Brad Sherman

Mr. SHERMAN

Mr. SHERMAN. Absolutely.

Mr. SHERMAN. I have long advocated for a unicameral legislature.

Mr. SHERMAN. If I can comment on that further?

Mr. SHERMAN. The Senate has addressed this issue, and they have discussed the bill. Most of the commentary has been positive. There was a recent hearing. In particular, I believe that Mr. Toomey had a concern that somehow this bill would influence future instruments and that somehow regulators would be pushing banks, particularly smaller banks, to use SOFR in the instruments they draft in the future. That is why the report that accompanies this bill makes it excruciatingly clear that nothing in this bill authorizes, directs, encourages, or allows a regulator to point to this bill and say: Now, bank, you need to use SOFR in the instruments used in the future. Nothing in this bill authorizes a regulator to push or give a preference to any other regulation. The report language was drafted with Senator Toomey in mind.

Mr. SHERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I will simply comment again, for the record. This bill deals with tough legacy LIBOR instruments drafted in the past, and nothing in it-- and you can look at every word of all 22 pages--nothing in it would allow anyone to say you have got to use SOFR, or you ought to use SOFR, or we give you a preference to use SOFR, or any other benchmark in any instrument you draft in the future. And just in case that wasn't excruciatingly clear, we put it in the report as well. Mr. Speaker, I believe I have the right to close. I have no other speakers, so I will reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. SHERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I am prepared to close. As to the process, we have had a dozen hearings with the top financial officials in the U.S. Government over a period of 2 or 3 years at the full committee, in which it was appropriate and, in my case, I used this opportunity to bring up the LIBOR issue. They have testified again and again that we need Federal legislation. Then the six regulatory agencies involved each have reviewed this down to the comma, and we have had discussions, down to the comma. They have helped us draft legislation. My hope is that we not only pass this legislation today, but that my Republican colleagues help me pass this bill through the Senate in the current form. You want a form that reflects the regulators? Every comma reflects what the regulators would like to see. It is important that this bill not be held up in the Senate by those who want to change existing law and say, well, not only should this act not allow a regulator to push a bank toward this or that index, but if any other law gives the regulators the power to do that, we should strip that authority from them. That is not the purpose of this bill. If somebody wants a bill titled, regulators shouldn't be pushed to telling banks what to do on indexes, I will work with the gentleman, if he wants to, on a freedom to pick your own index bill. This is a bill to just deal with LIBOR. So my hope is that we will have Republican House Members who urge the Senate to move quickly because, yes, it would have been better to deal with this issue 2\1/2\ years in advance. We have dealt with it 1\1/2\ years in advance; a full hearing, a full markup, a full opportunity for anyone to submit amendments at that full markup, and a dozen hearings, at which it was appropriate to address questions--at least I did--of the top officials in our country dealing with financial matters about the importance of LIBOR. This bill is important because it deals with $16 trillion of instruments where we will not be able to calculate how much the borrower must pay the lender after June 30 of 2023 unless we pass this bill. This is a consensus product. The consumer and public interest groups, the business groups, the regulators, and we are passing it and need to pass it expeditiously so that we deal with this issue long before it disrupts our financial markets. Mr. Speaker, I urge its adoption, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. SHERMAN

Mr. SHERMAN. Madam Speaker, may I inquire how much time I have remaining.

Mr. SHERMAN. Madam Speaker, I rise in support of the Sherman-Waters amendment, No. 746. Madam Speaker, for quite some time, Chairwoman Waters and I have been in favor of strong sanctions against Russia for interference in our elections. Now, I don't want this to be partisan. There is this idea that only Democrats care about protecting our elections from Russian interference. That is not the case. When the Senate was controlled by Republicans, the Senate Intelligence Committee issued a report stating: ``The Russian Government engaged in an aggressive, multifaceted effort to influence, or attempt to influence, the outcome of the 2016 Presidential election.'' But there are those who think that perhaps President Trump did not believe that Russia tried to influence our elections. Putting aside 2016, what did the Trump administration say about our 2018 election? On September 30, 2019, the Trump Treasury Department announced sanctions in response to Russian interference in our 2018 election, and then the Trump administration imposed sanctions on a ``Russian agent'' for trying to influence our 2020 election. Partisanship stops at the water's edge. We need to stop Russia from interfering in our elections. Both parties have imposed sanctions on Russia for doing so. The question is how we make those sanctions effective. Existing sanctions apply to the purchase of sovereign debt--this is debt issued by the Russian Government--but only when you are acting as the underwriter, not purchases in the secondary market. That is ineffective. In May of this year, the Russian Deputy Finance Minister told us that when he said sanctions-imposed restrictions don't cover the secondary market and so they are going to be ineffective or, in his words: ``So we don't expect the share of nonresidents to move far from the current levels.'' We need to listen to the Russian Deputy Finance Minister as to how to make the sanctions that both Democrats and Republicans agree on more effective. The sanctions imposed here will raise the cost of borrowing of the Russian Government by between half a percent and three-quarters of a percent based on a rating by ACRA. Further, it is good economic policy. We have a scarce amount of investment capital in the United States. I want to see it invested in American businesses, either in stock or as loans by our banks and others to our companies. Can anybody make the argument that we are worse off if money is invested in American companies instead of being lent to Vladimir Putin? There is no credible argument as to why American pension plans, asset managers, and households should be funding the Russian Government at a time when, in 2016, 2018, and 2020, both parties and former President Trump realized that Russia was interfering in our elections and deserves to be sanctioned. Let's make those sanctions effective by adopting this amendment. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. SHERMAN. Madam Speaker, I rise to offer and support the amendment.

Mr. SHERMAN. Madam Speaker, I see no substantive reason why the ranking member is opposed to this amendment. Both parties agree Russia has interfered in our elections in 2016 but more recently in 2018 and 2020. Both parties and the Trump administration agree that Russia should be sanctioned. But the Deputy Finance Minister of Russia pointed out that our sanctions so far have not been effective, that they are not effective until they apply to the secondary market. That is exactly what this amendment does. It is time to raise the cost of borrowing by the Russian Government and to see that money invested in American businesses, lent to American companies, instead of being lent to the Russian Government. Madam Speaker, I hear no substantive argument against that proposition, and I urge adoption of the amendment. Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. SHERMAN

Mr. SHERMAN. Mr. Speaker, had I been present, I would have noted ``YEA'' on rollcall No. 201. Stated against:

Mr. SHERMAN

Mr. SHERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I thank my good friend for yielding. I want to thank my colleague and co-chair of the House Congressional Caucus on India and Indian-Americans, Mr. Chabot, for joining with me in introducing this resolution. Mr. Chabot and I introduced this resolution recognizing the devastating impact that COVID-19 has had on India and expressing the sense of the House of Representatives about the need to provide the maximum possible assistance to India. The House has a long, bipartisan record of supporting and strengthening the relationship between the United States, the world's oldest democracy, and India, the world's largest democracy. I also want to thank Chairman Meeks and Ranking Member McCaul for working with us on this important resolution, and thank my colleagues on the Foreign Affairs Committee for passing this resolution unanimously. The COVID-19 outbreak in India requires a global response. We know that the COVID epidemic is not limited by international borders, and the pandemic will not end anywhere until it ends everywhere, as the chairman pointed out. This is particularly true with regard to variants and we are aware of the delta variant that is now spreading. Until we can vaccinate the world, there will be millions, billions of opportunities for this virus to infect; where it infects, it replicates; where it replicates, it mutates and poses the risk of developing a strain that, unlike the strains we have dealt with so far, evades the vaccines that we have developed. We have been working in a bipartisan manner to address the devastating effects of this second COVID-19 wave in India. Official testing results indicate that India has seen more than 340,000 daily infections and over 4,000 daily deaths. But many public health officials believe these numbers understate the matter, and that perhaps upwards of 2 million people a day have been infected in India. Of course, we have seen a slight abatement in those horrific numbers, but the problem remains. I want to thank the Biden administration and commend them for organizing so many parts of the U.S. Government, the CDC, HHS, USAID, the State Department, in getting materials to India that will help vaccine production, provide rapid COVID testing and, most importantly, oxygen support, particularly, oxygen concentrators and, of course, PPE to help save lives. This resolution is part of the ongoing effort of the India Caucus to help India at this time of need. Earlier this year, we sent a bipartisan request to the President requesting that we increase our assistance to India in battling COVID-19, particularly focusing on the raw materials necessary to manufacture vaccines and oxygen concentration equipment. By early May, the United States had provided over $100 million worth of medical supplies, including that oxygen support, and PPE, rapid diagnostic tests, and therapeutics. USAID also facilitated the delivery of 440 oxygen cylinders and concentrators to India, generously donated by the State of California. We should recognize the substantial support of the American public. In response to India's crisis, the Indian-American community has contributed significantly to the effort; individuals, along with the private sector, continue to do so. Indian-American companies, such as Prime Healthcare, are working to assist efforts, not only to deliver necessary medical supplies, but also ensure that they reach the people most in need. And the U.S.-India Business Council has worked to coordinate a coalition of corporations, nonprofits, and individuals to deliver thousands of ventilators and oxygen concentrators to India. This resolution stands with the people of India as they collectively work to stem the spread of COVID-19, urges the administration to facilitate private and in-kind medical supply donations, and urges the delivery of urgently needed supplies to India. This resolution recognizes the importance of work by the U.S. Government and of Indian Americans in the private sector. There is no doubt that the U.S.-India relationship is growing closer, and that our assistance to India, to help overcome this terrible COVID wave, is a critical part of building that relationship.

Mr. SHERMAN

Mr. SHERMAN. Mr. Speaker, over the last 5 years, we have seen a 40 percent increase in anti-Semitic hate crimes. Most are lone wolf property crimes, late at night. But last night in Los Angeles, we saw something new: organized violence. A small caravan of SUVs, waving Palestinian flags, drove to a significantly Jewish neighborhood. Dozens of men, wearing all black, with faces covered, disembarked at a restaurant, chanting ``death to the Jews.'' They demanded that diners either answer the question: ``Are you Jewish?'' And if they answered ``yes'' or they objected to the question, they were beaten, some sent to the hospital. Nearby, an Orthodox Jew, dressed distinctively, was chased down by a caravan waving Palestinian flags. He ran for his life, and thank God, he found safety. The Los Angeles Police Department will investigate these hate crimes. I also ask that those who criticize the Israeli Government to avoid rhetoric which will infuse these anti-Semites with the view that they are somehow part of the American mainstream.

Mr. SHERMAN

Mr. SHERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding. I thank our colleague from Texas (Mr. Taylor) for working with me on this bill, the Homebuyer Assistance Act of 2021. I thank the gentleman from Arkansas and the gentleman from Missouri for doing an excellent job of explaining the importance of this bill to the House, so I will be brief. There is no more important day in the economic life of a family than when they buy a home, particularly, their first home, and appraisers play an important role in that very important day. So this bill looks to bring into synchrony the rules of the FHA dealing with appraisers, the FHA being the third-largest Federal home loan finance agency, bring those standards into conformity or rough conformity with the two larger Federal home loan finance agencies, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. This will help deal with the shortage of appraisers that we are seeing in various parts of the country. Appraisers are an important part of the home-buying process for both lenders and borrowers to provide assurance that the amount of the mortgage is supported by the estimate property value. Since 2010, all the State-licensed home appraisers have been required to meet minimum Federal education experience and examination requirements set by the Appraiser Qualifications Board. So the standards set by the Appraiser Qualifications Board are fully sufficient for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and they should be for the FHA as well. Unfortunately, until this bill passes, appraisers for FHA mortgages must meet the higher standard. This creates a shortage of appraisers who can do FHA appraisals. By helping address the shortage of appraisers that plague many areas, this legislation will provide much-needed assistance for first-time, low-and-moderate income and minority homebuyers who rely on FHA mortgages or rely on mortgages that may become FHA mortgages during the process. Over 83 percent of the FHA home mortgages made in 2018 were to first- time homebuyers and over one-third of all FHA loans were obtained by minority households. I am pleased to say that with the support of this House, we passed the Homebuyer Assistance Act in 2019 with overwhelming bipartisan support, 419-5. Today, I hope the House renews that wisdom, and I hope to see a similar level of wisdom in the Senate.

Mr. SHERMAN

Mr. SHERMAN. Mr. Speaker, Hamas has fired 1,600 rockets into Israel. Each rocket is a war crime, for each was fired solely for the purpose of killing as many civilians as possible. President Biden has declared, unwaveringly, our support for Israel's right to defend itself. We grieve every civilian death, Israeli and Palestinian. We cannot accept at face value reports of Palestinian deaths since they come from Hamas, a terrorist organization, recognized as such by both the U.S. and the EU. Hamas has caused many Palestinian deaths since one-quarter of its rockets aimed at Israel actually explode in Gaza, and because Hamas locates its military operations in civilian neighborhoods, using human shields. Mr. Speaker, I want to commend Israel for its efforts to avoid civilian casualties while striking successfully at terrorists. I want to commend this Congress for funding Iron Dome, which has successfully avoided so many Israeli civilian deaths.

Mr. SHERMAN

Mr. SHERMAN. Madam Speaker, it's appropriate for me to republish my statement of March 11, 2019 on the meaning of cosponsoring legislation. Much of that statement was a republication of my statement of September 29, 2010, as I've maintained a consistent policy on this issue. The following is a republication of my statement of March 11, 2019. ``Madam Speaker, on Wednesday, September 29, 2010, stated for the Record: `Madam Speaker, I wish to clarify that when I cosponsor a bill, it does not necessarily mean that I agree with every part of it. At n minimum, my cosponsorship indicates that I support moving the bill forward through the legislative process, including being marked up in committee, and if sent to the floor by the relevant committee(s), then subject to consideration and amendment on the floor.' Let me reiterate that 2010 statement and provide additional background. I believe in the legislative process. I believe bills are improved during committee mark-ups and by consideration of amendments on the floor. The effect of cosponsoring a bill is to signal to the relevant committee chair(s) that I believe the bill should be marked-up in committee, a process that may well improve the bill (and in some cases may make the bill worse). When I decide to cosponsor a bill after it has completed the committee process, I do signal to the Speaker and Rules Committee that I believe the bill should be considered on the floor, and almost always under an open rule.''

Mr. SHERMAN

Mr. SHERMAN. Madam Speaker, I stand in solidarity with the Armenian American community in commemorating the pogroms against Armenians in the cities of Sumgait (February 27-29, 1988), Kirovabad (November 21- 27, 1988) and Baku (January 13-19, 1990). Thirty-three years ago, in the Azerbaijani town of Sumgait, peaceful Armenian residents were brutally targeted on the basis of their ethnicity and subjected to unspeakable crimes. The New York Times reported Armenians being ``hunted'' down and an account of a pregnant Armenian woman, who had been disemboweled. The U.S. Senate passed an amendment in July of 1989, noting that even the Soviet government had termed the murder of Armenians in Sumgait a ``pogrom.'' The Sumgait Pogroms were the beginning of an escalation of violence against the Armenian minority, with a wave of anti-Armenian violence spreading to Kirovabad in November 1988 and to Baku in January 1990, which culminated in the forcible expulsion of 390,000 Armenians from Azerbaijan and the 1991-94 war over Artsakh (Nagorno Karabakh). In response to the Sumgait and Kirovabad pogroms, over 100 leading academics and human rights advocates, including the Executive Director of the NAACP and Elie Wiesel, placed an advertisement in The New York Times titled: ``An Open Letter to International Public Opinion on Anti- Armenian Pogroms in the Soviet Union.'' The letter appealed to the international community to condemn the atrocities and prevent further violence by stating: ``The international community of states . . . must prove the authenticity of its commitment to human rights in order to ensure that, due to indifference and silence bordering on complicity, another genocide does not occur.'' (July 27, 1990, The New York Times) Unfortunately, Azeri attacks against Armenian civilians have only continued. In its latest bout of aggression against Armenia and Artsakh in the fall of 2020, Azerbaijan carried out indiscriminate attacks against civilians. A report by Human Rights Watch found that Azeri forces used inherently indiscriminate cluster munitions and artillery rockets or other weapons that did not distinguish between military targets and civilian objects. Multiple strikes hit residential homes in less than a minute, suggesting bombardment of civilian areas. Today, Armenians are still held captive in Azerbaijan, with no planned date to be returned to Armenia. Armenian prisoners of war have been subjected to physical beatings and other inhumane treatment at the hand of Azerbaijan. The government of Azerbaijan must be held accountable by the international community, and I will continue to work in Congress to shed light on and learn the lessons of such past and present atrocities.

Mr. SHERMAN

Mr. SHERMAN. Madam Speaker, at the direction of the Democratic Caucus, I send to the desk a privileged resolution and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. SHERMAN

Mr. SHERMAN. Madam Speaker, how ironic. An administration begins by building an unnecessary wall on our southern border, it ends by making necessary, a new wall around this Capitol. Madam Speaker, I introduced Articles of Impeachment in July of 2017 with one cosponsor, Al Green, and again in January of 2019. And on Monday night, I joined with so many of us in introducing these articles. I have introduced Articles of Impeachment in the 115th, 116th, and 117th Congress because Donald Trump has continuously posed a danger to this republic.

Mr. SHERMAN

Mr. SHERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding. I will speak longer than I usually do on these bills because I both want to persuade people to support the bill and also provide important information to the entire House that will be part of the legislative history of this bill and is designed to guide the SEC in issuing appropriate regulations. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of S. 945, the Holding Foreign Companies Accountable Act. I thank Chairwoman Waters and her staff for working with my office, and all the members who have been involved in this bill and making this issue a priority. Mr. Speaker, I believe this will be perhaps the most significant piece of investor protection legislation that the Congress adopts this Congress because it applies to some 224 publicly traded companies and assures investors of the financial statement integrity that they expect from all companies that are traded in the United States. Mr. Speaker, let's go back in history a bit. For well over a century, investors in corporations have insisted that the financial statements they get are audited by an independent auditor. But at the beginning of this century, we learned that that was not enough. We saw Enron and WorldCom. We passed the Sarbanes-Oxley bill, and created the PCAOB so that we have a system where not only are the companies' financial statements audited, but the audit is subject to being audited by a governmental entity. That is essential in this century to have investors adequately protected. So when we are dealing with 224 public companies with $1.8 trillion in capitalization, we need that level of protection. Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague from Ohio (Congressman Gonzalez) for joining me in leading on this issue in the House. I thank my good friend and cochair of the bicameral, bipartisan CPA Caucus, Mike Conaway, who has been working on these issues for many years. And I thank Senators Kennedy and Van Hollen for their leadership in advancing this bill. Mr. Speaker, currently the PCAOB, the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board, is unable to inspect the audit work and practices of certain audit firms in a handful of jurisdictions. Today, that includes Belgium and France to some degree, but, primarily, the issue is China. In most cases, audit firms in those jurisdictions cite local laws related to data protection or national security as a reason for being unable to provide the PCAOB with the information they need. Accordingly, as I mentioned before, the PCAOB has noted that the auditor for some 224 U.S.-listed companies with a combined total capitalization of $1.8 trillion is not subject to the enhanced oversight that this Congress has insisted upon since 2002. Since it was created, the PCAOB has established a formal cooperative relationship with foreign audit regulators that have allowed it to conduct inspections of firms in more than 59 U.S. jurisdictions. However, the PCAOB and the Securities Exchange Commission have tried to engage with Chinese regulators for over a decade in an effort to reach a similar cooperative agreement and are still not able to conduct inspections with regard to China or Hong Kong. Mr. Speaker, our legislation will bring an end to this sort of risk for investors in U.S. markets by requiring the SEC to stop trading in a company's stocks if the PCAOB is unable to inspect the audit report and the audit work papers for a period of 3 years. Mr. Speaker, this is an investor protection bill. I am chair of the Investor Protection and Capital Markets Subcommittee. This bill is not anti-China, and it is not designed to prohibit the trading of Chinese companies. Rather, it provides a 3-year window, during which we expect China will enter into a reasonable agreement with the SEC and the PCAOB so that we have the additional level of protection for investors that we expect and have demanded since we passed the Sarbanes-Oxley bill in 2002. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to say that the House has already passed this legislation in similar--and actually, superior--form as an amendment to the 2001 NDAA, National Defense Authorization Act. It is the intention of the authors of this Senate bill to achieve exactly what that language--approved by the House earlier this year--sets forward. And that amendment to the NDAA is part of the legislative history of this bill and our consideration of it today. Mr. Speaker, in order to guide the interpretation of this bill, Senator Kennedy and I have a statement, and I include in the Record that statement. United States Senate Statement: S. 945--Holding Foreign Companies Accountable Act. Considered on Friday, December 2, 2020 Madam Speaker, I write to submit a statement for the record to address S. 945, the Holding Foreign Companies Accountable Act. It is the intent of this legislation to provide the Securities and Exchange Commission with the discretion necessary to determine how much of a company's total audit must be performed by a firm beyond the reach of PCAOB inspections before trading in the company's securities is prohibited by the Commission. Consistent with our work with the Securities and Exchange Commission on this legislation, it is our expectation that the Commission will not prohibit trading in the securities of companies under this act, as long as not more than one third of a company's total audit is performed by a firm beyond the reach of PCAOB inspections. This legislation provides the Commission with the authority to determine how an audit would be measured, whether that be total revenue, assets, or another metric. Furthermore, the scope of this legislation is not intended to be limited to public companies which rely on foreign audit firms that have some form of ownership relationship with a PCAOB-registered public accounting firm. Specifically, it is intended to also encompass public companies which rely on foreign audit firms that are affiliated with or maintain some form of affiliation agreement with a PCAOB-registered public accounting firm. John Kennedy, U.S. Senator.

Mr. SHERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I will read it so that it is before the entire House. ``It is the intent of this legislation to provide the Securities and Exchange Commission with the discretion necessary to determine how much of a company's total audit must be performed by a firm beyond the reach of PCAOB inspections before trading in the company's securities is prohibited by the Commission. Consistent with our work with the Securities and Exchange Commission on this legislation, it is our expectation that the Commission will not prohibit trading in the securities of companies under this act, as long as not more than one- third of a company's total audit is performed by a firm beyond the reach of the PCAOB inspections. This legislation provides the Commission with the authority to determine how an audit would be measured, whether that be total revenue, assets, or another metric. ``Furthermore, the scope of this legislation is not intended to be limited to public companies which rely on foreign audit firms that have some form of ownership relationship with a PCAOB-registered public accounting firm. Specifically, it is intended to also encompass public companies which rely on foreign audit firms that are affiliated with or maintain some form of affiliation agreement with a PCAOB-registered public accounting firm.'' Mr. Speaker, one particular comment to draw your attention to is that it is not the intention of this bill to cover firms that have some small part of their audit being done in China, perhaps one subsidiary in China, but is rather designed to apply when a third or more of the audit is not subject to PCAOB inspection. And how you define one-third of the audit, whether that is the audit of one-third of the revenues or one-third of the assets, or some other metric, is left to the SEC. As House sponsor of this legislation, I have cosigned the statement I have just read, prepared by Senator Kennedy, but would have the following additional remarks: I will take this opportunity to make clear, it is not the intention of this legislation that every public company, which is a client of an audit firm with a branch, office, or affiliate in a jurisdiction beyond the reach of the PCAOB inspections, be subject to a trading prohibition. Instead, the trading prohibitions required under this bill are intended to be applied when a significant portion of the audit is prepared by an audit firm or the branch, or office, or affiliate of an audit firm which the PCAOB is unable to inspect, and the SEC has the authority to interpret this provision. As chair of the Investor Protection and Capital Markets Subcommittee, I appreciate how critical it is for investors on U.S. stock exchanges to have the additional protection that the financial statements have not just been audited, but that that audit is subject to review by the PCAOB. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate my colleagues for their support of this legislation, and look forward to its passage here today. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me enough time to both describe the major parts of the legislation and also make it clear to the regulators what expectations the House and Senate have for the regulations that they will issue.

Mr. SHERMAN

Mr. SHERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I rise in favor of H. Res. 825, which I authored, to focus our attention on the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. If you look back to 1945 when nuclear weapons literally exploded upon the world, most political scientists believed that within the next century after 1945 we would have had dozens of nuclear states and many nuclear wars. Well, so far, we have gone the vast bulk of a century since 1945 and we have not seen nuclear weapons used in anger. An important part of that is the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. There is no more important work for our committee than preventing the spread of nuclear weapons. That is why, for well over a decade, I have chaired or been ranking member on the subcommittee that focuses on nonproliferation. It is simple math. The more nuclear states, the more likelihood of a nuclear war. This resolution reaffirms the strong nonproliferation regime that is in the interest of the United States and supports the Nuclear Non- Proliferation Treaty. It urges the United States to continue to support the NPT regime and global nonproliferation and looks forward to a successful 2021 NPT Review Conference. I look forward to working with the new administration on nonproliferation issues. Every nation in the last 50 years that has developed a nuclear weapon has done so under the pretense that they were developing a nuclear energy program. That is why we have to be very careful when we enter into nuclear cooperation agreements with countries that may seek to develop a nuclear weapon. The best way to make sure that a nuclear energy program is not a nuclear weapons program is to make sure that the country that engages in that signs the additional protocol to allow the additional inspections of the IAEA. That is why what is important today--not only this resolution--is the conference committee that I sit on for the NDAA, which contains the provision that I wrote and introduced to this House as the Saudi Nuclear Nonproliferation Act, to say that we will not enter into agreements for nuclear cooperation with countries that refuse to sign the additional protocol. As we look forward to a new administration, we need to reenter the JCPOA with Iran and make sure Iran never develops a nuclear weapon. We have to prevent Saudi Arabia from developing a nuclear weapon, and we have to roll back the North Korean program. There is much for us to do in nonproliferation, and there is no work that is more important for our committee. Since I have some additional time, I would like to use it to express my views on the other important legislation that the Foreign Affairs Committee is bringing to this House today. The first is the Tropical Forest and Coral Reef Conservation Reauthorization Act of 2020, introduced by Mr. Chabot, for which I serve as the lead Democrat. This is an important debt-for-nature program critical to preserve tropical forests and coral reefs. Chairman Bera has introduced the Securing America From Epidemics Act. This bill recognizes the importance of working cooperatively--and I look forward to us rejoining the WHO--working cooperatively to deal with epidemics. And, of course, these provisions were part of the Heroes Act, which this Congress passed back in May. It authorizes the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations, an alliance of countries that are partners to finance and coordinate the development of vaccines for high-priority epidemic threats. I want to commend the gentleman from New York for his Caribbean Basin Security Initiative Authorization Act to promote safety, security, and the rule of law in the Caribbean. It is so important that we achieve improvement for the lives of those who are our immediate neighbors. This important bill would fund support for the justice sector and education for at-risk youth. I want to commend Representative Tom Suozzi for his resolution on the importance of the United States' alliance with the Republic of Korea and the contribution of Korean Americans. Just yesterday, I had a chance to meet with the chair and several of the members of the Korean National Assembly's Foreign Affairs and Unification Committee, and I look forward to a new administration reaching a different kind of relationship with North Korea and a stronger relationship with South Korea. I commend Chairman McGovern for his resolution condemning the poisoning of Russian opposition leader Alexei Navalny and calling for the United States to coordinate a robust international response. I think our committee is bringing to the floor of this House a package of important legislation. I look forward to it passing overwhelmingly.

Mr. SHERMAN

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

Mr. SHERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I rise in strong support of H.R. 5322, the Ensuring Diversity in Community Banking Act of 2019. I would like to thank Mr. Meeks, the chairman of the Consumer Protection and Financial Institutions Subcommittee for his leadership on this important issue. For over 22 years I have worked and watched Mr. Meeks as he has devoted prodigious quantities of his time and his considerable talents to the matters of the Financial Services Committee, and H.R. 5322 reflects that kind of skill and effort. The Financial Services Committee under the chairmanship of Ms. Waters and Chairman Meeks of the subcommittee have prioritized examining the important role of minority depository institutions, MDIs, and the role they play in our financial system, and we have worked on developing policies to support their efforts. Over the course of a series of hearings in this Congress, the committee has engaged with bank and credit union CEOs, with consumer groups, with experts and regulators all about how Congress can help or reverse the decline in our Nation's minority depository institutions, MDIs, particularly Black-owned banks. This is important because the data shows that MDIs serve the credit needs of low-income areas and serve them well and that these areas have a high percentage of the unbanked and underbanked. Unfortunately, these institutions have shrunk in numbers in recent years. The number peaked in 2008 at 215 MDI banks. Now that number is at just 143 MDI banks as of the second quarter of 2020, representing less than 3 percent of all FDIC-insured institutions. In 2008 we had 41 Black-owned banks, and today we have 18. This calls for congressional action. Furthermore, during this pandemic, low-income and minority communities have been hit the hardest. MDIs along with community development financial institutions, CDFIs, have delivered relief to these low-income communities during this pandemic. After Chairwoman Waters and the other members of this committee fought hard to ensure that MDIs and CDFIs could participate in the Paycheck Protection Program, MDIs and CDFIs were able to provide some $16 billion of loans to over 220,000 small businesses and minority-owned businesses across the country. But Congress must do more to support these institutions. Toward that end, H.R. 5322 provides a series of reforms that will preserve, grow, and encourage the chartering of new MDIs, as well as promote the effective engagement between MDIs and prudential regulators. This bill will encourage investments in MDIs, in part by strengthening a minority bank deposit program so that Treasury deposits Federal funds, funds which it manages in MDIs, thus providing MDIs with more funds that they can then lend. Furthermore, the bill encourages more partnerships between MDIs and large banks through the Department of Treasury's mentor-protege program, which should promote information sharing and more investments in MDIs. The bill also creates a new category of small banks called ``impact banks'' that provide most of their lending to low-income borrowers and would also benefit from some of the bill's provisions to ensure that we can do all we can to support low-income and minority communities. We also appreciate the collaboration demonstrated by ranking member of the full committee Mr. McHenry and other committee Republicans, as this bill was voted out of the committee in December by a unanimous vote of 52-0. This bill has broad support, including from the National Bankers Association, the Independent Community Bankers of America, the American Bankers Association, the Credit Union National Association, and the National Association of Federally-Insured Credit Unions. Mr. Speaker, I urge Members to support H.R. 5322, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. SHERMAN

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