for three years. what that means is if you are a student, your college career is over. host: and you think that's proper? these are just young adults that are trying to say that they are against the war in gaza. guest: they are inciting violence and many of them as you know are not even students. they are actually from outside the community. some are in the community but -- i think that's one of the things we have to get to the bottom of, i don't think -- this is sort of the summer of 2020, the summer of love they call it when cities were burning across america and all the rioting with the black lives matter, the antifa, those things have to be stopped quickly otherwise they just continue to spread like that. host: back to campus you think there's a role for the national guard or do you think it should just be addressed by local

police? guest: i think i >> we are leavingt this to honr our more than 45-year commitment to live coverage of congress. the house is coming in to debate three bills, including one to allow mine waste to be stored on public lands. you're watching c-span. the speaker pro tempore: the house will be in order. the prayer will be offered by chaplain kibben. chaplain kibben: would you pray with me.

as we face the day that lies ahead, send us out to serve you, dear god. may we be faithful to keep your commands. may we take time to enjoy the fellowship you provide. may we be eager to be loyal to you. and may our deep desire to be worthy of you sustain us when so many other things clamor for our attention. these are indeed challenges times -- challenging times but we trust that you hold them in your care. give us wisdom to appreciate the steadfastness of heart and soul our service to you requires. in a world where efficiency all too often overrides effectiveness, may our goal be your intent for our energies. while whole communities are rent by the contest of wills and divided by the race for power, may we live into your plan which transcends all selfish desire. as we watch as even the slightest disagreement becomes

grounds for discord, may we step up and step in to be instruments of the reconciliation you desire for your creation. make us strong and courageous. you have commanded us to serve you and have blessed us with your trust. we need not fear nor be dismayed, for you, o lord, are with us this day and in the days ahead. in your abiding love we stand and in your name we pray. amen. the speaker pro tempore: the chair has examined the journal of the last day's proceedings and announces to the house her approval thereof. pursuant to clause 1 of rule 1 the journal stands approved. the pledge of allegiance will be led by the gentleman from alabama, mr. carl. mr. carl: attention, salute. i pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america and to the republic for which it stands, one nation, under god, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

the speaker pro tempore: the chair will receive a message. the messenger: mr. speaker, messages from the president of the united states. the secretary: mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: madam secretary. the secretary: i am directed by the president of the united states to deliver to the house of representatives messages in writing. the speaker pro tempore: the chair will entertain up to 15 requests for one-minute speeches on each side of the aisle. for what purpose does the gentleman from virginia seek recognition? >> request permission to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> mr. speaker, i rise to recognize and honor the extraordinary service of superintendent doug straily. mr. good: mr. straily has worked tirelessly for many years to improve the lives of students, teachers and staff. for his effort, mr. straily was

named the 2024 virginia superintendent of the year by the virginia association of school superintendents, recognizing his outstanding leadership of the county schools. mr. straily began his career as a teacher and served as an athletics director, high school principal, snippet superintendent -- assistant superintendent before assuming his current position as superintendent. as a life long resident of the county, he has proudly depends kate -- dedicated 29 years of service to the county schools. his contributions to the community are immeasurable and he's a most worthy recipient of this award. i thank mr. straily for his exceptional achievements. i wish him continued success as he strives to impact students in the county. i'm honored to represent superintendent drowg straily and all -- doug straily and all of the public servants of the fifth district. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from new york seek recognition? >> mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent to address the house for

one minute and revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> mr. speaker, i rise today in honor of national nurses week and to celebrate the incredible contributions and sacrifices that nurses make each and every day. sen. kennedy: as an occupational -- mr. kennedy: as an occupation altherr pift myself, i've seen firsthand how important nurses are, not only in the delivery of health care but in their daily interactions with parents -- patients. they build connections and tend to a patient's needs, serving as the main conduit to a patient's medical care. my grandmother was a nurse and my mother was a nurse for more than 54 years and went on to teach nursing in retierpt. we should be grateful to our -- retirement. we should be grateful to our nurses but we need to do more to support them. this congress should prioritize the passage of h.r. 2530. this legislation will mandate specified minimum nurse to patient ratios in hospitals,

ensure medicare payments reflect those ratios and empower nurses to speak up if those ratios are violated. it's common sense that we protect patients, reduce burnout and fatigue among nurses and will save lives. let's get it done. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from south carolina seek recognition? mr. wilson: mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. wilson: thank you, mr. speaker. disastrous decisions of biden and far-left democrats continue to cause distress for families and destroy jobs. the federal reserve announced that they would keep interest rates at a two-decade high because bidenflation is making home ownership unattainment for millions of americans. biden has produced the highest inflation in 40 years, with higher prices every day since he took office. egg costs up 49%. baby food, 31%. electricity, up 29%. poutry up 24%.

coffee up 20%. unintentionally confirmed the deranged big government corruption to defame trump trup. this helps donald trump. this corrupt judge now will be my guest, i invite him to come in january to the inauguration of donald trump which he unintentionally is causing. in conclusion, god bless our troops who have successfully protected america for 20 years as the global war on terrorism moves from the afghanistan safe haven to america. we don't need new border laws, we need to enforce existing laws. biden shamefully opens the borders for dictators as more 9/11 attacks across america are imminent as repeatedly warned by the f.b.i. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from pennsylvania seek recognition? mr. thompson: mr. speaker, request unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is

recognized for one minute. mr. thompson: thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, i rise today to recognize may as mental health awareness month. mental health awareness month has been a cornerstone of addressing the challenges faced by millions of americans living with mental health conditions. by breaking the stigma and talking about depression, anxiety and other conditions, we can help those affected to seek quality care that they deserve. mr. speaker, by bringing attention to mental health, we can elevate the conversations surrounding mental health. we are focusing on prioritizing mental health and acknowledging it is ok to not be ok. if jeuferring or feel alone, please reach out for help. it's important to remember that you are not alone. this month, reach out to your loved ones and check in. by starting the conversation, we are one step closer to ending the stigma surrounding mental health. thank you, mr. speaker, and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back.

for what purpose does the gentleman from alabama seek recognition? >> mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. carl: mr. speaker, i rise today in remembrance of marine corps major general jerome gary cooper. cooper began his career at the university of notre dame, receiving his bachelor's degree in financing while participating in naval rotc. he then joined the marine corps. during the vietnam war he became the first african-american to ever command a marine corps infantry company. among his many accolades, he was awarded the bronze star and two purple hearts. in 1988, he was promoted to mange general at the headquarters of the marine corps, in 1989, president george h.w. bush appointed cooper as

assistant secretary to the air force in man power and reserve affairs. then president clinton appointed him as u.s. ambassador to jamaica. cooper leaves behind a legacy of sacrifice, heroism and inspiration to all. he passed away in mobile at the age of 87 and will be remembered for his priceless service to our nation. may you rest in peace. thank you, mr. speaker. and i yield my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from georgia seek recognition? >> mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute, to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> mr. speaker, i rise to urge my colleagues to pass a full re-authorization of the f.a.a. right now we have a federal aviation administration that is operating under 20th century technology. mr. collins: full re-authorization ensures the united states remains the gold

standard on the world stage in aviation by bolstering u.s. technology and restructuring the f.a.a. to improve efficiency. as a matter of fact, the f.a.a. re-authorization act of 2024 includes a handful of amendments many of my colleagues have worked with industry experts on for several months. one of which i was proud to have included in the house-passed version. this amendment encourages private sector investment in hypersonic technology so we can remain competitive on the world stage. our aviation sector drives over 5% of the g.d.p. and supports 11 million jobs. so full authorization ensures that our skies remain safe and our aviation industry stays competitive. so i urge my colleagues, let's get this good piece of legislation across the finish line. thank you and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from nebraska seek recognition?

without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> mr. speaker, i rise today to address president biden's student loan bailout schemes. just weeks ago the president unveiled a new executive action, even after the supreme court shut down his previous attempts to let people off the hook for their loans. mr. flood: he's not just trying to unilaterally cancel student debt. his agencies have been working to make the student loan repayment process dysfunctional. on one hand, the federal student aid agency is paying contractors who service student loans less money and that agency has acknowledged that the level of service for student loan holders will suffer as a result. on the other hand, the consumer protection -- the cfpb is using its enforcement authority to pursue these same contractors for their reduced levels of service that are the result of these same f.s.a. cuts. it seems like a plan designed to break the entire student loan

system. americans can't let the biden administration's plans succeed. we need a return to principled fiscal policy that encourages personal responsibility, a responsibility that supports the health of the american free enterprise system. with that, i thank you and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from north carolina seek recognition? >> mr. speaker, ask for unanimous consent to address the house, revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. davis: mr. speaker, a.l.s. is a pour that willing disorder that effect -- is a neurological disorder that effects thousands of people worldwide. recently i had the privilege of meeting two incredible advocates living with a.l.s. and their courage and determination deeply moved me. one of them is lou hall. a fellow air force veteran who was diagnosed in 2020 after

undergoing several surgeries. with his wife, tammy, lou is working tirelessly to raise awareness about the importance of early detection. troy tatum, an ordained disciples of christ reverend, was diagnosed in early 2022. since his retirement, troy and his wife, lee anne, have provided unyielding support and encouragement to others. to lou and troy, i greatly admire your strength, resilience and unwavering commitment to a cure. your stories are a testament to the human spirit and power of hope. mr. speaker, i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from california seek recognition? >> to address the house for one minute, revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> over the past eight weeks, my friends, ken and rowan, have paneled 3,500 miles across this

country to address the national homeless crisis. mr. sherman: and to raise funds to provide homes. founded 15 years ago in the san fernando valley, hope, the mission, has grown to become the largest rescue mission in the country, operating 23 interim housing shelters with 2,700 beds and serves over three million meals annually. and hope will be adding 11 new projects in 2025, including five permanent supporting housing sites, and i might point out that they're able to provide these housing sites at less than 1/4 of the cost done by local government in the los angeles area. hope works to treat the unique needs of the housing insecure, operate shelter sites for families, and for other victims of domestic violence, offering mental health services as well as shelter. ken and rowan have put their bodies on the line more than

once, not only bicycling across the country, but they live for -- lived for four days on the streets, they lived for four days in a car and previously ran to las vegas from los angeles. ... i look forward to continuing to support hope's efforts and hope my colleagues in the los angeles area do as well. i'm pleased to have secured $2 million for them for homeless services and another $2 million for mental health services and this year almost $1 million to provide modular, affordable housing. thank you. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from north carolina, mr. mchenry, seek recognition? mr. mchenry: i call up h.j. recent 109 and ask for its immediate consideration in the house. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the joint resolution. the clerk: union calendar number 398, house joint resolution 109, joint resolution providing for

congressional disapproval under chapter 8 title 5 of the united states code of the rules submitted by the securities and exchange commission related to staff accounting bulletin number 121. the speaker pro tempore: pursuan t to the house resolution 1194, the joint resolution is considered read. the joint resolution shall be debatable for one hour, equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member on the committee on financial services or their respective designees. the gentleman from north carolina, mr. mchenry, and the gentlewoman from california, ms0 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from north carolina, mr. mchenry. mr. mchenry: i ask all members have five legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and submit extraneous material on the joint resolution under consideration. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. mchenry: now, mr. speaker, i yield myself as much time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. mchenry: mr. speaker, i rise in support of this bipartisan resolution of disapproval. this resolution is an essential

effort to protect consumers and foster innovation in digital assets markets. it's also critical to stop the securities and exchange commission's regulatory power grabs in efforts to circumvent the administrative procedures act. i want to thank my friend, congressman flood of nebraska, a leader on financial innovation and digital asset policy for introducing this bipartisan resolution. staff accounting bulletin or s.a.b.121 is one of the most glaring examples of the current securities and exchange commission's reign of overreach. through s.a.b.121 the commission is trying to dictate how financial institutions and firms safeguard america's assets, in particular here, digital assets under the guise of so-called staff guidance. let me explain why this is deeply concerning, because they

call it a staff guidance, the securities and exchange commission, to avoid public comment and the rule making process governed by the administrative procedures act or a.p.a. this is where the public gives an opinion back or expertise back to the agency so they can improve their rule making by listening to the public. this is a long process here in the united states. not only did the securities and exchange commission bypass congress and the comptroller general but the commission did not even consult with other financial regulators responsible for overseeing banks prior to issuing sab-121. thanks to the work of the house financial services committee and my friend, senator lumus, they deemed sab-121 for purposes of the congressional review act, providing congress with the opportunity to right the wrong

of agency action. sab-121 requires financial institutions and firms who are safeguarding their customers' digital assets to hold those assets on their balance sheets. banks would be required to take on significantly questioneddity and other costs under the framework and makes it cost prohibative for financial institutions to give their digital assets. this is a massive deviation for highly regulated banks are traditionally required to hold assets on behalf of their customers. this is the point so everyone can understand, this is a change that harms consumers and makes them less protected. it's not a change for the better, clearly. it limits the options for consumers and increases concentration risk to the financial system and perhaps even worse, it could leave

america's assets vulnerable in the event of a bank failure, just as we saw with silicon valley bank last year. if you want americans' assets to be protected, they should be held in custody, not on a bank balance sheet. and if you want americans to be able to engage with digital assets safely and securely, banks, which are some of the most highly regulated entities in our country and in the world are probably the best places for them to be kept. unfortunately sab-121 makes this nearly impossible. we hear a lot from our democratic colleagues about consumer protection and if that concern is genuine, and i think it is, they should support congressman flood's bipartisan resolution before us today. let me give you one example why this guidance is problematic. the securities and exchange commission recently had approved 11 bit coin e.t.f.'s which allow everyday investors to gain exposure to this new technology.

it's a decade old but relatively new. of those 11, zero, and i repeat, zero use banks as their primary custodian. instead, all that risk is now concentrated in a few entities. let's do a quick recap, the executes and exchange commission upended traditional custody practices -- just like you hold a stock with a stock broker, it's held in custody and means that entity, if it goes bankrupt, your asset is still protected and held in custody and safeguarded in a safe. so we want digital assets to be treated the same way we treat other assets and protected. this staff accounting bulletin upends traditional practices for banking institutions and made a joke of our rule-making process and ignored other regulatory agencies and market participants that are impacted by this bulletin. that's a bad process and even

worse policy outcomes. so if you want consumers to be protected in digital asset markets, vote yes on this resolution. if you want to return bank custody practices to the tried, tested, and successful approach that we've had in this country for centuries, then vote yes. if you support financial innovation, you should vote yes as well. finally, if you want to send a message that rogue regulators cannot circumvent congress and our well-established rule-making process, vote yes. let's bring this commonsense -- let's bring this level of common sense into the world of the digital asset debate or crypto, and bring consumer protection back to this marketplace where it needs to be. and with that, i encourage my colleagues to vote yes on this congressional review act. but finally, i want to thank congressman flood on the republican side and congressman nichol on the democratic side

for their leadership on this important topic. with that, mr. speaker, i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from north carolina reserves. the gentlelady from california ms. waters, is recognized. ms. waters: mr. speaker, i yield myself as much time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized. ms. waters: i rise in support to opposition h.j. recent 109, a congressional review act resolution that would overturn accounting guidance for crypto assets from the securities and exchange commission known as staff accounting bulletin 121 or sab-121. the bill sponsors' falsely assert this bill is meant to address a narrow concern from a particular special interest group, but in reality, it is drafted in a way that is far broader than this narrow

concern. the collateral damage caused by this c.r.a. resolution would be far-reaching, causing significant harm to investors, consumers, public companies, and the safety and soundness of our capital markets. the bill takes a sledgehammer to fix an issue that may nearly need a scalpel and it does so because my colleagues on the other side of the aisle are not only interested in doing the bidding of special interest groups, they're also interested in attacking and undermining the s.e.c. in every possible way. as they have done relentlessly since the beginning of this congress. sab-121 is highly technical in the guidance. let me break it down simply, sab-121 has been in place two years and only applies to

companies that hold crypto assets on behalf of their customers. this is known as providing custody services. sab-121 provides guidance for these companies in two respects, first, it advises companies on how to disclose the crypto assets they take custody. and second, it advises companies on how to record those crypto assets on those balance sheets. the first prong of the guidance i described on disclosure of crypto assets is critical for providing transparency for the investors and the public on volatile crypto assets. this kind of transparency helps prevent the kind of fraud and mishandling of crypto assets that led to the collapse of major crypto companies like

f.t.x. in fact, this disclosure guidance has been broadly supported by industry and advocate stakeholders alike. the second prong of sab-121 advises relevant companies on how to record crypto assets on their balance sheets. under the guidance, the amount of the liability should correspond to the fair value of the crypto assets they are obligated to safeguard. this ensures the company providing custody services has sufficient resources to secure these assets for the uses against any theft, loss, or other misuse that could result in financial consequences. the s.e.c. has exchanged that this guidance is prudent due to the unique risks and uncertainties associated with

crypto assets. the sponsor of this resolution tried to reason that this bill is spent to respond to a narrow concern from largely custody banks, but it really has much more far-reaching negative consequences, specifically this special interest group has raised concerns that the second prong of sab-121 that i destroyed on accounting mechanisms -- i described on accounting mechanism would interact with banking requirements that would absolutely make it cost prohibative to provide custody services for crypto assets. to be clear, even this special interest group has expressed support for the disclosure, guidance in sab-121. they're only concerned about how the accountant guidance applies to their balance sheet. in fact, a letter sent by the

special interest group requests, and, quote, targeted modifications, unquote. to dress this concern, mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent to submit this letter for the record. but this bill does far more than implement targeted modifications, as this letter proposed. this c.r.a. resolution would overturn all of sab-121, not just a part this special interest group has complained about. so, mr. speaker, i am curious whether my colleagues on the other side of the aisle have actually read this letter from the special interest group that they're trying to pander or to whether they are bothered to consult the largest custody bank in the united states, the bank of new york melon which custodies more than $45 trillion

in customer assets because they told me that they do not want this c.r.a. and did not push for it in any way because they share our concerns about the bill being overly broad. the consequences of using a c.r.a. rather than a more narrow ly tailored bill goes beyond simply overturning sab-121 entirely when the aforementioned concerns from special interests only have to do with one little piece of it. if this resolution is passed, the s.e.c. would be prohibited from issuing any guidance in the future that is substantially similar to this one, including this closure guidance on this issue. . . this means that the s.e.c. would not be able to simply turn around and narrowly address this

one little concern while preserving the rest of the guidance. it also means that while the crypto industry clamors for the s.e.c. to provide more clarity, this resolution would tie the s.e.c.'s hands, making it harder for them to provide the clarity that the industry purportedly wants. i'm further concerned that if this resolution is passed, industry and investors alike will no longer be able to receive timely guidance from the s.e.c. staff as this resolution is also intended to be a warning. passing this resolution would have broad and negative consequences for all public companies and their investors with implications for the entire securities market, not just crypto. the s.e.c. has issued numerous

staff accounting bulletins. the one thing -- one being repealed today is number 121 that have helped companies understand how s.e.c. rules apply in specific situations. so if the s.e.c. were to pull back in this regard, it would be particularly harmful to smaller companies with less resources dedicated to compliance and would result in more enforcement actions as they struggle to understand how to best comply with s.e.c. rules. chairmaning henry and i have worked well together -- chair mchenry and i have worked well together to find common ground on crypto issues. however, instead of finding ways to work together, republicans are recklessly pushing this farmful partisan resolution -- harmful partisan resolution. let us not forget, s.e.c. is our cop on the block and should be supported because they protect

our investors. so i urge my colleagues to oppose this bill and i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady's letter is accepted into the record, without objection. the gentlelady from california reserves. the gentleman from north carolina is recognized. mr. mchenry: mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent to insert into the record the general accountability office's october 31, 2023, decision on the, quote, applicability of the congressional review act to staff accounting bulletin 121, end quote. and submit that into the record. it makes clear that the accusations the ranking member is making about how broad this is is simply not the case. it is a very targeted removal of this staff accounting bulletin that broadly effects digital assets, not one bank. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. mchenry: i'd like to now recognize a leader on

innovation, on the financial services committee, and broader policy, but i would like to yield three minutes to the gentleman from nebraska, the sponsor of the resolution, mr. flood. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for three minutes. mr. flood: thank you for yielding, chairman mchenry. mr. speaker, i'm pleased to speak in support of my bipartisan resolution, h.j.res. 109, a congressional review act resolution for the s.e.c.'s staff accounting bulletin or s.a.b.121 for short. i'd like to start by thanking members for working with me on this resolution and for the chairman's leadership in getting this to the floor. this is something of aably cated issue, -- of a complicated issue, as you've heard today. first, let me begin by briefly explaining what a staff accounting bulletin is. staff accounting bulletins are technical accounting guidance for public entities. they're typically noncontroversial in nature and, importantly for this debate, they're not rules. guidance is not supposed to

dictate a major change in policy. that's what our notice in comment rulemaking process is for. this specific bulletin effectively requires banks to put digital assets held in custody on their balance sheet. simply put, that's not how custody usually works. as federal reserve chairman once said, custody assets are off balance sheet, always have been, that's a quote. this bulletin up ends custodial practice for banks and it effectively keeps banks out of this market entirely. that's not good for consumers or investors. next, let's talk about the processes, the chairman has already mentioned. there were two major process fouls by the s.e.c. issuing s.a.b. 121. number one, the s.e.c. is not a bank regulator and s.a.b. 121 effects a core banking activity, custody. yet, the s.e.c. issued this bulletin without even talking to the regulators first. think about that. the s.e.c. issued this without

even talking to the prudential regulators. that's an incredible oversight, particularly given the bulletin's unusual treatment of custodial assets. number two, the nonpartisan government accountability office determined that this bulletin is effectively a rule. in other words, the s.e.c. got caught trying to circumvent the a.p.a. and the due diligence requirements that come with it. now let's talk about solutions. the easiest way to fix this problem is for the s.e.c. to simply rescind the bulletin themselves and work with the prudential regulators on an alternate solution. despite the fact that this bulletin was issued through a faulty process and despite the negative ramifications of keeping banks from taking custody of retail investor assets, the s.e.c. has been unwilling to have any conversation about making changes. that leaves us with no choice. congress needs to act through the congressional review act to rescind s.a.b. 121. let me briefly address an argument that ranking member waters and some of my democratic

colleagues have made on this issue. i've heard this argument that the c.r.a. should not be applied to an accounting bulletin, but let's contemplate the alternative. what are the implications if we fail to pass this resolution? this is an instance where the nonpartisan g.a.o. outright said the s.e.c. circumvented the proper regulatory process. think about why the congressional review act was passed in the first place. to give congress the ability -- mr. mchenry: i yield my colleague one more minute. mr. flood: think about why the c. rmpt a. was passed in the -- c.r.a. was passed in the first place. to check a regulator that has gone astray. if we don't pass this resolution, we are effectively giving the green light to our regulators to bypass the a.p.a. rulemaking process with immunity. this isn't just about the s.e.c. or bank custody, this is about providing the necessary check to executive branch power. regardless of your feelings on the banking policy or the s.e.c., i urge you to support this resolution for the sake of upholding the authority of the

institution we serve in, and before i yield back or before i yield back, i would ask, mr. speaker, unanimous consent to insert four letters into the record. number one is a letter dated april 27, 2023, sent by fed vice chair michael barr to senator lummis discussing the impact of s.a.b. 121. number, two a letter dated april 18, 2023, sent by fdic chairman to chairman mchenry and senator lummis in response to their march 2, 2023, letter. number three, a letter dated february 28, 2024, sent by the conference of state bank supervisors to chairman mchenry and ranking member waters outlining the unintended effects of s.a.b. 121 that could pose on customers and consumers and markets. and fourth letter is dated february 29, 2024, sent by the american bankers association to chairman mchenry, ranking member waters, expressing support for h.j.res. 109. with that, i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: without objection.

the gentleman yields. the gentleman from north carolina. mr. mchenry: reserve. the speaker pro tempore: reserves. the gentlelady from california is recognized. ms. waters: thank you, mr. speaker. my response to the gentleman from nebraska. my republican colleagues have claimed that the s.e.c. failed to consult with prudential regulators on s. ampt b. -- s.a.b. 121. but if this resolution is passed, the s.e.c. will effectively be barred from consulting with prudential regulators in order to issue revised guidance on this matter. again, the plain consequences of this bill do not match the purported goals of the bill's sponsor and supporters. if republicans wanted the s.e.c. to consult with prudential regulators and reissue modified guidance, they should do that. this bill does the opposite. it actually prevents the s.e.c.

from consulting with prudential regulators in order to reissue modified guidance. with that, mr. speaker, i now yield five minutes to the gentleman from california, mr. sherman, who is also the ranking member of the subcommittee on capital markets. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california is recognized for five mississippi. mr. sherman: thank you. the crypto industry comes before our committee almost every week saying, we want clarity. then the s.e.c. provides the clarity and now the friends of crypto are here to abolish the clarity. to not only take away release 121, which requires that the custodians of crypto indicate that on the balance sheet, but to prevent the s.e.c. from issuing a revised version of 121 that could call for that same disclosure to be made in

footnotes. it is very clear to me, as co-chair of the bipartisan c.p.a. caucus that the financial statements must reflect the incredible risk that banks take when they become custodians of billions and hundreds of billions of dollars, supposedly worth, of crypto. now, why the uniqueness of crypto? we've seen sam bankman-fried. he was the face of crypto. he is now facing only a quarter century in jail, which seems rather light. but the crypto industry would tell us that sam bankman-fried was just a single snake in the crypto garden of eden. the fact is we have learned

since sam bankman-fried's indictments that crypto is a garden of snakes. it is uniquely problematic. why is that? because crypto's whole purpose is to facilitate evading american law and to help criminals. and so who does it attract? criminals. what is the comparative advantage that crypto has as it attempts to become a currency and partially displace the dollar and the euro? is it more stable? certainly not. is it more useful to buy something? you can go to rayburn and buy a sandwich for $1. well, ok, $8. but you can't buy a sandwich anywhere in this complex for a bitcoin. so it's not a better medium of exchange. it's not a better measure of value. what advantage does it have?

well, it's secret. now, what the best way to have their secrecy is to have the iceberg above the water be available and visible, and then to have an under the water 7/8 of the crypto subject to being hidden from the know your cust me and anti-monday -- know your customer and anti-monitoring laws. how can it compete with the best currency in the history of the world? by tapping into the markets that don't want to be surveilled by the u.s. government. what are those? well, obviously the sanctions evaders, the drug dealers, the human human traffickers -- the human traffickers. but that is not a big enough market for crypto. they want the tax evasion market. the i.r.s. commissioner under donald trump testified that we're losing $1 trillion in

revenue. that means that they -- that those who are cheating on taxes, almost all at the high end of the spectrum, have to hide $3 trillion of income each and every year, that's $30 trillion of hidden income every decade. they can't do it with u.s. dollars. so crypto is designed to make -- now, if you think it will be successful in doing that and you want to bet against america and bet for -- and facilitate the undermining of american laws, while perhaps making a profit, you can buy crypto. but it is an asset whose very nature creates an additional risk. that risk needs to be shown in the financial statements of the custodian. and the custodian -- and this resolution would prevent the s.e.c. from causing that to be disclosed. even on the balance sheet or the footnotes. and if you doubt what is the

purpose of crypto, look at their latest invention. the mixer. what is it the mixer? it's designed to mix up law enforcement. it is a facility available to every crypto owner to disguise their transactions and to hide from american law enforcement. not only that, of course, crypto aspires and claims they will partially displace the dollar as a reserve currency. if it does that, that will be a tremendous decline in america's power in the world and the american economy. so, i see no reason for us to have rules that hide this risk from the shareholders of the custodian. ms. waters: i yield the gentleman an -- i minute. mr. sherman: -- the gentleman an additional minute. mr. sherman: thank you. i see no reason for to us hide from those who are looking at bank balance sheets the unique risk that they take in order to facilitate a crypto ecosystem

whose sole purpose, whose strategy is to defeat the american government, whether it tries to collect taxes or enforce our sanctions. and if you have any doubt, look at what the proponents, the visionaries behind crypto say. they say they're innovative. they are trying to innovate away to make sure that america cannot enforce its sanctions, cannot deal with drug dealers and cannot enforce its taxes. oh, and by the way, particularly useful to sam bankman-fried, cannot enforce its bankruptcy laws. i yield back. .... the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from south carolina is recognized. mr. mchenry: if they want to fix the sam friedman fraud, they need to approve the bill we passed out of committee that regulates crypto and provides regulatory powers. i'd like to yield one minute to the gentleman from oklahoma, a member of the science committee

and great leader. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. lucas: i support the bipartisan c.r.a. to overturn the s.e.c. staff accounting bulletin s.a.b. 121. it has removed a bank'sability to offer custodial accounts and prohibited banks from technologies. s.a.b. 121 unilaterally outside the rule making process without consultation of the banking regulators. this policy is not for the s.e.c. to decide and certainly not for the s.e.c. to dictate through a broad interpretation of accounting practices. the cost of and the availability of capital is dependent on the u.s. banking system's ability to adopt new technologies and compete in offering innovative products and services. s.a.b. 121 has put up barriers to that essential responsibility. this c.r.a. is a important

correction to the s.e.c.'s misstep. i want to thank congressman flood and congressman nickles for leading this effort and yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from north carolina reserves. the gentlelady from california is recognized. ms. waters: mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent to enter into the record a statement of administrative policy from the white house. the president states that the resolution before us would, quote, disrupt the securities and exchange commission's work to protect investors in crypto asset markets and safeguard the broader financial system. this statement not only explains how terrible this resolution is but that the president of the united states of america will veto it. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. ms. waters: i will yield three

minutes to the gentleman from massachusetts, mr. lynch, who is also the ranking member on the subcommittee on digital assets financial technology and inclusion. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for three minutes. mr. lynch: good afternoon, mr. chairman. i rise in opposition to 109 and this nonbinding interpretive guidance advises those holding crypto assets for customers to record those assets and liabilities on their market sheets and it recommends the companies disclose the nature and amount of crypto asset holdings. simply put, it advises caution and transparency regarding crypto because it is so volatile. the disapproval of s.a.b. 121 would have severe consequences for the u.s. financial services industry and be especially dangerous for banks, depositories, investors, and

consumers. as underscored in the bulletin, the safeguarding of crypto assets presents unique regulatory and legal risks that could significantly impact a company's financial condition and its operations. for this same reason, the bulletin seeks to ensure that investors are informed about these risks and making other capital investment and allocation decisions. the failure of silicon valley, first republic bank and others showed us nervous depositories can cause a run on bank assets when crypto assets become unavailable. and they can move them in a blink of an eye and makes the banks less stable. the sanction laws of finance and legal issues affecting several other crypto companies and satisfy catting bulletin 121 serves to protect investors. crypto is now in its 17th year, yet the primary use cases for

crypto tend to be money laundrying, tax avoidance, cyber criminal ransom wear payments and terrorist finance. regrettably crypto has become a perfect example of a text book case of an elegant idea that is being continually savaged by an ugly gang of facts. regrettably the republican leadership efforts to curtail s.e.c. regulations in the crypto sector are now extending to staff bulletins that are simply advisory and designed to publicize staff views. this resolution undermines the issue of publishing the bulletins for small firms that don't have the ability to speak directly with the securities and exchange commission for advice.

i urge my colleagues to vote no. thank you. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentlelady from california reserves. the gentleman from north carolina is recognized. mr. mchenry: i'd like to yield to the subcommittee chair on the financial services committee, the gentleman from kentucky, my friend mr. barr, for three minutes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for three minutes. mr. barr: i thank the chairman for his leadership on this issue and i stand in front of you today to support my friend and colleague from nebraska, mr. flood, and his c.r.a. resolution to nullify the s.e.c. staff accounting bulletin number 121 which would eviscerate financial institution's ability to provide custodial services for digital asset firms. in theory, under s.a.b. 121 a bank could make it impractical for any bank. this fact has been noted by the federal reserve board chair

powell which says it shifts away from practices as custodial assets receive offaccounting treatment. and overturns decades of custodial assets for banks. if a bank decides to custody digital crypto, the on balance sheet requirement would have liquidity and other prudential consequences and makes it difficult at best for regulated institutions to safeguard digital assets. the fact is technological legal and regulatory risks cited in s.a.b. 121 are already addressed by the legal and regulatory framework that applies to banks' custodial activities. yet s.a.b. 121 does not account for that. moreover and disturbingly, the s.e.c. did not consult with any of the prudential regulators before iss this flawed guidance. unfortunately, the failure to consult regulators over the same institutions largely impacted by a s.e.c. proposal has become

quite common under chair against letter. they don't have the expertise to assess the same risks as the regulators and it's not the duty of gensler which may have obligations to the functioning of our financial institutions and obviously to the soundness of our financial system. given the ability for safeguard assets under this rule and the clear lack of understanding regarding their prudential status from the regulators, this rule is fatally flawed. the fact of the matter is to the extent there is concern about the lack of regulation, if there's a concern about regulatory clarity or risk with crypto, then we should not make it impossible as a practical matter for well-regulated banks to protect americans who own digital assets with custody services. if you want to protect customers and protect investors and digital assets, we shouldn't be pushing crypto transactions into

less transparent, moreau peek, riskier, offshore places but exactly what s.a.b. 121 would do. i have to address this issue of silicon valley bank. its failure to do with deposit risk and interest rate mismanagement and nothing to to do with many of the customers were technology firms or worked in the black chain space. this is a red herring because it had nothing to do with that. i support mr. flood's measure and the bipartisan work and encourage my colleagues to support it as well. mr. mchenry: i yield my colleague 30 more seconds. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for 30 more seconds. mr. barr: i would ask unanimous consent to insert three letters into the record, a letter dated march 2,2023 cosigned by chairman health care and senator lummis asking them about s.a.b. 121 impact on regulated entities and asking if they were

consulted prior to s.a.b. 121's issuance. a letter dated april 26,2023 sent by acting comptroller sue to senator lummis in response to their march 2 letter and a letter dated march 16 to chairman harper. the speaker pro tempore: all letters accepted. mr. barr: i accept that and will yield. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from north carolina reserves. the gentlelady from california is recognized. ms. waters: i tell the member this is bill has been opposed by the biden administration. further, this bill is opposed by the following organizations, americans for financial reform, better markets, public citizen, consumer federation of america, u.s. perg, new jersey center action, demand progress, institute for agriculture and trade policy, texas apple seed

20/20 vision and bank of new york melon. i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady reserves. the gentleman from north carolina is recognized. mr. mchenry: i'd like to yield two minutes to my colleague from utah, mr. curtis. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from utah is recognized for two minutes. mr. curtis: thank you, mr. chairman. i rise in favor of h.j. res. 109 which repeal the regulation of the crypto currency and the banking industry. the s.e.c. and its chairman gary begins letter have -- gary begins letter have repeat -- gary gensler overstepped their boundaries. it was bypassed established procedures and it shows. this rule will limit banks' ability to offer digital assets as part of their custodial

services and makes it more challenging to safely engage in digital assets under the advisement 6 local banks who is able to accurately inform them of investments. crypto is used by millions of americans, hundreds of thousands of those in my district. unfortunately today they've been referred to as criminals, as drug dealers, and stay offense to that. we should be giving investors opportunities to take part in crypto currencies and not putting up artificial barriers and urge my colleagues to support this resolution and repeal the regulation and i yield my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from north carolina reserves. the gentlelady from california is recognized. ms. waters: republicans have echoed calls from the crypto industry saying that legislation is needed to provide clarification on how securities laws apply to them but their

actions reveal their true motivations. they don't want clarity, they want broad exemptions from securities laws. let's look at their actions to date. the first crypto related bill the republicans marked up was the f.i.t.21 act which they claimed was responsive to the need for clarity on crypto. the only thing clear about this highly convoluted bill is that it would provide the crypto industry with broad exemptions from current securities. i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady reserves. the gentleman from north carolina is recognized. mr. mchenry: if i may inquire how much time is remaining on each side. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from north carolina has 14 minutes remaining and the gentlelady from california has 9 1/2 minutes remaining. mr. mchenry: all right. i'd like to yield three minutes

to the chair of the digital asset subcommittee and the vice chair of the financial services committee, my friend, mr. hill, of arkansas. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from arkansas is recognized for three minutes. mr. hill: i thank chairman mchenry and congressman flood of nebraska for this excellent work in this congressional review act resolution to roll back the s.e.c.'s failure in their staff accounting bulletin 121. it would reshape the business of custody in this country. this is not just about crypto. this is a sweeping rule that the s.e.c. has implemented without following the administrative procedures act. the g.a.o. says it's a rule. if it's a rule, it needs to go through the administrative procedures act and have a comment period and get people involved. because as ranking member waters noted they did not consult with the banking regulators who have the primary role of supervising custody in this country. a custodian is someone who holds

your assets for you, whether it's shares of stock or acres of forestland or rental house or 10 bit coin. . hemming reserves is not financial services practices. this staff accounting bulletin is misguided. it requires money be setaside for that category of assets as digital assets in custody. it's part of the biden administration to treat digital assets differently from all other assets. that doesn't make any sense to house republicans. under mr. mchenry's leadership and mr. thompson's leader, the ag committee, we have a fit for purpose approach that directs the s.e.c. and the cftc how to handle digital assets. unfortunately this accounting bulletin is in the wrong direction. that's why we have the congressional review act. that's why we are using article 1 authority under the

constitution to say this is the wrong direction and that we will all come to this house floor and say it should be repealed and sent back. i would remind my friends on the other side of the aisle, senior biden official vice chairman barr of the fed acting comptroller su, all testified before our committee they were not consulted by the s.e.c. about this staff accounting bulletin. it is a significant change. it is a rule. it should have gone through the administrative procedures act to be out for public comment. that's why i thank the gentleman from nebraska for leading the charge on this important resolution. i urge adoption and yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yield back. the gentleman from north carolina reserves. the gentlelady from california is recognized. ms. waters: mr. speaker and members, the industry, the custody -- custody industry, the big banks that hold these crypto assets simply ask for a little correction, little clarity, a little information.

and the republicans are taking advantage of this. this is the first crypto bill that republicans are bringing to the floor today and it would do what they always tend to do. and this would actually reverse s.e.c. guidance that provides clarity on accounting standards, specifically for crypto assets. not only that, it would undermine the s.e.c.'s ability to provide late on crypto in the future. to provide clarity on crypto in the future. that's why this administration sees the bill for what it is and has advised us they would veto it. with that i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady reserves. the gentleman from north carolina is recognized. mr. mchenry: i yield three minutes to the chairman of the housing subcommittee, the vice chair of the digital asset subcommittee, long time leader in digital innovation and assets, the gentleman from ohio, mr. davidson. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from ohio is recognized for three minutes.

mr. davidson: i thank the chairman. this accounting bulletin has proven to be a barrier to publicly traded banks having an ability to mainfully engage in distributing ledger projects due to their overly broad definition of a crypto asset. sub121 makes no distension between asset types. generally states crypto assets pose certain technological, legal, and regulatory risks requiring special treatment. all other assets, if you want to make it a deposit at bank, they are glad to hold custody of the assets. somehow these assets qualify for special treatment. normally if there was on balance sheet treatment, it would also just be a clean entry. there wouldn't a mark to market that would require not just a balance sheet treatment that would be appropriate for a custody of a certain kind of asset, but you would have income statement flow throughs and all

kinds of other risks. why would a bank need to cover extra risk 100ers -- 100% of the deposit of the asset to take custody of the asset. this is a special treatment that applies to just these assets. applying balance sheet for crypto assets, is wrong. in attritional bankruptcy, assets are accounted for on balance sheet and are subject to creditor claims. conversely, assets held in custody for customers are accounted for off balance sheet. thus protected from creditor claims in bankruptcy because they remain the assets of the company. we would see this distinction in a company like fidelity where the assets are off balance sheet versus a company like silicon valley bank when they went bankrupt. the depositors were at risk. why would we change the standard with this out of jurisdiction

rulemaking by the s.e.c.? requiring custody crypto assets to be accounted for on balance sheets risks losing the bankruptcy protections of custodial services. this is an important distinction from the treatment for a broker-dealer that would be subject to a different form of bankruptcy under the securities investor protection act. distributor ledger technology does not change the underlying nature of risk of traditional assets, nor do they present risks that s.a.b. 121 purports to address. mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent to insert three letters into the record, a letter dated august 23, 2023 co-signed by chairman mchenry and representative hill sent to the comptroller general at the government accountability office urging g.a.o. to complete its assessment on whether the congressional review act applies to s.a.b. 121. a letter dated february 14, 2024, co-signed by the bank

policy institute, the american bankers association, the financial services forum, and securities industry and financial markets association sent to the s.e.c. requesting a meeting with the s.e.c. chairman urging him to reconsider s.a.b. 121. lastly, a bipartisan, bicameral letter dated november 15, 2023, co-signed by five representatives and two senators sent to the federal reserve, the o.c.c., fdic, ncua urging the agencies to withhold enforcement of s.a.b. 121 in light of g.a.o.'s decision. the speaker pro tempore: without objection on all three letters. mr. davidson: i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from north carolina reserves. the gentlelady from california is recognized. ms. waters: mr. speaker, the sponsor of this bill, mr. flood, has asked what the alternative to this c.r. a. resolution would be, and that answer's very simple. draft a bill that narrowly

addresses the current question about how this guidance applies to banks. the use of a cra is dangerous and reckless. i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady reserves. the gentleman from north carolina is recognized. mr. mchenry: my friend says dangerous and reckless, well, her party used the congressional review act process just like republicans have used the congressional review act process. it's not reckless or dangerous. it's law. and we are trying to be a check and balance on overreach of the administration. with that i'd like to yield two minutes to the esteemed member of the financial services committee and judiciary committee, mr. fitzgerald for two minutes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for two minutes mr. fitzgerald: i thank the came. i rise today in strong support of h.j.res. 109. i don't want to be redundant, but the s.e.c. staff county bulletin 121 is a radical

departure for how custodians account for other assets. by requiring them to treat digital assets as an asset and liability, s.a.b. 121 makes it nearly impossible for banks to provide custody services for digital assets due to the prudential requirements that it would trigger. innovations like the tokennization of assets have the potential to dramatically improve our financial infrastructure. tokennization will allow new innovations in traditionally liquid assets to become available to more people more efficiently. like commercial bank deposits. government corporate bonds. money market fund shares, real estate, gold. other commodities. however for tokennization to take hold, it's important for regulated financial institutions to be custodians in order to identify the entitlement holier. and mitigate any single point of failure in the record of the

ownership. this misguided action from the s.e.c. should be struck down and i urge my colleagues to vote yes for this resolution. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from north carolina reserves. the gentlelady from california is recognized. ms. waters: i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady reserves. the gentleman from north carolina is recognized. mr. mchenry: mr. speaker, aid like to yield three minutes to my colleague and good friend from north carolina, great leader in digital assets, m mr. nickel. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for three minutes. mr. nickel: thank you, mr. speaker. i rise in support of the bipartisan -- congressman mike flood. disapprove of the s.e.c.'s staff accounting bulletin 121. protecting consumers. re-enforces congress' role in the rulemaking process and pushes back on the s.e.c.'s hostility towards digital assets. listen, folks, s.a.b. 121 makes digital assets industry less

safe for consumers. it prevents well regulated banks from safeguarding digital assets that owned by their clients. s.a.b. 121 requires banks to place custody and digital assets on their balance sheets contrary to how traditional assets are treated. this makes it nearly impossible for a bank to provide custody of digital assets at scale leaving investors to rely on risker, unregulated options. whether you love crypto or hate it, you should want the most heavily superadvised financial institutions experts at custodial banking to safeguard digital assets. we are also seeing this issue with s.a.b. 121 play out in real time the s.e.c.'s recent approve of spot bitcoin e.t.p.'s allows retail investors access to this class to a regulated product. most bitcoin e.t.p.'s are held by the same nonbank custodian, banks aren't serving as custodians for any of these products as they would with a

traditional e.t.p., this could pose a risk to the safety and soundness of the financial system. a concentration of risk issue for sure. to make matters worse, the s.e.c. deliberately side stepped the customary regulatory process, amounting to an obvious overstep of the agency's authority. last october the general accounting office concluded that the s.e.c. breached statutory rulemaking requirements by issuing s.a.b. 121 as guidance rather than a rule avoiding the in the and comment period. it's used to determine existing policy not create brand new policy like s.a.b. 121. the s.e.c. issued the rule without conferring with banking regulators which is unacceptable given the lack of prudential authority over banking institutions. it's time for -- institutions. it's time for congress to take action. we shouldn't have to resort to use ago cra to fix this issue. gary begins letter could reissue this bulletin and work with

stakeholders to find a solution, unfortunately this is the only tool we have left. as with previously successful cra's, the s.e.c. will be able to reissue its rule as long as its made changes responding to statements made by members empty across-the-board. i ask -- congressional record. i ask you to support our bipartisan which will protection the investors and financial system. encourage innovation. bolster american competitiveness. and restore congress' role in administrative rulemaking. thank you. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from north carolina reserves. the gentlelady from california is recognized. ms. waters: mr. speaker, mr. donaldson entered a letter into the record from several bank trades. what he did not mention was that the banks only were asked for a targeted modification. when they wrote to the -- about this legislation.

in fact, in that letter they supported the transparency requirements this resolution would repeal. i reserve the balance of my t time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady reserves. the gentleman from north carolina is recognized. mr. mchenry: inquire about time remaining. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman has 3 3/4 minutes remaining. the gentlelady has 7 1/2 minutes remaining. mr. mchenry: i'm prepared to close. i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from north carolina reserves. the gentlelady from california is recognized. ms. waters: mr. speaker, i have no further speakers. i am prepared to close. if the gentleman from north carolina has no further speakers. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized. ms. waters: mr. speaker, i yield myself the balance of the time. i would urge my colleagues to see this bill for what it is. it is a giveaway to one powerful special interest group and an effort to weaken the s.e.c., a

crucial agency that protects investors and the functioning of our capital markets. this is the agency that is working to protect the retirement savings of millions of americans. this is the agency that is crucial to making our capital markets the envy of the world. this is the agency at the forefront of ensuring that innovation like encrypto is done responsibly and in accordance with existing security laws. we simply cannot afford to weaken the s.e.c. moreover, this bill harms investors by eliminating much needed transparency on volatile crypto assets. making it harder for them to make informed investment decisions. it also harms crypto users because transparency also deters

fraud and other mismanagement of assets that can lead to devastating losses for consumers. .. additionally, it creates market volatility because a lack of transparency can result in more failures of crypto-related companies. and finally, this bill harms all public companies who benefit from the s.e.c.'s practice of providing timely guidance through staff accounting bulletins. so if the republicans would like to address the issue raised by large custody banks, they should do that, but there's no need to cause broader harm to the s.e.c. and all of the people and companies they rely on to maintain safely and stability. so, mr. speaker and members, the president of the united states

would not be giving us this information this early about vetoing unless they saw this as a serious issue that must be dealt with right here on the floor of the house of representatives. and i thank you and yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady yields back. the gentleman from north carolina is recognized. mr. mchenry: i ask unanimous consent to insert into the record a may 7, 2024, letter from the bank policy institute, the financial services form and securities and financial market legislation, supporting h.j. res. 109 into the record. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. mchenry: mr. speaker, i yield myself the balance of the time. what i would say is this, colleagues, the administration's approach to digital assets doesn't make a lot of sense. the president has a executive order outlining work products he wants from agencies.

and on one hand they say we want to bring digital assets into regulated finance and need clear rules of the road. and on the other hand, the administration's appointees at the securities and exchange commission have done everything they can to undermine that level of clarity, number one. number two, issuing guidance that undermines whatever the current clarity is and diminishing that and number three, thereby diminishing consumer protection. so it's a nonsensical approach. so the administration says they want to veto this bill but they have a whole work stream the president issued without any forcing mechanism and executive order asking for a regulated stable coin which we've passed out of the house financial services committee with bipartisan votes. they've asked for market regulation to give clarity what is a digital asset and means of exchange so american consumers can participate in this

innovation that is the basis of the new generation of internet technology that the globe is using and america is behind. and so i really think it's important that we engage as best we can, whether it's with the stable coin bill we passed out of committee, the market regulation bill we passed out of committee, that is brings that clarity the president's executive order asks for. and take the first step to provide consumer protection that their financial assets are protected. if the firm goes bankrupt, they want to know they can get their asset back, and by passing this repeal, that's the first step in that process. so this is very important for consumer protection. if you support consumer protection, vote yes on this resolution. if you support safety and soundness for financial institutions, vote yes. if you support reigning rogue

violators, vote yes. it promotes digital innovation and thoughtful process making from our regulators. so with that, i urge adoption of this resolution, and i want to thank my colleagues on the democrat side, mr. nickel, and on the republican side, mr. flood, for their thoughtful approach to policymaking and general assets and on developing this congressional review act proposal in particular. with that, i urge the adoption of the resolution and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. all time for debate has expired. pursuant to the house resolution 1194, the previous question is ordered on the joint resolution. the question is on engrossment and third reading of the joint resolution. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the ayes have it. third reading. the clerk: joint resolution

providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, united states code, of the rules submitted by the securities and exchange commission relating to staff accounting bulletin number 121. the speaker pro tempore: the question is on passage of the joint resolution. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the ayes have it. the joint resolution is passed and without objection -- mr. mchenry: mr. speaker? the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from north carolina requests the yeas and nays. those in favor of taking this vote by the yeas and nays will rise and remain standing until counted. a sufficient number having arisen, the yeas and nays are ordered. pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20, further proceedings on this question are postponed.

the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from minnesota, mr. stauber, seek recognition? mr. stauber: pursuant to house resolution 1149, i call up h.r. 2925 and ask for its immediate consideration in the house. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: h.r. 2925, a bill to amend the omnibus budget reconciliation act of 1993 to provide for security of tenure for use of mining claims for ancillary activities and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: pursuan t to house resolution 1194, the amendment in the nature of a substitute printed in how the report 114-116 is a don'ted in the bill is considered read. the bill as amended shall be

debatable for 30 minutes, equally divided and controlled by the minority member on natural resources or their respective designees. the gentleman from minnesota, mr. stauber, and the gentlewoman from new mexico, ms. stansbury, each will control 15 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from minnesota, mr. stauber. mr. stauber: i ask unanimous consent members have five legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and insert extraneous material on h.r. 2925. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. stauber: mr. speaker, i rise today in support of h.r. 2925, the mining regulatory clarity act of 2024. in may of 2022, the united states court of appeals for the ninth circuit affirmed a lower court's decision for an approved mine plan for the rosemont copper mine in arizona. this is current called the rosemont decision and upended

regulatory precedent of decades and u.s. forest regulations that allows approval of operation on or off a mining claim as long as these operations meet environmental and regulatory standards. essentially this court's ruling puts the cart before the horse and fails to reflect the process of how a company actually develops a mine. i think there's some confusion about the mine approval process and what the term "valid claim" means. first, when looking to develop a mine, an operator must submit a mine plan of operations to the united states forest service or the bureau of land management. this plan must include the intended uses of the surface of the mining claim including those for waste rock replacements, mills, offices, and roads. the mine plant of operation is key in temping the economic feasibility of a mining site which in turn factors into the

basis of determining which mineral deposits are commercially developable and therefore valid. if allowed to stand, the rosemont decision would require the discovery and determination of a valid mineral deposit, meaning that operators must prove the existence of a commercially developable deposit before a plan of operations can be approved. remember a mine cannot move forward if the federal government does not approve any facets of the mine plant of operations, and mineral validity cannot be determined until after the economic viability of a site as is laid out in the mine plan of operations and verified by the federal government as well. h.r. 2925, mr. chair, would reverse this backward determination of the court, allowing american mining to russian on federal lands. i urge my colleagues to support this bill and i reserve the

balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from minnesota reserve s. the gentlelady from new mexico is recognized. ms. stansbury: thank you, mr. speaker. i rise in strong opposition to h.r. 2925 and would like to remind my friends across the aisle that mining is already happening on american lands and on our public lands, but this week, instead of working on meaningful legislation on behalf of the american people, our friends have opted instead to focus on a toxic free-for-all on our public lands, have opted to roll back energy efficiency in home appliances. in fact, they put forward a bill this week called hands off our home appliances because they're so concerned about the american people that they want to regulate the efficiency of your toasters, your dishwashers, your refrigerators and undermine the ability of our immigrant and his

pano communities have representation in the united states census and yes, to allow a free-for-all on our public lands. now, the american people are not asking us to do this p. they're asking us to work on real problems, to work on the economy, inflation, help families put a roof over their head, protecting our reproductive rights and access to the ballot box, protecting our democracy and dealing with the international crisis happening on multiple continents. my question is, why the heck are we back on the house floor one week -- yeah, that's right. one week after we voted on a bipartisan basis to send this bad bill back to committee because it couldn't even be supported on the floor once but here we are and our friends are trying to pass it once again

without revision or changes because they think they found a few extra spare votes. let's talk about mining law. the existing mining law of 1872 already gives our mining companies, including foreign owned companies the right to extract on our publicly owned lands. they can also do so without having to pay even one cent in royalties. that includes companies that are controlled by governments of adversarial nations. this is not only a shameful giveaway but a huge national security vulnerability for the united states. but this bill is not about clarifying a court decision, it's about giving more minerals away to those who would like unfettered access to our public lands. it would give the opportunity for multinational corporations and adversarial nations to control even more of our resources without having to play royal -- pay royalties to the

u.s. government and tie up claims to our public lands, whether or not there are minerals actually present there. this would make it impossible to invalidate a mining claim even if their real intent was other things, maybe to lock up development of other uses or buying them for other uses, including construction of transmission lines or other things they'd want to do. this should be of deep concern to anybody who does not wanted a veer sharal nations or the companies that operate in them to control our public lands or minerals. my colleagues on the other side of the aisle say it's either mine here or mine abroad and create a false aequivalency but it's not that simple. some of the countries trying to expand their mining operations here in the united states -- in fact, many of these multinational corporations are owned as subsidiaries like china and other countries with have

adversarial relationships with and also engage in practices we know cause human rights abuses, things like slave labor elsewhere in the world. while my friends across the aisle tried to claim this is really about mining on american lands, it's about granting unfettered access to these corporations. . . these entities it ship the minerals they take from american lands and they will them anywhere in the world. as he said, we already had this debate last week and the outcome was the entire house, right here on this floor, voted to send this toxic bill pack to the natural resources committee. that hadn't happened in years because this bill was so flawed and such a giveaway to foreign national-owned companies and a threat to our national security that it was agreed that it wasn't ready for prime time and shouldn't be passed on the floor. my colleague from new mexico,

representative leger fernandez, offered a motion to send the bill back to committee. so that we could discuss amending the bill to ban these adversarial corporations -from mining and locking up our public lands. i have to say i was heartened. we had six republicans join the democrats to do just that. you know what, we are not going to vote for this bill. it's about time. we need some bipartisan support to double down and protecting u.s. interests. in fact, as i said it's been decades since the house sent a bill back to committee like that. but as we see today here we are, republican leadership is trying once again to get the bill passed through brute force without addressing serious concerns, without sending it back to committee, without going through due process, and here we are debating it about to take a vote again. now, these concerns aren't new. last year the bill was included in h.r. 1, and at that time one of my republican colleagues

offered a very similar amendment banning mining on our public lands by foreign companies with records of human rights violations. we are literally talking about companies that have child slave labor records. but that amendment passed through committee on bipartisan basis, but yet they stripped it out and are trying to pass the bill without it here today on the floor. i just find it absolutely jaw dropping and extremely telling that this was the amendment that was stripped out of the bill that we are leer back a week later -- here back a week later after this bill failed on the floor. i think it's very clear what's going on here. this is really about advancing the interests of corporations, of interests on our public lands, and opening them up for exploitation. i think it's important that we talk about how outrageous this is. we have to ensure that our

public lands are not opened to our adversaries to these multinational corporation that is would exploit our minerals for free, and we need bipartisan action to make sure that that cannot happen. we should be back in committee discussing the vulnerabilities, discussing the national security implications, discussing american competitiveness, discussing energy policy not trying to jam through a bill that will violate human rights and international trade. with that i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady reserves. the gentleman from minnesota is recognized. mr. stauber: thank you, madam chair. i want to be very clear this bill will not allow mining companies to do whatever they want on public land. that's a fact. mining activity will not occur if any facet of a mine plant of operations does not pass our strict federal guidelines and our strict environmental guidelines. with that being said i want to offer two minutes to my good friend from arizona,

representative gosar. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from arizona is recognized for two minutes. mr. gosar: madam speaker, mr. chairman, i rise today in support of h.r. 2925, the mining regulatory clarity act offered by the gentleman from nevada, mr. amodei. h.r. 2925 would resolve harmful permitting uncertainty and litigation delays caused by a harmful 2019 court decision known as the rosemont decision. this decision revoked a previously approved mine plan to my great state of arizona, ignoring 40 years of federal permitting and land management regulations. the uncertainty caused by rosemont threatens to add years of delays to an already overburdened 30-year proposed mining project. on federal lands of the united states. congress should act to remedy the fallout created by rosemont and must work to expedite mine permitting and build up domestic mineral supply chains. madam speaker, i urge my colleagues to support this

bipartisan bill that would provide much needed certainty for domestic mining projects. with that i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentlelady from new mexico is recognized. ms. stansbury: i yield three minutes to the gentlewoman from california. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from california is recognized for three minutes. ms. porter: we have heard repeatedly from across the aisle that mining pollution is a thing of the past. that today's modern mining industry operates under the highest environmental standards and an after the mining operations stop, the industry cleans up after itself. if that sounds too good to be true, it's because it is. our current regulations require companies to post financial assurances to cover the cost of cleanup after their mining operations stop. but it is not enough. dangerous pollution still happens far too often. depending on the mine type and location, between 74% and 82% of

modern day mines are polluting beyond what their permits allow. the kicker? taxpayers pay domestic and foreign mining companies for their subsidies and often the entire cost of cleanup. given the $54 billion backlog to clean up mines abandoned before our current reclamation regulations, which continue to pollute our lands, waters, and communities, the american taxpayer literally cannot afford new mining pollution. that's why i filed an amendment to this bill to improve bonding requirements and make mining companies keep up with the new mining rush that this bill would enable. this is a commonsense amendment. if we are going to allow a toxic mining free-for-all, we should at least make sure that taxpayers are not footing the bill. after all, this bill opens up our lands to our foreign adversaries, and i don't expect them to clean up after

themselves out of the goodness of their hearts. so my amendment would make sure operators post financial assurances to fully cover reclamation of all mining activities. it would correct for inconsistencies in both bram and forest service regulations and codify them into law. it would have made sure these financial assurances were real money like surety bonds, irrevocable letters of credit, certificates of deposit, or cash. not insurance policies that lapse if the mining company goes bankrupt. it is time we hold industry accountable and make sure that they cannot pass on the costs of cleaning up after themselves, the costs of their earning profits, on to the american people. but guess what? the republican majority refused to even consider my amendment. they blocked it from getting a debate on the house floor, and even from get ago simple up or down vote. it's outrageous and it paints a dark picture of the house republicans' priorities.

polluters over people, and china over the american taxpayer. i yield back. the spe ms. stansbury: reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from minnesota is recognized. mr. stauber: thank you, madam chair. i want to thank my good friend, mr. gosar from arizona, for his words of support for this legislation. again this legislation would correct a misguided court decision revoking an approved mine for the rosemont copper mine project in arizona. arizona produced the second most amount of minerals in the united states in 2023. it also has over 30 million acres of federal lands. if the rosemont decision stands over 40% of arizona's lands will be taken off line in the u.s. towards the battle to produce enough minerals to meet our ever growing need. i want to share, as a member of the natural resources committee, when the democrats brought an expert forward, madam chair, and

an anti-mining expert. she said we have to stop hard rock mining. because the reclamation process doesn't work. i invited her to our great state of minnesota. i said i'll show you a reclaimed mine where we have deer hunting, bear, eagle, bees, birds, hey making on a reclaimed mine. we have drinking water come from mines that are not in operation. we have recreation in our mines in minnesota and elsewhere in this country. when i asked does hard rock mining expert, you say it's too dry in arizona to mine. you say it's too wet in minnesota. i said where would you like us to mine these minerals for our strategic national security? she said the quiet part out loud, nowhere. my colleagues on the other side of the aisle refuse to allow mining to happen in this cou country. we -- it was just mentioned the communist country of china. this administration today, madam

chair, is in consultation with the congo, where 15 of the 19 industrial mines use child slave labor owned by the chinese communist country. we, the biden administration, is entering in memorandums of understanding to have the critical minerals mined by child slave labor in the congo where there is zero environmental standards, zero labor standards to meet their green agenda, madam chair. they are ok with that, but they will not allow mining to happen in this country following our environmental standards and our labor standards. the fact of the matter is, madam chair, i live in the heart of mining country. and we -- the best water in minnesota is in the heart of mining country. we can drink it right out of the ground in we'll, minnesota. i can tell you something that this country, we bert take part in mining -- better take part in mining domestically. otherwise we'll find ourselves

in deep trouble. department of energy, department of defense says we need more domestic mining. we cannot rely on china and other adversarial nations. this is a simple fix. this is a simple fix. we believe the court erred. it's our job to legislate. relegislate this piece of -- this part of mining that is so important to the united states of america. it's so important to our communities where we are blessed to have these natural resources. and i have to -- i just have to say this, my good friend and colleague from california, let's go back many years, california started on a gold rush. they began because of mining. safe to say we don't want to follow california much longer with what's happening in that great state. but the fact of the matter is, madam chair, this is, i believe this is going to pass in a

bipartisan fashion. it is a good piece of legislation. and i look forward to passing it. i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentlewoman from new mexico is recognized. miss stansbury: thank you, madam speaker. i would like to yield two minutes to the gentlewoman from california. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from california is recognized for two minutes. >> thank you, madam speaker. yes, california is a great state. madam speaker, six republicans joined democrats in voting to stop this bill and send it back to meet. miss kamlager-dove: -- force the republicans who voted to sent bill back to committee, one had an amendment to say if a company is guilty of human rights abuses, including slave labor in other countries, they are not welcome to our land and minerals for free. by the time the bill came to the house floor last week, republican leaders had stripped the amendment right out. i guess republicans want to take the win on supporting drug

cartels and chinese sex traffickers, groups that benefit from human rights violations. in addition, the republican chair of the select committee on competition with china also filed an amendment to close the loophole. that one was blocked twice by republican leaders. republicans have voted to keep foreign adversaries from accessing our oil and gas, how are our minerals different? pardon my skepticism there is not a bipartisan concern here. this bill is a toxic, national security giveaway to our foreign adversaries. it undercuts our competitiveness and unconscionable on human rights, that is why we are seeing some republicans buck their party on it and i hope they will stand strong. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady reserves. ms. stansbury: i'd like to insert my side eye and reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from minnesota is recognized. miss stauber: thank you -- mr. stauber: the disas russ

results of the rosemont decision will divert capital to countries like the democratic republic of the congo and indonesia. when we choose this out out-of-sight, out-of-mind ideology, development flows to other nation was significantly lower environmental and labor standards. indonesia, for example, is currently the world's second -- world's largest sickle producer and dominant only expected to grow in the coming years. indonesia mining is accomplished with sweeping deforest station and pollution, many of which are financed again by the chinese communist party. these operations consistently ignore environmental impacts on local communities and leave the land far worse off than they found it. on the other hand, american mines, like this mine project in nevada, adhere to the best standards in the world and are committed to restoring the land after minerals are extracted. ..

mines are not committed unless a full plan mine is negotiated. and it must include a robust plan for reclamation after the project is complete. madam chair, it's simple, either we do it here or let foreign adversarial nations take over and it's a strategic national security interest and i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentlelady from new mexico is recognized. ms. stansbury: i yield 2 1/2 minutes to the gentlelady from new mexico. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized for 2 1/2 minutes. ms. leger fernandez: last week house republicans tried to pass h.r. 2925 to make it easier for the biggest mining corporations to take our public lands and mineral resources without giving the american people a dime. i filed a motion to send the bill back to the committee to consider my amendment which would have prevented companies owned or controlled by our

adversaries from taking our gold, copper, or precious rare earth minerals to use against us in the market or national security. fortunately, last week, a bipartisan majority including six republicans passed my motion. we stood up together for our national security. however, the republican leadership ignored last week's bipartisan vote and here we are again. what's worse, the rules committee, the republicans rejected molinari's amendment to conducting mining operations on our public lands. let me remind everybody, the chairman heads the select committee on competition between the united states and the chinese communist party. it's his job to know how dangerous china's mining of our precious minerals is to our economy and national security. the republicans blocked their own republican chair's amendment.

i believe in bipartisanship, so when i see an amendment i like and recognize is good, i support it. so madam speaker, at the appropriate time, i will offer a motion to recommit this bill back to committee once again. if house rules permit it, i would offer the motion with the chairman's amendment which would block foreign entity's mining of foreign lands. when republicans block even a consideration of an amendment which would ban china from taking away the precious metals that belong to the american people, republicans are putting the interest of wealthy foreign corporations over the american people. i hope the six republicans who were courageous enough to stand up for american security interests last week stand for america today. i ask unanimous consent to insert my amendment into the record. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. ms. leger fernandez: i urge

support for my motion so the natural resources committee can consider this amendment. this time in good faith. madam speaker, i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady reserves. the gentleman from minnesota is recognized. mr. stauber: federal lands account for as much as 86% of the land area in certain western states and these same states account for 75% of our nation's met always production. the mining regulatory clarity act is needed to ensure we have certainty of access through these essential material deposits. if we want to encourage invest ment in safe, responsible, clean mining practices that provide billions in taxes that support our roads, our bridges, our schools, and other essential services along with the essential materials to the american people, then we also need to support h.r. 2925. and madam chair, real quick,

you're hearing the other side of the aisle not necessarily debate the actual legislation. we've heard them talk about the process. so when you can't debate the legislation, then you go after the process. this is a very good piece of legislation and i look forward to it passing in just the next hour or so. and i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentlelady from new mexico is recognized with 30 seconds left in debate. ms. stansbury: thank you, madam speaker. we rise in strong opposition to h.r. 2925 which rolls out the welcome mat to our foreign adversaries to exploit our minerals. we must defeat this bill that we did last week. we debated the merits. it's bad for america and bad for national security and bad for our economy. it's bad for american mining. it's bad for the environment and that is why we must send it back and i support the gentlelady's motion to recommit. and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from new mexico yields. the gentleman from minnesota is recognized.

mr. stauber: thank you, madam chair. let's be clear, there's no mine operating on federal lands that are owned by the chinese communist country. zero. zero. anybody that mines in the united states will follow our environmental standards and our labor standards, doesn't matter which company. they're going to follow our rules. and for this administration to turn a blind eye to the atrocities and human rights violations to meet their green agenda, it's unconscionable. we can do it here in the united states with the best labor standards, the best environmental standards with our technology and be proud of these minerals we've produced. we can lead the rest of the world on how to do it. nobody does it better than the united states of america and our workers, period. and i reserve. is that it?

the speaker pro tempore: the only time remaining. mr. stauber: thank you, madam speaker. in closing, i want to address some of the misinformation we've heard about this bill. this bill does not allow mining -- companies to continue to operate under conditions that don't follow our labor and environmental standards. if the outlandish circumstances my friends on the other side of the aisle will happen if this bill is enacted could have actually happened all along, including land locks and subversion of environmental and government oversight, then why didn't it happen? because the harm they claim this bill could inflict upon our federal lands is actually not true. it's inaccurate. this bill would, however, allow america to become a global leader in mineral production once again. i support fair labor standards. i support high environmental standards. i support increasing our

national security. in short, i support domestic mining. i urge all of my colleagues to do the same. in supporting h.r. 2925. madam chair, i yield back the remainder of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields. all time for debate has expired. the previous question is ordered on the bill as amended. the question is on engrossment and third reading of the bill. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the ayes have it. third reading. the clerk: a bill to amend the omnibus budget reconciliation act of 1993 to provide for security of tenure for use of mining claims for ancillary activities and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlewoman from new mexico seek recognition? ms. leger fernandez: i have a motion to recommit at the desk. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the motion. the clerk: ms. leger fernandez moves to recommit the bill

h.r. 2925 to the committee on natural resources. the speaker pro tempore: pursuan t to clause 2-b of rule 19, the previous question is ordered on the motion to recommit. the question is on the motion. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the noes have it. the motion is not agreed to. for what purpose does the gentlelady from new mexico seek recognition? ms. leger fernandez: i ask for the yeas and nays. the speaker pro tempore: the yeas and nays are requested. those in favor of taking this vote by the yeas and nays will rise and remain standing until counted. a sufficient number having arisen, the yeas and nays are ordered. pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20, further proceedings on this question are postponed. the chair lays before the house a message. the clerk: to the congress of the united states, section 202-d of the national emergencies act, 50 united states code, 1522-d

provides for the national emergency or less within 90 days prior to the anniversary date of the declaration the president publishes in the federal register and transmits to the conga notice stating the emergency is to continue in effect beyond the anniversary date. in accordance with this provision i've sent to the federal register for publication the enclosed notice stating the national emergency with respect to the actions of the government of syria declare executive order 1338 of may 11,2004 as modified in scope and relied upon for additional steps taken in executive order 13399 of april 25,2026, executive order 13460 of february 13, 2008, executive order 13572 of april 29, 2011, executive order 13573 of may 18, 2011, executive order 13582 of august 17, 201 11, executive

order 1306 of april 22, 2012, executive order 13608 of may 1, 2012 to continue beyond effect of may 11, 2024. the regime's brutality and oppression of the syrian people who have called for freedom and a representative government not only endangerses syrian people themselves but generates instability throughout the region. the syrian regimes actions and policies including with respect to chemical weapons and supporting terrorist organizations continue to pose an unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security, foreign policy, and economy of the united states. for these reasons, i have determined it is necessary to continue in effect the national emergency, declare an executive order 1338 with respect to syria. in addition, the united states condemns the brutal violence and human rights violations and abuses of the assad regime and russian and iranian enablers. the united states calls on the

regime and its backers to stop the violent war against its own people and enact a nationwide cease-fire and facilitate the unhindered humanitarian assistance to all syrians in need and negotiate a political settlement in syria in line with the united states security council resolution 2234. the united states will consider changes in policies and actions of the government of syria in determining whether to continue or terminate this national emergency in the future. signed sincerely, joseph r. biden jr., the white house, may 8, 2024. the speaker pro tempore: is referred to the committee on foreign affairs and ordered printed. the chair lays before the house a message. the clerk: to the congress of the united states, section 202-d of the national emergencies act, 50 united states code 1622-d provides for the automatic termination of a national emergency unless within 90 days prior to the anniversary date of

its declaration, the president publishes in the federal register and transmits to the conga notice stating that the emergency is to continue in effect beyond the anniversary date. in accordance with this provision i've sent to the register for publication the notice stating it declare executive order 13873 of may 15, 2019 with respect to securing the information and communications technology and services supply chain is to continue in effect beyond may 15, 2024. the unrestricted acquisition or use in the united states of information and communications technology or services designed, developed, manufactured, or supplied by persons owned by, controlled by, or subject to the jurisdiction or direction of foreign adversaries augments the ability of these foreign adversaries to create and exploit vulnerabilities and information and communications technology or services with potentially catastrophic effects. this threat continues to pose an

unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security, foreign policy, and economy of the united states. therefore, i have determined it is necessary to continue the national emergency, declare an executive order 13873 with respect to securing the information and communications, technology, and services supply chain. signed joseph r. biden jr., the white house, may 8, 2024. the speaker pro tempore: referre d to the committee on foreign affairs and ordered printed. the chair lays before the house a message. the clerk: to the congress of the united states, section 202-d of the national emergencies act, 50 united states code 1622-d provides for the automatic termination of a national emergency unless within 90 days prior to the anniversary date of the declaration the president publishes in the federal register and transmits to the conga notice stating the emergency is to continue in effect beyond the anniversary date. nines with this provision, i've sent to the federal register for publication the enclosed notice stating the national emergency with respect to the central

african republic declare an executive order 13667 of may 12, 2014, is to continue in effect beyond may 12, 2024. the situation in and in relation to the central african republic has been marked with a breakdown of law and order. intersect aryan retention and use of child soldiers and widespread violence and atrocities included those linked to the kremlin entities such as the wagner group and threaten the peace, security, or stability of the central african republic and neighboring states and continue to pose an unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security, foreign policy of the puns. therefore, i've determined it is necessary therefore, i have decided to continue the national emergency with respect to the central african republic, signed

sincerely, the white house, may 8, 2024. the speaker pro tempore: refer to the committee on foreign affairs and ordered printed. pursuant to clause 12-a of rule 1, the chair declares the house in recess subject to the call of the chair. to that's why we're leading the way in taking to 10-g. >> mediacom supports