Ed Royce

Mr. ROYCE

Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Russell), the author of this legislation.

Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 583, I call up the bill (H.R. 3662) to enhance congressional oversight over the administration of sanctions against certain Iranian terrorism financiers, and for other purposes, and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and to submit any extraneous materials on this measure.

Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I appreciate all the Members who have engaged in this debate. As Ranking Member Engel noted, this is not usually the place we find ourselves. What we have seen from Iran over the last few months is that the Iranian threat isn't going away. So we will have to keep working together to address the Iranian threat, and I look forward to that continuing collaboration. As the Iran nuclear agreement gets set for implementation, some 500 specific individuals and companies and several banks are set to get relief for their ties to the nuclear program. This bill simply asks the President to ensure that those receiving this reprieve are not involved in Iran's support for terrorism, nor are they involved in the missile development program that Iran continues to push for intercontinental ballistic missiles. Soon, maybe in a matter of days, Iran will get access to over $100 billion in frozen oil assets, and this is not going to go to the Iranians on the street. This is not going to go to small business in Iran, to those that despise their government. It is going to go to the regime. It is going to go to the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps. The reason it would work that way is because that is the entity that nationalized these businesses years ago, after 1979. They are the ones that right now control approximately a quarter of the entire economy, including the major businesses, such as, for example, energy or construction. If we look at what the U.S. Department of Treasury says about this, they labeled the IRGC as the ``most powerful economic actor'' in the country. So this entity has deep reach into those critical sectors of the economic infrastructure, as the Treasury Department tells us. The IRGC's largest business is its construction arm, which controls 800 affiliated companies and billions of dollars in assets. These activities, in turn--and here is the problem, here is the nexus of the problem--fund Iran's ballistic missile program. What we had hoped for was, of course, to temper the appetite of the regime to move forward with that ICBM program. Instead what we see is a huge step-up several weeks ago as the President of Iran announced this huge step-up. Now we see these ICBMs that are being launched and tested. We also see the military activities, the regional aggression, the call for the overthrow of the governments in Yemen, which they actually carried out in Bahrain, and in Saudi Arabia. This is a huge problem because the IRGC are doing this. Now, during our hearings, Members expressed concerns that there would be no pushback from the administration when it comes to Iran's aggressive behavior. This has, unfortunately, proven correct. The response to two ballistic missile tests? The administration proposed a few modest sanctions. We were all notified about that. What happened? As soon as Iran pushed back, what happened? The administration pulled them back. The Iranian President, Hassan Rouhani, ordered his Defense Ministry to accelerate its missile program just weeks after the Obama administration joined with his diplomatic partners to sweep Iran's past illicit nuclear weapons activities under the rug. Again, countries pursue ICBMs for one reason: to deliver a nuclear warhead. I ask for an ``aye'' vote. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Trott), a member of the Committee on Foreign Affairs.

Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Shimkus), the chairman of the Committee on Energy and Commerce's Subcommittee on the Environment and the Economy. (Mr. SHIMKUS asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Roskam), a member of the Committee on Ways and Means, and the cosponsor of this bill.

Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Utah (Mr. Stewart), a member of the Committee on Appropriations and of the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence.

Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I want to recognize Congressman Russell for his work on this legislation, the Iran Terror Finance Transparency Act. I think we should all reflect on the reason for this resolution, one of the reasons, and that is that, since the Obama administration sealed the nuclear deal with Iran, Iran has been on a bit of a tear. It has accelerated its missile program at the request of President Rouhani. It has taken an additional American hostage. It has stepped up the slaughter in Syria. Days after that agreement was finalized, you had Iranian rockets firing 1,500 yards off the U.S. aircraft carrier Truman. And just yesterday, Iran detained 10 U.S. sailors, which was not appreciated, especially coming on the aftermath of firing those rockets near the Truman. Now, we are all relieved to learn this morning that the sailors have been released. Yet, in what could be a matter of days, Iran will cash in with $100 billion-plus in sanctions relief of money which is now in escrow. And I am sure it has occurred to many of us that if Iran behaves this way now, in a few days, when it gets its hands on this bankroll, especially given the fact that that money is going to the IRGC, not to the Iranian people, what other actions are we going to see from the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps? We had a story this weekend, front page, in the weekend edition of The Wall Street Journal, and the headline of that story is ``Nuclear Deal Fuels Iran's Hard-Liners.'' Iran's hard-liners will be the biggest winner out of this. The Revolutionary Guards, the same radical forces that held these 10 U.S. sailors, that force and their proxies control many of the industries that will benefit from the influx of hard currency and new investment. Whether it is energy or construction, they control it. This ICBM program, they control it. Just as many of us warned prior to this deal about the appetite for enforcement, once this deal gets underway, there is no pushback from the administration on this. Since the nuclear deal, Iran has tested two ballistic missiles. Now, that is in violation of the U.N. Security Council resolution. This administration's response was to announce and then abandon new sanctions within a very short timeframe, apparently to not offend the Supreme Leader, to not risk its flawed nuclear deal. When it comes to Iran, we need a policy of more backbone, not more backing down, because it was not supposed to be this way with this deal. In announcing the nuclear deal, President Obama claimed that American sanctions on Iran for its support of terrorism, its human rights abuses, and its ballistic missile program will continue to be fully enforced. Those were the President's words, and just after that, with Secretary Kerry's argument testifying before the Foreign Affairs Committee. This legislation is a first step in holding the administration to these commitments. Under the bill, before the President can lift sanctions on a particular person or bank or company to implement the nuclear deal, he must certify that their removal is related to Iran's nuclear program alone. That is who we were told would be getting the sanctions relief--not those tied to terrorism, not those tied to Iran's ballistic missile or other illicit weapons programs that were under sanction from the U.N. resolutions. When the Treasury Department sanctioned Bank Melli in 2007, it noted that the institution had provided banking services to the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps and the Quds Force. The Quds Force is in charge of assassinations outside of Iran. As we all know, the Revolutionary Guards have committed acts of terrorism and committed those missile tests that we just recently saw. Why, then, is this bank set to receive sanctions relief in the coming days? Bank Sepah, one of Iran's largest banks, will be another big winner of sanctions relief in the coming days. When that bank was designated, and that was January of 2007, then-Treasury Under Secretary Stuart Levey noted with this argument: ``Bank Sepah is the financial linchpin of Iran's missile procurement network.'' What we have to think about here is there is one reason--one reason-- why a state develops ICBMs. It is to deliver a nuclear payload. It is to deliver a weapon. So, he says it is the financial linchpin and ``has actively assisted Iran's pursuit of missiles capable of carrying weapons of mass destruction.'' Indeed, Iran's ballistic missile program is advancing under President Rouhani. He just called for the program to be accelerated. That is what we have in the face of this agreement. We should not be letting this bank off the ropes, opening it for business from Europe to Asia. To be clear, those Iranian banks and individuals not supporting terrorism and not supporting ICBMs can be delisted--that was what was originally represented to this Congress--but not those threatening our national security, and not those making threats to us while the Ayatollah is saying ``death to America,'' ``death to Israel.'' That is what this legislation does, and it is the policy that the administration explained to this House. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time. House of Representatives, Committee on Financial Services, Washington, DC, January 8, 2016. Hon. Ed Royce, Chairman, Committee on Foreign Affairs, Washington, DC. Dear Chairman Royce: I am writing concerning H.R. 757, the North Korea Sanctions Enforcement Act of 2015, and H.R. 3662, the Iran Terror Finance Transparency Act, both of which were referred to the Committee on Financial Services in addition to your Committee. As a result of your having consulted with the Committee on Financial Services concerning provisions of the bills that fall within our Rule X jurisdiction, I agree to discharge our Committee from further consideration of the bills so that they may proceed expeditiously to the House Floor. The Committee on Financial Services takes this action with our mutual understanding that, by foregoing consideration of H.R. 757 and H.R. 3662 at this time, we do not waive any jurisdiction over the subject matter contained in this or similar legislation, and that our Committee will be appropriately consulted and involved as this or similar legislation moves forward so that we may address any remaining issues that fall within our Rule X jurisdiction. Our 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 any such request. Finally, I would appreciate your response to this letter confirming this understanding with respect to H.R. 757 and H.R. 3662 and would ask that a copy of our exchange of letters on this matter be included in your Committee's report to accompany the legislation and in the Congressional Record during floor consideration thereof. Sincerely, Jeb Hensarling, Chairman.

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

Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Lance), who is the cosponsor of this legislation.

Mr. ROYCE. I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Russell), author of this legislation.

Mr. ROYCE

Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Speaker, I submit the following exchange of letters between myself and the Chairman of the Committee on Homeland Security regarding H.R. 757, the North Korea Sanctions Enforcement Act. January 12, 2016. Hon. Michael McCaul, Chairman, Committee on Homeland Security, Washington, DC. Dear Chairman McCaul: Thank you for consulting with the Committee on Foreign Affairs on H.R. 757, the North Korea Sanctions Enforcement Act, and for agreeing to forgo a sequential referral request so that the bill may proceed expeditiously to the Floor. I agree that your forgoing further action on this measure does not in any way diminish or alter the jurisdiction of the Committee on Homeland Security, or prejudice its jurisdictional prerogatives on this bill or similar legislation in the future. I will seek to place our letters on H.R. 757 into the Congressional Record. I appreciate your cooperation regarding this legislation and look forward to continuing to work with your Committee as this measure moves through the legislative process. Sincerely, Edward R. Royce, Chairman.

Mr. ROYCE

Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Smith), chairman of the Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on Africa, Global Health, Global Human Rights, and International Organizations.

Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 757) to improve the enforcement of sanctions against the Government of North Korea, and for other purposes, as amended.

Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and to include extraneous materials on this resolution.

Mr. ROYCE. I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate Leader McCarthy working with myself, working with Ranking Member Eliot Engel of New York to schedule this legislation for floor consideration. Last week, North Korea conducted its fourth known nuclear test. The Kim regime has developed increasingly destructive weapons. What we are concerned about here is the miniaturization of nuclear warheads that fit onto its most reliable missiles. We are also concerned about the submarine tests for firing from a sub these missiles that would be capable of launching those devices. We are concerned about the ongoing efforts to make certain that they have got the range now on a three-stage rocket, ICBM, to hit the United States. This threat is unacceptable, and it has to be aggressively challenged. The legislation that we are considering here is the most comprehensive North Korea sanctions legislation to come before this body. Importantly, what this bill does is use targeted financial and economic pressure to isolate Kim Jong-un and his top officials from the assets that they maintain in foreign banks and from the hard currency that sustains their rule. These assets are derived primarily from illicit activities, such as counterfeiting U.S. currency, something that North Korea has been caught doing with hundred-dollar bank notes, such as selling their missile systems around the world, contraband in cigarettes, drugs, and other illicit activities. And all of that is used to advance North Korea's nuclear program. They also pay for the luxurious lifestyle of the ruling elites, as we have seen in some of the exposes that come out of North Korea, and it is used to repress the people. In other words, the money from that hard currency pays for the generals, pays for the secret police, pays for the missile program and the nuclear weapons program. A strategy of financial pressure is the approach we took a decade ago when the previous administration targeted Banco Delta Asia. That was a Macao-based bank. This was in 2005. They were targeted for their role in laundering money for North Korea, and this cut it off from the financial system, really. This led other banks in the region to shun North Korean business, because when the option is out there between whether or not you are going to bank with North Korea or bank with the U.S. and the rest of the world, it is a fairly easy choice for these banks to make. At that point, they freeze the accounts, and that, obviously, isolates the regime. At that time, according to one former top U.S. official who was speaking to the issue of what the North Koreans would say when they would come into the meetings with the State Department, at every conversation we had with the North Koreans, he said, every one of them began and ended with the same question: ``When do we get our money back?'' Now, the part that got my interest at the time was not only the report that, because he couldn't pay his generals, there were problems for the regime--it is not a good position for a dictator to be in--but also that missile production lines had come to a halt because they couldn't buy on the black market; they didn't have the hard currency anymore to do it, the parts that they needed for their programs. Unfortunately, the pressure at the time was lifted. I think it was lifted prematurely for certain because the representation was made that Kim Jong Il was going to make concessions on his nuclear program, concessions that ultimately were never made. From my standpoint, what a mistake. From the standpoint of the people I talk to over at Treasury, what a mistake. They had a different vision on how those sanctions should be maintained. Today, the Obama administration has let its North Korea policy drift. A year ago, it promised a proportional response to the massive cyber terrorist attack against the United States. But to date, the administration's response has been dangerously weak. A mere 18 low- level arms dealers have been sanctioned. That has been it. Failing to respond to North Korea's belligerence, I think, only emboldens their leader. Disrupting North Korea's illicit activities will place tremendous strain on that country's ruling elite who have so brutalized the people of North Korea. I spoke to the defector who used to run their propaganda machinery about this. He defected through China. And he discussed this issue. He said: Look, that hard currency goes, not to the people; it goes for the military apparatus and the political apparatus of the regime. So we have got to go after those illicit activities like we went after organized crime in the United States: identify the network, interdict shipments, disrupt the flow of money. North Korea, after all, has been called a ``gangster regime.'' You have seen that term in the press. Well, it is pretty apt. This regime is a critical threat, frankly, to our national security. Under this bill's framework, anyone laundering money, counterfeiting goods, smuggling, or trafficking narcotics will be subject to significant sanctions. It is also important to remember the deplorable state of human rights in North Korea. Two years ago, a U.N. Commission of Inquiry released the most comprehensive report on North Korea to date, finding that the Kim regime ``has for decades,'' in their words, ``pursued policies involving crimes that shock the conscience of humanity.'' So this bill requires the State Department to use this report's findings to identify the individuals responsible for these abuses and to press for more ways in which to get information into North Korea so as to move the attitudes of the population inside the country. Mr. Speaker, a return to the strategy of effective financial pressure on North Korea is our best bet to end North Korea's threat to its own people, to our South Korean allies, and ultimately to us. I reserve the balance of my time. House of Representatives, Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, Washington, DC, February 26, 2015. Hon. Ed Royce, Chairman, Committee on Foreign Affairs, Washington, DC. Dear Mr. Chairman: I write concerning H.R. 757, the North Korea Sanctions Enforcement Act of 2015. As you know, the Committee on Foreign Affairs received an original referral and the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform a secondary referral when the bill was introduced on February 5, 2015. I recognize and appreciate your desire to bring this legislation before the House of Representatives in an expeditious manner, and accordingly, the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform will forego action on the bill. The Committee takes this action with our mutual understanding that by foregoing consideration of H.R. 757 at this time, we do not waive any jurisdiction over the subject matter contained in this or similar legislation. Further, I request your support for the appointment of conferees from the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform during any House-Senate conference convened on this or related legislation. Finally, I would ask that a copy of our exchange of letters on this matter be included in the bill report filed by the Committee on Foreign Affairs, as well as in the Congressional Record during floor consideration, to memorialize our understanding. Sincerely, Jason Chaffetz, Chairman.

Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 1 minute to the gentlewoman.

Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Poe), chairman of the Subcommittee on Terrorism, Nonproliferation, and Trade of the Committee on Foreign Affairs. He is also an original cosponsor with me on this legislation.

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

Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. We have the opportunity today to show Americans and the world that Congress is willing to lead on this vital national security issue. This is an issue that Congress has been focused on, obviously, for some time. I have spent much of my time on the Foreign Affairs Committee focused on the North Korean threat. Ranking Member Eliot Engel and I, in one of our first trips together as chairman and ranking member of the committee, traveled to visit our South Korean ally and toured the wreckage of the Cheonan. This was a corvette ship that was hit and split right in half by a torpedo fired by a North Korean submarine, costing the lives of 46 sailors. It is a reminder of the attitude that North Korea has in terms of its provocative action. Both Eliot Engel and I have been to North Korea on separate trips, and we can tell you it is a totalitarian state with an ever-present cult of personalities. If you have ever read Orwell's book, ``Nineteen Eighty-Four,'' the society in that book seemed almost more rational than this police state. I was talking to the former Minister of Propaganda. In the no-go areas, 1.9 million were starved to death in North Korea. You ask why. Well, with the paranoia of the police state, they are not considered particularly loyal out there. Besides, the food can be sold on the food exchange in the capital for hard currency. Donated food often is used in this way to support what he calls ``juche,'' to support this philosophy which leads them forward with this desire to have a nuclear weapon and the capability to deliver it. This bipartisan bill, which I authored with Eliot Engel as our principal coauthor, is based on legislation that unanimously passed the House last Congress. Its implementation will help sever a key subsidy for North Korea's weapons of mass destruction program, for only when the North Korean leadership realizes that its criminal activities are untenable do prospects for peace and security in Northeast Asia improve. This bill will return us to the one strategy that has worked to pressure North Korea at a time when Kim Jong-un is trying to blackmail his way to consolidating power. Congress must send the message to the Kim regime that they can either reform and disarm or the system can implode. Without hard currency, without being able to pay the generals, that system would implode. By cutting off Kim Jong-un's access to the hard currency he needs for his army and his weapons, this bill, H.R. 757, will squarely present the North Korean regime with that choice. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Ros-Lehtinen), chairman emeritus of the Committee on Foreign Affairs and author of multiple North Korea human rights and sanctions laws. She is also a cosponsor of this bill.

Mr. ROYCE

Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Speaker, on roll call nos. 21 & 22, I was unavoidably detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yea.''

Mr. ROYCE

Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Smith), the chairman of the Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on Africa, Global Health, Global Human Rights, and International Organizations.