[Pages H5657-H5662]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

FINANCIAL SERVICES AND GENERAL GOVERNMENT APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2024

The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Burchett). Pursuant to House Resolution
847 and rule XVIII, the Chair declares the House in the Committee of
the Whole House on the state of the Union for the further consideration
of the bill, H.R. 4664.
Will the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Bost) kindly resume the chair.

{time} 0919

In the Committee of the Whole

Accordingly, the House resolved itself into the Committee of the
Whole House on the state of the Union for the further consideration of
the bill (H.R. 4664) making appropriations for financial services and
general government for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2024, and
for other purposes, with Mr. Bost (Acting Chair) in the chair.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The Acting CHAIR. When the Committee of the Whole rose on Wednesday,
November 8, 2023, amendment No. 95 printed in part B of House Report
118-269 offered by the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Salazar) had been
disposed of.

Amendment No. 100 Offered by Ms. Tenney

The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 100
printed in part B of House Report 118-269.
Ms. TENNEY. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

At the end of the bill (before the short title) insert the
following:
Sec. __. The salary of Karine Jean-Pierre, White House
Press Secretary, shall be reduced to $1.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 847, the gentlewoman
from New York (Ms. Tenney) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from New York.
Ms. TENNEY. Mr. Chair, I rise today to offer an amendment to reduce
the salary of Karine Jean-Pierre, the White House Press Secretary, to
$1.
Mr. Chair, during Ms. Jean-Pierre's tenure as press secretary, she
has repeatedly lied to the American people and acted in a condescending
manner toward reporters, and she has also violated the Hatch Act.
Just to name a few of her lies, Ms. Jean-Pierre has claimed that
illegal immigration is down under the Biden administration. She also
claimed that nobody is just walking in across the southern border.
She also claimed that the 2016 election was stolen. She also claimed
that Governor Brian Kemp stole the 2018 Governor race from Stacey
Abrams. She also claimed that the Biden stimulus bill did not impact
inflation. She also claimed critical race theory or its equivalent
isn't being taught in our schools. She also claimed that nobody has
done more for the southern border or our border in general than Joe
Biden.
Mr. Chair, how can somebody with such a history of deceit continue to
serve as the liaison for the President and the American people?
The American people should not be forced to pay the salary of an
individual who dispenses bold-faced lies to the American people while
they foot the bill.
Ms. Jean-Pierre also has a history of anti-Semitic and anti-Zionist
rhetoric.
For example, she called AIPAC racist and Islamophobic for supporting
Israel. She wrote an op-ed that pro-Israel policies and values are not
progressive values, which I think many of my Democratic colleagues even
would contest.
Mr. Chair, I urge all my colleagues to support this commonsense
amendment to use the Holman rule to reduce the White House Press
Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre's salary to $1.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. HOYER. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Maryland is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. HOYER. Mr. Chair, this is another unserious amendment. We have
had over 50 of these. Every one that has been put to a roll call vote
has lost, and this one will, as well, I hope.
Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. TENNEY. Mr. Chairman, I respect the views of the gentleman in
opposition. However, the American taxpayers are beleaguered now with
inflation and with high energy costs, and dispensing lies from the
White House--our own White House--from the press secretary knowingly is
not something that the American people should tolerate or have to pay
for, quite honestly.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. HOYER. Mr. Chairman, this seems to be the substance of the
Republican response to all the issues that the gentlewoman raises.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. TENNEY. Mr. Chairman, inflammatory language comes out of Karine
Jean-Pierre. In fact, she is an election denier. She claimed that the
election of 2016 was stolen. She claimed that Stacey Abrams actually
beat Governor Brian Kemp in the election of 2018. An election denier is
standing at the podium of the White House actually dispensing even more
misinformation to the American people at their expense.

[[Page H5658]]

Mr. Chair, I ask my colleagues to join me in supporting this
amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. HOYER. Mr. Chair, I don't want to prolong this debate, but to
hear about election denial from the other side of the aisle is
extraordinary, and it is extraordinarily inconsistent with the
performance of the former President who lied regularly.
Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Tenney).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the ayes
appeared to have it.
Mr. HOYER. Mr. Chair, I demand a recorded vote.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from New York
will be postponed.
Mr. HOYER. Mr. Chair, I rise as the designee of the gentlewoman from
Connecticut, and I move to strike the last word.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Maryland is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. HOYER. Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentleman from Pennsylvania
(Mr. Cartwright), who is the distinguished ranking member of the
Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies Subcommittee.
Mr. CARTWRIGHT. Mr. Chairman, I thank the ranking member of the FS-GG
Subcommittee.
Mr. Chair, here in Congress we have a big opportunity to fight drug
trafficking in this country.
Congress originally authorized the High Intensity Drug Trafficking
Area program, HIDTA, in 1988 and renewed it in 1993 and in 1998.
The program provides significant financial assistance to State and
local law enforcement and facilitates strong cooperation among those
agencies and with Federal law enforcement.
That cooperation has led to many successes in our efforts to disrupt
the market for illegal drugs by interdicting and seizing drugs off of
our shores and within our borders.
This High Intensity Drug Trafficking Area program removes the supply
of illicit substances, making it harder for drug trafficking
organizations to sell their products. For example, in 2021, the HIDTA
program seized over 193 metric tons of cocaine products, 195 metric
tons of methamphetamine, 2,900 metric tons of marijuana, 4 metric tons
of heroin, and 9 metric tons of fentanyl.
We all know the toll that the drug trafficking continues to take on
communities across our country. Along our southern border, the Mexican
cartels are using any means necessary to import precursor chemicals
from China to produce synthetic opioids such as fentanyl. That is to
meet a growing demand, a demand that has resulted in over 100,000
deaths of Americans in just 1 year.
The accessibility and the affordability of these drugs leave Federal,
State, local, and Tribal partners in a continuous defensive posture to
keep dangerous narcotics out of our communities and successfully to
combat the drug trafficking networks that are responsible.
Nevertheless, still today we continue to see draconian cuts by the
majority to law enforcement efforts not only in this bill, the FS-GG
bill, but also in the bill produced by the Commerce, Justice, Science,
and Related Agencies Subcommittee where I am the ranking member.
These cuts serve only to amplify the supply of illicit drugs. These
cuts cause a proliferation in the violence associated with the drug
trade. These cuts damage the important work of successful programs like
HIDTA.
Here in Congress we have the opportunity to build on the investments
we have made in the war against drugs. We can provide the HIDTA program
with the resources it needs to address its existing and emerging
challenges in this war. We can send a clear signal to our adversaries
on the global stage that we will not allow this attack on our
communities without consequence. We can bring those responsible for
this drug trafficking scum to justice.
For these reasons, at the appropriate time, I will offer a motion to
recommit this bill back to the committee. If the House rules permit, I
would have offered the motion with an important amendment to the bill.
My amendment would increase the Office of National Drug Control
Policies High Intensity Drug Trafficking Areas program by $15 million.
Mr. Chair, I include in the Record the text of this amendment.

Mr. Cartwright moves to recommit the bill H.R. 4664 to the
Committee on Approriations with the following ammendment:
Page 41, 1ine 23, after the dollar amount, insert
``(increased by $15,000,000)''.

Mr. CARTWRIGHT. Mr. Chair, I hope my colleagues join me in voting for
this motion to recommit.
Mr. HOYER. Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

{time} 0930

Amendment No. 101 Offered by Ms. Tenney

The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 101
printed in part B of House Report 118-269.
Ms. TENNEY. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the
following:
Sec. __. None of the funds made available by this Act may
be used finalize, implement, or enforce the proposed rule of
the Department of Defense, General Services Administration,
and National Aeronautics and Space Administration titled
``Federal Acquisition Regulation: Disclosure of Greenhouse
Gas Emissions and Climate-Related Financial Risk'' (87 Fed.
Reg. 68312; published November 14, 2022).

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 847, the gentlewoman
from New York (Ms. Tenney) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from New York.
Ms. TENNEY. Mr. Chair, I rise today to offer my amendment to prohibit
any funding to finalize, implement, or enforce the Federal Acquisition
Regulation Council's proposed ``Federal Acquisition Regulation:
Disclosure of Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Climate-Related Financial
Risk'' rule.
Mr. Chair, this disastrous rule proposed by the Federal Acquisition
Regulation Council has numerous constitutional, national security, and
practical concerns, none of which have been adequately addressed by the
Federal Acquisition Regulation Council, otherwise known as FAR, nor has
the Council on Environmental Quality done its due diligence. Both
agencies have pushed for this rule in spite of a lack of due diligence.
First and foremost, this rule requires all Federal contractors that
do business of more than $50 million with the Federal Government to
disclose all scope 1, 2, and 3 emissions. This includes everything from
emissions produced by the contractor to the emissions produced by mere
office supplies that they buy for their employees.
We debated the ridiculousness of scope 3 emissions earlier, but this
is simply not practical or helpful to the American people. This rule
also seeks to require major Federal contractors to comply with the
Paris climate accords, a flawed deal that has never been ratified by
the Senate. However, the most objectionable part concerning this rule
is the requirement that companies set climate targets and then have
them validated by a company called Science Based Targets initiative, or
SBTi.
SBTi is a foreign--and I emphasize ``foreign''--London-based company,
which inherently has national security concerns. Under this rule, every
major Federal contractor, including companies critical to our national
security, is required to provide this foreign company with information
about all of their scope 1, 2, and 3 emissions and then strategize with
this foreign company about how to reduce them.
Despite the existence of numerous American-based companies that could
fill this same role, the FAR Council and CEQ chose a foreign company as
the named sole-source provider. Why? Because SBTi is nothing but a
front for Democratic donors and Democratic advocacy groups.
SBTi is owned by the We Mean Business Coalition, which is a project
of the New Venture Fund, which is managed by the famous Arabella
Advisors.
Arabella Advisors, for those who do not know, is the George Soros-
funded,

[[Page H5659]]

leftwing advocacy group that funnels dark money to leftwing causes and
candidates.
To summarize, the Biden administration has named this subsidiary, one
of their top donor's leftwing dark money organizations, as the sole-
source provider for all climate target validating for all major Federal
contractors.
During a hearing in the Science, Space, and Technology Committee on
this rule, even the Democrats' witness said that the SBTi was a poor
choice for this role, yet the Biden administration continues to forge
ahead with this rule anyway.
I look forward to continuing to work with my colleagues on the
Science, Space, and Technology Committee to get to the bottom of this
rule's suspicious creation, and I continue to urge the committee to
subpoena CEQ Chair Brenda Mallory to answer these concerns so the
American people know why this is continuing.
Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to support this amendment, and I
reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. HOYER. Mr. Chair, I claim the time in opposition to the
amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Maryland is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. HOYER. Mr. Chair, the proposed rule promotes transparency by
requiring Federal contractors to disclose their greenhouse gas
emissions and climate-related financial risks. This transparency
enhances accountability and helps the government and the American
people make informed decisions regarding its contracts.
By addressing climate-related financial risk, the rule encourages
businesses to assess and mitigate their exposure to climate-related
challenges. This proactive approach is critical in addressing the
financial implications of climate change and fosters sustainability.
Access to data on greenhouse gas emissions and climate risk enables
the government to make more informed procurement decisions. This means
selecting contractors that are actively addressing climate change and
demonstrating environmental responsibility.
Mr. Chair, for all those reasons, I strongly oppose the adoption of
this amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. TENNEY. Mr. Chair, I appreciate the concerns about making sure
that we have a cleaner climate. However, the gentleman doesn't talk
about this obvious issue with Arabella Advisors.
Everyone knows this is a dark money group that funds entities that
actually fund donors and is part of the donor class of the Democratic
Party, which is put in a unique position to actually control how we
manage climate and how we deal with these issues with Federal
contractors.
I cited in my initial remarks that this also includes security
issues. These are companies that are now going to have to confer with
suspect foreign entities to talk about these issues and share
information. This is a dangerous precedent.
Not only is it a Democratic donor issue, which is politically charged
and shouldn't be allowed in our rulemaking process or in our
governmental process, but it is also a threat to our security.
Mr. Chair, for those reasons, I urge all of my colleagues to support
this rule. It is a commonsense rule, and it is something that they
would certainly object to if the Republicans had proposed their major
donor base to be in this position on the Federal level and certainly as
part of the Federal bureaucracy in such a critical role.
Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. HOYER. Mr. Chair, I will not characterize it as rightwing or
leftwing, but what the gentlewoman does not talk about, of course, is
the donor base of the Republican Party and the interests that exist
that do not want this transparency.
Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
Ms. TENNEY. Mr. Chair, with all due respect, this is a mandatory rule
that requires every Federal contractor doing business over $50 million
a year to use this company, a foreign-based company, not an American
company, not a company where we can actually have oversight over it
using our rules.
Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Tenney).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the ayes
appeared to have it.
Ms. TENNEY. Mr. Chair, I demand a recorded vote.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from New York
will be postponed.

Amendment No. 102 Offered by Mrs. Wagner

The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 102
printed in part B of House Report 118-269.
Mrs. WAGNER. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert
the following:
Sec. __. None of the funds made available by this Act
may be used to finalize or implement the proposed
interpretive guidance of the Financial Stability Oversight
Council titled ``Authority To Require Supervision and
Regulation of Certain Nonbank Financial Companies'' (88 Fed.
Reg. 26234; published April 28, 2023).

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 847, the gentlewoman
from Missouri (Mrs. Wagner) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Missouri.
Mrs. WAGNER. Mr. Chair, I rise today to prevent the Financial
Stability Oversight Council, FSOC, from making it easier to designate
nonbank financial companies as a systemically important financial
institution, or SIFI.
The 2008 financial crisis was a result of Fannie Mae and Freddie
Mac's poor government housing policy that bilked taxpayers out of
billions of dollars and the inability of financial regulators to
properly identify systemic risk and take action until it was too late.
As a response to the crisis, Congress passed the Dodd-Frank Act of
2010. The Democrats' law has dramatically reduced competition in the
banking sector, imposed barriers to entry for new banks, and saddled
financial institutions with a mountain of new requirements that hit
small, midsize, and regional banks particularly hard.
Under Dodd-Frank, FSOC has the power to designate companies as a SIFI
and, therefore, subject to Federal Reserve supervision and enhanced
prudential standards--in other words, too big to fail.
Last week, FSOC finalized guidance that would allow it to apply these
same ``too big to fail'' burdens to nonbank financial institutions,
such as asset managers or broker-dealers, insurance companies, and
private funds.
It has been reported that the annual consumer cost of designating a
nonbank financial institution as a SIFI could range from $5 billion to
$8 billion, yet FSOC's new guidance fails to require any cost-benefit
analysis when making such a designation. Let me repeat that one more
time. These designations would cost consumers, American taxpayers, $5
billion to $8 billion per year.
This guidance put forth by the Biden administration rescinds the 2019
changes that rightfully moved FSOC's authority from an entities-based
approach to an activities-based approach in determining whether a
nonbank entity should be deemed a SIFI. To grant such unfettered
discretionary power to a government agency should concern every
American, particularly when the body exercising that power, FSOC, is
composed almost entirely of members of a single political party.
Mr. Chair, I urge all of my colleagues to support this amendment that
reins in our regulators, restores Congress' Article I powers, and saves
Main Street investors billions of dollars.
Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. HOYER. Mr. Chair, I claim the time in opposition to the
amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Maryland is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. HOYER. Mr. Chair, I have great respect for my friend from
Missouri, and it seems to me that this is a very serious matter that
she has raised.

[[Page H5660]]

It is also my belief that it ought to be considered in the context of
the Financial Services Committee and legislation propounded and offered
to this House for careful consideration of the serious assertions that
the gentlewoman makes. We ought to have the time to debate and fully
understand the ramifications of the actions that the gentlewoman speaks
of. However, in the context of this bill, we don't have the opportunity
to really make that kind of assertion or analysis.
The authority granted to the Financial Stability Oversight Council,
FSOC, to require supervision and regulation of certain nonbank
financial companies helps mitigate systemic risks in the financial
system. I was here in 2008, and we saw that. We saw it at great cost to
the economy and to individuals. By identifying and regulating
systemically important nonbank entities, FSOC can prevent potential
destabilizing events that could harm the broader economy.
The 2008 financial crisis highlighted, Mr. Chairman, the need to
monitor and regulate nonbank financial firms that can pose very
significant risks. The FSOC's authority fosters a coordinated
regulatory approach, ensuring that nonbank financial companies are
subject to appropriate oversight without duplicating efforts across
different regulatory agencies.
Mr. Chair, this may well be something that ought to be the subject of
greater discussion by the committee of jurisdiction and expertise, but
I strongly oppose the amendment and urge a ``no'' vote.
Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mrs. WAGNER. Mr. Chair, I thank the gentleman for his consideration
of the amendment. However, we have, in fact, held a hearing in the
Financial Services Committee about this very issue and some of the
costs that I am talking about. The $5 billion to $8 billion that this
would cost our taxpayers to implement was a part of that discussion
within the Financial Services Committee and came from testimony
directly there.
Again, these designations would cost consumers, American taxpayers,
$5 billion to $8 billion per year, and I urge my colleagues to support
this amendment that reins in our regulators, restores Congress' Article
I powers, and saves our Main Street investors billions and billions of
dollars.
Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

{time} 0945

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Chair, again, I thank the gentlewoman for her
observations and concern because, obviously, the conclusion that she
makes would be of concern to all of us. I simply suggest that this is
not the proper place for us to give the analysis and assess the
correctness of the assertion that has been made in terms of cost.
We have experienced a time where a failure to deal with nonbanks cost
this economy one of its deepest recessions since I have been in the
Congress of the United States.
I have no reason to believe one way or the other whether the
gentlewoman's assertion is correct because I just don't know. She is a
member of the Financial Services Committee, to my understanding, and if
her assertion is correct, then I think a bipartisan bill ought to be
brought to the floor and considered.
However, I think at this juncture this amendment ought to be
rejected.
Mr. Chairman, I urge its defeat, and I yield back the balance of my
time.
Mrs. WAGNER. Mr. Chairman, I thank my friend across the aisle for his
consideration and his kind words. I would just simply urge my
colleagues to support this amendment that would rein in our regulators,
and I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentlewoman from Missouri (Mrs. Wagner).
The amendment was agreed to.
The Acting CHAIR. The Chair understands that amendment No. 103 will
not be offered.

Amendment No. 104 Offered by Mr. Williams of Texas

The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 104
printed in part B of House Report 118-269.
Mr. WILLIAMS of Texas. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the
following:
Sec. __. None of the funds made available by this Act may
be used to establish a new pilot program (as such term is
defined in section 7(a)(25)(B) of the Small Business Act (15
U.S.C. 636(a)(25)(B))) of the Small Business Administration.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 847, the gentleman
from Texas (Mr. Williams) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman.
Mr. WILLIAMS of Texas. Mr. Chair, I rise today in full support of my
amendment to H.R. 4664.
Congress alone has the ability to authorize new programs.
Unfortunately, this past year we saw the SBA get around this basic fact
and effectively made a pilot program permanent through the rulemaking
process. This is unacceptable, and this amendment makes it clear that
the agency must respect the rule of law and not skirt congressional
authority.
This amendment would prevent the SBA from creating any new lending
programs. During the COVID-19 pandemic, the SBA took an outsized role
in the economy. Unfortunately, the after-action reports show the SBA's
track record was awful, horrible. SBA's inspector general estimates
that between $200 billion and $600 billion of American taxpayer dollars
from pandemic lending was lost to fraud.
Think about how large that number is. The entire FSGG bill we are
debating today has a top line appropriation number of $25 billion. This
agency alone had almost 10 times this amount of fraud flow through the
agency.
Where did it go? Well, we know it went to people who phonied up their
Social Security numbers. We know it went to people who said they were
somebody when they weren't. We also know it went to foreign nationals.
Now, in the private sector, where I come from, something with such a
poor track record would be shut down, not given additional
responsibilities. This amendment would stop any additional attempts for
the SBA to simply decide they can take on more lending activities.
In the Committee on Small Business we have worked to hold the SBA
accountable for its shortcomings and to increase transparency. With
many rule changes imposed by the SBA just this year, my amendment is a
commonsense approach that continues to build on the committee's mission
to restore and preserve the integrity of the agency.
Mr. Chair, the SBA should focus on their core mission, which is
helping entrepreneurs, Main Street America, capitalism, and what this
economy is all about. Let's get them back on that mission to where we
can get our economy going and small business can rely on what the SBA
says and does. I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. HOYER. Mr. Chair, I claim the time in opposition.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Maryland is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. HOYER. Mr. Chairman, the gentleman indicates that he came from
the private sector. I am sure he was very successful in the private
sector, as he has been in public life. In the private sector, one of
the things that we admire is the ability to innovate, adjust, and to
make changes when those are demanded by the marketplace.
This amendment undermines the ability of the Small Business
Administration to do exactly that: to innovate and reach more small
businesses by taking away the agency's pilot loan authority.
The gentleman is the chairman of the committee and knows better than
I, but pilot loan authority is the flexibility to assess the market,
assess the need, and take action. If they don't have that authority,
then, as some have argued in numerous amendments here, the Congress
ought to take that responsibility. Congress has not taken
responsibility very well, Mr. Chairman. We are not doing things we
ought to do.
If the private sector or the SBA were as inefficient and ineffective
as the Congress of the United States, we would shut it down, but of
course we can't shut down the Congress. We can just lament the fact
that we can't do

[[Page H5661]]

our work, that we don't respond in a timely fashion.
I am particularly concerned about Ukraine, under assault by a
despotic power. They need resources from the United States. By the way,
I read a report today that the United States is not the biggest
contributor to Ukraine. We are certainly the major partner. The EU and
others, including Japan, are the major partners because they want to
defend freedom. I am concerned about the fact that we haven't acted to
send a message to Putin, to Iran, to other despots that we will not
shrink from the responsibility of defending freedom here and around the
world.
This authority, in a microcosm, is to try to give the SBA the
opportunity to respond in a timely and effective fashion to
opportunities that it sees on behalf of small businesses. Pilot 7(a)
loans are provided by SBA to address the development of a specific
sector or geographical region based on the agency's identified needs.
We can shut everybody down in government, and unfortunately, frankly,
government is very risk averse, not as nimble as the private sector.
Why? It is because the administrators of all these agencies know that
they have got us looking over their shoulder, and if they make a slight
mistake, they have an amendment or they have a hearing or they have
some Congressman or Congresswoman who says: A-ha, gotcha.
If the private sector had that, it would be immobilized. It wouldn't
help because in the private sector, we understand that mistakes happen
because you are taking risks. By definition, risks sometimes result in
not succeeding or they wouldn't be a risk.
When we have an amendment like this--and we have had a number of
amendments like this, and concerns expressed--I get that. However, it
seems to me in this instance when my friend starts by saying he is in
the private sector, I welcome his experience. It is critically
important. We are the most successful economy on Earth because we allow
people to take risks. By definition, some fail. Obviously, most fail,
as a matter of fact. However, some are extraordinarily successful
because they took that risk. Now, what needs to happen, of course, in
the course of risking is when you find a failure, you stop it.
Mr. Chair, I urge that we reject this amendment because it precludes
the SBA from taking chances when they are available and can be
successful.

Mr. WILLIAMS of Texas. Mr. Chair, I have a hard time relating this
bill to Ukraine and Putin, which we just heard. Risk reward is a great
thing. Taking a risk and getting a reward is what made America great.
We find ourselves trying to fight for that all the time.
The SBA is needed for Main Street America. It is needed for small
business, but it needs to be fluid. It needs to be capitalized
properly. The SBA has misplaced $200 billion, as the auditor has said.
We need to find that. The SBA doesn't need to be getting bigger right
now. It actually needs to be getting smaller. Let's get this $200
billion and put it back in the economy so Main Street America can take
advantage of it. That is why this bill is important.
In closing, Mr. Chair, I think this bill is important. I think it is
going to actually help the SBA. It needs to be passed. The SBA is a
great agency when it is cooking on all cylinders, but it is not doing
that right now. Let's get them back in line. Let's get them to a size
that they can compete with and help Main Street America and get our
economy going again.
Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Williams).
The amendment was agreed to.

Announcement by the Acting Chair

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, proceedings
will now resume on those amendments printed in part B of House Report
118-269 on which further proceedings were postponed, in the following
order:
Amendment No. 100 by Ms. Tenney of New York.
Amendment No. 101 by Ms. Tenney of New York.
The Chair will reduce to 2 minutes the minimum time for any
electronic vote after the first vote in this series.

Amendment No. 100 Offered by Ms. Tenney

The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a
recorded vote on amendment No. 100, printed in part B of House Report
118-269 offered by the gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Tenney), on which
further proceedings were postponed and on which the ayes prevailed by
voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.

Recorded Vote

The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 165,
noes 257, answered ``present'' 1, not voting 16, as follows:

[Roll No. 641]

AYES--165

Aderholt
Alford
Allen
Amodei
Arrington
Babin
Balderson
Banks
Barr
Bean (FL)
Bentz
Bergman
Biggs
Bilirakis
Bishop (NC)
Boebert
Bost
Brecheen
Buchanan
Burchett
Burgess
Burlison
Cammack
Carl
Carter (GA)
Cline
Cloud
Clyde
Collins
Comer
Crane
Crawford
Curtis
De La Cruz
DesJarlais
Donalds
Duarte
Duncan
Dunn (FL)
Emmer
Estes
Ezell
Fallon
Feenstra
Ferguson
Finstad
Fischbach
Fitzgerald
Fleischmann
Foxx
Franklin, Scott
Fry
Fulcher
Gaetz
Gallagher
Garcia, Mike
Gonzales, Tony
Good (VA)
Gooden (TX)
Gosar
Graves (LA)
Graves (MO)
Green (TN)
Greene (GA)
Grothman
Guest
Guthrie
Hageman
Harris
Harshbarger
Hern
Higgins (LA)
Houchin
Huizenga
Hunt
Issa
Jackson (TX)
Johnson (LA)
Johnson (OH)
Johnson (SD)
Jordan
Joyce (PA)
Kelly (MS)
Kustoff
LaHood
LaMalfa
Lamborn
Langworthy
Latta
LaTurner
Lesko
Letlow
Loudermilk
Luetkemeyer
Luna
Luttrell
Malliotakis
Mann
Massie
Mast
McCaul
McClain
McClintock
McHenry
Meuser
Miller (IL)
Miller (OH)
Miller (WV)
Miller-Meeks
Mills
Molinaro
Moolenaar
Mooney
Moore (AL)
Moore (UT)
Murphy
Nehls
Norman
Ogles
Owens
Palmer
Perry
Pfluger
Posey
Reschenthaler
Rodgers (WA)
Rogers (AL)
Rose
Rosendale
Roy
Rutherford
Santos
Scalise
Schweikert
Scott, Austin
Self
Sessions
Smith (MO)
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smucker
Stauber
Steel
Stefanik
Steil
Steube
Strong
Tenney
Tiffany
Timmons
Van Drew
Van Duyne
Van Orden
Walberg
Waltz
Weber (TX)
Webster (FL)
Wenstrup
Westerman
Williams (NY)
Williams (TX)
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Yakym
Zinke

NOES--257

Adams
Aguilar
Allred
Armstrong
Auchincloss
Bacon
Baird
Balint
Barragan
Beatty
Bera
Beyer
Bice
Bishop (GA)
Blumenauer
Blunt Rochester
Bonamici
Bowman
Boyle (PA)
Brown
Brownley
Buck
Bucshon
Budzinski
Bush
Calvert
Caraveo
Carbajal
Cardenas
Carey
Carson
Carter (LA)
Carter (TX)
Cartwright
Casar
Case
Casten
Castor (FL)
Castro (TX)
Chavez-DeRemer
Cherfilus-McCormick
Chu
Clark (MA)
Clarke (NY)
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Cole
Connolly
Correa
Costa
Courtney
Craig
Crockett
Crow
Cuellar
D'Esposito
Davids (KS)
Davidson
Davis (IL)
Davis (NC)
Dean (PA)
DeGette
DeLauro
DelBene
Deluzio
DeSaulnier
Diaz-Balart
Doggett
Edwards
Ellzey
Escobar
Eshoo
Espaillat
Evans
Fitzpatrick
Fletcher
Flood
Foushee
Frost
Gallego
Garamendi
Garbarino
Garcia (IL)
Garcia (TX)
Garcia, Robert
Golden (ME)
Goldman (NY)
Gomez
Gonzalez, Vicente
Gonzalez-Colon
Granger
Green, Al (TX)
Grijalva
Harder (CA)
Hayes
Higgins (NY)
Hill
Himes
Hinson
Horsford
Hoyer
Hoyle (OR)
Hudson
Huffman
Ivey
Jackson (IL)
Jackson (NC)
Jacobs
James
Jayapal
Jeffries
Johnson (GA)
Joyce (OH)
Kamlager-Dove
Kaptur
Kean (NJ)
Keating
Kelly (IL)
Kelly (PA)
Khanna
Kiggans (VA)
Kildee
Kiley
Kilmer
Kim (CA)
Kim (NJ)
Krishnamoorthi
Kuster
LaLota
Landsman
Larson (CT)
Lawler
Lee (CA)
Lee (FL)
Lee (NV)
Lee (PA)
Leger Fernandez
Levin
Lieu
Lofgren
Lucas
Lynch
Mace
Magaziner
Manning
Matsui
McBath
McCarthy
McClellan
McCollum
McCormick
McGarvey
McGovern
Meeks
Menendez
Meng
Mfume
Moore (WI)
Moran
Morelle
Moskowitz
Moulton
Moylan
Mrvan
Mullin
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Neguse
Newhouse
Nickel
Norcross
Norton
Nunn (IA)

[[Page H5662]]

Obernolte
Ocasio-Cortez
Omar
Pallone
Panetta
Pappas
Pascrell
Payne
Peltola
Pence
Perez
Peters
Pettersen
Plaskett
Pocan
Porter
Pressley
Quigley
Ramirez
Raskin
Rogers (KY)
Ross
Rouzer
Ruiz
Ruppersberger
Ryan
Sablan
Salazar
Salinas
Sanchez
Sarbanes
Scanlon
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schneider
Scholten
Schrier
Scott (VA)
Scott, David
Sewell
Sherman
Sherrill
Simpson
Slotkin
Smith (WA)
Soto
Spanberger
Spartz
Stansbury
Stanton
Stevens
Strickland
Swalwell
Sykes
Takano
Thanedar
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Thompson (PA)
Titus
Tlaib
Tokuda
Tonko
Torres (CA)
Torres (NY)
Trahan
Trone
Turner
Underwood
Valadao
Vargas
Vasquez
Veasey
Wagner
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watson Coleman
Wexton
Wild
Williams (GA)
Wilson (FL)
Womack

ANSWERED ``PRESENT''--1

Griffith

NOT VOTING--16

Ciscomani
Crenshaw
Dingell
Foster
Frankel, Lois
Gimenez
Gottheimer
Houlahan
Jackson Lee
Larsen (WA)
Pelosi
Phillips
Pingree
Radewagen
Sorensen
Velazquez

{time} 1036

Messrs. HUDSON, VEASEY, LUCAS, BAIRD, and MOULTON changed their vote
from ``aye'' to ``no.''
Messrs. KELLY of Mississippi, POSEY, CURTIS, WESTERMAN, Mrs. RODGERS
of Washington, and Mr. MOORE of Utah changed their vote from ``no'' to
``aye.''
Mr. GRIFFITH changed his vote from ``aye'' to ``present.''
So the amendment was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.

Amendment No. 101 Offered by Ms. Tenney

The Acting CHAIR (Mr. Yakym). The unfinished business is the demand
for a recorded vote on amendment No. 101, printed in part B of House
Report 118-269 offered by the gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Tenney),
on which further proceedings were postponed and on which the ayes
prevailed by voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.

Recorded Vote

The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The Acting CHAIR. This is a 2-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 220,
noes 202, not voting 16, as follows:

[Roll No. 642]

AYES--220

Aderholt
Alford
Allen
Amodei
Armstrong
Arrington
Babin
Bacon
Baird
Balderson
Banks
Barr
Bean (FL)
Bentz
Bergman
Bice
Biggs
Bilirakis
Bishop (NC)
Boebert
Bost
Brecheen
Buchanan
Buck
Bucshon
Burchett
Burgess
Burlison
Calvert
Cammack
Carl
Carter (GA)
Carter (TX)
Chavez-DeRemer
Cline
Cloud
Clyde
Cole
Collins
Comer
Crane
Crawford
Cuellar
Curtis
Davidson
De La Cruz
DesJarlais
Diaz-Balart
Donalds
Duarte
Duncan
Dunn (FL)
Edwards
Ellzey
Emmer
Estes
Ezell
Fallon
Feenstra
Ferguson
Finstad
Fischbach
Fitzgerald
Fleischmann
Flood
Foxx
Franklin, Scott
Fry
Fulcher
Gaetz
Gallagher
Garbarino
Garcia, Mike
Golden (ME)
Gonzales, Tony
Gonzalez, Vicente
Gonzalez-Colon
Good (VA)
Gooden (TX)
Gosar
Granger
Graves (LA)
Graves (MO)
Green (TN)
Greene (GA)
Griffith
Grothman
Guest
Guthrie
Hageman
Harris
Harshbarger
Hern
Higgins (LA)
Hill
Hinson
Houchin
Hudson
Huizenga
Hunt
Issa
Jackson (TX)
James
Johnson (OH)
Johnson (SD)
Jordan
Joyce (OH)
Joyce (PA)
Kean (NJ)
Kelly (MS)
Kelly (PA)
Kiggans (VA)
Kiley
Kim (CA)
Kustoff
LaHood
LaLota
LaMalfa
Lamborn
Langworthy
Latta
LaTurner
Lawler
Lee (FL)
Lesko
Letlow
Loudermilk
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Luna
Luttrell
Mace
Malliotakis
Mann
Massie
Mast
McCarthy
McCaul
McClain
McClintock
McCormick
McHenry
Meuser
Miller (IL)
Miller (OH)
Miller (WV)
Miller-Meeks
Mills
Molinaro
Moolenaar
Mooney
Moore (AL)
Moore (UT)
Moran
Moylan
Murphy
Nehls
Newhouse
Norman
Nunn (IA)
Obernolte
Ogles
Owens
Palmer
Pence
Perez
Perry
Pfluger
Posey
Reschenthaler
Rodgers (WA)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rose
Rosendale
Rouzer
Roy
Rutherford
Salazar
Santos
Scalise
Schweikert
Scott, Austin
Self
Sessions
Simpson
Smith (MO)
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smucker
Spartz
Stauber
Steel
Stefanik
Steil
Steube
Strong
Tenney
Thompson (PA)
Tiffany
Timmons
Turner
Valadao
Van Drew
Van Duyne
Van Orden
Wagner
Walberg
Waltz
Weber (TX)
Webster (FL)
Wenstrup
Westerman
Williams (NY)
Williams (TX)
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Womack
Yakym
Zinke

NOES--202

Adams
Aguilar
Allred
Auchincloss
Balint
Barragan
Beatty
Bera
Beyer
Bishop (GA)
Blumenauer
Blunt Rochester
Bonamici
Bowman
Boyle (PA)
Brown
Brownley
Budzinski
Bush
Caraveo
Carbajal
Cardenas
Carey
Carson
Carter (LA)
Cartwright
Casar
Case
Casten
Castor (FL)
Castro (TX)
Cherfilus-McCormick
Chu
Clark (MA)
Clarke (NY)
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Connolly
Correa
Costa
Courtney
Craig
Crockett
Crow
Davids (KS)
Davis (IL)
Davis (NC)
Dean (PA)
DeGette
DeLauro
DelBene
Deluzio
DeSaulnier
Doggett
Escobar
Eshoo
Espaillat
Evans
Fitzpatrick
Fletcher
Foushee
Frost
Gallego
Garamendi
Garcia (IL)
Garcia (TX)
Garcia, Robert
Goldman (NY)
Gomez
Green, Al (TX)
Grijalva
Harder (CA)
Hayes
Higgins (NY)
Himes
Horsford
Hoyer
Hoyle (OR)
Huffman
Ivey
Jackson (IL)
Jackson (NC)
Jacobs
Jayapal
Jeffries
Johnson (GA)
Kamlager-Dove
Kaptur
Keating
Kelly (IL)
Khanna
Kildee
Kilmer
Kim (NJ)
Krishnamoorthi
Kuster
Landsman
Larson (CT)
Lee (CA)
Lee (NV)
Lee (PA)
Leger Fernandez
Levin
Lieu
Lofgren
Lynch
Magaziner
Manning
Matsui
McBath
McClellan
McCollum
McGarvey
McGovern
Meeks
Menendez
Meng
Mfume
Moore (WI)
Morelle
Moskowitz
Moulton
Mrvan
Mullin
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Neguse
Nickel
Norcross
Norton
Ocasio-Cortez
Omar
Pallone
Panetta
Pappas
Pascrell
Payne
Pelosi
Peltola
Peters
Pettersen
Plaskett
Pocan
Porter
Pressley
Quigley
Ramirez
Raskin
Ross
Ruiz
Ruppersberger
Ryan
Sablan
Salinas
Sanchez
Sarbanes
Scanlon
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schneider
Scholten
Schrier
Scott (VA)
Scott, David
Sewell
Sherman
Sherrill
Slotkin
Smith (WA)
Soto
Spanberger
Stansbury
Stanton
Stevens
Strickland
Swalwell
Sykes
Takano
Thanedar
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Titus
Tlaib
Tokuda
Tonko
Torres (CA)
Torres (NY)
Trahan
Trone
Underwood
Vargas
Vasquez
Veasey
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watson Coleman
Wexton
Wild
Williams (GA)
Wilson (FL)

NOT VOTING--16

Ciscomani
Crenshaw
D'Esposito
Dingell
Foster
Frankel, Lois
Gimenez
Gottheimer
Houlahan
Jackson Lee
Larsen (WA)
Phillips
Pingree
Radewagen
Sorensen
Velazquez

{time} 1044

So the amendment was agreed to.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.

PERSONAL EXPLANATION

Mr. GOTTHEIMER. Mr. Chair, I missed the following votes, but had I
been present, I would have voted ``no'' on rollcall No. 641 and ``no''
on rollcall No. 642.
The Acting CHAIR. There being no further amendment, under the rule,
the Committee rises.
Accordingly, the Committee rose; and the Speaker pro tempore (Mr.
Yakym) having assumed the chair, Mr. Rutherford, Acting Chair of the
Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union, reported that
that Committee, has had under consideration the bill (H.R. 4664) making
appropriations for financial services and general government for the
fiscal year ending September 30, 2024, and for other purposes, and,
pursuant to House Resolution 847, he reported the bill, as amended by
that resolution, back to the House with sundry further amendments
adopted in the Committee of the Whole.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the rule, the previous question is
ordered.
Pursuant to clause 1(c) of rule XIX, further consideration of H.R.
4664 is postponed.

____________________