Maxine Waters

Ms. WATERS

Ms. WATERS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 1716, the Taiwan Conflict Deterrence Act of 2025, sponsored by Representative McClain and cosponsored by Representative Sherman. Recognizing that China is a threat to Taiwan and to democracy globally, the United States must strongly and overtly support Taiwan, in part by pushing back on China's overt provocation toward Taiwan. As recently as last month, China flew over 70 warplanes over the Taiwan Strait, encroaching into Taiwanese territory and raising new concerns about Chinese Government aggression. The commander of the U.S. Indo-Pacific Command shared in his April congressional testimony that the Chinese military pressure on Taiwan has reached a ``rapid boil.'' Month after month, the Chinese Communist Party and Government further press at the edges of Taiwan's security and America's support for Taiwan. This Congress must speak loudly about our concern about such international actions by the Chinese Government, actions that could intentionally or unintentionally lead to an escalation of China's conflict with Taiwan. H.R. 1716, the Taiwan Conflict Deterrence Act of 2025, is one sensible avenue to do so, requiring the Treasury Secretary to publish a report on and restrict senior officials of the People's Republic of China and their families from financial institutions and accounts in the United States. The report mandated by the bill is intended to raise public awareness of hidden and corruptly gained funds that are directly or indirectly controlled by such officials--for those listed in the report, and their immediate family members. The bill would also restrict U.S.-based financial services, intending to limit the financial options for these officials and to extend the deterrent or punitive impacts to their families. Both actions would only occur under the bill if the President uses a never-applied--and hopefully unnecessary--clause in the Taiwan Relations Act, which would require congressional notification due to a China-led threat to ``the security or the social or economic system of the people on Taiwan and any danger to the interests of the United States arising therefrom.'' Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this bill, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. WATERS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time. Mr. Speaker, I support H.R. 1716, cosponsored by my colleagues Representative McClain and Representative Sherman. This bill supports Taiwan in combating Chinese provocations against Taiwan. This bipartisan bill proposes to restrict top officials in China from having significant transactions or engagement at American financial institutions and aims to expose hidden funds of Chinese officials if the Taiwan Relations Act congressional notification is ever triggered by a United States President. Especially now, as China increases its forays into Taiwanese territory, the United States Congress should support stricter measures against China's Government, sending the message that we will not tolerate the next step beyond its incursions. I support H.R. 1716 to protect global security and democracy, and I support doing more to accomplish this goal. Mr. Speaker, I, again, urge my colleagues to support this bill, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. WATERS

Ms. WATERS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 1450, the OFAC Licensure for Investigators Act, sponsored by Representative Beatty. This bill would require the Secretary of the Treasury to develop a pilot program at the Office of Foreign Assets Control, OFAC, by which private-sector firms like blockchain analytics firms or the financial intelligence units within correspondent banks could receive a license to send or receive nominal financial transactions to and through sanctioned entities. These small amounts could yield big details that could further our understanding of what is happening and by whom in sanctions evasion and money laundering investigations. We need what this bill proposes because as the global anti-money laundering and countering the financing of terrorism regime has become increasingly effective in detecting and deterring the abuse of the financial system, bad actors have often moved their transactions into illicit markets and spaces or used technologies and methods that are harder to track. Investigative efforts by firms and in-house functions dedicated to tracking down these attempts to avoid detection help banks and governments, among others, to identify bad actors, accounts, and typologies used by criminals and terrorists. They are limited, however, in how far they can see into these dirty operations. One of those limitations in the visibility into the financial transactions of bad actors is due to sanctions, which appropriately and forcefully prevents parties from engaging with targets of sanctions. Investigators, whether in private firms or large bank intelligence units, must stop a transaction after finding evidence that suggests that a wallet, account, or address may be associated with a sanctioned person. With the specific licenses envisioned by this bill, OFAC would closely manage narrow and explicit exceptions to its sanctions programs to allow investigators to engage with sanctioned persons in order to gain more visibility into the opaque networks and practices. Again, OFAC would be limited to allowing only nominal amounts for such traceable transfers. The bill also ensures that there is robust oversight of this process, requiring the recipients of these specific licenses to report to OFAC monthly on their findings. This is similar in concept to the keep-open letters that government officials provide to financial institutions to keep open suspicious accounts so the government can watch the transactions and follow the money. That is because H.R. 1450 would help investigators better follow the money to make their sanctions and money laundering investigations more fruitful for the United States Government, banks, and others that employ such services. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this bill, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. WATERS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from Ohio (Mrs. Beatty), who is also the ranking member of the Subcommittee on National Security, Illicit Finance, and International Financial Institutions, and is the sponsor of this bill.

Ms. WATERS. Mr. Speaker, this bill, H.R. 1450, the OFAC Licensure for Investigators Act from Representative Beatty would develop a program at the Department of the Treasury that would allow financial crime investigators, including those at the Office of Foreign Assets Control, that is OFAC, to better trace and understand the efforts by bad actors to evade sanctions and launder funds. By allowing nominal amounts to be directed through certain accounts with stringent U.S. Government oversight, banks, government agencies, and others seeking knowledge about how these bad actors behave and are connected will benefit. This bill will help to keep our financial system and national security secure. I, again, urge my colleagues to support this bill, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. WATERS

Ms. WATERS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, crypto week has been going so well, hasn't it? Mr. Speaker, that is because bailing out billionaires is hard work. I look at how hard Republicans worked to strip healthcare from 17 million Americans, shutter rural hospitals, and take food assistance from 12 million people just to hand the richest 1 percent of Americans a tax break they don't need. No one should be surprised that the Republicans' next order of business is a billion-dollar handout to the President himself. In just 6 months, President Trump has enriched himself and his family to the tune of $1.2 billion, and that is just the beginning. President Trump used to call crypto a scam. In 2021, Trump said: ``Bitcoin, it just seems like a scam . . . I don't like it because it is another currency competing against the dollar.'' Melania was actually the first to get involved in the crypto ecosystem. In January 2022, she announced an auction of her non- fungible token, or NFT, collection. Trump then followed suit in December 2022, launching his own NFT collection, ditching his concerns about crypto because he saw it as a way to pad his pockets. During the campaign trail, Trump ramped up his crypto involvement. In September 2024, he and his family launched World Liberty Financial, a crypto trading platform. Days before the Inauguration, Trump launched his memecoin which he later used to offer access to the White House to the highest bidder, foreign or domestic. His family's crypto empire hasn't stopped there. World Liberty Financial launched a stablecoin called USD1. Shortly after that, the Abu Dhabi-backed investment firm, MGX, bought $2 billion worth of Trump's coin to make an investment in Binance. Trump's family has also launched a bitcoin mining operation and multiple crypto exchange-traded funds, or ETFs. All of this comes at the same time that the Trump administration has taken away the independence of the financial regulators like the Securities and Exchange Commission. He issued Executive Order 14255 which now requires all rules written by the financial regulators to be reviewed and approved by the White House budget office. This means this bill would hand over to the President the ability to write the rules he wants to advance his crypto operations. Not only that, under the Trump administration, the SEC has said that memecoins, stablecoins, and bitcoin mining all do not fall under their oversight. Can my colleagues imagine that? Do these assets sound familiar? Oh, yes, they do because these are all ventures that Trump and his family are pursuing now with no oversight by Wall Street's cop on the beat--that is the SEC. Surely, each of my colleagues can see how this is a blatant conflict of interest. Democrats do. It is why I introduced the Stop Trump and Crypto Act to ban the President, Vice President, and all the Members of Congress from crypto corruption. If we do not ban elected officials, including the President or Vice President, from this crypto corruption in H.R. 3633, each of us will be complicit. Yet, even if we included language to stop the crypto con, this bill, which should be called the calamity act, is bad public policy. That is plain and simple. The bill would lead to increased investor harm, plant the seeds for the next financial crisis, and endanger our national security. Just last week, the former chairman of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission warned that this bill would allow traditional companies, like Apple or Google, to evade securities laws. They could walk away from the disclosure, antifraud, liability, and corporate governance protections that investors have relied on for 90 years. The bill blocks our State regulators from protecting seniors against fraud in crypto. Additionally, the calamity act does not address illicit finance and other crimes commonly seen in the crypto space. It does not provide nearly enough direction to agencies, which would be required to match the level of financial crimes and noncompliance seen in the industry. It also does not provide sufficient funds for Federal agencies to examine and enforce these laws. Mr. Speaker, for all of these reasons, I strongly, strongly oppose this bill, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. WATERS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Lynch), who is also the ranking member of the Subcommittee on Digital Assets, Financial Technology, and Artificial Intelligence.

Ms. WATERS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Casten), who is also the vice ranking member of the Financial Services Committee.

Ms. WATERS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/4\ minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Sherman), who is also the ranking member of the Subcommittee on Capital Markets.

Ms. WATERS. Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 15 seconds to the gentleman from California.

Ms. WATERS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Velazquez), who is also the ranking member of the Small Business Committee.

Ms. WATERS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Foster), who is also the ranking member of the Subcommittee on Financial Institutions.

Ms. WATERS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Massachusetts (Ms. Pressley), an unapologetic leader for justice.

Ms. WATERS. Mr. Speaker, may I inquire as to the time remaining.

Ms. WATERS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Kamlager-Dove).

Ms. WATERS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time. Mr. Speaker, let me reiterate: A vote for H.R. 3633 is a vote to give Trump the pen to write the rules that would put more money into his family's pockets. A vote for H.R. 3633 is a vote for increased investor harm. A vote for H.R. 3633 is a vote to plant the seeds for the next financial crisis. A vote for H.R. 3633 is a vote to endanger our national security. That is why I am voting ``no'' on H.R. 3633, the calamity act, and I urge all Members to not give a vote to Trump to own crypto and not to give a vote to the Vice President. They are the only two elected officials in this bill who can own crypto businesses. I want to see all of the Cabinet, the President, the Vice President, and all Members of Congress unable to own crypto businesses. Mr. Speaker, I urge all Members to vote no, no, no, on this bill, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. WATERS

Ms. WATERS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, 2 weeks ago Republicans boasted about how they would provide billionaires with tax cuts they don't need by stripping healthcare from 17 million Americans, shuttering hospitals across the country, and starving 12 million families, including millions of children. These billionaires are the same individuals who proudly gave millions of dollars to President Trump's campaign. They literally bought votes during the last election and even sponsored Stalinist military parades to celebrate the President's birthday. No one should be surprised that these same Republicans' next order of business is to validate, legitimize, and endorse the Trump family's corruption and efforts to sell the White House to the highest bidder. S. 1582, the so-called GENIUS Act, establishes a woefully deficient Federal framework for dollar-denominated payment stablecoins in the United States. Stablecoins are a form of digitized private money. Unlike other types of crypto, these coins claim to always maintain their value, often one coin for $1. Nevertheless, that promise of stability is precisely what causes stablecoins to be subject to bank-like runs where the public rushes to sell their stablecoins at the first whiff of instability, making a bit of bad news into a full-blown financial crisis. It was for this reason that when I was chairwoman of the committee, I sought to create a Federal framework to oversee these stablecoins and ensure that consumers are protected. I worked with the Biden administration and former Republican Chairman Patrick Henry to craft legislation. We achieved that goal, and I posted that legislation earlier this year. We wanted to create a strong Federal system to oversee this type of crypto market that protected consumers, our national security, and financial stability. Unfortunately, the election of Donald Trump ended those bipartisan efforts and brought a significant new challenge to stablecoins. That challenge was the Trump family's brazen corruption using crypto to sell access in exchange for official acts. It just so happens that those stablecoins are one of the main vehicles Trump is using to make his corrupt crypto billions. The Trump family's crypto company, World Liberty Financial, launched a stablecoin called USD1 in April. Shortly after that, the Abu Dhabi-backed investment from MGX bought $2 billion of Trump's coins to make an investment in Binance, a company that had been under investigation for numerous legal violations. Trump and his family will make tens of millions of dollars just on that transaction from the interest earnings alone. That is Abu Dhabi's money. More concerning, by passing this bill, Congress will be telling the world that Congress is okay with corruption, okay with foreign companies buying influence, and okay with criminals buying Trump coins to seek pardons and beneficial treatment. Each of my colleagues surely can see how this is a blatant conflict of interest. Democrats and the rest of America do, as well. It is why I introduced the Stop TRUMP in Crypto Act, to ban the President, Vice President, and Members of Congress from crypto corruption. If we do not ban elected officials in S. 1582, including the President or Vice President, from crypto corruption, each of us will be complicit. Let me be clear on this point because there has been a lot of misinformation. This bill has a policy statement that elected officials like Members of Congress and Senators, as well as government officials, cannot issue their own stablecoin. Are my colleagues aware who Republicans did not ban? Get this straight. The President and the Vice President are the only elected officials that can have a crypto business. Why are the Republicans protecting the President so he can make billions and billions more? Don't just take my word for it. Earlier this week, Chairman Hill confirmed this much in the Rules Committee. Anyone who says the bill stops the President's company from issuing stablecoins is not telling the truth. Yet, even if we adopted such a ban, the GENIUS Act, sent over by the Senate and apparently unable to be amended, is still bad public policy. S. 1582 creates the appearance of a Federal framework for stablecoins, but it does not provide the Federal Government with the full authority it needs to ensure that all stablecoin issuers comply with the law. The bill also creates risks for consumers who will be stuck in a lengthy bankruptcy process if a stablecoin ever fails. Additionally, it leaves the door open for foreign firms that present a major national security threat, including targets of sanctions, all to appease those in the Trump family's inner circle which has ties to those shady entities. Yes, I am talking about Tether, the foreign stablecoin issuer everyone knows has been used in terrorist financing, organized crime schemes, and other horrible acts but which the Secretary of Commerce has close ties with. Let me give one more example of why this bill is just bad for America. The very heart of this bill is that stablecoins will, in fact, be stable because they will be backed one to one with solid, safe assets. I invite anyone to read the bill. While some of the reserves are cash and short-term Treasury securities, this bill allows for uninsured deposits. We already know how dangerous these deposits are. When Silicon Valley Bank failed, Circle, the largest stablecoin today, had $3 billion locked up in uninsured deposits and needed the Federal Government to rescue it. That isn't all. A stablecoin issuer is also permitted to hold bitcoin as reserves. That is because someone added language in this bill late in the night that added new definitions and language to the bill. The language allows for a stablecoin issuer to use any money received under repurchase agreements that are a means of exchange currently authorized or adopted by a foreign government. Do my colleagues know what Trump's favorite strongman, the dictator of El Salvador, adopted as a legal currency? He adopted bitcoin. This highly volatile cryptocurrency will now be eligible to be a reserve backing your stablecoins. It is truly absurd and dangerous and will lead to consumers losing their money and the taxpayers being called on to bail out the financial system. It is for all of these reasons that I submitted several amendments to this bill, none of which were made in order by Republicans, because the President has rejected any conflict of interest language that binds him. One interesting point is that even Chairman Hill himself inserted language at the end of the so-called CLARITY Act that the House is separately considering this week that actually amends the GENIUS Act. Mr. Speaker, you heard me right. Rather than amend the GENIUS Act, which our own chairman saw had problems, he put his changes at the end of the CLARITY Act. Mr. Speaker, you may be asking why he would do that. He could just offer his amendments to the GENIUS Act. The reason is that House Republican leadership has given up our power as the United States House of Representatives to work the will of our Members on behalf of our constituents and make changes to any legislation that the Senate sends us. Instead, we are simply taking the language directly from the Senate with no amendments, even when the chairman and other House Members know that this bill is flawed. Unfortunately, because President Trump demanded the bill be passed without any changes, that is what the Republican Congress will do. One of Chairman Hill's changes to the GENIUS Act addresses a key concern I have had from the beginning, which is that Facebook and any other Big Tech company should not be allowed to issue their own stablecoin. That would violate a longstanding separation of banking and commerce in financial regulation, and our chairman's amended language would help close this loophole. Unfortunately, the GENIUS Act allows Elon Musk's X to issue its own stablecoin and creates a pathway for Facebook to do the same. For these reasons and many more, I strongly oppose this bill. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. WATERS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Lynch), who is also the ranking member of the Subcommittee on Digital Assets, Financial Technology, and Artificial Intelligence.

Ms. WATERS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Sherman), who is also the ranking member of the Subcommittee on Capital Markets.

Ms. WATERS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Casten), who is also the vice ranking member of the Financial Services Committee.

Ms. WATERS. Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 15 seconds to the gentleman from Illinois.

Ms. WATERS. Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 15 seconds to the gentleman from Illinois.

Ms. WATERS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Velazquez), who is also the ranking member of the Committee on Small Business.

Ms. WATERS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Davidson) who is the Republican chairman of the National Security Subcommittee.

Ms. WATERS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, since assuming office, President Trump has been making himself richer and richer, while working-class Americans are struggling just to stay afloat. President Trump has earned $1.2 billion since he entered office. The Trump family has been using the Office of the Presidency, and the way that they are doing this is extremely alarming to me and my fellow Democrats. Now, let me go through this timeline once more. In September 2024, on the campaign trail, the Trump family launched World Liberty Financial, which they have described as a decentralized finance, or DeFi company. On January 17, 2 days before the Presidential inauguration, President Donald Trump launched his Trump memecoin. Days later, Melania Trump launched her memecoin. On March 25, 2025, World Liberty Financial launched a dollar-pegged stablecoin just 1 week before the House Financial Services Committee marked up stablecoin legislation and 2 weeks after Senate colleagues held their markup. On March 31, Eric Trump and Donald Trump, Jr.'s, American data centers merged with American bitcoin, a bitcoin mining operation. On July 8, Trump Media and Technology Group, the company that operates the Truth Social media platform, announced that it had filed paperwork with the SEC to approach to launch the crypto blue chip ETF later this year. Now, let's add all of this up. Since January of this year, President Trump and his family have launched or are planning to launch six different crypto ventures. Congressional Republicans and the crypto industry will state that these conflicts of interest take away from the discussion on other parts of the bill. They claim that this bill is good for consumers and investors. Well, let me tell you, it is not. It is good for Trump's family and wealthy crypto investors that can afford to see themselves through an FTX-type collapse. No one, not a Republican or a Democrat, should be using their office to make themselves richer while everyday Americans are struggling to buy groceries and pay for their healthcare. Everyday Americans are simply trying to survive, thanks to Republican policies, while President Trump and his billionaire boys' club thrive in the economy. It is simple. People want to know why Members of Congress can't simply exclude the President and the Vice President. Why do they keep them in both of the bills as owners of crypto? Why did they avoid my amendment that would take them out? I don't believe that the President, the Vice President, his Cabinet, his family, or any Members of Congress should be owners of crypto. I certainly don't believe that the Office of the Presidency should be used by anybody, any President, now or in the future, to be the owners of crypto. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.