THE DAILY WHIP: WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 14, 2015

Complete Consideration of H.R. 240 – Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act, 2015 (Rep. Rogers (KY) – Appropriations). This bill funds the accounts under the Appropriations Homeland Security Subcommittee for the remainder of FY2015. It would provide $39.7 billion in discretionary funding for the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), an increase of $400 million above the FY2014 enacted level, including $10.7 billion for Customs and Border Protection (CBP), $5.96 billion for Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), $4.8 billion for the Transportation Security Administration (TSA), $10 billion for the Coast Guard, $4.35 billion for the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and $1.7 billion for the Secret Service.

However, as has all too often been the case, House Republicans are using must-pass legislation to advance their extreme agenda. This Appropriations package is being brought to the Floor with poison-pill amendments, as a direct attempt to override President Obama’s executive action in November to address our broken immigration system. President Obama’s actions provide smarter enforcement at the border, prioritize deporting felons—not families—and allow certain undocumented immigrants, including the parents of U.S. citizens and lawful residents, who pass a criminal background check and pay taxes to temporarily stay in the U.S. without fear of deportation. By deciding to attach these poison-pill amendments to the Homeland Security Appropriations bill, House Republicans are showing once more—just one week into the 114th Congress—that they are not serious about governing.

Lastly, in the Statement of Administration Policy, the President's senior advisors stated that they would recommend a veto of the bill if it included these objectionable restrictions.  Members are urged to VOTE NO on final passage if either or both the Aderholt/Mulvaney/Barletta Amendment and Blackburn Amendment are adopted.

The Rule, which was adopted yesterday, provides for no further general debate and makes in order 4 amendments, debatable for 10 minutes, and one amendment, offered by Rep. Aderholt, debatable for 20 minutes, equally divided between the offeror and an opponent.  The amendments are:

Aderholt/Mulvaney/Barletta Amendment. This amendment would prohibit the use of funds to carry out (1) all but one of President Obama’s executive actions announced on November 20, 2014, including the memorandum that expands the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) initiative and establishes a new Deferred Action for Parental Accountability (DAPA) initiative to grant deferred action to certain undocumented immigrants, and (2) four of the “Morton Memos” on prosecutorial discretion and immigration enforcement priorities issued in 2011 and 2012 that have effectively prevented certain classes of illegal immigrants from being removed from the country. The amendment also provides that no funds may be used to carry out any substantially similar policies to those defunded and that no funds may be used to grant any Federal benefit to any immigrant as a result of the policies defunded. The only executive action this amendment leaves in place pertains to pay increases and workforce realignment for Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officers.

With respect to the November 20, 2014, announcements, the amendment would prohibit U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) from using fees that it collects to (1) implement the DAPA initiative, which offers temporary protection from deportation and employment authorization to certain parents of U.S. citizens or lawful permanent residents, or (2) expand the DACA program to remove the age cap and extend protection to young people brought to the country prior to January 1, 2010.

Beyond DACA and DAPA, the amendment would prohibit the use of funds to carry out memoranda designed to, among other things, strengthen border security, promote existing pathways in law for persons to obtain green cards and citizenship, spur entrepreneurship, better integrate immigrants and refugees into our communities, and enhance public safety. Members are urged to VOTE NO.

Blackburn Amendment. This amendment would prohibit the use of funds to consider new, renewal or previously denied DACA applications. The amendment would strip protection from hundreds of thousands of young people who already have come forward, passed background checks, obtained temporary protection through DACA, and have led law-abiding lives. It is further designed to prevent the President from building upon the DACA program or offering protection to other young people who might not qualify under the program’s rules right now. It would lead to the deportation of the hundreds of thousands of “DREAMers” who already came forward and received DACA protection. Members are urged to VOTE NO.

DeSantis/Roby Amendment. This amendment would prevent the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) from implementing any immigration enforcement policy that fails to make every non-citizen who has been convicted of certain sex offenses and domestic violence the highest priority for enforcement.  The amendment is unnecessary, because existing policies already make such criminals high priorities for enforcement and bar them from deferred action under DAPA and DACA.  The National Task Force to End Sexual and Domestic Violence, the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, the American Immigration Lawyers Association, and more than a dozen sheriffs and police chiefs oppose the amendment because it would also endanger victims of domestic violence by overturning the DHS policy requiring inquiry into whether a person convicted of misdemeanor domestic violence offense was actually the victim of that crime.

Salmon/Thompson (PA) Amendment. This amendment expresses the Sense of Congress that the Administration should not pursue policies that disadvantage the hiring of U.S. citizens and those lawfully present in the U.S. by making it economically advantageous to hire workers who qualify for deferred action. The amendment incorrectly suggests that employers may be incentivized to give hiring preference to individuals who qualify for deferred action because they are not eligible for premium subsidies under the Affordable Care Act (ACA). In fact, all full-time employees, regardless of immigration status, are counted as an “employee” in determining whether and how much an employer owes in penalties for failure to meet the health care coverage obligation under the ACA‎.

Schock Amendment. This amendment expresses the Sense of Congress that the Administration should adjudicate petitions of individuals in lawful status before adjudicating petitions of individuals in unlawful status.  It is based on the false assumption that because wait times for some legal immigration categories increased due to the adjudication of DACA applications, further delays will result from the implementation of DAPA.  The amendment ignores the fact that USCIS is hiring many new adjudicators to process these applications, so the processing of deferred action applications is not expected to slow the processing of legal immigration petitions.  Moreover, the amendment sweeps far too broadly and would interfere with the adjudication of many other applications filed by persons in unlawful status, including asylum applications, U visa and T visa applications by victims of serious crimes and sex trafficking, and green card applications by the spouses of U.S. citizens and victims of domestic violence entitled to relief under the Violence Against Women Act.

Bill Text for H.R. 240:
PDF Version

Background for H.R. 240:
CRS Report: Department of Homeland Security: FY2015 Appropriations

Complete Consideration of H.R. 37– Promoting Job Creation and Reducing Small Business Burdens Act (Rep. Fitzpatrick – Financial Services/ Agriculture). This bill is a combination of eleven bills, most of which were passed as standalone measures (both in the Financial Services Committee and on the House Floor) last Congress and one new provision which alters Dodd-Frank’s Volcker Rule.

Title I (H.R. 634 last Congress) would provide an exemption for nonfinancial end-users (e.g., airlines) from posting margin.  This bill passed the House on suspension of the rules last year and was included in last week’s TRIA reauthorization.

Title II (H.R. 547 last Congress) would provide an exemption from clearing for a company's (e.g., GM, GE, Caterpillar) central treasury unit when the swap is used to hedge the company's commercial risk and not for speculative purposes. This bill passed the House last Congress by voice vote.

Title III (H.R. 801 last Congress) would allow for thrift holding companies to use the SEC-shareholder registration and deregistration contained in Title VI of the JOBS Act as banks do. This bill passed the House last Congress by a vote of 417-4.

Title IV (H.R. 2274 last Congress) would exempt certain “merger and acquisition brokers” (brokers who facilitate mergers, acquisitions, business sales and business combinations on behalf of buyers and sellers of privately-held companies, such as restaurants) from SEC registration if they meet specified criteria. This bill unanimously passed the Financial Services Committee last Congress. However, since that Committee vote, the SEC took a regulatory action that made this bill unnecessary.

Title V (HR 742 last Congress) would remove the Dodd-Frank requirement that either the swap data repository (SDR) or primary regulator (e.g., CFTC) be indemnified prior to sharing data with other regulators, foreign or domestic. Foreign regulators have written several letters expressing strong concerns that current requirements that a foreign regulator indemnify the CFTC or SDR could result in retaliatory actions taken against the US by foreign jurisdictions and diminish swap data sharing across jurisdictions. This bill passed the House last Congress by a vote of 420-2.

Title VI (H.R. 3623 last Congress) would broaden some of the federal reporting exemptions available to “emerging growth company” contained in Title I of the JOBS Act. An “emerging growth company” is one that has issued or proposes to issue stock and had gross revenues of less than $1 billion during its most recently completed fiscal year.  The bill unanimously passed the Financial Services Committee last Congress.

Title VII (H.R. 4164 last Congress) would exempt small companies (75% of all public companies) from the SEC mandate to use a computer program mandated called xBRL (eXtensible Business Reporting Language), a computerized format for filing financial statements with the SEC. This bill passed Financial Services Committee in the last Congress by a vote of 51-5.

Title VIII is a new which provision which amends Dodd-Frank’s Volker Rule. It would give banks an additional 2 year extension, on top of the three year delay provided by the regulators in December, until 2019 to divest of collateralized loan obligations (CLO) issued before January 31, 2014. 

Title IX (H.R. 4200 last Congress) would exempt advisers to a “Small Business Investment Company” from SEC registration as investment advisers.  The bill unanimously passed the Financial Services Committee last Congress.

Title X (H.R. 4569 last Congress) would require the SEC to simplify disclosures for public companies. The bill unanimously passed the Financial Services Committee last Congress.

Title XI (H.R. 4571 last Congress) would modify SEC Rule 701, allowing private companies to compensate their employees up to $20 million in company securities (currently it is capped at $5 million) without having to provide the employees certain basic financial disclosures about the company.  The bill passed the Financial Services Committee last Congress on a mostly party-line vote.

This package is the same legislation that failed under suspension of the Rules on January 7th. In the Statement of Administration Policy, the President's senior advisors stated that they would recommend a veto of the bill.

As of last night, the House had completed all general debate. Today, the House will consider the motion to recommit and vote on passage of H.R. 37.

Bill Text for H.R. 37:
PDF Version

Background for H.R. 37:
CRS Report: Congress Contemplates Extending Volcker Rule Conformance Period for CLO Investments