unintended consequences for our regulatory framework. it would do so by broadening the scope of when private securities offerings can be solicitted or advertised to the public without first verifying that the purchaser is financially sophisticated enough to understand the risk involved. what we call, quote, accredited investors, unquote. specifically, the bill would require the s.e.c. to amend its safe harbor rules for private placement under rule 506 of regulation d so that the current verification requirements for general solicitation and advertising do not effectively apply to sales events sponsored by certain groups, colleges, nonprofits, trade associations, or angel investor groups for

example. the bill's intent to expand the role of angel investors in capital formation a laudable goal. but one that needs appropriate rules to ensure investors have the protection and legal recourse needed to make sound investment and so while the bill would limit the amount and type of information that can be communicated for these events, it would still allow companies to condition the markets for their securities and offer them to any member of the public that walks in the door. now let me be clear. if a university wants to sponsor a so-called demo day with companies who want to pitch their ideas and products, they already can and the entire public can attend. . the companies can't talk about offer or sales securities in their company. i'm concerned that this bill, however, would cause real harm to retail investors.

for example, a hedge fund could set up an event, sponsored by a questionable college like centian, pass out fliers on campus, advertising their shares, and then sell those shares to anyone who attend the -- who attended the event, including the students who may know nothing about how this whole operation works. they would not have to take reasonable steps to verify that these purchasers are accredited investors. furthermore, events sponsored by government entities, nonprofits and universities, are likely to attract the very people we're trying to protect. investors who are not accredited and do not have enough financial sophistication or wherewithal to understand the investments. we created rule 06 exemption under the jobs act to expand the market for private

offerings, private companies can now advertise and solicit offerings to the general public. which helps them to raise the capital they need to grow their businesses. but in exchange for the expanded framework and lower levels of investor protection, we passed a simple amendment that i offered to require companies to just take reasonable steps to verify that the purchaser of the security is an accredited investor. the intent was simple. if a company is going to advertise riskier private offerings, it must ensure that the buyer has the necessary income and assets to qualify for such a purchase. rather than rely on so-called self-certification. the bill would effectively reverse this sensible amendment, during these sales events. at best, the bill is also unnecessary. the s.e.c. has already provided relief to angel investor groups, if they curate the

people who attend these sales events. they have to either make sure they have a pre-existing relationship with the investor, or verify their income and assets at the time of purchase, consist went our regulatory framework. i have offered an amendment which will be debated later today, that would codify s.e.c.'s relief and prevent harm to everyday investors. it would also limit the exemptions to operating companies so shell companies and invest -- and investment vehicles like hedge funds can't solicit potentially risky offerings to unknowing investors. these revisions to the bill would strike an appropriate balance between capital formation and investor protection. while still supporting angel investor groups. however, without my amendment, i cannot support this bill. i thank you and i reserve the alance of my time.

the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman reserves the balance of her time. the gentleman from texas is recognized. mr. hensarling: i'm very happy to yield one minute to the gentleman from california, mr. mccarthy. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california is recognized for one minute. mr. mccarthy: i want to thank the gentleman for yielding. before i move on, i want to thank him for his work on financial services. this is another bill coming to the floor with a large bipartisan vote, coming out. and creating jobs. that's what this floor is all about. so today we're talking about an american economy that is ripe for innovation. this is what is needed to create jobs and opportunity. my colleagues, i ask them, how many times have you traveled back to your district and sat down and saw an individual that craves to be an entrepreneur, it could be that single mom, could be that person that stuck in a job, or a young kid with great idea.

but as they roll out their idea, they find they're not going to get stopped except from maybe a government regulation. think of the jobs they could create. the places we can grow. but because of the technological revolution of our country, the startups we have come to know are now some of the largest companies in our economy. our goals shouldn't be to stop the next great american company from coming into existence. we should actually enable it. we should tear down the government-made barriers to their potential and embrace the positive disruption that will keep america as the world leader in innovation. that's the goal of the innovation initiative. and that's what we're here today doing. we will pass today the helping angels lead our startups act, which enables ready investors to invest in startups. startups are in a world of high risk and high reward. they can't just go to a bank for a loan. they need angel investors who

are willing to take that risk for the next company that will change the world. and washington should not stand in the way for making that -- of making that happen. several years ago congress passed and the president did sign the jobs act. our goal was to help increase access to capital. unfortunately some of the provisions in our bill were misinterpreted by the s.e.c. against the spirit of entrepreneurship. thus keeping the barriers to capital in place. today's bill gives new companies an opportunity to identify and interact with potential investors. thus opening the door for the next great idea, to get the funding it needs to get up and running. i want give to -- i want to give a special thanks to chairman chabot for identifying this inefficiency and acting to solve it. you know, i started my first business when i was 19 years old. there's three lessons you learn. you're the first one to work.

you're the last one to leave. and you're the last one to be paid. the last thing you need is government stopping you from achieving your dream. it's very simple when we talk to colleagues here. there's one or two ways to go on this bill. if you sit back and you look at starbucks, zon or amazing success stories in america where millions of people work. the idea would be, if you believe america needs to continue the opportunity from more trepreneurs, for companies such as that, it started with angel investing. so you would vote yes. but if you believe america doesn't need innovation, that america thinks the new facebook shouldn't be there, that we should put up new barriers to stop a dream, to stop the growth, you'd probably vote no. that's why later today when this bill gets through, it will

be a big bipartisan vote because we believe in america. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentlewoman from california is recognized. ms. waters: i yield to the gentlelady from arizona three minutes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from arizona is recognized for three minutes. >> thank you for granting me time. thank you, mr. chabot, mr. hurt, and others, for working with me on this bipartisan bill to help entrepreneurs and startup companies create jobs and grow our economy. american startup businesses are growing both in number and diversity. sinn sinn entrepreneurs are find -- ms. sinema: entrepreneurs are finding new and better ways to bring together talent, innovation and investment capital in increasingly competitive small business environments. the hail oates act clarifies s.e.c. -- halos act clarifies .e.c. regulations. these events provide invaluable opportunities for entrepreneurs to meet and exchange ideas with students, professors, business

professionals and potential future investors. the halos act creates a clear path for startups to participate in demo days sponsored by a government entity, a nonprofit organization, an angel investor group, venture association, or other entity permitted by the s.e.c. specifically this act clarifies the definition of general solicitation to exempt communications and presentations at these events where advertising does not make specific investment offerings, and where no specific securities offering information is communicated at the event. this simply permits startups to connect with business experts, potential future investors, and other entrepreneurs, while maintaining existing accreditter to investor verification requirements and exceptions already under regulation d for the actual purchase or sale of securities. it does not in any way permit the sale of securities to unaccredited investors at demo days. companies such as amazon,

costco, facebook, google and starbucks were all initially funded by angel investors. as we work to make america more competitive in the new global economy, we need to encourage the growth of innovative startups and job creating small businesses. again, thank you to my co-sponsors and to the chairman for working with us on this commonsense, bipartisan bill. i'm committed to working with my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to ensure that arizona startups have the support that they need to grow their businesses and create jobs. mr. chairman, i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman yields back the balance of her time. the gentleman from texas is recognized. mr. hensarling: mr. speaker, i'm now very happy to yield three minutes to the chief sponsor of the halos act, the gentleman from ohio, mr. chabot, who is chairman of our small business committee. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from ohio is recognized. mr. chabot: thank you, mr. speaker. thank you, mr. hensarling, for your leadership on this. i'd also like to thank the gentlelady from arizona who

just spoke for her leadership on this as well. as the chairman of the house small business committee, i have the great pleasure of hearing from america's small business owners each and every day. both in my district and up here in washington. the stories of success are always encouraging to hear. but all too often what i'm told is how the government is making it difficult for small businesses to grow and succeed. and therefore create jobs. perhaps the most common concern is just how difficult it is for entrepreneurs starting out to access the needed capital to grow. this bill expands access to capital by ensuring small businesses can continue to connect with so-called angel investors. one popular way small businesses have connected with angel investors is through demo days. these are events sponsored by universities and nonprofits and local governments and acceleraters and incubators and other groups that allow entrepreneurs to showcase their

products and informally meet investors and customers. however, s.e.c. regulations are threatening to force these events out of business by imposing unwielding regulations dictating who is and who is not allowed to simply attend. these regulations would force everybody who merely walks through the door to go through what is essentially a full financialnterrogation, handing over tax documents and bank statements and paybook information and on and on and on. mr. speaker, this doesn't make any sense. we should be encouraging participation in demo days, not creating obstacles. after all, not only are these events a place to connect investors with our community's small businesses and entrepreneurs, but they also provide a great opportunity for students, for example, and our next generation of entrepreneurs, to ask questions and learn what it takes to get a business off the ground. mr. speaker, i would like to thank again chairman hensarling for his leadership in getting

this bill through the committee, as well as representative hurt, representative sinema and representative takai, f working in a cooperative and bipartisan manner to move this bill to the house floor. it was very bipartisan and all the republicans voted for it and almost half the democrats voted for it in committee as well. it is always wonderful when we're able to work together to support small business and there's no better time than now. next week is national small business week. when we will be celebrating the contributions of small businesses and entrepreneurs in every community all across america, every one of us has small businesses in our district -- in our district. it serves as you a reminder to us in this chamber of how important it is to create policies that promote an environment for small business to succeed. and this bill is one more step in that direction. so i again want to urge my colleagues to support h.r. 4498 and, again, really appreciate the bipartisan nature of this bill and its support thus far. and i yield back the balance of

my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentlewoman from california is recognized. ms. waters: i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman reserves the balance of her time. the gentleman from texas is recognized. mr. hensarling: mr. speaker, i now yield three minutes to a sponsor of the bill, the gentleman from virginia, mr. hurt. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from virginia is recognized. mr. hurt: thank you, mr. speaker. i rise today in support of the halos act. i first would like to thank the chairman of the financial services committee, mr. hensarling, for his leadership on the jobs act and on this issue, specifically. i'd also like to commend the efforts of representative chabot and sinema and it's been an honor to be able to work with them on such an important issue. . it's an honor to be able to work with them to craft a sensible bipartisan bill seeking early stage capital investment. mr. speaker, i represent a rural district in virginia, virginia's fifth district, that stretches from the northern

piedmont of virginia to the north carolina border. as i travel across my district, a recurring theme that i hear from my constituents is they're concerned about jobs and the economy. at a time when our economy is struggling, congress must do everything possible to help small businesses achieve success. these entities are our nation's most dynamic job creators and they are essential to our economy. charlottesville, virginia, is recognized one of the most fastest growing markets for ven tal capitalists. the amount of capital has invested over 150%. this type of investment can have a profound impact on a community, making it more attractive to other startup companies and ultimately producing more job growth. indeed, senator chris murphy of connecticut, said it best when he introduced the senate verget of the halos best. i heard from interested backers alike that the most important thing we can do to help these businesses is make it easier for angel investors to put capital behind them, and that's exactly what our bipartisan halos act will do. in 2014 alone, angel investors

deployed over $24 billion to over 70,000 startups. many of these investments go into companies in their own communities and states and beyond capital, angel investors often provide advice and guidance to help these companies succeed and create jobs. it's for these reasons that i ask my colleagues to support this bill. if enacted, the halos act would amend the securities act to define an angel investor group and clarify the definition of general slit take so that startup enter -- solicitation so that startup enters can have demo days where there is no direct investment offering. the halos act would alleviate the burden placed on startups with regard to privacy and compliance concerns, which often require entrepreneurs and startups to take on burdens they do not have the means to handle. these burdens have a significant impact on an entrepreneur's ability to interface with investors because of the risk of violating federal securities laws by having their interactions with investors being viewed as a general solicitation.

ahoes would lift this burden and it's an important step in continuation the success this committee has achieved with the bipartisan jobs act. the jobs act made it easier for startup enterprises to market their company to a larger pool of investors. the s.e.c. has classified events as general solicitations, requiring entrepreneurs and startups to verify accredited investor status. this jeopardizes the future of events like demo days where startups can interact with these investors and venture capitalists. this makes sure that defining the term angel investor group and exempting an angel event general solicitation. the halos act is a simple bipartisan -- mr. hensarling: i yield the gentleman 30 seconds. mr. hurt: this is a bipartisan and bicameral solution to make sure they continue this commonsense interaction. i thank you, mr. speaker, and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentlewoman from california

is recognized. ms. waters: i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman reserves. the gentleman from texas. mr. hensarling: mr. speaker, might i inquire if the other side has any further speakers? before we use all our time. ms. waters: we have no further speakers. mr. hensarling: in that case, mr. speaker, i'm very happy to yield to the gentleman from virginia, mr. garrett, 2 1/2 minutes, -- new jersey, mr. garrett, 2 1/2 minutes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new jersey is recognized. mr. garrett: thank you, mr. speaker. i want to thank the sponsors of the underlying legislation for the underlying bill. so i rise in support of h.r. 4498, in the helping angels lead our startups act, and i urge all my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to support this very important piece of legislation. mr. speaker, you know, it was two weeks ago at the capital markets subcommittee we held a hearing that examined the ositive impact of the 2012 jobs act it was having on our economy. you see, by reducing burdens on startup companies and modernizing our laws, the

consensus was clear. the jobs act was a big win for entrepreneurs, innovation and ultimately economic growth and opportunity and job creation in this country. but that doesn't mean that we shouldn't be doing more besides the jobs act, and it certainly doesn't mean that the securities and exchange commission, the s.e.c., has done a perfect job by any means when it comes to implementing the important provisions of the jobs act. you see, at times the s.e.c. has taken liberties, if you will, with their rulemaking that run contrary to the wishes and purposes of congress which ultimately could limit the pact of this great new revolutionary legislation. one was the way the s.e.c. implemented title 2 of the jobs act which made it easier for them to use general solicitation for private offering of stocks. you see, what happened here in the final rule the s.e.c. classified events such as demo days held by angel investors as being general solicitation. this means that angel groups

would have to then comply with all the rules and regulations that are designed for issuers who are actually engaged in the offering of securities which is not. so events such as demo days is an important economic development tool, if you will, used by small startup companies to help educate people, educate a pool of potential investors. they're not security offerings, and they should really, really not be treated as such. and why is this important? well, in 2014, angel investors put some $24 billion towards in over 73,000 startups. so clearly this is a preferred source of capital throughout the economy. any kind of regulation that would hamper the ability of angel investors to communication with startup companies would jeopardize the ability of angel investors to fund the, i don't know, next apple or google startup. so here we are with h.r. 4498. it would make simply a small technical fix to the jobs act and would allow such events to continue without that heavy

hand of government getting in the way. so i want to thank the sponsors and urge the bipartisan support of this underlying bill. with that i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentlewoman from california. ms. waters: i continue to reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman continues to reserve. the gentleman from texas is recognized. mr. hensarling: mr. speaker, i now yield two minutes to the gentleman from michigan, mr. huizenga, chairman on monetary policy and trade subcommittee. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan is recognized. mr. huizenga: i thank the gentleman for yielding. as a small business owner and coming from a family with very entrepreneurial people, i know the importance of fostering an environment that allows economic opportunity and allows small businesses to grow and create jobs. west michigan is a hub of entrepreneurial activity, organizations like the grand rapids adventures network, a very innovative place called start garden, are the center of that. start garden does two demo days a year with very sophisticated

investors. in fact, over the last three years of start garden's existence, they have helped launch 200 various companies and have given them that investment. one of those is boxed water is better, and just this past week, my office received its first shipment from holland, michigan, of boxed water is better. founded in 2009, the team at boxed water combined west michigan ingenuity with capital from investors through start garden who now employ 60 people and have facilities in both michigan and utah and sell their product in over 8,000 stores nationwide and are now starting to sell around the globe. while small business across the globe and across the country like boxed water are looking for real solutions from congress to help them innovate and thrive. the jobs act, a solution to jump-start capital formation for small businesses, entrepreneurs and startups, was signed into law in 2012, but instead of helping small

businesses access capital through the jobs act, as congress had intended, the securities and exchange commission has choked off avenues of that capital formation. in order to participate in a demo day, the s.e.c. requires startups to register as securities offering and verify the sophistication level of potential funders, some of which don't have the financial means to do, according to start garden. i'd like to thank the gentleman rom ohio for introducing the halos act, investors that will help the capital they need to turn their startup into a growing and striving business. demo days, featuring boxed water and others, these participants will -- not considered general solicitation under the securities act. we need more entrepreneurs to expand, hire and invest and the halos act is an innovative way to do that. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back.

the gentlewoman from california is recognized. ms. waters: i continue to reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman continues to reserve. the gentleman from texas is recognized. mr. hensarling: mr. speaker, i'm now pleased to yield two minutes to the gentlelady from missouri, mrs. wagner. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from missouri is recognized for two minutes. mrs. wagner: i thank the chairman for his leadership and, mr. speaker, i'd also like to thank representative chabot of ohio for introducing this bipartisan piece of legislation as well as my colleagues on the financial services committee. congressman hurt of virginia and congresswoman sinema of arizona for sponsoring this legislation. h.r. 4498, the helping angels lead our startups act, provides be a important fix to our securities regulations that removes friction between entrepreneurs and the potential investors that are looking to support startup companies. when we think about angel investing our venture capital, we think of the silicon valley tech theme or the financial powerhouse of new york city. however, more and more startups

are all across the country, and they're using important changes under the jobs act in order to raise financing no matter where they're located. in fact, as reported in the st. louis business journal, st. louis has the nation's fastest growing startup scene. as more and more investors are drawn to the st. louis area, these early stage investments are critical for helping keep these companies in missouri and creating more local missouri jobs. yet, while st. louis' startups have experienced tremendous growth recently, small businesses and startups everywhere are still having difficulty in obtaining financing and investment in today's economy at a crucial stage when they are trying to grow and expand. the halos act will make a small change that makes it easier for small businesses to find those vital investments. it would exempt demo days from general solicitation requirements that would put a burden on entrepreneurs and

would make it more difficult for investors to provide financing. for those companies that are not yet ready to go public, it is important that they are given the opportunity to pitch their business ideas to those who are interested in learning more. i urge passage of this bipartisan piece of legislation, and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman yields back. the gentlewoman from california is recognized. ms. waters: i continue to reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman continues to reserve. the gentleman from texas is recognized. mr. hensarling: mr. speaker, i'm now very pleased to yield two minutes to the gentleman from illinois, mr. hultgren. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from illinois is recognized for two minutes. mr. hultgren: thank you, mr. speaker. thank you, chairman hensarling. today i'm proud to be able to speak in support of the helping angels lead our startups, or halos act. i'd also like to thank chairman chabot, congressman hurt and congresswoman sinema for putting forward this bipartisan legislation. i'm fortunate to hear regularly from innovators across illinois and through my work on the house science, space and

technology committee, chicago is a hub for angel investors. the illinois venture capital association was one of the first associations to provide private equity. the state of illinois offers an angel investment credit program to attract and encourage investment into early stage innovative companies throughout my state. these innovators oftentimes have a simple idea that can be life changing but financing these ideas can become reality that is harder than you might think. angel investors play a key role in the earliest stages of these startups. they provide the initial round of funding to help get these life-changing ideas off the ground. startups are the job creators that drive our economy, make life-changing medical break throughs and harness technology to accomplish the impossible. these startup companies frequently participate in demo days, as been talked about, to increase the visibility of their company, explain their ideas and hope to informerly attract investors. they are sponsored by a variety

of organizations interested in promoting innovation and job creation. for example, the university of illinois' research park told me this bill would address some of the unintended consequences of the jobs act and crowdfunding which could make things like banish champaign angel network, the share the vision showcase, pitch practice at enterprise works and other public forums for startups in yirl problematic. they want to encourage showcasing our startups without fear these programs would be instituting a formal fundraising solicitation that would require reporting to the s.e.c. this bill simply clarifies s.e.c. regulations to ensure small businesses may participate in educational demo days without having to verify that attendees are accredited investors. this is a burdensome process meant only for securities solicitation, not just informal conversations. i encourage all my colleagues to support this important bill and yield back.

the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentlewoman from california is recognized. ms. waters: i continue to reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman continues to reserve. the gentleman from texas is recognized. mr. hensarling: mr. speaker, might i inquire how much time is remaining on each side? the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas has 8 1/2 minutes remaining. mr. hensarling: i'm now happy to yield two minutes to the gentleman from arizona, mr. why is kert. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from arizona -- mr. schweikert -- mr. hensarling: i'm now happy to yield two minutes to the gentleman from arizona, mr. schweikert. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from arizona is recognized. mr. schweikert: there's a crisis in our country. the fact of the matter is, there's more business concerns closing, going out of business, than being started. so if you're concerned about economic growth, if you're concerned about growing payrolls, people being able to pay, survive financially, you should be fixated on the fact that we have more businesses closing than opening. and being someone who was here

and spent a year of his life working on the jobs act, the individual bills, who was almost giddy that we had a bipartisan piece of success that so many of us were incredibly optimistic that was going to create economic growth, and to be here today, four years later, dealing with something, i'm sorry, that's almost absurd in the discussion, that the s.e.c. has made it more restrictive today than it was before the jobs act, so think about this. your university, your community college, your group brings together a number of little businesses that are trying to raise capital, and now under the interpretation it's coming out as, you're going to have security at the door to interview people, look at their financials, maybe, you know, i mean, this is crazy. so is the kater going to have to get certified? how about the security person at the door? are they going to have to get

certified? think about what this means and the absurdity that little businesses that are trying to capitalize, can't even tell their story without plaking sure that the people in the -- without making sure that the people in the room hearing it have met some sort of definition that the s.e.c. has imposed after we all thought we did a piece of legislation that opened up this type of communication. with that, mr. speaker, i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentlewoman from california is recognized. ms. waters: i continue to reserve my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman reserves the balance of her time -- the gentlewoman reserves the balance of her time. the gentleman from texas is recognized. hen hint hsh -- mr. hensarling: i now yield two minutes to the gentleman from pennsylvania, mr. costello. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from pennsylvania is recognized for two minutes. mr. costello: mr. speaker, i rise today in support of h.r. 4498, the helping angels lead our startups act. i co-sponsored this bipartisan legislation because it will

assist entrepreneurs in accessing angel investors who provide critical financing for startup businesses and local entrepreneurs. from construction companies to medical technology producers and manufacturing, and perhaps even the next iphone app, there are pennsylvanians in my district who are full of forward thinking ideas, who need access to daptal -- capital. by revising an unintended bureaucratic regulation that puts a hindrance on startup businesses, this will further enable entrepreneurs access to the capital they need to create jobs and be successful. let me just say that again, mr. speaker. here we have an example of a washington, d.c., bureaucratic interpreterive rulemaking -- rulemaking interpretation getting in the way of enabling entrepreneurs with good ideas from getting access to capital. and subsequently creating jobs

in local communities. there's a simple solution to fix that. that is why i'm supporting this legislation. i'm proud of pennsylvania's long standing history as a leader in innovation and i want to do everything i can to remove barriers and support our local job creators. i encourage all of my deleegs -- all of my colleagues to support this bipartisan legislation and yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentlewoman from california is recognized. ms. waters: i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman reserves the balance of her time. the gentleman from texas is recognized. mr. hensarling: mr. speaker, i'm very pleased now to yield two minutes to the gentleman from colorado, mr. polis, a member of the rules committee. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from colorado is recognized for two minutes -- the gentleman from colorado is recognized for two minutes. mr. polis: i thank the chair for -- the chair for the time. the united states leads the global economy on innovation. and there's a lot of pieces of the innovation agenda, some that republicans and democrats disagree on, some that they agree on. but i'm pleased to be here today on a small piece, but an important piece, that can help move the innovation agenda forward, help america retain

and grow its competitive advantage. let me set the scene. this could be a ballroom at a university, could be a theater that's rented out for the night. there might be five or 10 teams of entrepreneurs that worked hard on their business plans, perhaps they were part of some business plan competition to refine their pitch deck. the audience fills out. who is in the audience? it wouldn't be a worthwhile event if there weren't potential investors there. so of course the bulk of the audience could be half -- bulk of the audience, could be half, could be most of it, will be accredited investors. who else should be in the room? who do we want to make sure that we don't seal off the opportunity to learn and gain from that experience? well, could be university faculty, graduate students, professors, they don't happen to be worth $2 million, but they might be consult it's an, they might be professionals, lawyers and -- consultants, they might be professionals, lawyers, bankers. might be students and future entrepreneurs who want to learn

about the pitch process. so they too can refine their ideas and be on the stage the next time around. that's what this bill allows. for us to make sure that the great opportunity that this country offers reaches people from all economic backgrounds, we can't lock everybody except for the millionaires and billion airs out of the room that helps form the -- billionaires out of the room that helps form the capital for the next great companies. what this does do is allow folks who are not accredited investors, that are not there as a potential investor, to be in the room. to learn from the experience. to perhaps get a job if they're an aspiring programmer, to perhaps team up with a company that's presented as a co-founder to compliment some of the competencies that the other founder has, to make sure that they too are in that great room of opportunity. i urge my colleagues to vote yes and i yield back. mr. hensarling: i yield the gentleman an additional 30 seconds. mr. polis: i thank the

gentleman. i believe our startup communities will be strengthened, startup ecosystems like the ones that i'm proud to say exist in towns like fort collins and bowleder in my district can be made more -- bolder in my district can be made -- boulder can be made more diverse by this law, and those in the room can expand opportunity beyond people who are already millionaires and billionaires. i urge my colleagues to vote yes and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentlewoman from california is recognized. ms. waters: i continue to reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman continues to reserve. the gentleman from texas is recognized. mr. hensarling: mr. speaker, we have no further speakers and i believe we have the right to close. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from california is recognized. ms. waters: thank you very much. mr. speaker, and members, we've heard a lot of conversation from the opposite side of the aisle about what the s.e.c. has done or has not done. as a matter of fact, it was represented that the s.e.c. had

misinterpreted the bill. that is not true. we absolutely need rules of the road. we need to make sure that we are protecting investors. we need to make sure that we are not allowing folks to be put at great risk who don't understand or know what is happening in these rooms. i am concerned about these demo days on campuses, where students may be encouraged in these presentations to invest their parents' money or get their parents involved in a scheme that they may not be aware of. why is this so important to us? it is important to us because we have arrived at a time in the congress of the united states where we recognize the

need for consumer protection. prior to the recession that we had, that was created in 2008 because of the subprime meltdown and the faulty products that were placed out in the marketplace by banks and financial institutions, consumers were really ignored and not protected. we have payday loans that target our communities, that charge 400% to 500% interest and take advantage of some of the most vulnerable people in our society. we have all of these fraudulent mortgages that almost brought this country down, created a recession almost -- a recession, almost a depression, and we're finding them still, some of the exotic products that they put out on the market that tricked people into signing on the dotted line, who eventually lost their homes.

we have the fiduciary duty that we have been debating in congress, you know why we're debating that? we're debating that because we have investment advertisers -- advisors who were in conflict with the people that were supposed to be protecting. and supposed to be advertising -- sizing, and they lerly -- advising, and they were literally were advising seniors, who had savings for their retirements, to invest into plans they would ultimately lose all of their money in. and so in addition to payday loans and fraudulent mortgages and conflict of interest and if i doucheary, we've -- if i douche year, we've had -- if you doucheary, we've had --ify dutionary, we've had -- fiduciary, we've had arbitrary regulations. we're making sure that we have a consumer protection brur -- bureau that's doing the work

that had not been done all of these years, and, yes, we're concerned about this, we supported the jobs act. we supported it with an amendment that i put in there that said that you must make reasonable -- take reasonable opportunities to ensure that you know who these investors are. and we're talking about a accredited investors. folks who have resources, folks who know how this game is operated, folks who can protect themselves, they have lawyers, th have consultants, all of that. what we don't want is we don't want these students and we don't want people who walk in off the street who may be presented with an opportunity that's not a real opportunity. for example, what if we had something like corinthian, a private postsecondary school we had to close down, or the

university of phoenix, or the trump university, any of these who could present themselves as credible businesses to be invested in, home to find out later that the students have been misled, they have not gotten jobs, they don't have anything, they've not made any money, and so we're saying, this is another effort to simply protect those who oftentimes are the targets of the ripoffs and the frauds. and so i would ask my colleagues to support the amendment that i'm going to put to the bill, to make sure that they know who's in the room. i would ask them to support this simple amendment that was made in order in the rules committee. to make sure that we're protecting those investors and keeping them from getting ripped off. now, some of my friends on the opposite side of the aisle would have you believe that

we're not interested in capital formation. that we're not interested in entrepreneurship. that we're not interested in joint ventures. that is absolutely not true. as a matter of fact, folks on this side of the aisle are fighting to make the financial institutions responsible and the banks to make loans where they should be making loans. we have to have a c.r.a. to make sure that they're doing what they should be doing with the depositive's money and on on.on and we fight for small businesses every day. we joined up with our colleagues on the opposite side of the aisle to support the jobs bill, even though we had some concerns ability s.e.c. tried to make sure that we had the kind of legislation that would protect these investors. now they're saying, we don't like what the s.e.c. is doing. they're misinterpreting that. they're messing this all up. that's not true. we know they don't like the

s.e.c. as a matter of fact, they do everything that they can to limit their funding so that they cannot be effective. but these are our cops on the block. the s.e.c. are our cops on the block, to try and make sure that we limit the ripoff and the frauds and the undermining of average citizens in our society. and so we support the jobs act, we believe that we should not have these operations on the campuses without knowing who's in the room and allowing investors to be put at risk. and with that, mr. speaker, and members, i would ask for a no vote on the bill and i'm going to ask for an aye vote on the amendment that's going to come up. if my colleagues on the opposite side of the aisle accept this very, very reasonable amendment, then i will vote to support the bill. but if they don't show any concern or compassion for the

of investors, then i cannot support the bill -- of investors, then i cannot support the bill and i will ask mue i -- micah cuss not to support the bill. it's as simple as that. when will we stop fraud lent workings in this country that rip off students, who don't care about whether or not our investors, who are interested in capital formation, and investing in real enterprises, that can help to grow that business, and to make some money themselves, when are we going to recognize we can do both? we don't have to just be on the of those who would take advantage of people, we must be on the side of both our investors who are willing to put up money, and for our businesses who need capital formation, but somehow, somehow we always end up letting the most vulnerable people in our society be the target of fraud

by those who take advantage of them. . with that i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman yields back. the gentleman from texas is recognized. mr. hensarling: mr. speaker, how much time do i have remaining? the speaker pro tempore: 2 1/2 minutes. mr. hensarling: i yield myself the balance of the time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for the balance of the time. the gentleman is recognized. mr. hensarling: mr. speaker, again, i am very, very happy that yet another bipartisan bill has come out of the financial services committee to try to get this economy working for working people. i took note there were more democrats coming to the floor to be in favor of the bill than against the bill and that almost 80% of the members of the financial services committee reported this bill favorably. now, the ranking member spoke passionately trying to help the most vulnerable. she cares about investor

protection but, mr. speaker, the only people for can buy the securities in a private offering are millionaires. and so the question is, who do you care more about, the millionaire investors or the working poor who need better jobs? you can't have capitalism without capital, and yet the ranking member would put one more burden in front of small businesses and entrepreneurs trying to create businesses so that people can have better jobs and a better future for themselves and their family. listen, i'm glad we have millionaire investors. i wish we had more of them, but they are already protected. you must be an accredited investor in order to partake, to actually buy the security. all we're debating now is whether you have to prescreen,

as the gentleman from arizona said, the caterer or the security guard at the door, to be part of the demo day. something, mr. speaker, that was perfectly legal and had gone on for years and years and years prior to this s.e.c. rule and yet we have an agency, the south carolina s.e.c., creating law -- the securities and exchange commission, creating law out of thin air, making it more difficult for the working poor to find better jobs, to make sure that people have a better career path, to make sure we can find the next facebook, making it more difficult. this is, i believe, will have a strong bipartisan support on the floor. we all need to support the halos act, h.r. 4498, and at the end of the day, who are you going to come down in favor of, the working poor or millionaire investors who are already protected? this side of the aisle will come down in favor of the working poor who needs jobs in

an economy that's been hurt by obamanomics. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. all time for debate on the bill has expired. for what purpose does the gentlewoman from california seek recognition? ms. waters: i have an amendment at the desk. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will designate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 1 printed in house report 114-530 offered by ms. maxine waters of california. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to house rule 701, the gentlewoman from california, ms. waters -- waters and a member opposed will each control five minutes. the chair recognizes the gentlewoman from california. ms. waters: thank you very much, mr. chairman. as i mentioned during the general debate on h.r. 4498, i'm offering this amendment today in order to clarify and improve the bill. if this amendment is accepted, i am prepared to support this legislation.

indeed, i support the goal of connecting angel investor groups with companies seeking funding, particularly startups and emerging firms. angel investor groups tend to be comprised of highly sophisticated individuals with significant experience investing in higher risk offerings. they tend to occur ate their groups carefully -- curate their groups carefully during these demo day events. as such, my amendment seeks to support the effort of these angel investor associations without creating a harmful loophole in some of the protections we put in place when we adopted the jobs act of 2012. this amendment includes several provisions to advance these goals. first, my amendment stipulates hat no sponsor of a demo day can collect finders fees for

connecting investors to companies. this provision ensures that event sponsors -- colleges, nonprofits, trade associations or otherwise -- don't have perverse incentives to drum up security sales. second, my amendment limits the relief offered under the bill to actual operating companies in the real economy. as such, it excludes certain entities, like shell companies, and investment vehicles like hedge funds. i think that my amendment is appropriately calibrated to ensure that benefits provided under the bill go to startups, like technology firms or manufacturing companies, rather than opaque or speculative firms. third, my amendment would codify the relief that the s.e.c. has already provided for angel investor groups as it relates to these demo days. this will provide legal

certainty to these groups without opening up any new loopholes. let me describe how this would work. if the company wants to hold a demo day and also condition the market for a securities sale, as h.r. 4498 would allow, they would have to curate the group of people that would attend the event. currently, as drafted, they are not limited to holding science fair style demonstrations. they can discuss the securities being offered, the types and amounts of these securities and how they intend to use the proceeds of the offering. under the s.e.c.'s relief and codified in this provision in my amendment, companies can hold these presentations. they can talk about the securities and they can solicit attendance. they can even avoid the accredited investor

verification requirement in the jobs act. they just have to call their existing networks of accredited investors and angel investor group members rather than blasting out an invitation to the entire college campus. and if companies do want to blast out the invitation to entire campuses, they still can. they just have to abide by the verification provisions in the jobs act. in summary, this amendment i'm offering today ensures that no loopholes to the jobs act verification requirement are opened up. that all manner of conflicted fees are prohibited and that benefits of the bill go to actual operating companies. and that's very important. actual operating companies. mr. chairman, whether it is through my work to clarify and improve the jobs act during the

112th congress or with my work with members on this committee to amend the definition of accredited investors or through my amendment today, i have long shown a willingness to work in good faith on issues related to capital formation. i would urge my colleagues to adopt my amendment so that we can support a strong bipartisan bill. nd so mr. hensarling brags about how many democrats supported this bill. he brags about the fact that in ommittee and then on the floor . we all tried to be very cooperative in the jobs act, and i have bent over backwards tone sure we can get a jobs act to see what could happen with creating jobs, but what they have done now is they've gone a step further beyond what we agreed upon and so with that i

ask for an aye vote on my amendment and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from texas seek recognition? mr. hensarling: i move to claim -- i rise to claim the time in opposition. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. hensarling: thank you, mr. speaker. the amendment from the ranking member of the financial the es committee repeals halos act. we are having the same debate we just had. it would outlaw demo days as they're currently practiced. the whole idea of the halos act s to ensure that demo days that existed prior to this s.e.c. rule will continue. that startups can continue to have access to capital without the additional burden of having to screen those who actually come into demo days. mr. speaker, again, a private

offering, a private offering can only -- can only be engaged -- the security can only be purchased by an accredited investor. those are the existing rules, so there is almost a mythical group that the ranking member is attempting to protect. at the end of the day, these are millionaire investors who are the angel investors, who are the accredited investors, who we need in these -- to help fund these startups. and what the gentlelady from california's amendment does is, again, gut the bill. it basically just simply codifies this s.e.c. rule that absolutely overturns the congressional intent to make sure that we have greater access to capital. in addition, there's an entire new defined term of issuer in

her amendment, notwithstanding the fact this is already defined in section 38-a of the securities and exchange act of 34 so we have undefined vague terms that are being introduced here. i'd also remind the gentlelady from california in all that in the halos act -- it already prohibits a sponsor from engaging in investment negotiations between the issuer and investors, charging event attendees fees other than administrative fees and compensation that would require them to register with the s.e.c. as a broker-dealer or investment-advisor. so these are ill-placed concerns that at the end of the day puts up another hurdle, another hurdle from angel investors funding the next new facebook, the next new costco, the next new starbucks, and putting tens of thousands of americans back to work. firm -- affirm

the jobs bill. i reject the amendment by the gentlelady from california. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. pursuant to the rule, the question is on the amendment by the gentlewoman from california, ms. waters. the question is on the amendment by the gentlewoman from california. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair -- the noes have it. ms. waters: a recorded vote is requested. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman asks -- is requesting for the yeas and nays. the yeas and nays are requested. hose in favor of taking this te by the yeas and nays will rise. a sufficient number having arisen, the yeas and nays are ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device. pursuant to clause 8 and clause 9 of rule 20, this is a 15-minute vote on the adoption

of the amendment, will be followed by five-minute votes on a motion to recommit, if ordered, passage of the bill, if ordered, and the motion to uspend the rules and pass s. 1890. this is a 15-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with 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.]

the speaker pro tempore: on this vote the yeas are 139. the nays are 272. he amendment is not adopted. the question is on engrossment and third reading of the bill. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no.

the ayes have it. third reading. the clerk: a bill to clarify general solicitation under federal securities law. the speaker pro tempore: the question is on passage of the bill. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the ayes have it. the bill is passed. ms. waters: mr. speaker. i ask for the yeas and nays. the speaker pro tempore: the -- ms. waters: mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the yeas and nays are requested. those favoring a vote by the yeas and nays will rise. a sufficient number having arisen, the yeas and nays are ordered. members will record their votes y electronic device. his is a five-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with 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.]

the speaker pro tempore: on this vote the yeas are 329. the nays are 89. on this vote the yeas are 325. the nays are 89. the bill is passed. woid, the motion to reconsider is laid on the table. -- without objection, the motion to reconsider is laid on the table. the unfinished business is the vote on the motion of the gentleman from virginia, mr. goodlatte, to suspend the rules and pass s. 1890, on which the yeas and nays are ordered. the clerk will report the title of the bill. e clerk: senate 1890, an act

to amend chapter 90 of title 18, united states code, to provide federal jurisdiction for the theft of trade secrets, nd for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: the question is will the house suspend the rules and pass the bill. members will record their votes by electronic device. this is a five-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with 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.]

the speaker pro tempore: on this vote the 410. the rules is suspended and without objection, its the motion to reconsider is laid on the table. for what purpose does the gentlewoman from north carolina seek recognition. ms. foxx: i send a privileged report for filing under the rule. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title.

the clerk: resolution providing for consideration of the bill h.r. 4901 to re-authorize the scholarships for opportunity and results act and information other purposes. and house joint resolution 88, disapproving the rule submitted by the department of labor relating to the definition of the term fiduciary. and to may 9, 2016. the speaker pro tempore: referred to the house calendar and ordered printed. the chair will now entertain requests for one-minute peeches. for what purpose does the gentleman from texas seek recognition?

mr. poe: permission to address the house -- mr. speaker, the house is not in order but i request permission to address the house for one minute and revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is correct. the house will be in order. the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. poe: targeted, bullied and terrorized. these are the words that bonnie ott used to talk about her peace corps and another sexually assaulted, scott was dismissed. interesting. this is not the first time we have heard of these actions. in 2015. a report was found -- a report found one in four victims. half of the victims do not report their attacks and many

state they were blamed by the peace corps. ven though congress has passed the act of 2011, the peace corps as work to do to protect these amazing ambassadors abroad. this these are the best america has and these volunteers must know that america will protect them overseas. america will stand by them and not abandon them and if a crime is committed, they need to know the crime is not their fault but the fault of the perpetrator. and that's just the way it is. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlewoman from texas seek recognition? ms. jackson lee: i was detained with a meeting off campus at the white house and i would like to i ask unanimous consent to place it appropriately in the record,

for the waters amendment, i ould have voted eye and for s. 1890, i would have voted aye. i ask respectfully to have my votes placed in the record and i ask unanimous consent. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. the gentlewoman's statement will appear in the record. are there any further one-minute requests? or what purpose does -- for what purpose does the gentlewoman from new mexico seek recognition? >> request unanimous consent to

address the house. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. >> mr. speaker, i rise today to recognize april 30 as [speaking spanish] celebrating young americans. this serves to celebrate the importance of young children. when translated means day of the children helps bring hispanic families nationwide to recognize the importance of literacy. recognizing this day highlights the growing presence of hispanic youth and the lasting impact of hispanic impact on the cultural fabric of this nation. this important holiday is celebrated by numerous countries and more than 130 cities across the united states. in order to support the cities,

counties and states and communities that already i will introduce a resolution to recognize april 30 as [speaking spanish] celebrating young americans. day. ognize the and i urge my colleagues to support this important holiday and co-sponsor my resolution as april 30 as celebrating young americans. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the chair lays before the house the following personal requests. the clerk: leaves of request requested for mrs. lawrence of april 26 and 27. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. the request is granted. under the speaker's announced

policy of january 6, 2015, mr. oh hoe is -- yoho is recognized as the designee. mr. yoho: i would like to rehe questions that members have five dditional days to put in extraneous material. and i know they are running on a tight schedule. with that in mind i would like to recognize the gentlelady from washington state whose bold leadership and kindness make her one of this greatest leaders and i thank her for the unauthorizing spending accountability act that is a vitally important piece of legislation that will go a long way to eliminate federal programs that have not been

authorized but come in to receive appropriations and i'm a proud co-sponsor of this legislation and encourage the house to support it and with that i yield five minutes to chairman kathy mcmorris rod grers from the state of washington. mrs. mcmorris rodgers: this is a very important discussion and goes to what is foundational about america and authority that rests in congress. so looking forward to this special order and hoping we will continue this discussion in the weeks ahead. but a big thank you to the the gentleman from florida for his leadership in bringing us all together. in the fall of 2014, this was right after the ice bucket challenge, gill gleason who is a mom in my district and she was

almost in tears, the centers for medicare and medicaid was proposing new rules, new regulations that would take away the important commoun occasion device for those who lost their ability to speak and affecting a.l.s. patients. her son is a football player, football star and she came to me in desperation because c.m.s. rules were going to take away his communication device. and this is one of many examples where bureaucrats, arrogant and unaccountable are making rules and regulations outside of the congress, outside of the vote and the approval of the elective representatives. i think about the veterans administration. this is an agency that is dedicated to our veterans and so

often our veterans feel they get lost and instead of having the red carpet treatment they feel like they are given the run-around. they have to wait weeks and weeks to schedule a doctor's appointment. the f.d.a. came out with new rules that for a pizza restaurant would require them to somehow disclose the 34 million combinations of pizza. land management, environmental regulations, threatening to regulate every mud puddle in america and the list goes on and on. our founding fathers envisioned our three branches of government. very important. the judicial branch and legislative branch and executive branch, very important roles. no one person was going to be

making all of the decisions. and the reason why people are so frustrated today is because of 1600 pennsylvania. he has been delegitimizing and our roles, too often, we feel like we are bystanders as more and more rules and regulations are generated outside of our input and outside of our approval. it's interesting to note that the capitol, the congress is really the center of washington . s -- washington, d.c., and all other roads would lead to a side street. how did we go so far between what our body is so closest to the people. how do we restore people s'

trust, the branch elected by them? . at the start is article 1 of the constitution. restore the decisionmaking that belongs in the house and the senate with the elected representatives of the people. there's many ideas out there to restore the balance of powers, but i wanted to focus on one in particular. a way that we can be positive disruptors, challenge the status quo, take back the power of the purse and get the federal government off of autopilot. and that's by tackling what we refer to as unauthorized spending. there are hundreds of programs and departments that have stayed on the books despite the fact that their deadlines have come and gone. i'd like to refer to them as zombie government programs, potentially living beyond their intended life span because they haven't been authorized in years and sometimes decades. for example, the v.a. hasn't been authorized since 1996.

b.l.m. hasn't been authorized since 1998. other agencies, the federal elections commission, there's a long list. it's estimated that over $300 billion in spending is in these unauthorized programs. if the elected representatives committed to doing our jobs, reviewing, rethinking, possibly eliminating these programs if they exceeded their life, the people would be well-served. i introduced the unauthorized spending accountability act, to require these expired zombie programs to be renewed, to hold the bureaucrats accountable that have become disconnected from their mission. programs and agencies should not receive taxpayer funding unless the people's representatives, their voices in government have authorized them to do so. the demands on families, on businesses, on institutions have changed. in some ways, the only place

that hasn't changed is congress. we need to rethink government from the top-down, restore the power of the purse. article 1 is just as relevant today as it was at the founding of our country. our founders recognized that every individual is made in the image of god. we celebrate the potential of every individual, and our laws must reflect the will of the people. this is the genius of america, and i yield back. mr. yoho: i'd like to thank the lady from washington for the great words that you said in preserving our constitution and the work that you're doing to bring article 1 powers back to the house. you know, we get blamed a lot for the dysfunction in this country about what this body is not doing, and, you know, you're so right in bringing that power here so i thank you for your leadership on that. at this time, mr. speaker, i'd like to yield approximately one minute to a stall wart from the great state of -- stalwart from the great state of utah that is leading a charge in making --

and making quite a name for herself, mrs. mia love. ms. lofgren: i'm so -- mrs. love: i'm working on a project called the article 1 project, trying to restore power back to the united states congress. i rise on behalf of all the utahans in my home who expressed frustration with our regulatory state. for decades, congress has delegated many responsibilities to executive agencies. as a result, unelected and unaccountable agencies have impacted american lives, more than the decisions of their elected officials. in this congress, for example, 146 bills have been signed into law after going through the house and the senate. meanwhile, 3,378 rules and regulations were finalized last year alone, joining thousands of others that ultimately cost the american economy $4 trillion a year.

our constitution is designed to preserve individual liberty, but this government instead seeks to increase bureaucratic influence. the american people deserve better. they deserve representatives of their choosing, who are in power to make decisions. they also deserve to know that if those representatives fail they can hold them accountable and bring about change. at the end of the day, that's what restoring constitutional power is about, giving the american people a voice and for that, that cause especially, i am proud to fight for. thank you. mr. yoho: and i thank the young lady from utah and i appreciate the work you're doing and keep it up. we only have a nation to save. mr. speaker, the united states constitution is the supreme law of the united states of america. ours is the shortest constitution in existence and the longest serving, 227 years since its ratification in 1789. our founders can have many things said of them but one

thing we can all agree on through divine guidance they got it near to perfection as a document can be. our constitution has created the freest, the largest middle class, the most successful country on the planet, and for the first time in recorded history, allowed people to become self-determining. it has allowed for personal freedoms never before seen in human history. rights s us unalienable of being life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. it allows for personal property rights. these are the things that allows a republic as ours to flourish, for ideas to be created and expanded upon. because it allows for the possibilities of that unlimited potential inside each and every human on the planet. it's our constitution that allows for the way of life we have that others will risk everything, including life, to have a chance at freedom. so it is a document worth

protecting, preserving. it's a document that should be revered by all so we can pass it on to our future, future generations and for the prosperity and good fortune that we inherited by us, this generation. and it's been paid for, that price that's been paid for came from the blood, sweat and tears of our founders and the people that came before us but also every military person, including their spouses and family and each and every member of congress takes an oath and a pledge to uphold our constitution. article 1, section 1, reads -- all legislative powers herein granted shall be vested in a congress of the united states which shall consist of a senate and a house of representatives. article 1, section 8, powers list clearly the powers that we have and they go on and list the powers that congress has to collect taxes, provide for the

common defense, to regulate commerce, to establish a uniform rule of naturalization and it ends up in section 8, to make all laws necessary for carrying into execution the forgoing powers. all other powers vested by this constitution and the government in the united states are in the department of -- or officers thereof. article 2, section 3, reads -- the president's responsibility as deline ated in article 2, section 3, is this -- the president is to see that the laws are faithfully executed. i want to take that back -- repeat that. the president is to see that the laws are faithfully executed. this is called the take care clause. i've only spent three years here, but in that time we've watched this body work to rein in, not just the executive branch, but the administrative agencies multiple times. you know, we sued the president

and won two times in the supreme court. we've had fights over the power of the purse. we've had supreme court fights, whether it's dealing with immigration laws and rules or not enforcing the laws on the book. we have fought the president just on enforcing the laws that are already on the book. we don't need any more laws. we need to follow the ones we have. it's not just this administration. it's previous administrations. i fear where we're going in this next election, if we don't get our house in order if we don't bring article 1 powers back to this house, at that point when we overstep the boundaries of our constitution by an executive branch or by administrative agencies, it's too late to try to reel them in and so now it's urgent to do it. to put it off any longer would be buying fire insurance for your house after your house catches on fire. it's too late. in addition, as i talked about, we fought overstepping

out-of-control federal agencies that are wreaking havoc on american businesses and costing every american, according to the c.b.o. estimates, of approximately $14,500. if i look at the administration and the rules and regulations that have come out since 1999 to 2008, there's been pproximately 750 regulations -- rules that have come out. from 2009 to 2015, there's been over 530 rules coming out just from the obama administration. and if i look at the final rules issued just under george w. bush, rules and regulations, that amount was 2,430. when i look at president obama, rules and regulations, to date -- and we're only four months into his last year of term -- to date the obama administration has had over

28,000 rules and regulations coming out that are strangling and suffocating american businesses paid for by the american taxpayers. i recently introduced house resolution 693 that asks for a permanent select committee to investigate, not just this executive branch, but all future ones so we can have in place a vehicle to rein in an overstepping administration, and i've got -- i want to yield for as much time that he may need a colleague of mine, a classmate of mine from the state of texas, who has co-sponsored h.r. 693, mr. randy weber, and i appreciate your work on this important topic. mr. weber: well, thank you to my friend from florida, mr. yoho, for introducing h.res. 693. mr. speaker, as of yesterday,

the obama presidency is 90% over. so let's do a quick recap of just what has happened these past 7 1/2 years. first, the president has violated the constitution by unilaterally changing sections of the affordable care act at least 23 times without congressional approval. that's public law 111-148. even though he probably said on 20-some occasions he didn't have constitutional authority to do things, he still did it. number two, the president and the department of justice were in direct violation of their constitutional responsibility in defending the defense of marriage act, which is public law 104-199. the president and his department of justice continue to choose not to enforce federal drug laws, public law

91-513, the control substances act. and public law 106-90, the anti-drug abuse act of 1986. the president violated the constitution by making presidential appointments to the national labor relations board and the consumer financial protection bureau while congress was not in session. so declared by him. now, i read the constitution, mr. speaker. only the senate majority leader can decide when the senate's in session, not the president, and i might add, the president was slapped down by the supreme court 9-0. further, the president and the department of injustice abused executive privilege in the operation fast and furious scandal. by refusing to comply with the subpoena issued by the committee on oversight and government reform of the united states house of representatives , thereby violating section 192 of title 2 of the u.s. code. the president has violated the

law by unilaterally changing our nation's immigration laws with regards to deferred action, giving illegal aliens access to government programs and tax credits funded by our constituents, which is in controvention to our constitution. the president and the department of health and human services failed to enforce federal law, public law 111-5, by illegally waiving the work requirements for well fair recipientses -- welfare recipients. they have violated the first amendment to the united states constitution by targeted nonprofit organizations because of their religious or political beliefs. the president and the department of defense knowingly violated the national defense authorization act, ndaa, of 2014 by not providing a 30-day notice to congress prior to transporting five guantanamo

detainees to qatar in a prisoner swap. they got, some would say in military terms, the terrorists got five nuclear weapons and we got one conventional weapon which turned out to be a dud. the president and his the president and administration moved forward with their plan to close the guantanamo detention facility and move detainees. by the way, did you know that one out of three prisoners released rejoined their terrorist organizations and wind up at the front line seeking to kill more americans. folks, it is the duty of the legislative branch to write and pass laws. the judicial branch to interpret those laws. and the executive branch's duty to enforce those same laws. the very success of our form of government comes from this simple balance of powers. this critically