Darrell Issa

Mr. ISSA

Mr. ISSA. Madam Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 7177) to amend title 28, United States Code, to consolidate certain divisions in the Northern District of Alabama, as amended.

Mr. ISSA. Madam 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 H.R. 7177.

Mr. ISSA. Madam Speaker, I am prepared to close, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. ISSA. Madam Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time for the purposes of closing. Madam Speaker, we are the United States of America, and it is, in fact, the people of the State of Alabama who have asked for this, the people's Representatives of Alabama who have unanimously supported it, and the Judicial Conference which studied it and found it to be appropriate. Today, I am honored to be part of the other 49 States ratifying the need of one in their best interest as they brought it to us, which is, in fact, what the United States was formed for, is to support the common good and the individual States in any way that we can. Madam Speaker, I urge Members to support this bill, vote it out, and send it to the Senate. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. ISSA

Mr. ISSA. Madam Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 8666) to amend title 28, United States Code, to authorize holding court for the Central Division of Utah in Moab and Monticello.

Mr. ISSA. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam Speaker, our Federal courts are critical to ensuring that Americans have access to justice. The Central Division of the District of Utah is currently authorized to hold court only in Salt Lake City, Provo, and St. George. For residents of southeastern Utah, however, traveling to those courthouses is burdensome and requires hours of driving, and it affects their ability to access the Federal court system. H.R. 8666 addresses these issues at essentially no cost to the U.S. Government. The bill authorizes the Central Division of the District of Utah to hold court in Moab and Monticello in southeastern Utah, in addition to those other locations allowed by law. In addition, this will be free of cost because the District of Utah already has agreements in place with State and county courthouses in those cities. Those facilities are being provided at no cost to the Federal Government because they are in the best interests of the people of Utah. These changes, which have been requested by the District of Utah, are endorsed by the Judicial Conference of the United States and the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit. In fact, it is also endorsed by the U.S. Attorney's Office and the Federal Public Defender's Office for the District of Utah. Madam Speaker, I strongly urge the passage of this bill, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. ISSA. Madam Speaker, I yield such time as she may consume to the gentlewoman from Utah (Ms. Maloy).

Mr. ISSA. Madam Speaker, I am prepared to close, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. ISSA. Madam Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time. Madam Speaker, in closing, this is yet another bill that says a great deal about the way Members of Congress know their districts. Members of Congress travel their districts. They understand the needs of it, so when a Congresswoman like Ms. Maloy comes to us, she comes knowing what she needs and has already done the homework, both in traveling and in working with the Judicial Conference. This is yet another example where the right answer comes from the people closest to the people, the individual Representatives. The committee is proud and happy to support this commonsense change. Madam Speaker, I urge support of the underlying bill, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. ISSA

Mr. ISSA. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H. Res. 1371, and I stand before you for the fourth time requesting that my State's former attorney general, former U.S. Senator, and now Vice President and candidate for President come to the border. Mr. Speaker, the other side will tell you she wasn't a border czar. I am going to tell you they didn't say she didn't have the border responsibility given to her by the President and dealing with the root causes, so to speak, when it happened. They are now revising history. You can't unring the bell. She was assigned it. She said she was going to do it, and she didn't come to the border. I represent the district that has the most border crossings in America over the last two quarters. We had over 250,000 encounters just in the last year. Most importantly, 90 percent of the over 52,000 of what my colleagues call special interest aliens crossing the border since October 2023 entered from my district. These are Chinese. These are Russians. These are people who have come from countries where we cannot verify and cannot return. They are not just being encountered, but they are being brought into the country. They are being sent to New York. They are staying where they want to stay and doing what they want to do. That is what this administration has done for 4 years. In 4 years, our country has absorbed 10 million or more people as a result. Some were get-aways, 500,000 at a crack, per year. Some simply presented themselves and were automatically allowed in. This administration has not used the tools they claim to use. Now, in an election year, they want to unclaim their border czar, and they want to unclaim responsibility for an un-American activity, letting people into the country outside the intent of the law. Mr. Speaker, I urge support for the resolution.

Mr. ISSA

Mr. ISSA. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from North Carolina (Ms. Ross).

Mr. ISSA. Mr. Speaker, I continue to reserve.

Mr. ISSA. Mr. Speaker, I do not have additional speakers at this time.

Mr. ISSA. Mr. Speaker, may I inquire as to how much time is remaining.

Mr. ISSA. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, there are a couple of things I want to set straight. The gentlewoman regularly talks about cost. The bill clearly says at no cost. This material has to be available at no cost. The gentlewoman continues talking about private information. It makes it clear, in the amended portion of this bill, that private information is safeguarded. Notwithstanding that, for everyone in America who has used a computer, all these entities ask for is, in fact, to log in with a name and identification. This facilitates better service when you return. However, we also all know that anybody can get a free Gmail account under any name, so the idea that you are giving out personally identifiable information, that is a choice if you use yours rather than a one-time-use Gmail or other mail you may have just gotten. As a matter of fact, this is no more invasive than when I log in to do my Wordle daily with The New York Times, and I feel pretty comfortable that I am safe there. Lastly, I want to make sure we understand that these books and their digital versions are not just laws. These books, by testimony even from Mr. Massie, a distinguished member of the committee, are how-to books. Extensively, Mr. Massie, one of the four votes that sided with Ms. Lofgren, in fact, told us how he used the book as a guideline to do construction of his own home. In open court, he said that he didn't go to get a permit. He wasn't trying to comply with the law. He used the book because it taught him how to do a good job. He used it sometimes and didn't use it others. I am paraphrasing my colleague, and I hope I have done it accurately, but in fact, it is clear that there is so much more information than just a law. We all pore through laws in this body. We know what laws look like. Laws are so complex in the way they are written that usually you need a separate book to understand them, and this is no exception. If we do not protect the copyright here as the Constitution requires, we will regret it because, in fact, a building code that says, yes, you must have so many electrical plugs between a certain place doesn't tell you that you can have more, doesn't tell you how to do more, doesn't teach you. These books published by the standard-setters for generations have been how-to. They have been available in libraries to read, but not to make copies of. They have been available online, as the gentlewoman said, but, in some cases, without the protections we seek today. I want to close this portion of my statement by saying one thing: The gentlewoman made a point that some of these organizations do have large revenues. Most are nonprofits, and they exist for the benefit of producing these standards. This body does not look at a copyright holder and say that because a songwriter or musician is making good money, his song should be given away for free. How much you make and how you spend it, especially for a nonprofit, should never be questioned as to whether or not they are entitled to a copyright. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time, and I am prepared to close.

Mr. ISSA. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 1631) to amend title 17, United States Code, to reaffirm the importance of, and include requirements for, works incorporated by reference into law, and for other purposes, as amended.

Mr. ISSA

Mr. ISSA. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (S. 4548) to make a technical correction to the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2024 by repealing section 5101 and enacting an updated version of the Foreign Extortion Prevention Act.

Mr. ISSA. 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 S. 4548.

Mr. ISSA. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, S. 4548 makes technical and conforming changes to the Foreign Extortion Prevention Act, which was enacted as part of last year's National Defense Authorization Act. The FEPA was introduced to create a Federal offense that would contemplate a Foreign Corruption Practices Act. Again, the Foreign Corruption Practices Act, which has been in place for many years, is the act that the American people rely on to make sure that Americans, no matter where they are doing business, abide by U.S. practices, no bribes, and no mislaid funds. In fact, it is the reason that the United States is the envy of the world when it comes to contracting with our companies. While the FCPA prohibits the paying of a bribe to a foreign official, the FEPA prohibits the demanding of a bribe by a foreign official. However, the FEPA text that was enacted last year in the NDAA had several flaws. First, the law was added to the domestic bribery statute in title 18, creating an inconsistency in the sections that are being defined in the elements of the crime. These inconsistencies may prevent the FEPA and the domestic bribery statute from operating in the way that Congress intended. Second, there were inconsistencies between the language of the FCPA and the FEPA. Because these statutes are intended to be complementary, with parts of them addressing the same problem, we need to harmonize it. For that reason, this technical and conforming change has been brought to the committee's attention. We stand for it, we have reviewed it, and in fact, we hope that all will vote on it. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. ISSA. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time. Mr. Speaker, the bill before us isn't just another example of the hardworking Sheila Jackson Lee that both of us served with for more than two decades. In closing, I take a moment to pay tribute to the gentlewoman, not on my side of the aisle, not always on my side of a vote, but never has our committee had a harder working, more dedicated Member, a Member who I had the honor of traveling with to many places, including the Middle East, Africa, and elsewhere. She would get up early. She would work late. She would add meetings on top of meetings, even on congressional delegations that seemed to be filled beyond the possibility of doing it all. I don't remember a piece of legislation on which she wasn't prepared to opine with accuracy and proper briefing, and I don't remember an opportunity missed to offer an amendment or a need for greater transparency. I join my colleague, Mr. Nadler, in saying she will be missed. She will be missed because nobody could have had somebody more interested in transparency, in proper reporting, and quite frankly, the importance of this body. She was a person of the House, and she will be missed. Mr. Speaker, I urge support and yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. ISSA

Mr. ISSA. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (S. 227) to amend title 28, United States Code, to provide an additional place for holding court for the Pecos Division of the Western District of Texas, and for other purposes.

Mr. ISSA. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and insert extraneous material on S. 227.

Mr. ISSA. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, Americans depend on the Federal court system to protect their rights and obtain relief when their rights are violated. It is also where criminals are prosecuted, highlighting the importance of making our communities safer. That is why improving and ensuring accessibility to courts for our citizens is so important. This important bill adds four words to the United States Code to save thousands of Americans in Texas and Washington from having to make long, burdensome trips just to reach the nearest Federal courthouse. The bill authorizes Federal courts in the Western District of Texas and Western District of Washington to hold court in Alpine, Texas, and Mount Vernon, Washington, respectively. Both Alpine and Mount Vernon already have existing facilities necessary to hold court, so the cost of the bill is little or nothing. By authorizing these districts to utilize their locations already built, we will reduce the administrative burdens on the court system and logistic burdens on which businesses count. For example, the Judicial Conference of the United States has noted that Americans in the Western District of Texas must drive as far as 100 miles to reach the courthouse in Pecos, Texas. The Judicial Conference identified a similar hardship for Americans in the Western District of Washington. That is why I support this commonsense, bipartisan legislation and urge both sides of the aisle to do the same. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. ISSA. Mr. Speaker, I join my colleague from New York in urging that this bipartisan bill be passed. Mr. Speaker, I will close simply by saying it is seldom that people come before this body saying: I have something that will cost the government little or nothing but will save Americans a great deal. Mr. Speaker, I urge support and yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. ISSA. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.