Bill Pascrell

Mr. PASCRELL

Mr. PASCRELL. Mr. Speaker, I wrote to FBI Director James Comey in September and requested the materials related to the FBI's investigations into the 2008 financial crisis. Elizabeth Warren joined me in this request, which we made as a result of the precedent the FBI established in a high-profile case involving a Secretary of State's emails. In citing ``intense public interest'' and ``the interest of transparency,'' the FBI saw fit to provide extensive testimony to Congress and hundreds of pages of documents that gave context to its decision not to prosecute. It has been 8 years since casino-style bets and a culture of fraud on Wall Street crashed our economy and caused millions of Americans to lose their jobs and their homes; yet no top executives were charged with crimes, and many Americans have a gnawing sense that justice has not been served. As of today, I have not received one word. The DOJ has obtained financial settlements from major institutions, like Citigroup and Bank of America. The American public has a clear interest and stake in understanding why the FBI did not pursue charges against the recommendations of its own commission.

Mr. PASCRELL

Mr. PASCRELL. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the rule. In the waning days of the 114th Congress, here we are debating a bill once again to roll back Wall Street reforms. This is what it comes down to. How tone deaf can we be? Here is a news flash: the whole country is focused on defending blue-collar jobs, bolstering our industrial manufacturing base. Folks are zoned in on that, focused on that issue. So we need to stop outsourcing now. This Congress should start by defeating the previous question and bringing up the Bring Jobs Home Act. Around 5 million United States manufacturing jobs have been lost since 1994, good-paying jobs. Their loss has led to a somewhat demise of the middle class in America. Just ask folks in places like Ohio and Pennsylvania, who have seen steel mills and rubber factories shipped overseas. My hometown of Paterson, New Jersey, was formerly the hub of the textile manufacturing industry, which no longer exists. So why are we subsidizing it? Why are we subsidizing American companies to move to other shores? That is what we are doing. Right now, when companies move overseas, they can take a tax deduction for the cost of the move. That is a huge tax break. How do we defend it and why do we defend it? So the bill that the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Hastings) referred to eliminates this tax deduction and gives a tax credit of up to 20 percent of the cost of moving businesses, bringing businesses back to the United States of America through U.S. companies. That seems to me to make more sense. Why are we paying folks to leave when we could be paying them to get back into this country? I don't know how you disagree with that. The companies would have to add jobs to claim the tax credit. That is the caveat. I think it works. I ask you to consider it. Let's stop subsidizing companies that ship jobs overseas and start bringing jobs back to our shores. Let's stop talking about it. Let's do something about it. Mr. Speaker, it doesn't get much simpler than that. This is not a new idea at all. President Obama and the Democrats in Congress have raised this bill for years, and the Republican Congress has blocked the bill at every turn. Senator Stabenow of Michigan leads this bill in the Senate, where it cleared a procedural vote 93-7 in 2014. I challenge you today to take up and pass the bill, to stand up for American manufacturing and the workers here at home who need help. Don't be all talk. Step up to the plate. Take a stand where it counts. I urge a ``no'' vote on the previous question so we can bring up the Bring Jobs Home Act and start bringing jobs back to the United States of America, the greatest country in the world.

Mr. PASCRELL

Mr. PASCRELL. Mr. Speaker, as a cosponsor of H. Con. Res. 40, I rise today in strong support of its passage. Tragically, the division on the Korean Peninsula separated more than 10,000,000 Korean family members, including some who are now citizens of the United States. As a result, many Korean Americans have waited for over 60 years for a chance to meet their relatives in North Korea for the first time. Although there have been 19 rounds of family reunions between South Koreans and North Koreans, instability has continued to impede the reunion of these divided families. As some family members reach the later years of their lives, time becomes an important factor in giving these families the opportunity to connect. Congress first signaled its interest in family reunions between United States citizens and their relatives in North Korea in section 1265 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 (Public Law 110-181), which became law on January 28, 2008. We furthered our commitment to reunification when President Barack Obama signed into law the Continuing Appropriations Act 2011 (Public Law 111- 242), which urged the Special Representative on North Korea Policy to prioritize the issues involving Korean divided families. Enabling Korean Americans to meet their family members from North Korea will help establish the goodwill to lay the foundation for peace on the Korean Peninsula. While peace on the Korean Peninsula remains a long-term goal for the United States and all stakeholders in the region, a first step towards achieving it would be to allow family members to be reunified. This would be a significant step forward for greater security and stability for the region and the world. I urge my colleagues in the House to swiftly pass H. Con. Res. 40.

Mr. PASCRELL

Mr. PASCRELL. Mr. Speaker, as Chairman of the Congressional Fire Services Caucus, I rise today to commemorate the 50th anniversary of the Fire and Emergency Manufacturers and Services Association (FEMSA) and the 70th Anniversary of the Fire Apparatus Manufacturers' Association (FAMA). In advance of their joint conference in Nashville, TN on October 5th, I would like to personally extend my congratulations to both organizations in recognition of their distinguished legacies. Both of these organizations bring their members together to discuss ideas on how best to provide the needed tools, equipment, educational materials, and apparatus that enable our nation's firefighters and emergency services personnel to perform their missions safely and more effectively. The brave men and women serving in our nation's fire and emergency services put their lives on the line every day to protect our communities. Every year the fire service industry does everything it can to reduce the threat of injury and death for these heroes. While members of both FEMSA and FAMA compete with each other for business, these two associations have served a critical role in bringing fire service companies together to advance important issues to the industry and the fire service as a whole. The fire service industry is vast, comprised of both large and small companies. These companies are located in nearly every state in our nation, including my home state of New Jersey. They provide thousands of well-paying jobs to highly skilled and trained workers. Some bear a family name and are guided by new generations of family members who possess the same values and work ethics as the founders themselves, while others are large companies providing a broad range of technologies and equipment. Thanks to the great work being done by FAMA and FEMSA, the fire service industry has been bolstered by individual companies working collectively to develop new technologies and training methods. Next week marks two important anniversary milestones for the fire service industry. I extend my congratulations to both the Fire and Emergency Manufacturers and Services Association and the Fire Apparatus Manufacturers' Association. I encourage both organizations to continue their important missions as we all work together to make the fire service industry a safer profession for all who serve.

Mr. PASCRELL

Mr. PASCRELL. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to stand in solidarity with my brothers and sisters in Ukraine by urging my colleagues to swiftly pass the STAND for Ukraine Act. Nearly two and a half years ago, Russian President Vladimir Putin undermined Ukrainian sovereignty when the Russians began illegally occupying Crimea. This act emboldened him to double down on bullying his neighbors, testing the resolve of NATO and trying to fracture Western unity. His disrespect for global order knows no bounds. That is why the United States must reiterate to the world that it will not tolerate Russia's aggression. While some misguided people have said that ``Putin is not going into Crimea,'' this bill makes it perfectly clear: Russia's illegal occupation of Crimea will not be tolerated by the United States. We must hold Russia accountable for its disrespect for global order and continued violations of international law. That is why I am a strong supporter and cosponsor of the STAND for Ukraine Act, which tightens sanctions on Russia and rejects any form of recognition of Russian rule over Crimea. Mr. Speaker, I hope this bill will become law quickly so we can make sure that President Putin knows the United States stands with our ally Ukraine.

Mr. PASCRELL

Mr. PASCRELL. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I am proud to introduce H.R. 5713 with Mr. Tiberi, Sustaining Healthcare Integrity and Fair Treatment Act. I think this is good legislation, not because my name is on it but because I thought a lot of thought came into this, and staff helped tremendously. This is one of the areas I have tried to concentrate on since being in Congress: long-term and acute care. As the cofounder and co-chair of the Congressional Brain Injury Task Force, I understand the important role that long-term care hospitals play in the recovery of many individuals who suffer moderate to severe traumatic brain injuries, or TBIs. I use this as one example, the area of TBI. If there is one thing I have learned about TBI in the 18 years I have been working on this issue, it is that recovery looks different for everyone, whether you are on the battlefield or you fall off a ladder trying to fix your roof. I understand the important role that long-term care hospitals play. I want to repeat that. That is why we must, I believe, preserve access to all post-acute care options, so that patients can receive the individualized care they need, and we don't tell them: get out, because your time is up, in the middle of their treatment. And that is what the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Tiberi) has talked about many times. This is the right legislation, I believe, for this particular problem. H.R. 5713 would provide an additional 9 months of relief from the full implementation of the 25 percent rule for long-term care hospitals, which Mr. Tiberi mentioned. This bill includes technical changes for long-term hospitals. H.R. 5713 would, first, clarify the application of rules on the calculation of the hospital length to certain moratorium-excepted LTCHs, the long-term care hospitals. Second, it would correct the status of Calvary Hospital in New York City that has led to secondary-payer issues, big issues. Third, it would provide a temporary exception to the application of the Medicare long-term care hospital site-neutral provisions for certain spinal cord specialty hospitals. Fourth, it would exempt four payment codes for severe wounds from site-neutral payments. This is a bipartisan piece of legislation. We can do this. We could do it, without exception, if you put people in the room who want to compromise, who don't know all the answers, and I don't. We could come to a conclusion. This bill would offset the cost of this extension by implementing an important program integrity policy that would allow the Secretary to reject Medicare claims from new Medicare suppliers and providers located just outside of the moratorium areas. While this bill is an important step forward, it is just a temporary Band-Aid on the 25 percent rule. I say to the gentleman, I don't believe it is a permanent solution, but I think it helps us. We need to work together to find a long-term solution to the issue. I urge my colleagues to support this bill before us today. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. PASCRELL. Mr. Speaker, long-term hospitals are an important part of our post-acute care system. This bill will help preserve access and maintain fairness for these hospitals and their patients. I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 5713, and it is my hope that this bill is taken up expeditiously on the other side of the building in the Senate. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. PASCRELL

Mr. PASCRELL. Mr. Speaker, on September 12, 2016, I missed the two roll call votes of the day. Had I been present I would have voted: AYE--Roll Call No. 496--H. Res. 847, Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives about a national strategy for the Internet of Things to promote economic growth and consumer empowerment. AYE--Roll Call No. 497--H. Res. 835, Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that the United States should adopt a national policy for technology to promote consumers' access to financial tools and online commerce to promote economic growth and consumer empowerment.

Mr. PASCRELL

Mr. PASCRELL. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I want to commend the main sponsor of the bill, Congressman Dold from Illinois. I think it is very thoughtful legislation. Our Olympic athletes have worked and trained tirelessly to represent the greatest country in the world on the world stage. They have won contests in athletics, and they have won our hearts and minds. We know that time spent in training and in competitions requires enormous sacrifices from the athletes and their families. We are proud of our Olympians. I appreciate the spirit of this legislation. We do not want to hit our athletes with a tax bill when they return home. That is a wonderful thank you. That is why I will support this legislation today. I am confident and very happy to support this legislation. It does include the amendment that the sponsor of the bill just mentioned, put forth in the Ways and Means Committee, to limit tax exclusion to those Olympians making less than $1 million a year. Some of these athletes win not only medals but lucrative endorsements. Michael Phelps is worth an estimated $50 million to $60 million. NBA players like Kevin Durant make an estimated $56 million in 1 year. In fact, Forbes reports that the 12 members of the U.S. basketball team earned a collective $257 million in salaries and endorsements over the past year. God bless them. But a cash prize for winning a competition is income, and there are many professions in the United States--and I think the sponsor would agree--that are valuable that we do not exempt from income taxes: teaching children with special needs, taking care of cancer patients, or taking care of our police and firefighters. My colleague, John Larson, introduced an amendment to allow volunteer firefighters to exclude from taxes nominal benefits they receive in their communities. These are ideas that merit our consideration, and there are many individuals worth honoring in our society. This legislation honors our Olympic athletes, while making sure our highest-paid professional sports stars continue to pay their fair share. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. PASCRELL. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time. Some people say that we don't win anymore. I would like to remind those people that the United States won 105 total medals in Rio. Thirty-eight of them were gold. To those who say America doesn't win anymore, we could cite many, many other examples, of course. Our Olympic athletes make us proud. New Jersey's own Laurie Hernandez wowed us with her strength and agility in the gymnastics competition. Soccer star Carli Lloyd and rower Lauren Schmetterling made New Jersey proud, as did Hoboken-born track star Keturah Orji, not to mention a former intern from my office, Caylee Watson, who competed for the U.S. Virgin Islands in the backstroke swimming competition. You can't make this stuff up. This is great. They are just a few of the incredible athletes who inspired us this summer in Rio. We should do all what we can to honor these Olympians with our gratitude and our admiration. Again, I salute the sponsor. This bill recognizes the tremendous sacrifice of time and resources in Olympic athletes' training, while also preventing another tax cut for wealthy individuals who don't need it. I urge my colleagues to support this legislation. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. PASCRELL

Mr. PASCRELL. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize Campus Fire Safety Month during the month of September. I first became involved in the issue of campus fire safety following a tragic fire at Seton Hall University, in which three students were killed. Since that time, we have made many strides, including the passage of the Campus Fire Safety Right to Know Act, which will ensure that prospective students and their families are provided with the fire safety records, information and statistics of colleges and universities. Last academic year, there were no college-related fire deaths anywhere in the U.S. for the first time since 2000--an incredible drop from when 20 people were killed in 2006-2007. This progress can be attributed to the commendable efforts of fire departments, schools, and communities coming together to address this serious problem. According to the United States Fire Administration, 94 percent of college-related fire deaths happen in off-campus housing, where most students live. Through greater awareness and education, both students and parents are able to make informed decisions on choosing fire-safe housing that includes smoke alarms and two ways out. Students are more aware of how their actions can avoid having a fire happen in the first place and what to do if one does occur. This not only helps save their lives, but also the lives of their roommates and the fire fighters who are responding. By teaching college students about fire safety, we are teaching them not only how to be fire-safe during their time in college, but also for the rest of their lives. By creating a fire-safe generation now, we can make society safer for the future and reduce the tragic impact of fire. In the U.S. approximately 3,000 people die in fires every year. It is my sincere hope that college campuses in New Jersey and across the nation will participate in Campus Fire Safety Month activities throughout September. We must do all that we can to keep our nation's students safe and informed. This is also why I introduced the Campus Fire Safety Education Act, to provide universities with grants they can use to develop or implement campus fire safety education strategies. We must do everything in our power to ensure the safety and security of our children when they leave for college. I want to commend all of those who are working to make our campuses and communities better places to live, because fire safety is everyone's fight. Fire safety on campus today means a fire safe nation for tomorrow.

Mr. PASCRELL

Mr. PASCRELL. Now, these arrangements were so problematic that they prompted the Department of Justice--we have selective memory--to issue a new guidance limiting prosecutors' discretion in reaching such agreements, and the Judiciary Committee held an oversight hearing in 2009. When Democrats tried to highlight the issue of using a public office to funnel large legal fees to cronies who then turned around and bankrolled campaigns, those on the other side said they did not see it for what it was--crony capitalism. They have heard the term before. Rather, they bent over backward to praise Mr. Christie and accused Democrats of grasping for ways to embarrass a ``rising Republican star.'' Now that time has passed and a different administration is in charge, we are now hearing a different story, but very real issues with these practices still remain. I agree that we need reforms, my friend from Georgia. I agree. I hope that my colleagues will take a look at the deferred prosecution agreements reform legislation that I, Mr. Pallone, and Mr. Cohen have introduced. The issue here is not the government forcing companies to use deferred prosecution agreements to potentially divert funds away from helping victims when it comes to corporate malfeasance. The more egregious issue is that firms have avoided prosecution to begin with. The little guy gets it in the neck, and the banks and the corporations are never held accountable. The other side knows. The gentleman, my friend, has opened up a can of worms here--and I mean that sincerely.

Mr. PASCRELL. I yield to the gentleman.

Mr. PASCRELL. Reclaiming my time, Mr. Speaker, in all of the settlements, Chris Christie appointed political allies and supporters as monitors to oversee corporate compliance, which the gentleman is talking about, which netted those allies tens of millions of dollars. These allies then served as major donors to a political campaign account.

Mr. PASCRELL. We are on a roll here. Mr. Speaker, the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission made recommendations to the Department of Justice to criminally prosecute top executives at several large financial institutions, but we have yet to see a major Wall Street executive be criminally charged. That is criminal. You want to know what ``criminal'' is? That is criminal. So we come here today, and I urge my colleagues to oppose this bill. I don't question the motivations of the sponsor, by the way. That is not my motive. We learned in March that the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission--I will repeat--recommended that the Department of Justice criminally prosecute. Nothing has been done. I have also written a letter to the chairman of the Judiciary Committee. By the way, this is not partisan. Our own Justice Department hasn't done anything either. I am being fair about this, but they have to look into this. They can't come before us and tell us they are trying to save the little guy or the victims when they allow this and permit this to go on day in and day out when the banks never were held accountable. No one has ever been brought before a court. Eight years later, and we are here. Rather than wasting time on this fishing expedition, if the House really wants to ensure punishment is carried out and that the actual victims receive compensation, we need to actually address the root cause of the problem. Mr. Ranking Member, my friend from Georgia, we have to address the root problem.

Mr. PASCRELL. I thank the gentleman from Georgia, and I thank the gentleman from Massachusetts. Mr. Speaker, I am glad you had a little reference here: don't allow companies or corporations to avoid their responsibilities. I want to speak to that issue. I think it is very, very, very critical. Mr. Speaker, let's not beat around the bush. We are on the floor today debating H.R. 5063 under the guise of ``ensuring responsibility.'' I mean, who would be against that? That is like apple pie. However, this bill is nothing more than a political exercise void of real reprimand for these practices, reforms to the system, or redress to actual victims. If that is what it did, I would be here supporting it. We have known for years of instances where deferred prosecution agreements have gotten out of hand. You don't remember those days? I will bring them back to you. When I tried to make modest reforms to improve the transparency of these agreements, I was rebuffed by Members on the other side of the aisle. They have short memories. They have selective memories. Where was this outrage when I was screaming about seven deferred prosecution agreements with large medical device companies that were negotiated by New Jersey's former United States Attorney Chris Christie? There is a name. One of the settlements allowed Bristol-Myers Squibb to avoid prosecution for securities fraud in exchange for a $5 million donation to Mr. Christie's law school alma mater; and I am listening to preaching over here and pontificating about what is going on today about these groups that are lined up to get their money from the Justice Department. I didn't hear one word--not one word. In fact, if the gentleman has a word to interject, I will hold on for 10 seconds and listen.

Mr. PASCRELL

Mr. PASCRELL. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to speak on why this is a bad idea. We have seen in recent years a proliferation of political groups claiming tax exempt social welfare. You know how many groups in the past 5 years have claimed that? That is the status as a means to hide the identities of their donors. Can't put it any more elementary than that. Now, that is the very law my friend from Illinois--and I mean that seriously--the very law that he is talking about. These groups offer a back door into unrestricted spending on political speech, often in the form of advertising meant to influence elections. I don't think we would disagree on that point. H.R. 5053 would make it easier for super-PACs to spend money anonymously in support of their preferred candidates or political party. That is H.R. 5053. The bill before us today would make it easier for groups to operate in the shadows, groups like Americans for Prosperity and American Future Fund, which together spent more than $61 million in just one election in 2012 yet still claim tax exempt status. Now, I believe we need better transparency and accountability in our system. Disclosure of donors to the IRS is a minimum safeguard and a practical tool for auditing. Furthermore, requiring disclosure of donors is one of the only safeguards we have against foreign money influencing our elections. That is why so many good government groups have spoken out against this legislation, groups that promote transparency in our political system, like the Sunlight Foundation and the League of Women Voters. This bill would make it easier, Mr. Speaker, for anonymous donors to funnel dark money into groups that spend unlimited sums of money to influence elections. This flies in the face of our democratic principles. I urge my colleagues to oppose it. This isn't about the IRS. This is about hiding who contributes and how much. The IRS isn't for sale, but there are many buyers out there, Mr. Speaker, who want to remain unknown. You and I, the sponsor of this bill, we don't have that luxury. We have to put down everything when someone contributes to us. You know it, and I know it. I believe the PACs should have to do that, too. Why in God's name you don't think so, I have no idea.

Mr. PASCRELL

Mr. PASCRELL. Mr. Speaker, I want to state that on June 7, 2016, I missed four roll call votes due to prior commitments in my district. Had I been present I would have voted: YES--Roll Call Vote 269--H. Con. Res. 129--Expressing support for the goal of ensuring that all Holocaust victims live with dignity, comfort, and security in their remaining years, and urging the Federal Republic of Germany to reaffirm its commitment to this goal through a financial commitment to comprehensively address the unique health and welfare needs of vulnerable Holocaust victims, including home care and other medically prescribed needs. YES--Roll Call Vote 270--H.R. 4906--To amend title 5, United States Code, to clarify the eligibility of employees of a land management agency in a time-limited appointment to compete for a permanent appointment at any Federal agency. YES--Roll Call Vote 271--H.R. 4904--Making Electronic Government Accountable by Yielding Tangible Efficiencies Act of 2016 YES--Roll Call Vote 272--H.R. 1815--Eastern Nevada Land Implementation Improvement Act

Mr. PASCRELL

Mr. PASCRELL. Mr. Speaker, today, May 18, 2016, I was unable to vote on H. Res. 735. Had I been present, I would have voted: ``Nay''--Rollcall No. 200--H.R. 735--Rule providing for consideration of H.R. 4909--National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017.

Mr. PASCRELL

Mr. PASCRELL. Mr. Chair, I rise today in support of H.R. 5046, the Comprehensive Opioid Abuse Reduction Act. Addiction affects people from all walks of life. It is not confined to people of certain races, classes, and ages. Its broad reach is perhaps what makes it so terrifying. Prescription drug abuse and alarming increases in heroin abuse have gripped our country and it is past time for it to grip the attention of the Congress. I was proud to vote for many great bills this week to improve the prevention and treatment of substance abuse, particularly opioid abuse. While all of these bills, including the one before us today, address many aspects of this complex issue, we need to be honest and admit that in order to truly address this problem, we have to invest funding in it. There are already many programs in place that are successful in preventing and treating substance abuse, but they are underfunded. We need to change that. As we embark on the Fiscal Year 2017 appropriations process, I urge my colleagues to keep this mind. Substance abuse destroys families, friendships, our communities, and virtually everything else in its path. The time to act is now.

Mr. PASCRELL

Mr. PASCRELL. Mr. Speaker, due to an obligation in my district, I regrettably missed Roll Call votes 190, 191, 192 and 193. Had I been present, I would have voted ``nay'' on Roll Call Vote 190, ``nay'' on Roll Call Vote 191 and ``yea'' on Roll Call Vote 191, and ``yea'' on Roll Call Vote 193.

Mr. PASCRELL

Mr. PASCRELL. Mr. Speaker, as the chairman of the Congressional Fire Services Caucus, which is the largest caucus in the Congress, I rise in advance of the 40th anniversary of the establishment of the National Volunteer Fire Council on May 20 so as to recognize its hard work and dedication to protecting our communities. The brave men and women who volunteer their time are professionals who put their lives on the line every day. Founded in 1976, the NVFC came together in Chicago to provide a unified voice for volunteer firefighters across our Nation. With this guiding vision, the NVFC has grown its ranks to a board comprised of 49 State fire service associations and with a membership of nearly 20,000 individual and department members. Today, volunteers have a strong voice at the table when it comes to critical fire and emergency service issues thanks to the NVFC. The organization has been there to meet the challenges that volunteers face and to address critical issues every day. From groundbreaking programs and innovative resources to legislative and regulatory advocacy, the NVFC continues to serve the volunteer in meaningful and significant ways. I look forward to continuing to work with them to advocate for our volunteers.

Mr. PASCRELL

Mr. PASCRELL. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I commend my friend from Ohio (Mr. Renacci) for his work on this bill. As he knows, I have been interested in this issue of tax fraud and identity theft for some time. I am pleased that the bill we are marking up today, H.R. 3832, includes many provisions included in the bill that I put forth, H.R. 3981, the Identity Theft and Tax Fraud Prevention Act. These provisions include having a central point of contact for a victim of identity theft and taxpayer notification of suspected identity theft. In addition, two of my amendments were included in the bill. The first would create a local law enforcement liaison within the Criminal Investigation Division of the IRS. Our police and law enforcement officers are out every day, keeping our communities safe and tracking down criminals. Too often, coordinating their efforts with the IRS when it comes to identity theft is not as easy as it should be. My amendment helps law enforcement officers do their jobs by creating a local law enforcement liaison at the IRS. This position will be tasked with sharing information and responding to local law enforcement when they have information or inquiries about identity theft cases. It is common sense, and it will make it easier for police officers to go to a single place at the IRS when they want to work a case. The second amendment included in this bill deals with the IRS phone scam, and this is growing by the day. Imagine sitting at home when you receive a call from a threatening voice on the other end of the line that claims to be the IRS. For too many Americans, this experience is all too familiar. These criminals may ask unsuspecting citizens for their personal information, for their Social Security numbers, or even for bank account information--that has been done; it is very common-- and will threaten them with arrest or other penalties if the listeners don't comply. These phone scams have become increasingly aggressive and harmful to taxpayers. My amendment addresses this problem in practical ways. First, it requires the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration to issue a report that identifies potential technological solutions to the phone scam. Second, it would have the IRS provide information to callers who may be put on hold, when calling in, regarding common identity theft tax scams and how to avoid them. We need to do all we can to make sure taxpayers are informed and armed against these scams. Identity theft and tax fraud is a growing problem in the United States of America. As technology changes and as criminal syndicates target American citizens' tax returns, we have an obligation to address the issue. This bill does not go quite as far as I would have liked, and I urge my colleagues to take a look at H.R. 3981. I am also proud to be a cosponsor of Congressman John Lewis' bill, the Taxpayer Protection Act of 2016, which takes additional steps to increase funding for taxpayer services and to end the use of private debt collectors. This bill is a step in the right direction. I congratulate its sponsor as it is a good example of how we can work together across the aisle and find commonsense solutions for the American people. I hope this is a harbinger of things to come. Who knows? I reserve the balance of my time.

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

Mr. PASCRELL. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I just want to quickly say that what is really happening out there is that many seniors are being preyed upon. When you get a threatening phone call, you don't know what to think. And when you are up there in age, as some of us are, Mr. Kelly, you don't know what to expect, and you don't know who to turn to. So this is very important, what Mr. Renacci is putting forth right now. I just want everyone to understand that. It has good bipartisan support, and I hope that we can move this very, very quickly. I reserve the balance of my time.