkansas

Mr. HILL of Arkansas. Mr. Speaker, financial fraud is a plague. Financial fraud is one of the fastest growing crimes in this country, harming families and seniors across the Nation. Last year alone, Americans lost more than $12.5 billion to scams. These crimes steal hard-earned savings and retirement funds. They destroy lives, and they undermine confidence in our financial system. That is why it is critical for every American to take simple steps to protect themselves. Never share banking or personal information unless you have verified the source. Be cautious of unsolicited calls and emails. Review bank statements regularly, and use and develop strong passwords and multifactor authentication to secure your accounts. If you suspect fraud, report it immediately to law enforcement or the FBI's Internet Crime Complaint Center. Mr. Speaker, as chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, I have a mission to protect both Arkansans and all Americans from financial crime. It remains a top priority. Expressing Appreciation to First Service Bank of Arkansas

Mr. HILL of Arkansas. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to express appreciation to First Service Bank of Arkansas for their contributions to our beloved, respected Arkansas military community through their annual Operation Red, White, and Brave. This program has raised both awareness and funds that provide resources for home modifications and financial assistance efforts for both veterans and current Active-Duty members and their families throughout our central Arkansas area. This program raises money through donations, events, and an annual charity golf clinic. Mr. Speaker, every day, I love representing the amazing volunteers and generous citizens across our Second District. Local community businesses like First Service Bank that dedicate time and effort to help our veterans and the people of Arkansas are a real feature and strength of central Arkansas. Congratulating Randy Massanelli

Mr. HILL of Arkansas. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate Randy Massanelli on his retirement as vice chancellor of the Government and Community Relations unit at the University of Arkansas and to thank him for his dedicated service to his community and our proud State. As a native of Pine Bluff, Arkansas, and a proud graduate of the University of Fayetteville, Mr. Massanelli served in the United States Army for 15 years, rising to the rank of major before moving to higher education. While in the Army, Randy served in numerous assignments as the officer in charge of ground convoy movements for the Pershing II missiles in Europe and a combat tour in the Persian Gulf war, earning countless honors, including the Bronze Star for service and sacrifice. In 2014, Mr. Massanelli joined the University of Arkansas and has been bringing his keen judgment and personal experience, working tireless hours to help obtain important research grants and funding for the University of Arkansas. Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend, Randy Massanelli, for his years of service and commitment to Arkansas. His work is a model for future generations of public servants, and his devotion to our State is truly commendable.

Mr. HILL of Arkansas

Mr. HILL of Arkansas. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the extraordinary work of the Arkansas Mission of Mercy dental clinic and its executive director, my good friend, Dr. Terry Fiddler of Conway, Arkansas. For more than 20 years, including just last weekend, Arkansas Mission of Mercy has provided free, high-quality dental care for families who would otherwise go without. Each year in Conway, hundreds of Arkansans line up in the early morning hours, some arriving before 3 a.m., for the chance to receive care. Throughout these annual clinics, Mission of Mercy has served more than 28,000 patients and delivered over $23 million in free dental services across our State. This effort is powered by more than 800 volunteers, including dozens of dentists, hygienists, and medical professionals who give their time to serve their neighbors. Dr. Fiddler and the Arkansas Mission of Mercy are not just restoring smiles. They are restoring dignity, health, and quality of life for thousands of Arkansans. I thank Dr. Fiddler and his team for their years of service to our State. Importance of Financial Literacy

Mr. HILL of Arkansas. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to talk about the importance of financial literacy. April is National Financial Literacy Month, and it is worth pausing to recognize why it matters so much to our families. Every day, Americans make decisions that shape their financial future: how to save, how to budget, how to plan for the unexpected. These choices have lasting consequences, and yet, too many people navigate them without the right tools or knowledge. As a former community banker and investment adviser, helping Arkansans understand their finances and plan for a secure future was one of the most rewarding chapters in my career. The basics are simple but powerful. Live within your means. Save for that rainy day. Take advantage of compound interest. Plan ahead. It is never too early or too late to learn about financial literacy. If you don't know where to start, reach out to your local bank, financial adviser, or financial planner in your community. When Americans have the confidence and knowledge to manage their money well, they are better positioned for long-term success. Honoring John Purifoy Gill

Mr. HILL of Arkansas. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the life and extraordinary legacy of a true Arkansas leader, John Purifoy Gill, who passed away last month at the age of 89. John was a decorated marine, retiring as a lieutenant colonel, and a distinguished attorney who helped shape Arkansas law for decades. From serving as a delegate to the Arkansas Constitutional Convention to leading the Arkansas Bar Association, his impact on our legal community is lasting and profound. But John's leadership extended well beyond the law. He was a historian, a preservationist, and a storyteller, who dedicated his life to capturing the spirit of the Natural State. His books, his work with our State Parks Commission, and his deep involvement in historic preservation ensured that Arkansas' story would be told and long remembered. I had the privilege of working closely with him to honor Scipio A. Jones where John's research and advocacy were instrumental in placing this foundational and incredibly important attorney's portrait in the Little Rock post office that now bears his name. John was a dear friend and a trusted voice. I loved our collaboration in historic preservation, outdoor recreation, and public service. He leaves behind not just an extraordinary professional legacy but a loving family, a stronger Arkansas, and a standard of service that will continue to guide us. Honoring Alan Greenspan

Mr. HILL of Arkansas. Mr. Speaker, I want to recognize that last month on March 6, Alan Greenspan celebrated his centennial, 100 years old. Most Americans know him well as the man who ran the Federal Reserve for nearly 20 years, through four Presidents, historic prosperity, and he was witness to more than a few financial crises on his watch. Often called the Maestro, he was confirmed as Fed Chairman on August 11, 1987, just 2 months before Black Monday, the largest single-day percentage decline in market history. The next morning, the Fed issued a one-sentence statement: ``The Federal Reserve, consistent with its responsibilities as the Nation's central bank, affirmed today its readiness to serve as a source of liquidity to support the economic and financial system.'' It was short, calm, and unambiguous. Markets stabilized, and the crash did not become a depression. That was Greenspan: precise under pressure and deliberate when others were panicking. He went on to navigate the savings and loan crisis, the Gulf war recession, and the dot-com boom and bust. My best wishes for his centennial, and my best wishes to his family.

Mr. HILL of Arkansas

Mr. HILL of Arkansas. Madam Speaker, I rise in support of H.J. Res. 139, a straightforward, commonsense balanced budget amendment to the United States Constitution. Throughout my tenure in Congress, I have consistently supported solutions to address Washington's top-down, one-size-fits-all approach to spending. For decades, Washington has spent beyond its means, avoided difficult decisions, and relied on borrowing to fund an ever- expanding government. That approach has proven unsustainable, and today the consequences are impossible to ignore. History has shown that we cannot afford to wait any longer. In 1995, when our national debt was $4.9 trillion, the Senate failed to pass a balanced budget amendment, by a single vote. The last time this house debated this important measure was in April 2018--just 8 years ago, but that was before a global pandemic, and our debt reached $21 trillion. This measure was critical then and is essential today with our national debt now exceeding $38 trillion, and annual deficits are approaching $2 trillion. This is not abstract math. Rising debt means higher interest costs, fewer resources available for national priorities, and a growing burden for future generations. Working families, farmers, and small businesses in central Arkansas live within their means. They make responsible choices every day about spending, saving, and prioritizing their needs. The federal government should operate with the same level of discipline. Yet Washington cannot get its excessive spending under control. Addressing this issue is long overdue. A balanced budget amendment is just one tool to get our fiscal house in order. Its purpose is simple: restore accountability and discipline to a broken budget process. It would require Congress to confront tradeoffs honestly, set clear priorities, and stop treating unlimited borrowing as a substitute for responsible policymaking. Passing this sends a clear message that Congress is serious about reining in spending and putting our Nation on a sustainable fiscal path. Our Nation must spend within its means. I will continue to support efforts that restore fiscal discipline, strengthen our economy, and ensure a stronger future for our children and grandchildren.

Mr. HILL of Arkansas

Mr. HILL of Arkansas. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to H. Con. Res. 38, Directing the President pursuant to section 5(c) of the War Powers Resolution to remove United States Armed Forces from unauthorized hostilities in the Islamic Republic of Iran. The United States and the Islamic Republic of Iran have had an adversarial relationship since the 1979 Iranian Revolution. In 1979, Iranian theocratic revolutionaries removed Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, who was a close U.S. ally. and the current Islamic Republic was declared. The establishment of the Islamic Republic, also known as the Iranian regime, in conjunction with the U.S. Embassy hostage crisis, laid the groundwork for the United States to have no diplomatic relations with Iran beginning in 1980. Since 1979, the United States has used sanctions and diplomacy to deter, constrain, and encourage the Iranian regime to change its egregious behavior. That behavior includes supporting terrorism at home and becoming the globe's largest state sponsor of terrorism, developing a nuclear weapon program, proliferation activities, destabilizing the region through its ballistic missile and drone development, and attacks directly and indirectly killing Americans for over four decades. That sanction posture is now over four decades old. In 1979, the Carter Administration imposed sanctions on Iran in response to the U.S. Embassy hostage crisis. In the 1980s and 1990s, Congress expanded sanctions on Iran to deter and compel the Iranian regime to stop supporting international terrorism and its pursuit of advanced weapons. including chemical, biological, and nuclear. In 2002, the United States and our allies learned about previously undisclosed nuclear facilities in Iran. In response. the United States and our allies imposed further sanctions on Iran to convince the Iranian regime to limit its nuclear activities. The Iranian regime did not stop or limit the activities, so in 2006 the United Nations Security Council imposed multinational sanctions preventing trade with Iran. In 2009. the Iranian regime violently cracked down on mass protests over its 2009 presidential election. In response, Congress targeted more sanctions on Iran that aimed at Iran's oil exports and economic sector. Congress determined that to lift those sanctions, the Iranian regime must stop its support of international terrorism and end its proliferation activities. That has never happened, as the Iranian regime is the number one state sponsor of terrorism and has continued to pursue nuclear and advanced weapons. In 2015, the Obama Administration tried a new approach of appeasement and entered the United States into the disastrous Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCOPA). This is also known as the ``2015 Iran nuclear deal,'' which required Iran to curb its nuclear program, reduce uranium enrichment by 98 percent, and dismantle most centrifuges. In exchange, the United States, China, France, Germany, Russia, and the United Kingdom agreed to provide significant relief from international sanctions imposed on Iran. This deal was disastrous because Iran continued to enrich uranium and pursue their nuclear weapons goals. In addition to that disastrous policy, the Obama Administration transferred $1.7 billion in cash to Iran in January 2016. On top of that, the 2015 Iran nuclear deal allowed billions in new commerce to flow into Iran. Again, remember that the Iranian regime is the number one state sponsor of terrorism. That money benefited the Iranian regime's dangerous behavior. In 2018, President Trump pulled the United States out of the disastrous 2015 Iran nuclear deal and announced that the United States would reimpose sanctions on Iran. With no delay, Iran escalated its regional military activities, which included directly attacking the United States forces in the region. The Biden Administration was unable to deter the Iranian regime. In addition, the Biden Administration recklessly provided Iran with sanctions relief that gave Iran access to approximately 816 billion in previously frozen funds. Those shortsighted actions of the Biden Administration sadly played a part in the build-up of the October 7th attack on Israel by the Iranian regime-backed terrorist organization, Hamas. In response, Congress passed new sanctions on any foreign financial institution that engages in transactions with the $6 billion in Iranian funds. In 2024, my bill, the Holding Iranian Leaders Accountable Act, was signed into law to expose the Iranian regime's financial corruption. In 2025, back in the White House, the Trump Administration renewed a ``Maximum Pressure'' campaign on the Iranian regime. The actions by President Trump and his Administration recognize that nearly five decades of sanctions imposed bilaterally and by the United Nations have failed to stop Iran's destructive ambitions. The Trump Administration recognizes that years of intensive but ultimately futile negotiations over Iran's nuclear weapons program accomplished nothing and were rightly rejected by bipartisan majorities in both the House and Senate at the end of the Obama Administration. Today, the House is considering a War Powers Resolution. This War Powers Resolution does not account for the nearly five decades of history. This resolution is not about whether we support the major combat operation that is currently ongoing in Iran--it is about curbing the power of the Executive Branch, specifically the President, to protect the United States from the Iranian regime. Taking away the authorities granted to the President under the War Powers Resolution in the very midst of an ongoing major combat operation is reckless and shortsighted. I encourage my colleagues to oppose H. Con. Res. 38.

Mr. HILL of Arkansas

Mr. HILL of Arkansas. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the topic of the Special Order.

Mr. HILL of Arkansas. Mr. Speaker, I am honored to rise today with my colleagues to lead the House of Representatives in reading President George Washington's farewell address. Having just celebrated the 294th birthday of our indispensable first President, this is a fitting tribute as we celebrate the 250th year of our Nation's creation. The farewell address is a remarkable document. Published in the American Daily Advertiser on September 19, 1796, it was never delivered in person, but it was widely read and remains one of the most important documents in American history. President Washington completed his two terms as our indispensable first President. He was first in war, first in peace, and first in the hearts of his countrymen. Every step of the way, he viewed his actions through the lens of the precedent it would set for the Presidency and for future Presidents: his dress, his decorum, his relationship with Congress, his decisions about his Cabinet, and his approach to executive decisionmaking. In this address, you will see clearly that he ended his extraordinary public career on a high note. The practice of reading the farewell address began in a joint session of Congress on February 22, 1862, during the darkest days of the Civil War. The Senate revived the ceremonial reading in 1888, and each year since 1896, the Senate has observed George Washington's birthday in February by selecting a Senator, alternating parties, to read the 7,641-word statement in their legislative session. This year, fittingly, in this year of America250, our semiquincentennial, it was Senator Tim Kaine of Virginia. The House revived the ceremonial reading in 1889 and continued intermittently until 1933, after which it became an annual fixture in until 1979. Today, Mr. Speaker, my colleagues and I are delighted to return this tradition to the House floor accompanied by our handsome portrait of our first President by John Vanderlyn that has hung here in the House Chamber since the 1830s. Mr. Washington's Farewell Address: ``Friends and Fellow-Citizens: ``The period for a new election of a citizen to administer the executive government of the United States being not far distant, and the time actually arrived when your thoughts must be employed in designating the person who is to be clothed with that important trust, it appears to me proper, especially as it may conduce to a more distinct expression of the public voice, that I should now apprise you of the resolution I have formed, to decline being considered among the number of those out of whom a choice is to be made. ``I beg you, at the same time, to do me the justice to be assured that this resolution has not been taken without a strict regard to all the considerations appertaining to the relation which binds a dutiful citizen to his country--and that, in withdrawing the tender of service which silence in my situation might imply, I am influenced by no diminution of zeal for your future interest, no deficiency of grateful respect for your past kindness; but am supported by a full conviction that the step is compatible with both. ``The acceptance of, and continuance hitherto in, the office to which your suffrages have twice called me, have been a uniform sacrifice of inclination to the opinion of duty and to a deference for what appeared to be your desire. I constantly hoped that it would have been much earlier in my power, consistently with motives which I was not at liberty to disregard, to return to that retirement from which I had been reluctantly drawn. The strength of my inclination to do this, previous to the last election, had even led to the preparation of an address to declare it to you; but mature reflection on the then perplexed and critical posture of our affairs with foreign nations, and the unanimous advice of persons entitled to my confidence, impelled me to abandon the idea. ``I rejoice that the state of your concerns, external as well as internal, no longer renders the pursuit of inclination incompatible with the sentiment of duty or propriety, and am persuaded whatever partiality may be retained for my services, that in the present circumstances of our country, you will not disapprove my determination to retire. ``The impressions with which I first undertook the arduous trust were explained on the proper occasion. In the discharge of this trust, I will only say that I have, with good intentions, contributed towards the organization and administration of the government, the best exertions of which a very fallible judgment was capable. Not unconscious in the outset of the inferiority of my qualifications, experience in my own eyes, perhaps still more in the eyes of others, has strengthened the motives to diffidence of myself; and every day the increasing weight of years admonishes me more and more that the shade of retirement is as necessary to me as it will be welcome. Satisfied that if any circumstances have given peculiar value to my services, they were temporary, I have the consolation to believe, that while choice and prudence invite me to quit the political scene, patriotism does not forbid it.'' Mr. Speaker, I now yield to the distinguished gentleman from Utah (Mr. Kennedy) to continue our reading.

Mr. HILL of Arkansas. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Utah for his participation. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the distinguished gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Beyer), who joined us. He is the distinguished former Lieutenant Governor of the Commonwealth of Virginia.

Mr. HILL of Arkansas. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from the Commonwealth of Virginia (Mr. Cline) to continue our reading.

Mr. HILL of Arkansas. ``This spirit, unfortunately, is inseparable from our nature, having its root in the strongest passions of the human mind. . . . [B]ut, in those of the popular form, it is seen in its greatest rankness and is truly their worst enemy. ``The alternate domination of one faction over another, sharpened by the spirit of revenge natural to party dissension, which in different ages and countries has perpetrated the most horrid enormities, is itself a frightful despotism. But this leads at length to a more formal and permanent despotism. The disorders and miseries which result gradually incline the minds of men to seek security and repose in the absolute power of an individual; and sooner or later the chief of some prevailing faction, more able or more fortunate than his competitors, turns this disposition to the purposes of his own elevation on the ruins of public liberty. ``Without looking forward to an extremity of this kind (which nevertheless ought not to be entirely out of sight) the common and continual mischiefs of the spirit of party are sufficient to make it the interest and the duty of a wise people to discourage and restrain it. ``It serves always to distract the public councils and enfeeble the public administration. It agitates the community with ill-founded jealousies and false alarms, kindles the animosity of one part against another, foments occasionally riot and insurrection. It opens the door to foreign influence and corruption, which find a facilitated access to the government itself through the channels of party passions. Thus the policy and the will of one country are subjected to the policy and will of another. ``There is an opinion that the parties in free countries are useful checks upon the administration of the government and serve to keep alive the spirit of liberty. This within certain limits is probably true--and in governments of a monarchical cast patriotism may look with indulgence, if not with favor, upon the spirit of party. But in those of the popular character, in governments purely elective, it is a spirit not to be encouraged. From their natural tendency, it is certain there will always be enough of that spirit for every salutary purpose. And there being constant danger of excess, the effort ought to be, by force of public opinion, to mitigate and assuage it. A fire not to be quenched, it demands a uniform vigilance to prevent its bursting into flame, lest instead of warming it should consume. ``It is important, likewise, that the habits of thinking in a free country should inspire caution in those entrusted with its administration, to confine themselves within their respective constitutional spheres, avoiding in the exercise of the powers of one department to encroach upon another. The spirit of encroachment tends to consolidate the powers of all the departments in one and thus to create, whatever the form of government, a real despotism. A just estimate of that love of power and proneness to abuse it which predominates in the human heart is sufficient to satisfy us of the truth of this position. The necessity of reciprocal checks in the exercise of political power, by dividing and distributing it into different depositories and constituting each the guardian of the public weal against invasions by the others, has been evinced by experiments ancient and modern, some of them in our country and under our own eyes. To preserve them must be as necessary as to institute them. If in the opinion of the people the distribution or modification of the constitutional powers be in any particular wrong, let it be corrected by an amendment in the way which the Constitution designates. But let there be no change by usurpation; for though this, in one instance, may be the instrument of good, it is the customary weapon by which free governments are destroyed. The precedent must always greatly overbalance in permanent evil any partial or transient benefit which the use can at any time yield. ``Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports. In vain would that man claim the tribute of patriotism who should labor to subvert these great pillars of human happiness, these firmest props of the duties of men and citizens. The mere politician, equally with the pious man, ought to respect and to cherish them. A volume could not trace all their connections with private and public felicity. Let it simply be asked where is the security for property, for reputation, for life, if the sense of religious obligation desert the oaths, which are the instruments of investigation in courts of justice? And let us with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion. Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on minds of peculiar structure, reason and experience both forbid us to expect that the national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle.'' Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Utah (Mr. Kennedy).