Ed Royce

Mr. ROYCE of California

Mr. ROYCE of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, over the past decade, we have seen rapid technological advances. We have seen an increase in foreign investment in the United States, but we have seen it especially from countries like China and Russia that pose national security concerns to us. Of great alarm, our regulatory system has not kept pace. Mr. Pittenger's bill before us today seeks to change that. The Foreign Investment Risk Review Modernization Act of 2018 represents a broad bipartisan agreement to reform our regulatory systems to protect both our national security and to protect our economic prosperity. Specifically, this bill strengthens national security reviews of certain commercial transactions conducted by CFIUS, as well as reforms and modernizations in order to bring up to date outdated U.S. export control systems. That regime is reformed here. I want to thank the chairman of the Financial Services Committee, Mr. Hensarling, for his leadership on this issue. The Committees on Armed Services, on Intelligence, Energy and Commerce, Budget, and Oversight and Government Reform also played important roles in shaping this legislation. This has been a truly collaborative process. Mr. Speaker, this body has not addressed exports of dual-use items-- products and services that have both commercial and military application--since the Export Administration Act of 1979. Since that lapse, nearly 25 years ago, successive administrations have relied on emergency authorities that have not kept pace with technological advances. Today, we are acting to fix that problematic lapse because the United States' position as the world's largest exporter of goods and services is at risk. We will lose many good-paying jobs if we don't better secure advanced technology and if we don't better secure intellectual property. That is why, this spring, the Foreign Affairs Committee passed the Export Control Reform Act of 2018. We passed this legislation. And under this approach, reflected in title VIII of the bill before us, modernized U.S. export control laws and regulations will continue to have broad authority governing the transfer of dual-use items and technology to foreign persons, whether that transfer takes place abroad or if that transfer takes place here in the United States. Let me just highlight a few critical features of the export control provisions of the legislation. This title of the bill requires that export controls be calibrated and continually updated to ensure lasting U.S. leadership in these fields: science, technology, engineering, manufacturing, and other sectors critical to the industrial base. It ensures that sensitive manufacturing know-how, which may include such items as written or oral communications, blueprints, engineering designs, specifications, are subject to appropriate export controls regardless of the nature of the underlying transaction. And lastly, it establishes a new authority for the U.S. export control agencies and the Department of Defense to identify and appropriately control emerging and foundational technologies that may be critical to U.S. national security. This includes artificial intelligence, robotics, augmented and virtual reality, new biotechnologies, new financial technologies, and advanced materials. Ten years ago, Mr. Sherman and I held a series of hearings to examine China's increasingly aggressive policies in the wake of the EAA'S expiration. I appreciate his passion for these issues and his understanding of the need to balance our economic and national security interests. We do need a nimble, adaptable system that protects but doesn't unduly burden our world-class industries. Modernized U.S. export controls and CFIUS reforms are both critical to the challenges posed by China and by Russia and by others. This bill will help keep America safe, help keep us strong. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time. House of Representatives, Committee on Oversight and Government Reform Washington, DC, June 26, 2018. Hon. Edward R. Royce, Chairman, Committee on Foreign Affairs, House of Representatives, Washington, DC. Dear Mr. Chairman: I write concerning H.R. 5841, the Foreign Investment Risk Review Modernization Act of 2018. This bill contains provisions within the jurisdiction of the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform. As a result of your having consulted with me concerning the provisions of the bill that fall within our Rule X jurisdiction, I agree to forgo consideration of the bill, so the bill may proceed expeditiously to the House floor. The Committee takes this action with our mutual understanding that by foregoing consideration of H.R. 5841 we do not waive any jurisdiction over the subject matter contained in this or similar legislation, and we will be appropriately consulted and involved as the bill or similar legislation moves forward so we may address any remaining issues within our Rule X jurisdiction. Further, I request your support for the appointment of conferees from the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform during any House-Senate conference on this or related legislation. Finally, I would appreciate a response confirming this understanding and ask that a copy of our exchange of letters on this matter be included in the bill report filed by the Committee on Armed Services, as well as in the Congressional Record during floor consideration thereof. Sincerely, Trey Gowdy.

Mr. ROYCE of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Texas, and I ask unanimous consent that he may control that time.

Mr. ROYCE of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time. Mr. Speaker, in closing, I would like to thank several of my colleagues, the ranking member of the Foreign Affairs Committee, Mr. Engel, as well as, of course, Chairman Hensarling, Ranking Member Waters, and Mr. Pittenger. I want to thank them for incorporating as title VIII the text that I authored as H.R. 5040, this is the Export Control Reform Act of 2018. This is the measure we put out of the Foreign Affairs Committee. This title modernizes and reforms outdated export controls designed to impose trade controls on the old Soviet bloc. It was long past due that we update these controls to reflect the realities of modern international commerce and the national security threats of the century we are in right now. I would urge my colleagues to join us in modernizing both the CFIUS and export controls process which we do now in this combined bill. A ``yes'' vote will ensure continued U.S. leadership in high technology industries essential to the health of our economy and essential to our national security. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. ROYCE of California

Mr. ROYCE of California. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

Mr. ROYCE of California. Mr. Chairman, let me start by just thanking the chairman of this committee, and I thank his committee for working with me on my proposed changes and for including an additional amendment in the manager's package. The amendment before us expands the number of projects eligible under the non-Federal implementation pilot program, and, as you know, the pilot program was established by WRDA in 2014. What it does is, it allows projects that can demonstrate greater cost effectiveness, greater efficiency to receive direct funding. Savings from this program then go toward either deficit reduction and other Corps projects. So the original pilot allowed for 15 projects. This expands the program to allow for a total of 32 projects. These projects will need to be authorized and meet the criteria under the program, and if more projects qualify under this pilot, it has the potential to save taxpayers more money. Mr. Chairman, I urge support, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. ROYCE of California. Mr. Chairman, I rise as the designee of Mr. Keating to offer amendment No. 5.

Mr. ROYCE of California. Mr. Chairman, this particular amendment would expand the Army Corps of Engineers' authorization to permit cooperation with regional coalitions who are seeking to create or improve water infrastructure in their areas. The amendment today would help achieve the goal by encouraging towns and counties to create partnerships with the Army Corps so they can pursue creative solutions to local infrastructure needs and they can do this together. The reason for it is because watersheds do not follow municipal or even State boundaries, as we know, so it is regional approaches like the project in Mr. Keating's district that provide effective and efficient solutions. So I thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I urge my colleagues to support this commonsense amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. ROYCE of California. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. ROYCE of California

Mr. ROYCE of California. Mr. Speaker, it was 5:39 a.m. on June 25, 2010 when we passed the Dodd-Frank Conference Committee Report. At that early morning hour--other than a need for sleep--there was little we agreed upon. But one thing stood out, Republicans and Democrats openly discussed that there were problems in the bill that would need fixing. We knew some of the unintended (and intended) consequences that community banks and credit unions would face when looking to lend to homeowners and small businesses. Sadly, Mr. Speaker, it has taken nearly 8 years for us to pass into law any meaningful changes of those sweeping reforms. Smaller institutions have suffered; they have fewer assets over which to spread ever-increasing compliance costs. That's what leads to this conundrum where we have fewer banks today than we did during the Great Depression. Today, we take a step in rewriting these wrongs. I'm particular proud that the bill before us includes many provisions I authored on a bipartisan basis. S. 2155 provides potential homeownership for the so- called ``credit invisibles,'' increases small business lending from credit unions, and improves access to capital for companies looking to go public and hire more workers. I urge my colleagues to pass these overdue reforms.

Mr. ROYCE of California

Mr. ROYCE of California. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Foreign Affairs be discharged from further consideration of the resolution (H. Res. 835) supporting robust relations with the State of Israel bilaterally and in multilateral fora upon seventy years of statehood, and for other purposes, and ask for its immediate consideration in the House.

Mr. ROYCE of California. I have an amendment to the text at the desk.

Mr. ROYCE of California. I have an amendment to the preamble at the desk.

Mr. ROYCE of California

Mr. ROYCE of California. Mr. Speaker, I was here during the debates that we had on Dodd-Frank and involved in much of the discussion. On the Democratic side and on the Republican side, there were a number of things we debated, but through all of that debate, there was a bipartisan belief that auto dealers and lenders were certainly not at the heart of the crisis and should not be the focus of new regulation. With that in mind, as the chairman has noted, section 1029 of Dodd- Frank explicitly exempted auto dealers from CFPB supervision and regulation. If that is the case, Mr. Speaker, why are we here today? We are here because the auto dealers are the focus of a CFPB action that ends the consumers' ability to receive discounted car loans. Why are consumers facing higher, not lower, costs when going to buy a car? The answer is regulatory overreach. CFPB ignored the will of Congress, ignored the law as written. As The Wall Street Journal noted, Congress' explicit exemption ``didn't stop former CFPB chief Richard Cordray, who used the back door of auto financing to regulate dealers.'' And while Mr. Cordray may have been able to suspend this belief, we do not have the same luxury here. We are not here by choice, frankly. We must act to pass this resolution today. And, Mr. Speaker, I would like to share the bipartisan call for enforcement of the Equal Credit Opportunity Act and make this point: let's work together to tackle discrimination where it exists--where it exists--not where regulators ignore the law and employ algorithms to guess that it might exist.

Mr. ROYCE of California

Mr. ROYCE of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, in January this body came together. It was a near unanimous vote to support the Iranian people, who were engaged in legitimate protests against a very oppressive regime. I want to thank Mr. Mike McCaul here, chairman of the Committee on Homeland Security, and Mr. Eliot Engel, the ranking member of our Committee on Foreign Affairs, for their engagement in this issue. At the time, we were witnessing tens of thousands of Iranians who had taken to the streets in the largest demonstration that we had seen since the Green Revolution of 2009. The protests, aimed at economic stagnation, aimed at widespread corruption--and people were talking about that all the time--aimed at the Revolutionary Guard Corps' control over that economy because they had nationalized, seized, so much of that economy. And quickly we saw that spread across Iran, as Persians sought to exercise the fundamental right of freedom of expression, as people across that country, of every ethnicity and every religion, began to speak out. Many demonstrators shouted slogans aimed at Iran's costly support for Syria's Bashar al-Assad, if you recall, from reading the press accounts. And they attacked, they argued about the cost, the support that went to the terrorist groups such as Hezbollah. Predictably, the Iranian regime moved swiftly to quash the demonstrations and throttle social media. More than 1,000 Iranians were jailed, dozens were killed. H. Res. 676 condemned this brutal violence back in January, called for targeted sanctions to hold the regime to account. But today we act to make good on that call, because the bill before us today, Chairman McCaul's H.R. 4744, requires the administration to determine whether senior Iranian officials should be sanctioned for human rights abuses. And it also requires determinations on whether Iranian businesses should be sanctioned for public corruption with respect to those who are involved in corruption. And it mandates sanctions on those officials responsible for Iran's wrongful, politically motivated jailing of U.S. citizens. Mr. Speaker, for years the regime in Tehran has systematically beat down all opposition inside Iran. It regularly uses brutal tactics back in Iran, including torture and mass executions, as it seeks to export violence and radical ideology abroad as well. I think all of us can think back to that 1979 revolution and contemplate how much better Iran would have been had it not went off onto a path of becoming a rogue state. As this legislation details, today the regime flagrantly disregards commitments it has made to respect the fundamental rights of the Iranian people. Many of us recall the barbaric mass executions carried out over a 4-month period in 1988. And I dare say, if you know any Persians, if you know people who escaped from Iran, you know that, during that period of time leading up to 1988, there were over 30,000 students and young professionals who lost their lives as a consequence. We know that the political prisoners there went through a grueling experience, in Evin Prison and other prisons. Many were executed by hanging, many by firing squad. They refused to renounce their political affiliations, and that was the fate that was handed out to them. And today the regime still persecutes ethnic and religious minority groups; such as, the Baha'i; Christians, of course; Sufi; Sunni; dissenting Shia Muslims. And we all remember the way the ayatollah brutally suppressed the peaceful political dissent during the Green Revolution, during which the previous administration remained embarrassingly silent, in my view. And many of us here on this floor today spoke up often at that time about that dissent during the Green Revolution, because I think this was a real opportunity missed by the United States. So again, Mr. Speaker, I want to thank Chairman McCaul and I want to thank Ranking Member Engel for their leadership on this legislation. I am glad we have strong bipartisan support for this measure. Regardless of how one views the Iran nuclear agreement, it is critical that the United States and our allies continue to press Iran for its dangerous and threatening acts that fall outside of the JCPOA. This is an area where officials from both the Trump and Obama administrations agree, and they agree for good reason here. Remember, this is the same regime that is holding American citizens, including one who is in very poor health, on sham charges in one of the largest ransom schemes, from my standpoint, that was ever devised. This regime, of course, held its first American hostages in 1979, when it overran our U.S. Embassy. The regime's MO remains the same. It is far past time the regime faced consequences for its attacks on Iranians and Americans alike. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time. House of Representatives, Committee on Ways and Means, Washington, DC, April 13, 2018. Hon. Edward R. Royce, Chairman, Committee on Foreign Affairs, Washington, DC. Dear Chairman Royce: I am writing with respect to H.R. 4744, the ``Iran Human Rights and Hostage-Taking Accountability Act,'' on which Ways and Means was granted an additional referral. As a result of your having consulted with us on provisions in H.R. 4744 that fall within the Rule X jurisdiction of the Committee on Ways and Means, I agree to waive formal consideration of this bill so that it may move expeditiously to the floor. The Committee on Ways and Means takes this action with the mutual understanding that we do not waive any jurisdiction over the subject matter contained in this or similar legislation, and the Committee will be appropriately consulted and involved as the bill or similar legislation moves forward so that we may address any remaining issues that fall within our jurisdiction. The Committee also reserves the right to seek appointment of an appropriate number of conferees to any House-Senate conference involving this or similar legislation, and requests your support for such request. Finally, I would appreciate your response to this letter confirming this understanding, and would ask that a copy of our exchange of letters on this matter be included in the Congressional Record during floor consideration of H.R. 4744. Sincerely, Kevin Brady, Chairman.

Mr. ROYCE of California. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 4744) to impose additional sanctions with respect to serious human rights abuses of the Government of Iran, and for other purposes, as amended.

Mr. ROYCE of California. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and to include any extraneous material on H.R. 4744, currently under consideration.

Mr. ROYCE of California. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. ROYCE of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. McCaul), chairman of the Committee on Homeland Security and the author of this bill.

Mr. ROYCE of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Ros-Lehtinen), who chairs the Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on the Middle East and North Africa.

Mr. ROYCE of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Poe), chairman of the Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on Terrorism, Nonproliferation, and Trade.

Mr. ROYCE of California

Mr. ROYCE of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. LaHood), the author of this resolution.

Mr. ROYCE of California

Mr. ROYCE of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, let me thank the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Ros- Lehtinen), the chairman emeritus of our committee, for her tireless work advocating on behalf of Holocaust survivors. Let me say at the outset here that no one in Congress, no one in this Congress, has done more to advocate on behalf of survivors than Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, and I believe that to be true through her entire tenure in this body. Let me also explain the thoughts, as explained to us, behind our Senate colleagues that put together the JUST Act. From their standpoint, from their vantage point, the JUST Act is a simple reporting requirement to assess the progress of signatories to the 2009 Terezin Declaration on Holocaust era assets and related issues. The goal there, of course, was to fulfill the principles in that declaration. A lot of time and effort went into trying to leverage that agreement out of 46 countries that agreed to these principles. Now, here is the point; here is where we have a difference of opinion: of those 46 countries, some of them are falling woefully short of their commitments. Here are the conflict divisions. Some are saying, many are saying: Look, we need to put pressure on them. The Senate unanimously came to the conclusion that a way to do that is with this bill, because what the legislation does is to ensure that there is an accountability mechanism of checking adherence to the declaration principles and to making sure that it doesn't fall by the wayside by bringing accountability to those countries that don't. The injustices of the Holocaust, frankly, here today, those injustices are too many to name. Many are unaddressed in that declaration, and I concur from that standpoint. But, at the same time, we need to continue pushing to right the full spectrum of these wrongs. Before us we have a bill which will bring much leverage. We cannot lose the headway that we have made toward compensating survivors and families for what was rightfully theirs. Our partners have already agreed to the restitution principles in the declaration. A formal report that shows who has fallen short and how, it is argued by our colleagues in the Senate, would be a powerful instrument for the U.S. Government to push for changes. From my standpoint, I understand the arguments being made by the Senate. It does not mean that we should not go forward to make other points. But the argument they make to us is let's give the State Department the tools it needs to ensure accountability. This is an argument that, on both sides of the aisle, the preponderance of Members here, I think, concur with. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. ROYCE of California. Mr. Speaker, I continue to reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. ROYCE of California. Mr. Speaker, I continue to reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. ROYCE of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, we have been contacted on behalf of the JUST Act by a number of organizations in support of the Senate bill. The major American Jewish organizations supporting this measure are the American Jewish Committee, the Anti-Defamation League, the Jewish Federations of North America, the B'nai B'rith, the HIAS refugee assistance organization, Union for Reform Judaism, Orthodox Union, World Jewish Restitution Organization, and others; and they have argued that the Justice for Uncompensated Survivors Today Act, or JUST Act, as the Senate calls it, is a measure that will have an outsized impact in encouraging countries to continue working to make amends for the evils of the Holocaust. That is what drove the Senate to pass this bill. Now, just to go into the details again a little bit: it was in 2009 that representatives of this country and 40 other countries agreed to a set of principles to address the welfare of survivors, to address Holocaust education, and to address issues related to restitution for seized property, among other issues. Now, that is what these 40 nations committed to. So 10 years have passed, approximately, and it is time that we take stock of the work under way because, while a number of these partner countries have made great strides to uphold their commitments under the agreement, you and I know--everybody here knows--that some countries have fallen short. And this legislation, which charges the State Department with the responsibility for this important report--and let's call it naming and shaming; that is basically what is intended here--gives the United States another tool to seek justice for Holocaust survivors, to seek justice for the families of Holocaust victims. And it is our hope that passing this bill will motivate improvements even before the report is penned. Already we have seen some of these countries overseas renew their engagement on this issue, and that is the leverage that we want to deploy. It is a devastating issue to even begin a discussion because we can never compensate Holocaust survivors truly for the unbelievable horror and devastation that they suffered. But from the perspective of most of the organizations that have talked to us about the bill, their point would be: We can try. We can try to restore what is rightfully theirs. And part of the trying, from their standpoint, is to shed light on the efforts, or lack thereof, that other countries are making. And this bill does that. It unanimously passed the Senate for that reason. Mr. Speaker, I thank all the Members here who participated today in the debate over this very difficult issue, and I yield back the balance of my time.