John Sarbanes

Mr. SARBANES

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

Mr. SARBANES. Mr. Chairman, whatever priority or alternative use of these funds is being proposed, I can't imagine that it would compete with where this money is being taken away from. The $30 million that has been identified would be taken away from the Fulbright Program, which is one of the most effective programs of public diplomacy the United States has ever produced. Authored by William Fulbright, it has established cultural exchange for decades between the United States and countries around the world and done so much good in terms of projecting American values abroad and inviting people from other countries to come here to the United States to learn about our Nation and what we stand for. I admit that I am biased. I had the privilege and honor, back in 1984, to go to Greece on a Fulbright scholarship, and I saw firsthand the benefits of that program. There are 37 current and former heads of state or government and 57 Nobel laureates who are alumni of the Fulbright Program. The various programs of international cultural exchange are a signature of international exchange that we have in this country. It is really the crown jewel of those programs, and to take any money away from the program, I think, is a very serious mistake. I would also add that investment in the Fulbright Program leverages a tremendous amount of additional resources when you look at what other countries have put into the equation. The program now operates in 165 countries around the world, and 49 of those countries match or exceed the funding that the United States puts into the program. So, in other words, we have invited countries around the world to step up and partner with us through the Fulbright Program on international exchange. They have taken that invitation seriously, and they have put significant resources behind it, which has kept the program strong even though funding, recently, here in this country has been flat. If anything, we should be increasing our investment in a program like this at a time when public diplomacy and making sure that people around the world understand who we are and what we stand for should be a number one priority. I urge my colleagues, Mr. Chairman, to reject this amendment. I think it is a mistake. There are 1,300 U.S. colleges and universities, half of which are public and more than 125 of which are minority serving, that now benefit from hosting Fulbright scholars here in the United States. Mr. Chairman, I urge opposition to this amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. SARBANES. Mr. Chairman, I certainly don't quarrel with the concerns and priorities that my colleague has set forth. Let's find resources to address those issues, but let's not take them from a proven valuable program like the Fulbright Program. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Lowey).

Mr. SARBANES

Mr. SARBANES. Mr. Chair, during rollcall Vote No. 428 on H.R. 3219, I mistakenly recorded my vote as ``present'' when I should have voted ``no.'' Amendment No. 63 Offered by Mr. Perry

Mr. SARBANES

Mr. SARBANES. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding to me. Mr. Speaker, here we are again: the special interests are running the show in Washington. Pointblank, this resolution will make it harder for Americans to get justice. Specifically, this will unwind critical new rules that allow financial consumers to take collective action. You heard that right. This is an effort to take away your ability to sue big banks when they run you over. Instead, the majority wants to force you into unfair, bureaucratic arbitration processes that severely disadvantage you in favor of the Wall Street firms. I always ask the same question when the Republicans bring these measures up here to gut consumer protections: Who back home is asking for this? Who is coming to the townhalls and begging to repeal this rule? Who is asking you to make it harder to seek damages when someone is being harmed by a big bank? Nobody is asking for this. In fact, as Keith Ellison said a few minutes ago, there are 100,000 people who are beseeching us to support this rule to protect them out there. Nobody is asking to repeal this rule or shut this rule down. I know who wants it here in Washington. It is the big money special interests, the so-called swamp. We can't let this happen. The American people should be furious. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to oppose this reckless, shameful effort.

Mr. SARBANES

Mr. SARBANES. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to celebrate the 100th anniversary of Fort George G. Meade. For a century, Fort Meade has been an integral part of both our national security system as well as the Maryland community. First constructed to house troops shipping off to fight in World War I, Camp Meade--as it was then known--was named for Civil War hero Major General George Gordon Meade, whose victory at the Battle of Gettysburg halted the Confederacy's invasion of the Union and turned the tide of the war. Over the course of World War I, more than 400,000 service members left from Camp Meade to fight in the war. During the interwar period, Fort Meade housed the Army Tank School as well as the Experimental Motorized Forces. During World War II, approximately 3.5 million soldiers trained at Fort Meade, which was also used to house Italian and German prisoners of war. After WWII, the Fort reverted to peacetime activities. The Fort's importance grew when the Second U.S. Army moved to Fort Meade, and again when the First U.S. Army merged with the Second and moved to Fort Meade. In 1953, the Fort became the first to deploy the Nike I antiaircraft missile system. Later renamed the Nike Ajax, the Nike I was the world's first surface-to-air missile defense system and was designed to protect the capital region from Soviet bombers. The Cold War period initiated a shift at the base to a greater intelligence focus. Fort Meade has been vital to the intelligence mission of the United States since the 1950s, when it became the headquarters for the National Security Agency (NSA). The Fort's mission expanded in 1995 when the Defense Information School moved there. Since that time the School has expanded to include both the Defense Visual Information School and the Defense Photography School. More recently US Cyber Command was moved to Fort Meade. Today, six cyber headquarters are housed at Fort Meade, making it the epicenter of our 21st century defense. The 2005 BRAC ushered in some of the most significant growth in the history of the Fort. The Defense Information Systems Agency (DISA), which provides complete information technology services to the Department of Defense, moved its headquarters to Fort Meade, bringing 4,300 workers to a new 1.1 million-square-foot headquarters. The Defense Media Activity and Defense Adjudication Activities also relocated to the base, bringing a combined total of over 1,300 positions employees with them. The continued growth of Fort Meade during a time of downsizing and shrinking budgets speaks to its efficacy and its essential mission. The NSA presence at Fort Meade makes the base one of the most important to the security of our nation. The work done by thousands of Marylanders at the Fort every day is crucial for maintaining day to day IT stability for all Americans and disrupting terrorist networks and plans. In addition to its vital impact on our nation's intelligence mission, Fort Meade has sent many active duty service members abroad. Collectively, around 2,700 personnel from 42 units were deployed from the base during Operation Desert Shield and Operation Desert Storm. I also want to emphasize the enormous impact Fort George G. Meade has on the economy of our state. Fort Meade employs over 56,000 personnel across 119 agencies and has a supported population of over 145,000, providing a significant boost to the local economy. Fort George G. Meade is the largest employer in Maryland, the fifth-largest employment center in the state, and has the third-largest workforce of any U.S. Army installation. In the past 100 years, Fort Meade has made a profound impact on Maryland, the United States, and the world. I am confident that legacy will continue over the next 100 years and beyond, and once again congratulate Fort George G. Meade and all who have served there on this momentous anniversary.

Mr. SARBANES

Mr. SARBANES. Mr. Chairman, in 2008 our financial system cratered, bringing the broader world economy to its knees. Millions of Americans lost their homes; millions more lost their jobs by no fault of their own; and $13 trillion in wealth and savings was lost. We went to work fixing the glaring holes in our Nation's financial regulatory system. Among other things, we enacted tougher mortgage standards; we brought the derivatives market out of the shadows; we stopped the casino-like bets at our investment banks; and we created a consumer-focused protection bureau. Unfortunately, what we couldn't do was eradicate greed; and, sadly, today greed is rearing its ugly head once again. The Republican- controlled Congress is about to pass H.R. 10, the ``Wrong'' CHOICE Act, a bill that would throw away the lessons of the 2008 financial crash and unleash the demons that nearly took down the world economy. I urge the House to reject this bill.

Mr. SARBANES

Mr. SARBANES. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H. Res. 354, which forcefully condemns the shocking assault carried out here on American soil, here in our Nation's Capital, by trained paramilitary agents of the Turkish Presidential security force against a peaceful assembly of protesters who were exercising their First Amendment rights to freedom of speech. Video footage offers evidence that President Erdogan sanctioned the attack, and then calmly sat back to watch as his bodyguards carried it out. Each of us in this Chamber must ask the question: What sort of foreign leader invited for an official visit by the President of the United States would conduct himself in such a reprehensible manner and would show such contempt for America's commitment to human rights and civil liberties? Make no mistake. This is the same man who has ordered mass incarcerations in his own country, who persecutes dissenters and jails democratically elected officials, and who locks up journalists on a whim. In fact, he is the number one jailer of journalists in the world. The assault on innocent protesters in the streets of Washington, D.C., is entirely consistent with the impulses of an autocratic Turkey. It has unmasked President Erdogan for the bully that he is and offers Americans a teachable moment on the character of official Turkey. It reflects a deeply imbedded reflex that, in the modern era, has brought the world, among other things, the unlawful invasion and occupation of Cyprus, the Armenian genocide, and the violent repression of the Kurdish people. This incident demands more than just the prosecution of Erdogan's security personnel or the expulsion of the Turkish Ambassador or the strong condemnation of Erdogan himself, all of which should happen. It is time for a complete reevaluation of the U.S. relationship with Turkey. We cannot pretend that it is business as usual with a foreign leader that has attacked our Nation's most cherished democratic values on our very own soil.

Mr. SARBANES

Mr. SARBANES. I thank the gentleman for yielding. Mr. Speaker, I came to the floor today expecting to support H.R. 1293, which has to do with the reporting of official time, but based on the negative commentary we are getting generally about official time and the knock against Federal employees we have heard here today, I am anxious now about supporting this bill because it appears that what is happening is our colleagues on the other side are setting the table for bringing other legislation eventually to the floor that is actually going to attack and undermine official time. My colleague earlier referred to a wolf in sheep's clothing represented by this bill. You can look at it as the camel's nose under the tent. Whatever it is, I am worried now that the agenda here is to undermine official time. Let's remind ourselves of the various benefits of official time. It helps to resolve workplace disputes, which is really important. It helps to improve efficiency within the workplace. It is what leads to negotiating positive agreements between labor and management. It is how official time, when it is used wisely--and there is no evidence that it is not used wisely; there is no evidence of abuse or misuse of official time--and when it is used the way it has been used, it helps our Federal agencies help the American people. It helps these agencies function well. I hope that we can reject whatever is coming down the pipeline. I was cautiously optimistic when I came to support this bill that these other efforts that seem to be underway were maybe being put to bed, but now I am concerned that there is an agenda coming. So we will just have to see how it goes. I want to reiterate my strong support for the use of official time the way it is used by our Federal employees, which is in a very positive fashion, and I urge my colleagues on the other side to protect official time and all of its benefits.

Mr. SARBANES

Mr. SARBANES. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Dr. John S. Ostrowski, a retired Navy Captain who will celebrate his 75th Birthday on May 28th. He has lived a life of service to his country, and has produced a legacy of continued service to our Nation through his family as a result of his example, inspiration and guidance. As an officer in the United States Navy, Captain Ostrowski served his country honorably for 26 years as a dentist, with tours of duty on ship, ashore at various Naval Hospitals, and overseas in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. He pioneered the use of dental implants in the U.S. Navy, and in the latter phase of his career, taught a new generation of Navy Dentists to prepare them for service to their fellow Sailors and Marines. Following his Navy career, Dr. Ostrowski opened his own private practice in Annapolis Maryland, which he successfully operated for over 25 years, providing services for the patients in his community. He was often known to provide his dental services for free to those in need--an expression of the importance he has consistently placed on charity and compassion to others. Dr. Ostrowski and his wife Maeve raised five children--four sons and one daughter. His oldest son is a 28-year active duty Marine pilot who has achieved the rank of Colonel and served in Iraq, Haiti, Okinawa, and on multiple shipboard deployments. His second son joined the Navy, also as a pilot, attained the rank of Commander and commanded a squadron in Oceana Virginia before tragically losing a battle with cancer. His 3rd son is an automobile mechanic who has owned and operated a successful auto repair business in Annapolis for the past 20 years. His fourth child, his daughter, has been a successful school teacher, principal and executive school administrator. She has recently pursued her entrepreneurial interests and founded a small business as a nutrition specialist and coach. Finally, his youngest son is a successful executive and partner in a financial services company. His legacy has extended to his grandchildren, of which he has 21, with number 22 on the way this fall. Included in this number are 3 Naval Academy Midshipmen and a scholarship student at Temple University. High school baseball, softball, football and lacrosse athletes, student government representatives, gymnasts, and cheerleaders are counted among his other grandchildren. On behalf of the State of Maryland, the County of Anne Arundel, and our constituents, I want to extend my heartfelt gratitude for Dr. Ostrowski's commitment to public service and inestimable contributions as a father, grandfather, dentist, Naval Officer, mentor, counselor, and advisor. Not only has he led an exemplary life of service, charity, and industry, but he has inculcated those same qualities into his children and grandchildren, thus perpetuating the highest ideals of service and citizenship in subsequent generations of Naval officers and his family. As he celebrates his milestone 75th birthday, I congratulate him on a life well lived and look forward to his continuing contributions to our communities, and wish him, his wife Maeve, his children and his grandchildren all the best in his years ahead.

Mr. SARBANES

Mr. SARBANES. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding. Mr. Speaker, President Trump and the Republicans are looking for a win. They want to put points on the scoreboard. But why would you want to win by taking healthcare coverage away from 24 million Americans? Why would you consider it a victory to raise premiums and copayments and deductibles on millions of Americans, including millions of older Americans? Why would you view it as a success to eliminate protections for preexisting conditions? If I could vote against this bill 100 times, I would do it. If I could vote against it 1,000 times for the thousands of my constituents that will be hurt by this bill, I would. It is wrong, it is immoral, and it is inhumane.

Mr. SARBANES

Mr. SARBANES. Mr. Speaker, the President said he would drain the swamp in Washington. He has flooded it. He said he would break the cycle of corruption. He has accelerated it. Nearly 100 days into his administration, the President has reneged on the fundamental promise that he would clean up Washington. Today, the Democracy Reform Task Force is releasing a report detailing 100 ways the Trump administration has flooded the swamp in the first 100 days. As the report chronicles, President Trump has made a mockery of ethics law and regulation, promoted a culture of secrecy in the executive branch, stacked his Cabinet with Big Money campaign donors, installed a special interest revolving door into the Trump White House, put big money ahead of the public interest, turned the Presidency into a profit-making enterprise, pursued public policy for his personal benefit, and raided the Treasury to pay for vacations and private business promotion. These are not the actions of a President intent on draining the swamp or restoring a voice to the voiceless or restoring power to the powerless. Americans of all political stripes are starting to wonder: ``Maybe the President isn't looking out for me and my family. Maybe he is just looking out for himself, his business, and his brand.''

Mr. SARBANES

Mr. SARBANES. Mr. Speaker, this is a terrible bill. It is a terrible bill. It is wrong for the country. Why would the President, why would the leadership on the Republican side here in Congress, why would they choose as the first order of business taking healthcare coverage away from 24 million Americans? It is wrongheaded. It is immoral. It is inhumane. It makes no sense. It is wrong for America. In the people's House, we need to vote it down.

Mr. SARBANES

Mr. SARBANES. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in opposition to yet another reckless attack by the majority on the retirement security of millions of Americans. I don't get why the majority is so determined to go after the retirement security of so many millions of Americans across this country, but that is what H.J. Res. 66 would do. It may get harder for everyday Americans to prepare for their retirement. The resolution we are considering today would prevent State governments--it doesn't make any sense to do this--from providing retirement savings opportunities for their citizens. The fact of the matter is, as was just alluded to, this resolution was designed at the behest of Wall Street and well-connected lobbyists to sideline competition and transparent financial products in the retirement savings market. But this isn't the first time. They put all their energy behind blocking the automatic IRA when it was a proposal that came forward a few years back, even though it was a Heritage Foundation proposal. Then they went after the fiduciary rule that President Obama and the Department of Labor sought to put in place that would protect our retirees from unscrupulous investment advisers. Then President Trump comes in with an executive order to undo what the Department of Labor was trying to do. So we shouldn't be surprised by this action, but we ought to be furious about it. My State, Maryland, was one of the States that tried to figure out how to protect retirees because we couldn't get it done up here. Now, what are we doing? The party of states' rights is advancing a Congressional Review Act resolution designed to hinder State legislatures that are working to provide access to safe and affordable retirement savings options for their citizens. We shouldn't allow this to happen. I encourage my colleagues to reject this senseless resolution.

Mr. SARBANES

Mr. SARBANES. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the extraordinary events surrounding the SS Exodus 1947, to which a historic memorial will be dedicated in the Port of Haifa in Israel this coming July. The SS Exodus 1947, originally known as the President Warfield, was a passenger ship operating on the ``Old Bay Line'' between Baltimore, MD and Norfolk, VA. The ship served in that role for nearly 15 years before being repurposed during World War II, when it served both the Royal Navy and the United States Navy. Following the war, the ship returned to the U.S. and was placed in the Naval Reserve Fleet in Virginia, where it was to be sold for scrap. Before the ship could be scrapped it was sold to the Haganah, the precursor to the Israel Defense Forces. The Haganah intended to use it, amongst 9 other ships, to evacuate displaced Jews from Europe to what was then Palestine, at the time under British Control. Before undertaking this mission the ship was towed to Baltimore, where it was refitted and crewed, primarily by volunteer Jewish-American ex- soldiers. Once in Europe, the ship originally designed for 400 passengers was loaded with 4,454 Holocaust survivors and departed from the French Port of Sete. The ship was intercepted in international waters by a task force of eight British Naval vessels and was boarded by Royal Marines. While the unarmed crew and passengers fought back with whatever could be turned into weapons, they were eventually overwhelmed and taken back to France and then to displaced persons camps in Germany on British prison ships. The events on the Exodus garnered international media attention and are considered by historians to have played a role in the passage of United Nations Resolution 181, which established the State of Israel. The mayor of Haifa in 1950 dubbed the Exodus the ``Ship that Launched a Nation.'' Memorials and historical markers for the Exodus have been placed in the Baltimore Harbor, as well as France and Germany. I am proud of the small role that Baltimore played in these historic events and also commend the work of my constituent, Dr. Barry S. Lever, with the Jewish American Society for Historic Preservation to dedicate a memorial to the Exodus in Israel, and I congratulate them on their successful efforts.

Mr. SARBANES

Mr. SARBANES. Mr. Speaker, I rise today and join with my colleagues from Maryland in congratulating and saluting Senator Barbara Mikulski on her amazing and outstanding career. They often say of people that, once they start their career, they never look back. Well, in Senator Mikulski's case, she always looked back. She always remembered where she came from, and she fought for the people of east Baltimore every step of the way. I had the pleasure over the years, as I attended events with Senator Mikulski, of gathering of what I call Mikulski-isms, these golden nuggets of wisdom that you can live by. I wanted to mention a few. She used to talk about the need to cooperate. She used to say: I am not into finger-pointing; I am into pinpointing. She said, when others are wringing their hands, we need to come with a helping hand. She talked about the fact that, behind every me, is a ``we.'' She talked about how people have three shifts every day: they work at their job, they come home and they work for their family, and they serve in their community. I remember her once referring to a particularly futile effort as ``spitting off the Bay Bridge to raise the tide.'' We love to remember Senator Mikulski's voice. We are going to miss her in this place, but we are going to remember that voice that fought for Baltimore, for Maryland, and for America.

Mr. SARBANES

Mr. SARBANES. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to oppose this legislation, but I also want to speak to the millions of Americans of all political stripes who want Washington to change, who want to reclaim their voice in their democracy, and who long, actually, for the interests of Main Street to be put ahead of the interests of Wall Street. Unfortunately, Washington hasn't heard you, America. The system is still rigged and the swamp is only getting deeper. Special interest lobbyists are sharpening their knives in advance of the new Congress, and President-elect Trump's administration is ready to carve up the Tax Code for their benefit and eliminate oversight of Wall Street. In fact, bank stocks are surging now with Wall Street giddy at the prospect of tossing out critical rules and regulations designed to prevent another financial collapse and taxpayer bailout. As one Wall Street analyst put it immediately after the election: ``Everything is in play.'' Or maybe we should just use Mr. Hensarling's words: ``You ain't seen nothing yet.'' If you need further proof that special interests and the Wall Street elite will be empowered in the new Congress and administration, look no further than President-elect Trump's nomination for the Treasury Department: Steve Mnuchin--a billionaire hedge fund manager, former Goldman Sachs executive and bank CEO. President-elect Trump, a supposed champion of the working class, now seeks to appoint a financier who, like Trump, personally profited on the financial ruin of hardworking Americans. What does this have to do with the bill we have before us, you may ask? Well, a lot. Today, before the new President is even seated and Steven Mnuchin is even confirmed, H.R. 6392 will dramatically upend sensible oversight of some of the Nation's largest banks, many of which were directly implicated in the financial collapse of 2008. Taxpayers lose under this legislation, but guess who stands to benefit from it? Steve Mnuchin. He serves on the board of the bank CIT, receiving a salary of $4.5 million. CIT is one of only 27 banks in the country that will benefit from this terrible legislation. What is more, under this legislation, Mnuchin, if confirmed, will be in charge of overseeing the replacement designation process for CIT and the other 26 large regional banks rewarded by this legislation. Mr. Speaker, this legislation and the nomination of Steve Mnuchin is a direct rebuke of President-elect Trump's promise to ``drain the swamp.'' The only thing cleaner about the swamp is that the alligators will be wearing suits and ties. Millions of Americans of all political stripes are hurting. They want a more representative democracy. They want public policy designed for the public interest, not the special interests. They want a fair shake. Let's show them we are still fighting for them. Let's defeat this Wall Street giveaway.

Mr. SARBANES

Mr. SARBANES. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to commemorate the historic season of the Baltimore Oracles, my staff's congressional softball team and the victors of the 2016 Congressional Softball League championship. I was going to bring the trophy down, but it is much too big and much too heavy to carry. Mr. Speaker, the Oracles vanquished their opponents this season, achieving an astounding 19-1 record. Led by cocaptains Peter Gelman and Katie Teleky, and shadow-captain Raymond O'Mara, the team was a perfect blend of stout defense and potent offense. Mike Pulver, Anna Killius, Paul Kincaid, and Lucinda Lessley held down the infield, while Andy Allen, Max Frankel, Brian Kaissi, and Zach Weber roamed the outfield. Big bats littered the lineup, but the batters were always ready to oblige the team's heart and soul, Tim O'Neil, and hit just a single. Other contributors integral to the team's success include Kate and Adrienne Star, Evan Horn, Jake Barr, Will Pisano, Julia Kandel-Krieger, James Howard, Becky O'Mara, Alex Bond, and Winston, the team's ever- chipper mascot. Mr. Speaker, the Baltimore Oracles are champions, and that is truly world class.

Mr. SARBANES

Mr. SARBANES. Mr. Chair, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding. I rise in opposition to H.R. 2357, the Accelerating Access to Capital Act. Mr. Chair, 7 weeks ago, the Republican majority recessed the House for the summer district work period--7 weeks. Seven weeks is a long time, time that we in Congress could have spent addressing the many pressing issues that are facing the country right now. The 7 weeks did, however, provide me and my colleagues an opportunity to go back to our districts, meet with our constituents, and learn about what their priorities are, what the priorities are that the American people have for the remainder of the 114th Congress. I, for one, heard from my constituents on a number of things. They are concerned about the arrival of Zika in the United States, and they want a more comprehensive Federal response to that outbreak. They were shocked by the devastation in Flint, Michigan, and worried about their own water quality. They were bewildered that the gun lobby continues to block sensible gun safety reforms in the face of increasingly routine mass shootings and senseless gun violence on our streets. Incredibly now, Mr. Chairman, we have returned; and what are we doing in our first days? What are we doing? What are some of the first things that we are bringing up in spite of what the public has said its priorities are? Yet again, we are voting on a bill that is designed to roll back the important oversight of our financial markets and to eliminate critical consumer protections that guard against unscrupulous securities sales. This bill, H.R. 2357, the Accelerating Access to Capital Act--or, as I call it, the ``Wolf of Wall Street Enhancement Act''--would jump-start fraud in our capital markets. Each of the bill's three titles would reduce transparency, weaken consumer disclosure, and fuel fraud in our financial markets. I want to ask my colleagues: Who are the people out there who are asking for these changes in our securities law? Did anyone hear in a town hall that they did? Did anyone hear at those meetings this summer about the need to expand shelf registration for unproven companies? Who back home is clamoring for unregistered, undisclosed security offerings? Who wants to further tie the hands of the SEC's in adopting even the most modest disclosure requirements? Yet again, Congress' agenda has been warped by the undue influence of narrow special interests. Yet again, we are ignoring the real priorities of the American people. Mr. Chairman, we have more important business than this. I urge my colleagues to vote against this legislation.

Mr. SARBANES

Mr. SARBANES. I thank the gentleman for yielding. Mr. Chairman, I want to commend Mr. Kildee for this amendment, which promotes more accountability and transparency and disclosure at a time when that is what people are asking for. They want to know where the secret money is coming from, and they want to know where it is going. They say sunshine is the best disinfectant, but yet again, this House is acting to shield corporate and big money donors from the light of day. It is this Russian doll technique. You open the Russian doll because you think you can see what is inside, and then when you open it, there is another doll inside; and then you open that one, and there is another doll inside that one. You can never get to where the money really is. You can never find out who is actually bankrolling these huge expenditures, these TV commercials that are coming in, this megaphone that is taking over our politics from secret interests. All Mr. Kildee is seeking is that we provide the transparency, the disclosure, the information that the American people are seeking. We need more of that. We need more disclosure. We need more accountability. We need more transparency. That is what the American people are demanding. That is what this amendment would do. Let's pass this amendment and ensure that accountability in our politics.

Mr. SARBANES

Mr. SARBANES. Mr. Speaker, a moment ago, the House Chaplain expressed the hope--I would imagine it is a fervent hope--that we would return to this place with ``a spirit of common purpose.'' Those are the words that he used. Nothing would reflect the common purpose of the American people more than allowing us to have a vote on gun safety legislation in this House. Ninety percent of Americans support universal background checks. That is common purpose. A majority of responsible gun owners in this country support universal background checks. That is common purpose. Eighty-five percent of Americans say that, if you can't fly on a plane because you are too dangerous, you shouldn't be able to buy a weapon. That is common purpose. So, what is the problem? Why can't we bring legislation? Why can't we respond to the anguish and grief of so many families and communities around this country? The Speaker of this House will not allow legislation to come to the floor. He won't allow us to express the common purpose of the American people. Give us a vote. Give us a chance to demonstrate that common purpose and address this scourge of violence in our country.

Mr. SARBANES

Mr. SARBANES. Mr. Speaker, this is the final amendment to the bill, which will not kill the bill or send it back to committee. If adopted, the bill will immediately proceed to final passage, as amended. Mr. Speaker, we have had a debate here today on this larger issue of accountability to the American people when it comes to our politics, the way we govern, and the huge amounts of secret money that are pouring into our politics in a way that has left the average American feeling cynical and disconnected from their democracy. If anything, what Americans want to see is not less information and less accountability when it comes to politics, but more of it. Now, many people out there are just kind of hanging on by a fingernail in terms of any confidence or trust when it comes to our democracy and our politics because they see how Big Money has sort of taken over the conversation and that the megaphone that Big Money has is hard to compete with if you are just a regular person out there who wants your voice to be heard. But it is made even worse when you don't know who is holding that megaphone when that speech comes in with all that money behind it and you don't know who the speaker is because that is hidden away because all of this money has become secret. One of the mechanisms that is being used by Big Money out there to kind of foist themselves onto our politics and push average Americans on to the margins of their own democracy is to go in there and try and hijack, commandeer, and takeover these 501(c) organizations. These tax exempt organizations end up really engaging primarily in political activity but are masquerading as these 501(c) organizations that are supposed to be engaged in tax exempt activities. So what this motion to recommit would do is pretty straightforward. It says that if one of these 501(c) tax exempt organizations--and I am reading now from the motion to recommit, from the amendment that would be made--is directly or indirectly participating in or intervening in any political campaign on behalf of or in opposition to any candidate for public office, then in that instance, the IRS ought to be able to collect that information on who their donors are. Look, it makes sense. Taxpayers out there are saying: We understand that there are organizations that should be tax exempt because of the good work that they are doing, that they are actually social welfare organizations, the local Boys & Girls Club, organizations like that, providing a public benefit. That is okay. We will pay our taxes. But we understand that those organizations shouldn't have to because they are doing something that is good for the public and good for the community and so forth. But if an organization is getting taken over by some group that has got a political goal or political objective, then it shouldn't be entitled to that tax exemption anymore. That is what this motion to recommit says: You don't get to deny the IRS the kind of information that will allow them to make a judgment as to whether you deserve to have that tax exempt status. So that is all that we are trying to do. There are two things that the IRS needs to look at when they are deciding whether a C organization is engaged primarily in political activity. One is, where is the money going? How are they spending it? They will be able to see that. But the other is, where is the money coming from that is getting spent? Who is behind the thing? That helps them decide, is this organization really fulfilling tax exempt purposes, or is it just masquerading that way when, in fact, what it is doing is engaged primarily in political activity? So we want the IRS to have the information that allows them to reach a judgment as to whether an organization that is benefiting from this tax exemption really deserves to get that tax exemption. That is what this motion to recommit would do. We need more accountability, not less, in our politics. We need more information to decide who appropriately is benefiting from this tax exempt status. Mr. Speaker, for that reason, I urge my colleagues to support the motion to recommit, and I yield the balance of my time.

Mr. SARBANES. I thank the gentleman for yielding. Mr. Speaker, fundamentally, this is about which direction we want to move in as a country, as a Congress, as a responsible institution, as a government, in terms of whether we are going to respect the American people and their voice, whether we are going to turn their voice over to Big Money, to special interests that are hijacking our politics and our government. The problem with the proposal that is being put on the floor today is that it is moving us in the wrong direction. It is moving us away from the kind of disclosure information transparency in our political process that the American people are demanding. If you talk to the average person out there, they feel disrespected, locked out, left out, left behind, pushed to the margins of their own democracy, feeling as though Big Money calls the shots, the insiders rule the roost, and the average person has no voice, is of no consequence. They see the money being spent on these campaign commercials during election time. They don't know where it is coming from. They don't know what organizations are supporting it, and they feel like they don't have a stake in their own democracy anymore. What is interesting is that, you know, traditionally, in the past, Republicans had argued for more transparency and disclosure; that all political activity, all contributions that were made and all expenditures, should be divulged. In fact, in 1996, Mitch McConnell, the majority leader in the Senate, declared, proudly: ``Public disclosure of campaign contributions''--public disclosure of campaign contributions--``and spending should be expedited so voters can judge for themselves what is appropriate.'' We are moving even further away from public disclosure because this bill would say that the IRS isn't even going to be able to collect information on who is donating to these 501(c)(3) organizations. So at a time when the American people are saying we need more accountability in our politics, in our government when it comes to this secret money that is out there, at a time when Americans want more accountability, this bill moves us towards less accountability. It will move secret money even further into the shadows and contribute further to a less responsive and less transparent democracy. I can hear the American people saying to the Republicans who are putting this on the bill, who are authoring this legislation: Are you new here? Are you new in this current environment, political environment, where we are so angry, as the American people, that we want to understand who is trying to hijack our politics, and you are going to move us in the opposite direction? People already feel locked out. We don't have to do more to push them in that direction. We need more accountability, not less. For that reason, I urge my colleagues to defeat this bill today.

Mr. SARBANES. I just wanted to respond to this idea that the public wouldn't benefit from this. Yes, there are opportunities to develop more disclosure of this information to the public, and certainly the Democrats would like to see that. But the public would benefit from the IRS' getting more information about where this money comes from because it is the IRS' responsibility to determine whether these 501(c)(3) organizations are getting hijacked and taken over by special interest money--potentially foreign interest--and so forth. So the public would absolutely benefit if the IRS, which is the organization that has responsibility for determining whether you should have tax-exempt status or not, can fulfill that function on behalf of the public, and this would make it even more difficult for that agency to do its job in that respect.

Mr. SARBANES. Mr. Speaker, I have a motion to recommit at the desk.