Silvestre Reyes

Mr. REYES

Mr. REYES. I thank the gentlelady for yielding. I rise in opposition to Mr. Burgess' amendment because the State of Texas today is facing a $27 billion deficit. Last week, Governor Rick Perry came to Washington to ask our Republican colleagues for an $830 million bailout--and voila--we have Mr. Burgess' amendment. If this amendment passes, it will shortchange our schools and give a huge bailout to Governor Rick Perry. Last year, as you have heard, he accepted more than $3 billion in Federal funds, but instead of going and putting that money towards education in Texas, he used it to expand the State's tax surplus rainy day fund. Today, Mr. Burgess' amendment would absolutely give Governor Perry a blank check--how good is that?--giving an $830 million bailout to the same State leadership that robbed Texas children and Texas schools and Texas teachers of that money before. With that, I ask support to bring down this amendment.

Mr. REYES

Mr. REYES. Mr. Chair, I rise in strong support for the amendment to H.R. 1 to restore funding for the Pell Grant and stand in firm opposition to the underlying bill. The Pell Grant is extremely vital to help economically disadvantaged students pay for higher education. In fact, over 55,000 students in my congressional district use the Pell Grant to pay for their higher education costs. I am highly disappointed that after years of hard work by previous Congresses to increase the maximum Pell Grant award to $5,500, the Republican Continuing Resolution today would cut Pell Grant resources by $5.6 billion reducing the maximum Pell Grant award by $845. Indeed, this cut would translate into a loss of tens of millions of dollars in financial aid for students in my congressional district alone. As Congress looks to enact the full year Continuing Resolution for fiscal year 2011, H.R. 1, I urge my colleagues to oppose amendments that seek to cut critical education funding and severely impact the future of our students, communities, and nation. While cutting the deficit is important, doing so at the expense of special education grants for local school districts, Head Start for children, and Pell Grants to underserved college students, among other educational initiatives, is the wrong approach and unacceptable. As it stands, H.R. 1 would not only make it more difficult for college students to afford a higher education, but it also would make it difficult for K-12 schools to provide beneficial services like after school tutoring, or much needed literacy, math and science supplemental education. In fact, as written, H.R. 1 will cut: Head Start by over $1 billion, leaving an estimated 127,000 poor children without access to early childhood education, health, and social services and the potential loss of over 14,000 jobs; ESEA Title IA funding by $693 million, eliminating critical resources that help schools assist educationally underserved children in high- poverty schools and by some estimates would reduce or eliminate services for 957,000 high-risk children and result in the loss of over 9,000 education jobs; Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, IDEA, state grants by $557 million, leaving already struggling states and school districts with fewer resources to meet the needs of over 324,000 students with disabilities and resulting in the loss of another 7,000 education jobs; Job Corps by $300 million and eliminate any advance funding appropriated in FY 2010 for use in FY 2011, resulting in a $900 million cut to the program. These cuts will force the closure of 75 out of 124 Job Corps centers, the loss of over 21,000 jobs, and leave 36,000 at- risk-youth without the mentoring and educational services of Job Corps, and; Hispanic Serving Institutions by $100 million, leaving many outstanding universities without the needed funds to educate and prepare the fastest growing demographic group in the country. Every child deserves a quality education. H.R. 1 threatens America's progress and vision to remain competitive in the global arena. While the deficit should be a top priority, I urge my colleagues to ensure that this bill provides schools and universities the necessary resources to prepare our students for the future.

Mr. REYES

Mr. REYES. Mr. Chair, I rise today to express my strong opposition to the significant cuts to community health centers included in this bill. The Continuing Resolution proposes to reduce funding to community health centers by $1 billion, a nearly sixty percent reduction from FY2010 levels. Over the past few years, millions of families lost their health insurance due to job losses, and they now depend on community health centers to receive health care. If these cuts are signed into law, 192,834 people in Texas alone would lose access to health care. These cuts are especially harmful to the people of my district. Border communities face unique health concerns and challenges, and community health centers play a critical role. The cuts will have devastating effects on the communities and patients who most need access to care--patients with diabetes, heart disease, and HIV/AIDS, as well as children and pregnant women. Community health centers provide access to quality health care to those who would otherwise forgo a doctor's visit or seek treatment in an emergency when it's too late. In my congressional district for example, Centro San Vicente, one of many community health centers, provides health services for over 10,000 people a year. The irresponsible cuts contained in the Continuing Resolution will merely shift the burden to local communities, such as the district I represent, where local property taxpayers have already spent more than $500,000,000 since 1998 to pay for those who could not afford to pay for health care at our public hospital. Republicans cannot merely ignore the problems that arise when 50 million people in the United States lack basic health coverage. They have voted to repeal the health insurance reform law, and now want to cut the very clinics that help lower health care costs by encouraging uninsured patients to seek treatment in a doctor's office, not in an emergency room, where the costs are substantially higher. I understand the need for fiscal discipline, but drastically funding to a cost-effective program that has improved countless lives makes little sense from both a moral and fiscal perspective. I urge my colleagues to vote against this bill which strips funding for community health centers.

Mr. REYES

Mr. REYES. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize an outstanding medical professional in my congressional district, who has dedicated his life and profession to helping those who are most in need. Dr. Jose Luna serves as the Chief Medical Officer at Centro San Vicente and is currently the chairman of the El Paso County Hospital District Board of Managers. He is a tireless advocate for those who do not have access to affordable health care, and has committed himself to improving the lives and health of residents along the U.S.-Mexico border. In honor of his work, the El Paso Diabetes Association is recognizing Dr. Luna at their 3rd annual HOPE Ball as an individual who has been an invaluable partner in the fight against diabetes. The statistics regarding diabetes are staggering. Diabetes is an epidemic affecting nearly 24 million Americans and another 57 million with pre-diabetes. Every 24 hours, 4,100 people in the U.S. are diagnosed with diabetes. In El Paso, as many as one in six people are currently living with diabetes, and many more are unaware that their lifestyle choices are putting them at risk or have already made them pre-diabetic. It is important that we all understand how diabetes affects us, our families, and our community. Since 1968, the El Paso Diabetes Association has been an invaluable asset to my congressional district by providing personalized services including diabetes management and prevention. The organization's mission is to promote education and early detection, empower people to take control of their health, and increase access to resources, and Dr. Luna, this year's HOPE recipient is dedicated to those goals. Dr. Jose Luna has been involved with the El Paso Diabetes Association for over 8 years, and has made a significant impact, especially with the uninsured and medically underserved. His service to the organization and our community is having a positive impact on the lives of El Pasoans and is helping stem this growing epidemic. Dr. Luna is most deserving of this honor, and I applaud his work and dedication to make El Paso a better and healthier place. Today, I am proud to recognize Dr. Luna and everyone at the El Paso Diabetes Association, and I greatly appreciate their hard work for the betterment of our community.

Mr. REYES

Mr. REYES. I thank the gentleman for yielding. Mr. Speaker, I rise to express my strong opposition to H.R. 2, which seeks to dismantle the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. Repealing this law would be detrimental to districts like the one I represent, which have unsustainably high rates of people without health insurance. Nationally, about one in five people is without health insurance. The problem in my district means one in three is without basic health coverage. That's 230,000 people in my district alone. When these individuals can't get preventative care and they get sick, they wind up in the emergency room, which is the most expensive kind of health care there is. According to the latest figures from our county hospital, more than $500 million of local property tax dollars have been used to cover the costs of those who could not pay for treatment and services--$500 million. We passed the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act to help address this problem and provide affordable health care insurance to those who currently are uninsured. I urge my colleagues to vote against H.R. 2.

Mr. REYES

Mr. REYES. I thank my colleague for yielding. Madam Speaker, today I rise on behalf of the people of the 16th Congressional District of Texas to express our community's profound sadness in the wake of Saturday's senseless act of violence that claimed the lives of six Americans and has left our esteemed colleague, Gabby Giffords, fighting for her life and has affected 13 others. Ironically enough, last week on Thursday we had a meeting of the Border Caucus. Gabby came to that meeting, and we discussed the agenda for the 112th Congress. I can tell you that she is a tireless champion on border issues. She is an incredible Member, dedicated to representing the people of her district, and I have had the pleasure of working with her on border issues, on military issues, and on intelligence issues on many occasions. Over the last few days, my office has received an outpouring of support for Gabby, for her family, and for her staff, as well as everyone else who was affected by this tragedy. Madam Speaker, when I was in my congressional district this past Sunday, I was approached by a gentleman who I recognized who said something to me that I thought was very touching. He said: Congressman, I often disagree with you on many issues, but I want you to know that I'm praying for your friend from Arizona and for you. I hope she keeps up the fight and pulls through. I expressed my appreciation on behalf of all of us and shook his hand. Madam Speaker, in the aftermath of this tragedy, one of the best ways that I know of to honor the victims is to come together as Americans, as so many Members have said, and to speak with one voice against the violence and the hate that claimed the lives of both Republicans and Democrats, Americans all both young and old. Our thoughts and our prayers today and since Saturday have been with Gabby, her family, as well as all of the victims and their families affected by this terrible tragedy. It is now up to us to move forward in the same spirit that they have shown as they persevere through this terrible time. With that, it rests on us to be better. As Mark's brother said from space: It is a peaceful planet. It looks peaceful. Sadly, it is not; but we can do better. We must do better.

Mr. REYES

Mr. REYES. Madam Speaker, I rise today to express opposition to the rule and the irresponsible move by the Republicans to dismantle health care reform for millions of Americans. There are a multitude of reasons why I am opposing this rule and why it is an affront to the democratic process, but I will focus on three today. First, this rule shuts out any attempt to change the Republican proposal. After promising a transparent process and an honest attempt to engage Members across the aisle, Republicans went back on their word and closed the door on any meaningful conversation. Yesterday's Rules Committee meeting serves as an example of the extreme tactics being used by the majority to shut out opposition. Thirty Democratic amendments were submitted for consideration, including several that I co-sponsored, aimed at preserving key consumer protections in the health care reform law. One of the most notable provisions includes prohibiting insurance companies from rescinding an individual's health coverage due to illness or imposing annual or lifetime limits. The Democratic amendments would also preserve access to primary care and the medical loss ratio (MLR) provision. This provision requires insurance companies in the individual and small group markets to spend at least 80 percent of the premiums on medical care and quality improvement activities. Finally, the amendments would prohibit repeal if it increases cost sharing or otherwise reduces access to preventive health benefits such as mammograms, colonoscopies, and diabetes screenings. All 30 Democratic amendments were rejected by the Republicans, leaving no room for dialogue or reform. My second concern is that Republicans are trying to turn back the clock on the Democratic reforms that have allowed millions of Americans to access affordable quality health care across the country. In my state alone, preliminary estimates suggest that 161,000 young people under the age of 26 will become ineligible to remain on their parents' health insurance, 2.8 million Medicare patients will pay more for preventative services, and 128,682 Medicare recipients will pay higher prescription costs. Moreover, Republicans are ignoring warnings from the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office that repealing the Affordable Care Act will add $230 billion over the next 10 years to the already massive budget deficit. Third and most importantly, there is an incredible amount of business to be done, and the American people expect that the Republicans will get to work with Democrats and the President to create jobs and build on the progress of the past two years. Instead of obsessing over the repeal of the health care law, Republicans should focus on revitalizing communities like mine on the border by passing bills that strengthen infrastructure and security. I urge Republicans to take a look at my PORTS Act as an example of bi-partisan legislation that accomplishes both of these goals and will actually benefit the American people. In short, we need to work together to get it done. I hope that this rule is not the beginning of a session marked by continual efforts to thwart debate and stifle opposition. I urge my colleagues to vote against this closed rule.

Mr. REYES

Mr. REYES. I thank the gentlelady for yielding. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the Don't Ask, Don't Tell Repeal Act, and I do so as a proud veteran who served in Vietnam a long time ago. I can tell you, gays served proudly in Vietnam with us, just as gays are serving in today's military. But what we are arguing about here is the inconsistency of forcing people to lie about who they are. I feel strongly that all Americans that are fit and willing to serve ought to have a fair and equal chance to volunteer for military service. Lifting the ban to allow our troops to serve openly is consistent with the American values which the previous speaker spoke about that our military members risk their lives to defend. I can attest to the fact. I represent a large military facility in my district, so I have the opportunity to ask the troops for their opinion on this particular issue. Their opinions track with the study that was done. They don't care what sexual preference their buddy might be. They only care that he or she performs when they are in combat--when they have to have their back and they have to depend on them having their back. It is as simple as that. This is an idea whose time has expired, like my time is about to expire. I urge Members to vote for repeal of this act.

Mr. REYES

Mr. REYES. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to convey my strong support for the latest version of the DREAM Act. This common-sense legislation will significantly reduce the burdens on our federal border law enforcement by allowing them to focus on more serious targets who are in this country illegally and may pose a security threat to the United States. Providing a limited incentive for young people (who have significant potential to contribute to our economy and Armed Forces) to come forward and identify themselves is a pragmatic solution that will have a meaningful impact on our nation's immigration enforcement efforts. As a 26-year veteran and former Sector Chief of the United States Border Patrol, I strongly believe that the failure to address this problem at this critical juncture will only undermine our security in the years ahead. I am particularly disappointed by those who have characterized this sensible legislation as ``amnesty'' and a threat to our national security. As the only Member of Congress who has patrolled our nation's southern border, I know this measure will support the men and women who work hard every day to enforce our nation's immigration laws. The DREAM Act sets forth reasonable requirements for undocumented children that will enable federal law enforcement to quickly identify them, and allocate more time and resources to the threats that genuinely pose a security risk to our nation. By focusing on those individuals who may pose a more serious risk, instead of young people who could make a valuable contribution to the economic and military security of our nation, the DREAM Act is a major step forward in making our nation safer. I strongly urge your support of this important legislation.

Mr. REYES

Mr. REYES. Madam Speaker, today I pay tribute to Mr. Anthony P. Placido on his retirement from public service at the end of this month after more than 30 distinguished years in law enforcement. Mr. Placido began his law enforcement career with the U.S. Customs Service, but he later joined the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration and quickly rose through the ranks, using his foreign affairs experience and leadership skills to manage counter-narcotics efforts both in domestic and foreign posts. In his time with DEA, he acted, among other things, as a Team Leader for the Tactical Intelligence Unit in Peru, a Senior Inspector with the Office of Professional Responsibility, and a Country Attache for Bolivia. In his two years as the Regional Director for the Mexico-Central America Division, supervising and coordinating DEA operations across eight countries, Mr. Placido was credited with dismantling and disrupting several major drug trafficking cartels. His success earned him an appointment to serve as the Special Agent in Charge of DEA's New York Field Office, where he established the first Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Strike Force in the nation. Mr. Placido's focus on multi-agency joint missions made him the right person to serve as the founding Director of the Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Fusion Center, where he continued to emphasize the necessity of interagency cooperation and information sharing in the fight against transnational criminal organizations. As Chairman of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, I have had the opportunity most recently to work closely with Mr. Placido in his current role as Chief of Intelligence for the DEA. During this time, I have come to appreciate his professionalism, expertise, and candor, as well as his work to cultivate extensive relationships and collaborative partnerships with other elements of the intelligence and law enforcement communities. In particular, Mr. Placido has dedicated himself to promoting the El Paso Information Center (EPIC) as a frontline resource for law enforcement organizations. He has been an enthusiastic advocate for bringing the wide ranging expertise of federal, state, local, and tribal law enforcement officers to bear in a variety of crucial national missions, from counternarcotics operations to counterterrorism investigations. Under his leadership, EPIC has become a world class clearinghouse for tracking, investigating, and disrupting international drug operations. Over the course of his career, Mr. Placido has seen the DEA's mission evolve and expand. It is truly a testament to his integrity and dedication that he has met the challenges of an increasingly complex set of national security threats, without losing sight of the needs of the officers patrolling our streets. The Nation is better and safer as a result of Mr. Placido's service. For that, I pay tribute to him.

Mr. REYES

Mr. REYES. Mr. Speaker, it is a privilege and an honor to be here this evening to honor a great American. I have had the privilege of traveling throughout the world with Ike Skelton. One of my first trips was with Ike Skelton. We went to the Far East. We had Thanksgiving with our troops at the DMZ in South Korea. Subsequent to that, we also took a trip to Bosnia several times, spent one Easter with the troops. So many memories of trips to visit the troops and their families to look at the facilities, to make sure they had all the equipment they needed to have, all the support that we could possibly have been able to give them on the committee. I have had the privilege and honor of visiting Ike's district in Missouri, and I invited Chairman Skelton to come to El Paso. I grew up in a little town right outside of El Paso by the name of Canutillo. The main street of this little town was Doniphan Drive. Never did I dream that I had grown up in this environment with a direct connection to Missouri, because when Ike Skelton came to my district, he immediately recognized the connection. He said, This street was named after Colonel Alexander Doniphan, who was a Missourian and came to Texas to save Texas. Immediately a connection there. Chairman Ike Skelton is, in my eyes, a professor of history, a professor of, particularly, military history. We all famously have a list of recommended readings from Ike Skelton. I have to confess I haven't read all those books yet, but I am working on it. It gives you a better understanding; but for me, it gives me a unique perspective on who the man, Ike Skelton, is. I couldn't agree more with my colleagues here this evening in paying tribute to a great American, a giant that has served this institution with dignity, with honor, with great passion, and with great love and care for our military men and women and for their families. Ike, it has been a tremendous honor to serve with you. I have learned so much from you that I think, by any measure, if there is a new Member coming here, my recommendation would be to emulate the great Chairman Ike Skelton. Thank you. And thanks to the people of Missouri for sharing you for over three decades of great public service to this great country. For me, an honor; for this country, an American legend. Thank you, Ike. God bless you, and God bless this country.

Mr. REYES

Mr. REYES. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on this legislation.

Mr. REYES. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I am proud to rise today in support of my motion to concur in the Senate amendment to H.R. 2701, the Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010. This bill has been a long time coming. It has been almost 6 years since an intelligence authorization bill has been signed into law. Year after year, the intelligence committees have marked up authorization bills and tried to get them enacted. And year after year, these efforts have fallen short. Authorization bills are critical to the smooth functioning of the intelligence community. We face innovative and aggressive adversaries, and the intelligence community needs the flexibility to adapt. But the authorities and institutions of the intelligence community are, to a large extent, set by statute. Only acts of Congress--traditionally in the form of authorization bills--can give the community the tools it needs to keep America safe. Most intelligence activities are, by necessity, shielded from public scrutiny. Congress has an obligation to ensure that the activities of the intelligence community are legal, effective, and serve the best interests of the United States. The Intelligence Authorization Act is the principal means for doing this. The bill before us today meets this high standard. It is the product of months of bipartisan discussions between the House and Senate intelligence committees, leadership, and the White House. Let me highlight several important provisions. First, the bill would substantially reform the process through which the President notifies the so-called Gang of Eight regarding certain sensitive covert operations. As Members may know, the National Security Act gives the President the authority to limit briefings on certain sensitive covert actions to the Gang of Eight. It has been the belief of both intelligence committees that the Gang of Eight authority has been overused, and that the entire committee membership should be informed on matters of critical importance. For that reason, an earlier version of the bill removed the statutory authority for limiting briefings to the Gang of Eight. Last July, the administration threatened to veto the bill if it included that language. After months of tough negotiations, we have reached a compromise that substantially improves the notification process, and which the President will sign. The bill requires that the President notify all members of the intelligence committees that a Gang of Eight briefing has occurred and give a ``general description'' of that notification. It requires that the full briefing be automatically made available to all members in 6 months, unless the President recertifies that the briefing must stay limited. It also requires that all Gang of Eight briefings be in writing and that the President maintain a written record of those receiving these limited briefings. Finally, like earlier drafts, it requires that the President provide the legal basis for an intelligence activity and sets a new standard for determining when certain activities must be notified. Second, the bill would help the General Accounting Office gain access to the intelligence community. For decades, the executive branch has prevented GAO from conducting audits or investigations into intelligence activities. This bill directs the Director of National Intelligence to come up with regulations to govern GAO access to the intelligence community. The new DNI, General Clapper, has suggested in testimony that he would be open to working with GAO. This provision would give him the opportunity to put his words into action. Third, the bill would put in place a number of measures to help stamp out waste, fraud, and abuse. It would create an Inspector General for the intelligence community, with authority to conduct oversight across the community and on the critical issues regarding coordination and cooperation between agencies. It also requires a comprehensive assessment of contracting practices across the community, which would give Congress the tools it needs to help control contractor costs. Fourth, the bill creates new cost-control measures for the acquisition of major systems, many of which have been subject to serious cost and schedule overruns in recent years. This includes a mechanism--based on the Department of Defense's Nunn-McCurdry provision--that requires congressional notification and program restructuring when certain cost thresholds are exceeded. Fifth, the bill modifies various authorities to ensure the intelligence community has the tools it needs to keep the country safe. These include an exemption to certain public disclosure requirements for operational files transferred to the ODNI, a reform that the Director of the National Counterterrorism Center said was critical to information sharing. Madam Speaker, these are vital reforms, as are others in this important bill. They have been priorities of this body, on a bipartisan basis, for a very long time. It's time we got these reforms enacted. It's time for us to pass this bill. Therefore, I urge all my colleagues to vote ``yes.'' With that, Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. REYES. Madam Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Harman) for the purpose of a unanimous consent request. (Ms. HARMAN asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Mr. REYES. Madam Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 1674, I call up the bill (H.R. 2701) to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for intelligence and intelligence-related activities of the United States Government, the Community Management Account, and the Central Intelligence Agency Retirement and Disability System, and for other purposes, with the Senate amendment thereto, and I have a motion at the desk.

Mr. REYES. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the chair of the Intelligence Community Management Subcommittee, the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Eshoo).

Mr. REYES. Madam Speaker, I yield myself 2 minutes. Madam Speaker, the American people are tuned in tonight. They must be confused that we are kind of talking in parallel universes here. For instance, there are no earmarks in this bill, in H.R. 2701. There are also a host of legislative provisions in this bill that will have a permanent effect on the operations in the intelligence community. Today's date, tomorrow's date, next week's date doesn't change any of that. And it's gratifying to know that for the last few months, our colleagues on the other side of the aisle have embarked on a listening campaign. It is good that they listen, and I hope that they have also gotten back the message that the American people are sick and tired of their strategy of just saying ``no'' to everything. Isn't it interesting--at least I find it interesting--that H.R. 2701 had unanimous support on the Senate side. That means both Democrats and Republicans. But somehow, some people don't understand or didn't get the memo that it is okay to agree on protecting this country. It's okay to agree to pass a piece of legislation that fundamentally does that. This bill does that. Is it perfect? No. Is it a compromise? Yes. But that is the reality of legislative compromises. They talk about Guantanamo. Tonight we are going to vote on a continuing resolution. This bill does nothing to impact on anything to do with Guantanamo. Voting on the continuing resolution, we will vote on keeping those protections in place. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. REYES. I yield the gentlewoman an additional 30 seconds.

Mr. REYES. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the chairman of the Technical and Tactical Intelligence Subcommittee, the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Ruppersberger).

Mr. REYES. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to a member of the committee, the gentleman from California (Mr. Schiff).

Mr. REYES. Madam Speaker, I now yield 2 minutes to a member of the committee, the gentleman from Oklahoma, who just, I might add, had a son last week, and a valued member of our committee, Mr. Boren.

Mr. REYES. Madam Speaker, it is my privilege now to yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Holt), a member of the committee and the chairman of the Select Intelligence Oversight Panel.

Mr. REYES

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

Mr. REYES

Mr. REYES. Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague and good friend from New York for yielding me time on this very important rule, and I rise in support of this rule. As I have many times in my tenure as chairman, I note that I owe a great deal to my vice chairman and good friend, the gentleman from Florida, as well, Mr. Hastings, who unfortunately has another commitment and was unable to be here. But H.R. 2701 contains a lot that is the product of his work. And I'm thankful for his long-term support on this important aspect to our national security. The authorities and institutions that govern the intelligence community are set by statute, but the threats that are posed by our adversaries continuously change. Regular updates to the law are necessary to ensure that the intelligence community has the tools that it needs to keep us safe. This bill includes nearly 6 years' worth of these statutory improvements. The bill reasserts Congress' role in conducting oversight of intelligence activities. And, most importantly, the bill fundamentally reforms the process for briefing Congress on certain sensitive covert operations. The bill also includes a compromise on GAO, which directs that the DNI come up with directives governing GAO access to the intelligence community. The bill also creates a new Inspector General for the intelligence community with the authority to root out waste, fraud, and abuse across the community and also assess the information sharing in that community. The bill includes language to bring intelligence community acquisition procedures closer in line with those of DOD acquisition reforms, including a provision that was modeled on the Nunn-McCurdy Act. I would also like to make an additional point about process. This is admittedly an unusual time to consider an authorization bill. The fiscal year is almost over and all relevant appropriations bills have already been enacted.

Mr. REYES. I thank the gentleman for yielding. To avoid significant complications regarding the use of appropriated funds, the bill does not include a classified annex or schedule of authorizations. But the legislative provisions in the bill, including those that I have just delineated, would make changes to permanent law and live well beyond this fiscal year. Moreover, I would like to emphasize that we sought a negotiation process that was as open as possible. The staffs of the House and Senate Intelligence Committees had dozens of meetings and countless hours in which both parties from both Chambers were represented. Like any important piece of legislation, H.R. 2701 includes some difficult compromises. Not every Republican provision or Democratic provision was included in the final version. Then, again, that's the process of compromise in the legislative process. The final bill incorporates a number of Republican ideas, including a floor amendment by Mr. Hoekstra requiring disclosure of a report regarding the shoot- down of a plane in Peru; an amendment by Mr. Rogers dealing with FBI jurisdiction overseas; and a provision by Mr. Conaway to ensure auditability of elements of the intelligence community. At the end of the day, this is a bipartisan product, and I urge adoption of the rule.