Providing for Consideration of H.R. Iranian Leadership Asset Transparency Act

Floor Speech

(Mr. McGOVERN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Woodall) for the customary 30 minutes.

With all that we have to do, I can't believe we are here doing this; nonetheless, here we are today, considering H.R. 5461, the so-called Iranian Leadership Asset Transparency Act.

This bill would require the Secretary of the Treasury to report to Congress and post online the estimated total assets under the direct or indirect control of certain senior Iranian leaders and other figures, along with a description of how these assets were acquired and are employed, regardless of whether said figures are subject to U.S. sanctions.

The fact is that this bill--and let's be clear about it--is nothing more than another attempt by Republicans to undermine the historic agreement the United States worked so hard to achieve to prevent Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons. Preventing Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons is a big deal. I am sorry my colleagues on the other side of the aisle don't share that view, but it is a big deal. The world will be safer with a nuclear-free Iran.

Last July, the United States, the United Kingdom, France, Russia, China, Germany--the P5+1--and Iran agreed to the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, which required Iran to abandon its nuclear program in exchange for U.S., EU, and U.N. sanctions being lifted. The agreement officially came into effect on October 18, 2015. U.S. nuclear-related sanctions were lifted on January 16, 2016, after the International Atomic Energy Agency verified that Iran implemented its key nuclear- related measures described in the agreement and the Secretary of State confirmed the IAEA's verification.

Since the implementation of the agreement, Republicans have repeatedly tried to create the impression of numerous scandals surrounding Iran and of supposed violations of the agreement; but the reality is that the agreement has, so far, prevented Iran from developing a nuclear arsenal. While we will continue to counter Iran's hostile activities in the region, we will not undermine the JCPOA.

H.R. 5461 would absolutely do nothing to increase transparency within the Iranian financial industry. Rather, this bill would cause confusion regarding compliance obligations, deter non-U.S. banks from reengaging with legitimate Iranian business, and undermine the letter and spirit of the nuclear agreement the United States worked so hard to achieve.

Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record the Statement of Administration Policy, which basically ends with this statement, that if the President were presented with this bill, his senior advisers would recommend that he veto this bill. Statement of Administration Policy H.R. 5461--Iranian Leadership Asset Transparency Act--Rep. Poliquin, R- ME, and one cosponsor

The Administration shares the Congress' goals of increasing transparency and bringing Iran into compliance with international standards in the global fight against terror finance and money laundering. However, this bill would be counterproductive toward those shared goals.

The bill requires the U.S. Government to publicly report all assets held by some of Iran's highest leaders and to describe how these assets are acquired and used. Rather than preventing terrorist financing and money laundering, this bill would incentivize those involved to make their financial dealings less transparent and create a disincentive for Iran's banking sector to demonstrate transparency. These onerous reporting requirements also would take critical resources away from the U.S. Department of the Treasury's important work to identify Iranian entities engaged in sanctionable conduct. Producing this information could also compromise intelligence sources and methods.

One of our best tools for impeding destabilizing Iranian activities has been to identify Iranian companies that are controlled by the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC) or other Iranians on the list of Specially Designated Nationals and Blocked Persons (SDN List) to non-U.S. businesses, so that they can block assets or stop material transfers. This process is labor-intensive and requires the judicious use of our national intelligence assets. Redirecting these assets to preparing this onerous public report would be counterproductive and will not reduce institutional corruption or promote transparency within Iran's system.

In addition, this bill's required public postings also may be perceived by Iran and likely our Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) partners as an attempt to undermine the fulfillment of our commitments, in turn impacting the continued viability of this diplomatic arrangement that peacefully and verifiably prevents Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon. If the JCPOA were to fail on that basis, it would remove the unprecedented constraints on and monitoring of Iran's nuclear program, lead to the unraveling of the international sanctions regime against Iran, and deal a devastating blow to the credibility of America's leadership and our commitments to our closest allies.

As we address our concerns with Iran's nuclear program through implementation of the JCPOA, the Administration remains clear-eyed regarding Iran's support for terrorism, its ballistic missile program, human rights abuses, and destabilizing activity in the region. The United States should retain all of the tools needed to counter this activity, ranging from powerful sanctions to our efforts to disrupt and interdict illicit shipments of weapons and proliferation-sensitive technologies. This bill would adversely affect the U.S. Government's ability to wield these tools, would undermine the very goals it purports to achieve, and could even endanger our ability to ensure that Iran's nuclear program is and remains exclusively peaceful.

If the President were presented with H.R. 5461, his senior advisors would recommend that he veto this bill.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, this bill is going nowhere. Quite frankly, I think it is an insult to the American people that we are bringing up more and more bills that are going nowhere when we have so much here to do. Congress has roughly a week before we recess again, and instead of focusing on passing a bipartisan bill to actually fund the government, House Republicans are wasting more time with partisan bills like this, and it really is quite unfortunate.

But, since Republicans want to talk about transparency so much, let's talk about the transparency--or the total lack of transparency--of their Presidential nominee, Donald Trump. I have got to tell you that I have been doing this a long time, and I think it is safe to say that Donald Trump's lack of transparency would make Richard Nixon blush.

For 40 years, America's major party nominees have publicly released their tax returns, a simple and basic disclosure made to the American people to help them choose which candidate is best fit to be our next President. Donald Trump, the nominee of the party that is telling us today that they care so much about transparency, has repeatedly refused to release his tax returns. This comes even after he promised in 2014 that he ``absolutely''--and I say that in quotes--would release them if he ran for President.

Let's be honest. In this House of Representatives, if Hillary Clinton refused to release her tax returns, there would be an outcry like you have never heard from my Republican friends. There would be calls for hearings and resolutions and probably even a vote to impeach her retroactively once she was elected. We all know that. But, on Donald Trump's lack of transparency--the guy who wants to be President of the United States--they are silent.

The secrecy and the lack of transparency doesn't stop with Donald Trump's tax returns. This month, Newsweek reported on how Donald Trump's extensive financial dealings overseas would pose an unprecedented conflict of interest that could threaten our national security and global interests.

In the article, they write:

Never before has a business posed such a threat to the United States. If Donald Trump wins this election and his company is not immediately shut down or forever severed from the entire Trump family, the foreign policy of the United States of America could well be for sale.

The Trump Organization has hundreds of business dealings involving more than a dozen countries on five continents, including Russia, India, Turkey, Libya, China, and South Korea. Newsweek warns that, as long as The Trump Organization remains open, foreign governments and businesses would be able to funnel money directly into the pockets of Trump and his family. That means American foreign policy would be literally for sale. It is a situation unlike anything we have ever seen in American history.

For example, Trump's business deals could motivate him to abandon NATO allies like Turkey and important Asian allies like South Korea. His deals in Azerbaijan could force him to alter his position on Iran or undermine U.S. relations with Armenia. His deals in India could influence his position over longstanding conflicts with Pakistan--in a volatile subcontinent where both nations have nuclear weapons.

When it comes to Russia, there are concerns about Trump's heaping praise and praise and praise on an increasingly hostile foreign leader, Russian President Vladimir Putin, at the same time his company is seeking business opportunities in Russia and how that conflict of interest could evolve if Trump were President of the United States.

Newsweek also reports that the friction caused by Trump's business dealings could jeopardize relationships with our allies like Turkey in the fight against ISIS. Additionally, one of Trump's business partners is a South Korean company that is involved in nuclear energy, which makes you wonder if that is why he suggested South Korea should have nuclear weapons.

So, if you want to talk about transparency and if you are worried about conflicts of interest and corruption, you ought to demand that the nominee of your party come clean with the American people. You ought to demand that he release his tax returns, that he make it clear that he would end all of his business ties if, God forbid, he would become President of the United States, which is something that, I hope, we never, ever get close to.

The bottom line is that that is something that is real and is right before us, and, quite frankly, we ought to be doing more about it. We shouldn't be wasting the American people's time with more partisan messaging bills that claim to be about transparency--bills that are going absolutely nowhere. We should focus on passing a bipartisan funding bill that keeps this government open and that takes real action to combat the very real Zika virus and other public health crises that Americans are actually confronting.

I urge the Members of both parties to defeat this rule and get back to work on real issues that actually matter in the lives of the people whom we represent.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I would just inform the gentleman that we have one additional speaker who says he is on his way.

I would just respond to the gentleman that the reason why the administration wants to veto this bill has nothing to do with the fact that they aren't concerned about Iran's role in promoting terrorist organizations around the world or being involved in very bad behavior.

I think they are opposed to this bill because they don't think it is worth anything; that it is not going to work. In fact, rather than preventing terrorist financing and money laundering, this bill would actually incentivize those affected to make their financial dealings less transparent and create a disincentive for Iran's banking sector to demonstrate transparency.

Look, we are all talking about this like this is all on the level. The real deal is that my friends on the other side are upset that the President of the United States negotiated a deal with Iran that prevents them from getting a nuclear weapon. So we see a multitude of bills like this coming to the floor.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to defeat the previous question. And if we defeat the previous question, I will offer an amendment to the rule to bring up legislation that would expand the Department of Homeland Security's presence overseas.

Mr. Speaker, this legislation would strengthen DHS's operations by authorizing and expanding Department of Homeland Security, Customs and Border Protection, and Immigration and Customs Enforcement programs that vet and screen individuals before they enter the United States. It would add an additional 2,000 Customs and Border Protection officers for overseas and domestic operations.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, to discuss our proposal, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Thompson), the distinguished ranking member of the Committee on Homeland Security.

I would ask my colleagues respectfully to support us in our effort to defeat the previous question so we can bring up the legislation that Mr. Thompson mentioned, legislation that would strengthen the Department of Homeland Security's overseas screening and vetting programs.

I would like to think that even though Democrats and Republicans don't always agree on everything, we can agree on something and that this is something that we ought to be able to agree on, and hopefully we will be able to have a vote on it.

Again, I regret that we are bringing up a bill that, again, is another attempt to try to undermine the deal that we have brokered with other nations around the world to prevent Iran from becoming a nuclear power, but here we are yet with another bill. The President is going to veto it. We can continue to debate the merits, but it is kind of a waste of time.

Again, I would hope my colleagues would vote ``no'' on the rule and vote ``no'' on the bill if we are presented with it.

I would just say one final thing to my friend from Tennessee (Mr. Duncan), who I have a great deal of respect for: The deal is that Mr. Trump is the first nominee, I think, that I can recall, who has not released his taxes. Secretary Clinton has released years and years and years of her taxes. We know more about Secretary Clinton than we know about any other nominee, I think, in history.

I have always kind of wondered why Mr. Trump says some of the things he says, which, quite frankly, I sometimes find unbelievable, some of the comments on foreign policy. But when you look at his financial interests and his investments in these various countries, you can kind of understand why he defends dictators, why he never mentions the words ``human rights,'' why he says some of the things he says about urging other countries to become nuclear powers when we should all be talking about how we control nuclear weapons in this country.

If we are worried about transparency and you are worried about conflicts of interest, and if we are truly worried about corruption, now is the time, I would urge my friends on the other side of the aisle, to tell the nominee of your party to come clean. There are so many tangled webs in The Trump Organization, so many financial ties to things that, quite frankly, should give every one of us concern. I don't know what the problem is about a little sunshine.

Like I said in the beginning, if Secretary Clinton did not release her tax returns, there would be calls for hearings and resolutions and there would be Special Orders, and it would go on and on and on; yet, with regard to their nominee, it is okay for him to withhold all this information from the American people. I think that is unfortunate.

So if we are talking about transparency here today and if we are worried about corruption and if we are worried about conflicts of interest, there is that old saying, ``Physician, heal thyself.'' I would urge my Republican colleagues to hold their nominee, hold their standard-bearer to a higher standard when it comes to transparency.

Mr. Speaker, I urge defeat of the previous question, and I yield back the balance of my time.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

The yeas and nays were ordered.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source