tv US House of Representatives Special Orders CSPAN September 27, 2016 7:00pm-9:01pm EDT
an amendment at the desk. the clerk: amendment offered by mr. weber of texas. the chair: the gentleman from texas and a member opposed each will control five minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from texas. easports.com -- we -- mr. weber: mr. speaker, this amendment is noncontroversial and mirrors language by senator corner in -- senator cornyn in the senate's version of wrda. thanks to chairman shuster for making our ports and waterways a critical national priority and for bringing this important legislation to the floor today. mr. chairman, this amendment would simply require the army corps of engineers to take into account the existing data studies and information developed by the gulf coast community protection and recovery district when conducting the coastal texas protection and restoration sturdy authorized in the water resources and development act of 2007.
counties were harris, galveston, jefferson and orange. hurricane ike struck this region in 2008, caused $37.5 -- with a b, nationwide. the storm caused over 100 fatalities, washed away homes, flooded communities and shut down much of the nation's and the region's energy production. the effects of another major hurricane in the houston region and our nation would be devastating -- in our nation would be devastating. over six million people call this area home and many work in critical economic sectors like health care and energy refining. the impact would be felt in every congressional district across the country. for example, according to reports published immediately
after hurricane ike made landfall, gas prices spiked between 30 cents and 60 cent per gallon across many states due to the disruption of energy production in the houston region. in 2013 the texas general land office entered into an agreement with g.c.c. -- gccprd to conduct a three-phase storm surge suppression study. the phase three report was released this past june. in addition to this study, the g.l.o. and the army corps of engineers are moving forward in partnership on the coastal texas protection and restoration study. once completed this study will make the case for coastal infrastructure projects that would qualify for federal dollars and would protect our vulnerable coastal communities and a major part of this nation's energy production. the study received funding in the president's fiscal year 2017 budget, but the current timeline for completion of this study is over five years. mr. speaker, it's been eight years since hurricane ike and
this timeline is unacceptable. mr. speaker, protecting the texas coast from dangerous storms is a critical federal interest and a national priority. this amendment would simply require the army corps to tap into an existing pool of data and information developed by texans in an effort to shorten the completion timeline of the coastal protection and restoration study. i urge adoption of this amendment and i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. does any member wish to speak in opposition? the gentleman from texas is recognized. mr. weber: mr. speaker, i urge adoption of the amendment and i yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from texas. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. he amendment is agreed to. it is now in order to consider amendment number 20 printed in house report 114-790.
for what purpose does the gentleman from iowa seek recognition? >> mr. chairman, i have an amendment at the desk -- mr. young: mr. chairman, i have an amendment at the desk. the clerk: amendment number 20 offered by mr. young of iowa. the chair: pursuant to house resolution 892, the gentleman from iowa, mr. young, and a member opposed each will control five minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from iowa. mr. young: i thank the chair. first i would like to thank the committee on transportation and infrastructure, chairman shuster and members of the staff for working so hard on this bill. mr. chairman, my amendment seeks to address situations where -- amendment. -- thighs theast hydraulically connected leskies are close enough to one another in the same water system and can have a huge impact on each other. so when a local flood protection system is in need of repair, we cannot allow federal inaction to stand in the way. without action from the corps, improvements to local levees have limited effects and are
insufficient. why is this important? not only does it put people and property in flood zones at risk, but it also increases costs for individuals and businesses in our communities, mandating flood insurance and classifying any development as high risk. i am seeing this in my district, where the city of des moines has been working with the corps since 2011. i know my district is not alone. i see it in other districts as well. mr. chairman, we cannot continue to have local governments be hindered by federal inaction. inaction on property the federal government took responsibility for years ago. in the end, this amendment will establish a policy that will reduce and ultimately negate the negative impacts the community-owned flood protection system accreditation caused by the army corps of engineers' failure to act. with that, i urge adoption of my amendment and i yield back. the chair: the gentleman reserves. >> no, he yielded back. the chair: the gentleman -- >> he yielded back. he said it. the chair: does the gentleman ield or reserve?
the gentleman yields. for what purpose does the gentleman from oregon seek recognition? mr. defazio: i rise in opposition. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. mr. defazio: this amendment, i have to say, we're not quite certain what it does. it seems to require the corps of engineers to take actions, you know, for anything that relates to a federal project, which is a locally owned flood control. i have no idea what the implications of this are. so my staff called the corps and said, how many projects do you think this would effect and what do you think the impacts would be? and the corps of engineers said they had no idea. i would like to address a question to the chairman. mr. chairman, mr. chairman, since the corps has no idea what this amendment does, what the financial implications are, since it would seem to give the federal government liability for all these local projects that are anywhere downstream or related to a federal project,
could the chairman explain to me what this amendment will do since the corps can't? mr. young: my understanding is it is a sense of congress, ask the corps to act -- -- mr. shuster: my understanding is it is a sense of congress, asks the corps to act -- mr. defazio: rereclaiming my time. it's not a sense of congress as offered. it's actually, it's quite definitive language. federally owned and operated levees compromised -- it shall be the policy of the corps of engineers to act expeditiously with actions required to authorize, fund, identify and implement improvements to reduce and negate negative impacts to community-owned flood protection system accreditation. it seems to me that it's pretty definitive with the shall part there. mr. shuster: well, it does say shall and it does ask the corps to act expeditiously which i think all of us want to encourage the corps to do that. mr. defazio: ok.
good luck with that. thank you. i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from iowa. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. he amendment is agreed to. it is now in order to consider amendment number 21 printed in house report 114-790. for what purpose does the gentlelady from connecticut seek recognition? ms. esty: mr. chair, i rise and seek recognition in support of my amendment. the chair: the clerk will designate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 21 printed in house report 114-790 offered by ms. esty of connecticut. the chair: pursuant to house resolution 92, the gentlelady from connecticut -- 892, the gentlelady from connecticut and a member opposed each will control five minutes. the chair recognizes the gentlelady from connecticut.
ms. esty: thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, i rise today in support of my amendment to the water resources development act, which would require the secretary of the army corps to implement a corrosion prevention strategy for our nation's water infrastructure. preventing corrosion is a bipartisan issue and affects every state, district and local community. in connecticut and across the country, corrosion shortens the life span of our critical water systems, harms the environment, and endangers public health and safety. many of our nation's water systems are over 100 years old. what's more, according to a study conducted by the federal highway administration in 2002, the corrosion of water and sewer systems across the united states costs the american taxpayers nearly $36 billion a year. a number that has only increased in the ensuing 14 years. by implementing strategies to
prevent corrosion, we can extend the life span of these water projects, save money and ensure that we have continued access to safe drinking water for years to come. surely we can all agree that preventing corrosion by doing -- corrosion -- by doing so we are being responsible stewards f taxpayer dollars, as well as citizens' health and safety. this is not a substitute for the serious conversation this country needs to be having on updating and bringing into the 21st century our roads, bridges, highways and sewer systems and water systems. but we do need to work toward extending the life span of current federal infrastructure. and we need to work hard on that today. today we have the opportunity to engage in a bipartisan effort on corrosion prevention. something that will be an important first step to extend the life span and the safety of these systems. it's the right, it's the
sensible thing to do. what corrosion control technologies are -- when corrosion control technologies are proper installed and maintained, corrosion is preventable. it's inexpensive and it saves lives. again, i urge my colleagues to support this amendment and with that i yield back the balance of my time. i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentlelady reserves the balance of her time. does any member wish to speak in opposition? mr. shuster: i rise in opposition, claim the time, although i do not owe poles the amendment. the chair: -- oppose -- mr. shuster: i do not oppose the amendment. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. mr. shuster: i yield the gentleman one minute. a minute and a half. >> thank you, mr. chairman. a special thank you to my co-sponsor, co-chair of the house corrosion caucus, congresswoman esty, who
introduced this amendment that will help the taxpayers protect america's aging infrastructure. corrosion in our nation's infrastructure reduces the life span of our investments, costs our taxpayers billions of dollars, threatens our environment, and endangers our public safety. mr. olson: if left unchecked, corrosion effects many sectors of our economy, including defense projects, energy development, ports, water infrastructure, utilities, roads, rails, bridges, and other critical american assets. the good news is that corrosion is an issue that can be tackled to sustain the life and value of our federal investments. when properly maintained, corrosion is largely preventable. i've dealt with corrosion my whole adult life. serving in our navy for nine years, i've seen young sailors fighting corrosion on our ships
with a paint scraper, a paint brush and a buchter of gray paint. the glory of the so-called paint and chip detail. and working for the houston region, i know how corrosion can impact our investment in our ports and waterways. this will save taxpayers billions down the road. if my colleagues want to know more about corrosion prevention, come to houston, texas, headquarters of the national association of corrosion engineers international. this amendment would simply require the army corps to schmidt a report on corrosion prevention activities for our nation's infrastructure. including water and sewer systems. i urge my colleagues to support this bipartisan, commonsense amendment, and i yield back the balance of my time. to the gentlelady from connecticut. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. does the gentleman reserve? mr. shuster: i do not reserve. i just want to say, if connecticut and texas can agree on this, then congress ought to
be able to agree on this. i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman yields. the gentlelady from connecticut is recognized. ms. esty: thank you, mr. chairman. i want to thank my friend and colleague in the -- and the co-chair of the corrosion prevention caucus. i am a navy daughter and the daughter and granddaughter of civil engineers. so believe me, i've learned a lot about corrosion and corrosion prevention in my life. again, this is the sort of bipartisan fix we need to be engaged in in this body. i want to thank my good friend, mr. olson, my good friend, the chairman, mr. shuster, and with that i urge all of our colleagues to support this commonsense amendment and with that i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentlelady yields. the question is on the amendment offered by the gentlelady from connecticut. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. he amendment is agreed to.
it is now in order to consider amendment number 22 printed in house report 114-790. for what purpose does the gentlelady from connecticut seek recognition? ms. esty: mr. chairman, i seek recognition to -- in support of my amendment which i believe is at the desk. k40 the chair: the clerk will dez egging nate the amendment. the clerk: -- will designate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 22 printed in house report 114-790, offered by ms. esty of connecticut. the chair: the gentlelady from connecticut, ms. esty, and a member opposed each will control five minutes. the chair recognizes the gentlelady from connecticut. ms. esty: i rise in support of my amendment which makes an important change to the north atlanta execocoastal -- coastal ecosystem. it enexpands the study from a feasibility study to a comprehensive management plan. first established in the 2014 water resources reform and development act the north atlantic coastal ecosystem
restoration study is a state of the art approach for bringing together the latest science on restoring coastal ecosystems as scale. the proposal in my amendment is an important change because it will allow the united states army corps of engineers to undertake critical habitat restoration projects of title -- tidal mar she is -- marshes, dunes and spawning areas across area from from maine to virginia. due to the varying habitats and ecosome along the atlantic coast, individual states are currently struggling to adequately address environmental and ecological issues that span the entire region. challenges from, for example, algal bloom, fish depletion and water quality issues know no boundaries and frankly defy the efforts of states to coordinate activities. beyond that, we simply lack the expertise in each and every state to address these shared
problems. what has resulted is a fragmented state-by-state approach to solving interconnected environmental problems that need holistic solutions. my amendment addresses this problem by creating a comprehensive, cooperative, regional approach to environmental restoration and management. by fostering collaboration between the army corps, state, and local partners we can more effectively tackle environmental issues and restoration of coastal ecosystems. my change will help states along the entire north atlantic united states solve major water quality ssues like algal bloom and threats to shellfish like the ones we are currently facing in long island sound. i urge my colleagues to adopt this commonsense amendment and i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentlelady reserves. for what purpose does the gentleman from pennsylvania seek recognition?
pll shuster: i seek time in opposition though i do not oppose. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. mr. shuster: i thank the gentlelady for bringing this amendment forward and i urbling my colleagues to support it. the chair: the gentlelady is recognized. ms. esty: thank you, mr. speaker. i urge adoption of the amendment and yield back. the chair: the gentlelady yields. the question is on the amendment offered by the gentlelady from connecticut. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. the amendment is agreed. o -- is agreed to. it is now in order to consider amendment number 23 printed in house report 114-790. for what purpose does the gentlelady from florida seek recognition? ms. frankel: i have an amendment at the desk. the chair: the clerk will designate the amendment. cloim amendment number 23, offered by ms. fran tell of florida. the chair: pursuant to house resolution 892, the gentlelady from florida, ms. fran tell, and
a member opposed each will criminal control five minutes. the chair recognizes the gentlelady from florida. ms. frankel: i bring this amendment on behalf of myself and mr. curbelo of miami, florida. it's an excellent, commonsense amendment. it's an authorization that requires no money and it stroiks an archaic, 30-year-old provision from law. i'd like to explain how it affects our home state of florida. quite simply, the slaw an obstacle to florida's tourism and shoreline protection. we're one of the top travel destinations in the world. we have over 100 million visitors with an impact to our economy and beafs play a very big role not only for visitors but for our shore protection and for protection of our property, people, and the environment. just like northern states have to fix their potholes after a bad winter in florida we have to restore our beaches and what has happened is that dade and broward counties have run out of usable sand to dredge off our
coast and after the sandy hurricane our sand supply is depleted. we have to rely on sand from northern counties and taking sand from inland is very, very expensive and to try to take sand from the coastal communities causes lit -- literally causes a public uproar, threats of litigation, it's our version of water war well, call them sand wars in florida. but there is a very easy solution and that is to allow the counties in south florida to buy sand from the bahamas. what's preventing that? there's language in a 1986 law, 1986 wrda bill, written at a time when sand in south florida was plentiful. it prevents state and local governments anywhere in the country from buying foreign sand without the army corps first findinging, this requires a study and another study, that
there's no domestic sources for sand for environmental or economic reason. one more task that an overburdened agency does not need to perform. so what this amendment does is simply strikes that outdated requirement. mr. chairman, i urge members to help end the sand wars and support my amendment and i reserve my time. the chair: the gentlelady reserves. does any member wish to be recognized in opposition? the gentlelady is recognized. ms. frankel: i yield back. the chair: the gentlelady yields. the question is on the amendment offered by the gentlelady from florida. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. he amendment is agreed to. it is now in order to consider amendment number 24 printed in house report 114-790. for what purpose does the gentleman from texas seek recognition? mr. fwreep green: i have an amendment at the desk.
the chair: the clerk will designate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 24 printed in house report 114-790, offered by mr. green of texas. the chair: the gentleman from texas, mr. green and a member opposed each will control five minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from texas. mr. green: thank you, mr. chairman. this amendment is one that has received bipartisan support. it is supported by gene green of texas as well as congressman john culberson of texas. this amendment is quite simple. what it does is accord the army corps the requirement to prioritize projects wherein we've had a loss of life a disaster declaration has been declared, and there is a partnership agreement in place and the funds have been authorized for the partnership. in texas, we have had, and across the country, i might add, floods that are no longer classified as 100 year floods.
indeed they're being classified as billion dollar floods. we've had the memorial day flood which was more than $1 billion. the tax day flood this was more than $1 billion. between the two, we had more than 15 lives last. approximately 17 to be more accurate this amendment would give us the opportunity to have some of the projects on the corps' docket completed such that we can eliminate some flooding and minimize additional flooding. i'm honored to say that the corps is aware of this amendment and i'm grateful to the rules committee for making it in order. i thank the chairperson and ranking member for assistance given as well. with this, i will reserve my time. the chair: the gentleman reserves. for what purpose does the gentleman from pennsylvania seek recognition? mr. shuster: i seek time in opposition though i do not oppose. the chair: without objection. mr. shuster: i thank the gentleman for bringing this forward.
it's similar to an amendment that mr. young from iowa brought forward. i think that was a good amendment, i think this is a good one. i urge my colleagues to vote for it and i yield back. the chair: the gentleman from texas is recognized. mr. green: if i may, mr. chairman. my colleague, gene green, has arrived, i'd like to yield such time to him as he may consume. the chair: the gentleman is ecognized. mr. green: thank you, mr. speaker. members, i rise in support of this amendment. many areas have faced severe, frequent floods in recent years. too many of these disasters have deadly consequences for our communities. since the beginning of the 114th congress more than 200 americans have died as a result of flooding. in texas alone, 77 people have perished as a result of flooding in under two years. heavy rains and flooding killed eight people in one week this last april this amendment would go far to address these
tragedies by allowing the army corps of engineers to prioritize flood control projects for areas that have lethal flooding to provide security and peace of mind to residents in these communities. both congressman green and i represent different parts of houston-harris county. his area was pretty devastated along with the northwest part where congressman mccaul has and a numb of other folks. there's a reason why we're called the coastal plain in houston. when it floods, we fill up the bayous and fills up the rivers, the only place it gos is in our businesses and hopes. that's why this amendment is so important. i urge my colleagues to support this amendment and protect our most vulnerable communities. i yield back my time. mr. green: reclaiming my time, i want to thank the chairperson an ranking member and the rules committee as well. i yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields. the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from texas. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no.
in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. he amendment is agreed to. it is now in order to consider amendment amendment number 25 printed in house report 114-790. for what purpose does the gentlelady from washington seek recognition? ms. herrera beutler: mr. chairman, i have an amendment at the desk. the chair: the clerk will designate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 25, printed in house report 114-790, offered by ms. herrera beutler of washington. the chair: the gentlelady from washington, ms. herrera beutler and a member opposed each will control five minutes. the chair recognizes the gentlelady from washington. ms. herrera beutler: my amendment is a simple technical correction to clarify the congressional intent to assist northwestern states in monitoring and pretchings of
invasive smee cease. they're seeing an invasion of mussels that are destroying hydropower for water supply, filtration systems. once this species becomes established and spreads it's difficult and very costly to eradicate. in some states, invase i mussels are costing industries hundreds of billions in repear. for the communities, an infestation would be devastating to the production of clean, renewble hydropower which means seep rate hikes for families and businesses located in our region and currently thriving due to the lo cost energy. communities would also suffer damages to fisheries and botes putting all users and recreators of the colombian river systems at risk. prevention is the first line of defense and the cheapest tool to use against invase i species. water craft inspection stations are particularly crucial dem successful monitoring an detection. these stations intercept
thousands of boats from all over the couldn't are toy inspect and decontaminate. this is why congress authorized funds in the 2014 wrda to support water craft inspection stations that protect the river basin from mussel invasions. unfortunately, these funds have yet to actually reach the stations due to an ambiguity in the law this amendment simply clarifies that the funds authorized under wrda are intended to assist in establishing new water craft inspection stations and support coverage for existing stations in the northwestern states. mr. chairman, this is a good government amendment to ensure that federal funds are being used for the purposes for which congress intended and i urge adoption and reserve the balance of my time. choup the gentlelady reserves. for what purpose does the gentleman from pennsylvania seek recognition? mr. shuster -- from oregon. mr. defazio: i want to thank the
gentlelady for bringing this forward. we are one of the last refuges in the united states free of the zebra mussel, which is incredibly destructive and expensive and this will help us protect the integrity of our vital river resources. i thank fer her bringing this forward and i fully support it. i yield, the chair: the gentleman yields. the gentlelady from washington is recognized. ms. herrera beutler: i thank the gentleman for his support and let's get this amendment moving. i yield back. the chair: the sque on the amendment offered by the gentlelady from washington. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. he amendment is agreed to. for what purpose does the gentleman from pennsylvania seek recognition? mr. shuster: i move that the committee do now rise.
the chair: the question is on the committee rising. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the ayes have it. ccordingly the committee rises. the speaker pro tempore: mr. chairman. the chair: mr. speaker, the committee of the whole house on the state of the union, having had under consideration h.r. 5303, directs me to report it has come to no resolution thereon. the speaker pro tempore: the chair of the committee of the whole house on the state of the union reports that the committee has had under consideration h.r. 5303 and has come to no resolution thereon.
the chair announces the speaker's appointment, pursuant to section 703 of the social security act, 42 u.s.c. 903, and the order of the house of january 6, 2015, of the following individual on the part of the house to the social security advisory board for a term of six years, effective october 9, 2016. the clerk: ms. kim hildred of alexandria, virginia. the speaker pro tempore: the chair announces the speaker's appointment, pursuant to section 114-b of the john c. stens i center for public service training and development act, 2 u.s.c. 1103, and the order of the house of january 6, 2015, of the following individual on the part of the house of the board of trustees for the john c. stennis center for public
training and development for a term of six years. the clerk: mr. greg harper of earl, mississippi. the speaker pro tempore: the chair lays before the house the following personal requests. the clerk: leave of absence requested for mr. payne of new jersey for the first series of votes. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the request is granted. pursuant to clause 1-a of rule 1, the chair declares the house in recess subject to the call of the chair.
the biggest disagreement right now is over aid to flinlt for the water crisis there. about 220 -- $220 million. and also for louisiana disaster aid for the terrible flooding that happened there as well. senator mitch mcconnell said earlier today or indicated that there could potentially be a deal to revert a shutdown by friday at midnight by lowering arms on both those issues and taking it out of the continuing resolution. host: the senate tried to move forward on the continuing resolution by senate democrats mostly and a handful of senate republicans blocking the efforts to move forward. is it -- center around the issues you just mentioned? guest: that's right. there was a vote to advance the legislation today but it lost by about 15 votes. there was a 60-vote threshold. the question is still over aid to flint and also aid to louisiana and a few other states that have been decimated by floods. host: this whole issue of the aid to flint gets a little complicated.
because it did -- the senate did pass aid to flint in their version of the water bill, which the house is now taking up. so why is the issue coming back up here in the continuing resolution? guest: the issue is really house republicans who haven't agreed to the language that's in the senate legislation that passed, i believe, with 95 votes. so, senator john cornyn, the g.o.p. whip, today acknowledged to reporters that house republicans have made this a little bit complicated by not agreeing to that language in the water bill and so now they're trying to be able to figure out if they should move forward and try to deal with this flint issue separately, or if they should -- if they can, like democrats want, put it onto that spending bill, that 10-week spending bill, that will fund the government through december 9. host: what about funding to fight the zika virus? how was that handled in the c.r.? guest: that was major contention throughout the year.
senate democrats had filibustered legislation because of a provision in there that they said would block funding to planned parenthood, an affiliate in puerto rico. that language has been largely resolved. it's been -- haven't really heard too much about that issue at all. in the language now the $1.1 billion to combat zika. and both democrats and republicans are pretty comfortable with that. both sides have been able to claim a victory on it. the really this language on flint and on the louisiana flooding aid. host: we've been focusing on the senate. what about house leadership? what have we heard from speaker ryan or other republican leaders? guest: the house is really in wait and see mode. trying to figure out what the senate's going to give them and with such little time, there's very little that they can actually do to change the outcome of this. host: going back to that tweet from national journal which points out federal agencies at least being prepared for a
possible shutdown. the last time the government shut down, 2013, the shutdown lasted 16 days. but there wasn't an election just around the corner. which members have to go out and campaign for. does that put pressure on members to get this thing done by friday? guest: absolutely. they want to get out of here, they want to go back on the campaign trail. they want to spend the next number of weeks, through election day, to go back home and talk to constituents and they want another long recess. host: alex rogers, covering a changing story on the c.r. you can follow his reporting on twitter. also at nationaljournal.com. thanks for the update. guest: thank for having me. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2016] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] >> the next president making appointments to the supreme court of the united states will be president donald trump. with hillary clinton in the white house, the rest of the world will never forget why they've always looked up to the united states of america. >> c-span's campaign 2016
continues on the road to the white house, with the vice presidential debate between republican governor mike pence and democratic senator tim kaine, tuesday, october 4, live from longwood university in farmville, virginia, beginning at 7:30 p.m. eastern. with a preview of the debate. then at 8:30, the predebate briefing for the audience. at 9:00 p.m., live coverage of the debate, followed by viewer reaction. the 2016 vice presidential debate, watch live on c-span, watch live and any time on demand at cspan.org, and listen live on the free c-span radio app. >> kevin braidy of texas is the chair of the house ways and means committee. he spoke in washington today about trade policy and the uncertain future of the trans-pacific partnership deal. we'll show you as much as we can in this next segment. tom brady it's a perfect day to be talking about -- mr. brady: it's a perfect day
to be thinking about trade. history just so happens -- i'm not much of a historian. turns out this day in history is a bit unique on sort of game changing, thought changing actions. on this day in 1825, the world's first public railroad was opened in northeast england. it made america rethink its transportation network. on this day in 1905, albert einstein's famous paper about e equals m-2 -- m.c. squared was published. solid matter explodes and hidden energy inside made us rethink everything. on this day in 1954, school integration began in washington, d.c., and baltimore public schools, making us rethink the concept of equality. this was the perfect day for us to be rethinking and . -examining u.s. trade policy
i'm convinced, done right and properly enforced, free and fair trade allows everyone to raise their em-- themselves out f poverty and into prosperity. free trade lies at the heart of our nation's post-world war ii prosperity, in my view, it's the freedom to trade is perhaps our greatest economic freedom. as we look to the future, the importance of re-examining or rethinking our nation's trade policies can't be overstated. just in the past couple of decades we have seen dramatic changes to nearly every facet of global commerce. these advancements have opened incredible opportunities for american businesses, workers and consumers. but they've also posed significant challenges for policymakers. our mission moving forward has to be to pursue trade policy, to reflect the challenges and opportunities facing american,
while also promoting competition and growth. i'm con vidgesed that as we -- convinced that as we rethink trade, you know, part of the challenge going forward is we need, at every opportunity, to make free trade more free. our trade agreements should be more aggressive, less protectionist, they should be bolder. selling meet okur trade agreements is -- mediocre trade agreements is hard. seller bolder ones are more valuable. we ought to, at every opportunity, reject early harvest in any trade agreement that we're in, and push trade negotiators to dig deeper on behalf of consumers. and make sure that those trade agreements have the strongest implementation plans to assure that they actually achieve what they're laying out to do. secondly, i would hope we can continue to focus on trade, not necessarily adding more social
issues to this. the may 10 agreement was a good, solid balance. it allowed both parties to move forward in a positive way on trade. i think the more others try to load these agreements with nontrade issues, from climate change to social rights, i think it is tougher to ahe -- to achieve the original goal. just lifting families and countries out of poverty and into prosperity is powerful enough. frankly, that's tough enough to achieve. but doing that, in my view, you know, when you -- when a family is going to bed hungry in a third world country, shivering under a makeshift tin roof, they're not focused on environmental advancements and labor rights. without prosperity, the opportunity to sell their wears around the world, to thrust that miege mr. speakerer budget farther with -- that meager
budget farther, that's one of the greatest powers of what we're doing in trade. i would begin to link trade with tax reform in a major way. i think, frankly, trade bears too much of the brunt for an uncompetitive u.s. tax code. i think decisions businesses often make to be competitive, both here and abroad, are as much or more linked to our tax reform or our tax problems in america, our code, rather than on trade itself, which is one of the reasons that the house republicans in our better way, tax reform, are focused on making u.s. competitive and eliminating any incentives in the tax code to move manufacturing, research or headquarters overseas. we ought to be talking about the two if we're serious about getting the economy growing for america. i think too, moving forward,
it's crucial, especially right now, watching this presidential campaign, as it runs itself out to november, i think it's crucial for the american people to understand that freedom to trade isn't about china. it's not about mexico, europe or asia. it's about protecting our individual freedom to trade as americans. to buy, sell and compete anywhere in the world with as little government interference as possible. that's the heart of our free enterprise system. that's what the freedom to trade brings us. so, for the entrepreneur toiling deep into the night in the garage, working on their new breakthrough product, this freedom ensures they have the opportunity to put that product on the market and make it available throughout the world. for american consumers, for families, for that single mom, the freedom to trade protects your ability to purchase whatever products you choose and keep prices for your goods
as affordable as it needs to be for you and your family. the reason -- one of the reasons i love economic freedom and the freedom to trade, it really answers a key question. who has the power? who has the power to decide what products you can buy and what -- at what price? is it washington that has the power? special interest groups? or is it you, the consumer? free trade ensures that it is the consumer that ultimately has the power to decide what to buy and at what price. i'm also convinced that while we live in an anti-establishment era, both here and around the world, the freedom to trade is the most ti-establishment power americans enjoy. it guarantees that when a new
product is designed or a better service unveiled, or a new breakthrough technology is produced, special interests can't hold you back from selling it, buying it or even disrurpting an entire industry. if you discovered and delivered a product or service better han what exists today. i'm convinced this is what thomas jefferson meant when he said, it is right, it is a right, and a duty. the freedom to trade is a right. in america. and we ought to keep that -- in the forefront as we work through this debate. he also, thomas jefferson explained, in order to function properly, free trade must be established on a reciprocal basis. this is another crucial part that shouldn't be left out of this debate. free trade agreements, tell our foreigners -- agreements tell our foreign competitors they can't sell into our markets unless we can sell into theirs. when we do that and level the
playing field, america is incredibly successful. from a sales standpoint. but also incredibly successful for that single mom looking for the best products at the most affordable price. reciprocity, while it doesn't -- isn't a language you hear in most of our debates, it's sort of the golden rule on trade. countries don't live up to their obligations. our trade agreements, w.t.o. rules provide us with the tools to challenge them. if necessary, retaliate. enforcement, holding our trading partners accountable, that's part of the commitment we make to the american people and i'm proud to say that this year congress has acted to give this administration and future administrations the strongest enforcement tools that we've had in modern u.s. history. so, when when we open up new markets to american-made goods through trade agreements and strictly enforce those agreements, america wins. today, where are we on the trans-pacific partnership?
i think this agreement represents a tremendous opportunity to open up more markets, more critical markets, and two-way trade. it is a chance for the united states to write the rules of this 21st century global commerce, and it provides unmistakable geostrategic benefits. as the institute's recent book makes clear, trans-pacific partnership represents a major opportunity to grow our economy, increase wages and purchasing power for american families and secure u.s. national interests in asia. my view is that is exactly the same. in my town hall meetings on trade, i do a lot of them back in texas, you know, i always talk about the asia-pacific as being the area with -- that will have half of all the middle class customers on the planet in that asia-pacific region. o just as when reporters ask
willy sutton why he robbed banks and he said, well, that's where the money's at, why do we want to be in the asia-pacific, that's where the customers are at. we want our workers, our farmers, our businesses competing on a level playing field in that lucrative market. ut, as we pursue this, the agreement has to be done right. there are still several significant concerns from members of congress that the administration has to address to get the necessary votes. these aren't minor details either, they are key issues for american businesses, for workers and consumers. as i've said repeatedly, the substance of the agreement will drive its timing. ultimately, congress controls the clock and we control whether the agreement is approved, so we'll move only when the administration addresses these concerns, otherwise we won't have the votes to pass it.
if you remember nothing else today, i think here's the key. we are running out of time. if the white house wants to get it done this year. as i hope we do. the white house's responsibility to address these longstanding concerns quickly, make sure it's getting support from both sides of the aisle, we are certainly working in the house to facilitate the meetings, the discussions, the ideas on how we resolve these outstanding issues, so that we can be in a position to move this legislation hopefully again this year. let me sort of conclude. i'll be glad to take questions, as i said at the outset, we have to carefully examine and re-examine our trade policies. make sure they're hitting the mark in the 21st century. we have to lead on trade. with this white house and the next, with the rest of the world, more importantly, with the american people, and to do that successfully we have to
reframe the debate back to the power of economic freedom. we have to make clear this is about protecting our freedom to trade, our freedom to buy and sell and compete throughout the world, with as little government interference as possible and given all that's at stake, we can't afford to disengage, we have to stand up and stand up aggressively for ur freedom to trade. i would be glad to stop and take some easy questions from the audience here today. [applause] >> thank you so much, chairman
brady. short, sweet, to the point. historical references. and finally bringing us to today. before i open it up to our distinguished audience, could i pose just a couple easy questions your way? mr. brady: i knew that wasn't going happen. i was just trying to suggest it. >> you can handle it. it'sry siprycal -- it'sry sip rocal. obviously -- it's resip ro call california. obviously, as you said, we're all aware, this is a time of much more pushback on trade, much more fear among congresspeople, even who recognize the work of it, to come up and stand up for it as they once did. whoever wins the presidential election on november 8, we know two things. first, almost certainly your party will retain the majority in the house and we assume you will retain chairmanship of the
ways and means. secondly, which ever candidate wins, and we've pointed out that one candidate's trade policies are a lot worse than the other's, but anyway, which ever candidate wins, neither of them want to pass t.p.p. neither of them want to pursue new trade openings it seems. how do you and your -- in your role expect to work with an administration that has that kind of attitude? mr. brady: i'm sort of reading behind -- between the lines on our presidential nominees and i think back eight years, to where even -- the democratic party, both senators clinton and obama were fighting each other to decide who would rip up nafta quickest and who would join charles schumer and lindsey graham on a 27% tariff increase on china. but we saw governance much different than that. president obama quickly
determined trade is a major power for us, economically here at home and throughout the world as well. i'm not surprised trade is struggling in public opinion right now. this has been -- financial crises are tough. it's been a very slow recovery. more -- look, two out of three americans still think we're in some type of recession. trade tends to suffer, you know, take the blame for that, especially in a world as global as today. to be expected a bit, here's what's frustrating. i think both of our presidential candidates need to be making the case, and they have occasionally dipped their toe into -- mr. trump has made the case, enforcement first, you know, isolationism in trade isn't acceptable. he's correct in both of those. both candidates want to go enforcement first. that's trick. but we've got to be aggressive -- terrific. but we've got to be aggressive in the outreach as well. i'm hopeful we can work with
both. th to improve and pass t.p.p., if it isn't done by the end of the year, which i hope it is. ready for and considered for a vote. i'm convinced, again, if we're serious about growing the economy, it's not enough simply to fix the way we tax. we have to have those markets to sell and ship. trade is so critical of that. i think the economy is going to be -- national security are the two biggest issues for the presidents. they have to know, we can't do it if we're building walls, protectionism, isolation in the trade area. >> so much there to your answer. one of the most interesting things you said in your opening speech and in your reply just now is this potential linkage between how american multinationals, american corporations who trade are taxed and the trade policy. again, an issue that keeps
coming up, whether it's apple in ireland or fisa or any of these, is the issue of repatriation of profits. how do you see that agenda going forward, from your seat? obviously at ways and means. mr. brady: i'm hopeful, in speaker ryan, he's given us a greep light on some of the biggest challenges facing america. certainly from the ways and means perspective, well care reform -- welfare reform. a new tax system. we laid out a blueprint. this speaker, in our committee, in our conference, has made a commitment to bring this to a vote in 2017. regardless of the outcome of the election. it's football season. the analogy would be, for the first time 234 30 years we're -- in 30 years we're going to put the ball on the court. on the field. we're going to move it down the field. i'm hopeful we can achieve it. it goes hand in hand with trade because today our companies struggle to compete around the world. when they compete and win, we're about the only country
that has a wall that taxes them to bring those profits and bring them back here in research or manufacturing or growth. our tax reform blueprint changes all that. we're not taxing worldwide. the tax rate to bring those profits back home will be zero. we're proposing a border-adjustable tax approach that mirrors what occurs in china and europe, other competitors, that we which wwe lift taxes off our exports. there will be a tax on the import. what that does, it virtually eliminates any incentive to send jobs in manufacturing, research, overseas, competition will occur on price, quality and service, whether you're in trade or in tax policy, that's exactly where you want it to be. i'm convinced tax and trade can move forward in the new year. >> that's very exciting. to pick up on your football analogy for a second. one of the things about playing
big-time football, which, you're from texas, there's always another game somewhere else at the same time. mr. posen: you mentioned the issue of national security and asia-pacific. one of the things that we've studied here at the institute is the idea that obviously china is proposing a bunch of bilateral or smaller trade deals. there are other deals being done by the e.u. with various countries. our colleague spoke for a long time about competitive stuff. do your colleagues in congress think about this issue, that if we don't move the ball down the field, we just defend, meanwhile, there's still another game being played at the next stadium? >> yes, but i don't think the public does. my advice is, do not abandon the trade deal.
that game is going on whether we are on the field or not your those countries are competing aggressively. both inherently understand that. i think a lot of members of congress do. it is not necessarily an easy sell at home. big.st seems we seldom with local examples. that business down the street that has every 10 workers selling products. i think for some of the public, they understand how global competitive it is out there. >> coming up on c-span, a hearing with edgar online enforcement on sanctuary cities. then, we will catch up with hillary clinton and donald trump on the campaign trail. first, an update on efforts to
fund the government passed the deadline on friday. >> with current government funding set to run out friday at midnight, we are joined by alex rogers, covering the story. we will start with the tweet from "national journal." we talk, how likely is it that the government will shut down after friday? >> leaders on the sides of the aisle are committed to making sure that doesn't happen. the biggest disagreement is over flint and the water crisis. aid,for louisiana disaster for the terrible flooding that happened there appeared -- there. mitch mcconnell said earlier there could potentially be a deal to avoid the shutdown by friday night by lowering arms on
both of those issues. mostly and aocrats handful of republicans blocking the efforts move forward. is it mainly centered on the issues you mentioned? yesterday there was a vote to advance legislation today but it 15 votes.out there are questions about flint and louisiana. >> a gets a little complicated, because the senate did pass aid to flint in their version of the water bill, which the house is taking up your wife the issue coming back up -- why is the issue coming back up? >> house republicans have not agreed to the language. , hetor john cornyn acknowledged today that the
house republicans have made this complicated by not agreeing to language in the water bill. they are trying to figure out if they should move forward and try to deal with the flint issue separately or if they can put it on to the spending bill that will fund the government through december 9. >> what about funding for the zika virus? >> that was a major contention throughout the year. senate democrats have filibuster legislation because of a provision that they said would block funding to planned parenthood and puerto rico. that language has been largely resolved. we've not heard much about that issue at all. in the language, it is $1.1 billion to combat zika, and democrats and republicans are pretty comfortable with that.
both sides claim victory on that. it is really the language on went and louisiana flooding. >> we've been focusing on the senate. what about the house? speaker ryan and other republican leaders? >> the house is trying to figure out what this and is going to such littlend with time, there is not much they can do to change the outcome. >> going back to the tweet from "national journal" that points out everything prepared for a , theble sector -- shutdown less shutdown lasted for 16 days, but there was not an election right around the corner. does that put pressure on members? >> they want to get out of here and get back on the campaign trail. they want to spend the next few weeks going back home and talking to constituents.
they want a long recess. covering aers changing story. you can follow him on twitter and on national journal. >> c-span's washington journal, live every day news and policy issues that impact you. coming up wednesday morning, oklahoma republican congressman steve russell will talk about friday's hunting deadline, eliminating government waste and government -- campaign 2016. steve cohen talks about his call for justice department investigation into the donald trump ambition. and our spotlight on magazine features an editor, who will talk about an article in which he accuses the democratic party of using certain tactics
to incite anxiety over discrimination and exclusion in order to solidify support from minority. c-span'so watch "washington journal." >> federal reserve chairman janet yellen will brief members of the house financial services committee on policy and the economy, that is live at 10:00 eastern on c-span3. >> e-house judiciary subcommittee is looking into immigration enforcement in new orleans. we heard from state and federal officials on sanctuary cities. this is just under two hours. good morning.
welcome to the subcommittee on regression and border some -- security. we welcome everyone to today's hearing entitled how the crescent city became a sanctuary city. i will recognize myself, i want to make a statement, and the my friends california. i want to introduce the catalyst and then recognize -- panalists. i will then recognize you individually. as close as though other come to being a judge. time and again, our nation has witnessed the tragic consequences of this administration's failure to enforce immigration law. witnessing these tragedies is unsettling enough, but it pales in comparison to the degree of anguish and separation experienced by the families of those victimized. we're not here merely to discuss
the failure to enforce the law, it is more disconcerting than that. we are here because the department of justice, supposed to be the chief enforcer of the law, is aiding and abetting local governments and the failure to enforce the law. toe again, the temptation make a political point has transcended the obligation to take care that the law be faithfully executed. by current policy, the new orleans police department prevent its employees from communicating with u.s. immigration and customs enforcement regarding the immigration that is of and a estee.-- are based on the department of a lawsuit was, filed against the city of new
orleans and the police department alleging various civil rights violations. on the basis of that lawsuit, the party has entered into an agreement. -- a decree. it stated that officers shall not take law-enforcement action on the basis of actual or perceived immigration status, including the initiation of stops or other field contacts. let me read the saline part of that again. shall not take law-enforcement action on the basis of actual immigration status. 28, 2016, new orleans police department issued a written policy entitled "immigration status" which forbids officers from inquiring about immigration that is and forbids them from immigration
enforcement. the new orleans police department policy was not only vetted but enthusiastically improved by doj civil rights division. it was also approved by dhs. the department of justice and the department of homeland security enthusiastically theoved and supported failure of law enforcement to take note of federal immigration laws. in addition to being mind numbingly antithetical to be faithful execution of the law, this new orleans policy statement appears to violate 1373,n eight usc code which provides no person or agency shall prohibit agency from sending, requesting or receiving information regarding
don't -- lawfully present aliens. a letter was sent to attorney lynch demanding she explained the drgs -- doj's role. on may 31 of this year, doj inspector michael horman issued a response.s -- they may be in violation of federal law appeared inspector general was requested to investigate allegations that the 143 districts are in violation.
for those of you who may be struck by the duplicity of the chief federal law enforcement toity reviving grant money states and municipalities who specifically failed to assist the enforcement of federal law, you're not alone. the inspector general found the laws and policies in several jurisdictions go beyond regulating responses and also address in some way the sharing of information with that will immigration authorities. after specifically reviewing the language of the new orleans waste department policy -- police department policy, it was view, it wouldur not serve as a savings clause. it is the understanding of the police department employees that they are not restricted from sharing status information, the policy would be inconsistent.
on july 7, doj's programs determined that section 1373 is applicable federal law for purposes of determining status eligibility for grant funding. that, the police department was awarded a grant. to a letter,nded they outlined the policy but failed to explain the new orleans policy is awful, which was an important part of the letter in the first place. friday, september 23, just a few days after our hearing was announced, we received a letter from the department of justice claiming a revised policy for the new orleans police department did comply. however, this policy makes no
mention of part b. in addition, doj has not provided this committee with any indication of how officers will be trained to implement this revised policy or how seemingly minor changes to the text will assure new orleans will not be operating as a sanctuary city, which leaves us with why we are here today. in public places, aliens can more readily have a weapon. that they're interested in providing sanctuary. the federal government has inserted itself in matters that are not inherently federal. to put this in terms that almost
anyone can understand, state and local law enforcement can be trusted to provide security for members of congress both here and in our home districts. they can be entrusted to enforce monologues, child sex laws, kidnapping laws, they can dissipate in task -- participate in task forces. but government a lift a finger to assist in federal immigration laws. to the department of justice go as far as the consent degree to inhibit the ability of the federal government to enforce federal law is stunning, even for a department of justice that has unfortunately become increasingly politicized. the consent degree can be interpreted it to her where your lens to adopt policies that require officers to violate federal law. let me repeat that.
this administration's department of justice is actually requiring new orleans police officers to break the law in an effort to further their political agenda. onhave had multiple hearings those who have been victimized by century cities. we've heard from their families and are aware of the tragic consequences. this is not theoretical. this is real life with real victims and grieving family members. illegal aggression is not a victimless crime. -- we can the law, you weaken it forever. when she decides state and local law enforcement are good enough to protect us in our districts but not good enough to be trusted in the execution of the law, good luck reversing that. i will recognize california.
>> thank you. they were again devoting time to what the majority calls century cities. my republicanhat colleagues argue against local policies. is a question why the majority believe that it knows better than several hundred state and local police departments across the country that have embraced community trust policing policies precisely because they believe that approach makes us all safer. for the republicans question the need for good community policing approaches at this moment when reports of tragic police shootings dominate the news nonsensical. we could address the republican concerns with century cities and many other immigration matters if we have devoted time spent poleext and divergent -- sion.and diverge
this is what the police chief of dayton, ohio set over a year ago when he testified for the judiciary community -- committee. these policies allow us to focus our limited resources on our primary mission, crime solving and community safety. they also acknowledged that victims of violent crime, human trafficking and other crime should never be afraid to reach out for help for fear of immigration consequences. i know that in the department of justice report investigating the new orleans police department dated march 16, 2011, it said minority groups nearly uniformly said the police really reach out for them for any purpose. one member of a vietnamese community organization said that a lot of young vietnamese people
who get shot unity, we know who orleansm, but new police will not do anything. i agree with that she and i know from my experience that law enforcement and local officials can work awkwardly with community groups -- cooperatively with community groups and prioritize serious terminals -- criminals. i also agree with prior statements to the committee that imposing federal mandate on local law enforcement by withholding funds would be a huge setback and efforts to improve relationships between dhs and local law enforcement. with respect to new orleans, the context like most things in the big easy, is different. the mayor requested the
department of justice civil rights division engage in a review of the police department. he recognized a history of civil rights violations of the police department had undermined trust with the community and reform was necessary. the vast majority of new orleans police department officers honestly and conscientiously perform and continue to perform their duties. but i hope my republican colleagues and i hear to defend the actions of a that caused such great harm over the years. -- the of the abuse abuse of the department has been well documented. the mayor and the superintendent of police was in support of the department of justice and working with the local communities. they entered into a consent degree and has adopted a bias free policy. it ensures that immigrants can report crime and service witnesses without retribution. it also makes clear that information regarding the
citizenship and immigration status will be shared when required by federal or state law. out of an abundance of caution, new orleans has been working with the justice department to revive the language to guarantee its complaints -- compliance. are not selfs identified as sanctuary cities, they are effective community policing tailored for new will and -- new orleans. orleans is set on a path to safer streets and better police relations with citizens of all backgrounds. but here comes republican congress to the rescue. their questioning the legality of a policy that is already been revised to ensure it is in compliance. members led nothing to do with new orleans are here to tell the
local police and civil leaders how to do their jobs, even though the new orleans east department is the republican approach will undermine public safety and make your jobs harder. they are pursuing a line of argument that jeopardizes trickle funding -- critical funding. with all due respect, i say to my colleagues let's let the local government and the officials do their jobs and we can focus on hours. -- ours. thankfully, these proposals have ultimately gone nowhere, but we have the votes to pass comprehensive reform in the last
congress. the last bill would have made our community safer, and bringing these people out of the shadows would further enhance public safety. if the republican leadership had given reform the same opportunity for a vote at all of these other measures, it would be the law today. business,he people's work to pass immigration reform. i think the chairman and heal back the balance of my time. >> we recognize the gentleman from virginia. >> thank you. sanctuary cities refused to operate with u.s. immigration and customs enforcement and enforcement of federal immigration laws. of centuryration cities has resulted in thousands of illegal aliens being released
to commit more crimes. two decades ago, congress enacted a policy designed specifically to prevent communities -- several century cities in the united states, one is new orleans. invited the mayor department of justice to review the police department, partially to transform new orleans into a sanctuary city. there appears to have been collusion to have the doj and city enter into an agreement that would forbid the police department from
.ooperating with ice prohibited officers taking of action regardless immigration status. new orleans police department issued a policy forbidding officers from inquiring about immigration status. more troubling, it prohibited assisting with ice . thus, new orleans the claim that doj's heavy hand forced it to become a sanctuary city and endanger its residents when it was a willing participant. the consent decree was a shocking action on the part of the apartment -- department of justice. impede the enforcement of federal law.
it appears to be in direct violation. excuse me. it was reviewed and approved in advance by the department of justice civil rights decision -- division. this is another example of the current doj's cavalier disregard for the constitution and the law. the chairman and i sent a letter in may asking how the police -- andent policy providing details on the policy. the department of justice was on was completely anonymous nonsense. a report was issued in may that expressed concern that ambiguous language in the century policy policyse -- sanctuary may cause a violation. the inspector general noted that unless the understanding of the
new orleans police department employees is that they are not prohibited from sharing icegration information with , -- i asked for the training materials to ensure their understanding. i've been provided with nothing. this leads to a troubling possibility that your lack of training, the new orleans police department has violated section 1373. before this hearing, after the committee's persistent efforts to expose this matter and demand informed usdoj that new orleans had revised its policy, specifically that it is to be construed in accordance -a.h section 1373
they presented that the policy now compliance with section 1373. unfortunately, this coordinated effort to preserve the patina of legality of their consent degree -- decree clearly fails. prevents employees from requesting information from ice, maintaining information and exchanging information from other agents is. -- agencies. arrestspd officer that an individual is most likely going to contact ice to request information regarding the immigration status. the revised policy expressly prohibits officers from making inquiries into an immigration status. nopd has provided no and
-- evidence that they are complying. the new orleans police department received over $2 million in law enforcement grants on the department of justice in fiscal year 2015. hasttorney general lynch essentially admitted, if the new orleans police department is in violation of section 1373, it would be disqualified from receiving these great -- grants. yet there's been no effort to cut off grants from new orleans. the department of justice actions shows the protection of our constituents and enforcement of federal law are no longer ironies of the department --
priorities of the department. in fact, it views them as roadblocks. i look forward to our witness testimony in learning more about how this new police department policy, including why is still prohibits compliance with 1373-b. >> the chair will now recognize the gentleman from michigan. >> thank you, chairman. i join in welcoming all of our witnesses. i would like to preface my remarks regarding today's hearing, which deals with community policing policies by observing that our nations conscious -- conscience continues to be rocked by a series of tragic event involving
law enforcement and the loss of black life. in our courtrooms, in our streets and on television confront a never ending body count. earlier this summer, my congressional colleagues and i scentedn unprecedented -- sit in to trying get a vote on commonsense gun legislation. this committee, we formed a bite totisan -- bipartisan group begin examining how we can best that congressure takes responsibility for race and policing in america. i believe this working group is one of the best examples of how we can come together at a time when the nation needs our leadership to reduce the levels
of violence in our communities. joined mypast week, i congressional black caucus colleagues in protest of yet another series of senseless killings of black men and children by police in cleveland, tulsa and charlotte. when you add to this volatile on police officers in baton rouge and dell is, -- dallas, the nation risks battle of whose life matters most. we mourn the loss of all life. to achieve -- we need to have
police accountability, prevent violent attacks on law enforcement and improve the relationship between police officers and the community that they are sworn to protect and serve. humanity -- community trust -- availableable to smart law enforcement, including those with immigration populations like new orleans and my district in michigan. crime rates decrease after localities adopt community trust policies. further, this satisfies the stronger policies just -- such as secure communities fail to lower crime rates.
instead, they make communities left safe because residents become more fearful and less likely to report terminal activity -- criminal activity or cooperate with investigations. we share the common goal of community safety. to suggest that local leaders and law enforcement officials policiessely pursuing that make their communities left safe is simply false and offensive. we are looking for real solutions and we should be undertaking comprehensive immigration reform. hearing,tely, this which pejoratively refers to new orleans community trust policy as a century city policy, is not about copperheads of reform, it
is about -- comprehensive reform summit is about fear mongering. a measure passed the senate in 2013, or the legislation that had 200 cosponsors in the last congress, would allow law-abiding immigrants to come out of the shadows and get right with the law. and it would enable customs enforcement to focus its resources on deporting the worst element. would help solution ensure the cities of new orleans and all communities, citizens and immigrants alike, as well as the brave men and women in law enforcement, are protected from harm. chairmang, i think the
and a look forward to a meaningful discussion in this hearing from our witnesses. thank you, mr. chairman. >> we have a very distinguished panel of witnesses. i will begin by swearing the men. -- them in. do you swear the testimony you are about to get the whole truth, so help you god? the witnesses answered in the affirmative. i will introduce you and then recognize you individually. first, it is my pleasure to welcome the honorable jeff landry, the attorney general of the state of louisiana. he joined the national guard in high school and served as both a police officer and a sheriff deputy. he ran unsuccessfully for , and became served
the attorney general in 2016. .e has a bachelors in science he also has a law degree from loyola. welcome. the honorable michael for with going -- joined the doj in 2009. he also served as commissioner of the u.s. senate seat commission. honorsuated with highest and earned his law degree with high honors from harvard. welcome. introduce pleasure to ms. gupta.
she worked as a civil rights attorney and deputy of the civil liberties union. -- she earned her undergraduate degree with high honors from yale and a lot of grief from new york university. welcome. is in charge of federal affairs for new orleans. he served as legislative council. lsu and loyolaom university college of law. you are recognized. you.ank thank you for the opportunity to
committee.s to me -- you, i took an oath to defend the constitution and i intend to uphold it -- unfortunately, sanctuary cities are a threat. our most important function is providing security and safety to our citizens. sanctuary cities not only jeopardize the ability to protect citizens, that enable illegals to commit crimes and roam free. sanctuary policies have seen an increase in crime. risengeles sol all crimes in 2015. fivent crimes of 20% and %. shootings of almost 15
27%.vated assaults up over 1800 illegals released by st. george cities -- sanctuary crimes,ommitted more including rape and child sex abuse. they encourage further illegal immigration and waste public resources as they force the federal government to find and arrest deportable criminals already taken into custody by local law enforcement. this spring, i advocated for legislation in the louisiana that would increase the safety by incentivizing the government agencies to follow the law. because of this effort, lafayette parish is no longer a sanctuary city parish.
the city of new orleans has changes policy allowing the police to cooperate with federal authorities. light, this bright committee has already provided a catalyst for change. i'm not trying to become the immigration police. between catching child predators, rooting out corruption and fighting federal overreach, i have more than enough to do. but i'm here to push for change because the administration has not only decided not to enforce the law, but they have used their power to coerce local jurisdictions in my state to institute century city -- sanctuary city policy. the justice department entered , -- a can and agreement
they cannot assist ice unless there is a court ordered issue. deputies find it unconscionable that immigrants cannot be held until a warrant or court order is issued. american citizens can be stopped on reasonable suspicion, arrested on probable cause and may not see a judge for two to three days. beegal immigrants should not given a greater right and we afford our own citizens. after hearing testimony in the statehouse in louisiana that the department of justice mandated that the city of new orleans policy, inctuary city wrote a letter to the attorney general asking for clarification. the response that this committee and i was a lengthy noninsured
-- non-answer. however, a recent report by the doj inspector general confirmed that sanctuary jurisdictions violating federal law prohibiting communication with ice officials. furthermore, it officially declared that local jurisdictions comply with federal laws to receive federal grants. the administration has been rewarding sanctuary cities with federal and tax money. i was criticized the governor of louisiana and the mayor by jeopardizing funding with the legislation i was supporting. the truth is that the doj mandated policy on the city is what is jeopardizing their funding. besides physical and legal issues, there are homeland security issues. cities, aliensy
can commit a minor offense and remain protected from being identified. in the current environment, why would we discourage cooperation between state and local law enforcement? reducing crime and saving lives are not a partisan issue. -- politicsicy never came up. i netlist a family -- met with a man who was killed by someone with a lengthy criminal past. question was why do they have to wait before
deporting this person? why cannot state and federal law enforcement work collaboratively to prevent these types of actions? we need sound in aggression policy that begins with securing the border and enforcing immigration laws already on the books. us onss must act those of a state and local level that up in fighting these policies. i'm proud that our efforts have the issues in the city of new orleans. because of the efforts we have made, our state no longer has any jurisdictions prohibiting them from communicating with federal immigration authorities. louisiana is safer because of these changes. thank you very much. >> thank you. chairman, thank you for
inviting me to testify before you today. earlier this year, the department advised the office of inspector general that he has received information that the jurisdiction receiving grants may be in violation. the department provided grant information related to more than 100 create state and local -- 148 state and local jurisdictions and asked them to review. we provided the department with a memorandum advising it of the steps to take and summarizing the information we learned. we did so expeditiously because it was ongoing, and because the department had not provided recipients with clear guidance as to whether section 1373 was an applicable federal law with which recipients were expected
to comply in order to satisfy relevant grant rules. based on the large number of jurisdictions cited by the department and the need to review this expeditiously, we judgmentally selected 10 jurisdictions for review. breach, we researched the local laws and policies. icelso interviewed individuals. we found the laws and policies of several jurisdictions with beyond the limitations on complying with retainer complies -- requests. we also found that the laws and policies of some jurisdictions in our group that addressed the ice retainer was might have a broader practical impact on a level of cooperation with ice and might be inconsistent.
ice officials expressed similar concerns. with regards to the new orleans police department, we noted that its existing policy broadly prohibited officers from disclosing a person's citizenship was an exception when the disclosure was " required by federal or state law. languagengs clause appeared to be inconsistent with plain language of 1373. require1373 doesn't cooperation with ice, but rather prevents jurisdictions from prohibiting or restricting employees from providing immigration that is to ice upon request. in our memorandum, we advised several steps they can consider taking to ensure that grant with 1373.compliance
to require grant applicants provide certifications and supporting documentation regarding compliance with 1373, and to consult with the department law enforcement town of foreign -- counterparts. we believe the steps we outlined would provide the department with assurances that a grant applicant was cooperating -- operating in compliance with 1373 and also would be help should the department later violations to investigation. this concludes my statement and i'll be pleased to answer questions.
>> thank you. >> good morning. distinguished members of the subcommittee, they keep her the opportunity to speak before you today about the justice department worked to advance public safety and promote effective constitutional and community-oriented policing. around the country, state and local law enforcement or as the first law defense. they keep families safe from harm and fight crime on our streets, and as recent events painfully my desk, they do this work at great personal risk. let us make no mistake, the vast majority of men and women wear the badge, served with professionalism with integrity and professionalism. they deserve our respect and support. yet when police apartment engaged in a pattern or practice of unconstitutional leasing, their actions can erode
community trust and undermine public safety. in 1994, congress charge the justice department with the responsibility to investigate law enforcement agencies for a pattern or practice of conduct that violates law, and to develop remedies. with new orleans, the city has agreed to reforms. mayor requested independent investigation of the police department. a policee inherited department described by many as the worst in the country. we published our findings in a detailed letter. among other violations, we found evidence that they were unfairly or failing to enforce the law
based on discriminatory characteristics. this is eroded public trust. crime victims felt afraid to share information with the police. this hurt public safety. in the context of reporting crime, one community member told us that out of fear they stayed quiet. i know many leaders across the country understand is concerned and recognize the very critical and important link between public trust and safety. orleans the doj and new entered into a consent decree in order to resolve unlawful police misconduct. it requires the police department to make changes regarding discriminatory policing and officer training.
in february of this year, after seeking input from the community , the district court as well is ,he doj and homeland security the police department issued a new policy to help officers police fairly. to prove thatd they comply with the statute to ensure that officers understand that they can send and receive information regarding an individual's immigration status and most effectively advance nondiscriminatory policing. the policy also states that officers can take law-enforcement action and assist in immigration enforcement when there is a threat to public safety, to execute criminal warns and to safely execute a court order. by facilitating a culture of trust and cooperation, the
policy will help local and federal law enforcement attacked public safety. the hard working men and women in new orleans continue to do that why fighting crime and partnering with federal law enforcement to prosecute people who are committed violent crime. we strongly believe this policy will help restore trust with crime victims and witnesses, and hand the sharing of information -- enhance the sharing of information and make the entire community safer. -- in new orleans, reform cannot happen overnight. i want to commend officials from the city and the police theirment for participation in this process. police report can help make the ts and officers safer
for years to come. >> thank you. my name is zach butterworth. thank you for giving me the opportunity. thank you. before i begin, i would like to thank the panel for the support that congress has provided to new orleans since hurricane katrina. a recovery would not be where it is without their support. or like thank you for your strong support of the victims of the flooding of baton rouge. i've seen the magnitude of the flood of those people will need your help for years to come. i want to emphasize three main points and then try to get the panel a little bit of context. first, public safety is a top priority.
, whoeverocumented commits a crime, they will be arrested. the new orleans is department takes island criminals off the streets. in 2012, the mayor formed a multiagency gang unit appeared that unit alone has arrested more than 100 of the most violent chronicles in new orleans. 18%.r is down 80% -- violent crime is down. my second point is that new orleans'policy does not make us a sanctuary city. we've been trying to follow federal law from day one. it should go without saying that any policy of police department adopt follows state, federal and local law. the review process here.
the police department, every policy is reviewed by the department of justice federal monitor, who is appointed by a federal judge. policy, we asked asked -- experts. officials from ice were brought in. the major city chiefs association represents 70 million americans they support trust andhat foster cooperation between police officers and immigrant communities that we all serve. opdhird point is that in policy will make the city safer and freezes up to focus on violent crime. it will allow anyone to report a crime or be a witness. the policy is already bearing fruit. on the grant, commanders are
seen better cooperation with immigrant communities. going back to 2010, we invited the justice department in. their investigation showed we had problems in the way we treated the immigrant community. we want to fix that. since 2010, we have launched 11 new recruit lasses, and written 34 of these policies. more are being drafted now. this includes canine use, taser operations, body cameras, to name a few. aing back to march 20 15 am we started drafting this policy. in ice.mber, we brought we asked the experts. they were brought in at local and headquarters level. at the time, they told us that the policy complied federal ice requirements.
alsocember, a judge brought in ice. there were substances -- substantive concerns at that time. a federal monitor approved the policy. a mealy, there were concerns about the policy, the mayor wrote to doj and said that if anyone in any agency has been done about this policy, these contact us. it was not until july that we received a letter back with information about 1373 and general compliance. when we received that information, we immediately went to work redrafting the policy with doj. the federal monitor did approve the updated policy as it was written. we believe a fully complies with federal law.
simpson put, the police department policy follows federal law. we will review our policies continuously and i'm happy to take questions. >> thank you. we now recognize the gentleman from virginia. >> thank you. let me take up where you left off. under the revised policy, new orleans police department are prohibited from making inquiries about immigration status, including two ice. and yet, in all the races authorizes's -- it them to make inquiries. >> we believe the policy complies with 1373. if there's anything about the policy that is unclear, we're happy to go back and take a
look. >> there is a specific reference 1373-b was left out. >> we are happy to go back and make sure there is no understanding. the mayor orare of city officials or the police department chief or others authorizing officers to make? >> this policy allows officers to communicate with ice. they will help ice and any public safety in point -- event. on a there any restriction police officer making a request to