Corporate Transparency Act of 2019

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. DAVIDSON of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I have a motion to recommit at the desk.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. DAVIDSON of Ohio. I am in its current form.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. DAVIDSON of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, this motion to recommit is about defending freedom. Civil liberties have historically united this great body.

Do any of my colleagues, regardless of party affiliation, really want law enforcement to access the data of small business owners and farmers without cause and without a warrant or subpoena?

Surely, this bill's sponsor would like to see these provisions restored to the current version of the bill so that due process and privacy rights of everyday Americans are protected.

Let's reiterate what this bill, H.R. 2513, does. This bill subjects small business owners, the smallest, 20 or fewer employees, to criminal penalties up to $10,000 in fines or 3 years in prison.

This bill creates yet another Federal Government database containing personally identifiable information of private U.S. citizens. This one collects the addresses and driver's license numbers of owners of legal and legitimate business operations.

A little-known Federal agency, FinCen, and law enforcement will have unbridled access to the database, which has fewer protections than any other existing Federal surveillance programs.

This motion to recommit is a commonsense proposal to require a subpoena so that Federal law enforcement officials do not query the sensitive information of American citizens without cause. The majority should not be opposed to this motion. Treasury already requires similar reporting of beneficial ownership information by banks through the Customer Due Diligence rule, and under the CDD rule, law enforcement must obtain a subpoena.

In fact, the version of the Corporate Transparency Act introduced in the 115th Congress, sponsored by the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Carolyn B. Maloney), only allowed disclosure to federal law enforcement agencies if it had a subpoena, but this language has now been dropped from the bill.

I question why this iteration of the bill would remove the subpoena requirement and why Democratic leadership would reject this amendment when I offered it at the Rules Committee.

On October 8, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court published its previously classified opinion detailing systemic abuses of the FISA program. Federal law enforcement officials at the FBI have improperly queried Section 702 FISA databases to spy on innocent Americans.

This abhorrent behavior violates the privacy rights of American citizens. Collectively, we must ensure that this database is safeguarded from any bad actor, including unauthorized access by Federal employees.

In light of these existing FISA abuses, it is imperative that Congress take steps to restore privacy protections for all Americans.

Starting with more robust safeguards in this bill is a great first step. After all, this bill will require the smallest businesses to file beneficial ownership information with FinCen, creating an estimated 30 to 40 million new filings each year. That is a really big database full of valuable information.

This motion to recommit ensures due process and gives farmers and small business owners confidence that their constitutionally protected right to privacy is not violated.

Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. DAVIDSON of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.

A recorded vote was ordered.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. DAVIDSON of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

The yeas and nays were ordered.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source