John Ratcliffe

Mr. RATCLIFFE

Mr. RATCLIFFE. Mr. Chair, while I respect the gentlewoman's service and the spirit in which she offers this amendment, this amendment carves out of the bill national security regulations from the Department of Homeland Security. As we all know, Mr. Chair, the Department of Homeland Security is an agency that has a long record of significant, unconstitutional regulatory overreach. To that end, we should be strengthening the courts' ability to check that, not weakening it, as the gentlewoman's amendment would do. Again, no area of regulation is so important that we should allow unelected bureaucrats to avoid the vigorous system of checks and balances that our Framers intended and that this bill would restore; so I urge opposition to this amendment. Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. RATCLIFFE. Mr. Chairman, I oppose the amendment. This is an amendment which carves out of the bill regulations issued by the Department of Housing and Urban Development. Mr. Chairman, there is no basis upon which to single out HUD as an agency to which courts should defer on questions of statutory and regulatory interpretation. To the contrary, HUD has proven that it can overreach just as egregiously, just as oppressively as any other agency, and, therefore, needs just as strong a check and balance from the courts like any other agency. Mr. Chairman, like too many of its sister agencies, HUD is attempting to use Federal regulation to unconstitutionally assert control over wide swaths of American life. To see this, one need look no further than HUD's controversial regulation in 2015 that threatens to federalize local zoning authority. That regulation would withhold Federal funding if municipalities all across the land don't actively work to change residential patterns that don't conform to the desires of HUD bureaucrats. The regulation is a major extension of HUD's authority. It challenges local, neutral zoning policies merely because they produce uneven effects across population groups. And the use of the withholding of Federal funds to make localities knuckle under to HUD's dictates is an attempt to extort local communities into giving up control of local zoning decisions that have traditionally been theirs under the Constitution. A decision like HUD's is precisely the kind of decision in a democracy that should be made by accountable, elected representatives of the people, not by the fiat of bureaucrats emboldened by smug claims to Chevron deference from the courts. I urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. RATCLIFFE. Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. RATCLIFFE. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition.

Mr. RATCLIFFE. Mr. Chairman, I oppose this amendment. It is an amendment which carves out of my bill agency action based on statutes that expressly grant agency discretion. As agencies seek to act within areas of statutory discretion, courts are more than able, more than qualified to determine responsibly whether the agencies have, in fact, acted within their discretion. Furthermore, Mr. Chairman, it is imperative that courts no longer defer to agencies, in defining as a matter of statutory interpretation, precisely what the limits of that discretion are. Otherwise, self- serving, unelected, and unaccountable bureaucrats will continue to interpret statutes in such a way as to intentionally empower agency overreach, and the courts will continue to stand idly by and let them get away with it. I urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. RATCLIFFE. I will again urge opposition to the amendment. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. RATCLIFFE. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition.

Mr. RATCLIFFE. Mr. Chairman, I oppose this amendment, which carves out of the bill consumer safety regulations from the Food and Drug Administration. While this is an important area of regulation, unfortunately, it is yet another area which has been riddled with bureaucratic overreach by unelected, unaccountable bureaucrats and their erroneous whims and political agendas. Mr. Chairman, we should strengthen the courts' ability to check these types of overreaching and erroneous statutory and regulatory interpretations, not weaken them, as this amendment would do. I urge opposition to the amendment. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. RATCLIFFE. Mr. Chairman, I again urge opposition to the amendment. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. RATCLIFFE

Mr. RATCLIFFE. Mr. 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 the bill under consideration.

Mr. RATCLIFFE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, as part of Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy's Innovation Initiative, I am very pleased to bring two important bills to the floor today that further the leader's efforts for ensuring that government can more effectively leverage cutting-edge cyber technologies. As chairman of the Cybersecurity, Infrastructure Protection, and Security Technologies Subcommittee, my colleagues and I have been working diligently with technology innovators, including tech startups, to find solutions that will help spur innovation and break down bureaucratic barriers that are currently preventing government from leveraging the private sector's emerging technologies. Mr. Speaker, I am grateful that the House is first considering H.R. 5388, the Support for Rapid Innovation Act of 2016, on the floor today. H.R. 5388 requires the Department of Homeland Security's Science and Technology Directorate, or S&T, to more effectively coordinate with industry and academia to support the research and development of cybersecurity technologies. H.R. 5388 requires S&T to support the full lifecycle of cyber research and development projects and to identify mature technologies to address cybersecurity gaps. In doing so, S&T must target federally funded cybersecurity research that demonstrates a high probability of successful transition to the commercial market within 2 years. This bill also extends the use of other transaction authority, or OTA, until the year 2020, which will improve DHS' ability to engage tech startups that are developing these cutting-edge technologies. Finally, Mr. Speaker, H.R. 5388 also includes important accountability requirements to ensure that there will be proper oversight of the authority. In December of last year, the House passed H.R. 3578, the Science and Technology Reform and Improvement Act. That bill included provisions similar to those in the bill that we are considering today. Mr. Speaker, over the last several years, we have seen evolving cybersecurity threats from nation-states, including China, Russia, North Korea, and Iran, as well as cyber threats from criminal organizations and terrorist groups like ISIS. Cyber criminals continue to develop even more cutting-edge cyber capabilities. In 2016, these hackers pose an even greater threat to the U.S. homeland and our critical infrastructure. The Federal Government desperately needs to keep pace with these evolving threats and more actively work with the private sector to find solutions. Mr. Speaker, the Department of Homeland Security's Directorate of Science and Technology is the primary research and development arm of the Department and, because the Directorate manages basic and applied research and development, including cybersecurity R&D for the Department's operational components and first responders, ensuring that there are mechanisms in place like S&T's cybersecurity research and development programs and OTA to support the dynamic nature of the cybersecurity research and development is both vital and essential for addressing Homeland Security capability gaps. Thank you again, Mr. Speaker, for calling up this important bill today because I am convinced that it will have an incredibly positive impact on encouraging technology innovation across the Nation to address our evolving homeland security needs. Mr. Speaker, I urge all Members to join me in supporting this bill, and I reserve the balance of my time. House of Representatives, Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, Washington, DC, June 20, 2016. Hon. Michael T. McCaul, Chairman, Committee on Homeland Security, House of Representatives, Washington, DC. Dear Mr. Chairman: I am writing concerning H.R. 5388, the ``Support for Rapid Innovation Act of 2016,'' which your Committee reported on June 8, 2016. H.R. 5388 contains provisions within the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology's rule X jurisdiction. As a result of your having consulted with the Committee and in order to expedite this bill for floor consideration, the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology will forego action on the bill. This is being done on the basis of our mutual understanding that doing so will in no way diminish or alter the jurisdiction of the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology with respect to the appointment of conferees, or to any future jurisdictional claim over the subject matters contained in the bill or similar legislation. I would appreciate your response to this letter confirming this understanding, and would request that you include a copy of this letter and your response in the Committee Report and in the Congressional Record during the floor consideration of this bill. Thank you in advance for your cooperation. Sincerely, Lamar Smith, Chairman.

Mr. RATCLIFFE. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 5388) to amend the Homeland Security Act of 2002 to provide for innovative research and development, and for other purposes.

Mr. RATCLIFFE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished gentleman from California (Mr. McCarthy), the majority leader.

Mr. RATCLIFFE. Mr. Speaker, I once again urge all of my colleagues to support H.R. 5388, and I yield back the balance of my time.

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

Mr. RATCLIFFE

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

Mr. RATCLIFFE. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and include any extraneous materials on the bill under consideration.

Mr. RATCLIFFE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support and I am very pleased that the House is considering H.R. 5389, the Leveraging Emerging Technologies Act of 2016. H.R. 5389 encourages engagement between the Department of Homeland Security and technology innovators, including tech startups. This important bill requires the Secretary of Homeland Security to proactively engage with innovative and emerging technology developers and firms to address homeland security needs. More specifically, H.R. 5389 provides the Secretary authority to identify geographic areas in the United States where high concentrations of innovative and emerging technology developers and firms exist and to establish personnel and office space in these areas to more effectively collaborate with these technology hubs. The Federal Government needs to do a better job working with the private sector, and this bill will support that goal by requiring the Secretary to develop and implement a targeted strategy to proactively engage innovative and emerging technology developers and firms. The Secretary must use this strategic plan to address and to reduce barriers to leveraging innovative and emerging technologies and the small business and startup ventures that create those technologies by incorporating them into the Department's acquisition process. In order to keep pace, the Department of Homeland Security recently established an office in Silicon Valley to encourage engagement and communication with the innovative technology developers in that area. Although a vital technology hub, Silicon Valley is not the only technology hub in the United States. For that reason, the Department should not be limited to a single geographic area from which to identify emerging and innovative technologies. Mr. Speaker, we are all learning that cybersecurity is national security. The Nation is under constant cyber attack from nation-states, from criminal groups, and from terrorist organizations, and, with each passing day, the attacks and tools that they are using are becoming more sophisticated. Requiring the Department to consider strategically how it will engage these technology developers will strengthen the Department's ability to access innovative and emerging technologies in order to combat these evolving threats. I am happy to support this measure today and believe it will move us toward further addressing homeland security needs by supporting technology innovation. Before I close, I include in the Record an exchange between the chairman of the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology and the chairman of the Committee on Homeland Security. Mr. Speaker, I urge all Members to join me in supporting this bill, and I reserve the balance of my time. House of Representatives, Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, Washington, DC, June 20, 2016. Hon. Michael T. McCaul, Chairman, Committee on Homeland Security, House of Representatives, Washington, DC. Dear Mr. Chairman: I am writing concerning H.R. 5389, the ``Leveraging Emerging Technologies Act of 2016,'' which your Committee reported on June 8, 2016. H.R. 5389 contains provisions within the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology's Rule X jurisdiction. As a result of your having consulted with the Committee and in order to expedite this bill for floor consideration, the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology will forego action on the bill. This is being done on the basis of our mutual understanding that doing so will in no way diminish or alter the jurisdiction of the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology with respect to the appointment of conferees, or to any future jurisdictional claim over the subject matters contained in the bill or similar legislation. I would appreciate your response to this letter confirming this understanding, and would request that you include a copy of this letter and your response in the Committee Report and in the Congressional Record during the floor consideration of this bill. Thank you in advance for your cooperation. Sincerely, Lamar Smith, Chairman.

Mr. RATCLIFFE. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 5389) to encourage engagement between the Department of Homeland Security and technology innovators, and for other purposes.

Mr. RATCLIFFE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Mississippi for cosponsoring this bill and for his leadership in this area. I, once again, urge my colleagues to support H.R. 5389. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. RATCLIFFE

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

Mr. RATCLIFFE. Mr. Chairman, I would like to thank Chairman Dent and Ranking Member Bishop for their hard work on behalf of servicemembers and veterans all across the country. The Ratcliffe-MacArthur-Bost amendment that I am offering today with my colleagues, the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. MacArthur) and the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Bost), will prohibit any funds made available in this act from being used to propose, plan for, or execute a new or additional round of base realignment and closure, or BRAC. My congressional district in northeast Texas is home to the Red River Army Depot, which has maintained a steadfast commitment to supporting America's Armed Forces since 1941. While the depot has endured many challenges over the years, it has remained dedicated to fulfilling its motto: ``We build it as if our lives depend on it. Theirs do.'' Not only is the depot a vital job creator, employing more than 5,000 people in northeast Texas and southern Arkansas, it is a critical component of our national defense. The depot acts as an insurance policy for America's security, one capable of bolstering production in a manner that simply can't be duplicated by civilian industries. So the need for this amendment is clear. In a fiscal environment where every penny is carefully scrutinized, we have to ensure that taxpayer dollars truly address our national security needs, and another round of BRAC certainly won't help us achieve this important goal. In addition to jeopardizing our defense readiness, BRAC has proven to be incredibly expensive. According to the Government Accountability Office, the last round of BRAC in 2005 cost the American taxpayers a whopping $35.1 billion. At the same time, the expected savings from the last round of BRAC haven't materialized, and those promised savings have since been revised downward by 73 percent. Mr. Chairman, at a time when the terror threat level hovers at an all-time high, it is especially important that we do everything possible to ensure that our military is prepared for the call of duty. The amendment that I have introduced today does just that. I urge my colleagues to support it on behalf of the safety of our Armed Forces and the American people. I yield to the chairman.

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

Mr. RATCLIFFE

Mr. RATCLIFFE. Mr. Speaker, I once again urge my colleagues to support Mr. Zeldin's bill, H.R. 1887. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. RATCLIFFE

Mr. RATCLIFFE. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include any extraneous material on the bill under consideration.