Tip:
Highlight text to annotate it
X
IS BECAUSE PEOPLE DON'T SEE
THAT WE'RE GETTING BACK TO
BASICS AND BACK TO
FUNDAMENTALS, WE'RE INCREASING
THE SIZE AND REACH --
WE'RE GOING TO TAKE YOU BACK
LIVE NOW TO THE HOUSE AND THEY
FINISH UP WORK ON THE ARIZONA
LAND SWAP BILL.
1904.
WILL THE GENTLEMAN FROM OHIO,
MR. LATOURETTE, KINDLY RESUME
THE CHAIR.
THE HOUSE IS IN THE
COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE HOUSE ON
THE STATE OF THE UNION FOR
FURTHER CONSIDERATION OF H.R.
1904 WHICH THE CLERK WILL
REPORT BY TITLE.
A BILL TO FACILITATE
THE EFFICIENT EXTRACTION OF
MINERAL RESOURCES IN SOUTHEAST
ARIZONA BY AUTHORIZING AND
DIRECTING AN EXCHANGE OF
FEDERAL AND NONFEDERAL LAND AND
FOR OTHER PURPOSES.
OF THE WHOLE ROWS EARLIER
TODAY, A -- ROSE EARLIER TODAY
A REQUEST FOR A RECORDED VOTE
ON AMENDMENT NUMBER 3 BY THE
GENTLEMAN FROM ARIZONA, MR.
GRIJALVA, HAD BEEN POSTPONED.
PURSUANT TO CLAUSE 6 OF RULE
18, PROCEEDINGS WILL NOW RESUME
ON THOSE AMENDMENTS PRINTED IN
PART B OF HOUSE REPORT 112-258
ON WHICH FURTHER PROCEEDINGS
WERE POSTPONED IN THE FOLLOWING
ORDER -- AMENDMENT NUMBER 1 NT
BY MR. LUJAN OF NEW MEXICO,
AMENDMENT NUMBER 2 BY MR.
MARKEY OF MASSACHUSETTS,
AMENDMENT NUMBER 3 BY MR.
GRIJALVA OF ARIZONA.
THE CHAIR WILL REDUCE TO TWO
MINUTES THE TIME FOR ANY
ELECTRONIC VOTE AFTER THE FIRST
VOTE IN THIS SERIES.
THE UNFINISHED BUSINESS IS THE
REQUEST FOR A RECORDED VOTE ON
AMENDMENT NUMBER 1 PRINTED IN
PART B OF HOUSE REPORT 112-258
BY THE GENTLEMAN FROM NEW
MEXICO, MR. LUJAN, ON WHICH
FURTHER PROCEEDINGS WERE
POSTPONED AND ON WHICH THE NOES
PREVAILED BY VOICE VOTE.
THE CLERK WILL REDESIGNATE THE
AMENDMENT NUMBER 1
PRINTED IN PART B OF HOUSE
REPORT 112-258 OFFERED BY MR.
LUJAN OF NEW MEXICO.
A RECORDED VOTE HAS
BEEN REQUESTED.
THOSE IN FAVOR OF TAKING THIS
RECORDED VOTE WILL RISE AND BE
A SUFFICIENT NUMBER HAVING
ORDERED.
MEMBERS WILL RECORD THEIR VOTES
THIS WILL BE A 15-MINUTE VOTE
FOLLOWED BY TWO TWO-MINUTE
VOTES.
[CAPTIONING MADE POSSIBLE BY
THE NATIONAL CAPTIONING
INSTITUTE, INC., IN COOPERATION
WITH THE UNITED STATES HOUSE OF
ANY USE OF THE CLOSED-CAPTIONED
COVERAGE OF THE HOUSE
PROCEEDINGS FOR POLITICAL OR
COMMERCIAL PURPOSES IS
EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED BY THE
REPRESENTATIVES.]
"WASHINGTON JOURNAL"
CONTINUES.
IT IS WEDNESDAY AT 9:15.
AS WE DO IT EVERY TIME, IT IS
TIME TO KICK A SPOTLIGHT ON A
MEGAN MCARDLE WROTE THE PIECE
ON WHETHER CONGRESSMAN ARE
GUILTY OF INSIDER TRADING, AND
TO START OFF WITH, OUR MEMBERS
ARE GUILTY -- ARE MEMBERS OF
CONGRESS GUILTY OF INSIDER
TRADING?
COMPLICATED QUESTION.
IN THE 1990'S THERE WAS A
PROFESSOR THAT DID A STUDY THAT
LOOKED AT WHAT THE DISCLOSURE
FORMS THAT MEMBERS OF CONGRESS
HAD TO FILE, AND TO ATTRACT
THOSE THINGS WITH THINGS THAT
OWN.
FOR EXAMPLE, LLOYD BENTSEN HAD
CONVENIENTLY BOUGHT AND SOLD
DAIRY COMPANIES BEFORE
REGULATION AFFECTED WHAT THEY
WERE DOING IN TERMS OF PRICES
THERE WAS A BUSINESS PROFESSOR
IN THE SOUTH WHO SAW THIS AND
MADE A SPLASH IN ONE OF THOSE OF
NEWS SHOWS.
HE WAS WATCHING IT AND THOUGHT
THAT IS NOT RIGHT, YOU NEED TO
DO THIS RIGHT.
YOU NEED TO LOOK AND SEE IF
CONGRESS OUTPERFORMS THE MARKET.
IT TOOK HIM FOREVER.
HE HAD TO GET ALL THESE
DISCLOSURE FORMS.
THIS WAS BACK BEFORE THE
INTERNET AND NOT REALLY
HE GOES THROUGH AND GET THE TEAM
TOGETHER, INCLUDING HIS WIFE, IN
TOGETHER.
HE LOOKS TO SEE IF THEY
PORTFOLIO.
THE ANSWER WAS THEY OUTPERFORMED
BY 30%, WHICH IS HUGE.
IT DOES NOT SOUND LIKE THAT
MUCH, BUT THIS IS THE 1990'S, SO
WE'RE TALKING ABOUT ANYONE WHO
CAN BREATHE AND HIT THE KEY ON
THE KEYBOARD CAN MAKE 20% IN THE
MARKET.
TO OUT DO THAT IS AN ENORMOUS
THING.
THIS YEAR HE FOLLOWED UP WITH A
STUDY ON THE HOUSE, AND SHOW
THEY DO NOT OVER PERFORMANCE
WELL, 6%.
THAT IS STILL AN ENORMOUS OVER
PERFORMANCE COMPARED TO THE
REST OF THE MARKET.
HOW DO WE DEFINE INSIDER
TRADING?
THIS IS INTERESTING.
A LOT OF PEOPLE THINK IT IS A
FRAUD ON THE MARKET, BUT IT IS
MORE COMPLICATED THAN THAT.
FOR EXAMPLE, IF YOU WORK FOR
PUBLICLY-TRADED COMPANY, AND YOU
ARE AWARE OF YOUR NEW PRODUCT
LINE IS NOT DOING WELL AND YOU
TRADE ON THE INFORMATION FROM
YOUR DEFINITELY GUILTY OF
INSIDER TRADING.
THIS BECAME A CRIME DURING THE
BEFORE THAT PEOPLE DID NOT
REALLY THINK OF IT -- THEY
EXPECTED EVERYONE WAS CORRUPT.
TRADING.
WHAT IS DEFINITELY NOT INSIDER
TRADING IS IF YOU ARE TALKING
ABOUT THIS AT ANOTHER EMPLOYEE
WITHAT A MOVIE THEATER AND AS
SOMEONE OVER HERE ISSUE AND THEY
GOT IN TRADE THIS, THAT IS
DEFINITELY LEGAL.
THERE WAS A MAN IN THE 1970'S
WHO WHEN THEY PRINT PERSPECTIVES
FOR MURDERERS, THEY TRY TOO HARD
THTO HIDE THE IDENTITY, BUT THEY
HAVE TO PREPARE THE PROSPECTUSES
BEFORE THAT, AND HE WENT OUT AND
TREATED ON THEM.
HE GOT INSIDER-TRADING, BUT THE
SUPREME COURT RULED THIS IS NOT
INSIDER TRADING, BECAUSE HE DID
NOT HAVE A FIDUCIARY DUTY TO
HOLD THIS INFORMATION PRIVATE.
HOWEVER, A FEW YEARS LATER, A
FELLOW WHO WAS RIDING FOR "THE
JOURNAL" WAS
ESSENTIALLY LEAKING WHAT WAS
GOING TO BE IN THE COLUMN TO
TRADERS WHO WOULD TRADE ON THE
INFORMATION BEFORE IT RAN.
HE WAS ALSO DONE THAT FOR
INSIDER TRADING, ENDED THIS CASE
THE ROLE AGAINST HIM.
WHAT THEY SAID IS HE HAD
MISAPPROPRIATED INFORMATION THAT
BELONG TO HIS EMPLOYER.
SO THEY SAID HE HAD
MISAPPROPRIATED INFORMATION.
THAT IS VERY DIFFERENT FROM
FRAUD ON THE MARKET.
ONE LAW PROFESSOR I TALK TO
POINTED OUT THIS IMPLIES IT IS
PERFECTLY LEGAL FOR "THE WALL
STREET JOURNAL" TO FRONT RUN ITS
OWN TRADE ISADES.
WHAT IT WAS UNDERMINED
CONFIDENCE IF WE KNEW THEY WENT
OUT BEFORE AND DID ANYTHING AND
TREATED IN THE STOCK?
THE LAW IS VERY COMPLICATED.
HOW DOES THIS APPLY TO CONGRESS?
THE PROBLEM WITH GETTING
CONGRESSMAN FOR INSIDER TRADING
IS WHO EMPLOYS THEM?
WHO WOULD THEY BE
MISAPPROPRIATING INFORMATION?
MORALLY THEY ARE EMPLOYEES OF
THE UNITED STATES PEOPLE, AND I
A LAW PROFESSOR HAS ARGUED THIS
THAT THEY HAVE A FIDUCIARY DUTY,
BUT IT IS NOT CLEAR.
IT IS NOT CLEAR THEY WOULD
VIOLATE THE RULES WE HAVE
SURROUNDING INSIDER-TRADING.
OUR GUEST WITH US UNTIL
TRADING.
AS A MEMBER OF CONGRESS EVER
BEEN FOUND GUILTY OF INSIDER
TRADING?
AS FAR AS I WAS ABLE TO
ASCERTAIN, NO ONE HAS EVER GONE
TRADING.
ANECDOTALLY, I TRIED TO TALK TO
PEOPLE WHO PROSECUTE THESE
I DID NOT GET A LOT OF INTEREST
THIS.
I TAKE THIS TO MEAN THERE'S NOT
A LOT OF INTEREST IN PURSUING
THE ISSUE, BECAUSE NOT ONLY IS
YOUR BOSS AND WHO WANTS TO GO
AFTER YOUR BOSS FOR INSIDER-
TRADING, BUT ALSO BECAUSE IT IS
INHERENTLY POLITICAL.
IT IS VERY DIFFICULT TO DECIDE
WHO GOODS TARGETED BY ETHICS
IT IS NOT ALWAYS TRUE.
THERE ARE REALLY EGREGIOUS CASES
THAT GET ON AFTER THE MATTER WHO
IS PART OF IT, BUT THE BOUNDARY
CASES OFTEN GET PROSECUTED WHEN
YOUR PARTY LOSES CONTROL.
I DO NOT THINK A LOT OF
THAT.
WHAT KIND OF INFORMATION
WOULD MEMBERS OF CONGRESS HAVE
IF IT WERE HAPPENING TO MAKE
THESE DECISIONS REGARDING STOCK?
ALL SORTS OF DECISIONS.
IF YOU THINK ABOUT HOW MANY
WOULD AFFECT THE COMPANY.
THINK ABOUT THE LLOYD BENTSEN
CASE.
WITH THAT CASE, IF YOU ARE A BIG
DAIRY PROCESSOR, KNOWING WHAT
THE CONTROLLED WHAT THPRICE OF MILK
WILL BE, IS A HIGHWAY BILL GOING
TO GO THROUGH LAND OF THAT IS
OWNED BY A COMPANY THAT COULD
SELL IT FOR LOT OF MONEY, HOW
ARE YOU GOING TO REGULATE
VARIOUS PRODUCTS?
CONGRESS' HAN CAN AND HAS
ALMOST PUT COMPANIES OUT OF
BUSINESS BY SURROUNDING CHANGES
OF WHAT THEY DO.
ALL OF THOSE THINGS HAVE
ENORMOUS IMPACT ON COMPANIES.
IT WOULD BE RELATIVELY EASY IT
THERE WERE NO CONTROLS ON IT,
AND IF YOU DID NOT REALLY HAVE
ANY COMPUNCTION ABOUT IT.
IT WOULD BE RELATIVELY EASY BY
KNOWING WHAT REGULATIONS WERE
UNTIL 10:00.
MARK FROM FLORIDA.
GOOD MORNING.
AND TRUE PROFESSIONAL YOU ARE.
I WANT TO MAKE A POINT.
I THINK A PROBLEM WE HAVE, IN
OUR HISTORY WHEN THE EXECUTIVE
BRANCH AND LEGISLATIVE BRANCH
HAVE RUN AMOK AND CORRUPTION,
WHICH I THINK WHAT HAS HAPPENED,
AND YOU WILL NEVER GET ANYONE IN
CONGRESS BECAUSE THEY HAVE
FRIENDS, FAMILY THAT DO
INVESTING FOR THEM AND THE KIDS
RUN THROUGH DIFFERENT THINGS,
BUT IN OUR HISTORY, THE MEDIA
AND THE NEWSPAPERS USED TO BE
THE ONES THAT HAVE THE POWER OF
ANOTHER LITTLE CHECK AND BALANCE
TO WHERE THEY COULD INFORM THE
PUBLIC OF THE CULTURE OF
CORRUPTION IN SUCH.
WHAT WE HAVE NOW IS I THINK THE
MEDIA IS CORRUPT AS WELL.
IF YOU LOOK AT BIG BUSINESS
WHO THEY ARE IN
CAHOOTS WITH AS WELL -- LOOK AT
THE MARTHA STEWART CASE.
THEY BUSTED HER ON TELEPHONE
CALLS AND THIS AND THAT.
THE MEDIA COVER THAT 24/7.
CALLER, THANKS.
THERE IS A LOT THERE.
THERE IS A LOT THER
THE FACT IS THAT CONGRESS IS IN
CHARGE OF REGULATING ITSELF,
LARGELY BECAUSE OF THE DANGERS
OF HAVING CONGRESSMAN SUBJECT TO
EXECUTIVE OVERSIGHT OR SOR
FORTH.
THAT IS ON TO SAY THERE NEVER
SUBJECT TO THE LAWS, THEY
ABSOLUTELY ARE.
AND HAVING SOMEONE ELSE WATCH
WATCH THEMSELVES.
DOCTORS HAVE THIS PROBLEM.
JOURNALISTS HAVE THIS PROBLEM.
GROUPS THAT SELF-REGULATE, YOU
HAVE A LOT OF SYMPATHY FOR OTHER
MEMBERS OF YOUR GROUP, AND YOU
DO NOT WANT TO LAY YOUR
YOURSELF WITH DISCLOSURE
REGULATIONS WHEN YOU KNOW YOU
ARE DOING NOTHING WRONG.
DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA.
KEEP ON THE DEMOCRAT LINE --
KEITH OF THE DEMOCRATS' LINE.
ARE TALKING TO ME?
IT IS DEBBIE.
I HAVE A QUESTION REGARDING THE
RECENT SYLANSOLAR COMPANY WOULD NEED
TUPELO'S TH WITH NANCY PELOSI'S BROTHER.
ALSO, COUNTRYWIDE LOANS AND
WHETHER CONGRESSPERSON GET A
SEPARATE QUESTIONS.
QUESTION ABOUT HER
BROTHER-IN-LAW, IT REALLY IN
ILLUSTRATES THE LIMITS OF THE
SPIRIT AND EVEN IF YOU REQUIRE
THEM TO THE BEST OFDIVEST THEIR STOCKS, YOU
WILL HAVE FAMILY THAT HAVE
STOCKS AND WILL CARE MORE THAN
THOSE THAT DO NOT HAVE MORE
DIRECT STAKE IN THE STOCK.
ON LOBBYING, IT IS A COMPLICATED
QUESTION, AND A LITTLE BIT
OUTSIDE OF THIS SCOPE OF THIS
ARTICLE, WHICH PERTAINS DIRECTLY
TO THE QUESTION OF IS SOMETHING
THAT IS A CRIME FOR EVERYONE
PEOPLE?
MORE BROADLY, WE CAN TOUCH
PEOPLE WHO HAVE A -- IT IS VERY
COMMON FOR PEOPLE TO TRY TO
ESCAPE THE INSIDER-TRADING BY
HAVING THEIR FAMILY MEMBERS
TRADE FOR THEM.
PRACTICE.
IT IS HARDER THAN USING TO GET
AWAY WITH IT.
CONSISTENTLY.
WE NOW HAVE COMPUTER PROGRAMS
THAT HIT THE STANDS OUT IF
SOMEONE IS LOOKING.
MEGAN MCARDLE, I HAVE A
COPY OF A FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE
STATEMENT THAT IS REQUIRED BY
IF THEY HAVE TO FILL THESE OUT,
COULD YOU FIND THE TRANSIT
TRADE?
THEY DO HAVE TO FILL OUT
FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE FORMS.
I DID NOT WANT TO IMPLY THE
MEMBERS OF CONGRESS ARE NOT
HONEST ABOUT THE LINK THESE OUT,
BUT IF YOU LOOK AT A CASE OF
CHARLIE RANGEL WHO HAD INTEREST
HE WAS NOT DISCLOSING EITHER ON
THESE FORMS OR TO THE IRS.
THIS WENT ON FOR YEARS WHERE HE
HAD TAX INCOMES, RENTAL HOUSES
IN PR HE WAS NOT DISCLOSING.
IT'S WE ARE DEALS THAT WERE
GIVING HIM RIGHT CONTROENT CONTROL FOR
APARTMENTS.
-- SWEETHEART DEALS THAT A
GIVING HIM RENT CONTROL FOR
INTERESTINGLY PEOPLE HAVE DONE
FOLLOW-UPS AND SHOW THEY
UNDERPERFORMED THE MARKET.
IT IS STILL IN CONTENTION
WHETHER OR NOT THIS IS
HAPPENING, OR WHETHER THE
FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE FORMS AND
PUBLICATION OF THESE STUDIES
HAVE MADE PEOPLE THINK TWICE
ABOUT DOING THIS.
YOU DO NOT KNOW.
WHAT THEY SAID TO ME IS THERE IS
SHORT-SELLING.
IF YOU THINK ABOUT THE
REGULATIONS THAT COULD
ADVERSELY AFFECT THE COMPANY,
SHORT-SELLING IN A LOT OF CASES
IS OBVIOUS THING TO DO.
YOU FIND OUT WE JUST
DISCONTINUED SOME BIG BOMBER
THAT BOEING IS SELLING AND YOU
SHORT THE STOCK BEFORE IT IS
SOLD, THAT IS NOT EVEN REPORTED
ON THESE DISCLOSURES.
AMOUNTS OF INCOME HAVE TO
BE REPORTED, BUT NOT THE AMOUNT
OF THE SPOUSE'S INCOME OVER
THE CAP ON OUTSIDE INCOME WAS
$24,000 IN 2005.
WHEN IT COMES TO ASSETS WORTH
THE CALENDAR YEAR.
EXCHANGES AMOUNTED TO MORE THAN
$1,000, AND ALONG WITH THE DATE
AND AMOUNT OF TRANSACTION.
WHAT ELSE COULD BE ON THE FORMS
THAT IS OF INTEREST?
SHORT SELLS AS A BIG ONE.
MORE BROADLY THE QUESTION OF
AUDITING IS THE REAL ISSUE.
THESE FORMS ARE ONLY REPORTED
YOU ONLY GET THE DATA YEARS
AFTER IT HAS HAPPENED.
THEN IT IS REALLY OLD NEWS.
IT IS HARDER TO GET THE ENERGY
TO GO INTO THESE CASES.
WAY.
ITS ETHICS INVESTIGATION.
AUDIT IS THE LARGEST BANK.
FREQUENCY OF REPORTING.
INSIDERS TO TRADE IN THEIR OWN
STOCK AFTER REPORTS THESE THINGS
MUCH MORE CLOSER TO REAL TIME.
IT SEEMS TO ME REASONABLE TO AT
THE VERY LEAST REQUIRE CONGRESS
TO DO THAT, BUT I THINK WHEN YOU
THINK ABOUT NOT JUST THE
POSSIBILITY FOR INSIDER TRADING,
BUT WHEN YOU THINK ABOUT ALL OF
THE CONFLICT OF INTEREST, AND
ALL OF US KNOW NO MATTER HOW
HARD YOU TRY TO NOT THINK ABOUT
CONFLICTS OF INTEREST, IT IS
ENTIRELY.
ANDMAYBE WE SHOULD THINK ABOUT
HAVING CONGRESSMAN PUT THEIR
ASSETS INTO ONE TRUST.
FORT KNOX, KY.
PETER ON THE REPUBLICAN LINE.
VERY QUICKLY, MA'AM, IS
THERE ANY WAY POSSIBLE THAT YOUR
ORGANIZATION AND YOURSELF TO DO
IT INVESTIGATING INTO THE
HISTORY OF CONGRESSIONAL
CONFLICT OF INTEREST SINCE THE
VIETNAM WAR ERA.
ALSO, WHEN IT WAS A KNOWN TIME
OUT ON THE STREET THAT MANY OF
YOUR MEMBERS OF CONGRESS AND
THEIR STAFF MEMBERS HAD WHAT WAS
CALLED STOCK HOLDINGS IN DEFENSE
CONTRACTS COMPANIES THAT WERE
ENGAGED IN CONTRACTUAL
OPERATIONS IN VIETNAM, AND SINCE
THEN ANOTHER SOURCE OF
INFORMATION FOR THESE
CONGRESSMAN IS ALSO THAT BECAUSE
THEY HAVE CONNECTIONS WITH THESE
LOBBYISTS OF THESE COMPANIES,
THE LOBBYISTS -- WHO IS TO NOT
SAY THEY ARE BRINGING
INFORMATION TO THEM ABOUT
POTENTIAL CONTRACTS THAT ARE
COMING UP IN WAR ZONES?
UNFORTUNATELY THAT WOULD BE
KNOWN AS WAR PROFITEERING.
MY QUESTION, WILL YOU
AND YOUR ORGANIZATION CONDUCT A
SERIES, WHICH COVERS POSSIBLE
CONGRESSIONAL CONNECTIONS WITH
LOBBYISTS OF THESE CORPORATIONS?
I THINK PEOPLE DO THOSE
SORTS OF STUDIES.
AS I SAY, THIS REALLY GOES BACK
TO THE CORE PROBLEM, WHICH IS
UNLESS WE HAVE THEM DIVEST ALL
OF THEIR ASSETS, THERE IS ALWAYS
GOING TO BE CONFLICTS OF
INTEREST, IF IT IS NOT DEFENSE
CONTRACTS, IT COULD WELL BE
AGRIBUSINESS OR MANY OTHER
THINGS THAT THE CONGRESS AFFECTS
EVERY DAY.
IS IT IS CONGRESS MEMBERS
THAT HAVE TO FILL THESE TYPES OF
THE SUPREME COURT ALSO
DOES DISCLOSURES.
I ASSUME WHAT HE IS REFERRING TO
IS CLARENCE THOMAS.
THERE BEEN A LOT OF PEOPLE
SUGGESTING HE SHOULD RECUSE
HIMSELF BECAUSE HIS WIFE HAS
BEEN AN ACTIVE CAMPAIGNER
AGAINST HEALTH CARE.
I THINK THAT IS A LITTLE BIT OF
A STRETCH IN A BUNCH OF WAYS.
IT IS NOT REALLY SHOCKING THAT
HIS WIFE IS CAMPAIGNING AGAINST
SHE WAS AN ACTIVIST BEFORE THEY
IT IS NOT CLEAR -- SHE DOES NOT
NECESSARILY DO WORSE IF HEALTH
IF IT STAYS LIVE, IT IS NOT LIKE
SHE DOES WORSEN THAT WAY.
SHE THEN GETS TO RAISE MORE
MONEY TO CAMPAIGN AGAINST IT.
THERE IS NOT A FINANCIAL
CONFLICT OF INTEREST HOST:.
AND STILL, TEXAS.
CLAY ON THE REPUBLICAN LINE.
ON THIS
VOTE THE YEAS ARE 189, THE NAYS
ARE 233RK THE AMENDMENT IS NOT
ADOPTED.
THE UNFINISHED BUSINESS IS THE
REQUEST FOR A RECORDED VOTE ON
AMENDMENT NUMBER 2 PRINTED IN
PART B OF HOUSE REPORT 112-258
BY THE GENTLEMAN FROM
MASSACHUSETTS, MR. MARKEY, ON
WHICH FURTHER PROCEEDINGS WERE
POSTPONED AND ON WHICH THE NOES
PREVAILED BY VOICE VOTE.
THE CLERK WILL REDESIGNATE THE
AMENDMENT.
AMENDMENT NUMBER 2
PRINTED IN PART B OF HOUSE
REPORT 112-258 OFFERED BY MR.
MARKY OF MASSACHUSETTS.
A
RECORDED VOTE HAS BEEN
REQUESTED.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF TAKING
THIS VOTE BY THE YEAS AND NAYS
WILL RISE AND REMAIN STANDING
-- THOSE IN SUPPORT OF THE
RISE AND BE COUNTED.
A SUFFICIENT NUMBER HAVING
ORDERED.
MEMBERS WILL RECORD THEIR VOTES
BY ELECTRONIC DEVICE.
THIS WILL BE A TWO-MINUTE VOTE.
[CAPTIONING MADE POSSIBLE BY THE
NATIONAL CAPTIONING INSTITUTE,
INC., IN COOPERATION WITH THE
UNITED STATES HOUSE OF
ANY USE OF THE CLOSED-CAPTIONED
COVERAGE OF THE HOUSE
PROCEEDINGS FOR POLITICAL OR
COMMERCIAL PURPOSES IS EXPRESSLY
PROHIBITED BY THE U.S. HOUSE OF
REPRESENTATIVES.]
ON THIS VOTE, THE
YEAS ARE 173, THE NAYS WILL
238, THE AMENDMENT IS NOT
AGREED TO.
THE UP FINISHED BUSINESS IS THE
REQUEST FOR A RECORDED VOTE ON
AMENDMENT NUMBER THREE PRINTED
IN HOUSE REPORT 112-258 BY THE
GENTLEMAN FROM NEW MEXICO, MR.
GRIJALVA.
THE CLERK WILL REDESIGNATE THE
AMENDMENT NUMBER
THREE PRINTED IN PART B OF
HOUSE REPORT 112-258, OFFERED
BY THE GENTLEMAN FROM ARIZONA,
MR. GRIJALVA.
THOSE IN SUPPORT OF
A RECORDED VOTE WILL RISE.
A SUFFICIENT NUMBER HAVING
RISEN A RAILROADED VOTE IS
ORDER.
MEMBERS WILL RECORD THEIR VOTES
THIS IS A TWO-MINUTE VOTE.
[CAPTIONING MADE POSSIBLE BY
THE NATIONAL CAPTIONING
INSTITUTE, INC., IN COOPERATION
WITH THE UNITED STATES HOUSE OF
ANY USE OF THE CLOSED-CAPTIONED
COVERAGE OF THE HOUSE
PROCEEDINGS FOR POLITICAL OR
COMMERCIAL PURPOSES IS
EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED BY THE
REPRESENTATIVES.]
ON THIS QUESTION,
THE YEAS ARE 182, THE NAYS ARE
240, THE AMENDMENT IS NOT
AGREED TO.
THE QUESTION IS ON THE
SUBSTITUTE.
THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
THOSE OPPOSED, NO.
THE AYES HAVE IT.
THE AYES HAVE IT.
THE AMENDMENT IS ADOPTED.
ACCORDINGLY, UNDER THE RULE,
THE COMMITTEE RISES.
PLEASURE.
MR. SPEAKER, THE
COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE HOUSE ON
THE STATE OF THE UNION HAS HAD
UNDER CONSIDERATION H R. 1904,
HOUSE RESOLUTION 444, AND
REPORT IT BACK TO THE HOUSE
WITH THE AMENDMENTS ADOPTED IN
THE COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE.
THE
CHAIR OF THE COMMITTEE OF THE
WHOLE HOUSE ON THE STATE OF THE
UNION REPORTS THE BILL HAS HAD
UNDER CONSIDERATION H.R. 1904
AND PURSUANT TO HOUSE
RESOLUTION 444 REPORTS THE BILL
BACK TO THE HOUSE WITH AN
AMENDMENT ADOPTED IN THE
COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE.
UNDER THE RULE, THE PREVIOUS
QUESTION IS ORDERED.
IS A SEPARATE AMENDMENT -- VOTE
DEMANDED ON ANY AMENDMENT
FROM THE COMMITTEE OF
THE WHOLE?
IF NOT, THE QUESTION IS ON THE
AMENDMENT IN THE NATURE OF A
SUBSTITUTE AS AMENDED.
THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
THOSE OPPOSED, NO.
THE AMENDMENT IS AGREED TO.
THE QUESTION IS ON ENGROSSMENT
AND THIRD READING OF THE BILL.
THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
THOSE OPPOSED, NO.
THIRD READING.
A BILL TO FACILITATE
THE EFFICIENT EXTRACTION OF
MINERAL RESOURCES IN SOUTHEAST
ARIZONA BY AUTHORIZING AND
DIRECTING FEDERAL AND
NONFEDERAL LAND AND FOR OTHER
PURPOSES.
THE
HOUSE WILL COME TO ORDER.
SEATS.
THE HOUSE WILL COME TO ORDER.
SEATS.
THE HOUSE WILL COME TO ORDER.
THE CHAIR WOULD ASK ALL PRESENT
TO RISE FOR THE PURPOSE OF A
MOMENT OF SILENCE.
WE ASK THAT THE HOUSE NOW
OBSERVE A MOMENT OF SILENCE IN
REMEMBRANCE OF THE BRAVE MEN
AND WOMEN IN UNIFORM WHO HAVE
GIVEN THEIR LIFES IN
AFGHANISTAN AND IRAQ AND IN
HONOR OF ALL THOSE WHO SERVE IN
THE ARMED FORCES AND THEIR
FAMILIES.
FOR
WHAT PURPOSE DOES THE GENTLEMAN
FROM FLORIDA RISE?
MR. SPEAKER, I HAVE A MOTION
TO RECOMMIT AT THE DESK.
IS THE
GENTLEMAN OPPOSED TO THE BILL?
I AM OPPOSED, IN ITS CURRENT
FORM.
THE GENTLEMAN
QUALIFIES, THE CLERK WILL
REPORT THE MOTION.
MR. DEUTCH OF
FLORIDA MOVES TO RECOMMIT THE
BILL H.R. 2904 TO THE COMMITTEE
ON NATURAL RESOURCES WITH
INSTRUCTIONS TO REPORT THE SAME
BACK TO THE HOUSE FORTHWITH
WITH AN AMENDMENT.
INSERT BEFORE THE PERIOD THE
FOLLOWING EXCEPT THAT SUCH
TERMS SHALL NOT INCLUDE ANY
COMPANY SUCCESSOR, ASSIGNED, OR
JOINT VENTURE WITH AN OWNERSHIP
INTEREST IN ANY PROPERTY OR
PROJECT ANY PORTION OF WHICH IS
OWNED BY THE IRAN FOREIGN
INVESTMENT COMPANY.
THE
HOUSE WILL BE IN ORDER.
THE GENTLEMAN IS RECOGNIZED FOR
FIVE MINUTES.
MR. SPEAKER,
UNITY MAY BE RARE
THESE DAYS --
THE
HOUSE IS NOT IN ORDER.
THE GENTLEMAN MAY PROCEED.
BUT IF THERE IS ONE
ISSUE WE HAVE CONSISTENTLY COME
TOGETHER ON, IT IS THE THREAT
POSED BY A NUCLEAR ARMED IRAN.
THAT'S WHY LAST YEAR THIS BODY
VOTED TO ENACT TOUGH NEW
SANCTIONS AIMED AT PREVENTING
IRAN FROM ACQUIRING NUCLEAR
WEAPONS.
THAT'S WHY 332 MEMBERS OF THIS
HOUSE.
THE HOUSE IS NOT IN ORDER.
THE
GENTLELADY IS CORRECT.
THE HOUSE WILL BE IN ORDER.
THE GENTLEMAN MAY PROCEED.
MR. SPEAKER, THAT'S
WHY 332 MEMBERS OF THIS HOUSE
ARE TODAY CO-SPONSORS OF NEW
LEGISLATION TO STRENGTHEN
IRAN'S SANCTIONS LAW AND IT IS
ALSO WHY THIS BODY SHOULD JOIN
ME ON THIS FINAL AMENDMENT TO
THE BILL SO WE DO NOT REWARD
COMPANIES THAT PROVIDE
FINANCIAL AID AND MATERIAL
SUPPORT TO THE IRANIAN REGIME
BECAUSE THIS BILL IN ITS
CURRENT FORM WILL BOLSTER
IRAN'S ILLICIT QUEST FOR
NUCLEAR WEAPONS THIS
LEGISLATION REWARDS U.S. LAND
TO RESOLUTION COPPER, A COMPANY
OWNED BY RIO TINTO.
WHICH ALSO OWNS A MAJORITY
STAKE IN A MINE IN LIBYA.
THE
GENTLEMAN WILL SUSPEND.
THE GENTLEMAN DESERVES TO BE
HEARD.
THE GENTLEMAN MAY PROCEED.
IN NAMIBIA WHERE
IT'S PARTNERS WITH THE IRAN
FOREIGN INVESTMENT COMPANY.
THE IRAN FOREIGN INVESTMENT
COMPANY IS WHOLLY OWNED BY THE
IRANIAN REGIME.
QUITE SIMPLY, WE ARE ABOUT TO
REWARD A COMPANY THAT PARTNERS
THE IRANIAN REGIME TO
MINE, OF ALL THINGS, THE
URANIUM IT NEEDS TO BECOME A
NUCLEAR POWER THIS CONGRESS
CANNOT BE IN THE BUSINESS OF
ASSISTING A REGIME THAT PLOTS
ATTACKS ON U.S. SOIL, THAT
KILLS AMERICAN SOLDIERS IN IRAQ
AND AFGHANISTAN AND THREATENS
TO WIPE OUR ALLY ISRAEL OFF THE
MAP.
IRAN HAS MADE ITS INTENTIONS
CLEAR.
PURPOSES.
LAST MONTH, AN ALLY REPORT --
MR. SPEAKER, THE HOUSE IS NOT
IN ORDER.
GENTLEMAN IS CORRECT.
IF MEMBERS WOULD PLEASE TAKE
THEIR CONVERSATIONS FROM THE
FLOOR.
THE GENTLEMAN MAY PROCEED.
THE IAEA NOTED THE
MILITARY DIMENSIONS TO THE
IRANIAN PROGRAM, THE THREAT IS
REAL AND THIS CONGRESS HAS
ALWAYS TAKEN IT SERIOUSLY.
WE HAVE WATCHED IRAN ATTEMPT TO
MAKE A MOCKERY OF U.S. LAW BY
FINDING NEW WAYS TO EVADE
SANCTIONS AND NOW WE ARE GOING
TO HELP THEM DO IT.
MY AMENDMENT DOES ONE THIN.
IT BLOCKS ANY IRAN EXCHANGE
WITH A COMPANY OR AFFILIATE
CONNECTED TO THE IRAN FOREIGN
INVESTMENT COMPANY.
LET ME BE CLEAR.
THIS WILL NOT PREVENT PASSAGE
OF THE LEGISLATION.
IF ADOPTED, IT WILL BE
INCORPORATED AND WE'LL VOTE ON
THE FINAL BILL.
WE HAVE COME TOGETHER AGAINST A
NUCLEAR ARMED IRAN BEFORE AND
WE CAN DO IT AGAIN TODAY.
LET'S PUT PARTISANSHIP ASIDE
AND LET'S UNITE AGAINST THE
VERY REAL THREAT OF A NUCLEAR
ARMED IRANIAN REGIME.
I AM PLEASED TO YIELD TO THE
RANKING MEMBER MR. MARKEY.
I THANK THE
GENTLEMAN.
THE BILL BEFORE US TODAY
PROPOSES TO GIVE AWAY NATIONAL
FORESTLAND TO THE RESOLUTION
COPPER CORPORATION SO THEY CAN
BUILD A GIANT COPPER MINE.
THE
GENTLEMAN WILL SUSPEND.
THE GENTLEMAN MAY CONTINUE.
THERE COULD BE
BETWEEN $2 BILLION AND $7
BILLION WORTH OF COPPER ON THIS
LAND.
WHO EXACTLY IS THIS COMPANY
THAT'S GOING TO BE THE
BENEFICIARY OF REPUBLICAN
MAJORITY LARGESS?
A CONTROLLING 55% OF RESOLUTION
COPPER SHARES ARE OWNED BY THE
GIANT MINING CONGLOMERATE RIO
TINTO.
WHAT ELSE DOES RIO TINTO OWN?
THEY OWN 65% OF THE WORLD'S
LARGEST OPEN PIT URANIUM MINE.
THE MINE IN NAMIBIA.
THEIR SECOND LARGEST PARTNER IN
THE URANIUM MINE WITH A 15%
STAKE AND TWO PEOPLE ON THE
BOARD OF DIRECTORS IS NONE
OTHER THAN THE GOVERNMENT OF
IRAN.
THE U.N.
THE U.N. SECURITY COUNCIL HAS
CONDEMNED IRAN FOR ITS
VIOLATIONS OF THE NUCLEAR
NONPROLIFERATION TREATY AND THIS
HOUSE HAS TWICE ENACTED STRONG
IRAN NUCLEAR SANCTIONS AND YET
RIO TINTO IS IN PARTNERSHIP WITH
URANIUM.
FOR WHAT PURPOSE?
AND WITH THIS BILL TODAY WE ARE
REWARDING RIO TINTO.
WE ARE TELLING RIO TINTO, NEVER
MIND THE U.N. SANCTIONS, NEVER
MIND THE SANCTIONS OF U.S. LAW.
WHAT THE DEUTCH AMENDMENT DOES
IS SAY, IF YOU WANT TO DO
BUSINESS WITH AMERICA, YOU NEED
TO STOP DOING BUSINESS WITH IRAN
AND MAHMUD AHMADINEJAD.
-- MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD.
UNDER THIS AMENDMENT, AS SOON AS
RIO TINTO SEVERS ITS PARTNERSHIP
WITH IRAN AND AHMADINEJAD, THE
COPPER AFFILIATE CAN PROCEED TO
TAKE TITLE TO THESE VERY
VALUABLE FEDERAL LANDS IN
ARIZONA, IN THE UNITED STATES OF
AMERICA.
I DON'T THINK THAT'S TOO MUCH
FOR THIS CONGRESS TO ASK.
VOTE FOR A STRONG NUCLEAR
NONPROLIFERATION POLICY.
SEND A MESSAGE TO AHMADINEJAD,
AMENDMENT.
DOES
THE GENTLEMAN YIELD BACK?
THE GENTLEMAN YIELDS BACK.
GENTLEMAN FROM WASHINGTON RISE?
SPEAKER.
I RISE IN OPPOSITION TO THE
MOTION TO RECOMMIT.
THE
MINUTES.
SPEAKER.
MR. SPEAKER, LET ME BE PERFECTLY
CLEAR AND I'LL SAY THIS AS
SLOWLY AS I CAN SO IT CAN BE
UNDERSTOOD.
THIS BILL DOES NOT WAIVE ANY
ECONOMIC SANCTION LAWS, ALL OF
THOSE LAWS STILL STAND.
NOW, LET ME SAY THIS.
THIS BILL IS ABOUT CREATING JOBS
IN ARIZONA.
BY CREATING JOBS IN ARIZONA WE
ARE CREATING AMERICAN JOBS
BUT THE LARGER DEBATE, IT IS
INTERESTING TO ME HOW I HEAR THE
OTHER SIDE COME UP WITH ALL OF
THESE DIFFERENT IDEAS.
HERE'S WHAT THE DEBATE IS.
THE DEBATE HAS BEEN GOING ON FOR
SOME TIME.
PROBABLY ABOUT THREE YEARS, COME
TO THINK OF IT, IT'S ABOUT
CREATING JOBS IN THIS COUNTRY.
OUR APPROACH ON THIS SIDE IS
VERY SIMPLE.
IT'S SIMILAR BECAUSE IT'S BASED
ON THE PREMISE OF OUR COUNTRY.
WE RELY ON THE PRIVATE SECTOR,
WE RELY ON PEOPLE TO MAKE AN
INVESTMENT TO CREATE AMERICAN
JOBS.
THEIR SIDE, WHAT THEY WANT TO DO
AND WE HEARD THIS IN THE DEBATE
IS TO RAISE TAXES AND CREATE
PUBLIC JOBS.
THIS CREATES PRIVATE JOBS, I SAY
VOTE NO ON THE MOTION TO
RECOMMIT AND PASS THE BILL AND I
YIELD BACK MY TIME.
GENTLEMAN YIELDS BACK.
WITHOUT OBJECTION, THE PREVIOUS
QUESTION IS ORDERED.
THE QUESTION IS ON THE MOTION TO
THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
THOSE OPPOSED, NO.
THE NOES HAVE IT.
RECORDED VOTE.
A
RECORDED VOTE IS REQUESTED.
THOSE IN SUPPORT OF THE REQUEST
FOR A RECORDED VOTE WILL RISE
A RECORDED VOTE IS ORDERED.
MEMBERS WILL RECORD THEIR VOTES
PURSUANT TO CLAUSE 8 AND CLAUSE
9 OF RULE 20, THIS IS A
15-MINUTE VOTE ON THE MOTION TO
RECOMMIT H.R. 1904.
IT WILL BE PRECEDED BY
FIVE-MINUTE VOTES ON H.R. 1904,
ORDERING THE PREVIOUS QUESTION
ON THE HOUSE RESOLUTION 448,
ADOPTING HOUSE RESOLUTION 448 IF
ORDERED AND SUSPENDING THE RULES
AND PASSING H.R. 2527.
THIS IS A 15-MINUTE VOTE.
[CAPTIONING MADE POSSIBLE BY THE
UNITED STATES HOUSE OF
REPRESENTATIVES.
ANY USE OF THE CLOSED-CAPTIONED
COVERAGE OF THE HOUSE
PROCEEDINGS FOR POLITICAL OR
COMMERCIAL PURPOSES IS EXPRESSLY
PROHIBITED BY THE U.S. HOUSE OF
REPRESENTATIVES.]
ON
THIS VOTE, THE YEAS ARE 187,
THE YEAS ARE 237, THE MOTION IS
NOT ADOPTED.
THE QUESTION IS ON PASSAGE OF
THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
THOSE OPPOSED, NO.
IN THE OPINION OF THE CHAIR THE
MR. SPEAKER.
THE
GENTLEMAN FROM MASSACHUSETTS.
I REQUEST A
RECORDED VOTE.
RECORDED VOTE IS REQUESTED.