Stephen Lynch

Mr. LYNCH

Mr. LYNCH. I thank the gentleman for yielding. Mr. Speaker, if I may, I would like to just amplify some of the concerns raised by the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Kildee) in his remarks about the fact that here we are, just the second day of this Congress, and we have a group of 11 bills that have been rolled up. There are many new provisions here that have never seen a hearing, unfortunately. This is not the open process that we had hoped for and had spoken about just yesterday. We have had very limited opportunity to review some of these new sections. Again, they have not had a hearing. They have not gone through regular order. H.R. 37 contains 11 separate bills, some of which I support, but some of which I oppose strongly. Portions of H.R. 37 have entirely new provisions that most Members have not had the opportunity to thoroughly analyze. For example, title XI of this bill modifies SEC rule 701 on stock- sharing. It allows private companies to compensate their employees up to $10 million in company stock without having to provide the employees with certain basic financial disclosures about the company. I voted against a similar bill, H.R. 4571, in the last Congress when it was marked up. But I also want to point out, that while I strongly support employees receiving equity benefits from the firms in which they work, those benefits should be tangible and real. We all remember Enron and WorldCom, where the company, as compensation to those employees, actually pressured them into buying company stock and did not provide full information to them. And eventually, those shares were worthless. So you had thousands of workers being partly compensated in company stock, and the stock was worth zero. Now we are going to expand this opportunity from $5 million to $10 million a year that each company will be able to pay their employees with company stock, and they don't have any obligation because part of this bill does not require them to make any type of a disclosure, Mr. Speaker. And there is no opportunity for those employees to get accurate financial information about whether the stock that they are being paid with is worth anything. It is just a bad road to go down. In closing, this bill uses the veneer of job creation to provide special treatment for the well-connected corporations, mergers and acquisition advisers, and financial institutions while doing very little to address the needs of those workers. With that, I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on the bill.

Mr. LYNCH

Mr. LYNCH. Mr. Speaker, today I rise to honor and congratulate the administration, coaches and players of the Cohasset High School football team. On December 6, 2014, the Skippers won the Massachusetts Interscholastic Athletic Association Division VI Super Bowl, earning them the title, State Champions. Cohasset High School has a long tradition of excellence in high school football. In 1957, the CHS football team went undefeated with a 9-0 record. CHS has won eight South Shore League championships since then, but 2014 is the school's first state championship. The 2014 team finished the season this year by winning ten consecutive games, including five hard-fought victories in the MIAA Tournament. This historic playoff run included a 35-3 victory over the previously undefeated Nantucket Whalers, a 28-7 victory over the Mayflower League Champion Bishop Connolly Cougars, a 20-7 victory over the Tri-Valley League Champion Millis Mohawks, a 35-6 victory over the Catholic Conference Champion Cathedral Panthers, and the 35-22 Super Bowl victory over the Littleton Tigers. Mr. Speaker, the young men on this football team conducted themselves in such a way as to bring honor, pride and recognition to the Town of Cohasset. They represent what is truly best about high school student athletes. Today, it is my honor to join with the families, friends and residents of Cohasset, Massachusetts, to congratulate the Cohasset High School football team on their historic achievement. Administration: Superintendent Barbara Cataldo, Principal Carolyn Connolly, Athletic Director Ron Ford, Head Coach Pete Afanasiw, Assistant Coaches Kevin Dooley, Jeff Knight, John Maher, Phil Maloney, Brian Pattison, Bob Silvia, Don Silvia, Dave Terry, Pete Umbrianna. Players: Xander Schubert, Michael Cohen, Danny Durkin, Luke O'Brien, Danny Axelson, Drew Skolnick, Mike Lund, Henry Butenschoen, Adam Benson, Brett Dooley, Nick Hall, Kyle Ferreira, David Burke, Liam Lynch, Cole Sullivan, Connor Curran, Christian Hanke, Patrick Haggearty, Jake Koncius, Noah Froio, Joseph Welman, Zach Silva, Mike Nolan, Nick Slamp, Cole Kissick, Ray Tolosko, Ollie Hanke, Tim Gillis, Sam Sullivan, Chris Norton, Thomas Durkin, Charlie Swartwood, Max Fitzgerald, Sean Mavilla, Jake Johnson, Jack Osten, Matt Froio, Jack Hoffman, Steve Iantosca, Bobby Driscoll, Vincenzo Kulturides, Liam Prescott, Nick Lydon, Derek Bennett, Ryan Losordo, Cal Osten, Jake Bennett, Tyler Mulhern, Victor Najjar, James Hynes, Jack Mahoney, Chris Lydon, Reed Parks, Alex Norton, Hayes Keniley, Nick Tetreault, Will Thomas, Ryan Donovan, Jack Donohue, Jack Speer.

Mr. LYNCH

Mr. LYNCH. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in honor of Kevin L. Cotter in recognition of his outstanding contributions to the United States' labor movement and to his hometown of Quincy, Massachusetts. The son of Edward and June Cotter, Kevin was born on October 15, 1948, in Somerville, Massachusetts. Kevin attended St. Catherine's Grammar School in Somerville, and then went on to Sacred Heart High School in East Cambridge until it closed in 1965. Kevin then completed his schooling at Somerville High School, graduating in 1966. Upon his graduation, Kevin applied to Plumbers' Union Local 12, where he was sworn in on October 24, 1966. He served a five-year apprenticeship and became an active Journeyman member of Local 12 in 1971. Since then, Kevin has held several appointed and elected positions throughout his career: 1973, elected to Local 12's Examining board, 1976, elected as a trustee to the Pension Annuity, Health, and Welfare Funds, 1982, served as President of the Labor Guild of the Archdiocese of Boston, 1985, elected Business Manager of Local 12. He was re-elected as Business Manager of Local 12 in 1997. Further, Kevin held positions in addition to his responsibilities at Local 12 including: President of the Labor Guild of the Archdiocese of Boston in 1983, appointment to the Board of Directors of Massachusetts Industrial Finance Agency by Governor Michael Dukakis in 1986, Marketing Officer for Custody Services to Union, Taft-Hartley Benefit Funds at State Street Bank, appointment to Board of Directors of the Massachusetts Water Resources Authority by Boston Mayor Thomas Menino in 2002, and Commissioner of the Quincy Housing Authority in 2002. Kevin was also elected as a delegate to the United Association National Convention in 1976, 1981, 1986, 2001, 2006, and 2011, in addition to serving on dozens of national and local labor related boards, committees, and councils. Recognizing his good work, several organizations have honored Kevin throughout the years. In 1991, he was the recipient of the Daniel J. Tobin award from the New England Chapter of the Irish American Coalition. In 2000, he received the Jewish National Fund ``Tree of Life'' Award. In 2004, he was the labor recipient of the ``Cushing Gavin Award'' from the Labor Guild of the Archdiocese of Boston for excellence in Labor Relations. Additionally, in 2007 he was selected for the ``Gompers, Murray, Meaney Award'' by the MA AFL-CIO. Mr. Speaker, Kevin is known for his integrity, loyalty, and his quick sense of humor. He has had the good fortune of being married to Betty for forty-two years; they are the proud parents to three children: Lisa, Colleen, and Kevin, and grandparents to four grandchildren: Isabelle, Gianna, Gabrielle, and Cecilia. I thank Kevin for his leadership and his service.

Mr. LYNCH

Mr. LYNCH. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I think we all agree that Federal agency Web sites must be secure in order to protect taxpayers from being the victims of an information security breach. For that reason, I support the measure before us, the Safe and Secure Federal Websites Act. The recent data breaches at Target, Neiman Marcus, and other retail establishments affected more than 100 million Americans. The importance of information security cannot be overstated. It is the responsibility of Congress to ensure that the Federal Government is not the source of these types of data breaches and to ensure that the personally identifiable information of American citizens is not compromised through Federal Web sites. This bill would require agency chief information officers to certify to Congress the functionality and security of new or substantially modified Web sites that contain personally identifiable information. It would also require that existing Web sites that contain personally identifiable information meet these security requirements within 90 days. We are not known for our speed around here, so I am not entirely sure that that will be enough for agencies to secure existing Web sites. I hope, as this bill moves forward in the legislation, the timeliness issue is addressed. However, overall, these requirements are positive, beginning steps in preventing harmful data breaches within the Federal Government. I also want to take special time to mention and to thank Congressman Connolly from Virginia for his positive contribution to this legislation and for his work on data security issues. Mr. Connolly's amendment to this legislation closes the loopholes in Federal privacy requirements and streamlines Federal oversight of agency implementation of privacy policies and procedures pertaining to agency responses to security incidents involving personally identifiable information. I join with the gentleman from Virginia in sincerely hoping that we can continue to work together to move this bill forward in a bipartisan manner. I also hope that we can work together to ensure that this bill is compatible with the existing framework of the Federal Security Management Act. I have no further speakers, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. LYNCH

Mr. LYNCH. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I am pleased to join my colleagues from Ohio and Michigan in the consideration of H.R. 4919, a bill to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 715 Shawan Falls Drive, in Dublin, Ohio, as the Lance Corporal Wesley G. Davids and Captain Nicholas J. Rozanski Memorial Post Office. As my friend from Ohio has noted, Lance Corporal Wesley G. Davids grew up in Dublin, Ohio, and graduated from Dublin Scioto High School in 2003. After the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, Mr. Davids was inspired to join the Marine Corps. He was deployed to Iraq with the 4th Marine Division, Marine Forces Reserve of Columbus, Ohio. On May 11, 2005, just one day after his 20th birthday, Lance Corporal Davids was tragically killed while conducting combat operations against enemy forces in Iraq. Also a native of Dublin, Ohio, Captain Nicholas Rozanski graduated from Dublin High School in 1994 and Ohio State University in 1999. Nicholas came from a family that honors military service and signed up for the National Guard in 2003. After deployments to Kosovo in 2004 and Iraq in 2007, Captain Rozanski was deployed to Afghanistan as a member of the 37th Infantry Brigade Combat Team in 2012. On April 4, 2012, Captain Rozanski was killed by a Taliban suicide bomber in northern Afghanistan. He is survived by his loving wife and two daughters. Mr. Speaker, we should pass this bill to honor these two fallen heroes, these sons of Ohio, who have made the ultimate sacrifice on behalf of our country. I urge the passage of H.R. 4919, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. LYNCH

Mr. LYNCH. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the gentleman for yielding the time and also for his kind words. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this bill, H.R. 3802, to extend the legislative authority for the Adams Memorial Foundation to establish a commemorative work in honor of former President John Adams and his legacy, and for other purposes. I would like to thank full committee Chairman Doc Hastings and Ranking Member Peter DeFazio, as well as the gentleman from Utah, Subcommittee Chairman Rob Bishop, and Ranking Member Raul Grijalva for helping get this very important bill to the floor. This bill simply extends the authorization of the Adams Memorial Foundation for 7 years. It is supported by the entire Massachusetts delegation, as well as Chairman Bishop, as I said, and will allow the Adams Memorial Foundation, the National Park Service, the National Capital Memorial Advisory Commission, and all stakeholders to continue to work toward finding a site and building a commemorative memorial honoring President John Adams and his family and the role they played in the shaping of our great Nation. I have the great and good fortune to represent the Massachusetts Eighth Congressional District, a district rich in history that includes the city of Quincy, nicknamed the ``City of Presidents.'' Quincy is home to the Adams National Historic Park, birthplace of John Adams, and the home at which his family lived until 1927. I am also proud to hold the House seat associated with our Nation's sixth President and dedicated public servant, John Quincy Adams. John Adams was a defender of due process, champion of independence, diplomat, Vice President, President, and Founding Father. He authored the Massachusetts Constitution, which is the oldest continually functioning written constitution in the world and the document after which the United States Constitution, frequently referenced on this very floor, was modeled. As the second President of the United States, he was first to reside in the District of Columbia and to occupy the White House. Yet there is no memorial in our Nation's Capital dedicated to one of our most influential Founding Fathers, a man Thomas Jefferson called ``a colossus of independence.'' That is a tragic omission that must be corrected. Our former colleague, my dear friend, Congressman Bill Delahunt, acted to correct this oversight when he introduced a bill authorizing the creation of the Adams Memorial Foundation. The Adams Memorial Foundation was established to commemorate not only John Adams, but also the legacy of the Adams family, who for generations embraced his ideals. That includes his wife, Abigail; his son and our sixth President and Congressman, John Quincy Adams; his wife, Louisa Catherine; their son, Charles Francis; and his sons, Henry and Brooks Adams. As the enabling legislation states: Both individually and collectively, the members of this illustrious family have enriched the Nation through their profound civic consciousness, abiding belief in the perfectibility of the Nation's democracy, and commitment to service and sacrifice for the common good. Since its authorization, the Adams Memorial Foundation, which counts among its leadership members of the Adams family and respected historians and architects, has been committed to realizing its goal of creating a commemorative memorial. However, siting a commemorative memorial in the Nation's Capital is an arduous undertaking, as my colleagues have pointed out. Despite broad support and the best efforts of the Adams Memorial Foundation, we remain without an agreed-upon location--but we are getting much closer--for this important memorial. I know that all stakeholders firmly believe the Adams legacy is worthy of memorializing in the Nation's Capital. This bill, if passed, will give all parties the time needed to reach agreement on a location that appropriately honors President Adams' legacy. For many of us who grew up in Massachusetts, the John and Abigail Adams family and their contributions to the Commonwealth and our Nation serve as a beacon upon which to focus our own efforts. George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, and John Adams are referred to as the sword, the pen, and the voice of our Nation's independence. Yet the voice, which was carried for generations beyond independence, goes unrecognized in this seat of the government he helped to create and sustain. In closing, I look forward to working with the Adams Memorial Foundation, the National Park Service, the National Capital Memorial Advisory Commission, and all stakeholders to correct this oversight. I thank Chairman Bishop of Utah again for his courtesy and support of this legislation, and I urge my colleagues to support this very important bill.

Mr. LYNCH

Mr. LYNCH. I thank the gentleman from Maryland for yielding and for his kind words. Mr. Speaker, as ranking member of the Federal Workforce Subcommittee, I rise in strong support of H.R. 4193, the Smart Savings Act. This legislation, as has been previously described, would change the default investment option for the Thrift Savings Plan participants from the G Fund to the Lifecycle Fund, or L Fund. The L Fund uses age- appropriate investment allocations, which result in the higher returns that have been discussed here earlier. First, I would like to thank my fellow cosponsors--the gentleman from California (Mr. Issa), Ranking Member Cummings from Maryland, Congressman Farenthold from Texas, Congressman Connolly from Virginia, and Congressman Woodall from Georgia--for working together on this bipartisan bill. The Thrift Savings Plan is an important component of Federal workers' retirement assets. Given the negative impact of pay freezes, furloughs, and other challenges to the pay and benefits of our Federal workforce over the last few years, I feel it is appropriate for Congress to provide investment options that will help Federal employees maximize their retirement contributions and savings. Changing the default investment option to the L Fund makes a lot of sense because the L Funds have substantially outperformed the G Fund over the last several years. However, the bill would also allow employees who are risk averse the ability to opt out and change their investment options. The House passed a substantially similar bill in the 110th Congress, but it was never enacted. This time around, I am hoping that this commonsense proposal will become law as a substantially similar bill in the Senate was recently approved in committee. H.R. 4193 is supported by many stakeholders, including the Federal Retirement Thrift Investment Board, the Employees Thrift Advisory Council, and various employee organizations. This legislation provides the dedicated men and women of our Federal workforce a reasonable option that, I believe, would help them more effectively provide for their own retirements. I urge my colleagues to join all of the cosponsors in supporting H.R. 4193.

Mr. LYNCH

Mr. LYNCH. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

Mr. LYNCH. Mr. Chairman, I thank the chairman and ranking member. Mr. Chairman, this amendment would increase the funding provided to the Treasury Department's Office of the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network, also known as FinCEN, by $3.339 million so that it remains at its current level of $112 million. This amendment would offset this necessary increase through corresponding decreases in the funding provided for the repairs and alterations and the rental of space accounts within the General Services Administration. If adopted, the amendment would have no effect on budget authority and would reduce outlays by $1 million. As cochair of the bipartisan Task Force on Antiterrorism and Proliferation Financing, I have worked closely with our cochair, Ed Royce, the gentleman from California, and with FinCEN, the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network, to help strengthen our national antiterrorist finance strategy, and I realize the increased need to be able to quickly and efficiently track and stop the flow of funds to terrorist groups in doing this important work. Through the task force, we have witnessed the critical and important work that the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network engages in. The skilled staff at FinCEN works tirelessly every day to track and stop the flow of elicit funds that would otherwise be used to aid terrorism in order to safeguard our financial system from evolving money laundering and mounting national security threats. We all know very well the risks presented by Hezbollah in Syria, al Qaeda in Yemen, ISIS in Iraq, and Boko Haram in Nigeria. By sharing financial intelligence with law enforcement, private industry, and its foreign counterparts, FinCEN supports financial crime investigations throughout the world. Congress has taken significant steps towards utilizing terrorist financing as a viable intelligence tool, as well as disrupting the financing of terrorist activities. Nevertheless, terrorists' proven ability to move money through innovative means necessitates continued progress in this critical counterterrorism area. As the chairman pointed out, FinCEN does incredibly important work. Most recently, FinCEN has played an instrumental role on the ground in Ukraine in support of international efforts to recover billions of dollars in missing Ukrainian funds that were misappropriated by former Ukrainian Government officials, including former President Viktor Yanukovych. With today's increasingly complex and rapidly evolving terrorist networks, we cannot risk our national security by reducing funding for this important department. I appreciate the chairman's challenges and the ranking member's challenges in trying to balance priorities within this bill, and I respect both of those gentlemen, but I do urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to support this amendment in order to make sure that the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network is properly funded. The balance here is funding for the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network versus a reduction in the repairs and alterations account and the rental space account for the General Services Administration. I think that we recognize where the real priorities of this Congress should be. This is not what the chairman mentioned in his opening remarks. This is not nonessential funding. This is not wasteful funding. This is very important funding with respect to the national security of our country.

Mr. LYNCH. I yield to the gentleman from Florida.

Mr. LYNCH. I thank the chairman. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. LYNCH

Mr. LYNCH. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I am pleased this evening to join my colleagues, Mr. Meadows from North Carolina and Mr. Reed from New York, in the consideration of H.R. 3765, a bill to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 198 Baker Street in Corning, New York, as the Specialist Ryan P. Jayne Post Office Building. A native of Elmira, New York, Specialist Ryan P. Jayne graduated in 2008 from Corning East High School, where he received the Judi McCort Memorial Scholarship for exemplifying courage, hard work, and responsibility. Specialist Ryan P. Jayne subsequently attended Corning Community College and enlisted in the United States Army in 2010 in support of Operation Enduring Freedom in Afghanistan. He was assigned to the 178th Engineer Battalion, 412th Theater Engineer Command, U.S. Army Reserve, based in Oswego, New York, and he served as a combat engineer. As Mr. Meadows indicated, on November 3, 2012, Specialist Jayne and two of his fellow soldiers were tragically killed when a roadside bomb hit their vehicle as they completed their route clearing duties. Specialist Jayne was on his second tour of duty in Afghanistan when that happened. Mr. Speaker, Specialist Ryan P. Jayne's life stands as a shining example of the bravery and dedication of the heroic men and women who serve our country at home and abroad. I urge the Members of both sides of the aisle to support this motion, authored by Mr. Reed of New York and championed as well by Mr. Meadows of North Carolina, to pay tribute to Specialist Ryan P. Jayne for bravely answering the call of duty and proudly serving his country. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. LYNCH. Mr. Speaker, in closing, I would just offer our prayers and condolences to the Jayne family and the people of Corning, New York, and Specialist Ryan P. Jayne's friends and neighbors. We all mourn their loss, and we appreciate the sacrifice that has been made on behalf of our country. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. LYNCH

Mr. LYNCH. Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.

Mr. LYNCH. Madam Chair, before I get started, I just want to join the chorus here and congratulate Chairman Wolf on his remarkable career as a leader here in this Congress and as someone who has worked diligently on behalf of his constituents but also in a way that I think has reflected greatly on this body. I think that the work product in this bill produced by Chairman Wolf and Ranking Member Fattah is a wonderful example of the possibilities when people work together. Madam Chairman, my amendment would increase by $3 million the amount appropriated for fiscal year 2015 for the Drug Courts program. The $3 million added to the Drug Courts program will be offset by decreasing by $3 million the amount appropriated for funding the International Trade Administration. Madam Chair, drug addiction in the United States is at an epidemic level. To call it otherwise grossly understates the problem. This epidemic affects every city and town across America, and it cuts across every demographic. It simply does not discriminate. Drug and alcohol addiction shatters lives, destroys families, and costs taxpayers billions of dollars annually. In fact, according to the National Institute on Drug Abuse, estimates of the total overall costs of substance abuse in the United States--including lost productivity, in-hospital care, incarceration, rehab, and crime-related costs--tally to over $600 billion annually in the United States. Now, many of us understand that drug addiction is a disease, and certain actions taken by people under the influence of drugs are typically uncharacteristic of that person. A handful of countries, as well as much of our own society here in the United States, have begun to realize that we need to deal with addiction and its outcomes in a way that can have a long-term, positive effect on the parties and families involved. Drug courts offer just such an opportunity by providing a support system and a roadmap for moving forward. Madam Chair, drug courts are specialized court dockets designed to handle cases involving drug and/or alcohol-dependent offenders charged with offenses such as possession of a controlled substance or other nonviolent offenses determined to have been caused or influenced by their addiction. Drug court cases are handled through a comprehensive program of supervision, drug testing, treatment services, and immediate sanctions and incentives designed to reduce the recidivism rates of these offenders by helping them overcome their substance abuse problems, which are the primary and proximate cause of their criminal activities. Drug courts coordinate the efforts of the judiciary, prosecution, defense attorneys, probation departments, law enforcement agencies, rehab facilities, mental health and social services, and also involve the community, the family, and the employer in many cases in an effort to break the cycle of substance abuse, addiction, and crime. If we can break that cycle, we all benefit. I have had the opportunity to visit many of the prisons and houses of correction in Massachusetts, where about 91 percent of those inmates have substance abuse problems or are dually addicted. The bottom line is that drug courts save money, they reduce crime, and restore families. Quite simply, drug courts work. According to the National Association of Drug Court Professionals, the drug court approach reduces crime by as much as 45 percent compared to traditional sentencing options. In fact, the available data indicate that nationwide, 75 percent of drug court graduates remain arrest-free at least 2 years after leaving the program, and reductions in crime have been maintained for at a minimum 3 years, and in many cases over 14 years. In addition to reducing crime, drug courts save money. As reported by the National Association of Drug Court Professionals, for every dollar invested in drug courts, taxpayers save as much as $27 when compared to the historic approach to these problems. This substantial savings comes from avoided criminal justice costs, reduced prison costs, and reduced recidivism and health care utilization--all areas, as we know, that devour vast sums of money annually in this country. And very important to us all, drug courts help restore families. According to statistics, family reunification rates for drug offenders are 50 percent higher for drug court participants. People struggling through addiction can become isolated from friends and loved ones. Reuniting with their family is often the first step in returning to normalcy and again becoming a productive member of the community. Madam Chairman, the underlying bill provides $41 million for drug court funding, $2.5 million over the 2013 post-sequester level. And I would like to thank Chairman Wolf--he has long been a champion of drug courts--as has Ranking Member Fattah. But these have been underfunded for a long time, and the adoption of this amendment would meet the need that has been amplified lately. I just urge my colleagues to support my amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. LYNCH

Mr. LYNCH. Mr. Speaker, I want to say thank you to Chairman Shuster and also Mr. Rahall. You did a wonderful job on this piece of legislation. This is very important to the entire country. I hope the way that you have both worked together, along with subcommittee Chairman Gibbs and Ranking Member Tim Bishop, is contagious because this would help this institution enormously. Thank you for bringing this bill to the floor. I was an ironworker before I came to Congress, and I worked in the Port of Boston. So I know firsthand how important the ports and waterways are to our economy in this country. I have the opportunity to jointly represent the Port of Boston with Mike Capuano, my colleague. The Port of Boston generates $2.4 billion in economic benefits annually and 34,000 jobs are connected with port activities. With the expected 2015 completion of the Panama Canal expansion project, those numbers will only increase as larger container ships utilize our ports on both coasts. Mr. Speaker, the Boston Harbor Navigation Improvement Project, recommended and approved by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and supported by this bill, is very important. I want to thank my colleagues from Massachusetts for putting up $135 million to join with the Federal funding on this. It will help us keep pace with our global competitors. Again, thank you, Mr. Rahall, and thank you, Mr. Shuster, for your hard work.

Mr. LYNCH

Mr. LYNCH. Mr. Speaker, point of order.

Mr. LYNCH. The gentleman was recognized for 2 minutes. It is way past 2 minutes. I was just wondering if we were keeping track of time.

Mr. LYNCH. I thank the gentleman from Maryland for yielding. Mr. Speaker, in response to those recent allegations, I do want to point out that our committee did look at the question of political motivation in selecting tax exemption applications. We asked the inspector general, Russell George, on May 17, 2013, in a hearing before the Ways and Means Committee: ``Did you find any evidence of political motivation in the selection of tax-exempt applications?'' The inspector general who investigated this case testified in response: ``We did not, sir.'' Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to this contempt resolution. What began as a necessary and compelling bipartisan investigation into the targeting of American citizens by the Internal Revenue Service has now deteriorated into the very sort of dangerous and careless government overreaching that our committee was set out to investigate in the first place. The gentleman from California commenced this investigation in May of 2013 by stating the following during his opening statement: ``When government power is used to target Americans for exercising their constitutional rights, there is nothing we, as Representatives, should find more important than to take it seriously, get to the bottom of it, and eradicate the behavior.'' I would remind the chairman that our solemn duty as lawmakers, to safeguard the constitutional rights of every American, does not only extend to cases where a powerful Federal department has deprived citizens of freedoms vested in the First Amendment, rather we must be equally vigilant when the power of government is brought down on Americans who have asserted their rights under the Fifth Amendment. And it is guaranteed that no person shall be compelled to be a witness against him- or herself nor be deprived life, liberty, and property without due process of law. In our system where ``innocent until proven guilty'' lies at the bedrock of our constitutional protections, Ms. Lerner's brief assertions of innocence, her 36 words, should not be enough to vitiate her Fifth Amendment constitutional rights. Regrettably, this contempt resolution utterly fails to reflect the seriousness with which we should approach the constitutional issue at stake here. In the face of Supreme Court precedent and a vast body of legal expert opinion holding that Ms. Lerner did not, in fact, waive her Fifth Amendment privilege by professing her innocence, Chairman Issa has moved forward with contempt proceedings without even affording the members of our own committee the opportunity to receive public testimony from legal experts on this important constitutional question. As held by the Supreme Court in 1949 in Smith v. United States: Testimonial waiver is not to be lightly inferred . . . and the courts accordingly indulge every reasonable presumption against finding a testimonial waiver. Chairman Issa has also chosen to pursue contempt against Ms. Lerner after refusing an offer from her attorney for a brief 1-week delay so that his client could finally provide the testimony that Members on both sides of this aisle have been asking for. These legally flawed contempt proceedings bring us no closer to receiving Ms. Lerner's testimony and have only served to divert our time, focus, and resources away from our rightful inquiry into the troubling events at the IRS. They are also reflective of the partisan manner in which this $14 million investigation--so far--has been conducted to date. Chairman Issa has refused to release the full transcripts of the now 39 transcribed interviews conducted by committee staff with relevant IRS and Treasury officials. He has also recently released two staff reports on these events that were not even provided to the Democratic members prior to their release. In closing, I urge my colleagues to join me in opposing this resolution.

Mr. LYNCH

Mr. LYNCH. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from New York for yielding. I rise today in opposition to this bill, the so-called Save American Workers Act, and to speak in support of working men and women of this great country. I am here today and every day, not only as a Member of Congress, but as someone who knows what it is like to work for a living. As someone who for 18 years as an ironworker strapped on a pair of work boots during boom times and down economies, I know what it is like to stand in an unemployment line when my local shipyard closed and when our auto plant shut down. Mr. Speaker, I am part of the American workforce. Like many of my colleagues, I represent hundreds of thousands of hard-working people who struggle every day to make ends meet. That is why I am deeply offended that the Republican leadership of this House, the people's House, has the temerity to refer to any of their efforts in the context of saving the American worker. Now, the simple fact is that during my time in Congress the actions of my colleagues, especially the Republican leadership, have spoken loudly to the contrary. It is impossible in the time allowed to me to cover all the anti-worker efforts that the Republican majority has undertaken since I have been in Congress. They have continually tried to roll back prevailing wage laws and workers' rights and protections that have been in place since the 1930s. They tried to cripple the National Labor Relations Board, put in place in 1935 to protect American workers. Their attacks on the Federal workforce are ceaseless, freezing pay and cutting benefits, and demoralizing our hard-working men and women in government. The Republican leadership has opposed equal pay for women; they have opposed raising the minimum wage; they have opposed employee nondiscrimination legislation. In fact, they won't even bring some of those bills for a vote. As we struggle to recover from the worst economic downturn since the Great Depression, the Republican leadership has refused to extend emergency unemployment benefits to the long-term unemployed, many of whom use that money just to put food on the table while they search for work. Now the Republican majority has the audacity to put forward a bill they call the Save American Workers Act. We have got to save the American worker from you. That is who we need to be saving them from.

Mr. LYNCH. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman, and I thank the Speaker for his indulgence. The bill before us today is more of the same. According to the Congressional Budget Office, the bill will add $74 billion to the Federal deficit, force 1 million more people to lose employer-covered health care, and leave 500,000 completely uninsured. According to a study released by the University of California Berkley, this bill will cause 6.5 million workers to lose more hours. This bill, like so many others offered by my colleagues from across the aisle, is not crafted to save the American worker. It is crafted to increase the profits of large employers while workers continue to struggle. Perhaps this bill should be named the ``Save American CEO Act.'' It is the height of hypocrisy, that after all their efforts to harm the American worker my colleagues should have the audacity to even offer a bill entitled ``Save American Workers Act.'' We all know and realize that we need to save the American worker from the Republican leadership. That is what we need to do. So I urge my colleagues to continue to oppose these efforts to destroy the middle class and sabotage the American worker and the American family.

Mr. LYNCH

Mr. LYNCH. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in honor of Maralin Manning of Quincy, Massachusetts, in recognition of her decades of dedicated service to her community. The daughter of the late Gertrude Mandros and the late Theodore Mandros, Maralin is a graduate of St. Mary's, Notre Dame High School and holds a Bachelor of Fine Arts Degree from the Massachusetts College of Art. Maralin is also a graduate of the Executive Training Program at Jordan Marsh, Co. Mr. Speaker, as a longtime resident of Quincy, Maralin Manning has been involved with countless business associations and community organizations. She was the director of the Quincy Business Association for twenty-two years before it merged with the Quincy Chamber of Commerce serving as the Chamber's business development director. Maralin has actively served a number of community organizations including the Board of Directors for the Maria Droste Services, Quincy After School Program, Kiwanis Club of Quincy, Quincy Salvation Army, Impact Quincy, and the Advisory Board of the Quincy High School Career and Technical Training. Continuing with her commitment to the Quincy community, Maralin has also served with the American Red Cross, Quincy Historic Commission, Quincy Downtown Development Citizens Advisory, Quincy Medical Center Curry Cancer Walk and the Mayor's Boy Scout Breakfast, and is a past trustee of the Quincy Historical Society and former board member of the Souther Tide Mill and the USS Salem. Previously, Maralin was an adjunct instructor at Mount Ida College, served as the director of the Chamberlain School of Retailing and fashion director for Jordan Marsh, Co. She is also an independent lecturer in fashion, color and advertising, and corporate branding. Prior to living in Quincy, Maralin was an active resident of Milton, Massachusetts, serving as a member of a number of town organizations including the Milton Public Schools PTOs, the Milton Town Republican Committee, and the high school rebuilding committees. Mr. Speaker, Maralin and her husband Robert are the parents of six children: Patrice Manning Flavin, Moira Manning Shigo, Robert Manning, Gregory Manning, Theodore Manning and Michael Manning. They are also blessed with 17 grandchildren. In closing, Mr. Speaker, it is my distinct honor to take to the floor of the House today to join with Maralin's family, friends, her community and the City of Quincy to thank her for her lifetime commitment of dedicated public service. I urge my colleagues to join me in recognizing and honoring Maralin Manning.

Mr. LYNCH

Mr. LYNCH. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to join with my colleagues from the Tom Lantos Human Rights Commission to mark a tragic milestone in the conflict in Syria. It has now been three years that the nation of Syria has been engulfed in a war that has only grown more violent over time and has fomented increasing stability throughout the region. The men, women, and children of Syria have endured unspeakable violence and devastating attacks that have ruined their homes and neighborhoods. The scale of displacement in Syria has been called the worst refugee crisis in recent history. Indeed, approximately one-third of the entire population has been forced to flee their homes. According to the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, over 2.5 Syrians have fled the country since March 2011, while another 6.5 million Syrians have been internally displaced. Syria has gone from being one of the largest refugee-hosting nations to surpassing Afghanistan as the largest source of refugees in the world today. Syria's neighbors have been profoundly affected by the conflict, both by the spillover of violence and the massive influx of refugees that have sought, and continue to seek, safety abroad. Jordan, Lebanon, Turkey, and Iraq have already taken in about 2.1 million refugees. One million refugees are in Lebanon. As a result, Lebanon's total population has increased by one-fifth. That would be like adding an additional 60 million people to the U.S. population all at once. Turkey has 634,900 refugees and Jordan is sheltering 584,000 Syrians, with 100,000 in the Zaatari refugee camp alone. Even Iraq, which once saw a vast flow of refugees into Syria, is now seeing a significant reverse flow. These nations, with assistance from the United States, the European Union, the United Nations, and the international community are doing all they can. However, resources are limited and the refugee camps are overcrowded. Additionally, while the refugees may have found protection from the war, many Syrian women and girls are instead encountering alarming levels of sexual and domestic violence. This is no way for the Syrian people to live. The only solution is for the global community to come together to support a final lasting political resolution that will bring peace and stability and allow these refugees to come home and rebuild their country. I join with my fellow Members to call for renewed efforts to help support the refugees and their host nations, and to finally end this reprehensible conflict once and for all.

Mr. LYNCH

Mr. LYNCH. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlelady from California for her leadership on this bill. She has been a tiger on this issue, trying to get this right. I also want to thank the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Cantor) and the Republican leadership, as well as Mr. Grimm from New York and Mr. Richmond from Louisiana who really, I think, without their work collectively, this would not be happening. I rise in strong support of H.R. 3370, the Homeowner Flood Insurance Affordability Act. Over the past several months, I have had the honor of working with my colleagues, both Republican and Democrat, to roll back the harmful and unintended consequences of the original Biggert- Waters Act. This legislation that we take up today is a culmination of a lot of efforts by a lot of individuals, as well as the activism on the part of our constituents. I have had an opportunity to attend some rallies and meetings in my district with over 1,000 people attending, where the concerns and the fears of my constituents were brought forward in great volume. H.R. 3370, the Homeowner Flood Insurance Affordability Act, will do a number of things. One, it reinstitutes or expands the grandfathering provisions in section 4 from what they were in the previous bill. A very important provision here, section 18 allows reimbursements for successful appeals. Now, what that will do is, if FEMA incorrectly--as they have in many cases--if they put homes in a flood zone incorrectly and a homeowner appeals that, they get the money that they expended for that appeal, for the surveying and technical assistance they need. In addition, section 24 provides for a flood insurance advocate to actually work on behalf of homeowners to make sure that they get the full and meaningful appeal that they deserve and also that they understand what the flood mapping process requires. More fundamentally, this bill is an example of what we can achieve when Congress works together, and I honestly hope that we will build on this spirit of bipartisan cooperation. I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of this critical bill.

Mr. LYNCH

Mr. LYNCH. I thank the gentlelady for yielding and for her work on behalf of American consumers. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in opposition to H.R. 3193, the so-called Consumer Financial Protection and Soundness Improvement Act. Let's be clear about what my friends on the other side of the aisle are trying to do here today. They would really like to completely repeal the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. Many of the sponsors of this act are the ones who tried to defeat the creation and empowerment of the CFPB to begin with. To be mindful, this is the only financial regulator solely responsible for protecting American consumers from unfair, deceptive, and abusive financial products. My friends on the other side of the aisle would like to destroy it, so they are trying to pass off this ``death by a thousand cuts'' approach as improvements to the Bureau's structure. This bill will bog down the consumer bureau in bureaucratic and congressional red tape. It will make it more difficult for the Bureau to seek out and retain qualified employees. It will also allow the companies that the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau is supposed to be regulating to have more information, better information--more accurate information, more extensive information--about consumers than the CFPB that is responsible for protecting them will have. In sum, it will make the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau a second-class and ineffective regulator, sending the signal to bad actors in our financial markets that we are not really serious about consumer protections, and this bill will do nothing to make consumers safer. I urge all of my colleagues to join me in voting ``no'' on H.R. 3193.