the speaker pro tempore: on this vote the yeas are 242 and the nays are 180.

the speaker pro tempore: on this vote the yeas are 243 and the nays are 182. one voting present. the previous question is ordered. the question is on adoption to the resolution. those in favor of the resolution say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes -- >> i ask for a recorded vote. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas has asked for a recorded vote. all those in favor of taking this vote by the yeas and nays will rise and remain standing until counted. a sufficient number having arisen, a recorded vote is ordered. 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 yeas are 237. the nays are 189. the resolution is adopted. without objection, the motion to reconsider is laid on the table. for what purpose. -- the house will be in order. the house will please come to order.

will members please clear the well? for what purpose does the gentleman from pennsylvania rise? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for a minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. >> thank you, madam speaker. as you know last night was the 49th annual roll call baseball game, and i'm happy to announce to the house today that that score has been settled this year and the democrats were victorious 13-6. mr. doyle: of course, the biggest winners last night were

our two charities, the national literacy council and the boys and girls club of washington, d.c. the final numbers aren't in as donations are still coming in, but we've gone over the $150,000 mark for our charities last night. i want to commend our republican team for a hard-fought game. they gave us a tough game right up until the last inning and kept all the fans in their seats until the very end. we had a couple outstanding plays on the democratic side. all of us woke up with great chagrin this morning to watch espn's top 10 and see anthony weiner as number nine top 10 -- and also some outstanding leading from steve driehaus. but the m.v.p.'s on the democratic side were killer bees, joe baca, mr. boccieri

and mr. baird. all had outstanding games. so, madam speaker, once again, the coveted roll call trophy stays blue and i'd like to recognize my good friend, the republican manager, joe barton. mr. barton: madam speaker, there have been those on the other side of the aisle that from time to time have spoken of the ungenerosity and the stinginess and the cold-heartedness of the republicans, but the seventh inning last night should put that to rest forever. we were very generous. every man of the republican mind made some effort in generosity of spirit to drop balls, misplace throws go out of their way to make sure that at least on the diamond the

democrats would feel good. now, we don't want this to go to your head, though, mr. doyle. that trophy is on loan. if you look at wherever the records are kept, if you win the next 20 in a row there will still be more r wins than d wins. mr. doyle: i have to say my friend is living in the past. mr. barton: so in the spirit of the moment, we cannot say that chairman slaughter ran a closed rule out on us. it was an open rule. it was fair competition, and luckily for both sides the real winners, as you said it, the boys and girls club and the washington literacy council. i do want to commend my republican team. i'm very proud of them.

john shimkus pitched his heart out. you know, bill shuster made an almost unassisted double play when he caught the ball and picked somebody off at first base. every member of our team got to play. they all were in good spirits and good fellowship. and we will show up next year with warmth in our hearts and continue this tradition and hopefully with a more pleasureable outcome for our side. -- pleasureable outcome for our side. mr. doyle, you deserved to win. we congratulate you. thank you. mr. doyle: thank you. thank you, madam speaker. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, five-minute voting will continue. the unfinished business is on the vote on the motion of the gentleman from california, mr.

filner, to suspend the rules and pass h.r. 4505 on which the yeas and nays are ordered. the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: h.r. 4505, a bill to enable state homes to furnish nursing home care to parents any of whose children died while serving in the armed forces. 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 yeas are --

the speaker pro tempore: on this vote the yeas are 420, the nays are zero. 2/3 of those voting having responded in the affirmative, the rules are suspended, the bill is passed and without objection the motion to reconsider is laid on the table. the house will come to order. will members please take their conversations off the floor and clear the well. members will please take their conversations out of the well. and members will please take their conversations off the floor.

for what purpose does the gentleman from colorado rise? >> madam speaker, by direction of the committee on rules, i call up house resolution 1490 and ask for its immediate consideration. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the resolution. the clerk: house calendar number 208, house resolution 1490, resolvinged that upon adoption of this resolution it shall be in order to consider the conference report to accompany the bill, h.r. 4173, to provide for financial regulatory reform to protect consumers and investors, to enhance federal understanding of insurance issues, to regulate the over-the-counter derivatives markets and for other purposes. all points of order against the conference report and against its consideration are waived. the conference report shall be

considered as read. the previous question shall be considered as ordered on the conference report to its adoption without intervening motion except, one, two hours of debate, and, two, one motion to recommit if applicable. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from colorado is recognized for one hour. mr. perlmutter: thank you, madam speaker. for purposes of debate only, i yield the customary 30 minutes to my friend from texas, mr. sessions, and i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from colorado is recognized. mr. perlmutter: i also ask unanimous consent that all members be given five legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks on house resolution 1490. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. so ordered. mr. perlmutter: madam speaker, house resolution 1409 provides for consideration -- 1490 provides for consideration of the conference report to h.r. 4173, the dodd-frank wall street reform and consumer protection act. this rule provides for two hours

of debate on the conference report. it waives all points of order and further the rule provides for one motion to recommit with or without instructions. madam speaker, today we will take a historic vote on the most significant reform to our financial industry since the new deal. these comprehensive reforms will reduce threats it to our financial system, increase oversight and prevent future bailouts. the bill strikes a responsible balance, ending the wild west era on wall street while laying a new regulatory foundation for long-term growth which is stable and secure. in the fall of 2008, this country was brought to its knees by a financial crisis, the likes of which i hope we never experience again. a crisis of this magnitude calls for reforms of similar

proportion. many elements on and off wall street contributed to the meltdown and this bill carefully crafts responsible solutions in each area. the bill protects consumers through the creation of a consumer financial protection bureau that will oversee the rule writing for banks and nonbanks and serve as the primary watchdog for consumers. for the very first time, nonbank entities will have federal oversight, a critical element to reining in abusive practices and products. an oversight council is established thunderstorm bill to make certain financial institutions do not become a systemic threat to our economic stability. we establish a process to close and liquidate significant financial institutions so if a failing firm begins to fail it is closed and it will no longer

be too big to fail. this disillusion mechanism ensures main street comes first, not wall street. we deal with hedge funds, credit rating agencies, mortgage reform, executive compensation and investor protection in this bill. we bring these issues out of the shadows and into the light so there is transparency to protect the system. i work -- i work to ensure a study on high frequency trading was included in this bill. as we saw from the flash crash in may, when the dow jones lost nearly 1,000 points in a matter of minutes because of computer error, we need to know the effects of technologically advanced practices such as high frequency trading have on the long-term investor. also transparency will be brought to the derivatives markets. businesses and manufacturers will be able to reduce their own risk wlile protections are put in place -- while protections are put in place for the overall system, providing regulators with a clear picture of the

derivatives market. another important provision in this -- in the house was strengthened in conference, it calls for strong limits on propriety trading or what most are calling the volcker rule. this provision strikes a good balance in banning proprietary trading without disrupting client services and asset management. in other words, banks can no longer gamble with their customers' money. the bill we are considering here today ensures there is no place to hide by closing loopholes, improving consolidated supervision and establishing robust regulatory oversight. i'm proud to stand here with my colleagues today, providing for consideration of a bill making the necessary reforms and establishing robust regulatory oversight. in this bill we protect consumers, taxpayers and depositors. i urge my colleagues to vote in favor of the rule and the underlying bill and with that i reserve the balance of my time.

the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas is recognized. mr. sessions: thank you very much, madam speaker. i want to thank the gentleman from colorado, my friend, for yielding me such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas. mr. sessions: madam speaker, i rise in opposition to this closed rule and the underlying bill. today we're considering a 2,300-page federal takeover of the financial services industry. this happened in health care, it's now happening in financial services. the bill before us today is just one more piece of the democrat majority's agenda to federalize more of the private sector of this country. i hear that as i travel in my district. madam speaker, while it's important to provide consumer safety and security in the marketplace and to minimize the chance of another financial crisis, i oppose this bill. i oppose this bill and the

underlying legislation holds many far-reaching consequences for the american economy and prohibits the ability of business, small and large, to create jobs and spur economic growth. obviously this bill, because it's done by the democrat majority, will be 2,300 pages. obviously, because this democrat majority, it will involve new big government plans, programs and obviously because it's the democrat majority, it will involve more taxes, fees and in fact it's $18 billion worth of new spending through these fees and taxes. in addition to making bailouts perm nenlt, which this bill does do, failing to address the root cause of the crisis and rewarding failed regulators, this democratic solution makes even more difficult for consumers to access credit and for businesses to comply with

overburdensome regulations. just a few minutes ago we heard the story about how republicans want to do nothing, republicans would do nothing because they're opposed to rules and regulations in the marketplace. that's not true. we already have enough rules and regulations in the marketplace. and i do agree, there are some things in here which do add to the safety and soundness features, but in the overall total, it's a bad deal. it's a bad deal for consumers, it's a bad deal for this country, and it certainly is a bad deal for anyone that wants to turn the corner on growing jobs in america. in a let are from the independent bankers association of texas, my -- in a letter from the independent bankers association of texas, any home state, it states, and i quote, this agency will have broad powers to write rules on all bank products and services which we believe will stifle innovation and

entrepreneurship. on long-standing products that have been -- on long standing products that have been offered by financial institutions. this will result in more cost and confusion to consumers and stifle funding in community banks. community banks represent the lifeblood of texas. i know this because i know a number of the banks and the people not only who lend with them but the people who rely on them day by day. i'm one of those persons. they're worried about what's happening here in washington, and once again they were given a reason to have fear by what has happened over the weekend, and this bill becoming even closer to law. the consumer financial protection bureau and the office of financial research, two brand new federal agencies created in this bill, once again, two brand new federal

agencies created in this bill will give unelected bureaucrats unprecedented power to track financial activities without citizens' approval. and these are not the only new regulatory components of the bill. this legislation allows for 355 new rule makings, 47 studies and 74 reports and potentially dozens more as implementation begins. but what should we expect from this democratic congress? the goal of regulatory reform should be to help, not hinder. it should be there to help our economy to sustain and gain back economic growth and, of course, gain back private sector job creation, not government jobs. this legislation, of course, does the opposite. it it takes a one-size-fits-all

approach to governing and undermineded u.s. economic competitiveness and economic growth. this will only increase intervention in the markets. it will ration credit. it will limit consumer choice, and perhaps worst of all, it will continue to kill jobs. i'm sorry, private sector jobs. i need to get that right. we're all for government jobs, but when it comes to free enterprise jobs we want to kill those things. this is the hallmark of the democratic party whose party -- and i know this. this is just part of it. but the three largest political items of the democrat majority, speaker nancy pelosi, to net lose 10 million american jobs through cap and trade, through card check and through health care. once again, we should have

included that in that list, jobs that are killed in the free enterprise system by this democrat majority. madam speaker, the motives are clear. my democrat colleagues are using policy and regulation to force a government takeover -- further government takeover of the free enterprise system. while paving the road to diminished private sector, this is their way of making sure that they are using a crisis or a preanticipation of a croix cisto -- perception of a crisis to get what they want. i get it and so do the people at hoke. madam speaker, republican party, my colleagues, the republican party are opposed to this bill. i ask my colleagues to oppose this rule and the underlying legislation. i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the chair recognizes the gentleman from colorado. mr. perlmutter: let me take one moment, madam speaker, to

remind my friend from texas that by cutting taxes br the wealthiest americans, prosecuting two wars without paying for them and letting wall street run amuck, the last month of george bush's term in office we lost 780,000 jobs that month. this country lost a lot of jobs because allowing not enforcing reasonable regulation we lost all sorts of jobs, but since january, february of 2009 till last month we reversed that to the point there were 400,000 jobs created, a swing of over 1,200,000 jobs per month in this country. my friends on the republican side of the aisle opposed reining in wall street. we know and americans across this country know that

something has to be done. with that i'd yield three minutes to my friend from california, congresswoman matsui. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from california is recognized for three minutes. ms. matsui: thank you very much. and i thank the gentleman from colorado for yielding me time. madam speaker, i rise today in strong support of h.r. 4173, the restoring american financial stability act of 2010. many families in my home district of sacramento continue struggling to make ends meet. i heard countless stories of those struggling to keep their homes, their jobs and their way of life. many of my constituents were and continue to be victims of predatory home loan lending, unfair credit card practices, payday loans and other forms of deceptive financial practices. the mortgage crisis, in particular, continues to impact many in sacramento. sadly, after more than two years millions of homeowners continue to face foreclosure. those that have not have seen the value of their homes

plummet. i have been to foreclosure workshops. i've seen the hardships and looks of desperation. i've heard from a constituent who held a traditional 30-year mortgage, but after repeated attempts from her lenders she was convinced to refinance her mortgage to a lower adjustable rate, and now that mortgage has reset and she is now facing foreclosure. i have heard from many constituents who applied for a loan modification but never even got a call back. i've heard from many others who say they were denied a loan modification under the making home affordable program, but their lender never even gave them a reason why. these are just a few of the many stories that i and i'm sure many of you have heard. madam speaker, no one is looking for a bailout. but families need real assistance and real reform. it's clear that the mortgage industry, after repeated public pledges, has yet to demonstrate a real commitment to help responsible homeowners.

madam speaker, i'm pleased that this bill includes an amendment that i offered, along with representatives kathy castor and betty sutton, that calls on the mortgage industry to help place more responsible homeowners into more affordable terms. the amendment will require mortgage industry participants in the making home affordable program to report basic information on a monthly basis, such as the number of loan modification requests received, the number being processed, the number that has been approved, and the number had a has been denied. it will also make that information available to the public through treasury department's website. it is clear that greater transparency is needed to ensure that all parties are actually helping homeowners. such transparency will lead to greater accountability. i strongly urge my colleagues to support this historic legislation, to ensure our consumers and our financial system are protected from

irresponsible financial practices. and with that, madam speaker, i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady yields back the balance of her time. the gentleman from texas is recognized. mr. sessions: thank you, madam speaker. madam speaker, our next speaker is a young gentleman from texas who has a clear voice and a sound footing, not only of economic principles, but also speaks for our party. i yield three minutes to the gentleman from texas, mr. hensarling. the speaker pro tempore: mr. hensarling from texas is recognized for three minutes. mr. hensarling: i thank the gentleman for yielding. i was very interested, madam speaker, to hear the gentleman from colorado defend the job statistics under the democratic rule of congress. i don't know too many democrats coming to the floor who want to defend 9.7% unemployment. frankly, it's one of the major reasons that the legislation on the floor ought to be opposed today. madam speaker, it's a job killer.

once again we have legislation that will make credit less -- less available and more expensive. let me point out four different aspects of this bill. number one, it creates a permanent wall street bailout authority. if you build it they will come. you build a bailout authority because you expect to bail people out. there's a choice to be had here. republicans believe in the bankruptcy code. there are improvements that need to be made, and unthe leadership of our ranking member, spencer bachus, we introduced that legislation, but our democratic friends prefer bailouts, bailouts over bankruptcy. now, they continue to say that the taxpayer won't be called upon to pay for these bailouts. well, isn't it kind of funny how throughout this conference process every time they've had an opportunity to choose either the taxpayers or the wall street banks they somehow

choose the wall street banks? and in fact when it came down to the government sponsored enterprises they set up a choice. i didn't set up the choice. but they set up a choice of who going forward is going to fund the bailout of the government sponsored enterprises, should it be wall street banks or should it be the taxpayers, and they decided it ought to be the taxpayers. just yesterday at the 11th hour -- actually, way past the 11th hour, they come up with a new funding mechanism taking money away from tarp that was supposed to be used, supposed to be used for deficit reduction and instead they're going to use it to help fund the bill most of which the congressional budget office says goes to the wall street bailout authority. this is number two. the number two incident where they had a choice between choosing taxpayers or wall street banks, they chose wall street banks. permanent bailout authority, costs jobs.

they ban to ration consumer credit literally to decide whether or not you can have a credit card, small business line of credit, what kind of mortgage you can get on your home. there is a new bank tax. they make derivatives more expensive, less available. all of this is going to harm job creation. you know, i talked to small businesses in my business like a gentleman from jacksonville, texas. i'm a one-man operation. all the legislation coming down the line i will stay a one-man operation. if lines of credit dries up i will no longer be able to have safe operating equipment. reject the job killing bill. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from colorado is recognized. mr. perlmutter: thank you, madam speaker. i'd respond to my friend from texas that first of all losing 780,000 jobs a month as we were when george bush left office, that's job killing, that's terrible. one of the things we're trying to do is right that ship.

secondly, he says that they set up a bankruptcy process for these banks. well, as democrats we said these failing banks if they're failing we are not going to let them linger along like in a chapter 7 bankruptcy. no more bailouts. with that i'd yield two minutes to my friend from connecticut, mr. larson. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from connecticut is recognized for two minutes. mr. larson: thank you, madam speaker. i rise in purpose of engaging in a col key with chairman frank to clarify the intent of section 1076 of this bill. it creates a new section 920 regarding interchange fees. interchange revenues are a major source of funding for the administrative costs of prepaid cards used in connection with health cards like f.s.a.'s, h.s.a.'s, h.r.a.'s and qualified transportation

accounts. these programs are widely used by both the public and private sector employers and employees and are more expensive to operate because of substantiation and other regulatory requirements. because of this i'd like to clarify that congress does not wish to interfere with those arrangements in a way that could lead to higher fees being imposed by administrators to make up for lost revenue which would directly raise health care costs and hurt consumers. this is clearing on something that was the intent that we would like to do. therefore, i ask chairman frank to join me in clarifying that congress intends that prepaid cards associated with these types of programs should be exempted within the language of section 920-a-722. mr. frank: if the gentleman will yield. he is correct. we intend to make sure those rules protect a number of things. smaller institutions from being discriminated against and say they are exempted from regulations.

state benefits programs. so the gentleman is absolutely correct. i can assure him that i expect the federal reserve to honor that. if there's any question about that i'm sure we will make sure that happens. mr. larson: i thank the chairman. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas is recognized. mr. sessions: thank you very much, madam speaker. at this time i'd like to yield two minutes to the gentlewoman from west virginia, mrs. capito. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from west virginia is recognized for two minutes. mrs. capito: thank you, madam speaker. i'd like to thank mr. sessions for yielding me time. i'd like to thank our ranking member, spencer bachus, for his dedication to this issue. i'd like to thank the chairman of our financial services committee for his dedication as well. this is a missed opportunity. from the start of the debate, it was apparent there was little or no interest from our democrat colleagues in working towards a consensus bill on regulatory reform. now they're using budgetary smoke and mirrors and i think it will be apparent to americans as this bill unfolds.

as my constituents say to us all the time, work together. unfortunately, the bill before us was drafted without our significant input. we are now faced with a bill that will give us institutionalized government bailouts, limits consumer choices and raises the costs for businesses, our job creators across this nation. my colleagues on the other side of the aisle will be backing the rhetoric and high praise for cracking down on wall street. however, the resolution authority in this bill does little or nothing to address the issue of the moral hazard that has been created by the tarp program. instead, failed firms will be wound down at taxpayers' expense. . they will push the limits of risk because they will know the government will be there to pay for their demise. many of the tombs used for tarp are institutionalized in this legislation. my friends can opine on wall street reform all they want, but this bill does not achieve that. why should the people of west

virginia help pay for poor decisions of wall street bankers or any state? they shouldn't. for over a year we have advocated for enhanced bankruptcy for these large, highly complex financial institutions. this approach would have created a level playing field between wall street and main street and would have assured all parties know the rules of the game ahead of time. furthermore, theetaxpayers would not have to worry if their children and grandchildren will have to pick up the tab for the mistakes of the fabulous of the world. the majority has decided to turn a deaf ear to the cry to end the bailout this. bill will fuel the growth of wall street, lead to job loss, and it represents a missed opportunity. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from colorado. mr. perlmutter: how much time does each side have, madam speaker? the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from colorado has 20 minutes. the gentleman from texas has 18 1/2. the chair recognizes the gentleman from colorado. mr. perlmutter: thank you.

i yield two minutes to the gentleman from connecticut, mr. himes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from connecticut is recognized for two minutes. mr. himescloverpb thank you, mr. chairman. i -- mr. himes: thank you, mr. chairman. i want to enter into a colloquy with chairman frank. the bill would prohibit firms from investing in traditional private inequity funds and hedge funds, because they use the act that defines the hedge funds, it could apply to corporate structures and not just hedge funds. joint ventures used to hold other investments that the volcker rule won't deem those things hedge funds. mr. frank: if the gentleman would yield. there's been some mockery because this bill has a large number of pages. although our bill's smaller. we do that -- by the way there are also the people who complain sometimes we have too much discretion to the regulators. it's a complex bill and we want

to make sure we get it right. the point the gentleman makes is correct. there is -- we do not want these overdone or extensive regulation and the distinction the gentleman draws is very much in this bill and we are confident that the regulators will appreciate that distinction, maintain it, and we'll be there to make sure they do. mr. himes: thank you. my understanding is it's consistent with attempt not to have firms with the regulation. providing a holding company with both financial and nonfinancial businesses will cease to be a holding company when it establishes an intermediate holding company under section 626. that company also may have an intermediate holding company under section 167. am i right the intent of this legislation is for these sections to be applied in harmony so an organization will have a single intermeet holding company that will be both the regulator s.n.l. holding company and the company for implementing the heightened supervision of activities under title 1.

mr. frank: you are right. to sum it up we want regulators and not regulate other activities when you have a hybrid situation. what the gentleman has described is how you accomplish that. mr. himes: thank you. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas. mr. sessions: at this time i would like to yield four minutes to the gentleman from new jersey, mr. garrett. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new jersey is recognized. mr. garrett: mr. speaker. like all my colleagues i believe that financial reform is necessary. but the legislation that's before us really which empowers failed bureaucrats through government overreach and unnecessary job killing is just not the right legislation. first one of the major fundamental flaws, 2,300-page bill is a section that basically empowers government bureaucrats with so-called resolution authority to basically pick winners and losers again to continue that failed bailout philosophy. i know the chairman and the proponents of this bill blame these provisions are meant to add certainty and stability to

our financial system. but when you think about it, when you set up an alternative to bankruptcy for failed firms, so that there are now two potential tracks for failed firms to go down, that actually introduces more uncertainty, more uncertainty for the financial markets, for the investors, counterparties, for our entire economy. that uncertainty, what does it lead to? it leads to failing to invest and leads to less job creation as well. furthermore, this section of the legislation gives an alarming amount of power to government regulators and bureaucrats to basically decide the fate of a firm and its creditors. under this administration we have seen this before, we have seen the rule of law trampled when the federal government buoyed into position secured creditors in favor of who? politically favored unsecured creditors. what does this legislation? this was codified the ability of the regulator to engage in similar conduct. further eroding confidence in

our rule-based economy and sending investors where? to this country? no. to overseas, scattering other opportunities rather than here in the u.s. not only that, but this resolution authority in codifying a better deal for bankruptcy for some of the politically connected gives large firms an unfair advantage over their smaller rivals. this does what? it increases more hazard. by encouraging investment firms that basically otherwise just don't deserve it. this is a part of the problem that led to the demise we have seen in other areas of our economy. talking about fannie mae and freddie mac, the g.s.e.'s, which by the way is never touched in this legislation whatsoever. another aspect of the problem with this bill is big brother. big brother overreach that didn't exist before. this bill creates two new government bureaucracy, including the so-called office of financial research, that will have unprecedented power to track the financial activities of everyone here and everyone in

the entire united states. you are taking money out of the a.m.t., a.t.m., that's tracked. credit card, that will be tracked. information about any one of your consumer transactions? that will now be able to be tracked and gathered without anyone's approval, any citizens' approval and it will be monitored by who? by un-elected and unaccountable bureaucrats in washington with few or hardly any constraints whatsoever on how they are going to use the information or when they are going to use the information. then there's a section on derivatives. another massive, massive job killer. i join with congressman frank lucas, we offered an alternative to this bill in the last days that was basically the original house version of the bill. it had broad bipartisan support. unfortunately, unpressure from democrat leadership, not a single democrat supported that house language in the final vote. despite the fact that very same

language was originally sponsored by the democrat financial services and agriculture committee chairman. results of all this? as a result of that section not being in means that businesses big and small all over this country which had absolutely nothing to do with this financial crisis will now have a very difficult time to hedge their risk, to guard against future risk because they will have to pay literally hundreds and hundreds of billions of dollars in additional funds to control risk on a daily basis. what does that mean for all of us? more job losses. this bill is a job killer. and will raise prices, too, for every american across the country whether you are talking about food prices, energy prices, you name it. how many jobs will be lost? a recrept study it was found between 100,000 and 120,000 jobs will be lost because of this job-killing bill. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from colorado. mr. perlmutter: i have to smile when i listen to my friends talk about job killing when let me --

letting wall street run wild, gambling like it was just a big casino, results in 780,000 jobs a month being lost. the point that during this recession we have lost eight million jobs. we've got to put people back to work. we need certainty. we need reasonable regulation. that's the purpose of this bill. with that i yield two minutes to my friend from georgia, mr. scott. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from georgia. mr. perlmutter: i'm yielding to him. mr. scott: thank you very much, mr. chairman. thank you for yielding. ladies and gentlemen, you would think that republicans were somewhere on another planet. let me correct the situation if i may. first of all this was a problem that occurred under the bush administration. because of policies by the republicans who were in charge. it was indeed paulson, our secretary of treasury, that came

to our financial services committee with two pieces of paper. and said here's what you need to fix it. throw all this money at wall street. let's give the truth in this matter. it was under democratic leadership that we said, no. yes, we have a credit problem. a credit freeze of the credit markets up on wall street -- will i not. you had your chance. i only have two minutes. and here we were. i know sometimes the truth hurts. and i feel their pain over there. but i am sick and tired of our republican friends assuming that they had no responsibility for this, mr. speaker. and we've got to set the record straight. it is in the charge of democrats under our leadership that we indeed are saddled with the responsibility of bringing confidence of the american people back to our private

enterprise system and to keep it free. it is because of what the democrats are doing that we are saving our free economic system. under their policies it was heading to straight ruin, causing the worst economic collapse second only to the depression. so we are moving here today with this extraordinary bill to do everything possible to make sure it never happens again. to restore confidence of the american people. we are beginning to do that. we are doing it by setting up a consumer protection agency. something we didn't have before. that's the reason this happened. they wrent to predatory lending. they went to scaring people into subprime lending when they could have afforded other loans. there was no protection for them. democrats are providing this protection. they were doing it because we had executive compensation -- the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. mr. scott: this is an important

bill. mr. sessions: i remind the gentleman who is speaking that we know what happened it's called pin the tail on the donkey. mr. speaker, at this time i'd like to yield three minutes to the the gentlewoman from from illinois, the gentlewoman from the financial services committee, mrs. biggert. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from illinois is recognized for three minutes. mrs. biggert: i thank the gentleman for yielding. mr. speaker, i rise in opposition to this rule and to ask this body to step back for a moment to do a quick sanity check. what's the purpose of this bill? i thought its purpose was to rein in wall street and end the abuses that precipitated the most massive financial meltdown in economic down turn since the great depression. its purpose is to make wall street pay for the abuses not main street. i'm all for that. in fact, along with my republican colleagues i offered the first reform bill, h.r. 3310, back in july, and many

amendments designed to rein in wall street and the abuses but not harm main street. so the banking chairman, chris dodd's, first regulatory reform proposal was similar to ours and offered great promise. unfortunately these common sense and necessary reforms were scrapped in favor of the bill that we consider today. instead we have before us a bill that turns the stated purpose upside-down. what do i mean? well, the end result is that goldman sachs supports the bill and the chamber of commerce opposes the bill. goldman's c.e.o. testified, and i quote, i'm generally supportive. the biggest beneficiary of reform is wall street itself, end quote. meanwhile the u.s. chamber, which represents main street, american businesses, opposes the bill. wall street supports this bill. while main street suffers. where's the logic in that? main street didn't engage in

shady accounting gimmicks. main street didn't make risky derivatives trades. main street didn't issue subprime loans. and yet what we have here is a bill that makes main street pay the price. and what is that price? increased taxes on community banks, manufacturers, small businesses, consumers, and american families. that will increase the cost of credit. taxes who decrease the -- small business who is seek financing to create desperately needed jobs. how will new taxes rein in wall street? this bill expands the size of government increasing our national debt, making taxpayer backed bailouts permanent, and distorts our free market by allowing bureaucrats to pick winners and losers. . it relates every financial employee from the janitor to the c.e.o. we need financial reform and

that's not what this bill delivers. i urge my colleagues to oppose this rule and the underlying bill and yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from colorado. mr. perlmutter: thank you. and i'd say to my friend from illinois, with whom i work with her on all sorts of arenas, i don't know where she says there are no taxes on small banks. there are fdic charges but there are no taxes as she would suggest. with that i give two minutes to my friend from north carolina, mr. miller. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman, mr. miller, is recognized for two minutes. mr. miller: thank you, mr. speaker. this bill is a huge step forward. working in middle-class families should not again have to worry that financial ruin works in the fine print of a contract that their bank's lawyer wrote. families that qualify for prime mortgages that they can pay will not again get trapped, again, in predatory subprime mortgages that they cannot pay. they can use a credit card

without worry of getting gouged. they can have overdraft protection that is convenient as the banks say it is, that it should be, not a trap to run up indefensible fees. if this bill is properly enforced we can properly believe again that our government is on the side of americans trying to make an honest living. this bill is about our values. our economy depends on our acting in our own self-interest and enjoying the rewards of our efforts that every major religious -- on the stone tablets that moses brought from mount sinai there is one, thou shall not covet thy neighbors. while some have erred through the faith and pierced themselves with many sorrows. when franklin roosevelt said about unscrupulous money changers in the temple he spoke in language easily recognized

by that generation. roosevelt spoke about restoring ancient truths. the measure of the restoration, roosevelt said, lies in the extent we apply social values more noble than monetary profit. the financial practices that this legislation seeks to reform have made few americans very rich but by taking advantage of working middle-class families who needed to borrow money and honest investors who wanted to lend it and by diverting too much of our economy from productive honest work. we need to restore the faith in which we have erred. this bill is a start. i yield back my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas. mr. sessions: thank you, mr. speaker. at this time i'd like to yield three times to the distinguished gentleman from california, the gentleman from the financial services committee, the gentleman, mr. royce. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for three minutes. mr. i thank the gentleman for yielding. i don't know --

mr. royce: i thank the gentleman for yielding. i don't know why it would be a surprise to the left that this financial system collapse -- and the reason i say that is because in 1992, the g.s.e. act passed this congress under a democratic majority passed this congress, and the g.s.e. act specifically was an attempt to get every american into a home. i understand the thought behind it. but the irrationality behind it in terms of creating these mandates on fannie mae and freddie mac, the g.s.e.'s, mandates that 50% of their portfolio of $1.7 trillion be in subprime, what did they expect would happen? the leverage, the plillcal poll that went in to getting the down payments down from 20% to 3% to 0%, and now as we have the very result that the

federal reserve warned us about when they came to congress in 2003 and 2004 and 2005 and warned us that if we did not take corrective action, if we did not allow the regulators to have the ability to deregulate or to regulate and deleverage these portfolios that we were going to create systemic risk and the financial collapse could be a consequence of this. and blocking repeatedly the efforts in the senate, which the democrats did, to address this issue, and then in 2007 -- finally in 2007 the democratic majority here brought to the floor a bill which they say attempted to address this issue. but, again, in theags will it tied the hands of the regulators so that they could not deleverage the portfolios, so they could not put it no

receivership. the reason they brought the bill to the floor was because it had a $300 billion provision in it for affordable housing. that's why the bill got out but it was opposed by the treasury and was opposed by the fed. so the point i want to make is after all of that history and after watching the collapse which we were warned about by the regulators and albeit with great intentions -- i know that -- everybody there would have a house if you could actually get down to zero down payment loans and you could force the g.s.e.'s to buy those junk -- that junk that was sold by countrywide. who do you think created the market? it was 70% of the market. it was because -- it was because there was an intention here to circumvent the rules of economics. and now in this legislation what is not addressed? this very monopoly, fannie mae

and freddie mac. we compound problems in this legislation because now -- i'd ask the gentleman to yield for 30 seconds. mr. sessions: i give the gentleman one additional minute. mr. royce: now, what we do with this legislation is we make the largest institutions too big to fail and we do so by putting in a provision that is going to allow them to borrow at a lower cost than their smaller -- to their smaller competitors who i guess are too small to save, right? they are going to be able to borrow at 100 basis points less because the government backstop you're putting in place and you're not allowing them go through a regular bankruptcy process. we'd like to see enhanced bankruptcy on the republican side. we'd actually like to see firms fail. creditors will get 100 cents on the dollar potentially. they are going to loan to big firms. these big firms are going to

become overleveraged. you've done the same thing here as you did with the government sponsored enterprises, fannie and freddie, that they forced their competition out of the market. and as a consequence of that became due onlies and failed. this is what we are trying to get across to our friends on the other side of the aisle. this is why we oppose your a pproach. we've seen this before. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from colorado. perlperm how much time? -- mr. perlmutter:? the speaker pro tempore: 18 1/4. the gentleman from colorado. mr. perlmutter: thank you, mr. speaker. mr. royce mentioned 2003, 2004, 2005. should have changed the g.s.e. and fannie mae and freddie mac. well, the republicans controlled the house. the republicans controlled the senate. the republicans controlled the white house. and they didn't do it. in fact, his former chairman on financial services, the

republican, mr. oxley, said the critics forgot that the house stepped up on reforming bills but he fumed about the criticism that people are giving about fannie mae and freddie mac. he said -- this is from the financial times, september 9, 2008, all that -- quote, all the handling and bed wetting is going on without remembering how the house stepped up on this. he says, what did we get from the white house? we got the one finger salute. very graphic quoteation from mr. oxley -- quotation from mr. oxley, chairman of the house financial services committee, saying it was the white house that stopped the changes that needed to be -- mr. sessions: will the gentleman yield? mr. perlmutter: and it was a billion dollars from those mortgages, from 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006 under republican leadership that is weighing down fannie mae and freddie mac that under the democrats we offered conservatorship and that's what they're in now, like a bankruptcy.

with that i'm going to yield two minutes to my friend, mr. ellison. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for two minutes. mr. ellison: mr. chairman, let me just correct one very, very serious flaw and that is to somehow blame the effort to -- blame the americans. this crisis has to due with a failure to regulate, a failure to give consumer protection to people who are getting mortgages that they couldn't pay for on tricky and unsound terms. because we are now going to have consumer protection bureau designed to protect those very same consumers. we are bringing stability to the market. we are bringing people a chance to have a home that they can actually pay for on terms that they will actually understand. this consumer financial protection bureau is going to be something that will help people keep the money that they earn and to make sound financial investments that will -- and purchases that will allow them to prosper and grow

unlike the ones that we saw in the past where republican leadership let the lay zeh fair economy move -- laysa fair economy move right on along without oversight which led us in this serious, serious crisis. the fact is, mr. chairman, the financial crisis that we're in is the result of a lack of oversight, a lack of regulation, a lack of clear rules. and this particular piece of legislation will bring real clarity. it will also help banks. it will help small community banks because they will be able to compete on an equal footing. their competitors will now be regular plated which they were not in the past. and smaller banks will be able to say that the products that they offer will be able to be offered to the consumer on a basis similar to those unregulated financial institutions which now will be regulated. so, mr. speaker, i think it's a good time to say that this is an excellent step forward.

it will help stop the nickeling and diming of americans. it will help stop the targeting of people for financial mistreatment, and it will bring greater stability to our economy. and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas. mr. sessions: thank you, mr. speaker. at this time i'd like to yield two minutes to the gentleman from illinois, the gentleman from the committee, mr. manzullo. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for two minutes. mr. manzullo: thank you. mr. speaker, we on the financial services committee have spent nearly two years holding hearings to determine the appropriate course of action for financial reform. in september, the committee began legislation to try to address failures in the financial market that have plagued the homes. the problem is the two big culprits here, fannie mae and freddie mac, now taken over by the government, could cost american taxpayers $1 trillion.

those two entities simply are not even -- nothing happens to them in this bill. the guys that caused the problems. you know, maybe you could take this 2,000-page bill and gel it into one sentence. you can't buy a home unless you can afford it. that's what caused the problem in the first place. no credit standards, so-called liar loans where people were allowed to buy homes when others sat at the closing table knowing full well that the buyers couldn't even make the first payment. and so it took the fed i think two years to come up with a rule that says, oh, bay the way, if you buy a house -- oh, by the way, if you buy a house you have to have written proof of your earnings. i mean, why do we need 2,000 pages of a bill and none of us addressed to the g.s.e.'s

simply saying freddie mac and fannie mae won't take the assignment of the mortgage unless the mortgage is sound? that will solve the problem. we wouldn't have the complete collapse of the system that we have today. but instead created the consumer protection financial bureau. now, what are thesis guys going to do in-- what are these guys going to do, maybe build a new building somewhere, and they are going to impose regulations in nearly every sector of the economy, what are they going to say? all they have to say, if you can't afford to buy a house, you can't have it. that should be the extent of the regulation. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. mr. manzullo: instead of one sentence, 2,000 pages. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from colorado. mr. perlmutter: i yield two

minutes to the gentleman from maryland, mr. van hollen. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for two minutes. mr. van hollen: i thank you, mr. speaker. the purpose of the wall street accountability bill is very clear. never again should the american taxpayer be asked to foot the bill for bad bets made on wall street. never again should millions of americans have to lose their jobs because of reckless conduct on wall street. and never again will we allow the american economy to be held hostage to bad decisions on wall street in the financial sector. unfortunately, mr. speaker, our colleagues on the other side of the aisle haven't gotten that message. . having stood in this chamber and voted to help rescue wall street and the financial sector, they are not there for main street today. and i think some headlines are instructive. "wall street journal," february 4, 2010, g.o.p. chases wall street donors, quote, in discussions with wall street executives, republicans are striving to make the case that

they are the bank's best hope of preventing president barack obama and congressional democrats from cracking down on wall street. roll call, december 8, 2009, g.o.p. meets with 100 lobbyists to plot to kill wall street reform. quote, in a call to arms house republican leaders met with more than 100 lobbyists at the capitol visitor center on tuesday afternoon to try and fight back against financial regulatory overhaul legislation. that's the story of this debate. and the choice is clear. are we going to be on the side of the big banks who held the american economy hostage, resulted in the loss of millions of jobs, and let the taxpayer on the hook? or are we going to side -- stay on the side of consumers, taxpayers, american workers, and small businesses? the choice is very clear. back in december every one of our republican colleagues voted

no on wall street accountability. let's hope that this time they stand on the side of the american taxpayer and the american consumer and make the right choice for the american people. thank you, mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas. mr. sessions: thank you, mr. speaker. i find it interesting that the same people who are down here arguing for giving them the responsibility and authority and how balanced their bill is are the same people that are bankrupting this country. they don't even apply their own lonic and common sense to what they -- logic and common sense to what they pass in this house. they talk about all this balance and responsibility, worried about the middle class. yet they are bankrupting this country. yet they are causing the largest unemployment that we have had in the modern era. and they are not even talking about what they have done to create that circumstance, they are trying to point the finger at somebody else. i think that that is irrelevant responsibility. mr. speaker, at this time i would like to yield two minutes

to the gentleman from the committee, mr. lance. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for two minutes. mr. lance: thank you, mr. chairman. my thanks to sessions, our ranking member, mr. baucus, as well as the chairman, and the gentleman from colorado. i rise to express my opposition to the rule for the financial bill that gives wall street firms the potential, permanent bailouts, institutionalizes too big to fail, and will ultimately constrict lending to consumers and small businesses at the worst possible time for our economy. the underlying measure does not fully audit the fed and does nothing to rein in housing giant fannie mae and freddie mac that already cost u.s. taxpayers $145 billion and counting. the troubled asset relief program fund by the original law was supposed to be used to reduce the deficit. none of the funding source for new spending and the increase in the ratio at the fdic should not be used for anything other than protecting depositors and bank

failures. if the democratic majority had chosen a fiscal bath of more spending and borrowing, this at a time when the federal debt is $13 trillion and rising rapidly. the americannpeople deserve a better plan that puts an end to bailouts, reins in fannie mae and freddie mac, and takes the government out of the business of picking winners and losers. this bill fails on all of these accounts. i oppose the rule and the underlying bill. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from colorado. mr. perlmutter: thank you, mr. speaker. i yield two minutes to mr. hare from illinois. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from illinois is recognized for two minutes. mr. hare: thank you, mr. speaker. for too long irresponsible actions of big banks put american families at risk. today with the passage of this financial reform legislation we will finally begin to protect consumers on main street from the greed on wall street. predatory lending, risky

schemes, and exploiting loopholes were just some of the choice words used by wall street fat cats to send our economy on the brink of depression. under this bill we are ending these practices and shining new light on products and transaction that is threaten the stability of the financial system. this bill is a landmark achievement in consumer protection by establishing a consumer financial protection agency, dedicated to ensuring that banks, bank loans, mortgages, and credit cards are fair, affordable, understandable, and most importantly transparent. this bill is good for small business. it's good for consumers. and god for financial security of our great nation. but also -- good for financial security of our great nation. but also to ensure we'll remain an engine of economic growth. i want to thank chairman frank and all the members of the leadership for having the courage to do what's right and

for standing up for american families. today we have the opportunity to say enough is enough. rein in wall street and protect our constituents. i ask my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to join me in supporting this critical piece of legislation. thank you, mr. speaker. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas. mr. sessions: thank you, mr. speaker. at this time i'd like to yield two minutes to the gentleman from cherry hill, north carolina, mr. mchenry. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. mchenry: i thank my colleague from texas for yielding. i encourage my colleagues to vote no on this closed rule and vote no on the conference report on the so-called financial regulatory reform bill. i say so-called because this is not much in the way of reform. it's changed. it's manipulation, it's going to be harmful to the american people. my district is still mired with high unemployment. we have over 13% unemployment in western north carolina. the people across this nation

have about 10% unemployment nationally. people are hurting. small businesses in my district are worried about access to credit. families are worried about being able to keep their credit card, keep their checking account, and keep the financial products they know and like. unfortunately this bill, this legislation restricts credit and makes credit less available and tighter going forward. and makes it harder for small business that is are struggling to meet payroll, much less create jobs. to make ends meet. now, the new taxpayer bureaucracy this legislation creates will intervene in the financial affairs of every single american. and not for the better. the results will be fewer loans for people to buy a car, purchase a home, go to college, or start a small business. and to make matters worse, and the kicker with this bill, is that it won't prevent the next crisis, and it doesn't even address the root causes of the

last crisis. certainly we are in favor of making sure the last crisis we face doesn't ever happen again. i think we agree on that. republicans and democrats. the fact is, this bill doesn't address the root causes of the last crisis. and so to call this a he reform is a sham, it's a fraud. and i encourage my colleagues to vote against it. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from colorado. mr. perlmutter: mr. speaker, how much time does each side have? the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from colorado has six minutes. the gentleman from texas has 1 1/2 minutes. mr. perlmutter: i yield two minutes to mr. mcmahon from new york. mr. mcmahon: thank you. i thank the gentleman for yielding. i rise today in full support of this bill and this rule. i commend chairman frank, chairman peterson, all the members of their staffs who worked so hard. this legislation, mr. speaker, addresses many of the problems at the heart of the financial crisis while allowing us to build an even stronger

regulatory foundation for future economic growth and stability in our financial markets which we need undoubtedly to create jobs in the american economy. since my first days in congress i have called for smart, thoughtful regulations for our shared goals for reform without unnecessarily burdening our economy or forcing our financial industries overseas. after a year and a half of kate and discussion, although not perfect, i think we struck the right balance here and i'm proud to support this bill. it is god for america, it is good for new york city, it is good for the people of staten island and brooklyn who sent me here to represent them. in particular i applaud the effort to bring greater transparency, accountability, and oversight to our derivatives market. this bill makes sure the regulators and private sector understand outstanding swap exposures for individual companies will never be allowed again to bring about a situation like what happened with a.i.g. but this legislation also

recognizes the important role that derivatives play in actually reducing systemic risk and increasing the flow of credit throughout our economy. whether it's an airplane, farm, hedging against currency risk, commercial real estate company or life insurance annuity hedging against interest rate fluctuation derivatives are vital tools to keep consumer prices low and help manage company budgets. these end user companies pose little or no systemic risk to our economy and this bill protects them from unnecessary and burdensome margin and clearing requirements. again i thank chairman frank for allowing me to be part of this process. and i thank the gentleman from colorado for yielding me this time. i yield back the balance of my time. thank you, mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: just a correction. the gentleman from texas has two minutes remaining. and the gentleman from colorado now has four minutes. will the gentleman from colorado seek recognition?

the gentleman from texas. mr. sessions: i appreciate that, mr. speaker. i would encourage the gentleman to use his time. we have a time disparate. i am the last speaker. i reserve my time. mr. perlmutter: i'm ready to close, if you are. mr. sessions: we are on time delivery today, mr. speaker. i appreciate that. thank you for engaging with me today. as i said earlier, mr. speaker, it's important to provide consumer safety and security in the marketplace, but our constituents are also concerned about much, much more. they are concerned about jobs. they are concerned about the economy. they are concerned about the tremendous debt this nation is taking on. week after week we come to the house floor to debate bills and to talk about the agenda that the democratic majority wants to have on the floor. and it would be true to say that republicans oppose that agenda,

because it's about taxing, it's about spending, it is about more debt, it is about bigger government, it's about the diminishment of the free enterprise system jobs. it's about the things that the american people have said they do not have confidence in this body solving. whether it's cap and trade, health care, or government takeover of the financial sector my friends in the majority already every single week to stick it to the free enterprise system. my friends, the democrats, seem more interested in accomplishing their political agenda than trying to help the american people. once again today we have a job loss bill on the floor. that's really what we should call this. more big government, fewer private sector jobs, $18 billion in fees that will have to be paid by the banks that we passed on to consumers. just on and on and on. the majority has an opportunity

today to vote against the previous question and every member of this body has a chance to say no to the more spending, more big government, more rules and regulations. and somehow to show the american people that they can make tough choices and cut spending. i encourage a no vote on the rule and a no vote on the underlying legislation and i appreciate the gentleman from colorado and his engagement with me today. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from colorado. mr. perlmutter: thank you, mr. speaker. appreciate the comments of my friend from texas. we couldn't disagree more about the value of this bill and the process we have gone through to get to this point. i'd first like to thank the chairman, also the ranking member of financial services, for holding hearing after hearing, taking testimony for the last year and a half, almost

two years, on the various subjects that are addressed within the bill. and to holding a very open and transparent conference that highlighted much of the bill and the differences between the house and the senate. i think that kind of transparency is what we need to see in the financial markets and that's at the heart of all of this. in september of 2008, we had a terrible financial free fall. starting with placing fannie mae and freddie mac in conservativeship and then a whole series of failors towards the end of that month. ultimately the president of the united states, george bush, he and his chief cabinet officers asked this congress to support the banking system in a way that none of us could have ever conceived, but that was needed in an emergency to save the banking system and keep this economy going in some fashion or another. even so, under the rules and the

approach taken by the republicans who are in office through -- throughout the bush administration and this congress from 1994 on to 2006, wall street was unregulated. it was allow the to just -- allowed to just go wild and it resulted in a terrible cataclysm that we are all paying for now. the bill that's before this body addresses nine separate subjects. . consumer protection, investor protection. it deals with credit rating agencies, derivatives, hedge funds, insurance. it deals with salaries so we don't incentivize too big of risk taking by executives so they put their banks or their financial organizations at risk. and it deals with too big to fail. putting a structure in place so that if financial institutions

get way out there, overleveraged as we saw in 2008 that we have a system in place where we can liquid ate them and close them, not put them on life support in a bankruptcy, as my republican colleagues would suggest. this is a time to bring certainty back in the market, reasonable regulation and reasonable enforcement back in the financial system. the bill that's being brought to this congress and this house today does just that. and with that this country needs to rein in wall street, we need to protect main street and the taxpayers and the people that live throughout this country. this bill goes a long way to doing that. with that i urge a yes vote on the previous question and on the rule. i yield back the balance of my time and i move the previous question on the resolution. the speaker pro tempore: all time for debate has expired. without objection, the previous question is ordered. the question is on adoption of the resolution. those in favor say aye.

those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. mr. sessions: mr. speaker, i ask for the yeas and nays. the speaker pro tempore: the yeas and nays have been requested. all those in favor of taking this vote by the anne -- yeas and nays will rise. a sufficient number having arisen, the yeas and nays are ordered. pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20, further proceedings on the question will be postponed. for what purpose does the gentleman from colorado rise? mr. perlmutter: thank you, mr. speaker. i send to the desk a privileged concurrent resolution and ask for its immediate consideration. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the concurrent resolution. the clerk: house concurrent resolution 293, resolved that when the house adjourns on any legislative day from thursday, july 1, 2010, through saturday, july 3, 2010, on a motion offered pursuant to this concurrent resolution by its majority leader or his designee it stand adjourned until 2:00 p.m. on tuesday, july 13, 2010.

or until the time of any reassembly pursuant to section 2 of this concurrent resolution whichever occurs first. and that when the senate recesses or adjourns on any day from wednesday, june 30, 2010, through sunday, july 4, 2010, on a motion offered pursuant to this concurrent resolution by its majority leader or his designee it stand recessed or adjourned until noon on monday, july 12, 2010, or such other time on that day as may be specified in the motion to recess or adjourn or until the time of any reassembly pursuant to section 2 of this concurrent resolution, whichever occurs first. section 2, the speaker of the house and the majority leader of the senate or their respective designees acting jointly after consultation with the minority leader of the house and the minority leader of the senate shall notify the members of the house and the senate respectively to reassemble at such place and

time as they may designate if in their opinion the public interest shall warrant it. the speaker pro tempore: the concurrent resolution is not debatable. the question is on the concurrent resolution. all those in favor say aye. all those opposed, no. the ayes have it. mr. sessions: mr. speaker, with that i ask for the yeas and nays. 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 by electronic device. pursuant to clause 8 of rule 9 -- clause 9 of rule 20, this 15-minute vote on house concurrent resolution 293 will be followed by five-minute votes on house resolution 1490 and suspension of the rules with regard to h.r. 1554. 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 thh 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 -- the nays are 186. the resolution is agreeded to. without objection, the motion to reconsider is laid on the table the unfinished business is on the vote of house resolution 1490 on which the yeas and nays were ordered. the clerk will report the title of the resolution. the clerk: house calendar number 208, house resolution 1490, resolution providing for consideration of the conference report to accompany the bill h.r. 4173, to provide for

financial regulatory reform, to protect consumers and investors, to enhance federal understanding of insurance issues, to regulate the over-the-counter derivatives markets and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: the question is on adoption of the resolution. 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 yeas are 233. the nays are -- the speaker pro tempore: on this vote the yeas are 234, the nays are 189. the resolution is adopted. without objection, the motion to reconsider is laid on the table.

the unfinished business is on the vote of the motion from the gentleman from oklahoma, mr. boren, to suspend the rules and pass h.r. 1554 as amended, on which the yeas and nays were ordered. the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: h.r. 1554, a bill to make certain property in mcintosh county, oklahoma, and to trust and the benefit of the muskogee creek nation, and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: the question is will the house suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended. 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 yeas are 419, the nays are one.

the speaker pro tempore: on this

vote the yeas are 421, the nays are one. 2/3 of those voting having responded in the affirmative, the rules are suspended, the bill is passed and weck the motion to reconsider is laid on the -- without objection the motion to reconsider is laid on the table. the house will be in order. will members remove the conversations from the floor. the speaker pro tempore: will members and staff please remove their conversations from the floor.

the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from massachusetts seek recognition? mr. frank: mr. speaker, pursuant house resolution 1490, i call up the conference report on h.r. 4173 and ask for its immediate consideration. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: h.r. 4173, an act to provide for financial regulatory reform, to protect consumers and investors, to enhance federal understanding of insurance issues, to regulate the over-the-counter derivatives markets and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to house resolution 1490, the conference report is considered read. the gentleman from massachusetts, mr. frank, and the gentleman from alabama, mr. bachus, each will control 60 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from massachusetts. mr. frank: mr. speaker, on the outset i ask unanimous consent

that all members have five legislative days to revise and extends their remarks on this matter. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. mr. frank: and, mr. speaker, i begin by yielding three minutes to one of the leaders in our effort -- the speaker pro tempore: will the gentleman suspend? the gentleman deserves to be heard will members remove their conversations from the floor. the house will be in order. the gentleman may proceed. mr. frank: mr. speaker, to begin i want to yield for a colloquy, three minutes to one of the leaders in the house and certainly in our committee, in forging this particular legislation and in fighting to make sure that fairness is done throughout all of our efforts, the gentlewoman from california, ms. waters. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognize for three minutes. ms. watson: -- ms. waters: thank you very much. i'd like to begin by thanking the chair of the financial services committee, my

colleague, mr. barney frank, for the leadership that he has provided and bringing us to this point in doing a regulatory reform. there were times i thought it would never happen but because of his brilliance, because of his leadership and his ability to listen to all of the members who serve not only that committee but the conference committee, we find ourselves here. but i would like at this point in time to engage my chairman, to make sure that i understand one particular word that was used in this conference committee report. so if i may make an inquiry of the gentleman from massachusetts, i'm trying to understand the meaning of the word initiated in paragraph 5 of the conference report. would initiated include any program or initiative that has been announced by treasury prior to june 25, 2010, and if so, i

assume that that means that programs such as the f.h.a., refinance program, which would address the problems of negative equity, which i understand treasury and the f.h.a. are working on, but is not yet publicly available, would be included, as would the fund program which is not fully implemented yet and this would not prevent, for example, within the $50 billion already allocated for that, adjusting resources between already initiated programs based on their effectiveness. mr. frank: if the gentlewoman would yield, the answer is a resounding yes. i certainly have been following her leadership in trying to make sure that these programs do more than many of them have done. so the answer to her question is yes. nothing new can be started after june 25, but it's not -- it does not reach back and strangle in the cradle those programs that were under way.

ms. waters: thank you very much. i appreciate that. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from massachusetts. mr. frank: i yield back the time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from alabama, mr. bachus. mr. bachus: thank you, mr. speaker. i yield myself five minutes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. bachus: thank you, mr. speaker. today i'd like to address the good,ed bad and the ugly in this bill -- the bad and the ugly in this bill. the good, there is consumer protection. there is more disclosure and transparency. there are some bipartisan provisions in this bill that add a whistle blower office to the f.c.c., but the bad and the ugly far outweigh those. in total, this bill is a massive intrusion of federal government

and to the lives of every american. it is the financial services equivalent of obamacare, the government takeover of our health care system. if finally enacted, it will move us further toward a managed economy, with the federal government making decisions that have been and should stay in the hands of individuals and private businesses. for instance, it will make the compensation of every employee of a financial firm subject to rules set by a government overseer. you can imagine anything as basic as what an employer pays an employee controlled by a federal bureaucrat in washington? it even applies to clerical employees. government regulators would be empowered to seize and break up even healthy firms they disease are systemic risks and even --

they decide are systemic risks and even employ new management to run these companies. as i said on the floor earlier today, these bills will institutionalize and saddle taxpayers with the losses resulting from out-of-control risk taking by wall street institutions. my colleagues on the other side of the aisle will tell you this bill does not include a bailout fund. they're wrong. as i explained earlier, here it is, laid out. you can lend money to a failing company,, how do you get money back from a failing company? you can urchase their assets, you can guarantee their obligations, you can sell their transfer of their asset, the there. and what does this cost? as i explained earlier, the fdic can borrow up to 90% of a firm's asset, that's $2 trillion in the

case of bank of america alone, they could borrow $2,100,000,000 in that case alone. that's a bailout fund period. not only will it make bailouts permanent, it will empower government employees to roll around settle bankruptcy law and so-called resolutions done behind closed doors with unequal treatment of creditors at the whim of politically influenced government officials. that has already happened. a financial firm's ability to survive a crisis like the one we went through two years ago will depend as it did then on whether its c.e.o. can get the president of the new york fed on the phone on a saturday night, as one firm did. friendships and being well connected should not determine the success or failure of private enterprises. finally, it imposes $11 billion

tax disguised as an fdic assessment, to fund this new government spending they tax what main street banks and financial institutions, they raise their fdic premiums even though those premiums would go to bail out wall street firms, not, say, depositors, as the system was designed to. mr. speaker, if you voted against this bill on the floor, if you voted it in committee, you need to vote for it -- you need to vote -- if you voted against it you need to vote against it again, because it's even worse than when it came out of the house. we've seen the anger and frustration generated by the injustice of too big to fail d bailouts. we've seen the folly of implied guarantees as with fannie mae and freddie mac. we've seen time after time the failure of government-run schemes to create jobs and grow the real economy, nevertheless

here the majority party is again doing the same thing over and over, blindly hoping that suddenly this time they'll get a different result. well, you're right. the american people are demanding a different result and in a series of recent elections they've told to go home and spend their own money, not theirs, not the takes pair. in conclusion, if you -- taxpayer. in conclusion, if you choose to bail out the creditors and counterparties of the big wall street firms or loan them money when they get in trouble, don't expect the voters to bail you out come november. with that, i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from massachusetts. mr. frank: mr. speaker, i yield myself such time as i may consume to correct a very incomplete picture that was just given. the gentleman keeps calling that one section, i'm astonished, astonished that he quotes it so blatantly out of context.

yes, there are powers that are given, clearly in the bill, only once the entity has been put into receivership on its way to liquidation. the gentleman from alabama has several times today talked about the powers as if they were just randomly given. i will be distributing the full part of this and it is the most distorted picture of the bill i've seen. it comes in the title, by the way, headed, orderly liquidation of covered financial companies. it's the purpose of this title to provide the necessary authority to liquidate failing financial companies. this cites, again, i'm astonished that he would not give the full picture that comes as part of a subtitlement that says, funding for orderly liquidation. mr. bachus: will the gentleman yield? mr. frank: yes. mr. bachus: i don't care whether

they're in receivership or not -- mr. frank: mr. speaker, please let's get this on the right point and instruct the gentleman as to the rules. i thought he was going to ask me about what he said. he has consistently read a part of this section, lead -- leaving out the part that would help members understand it. he didn't say what he just said, he said he read these in general. the powers he talked about come in the section, they are subsets of the section, funding for orderly liquidation, and those powers are upon the appointment of a receiver. so this is not to keep an institution going, this is not a.i.g., yes, he can be critical about the bush administration on its own without congress -- with regard to what congress did with a.i.g. we repealed in this bill the power under which they acted, with the federal reserve's concurrence. and by the way, it says also in here, those powers are subject to section 2 of 06. again, i don't know why the

gentleman would read this, but let me read it because it corrects entirely the whole >> inaccurate picture he gave people. the actions that he read can be taken if the corporation determines -- it's called mandatory terms and conditions for all orderly liquidation actions. a.i.g. was kept alive. this cannot be kept alive, this happens only as the deaths of the institution comes. and the corporation shall -- he may think the bush administration picked his friends. i think mr. bernanke is being fair to mr. geithner. they should determine such action is necessary for purposes of financial stability and not for the purpose of preserving the covered company. to ensure the shareholders do not receive payment until the claims are paid, ensured that unsecured losses is bailed losses in section 210. that's the fdic. make sure that the management

is removed. ensure that members of the board of direct ortiz are removed. so -- directors are removed. so it's quite the opposite of what the gentleman talked about. it says if an institution has gotten so indebted that it should not be able to pay its debts we step in and put it out of business. totally opposite what happened to a.i.g. it does say, yes, in some circumstances there may be an inability to do these things. but only after the institution has been liquidated. the gentleman talks about it and talks about it and never mentions that this is only as the institution is being put out of business. it is very clear elsewhere in here that any funds expended will come from the financial institutions, not from the taxpayers. now, we have a piece of legislation that we adopted in conference to try to do that. here, unfortunately, to get the republican votes necessary in the senate for an otherwise good bill we had to back that down, but it didn't change in here. so, yes, there is a provision -- there are provisions the gentleman read, but unlike the way he presented them, they

don't stand by themselves. they come only after as has been determined by the administration in power that the financial stability of the country requires first that the company be liquidated and secondly that some retention -- attention be given to its debt, but found funding out of the other financial institutions, not from the taxpayers. i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from alabama. mr. bachus: at this time i yield three minutes to the gentleman from texas, mr. smith. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas is recognized. mr. bachus: ranking member of the judiciary. mr. smith: i thank the ranking member and the gentleman from alabama for yielding. over a long history rooted in our constitution we have relied on the rule of law an impartial bankruptcy courts to resolve the debts of failed enterprises. history has proved us correct. the recent case of lehman brothers. as the peak of the 2008

financial crisis approached, lehman declared bankruptcy. within a week it sold its core business. within six weekts its credit default swaps was solved. experts have shown that the lehman case didn't cause the financial system to meltdown. this bill discards our proven bankruptcy system for something that the american people forcefully reject, government-sponsored bailouts. the roler coaster bailout ride of 2008 is what caused the financial -- the roller coaster bailout ride of 2008 is what caused the financial meltdown. the bill sponsors openly admit they don't know if it will work but they urge us to build it anyway. the question is why and the answer is simple. when government picks the winners and losers, government becomes more powerful. so do the wall street winners that government picks. meanwhile, main street and free enterprise lose. this administration and its

congressional allies embraced with the founders fought against, ever expanding government power over the lives of free men and women. the founders rejected this approach, the american people reject it and so should we. i yield back the balance of my time, mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from massachusetts. mr. frank: mr. speaker, producing this legislation has been one of the most impressive team efforts in which i have ever participated and an indispensible part of this team, his concern for mortgage lending and fairness in the rules is the gentleman from north carolina, mr. watt, and i yield him three minutes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for three minutes. mr. watt: thank you, mr. speaker. i want to thank my colleague for the time and for his leadership in this tremendous effort. i'd like to spend some time just challenging a notion that's out there that this whole meltdown was unforeseeable by anybody.

nobody could have foreseen it. dispel that notion by understanding that on march 16, 2004, the first anti-predatory lending bill was introduced in this house of representatives by brad miller of north carolina and myself. we saw forthcoming the possibility of this substantial meltdown because we knew that predatory loans were out there being made to people who could not afford to pay them back. again, on march 9, 2005, in the 109th congress we reintroduced the bill, the anti-predatory lending bill. on october 22, 2007, we reintroduced the anti-predatory lending bill in the 110th

congress. and finally, finally in this term of congress on march 26, 2009, we reintroduced it for a fourth time, and finally it is incorporated into this legislation. now, why is that important? it for the first time puts around loans, some provential rules that say you ought to exercise some common sense when you make a loan to somebody. don't do a loan to people without proper documentation of their income. don't give them a teaser rate for six months and then escalate it by two or three percentage points and increase their fees and their payments exponentially so that they can't pay it back. don't give them premiums that

reward the people who get people into the worst kind of loans rather than giving them the best loans available. don't charge a prepayment penalty for allowing somebody to get out of a higher interest rate into a lower interest rate. make sure that when you refinance somebody gets some net tangible benefit out of the refinance other than the person that's making the loan. don't allow people to steer to the highest interest rate and worst possible predatory loan when there are other loans available. don't fail to give the proper disclosures about what's going on and don't prevent the state attorneys' general from enforcing their own state laws when we don't even have a federal law on.

so that's in this bill, and if we had this kind of legislation in effect when we first started introducing it back in 2004, we could have avoided this. don't let anybody say that this was an unforeseeable chain of events that led to this meltdown. we need to correct it and make sure that going forward those kind of predatory practices never, never, never, never occur again in our country. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from alabama. mr. bachus: thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, at this time i yield two minutes to the gentleman from missouri, mr. blunt. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for two minutes. mr. plunt: thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker -- mr. blunt: thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, i thank the gentleman for his work on this bill. clearly the american people want to see the right thing dons to this economy. i think this bill fails the basic things it should have

done. it doesn't end too big to fail, mr. speaker. in fact, it institutionalizes too big to fail. treasury will be able to front money to wind down these failing firms but also treasury can decide if they are at risk for failure. way too much involvement in the -- the taxpayers coming in and doing exactly what the american taxpayers are tired of seeing us doing. the government-sponsored entities, fannie mae and freddie mac, we talked about it and we'll talk more on this floor today and have talked about for months as one of the prime causes of the economic problems we face as far as i can tell are not mentioned and if they are mentioned, mr. speaker, there's no reform. the root cause of the problem we have in the economy today was caused by these entities and they're not addressed and it was said they would not be addressed. more control, mr. speaker, by the federal reserve of more things and more regulation.

there's a new agency under the federal reserve that will be in charge of setting new rules for the banking sector of the country in its entirety. credit, mr. speaker, will not be more available. it will be less available. and people who are in the job-creating business are already making announcements about what they'll do as they respond to this. why is that? because this bill steps further into managing the economy. the government may be able to do lots of things but making business decisions is not one of them. utility companies, food processors, others who routinely try to protect themselves in a volatile marketplace won't be able to do this. mr. speaker, this bill will cost jobs at a time when we ought to be figuring out how to increase jobs. mr. speaker, i hope our colleagues will turn it down and go back and do the right thing. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from massachusetts. mr. frank: mr. speaker, i yield myself 15 seconds to correct the gentleman. we have not created a consumer

bureau under the federal reserve. it will be housed under the federal reserve. the federal reserve won't be able to interfere. some on the other side wished it would, but it would be an independent bureau. they will get mail at the federal reserve but nobody will be able to open it. i want to yield to the gentleman from pennsylvania, mr. kanjorski. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized four. mr. kanjorski: mr. speaker, i rise in support of the conference agreement and ask for unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. kanjorski: mr. chairman, this is not a perfect bill, but this is a darn good bill. i know we will hear objections on both sides of the aisle but if you have a chance to look at it -- and it's a lengthy bill -- the 2,600 pages that are presented to both the house today and was in the week or so ahead to the senate constitute the first revolutionary change

of securities laws in the united states since the great depression. at that time we had a tremendous collapse, and you are forefathers and predecessors rose to the occasion with establishing a regulatory platform within the united states that made us the envy of the world. we had in 2008 a collapse in the failure of that system. it primarily grew out of the failure of the regulatory system to use all the powers it had and to keep track with a highly speculative and greedful nature at the time to allow us to go into the tremendous credit crisis that we faced in 2008. to now make an argument that we need do nothing and we will recover and we will prosper is pure ludicrousness. the fact of the matter is there are holes, there are loopholes, there are failures within our system, and we have to cleanse that system and fix that system.

and that's exactly what this bill does. i'm pleased to say that i had a part in doing that. i helped repair one amendment, too big to fail amendment. what we can say to our successors and to our constituents is that never again in the future will there will be an unlimited power for financial institutions to grow either in size, interconnectedness or other negative factors that they can remain and put in jeopardy systemically the economy of the united states and the world. we have the authority vested in our regulators to see that doesn't happen. if our regulators are able and will use those powers, never again will we face the too big to fail concept of having to bail out some of the largest institutions in the world. secondly, a large part of this was devoted to investor protection. i can't go through all the elements, but for the first time in history we're going to

allow the regulators to study and come up with rules and regulations that allow fidelity -- fiduciary relationship between dealer, brokers, dealers, investors and their customers. most people in this country think that already exists. it doesn't. after this bill and the use of those new regulations it will. you can then trust that the advice being given by the broker-dealer or the investment counselor is in your best interest as a customer and not in theirs. we also called for the largest comprehensive study of the security exchange commission in the -- securities and exchange commission in the history of the commission. it will put in place the tools necessary to revise the entire s.e.c. in the future. it also will be the predicate for that type of a comprehensive study to be used in other agencies and commissions of government to allow us the long road of

reform in the american government. these things are in the bill. besides that, we have the capacity to require that no one in the future need worry about the responsibility of the companies they are dealing with as to whether or not they will have counterparties, whether they are relying on representations that are true and false, because we are going to have transparency within the system. we will have, in the other areas, dealing with derivatives, we're going to have exchanges. we're going to have disclosure. never has that happened in the history of the united states. over the years, the last two decades, we have made attempts and always fail. this time, we have succeeded. mr. speaker, without reservation, i recommend to my colleagues a vote of yes on this bill. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from alabama. mr. bachus: at this time, i yield three minutes to the gentleman from indiana, mr. pence. the speaker pro tempore: the

gentleman is recognized for three minutes. mr. pence: i thank the gentleman for yielding and i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. pence: mr. speaker, i rise in opposition to the conference report for h.r. 4173, the so-called restoring american financial stability act. we're used to creative titles around here but i've got to tell you, during a time of extraordinary economic duress, millions of americans unemployed, failed economic policies, it is darkly ironic that a bill that will do anything but restore financial stability issnamed for that purpose. the truth of the matter is, when you look at this legislation, it's proof positive again that this majority just doesn't get it. the american people are looking

-- are not looking at washington, d.c. and clamoring for more spending, more taxings, and more bailouts. they're looking at washington, d.c. a-- and saying, when are you going to focus on creating jobs? when are you going to set partisan differences aside, power grabs and big government agendas aside to do something to put americans back to work. under the guise of financial reform, democrats are pushing yet another bill to kill jobs, raise taxes and make bailouts permanent. let me say that again this legislation will kill jobs, by restricting access to credit, it will kill jobs by raising taxes on those that would provide loans and opportunities to small business owners and family farmers, and it makes the bad ideas of the wall street bailout permanent. free market economics depends on the careful application of a

set of ideals, traditional american ideals and principles. chief among them is the notion that the freedom to succeed must include the freedom to fail. personal responsibility is at the very center of the american experiment from an economic standpoint. it is -- it is that center from which we have become not only the freest but the most prosperous nation in the history of the world. as my colleagues on the other side of the aisle know, i vigorously opposed the wall street bailout because i thought it departed from that fundamental principle of personal responsibility and limbed government. i rise today to vigorously oppose this legislation that takes the bad ideas of the wall street bailout and makes them permanent. this legislation codifies the notion of too big to fail. a policy and approach the american people have roundly rejected.

it will give government bureaucrats more power to pick winners and losers. when a financial firm is fail, the treasury secretary and fdic can take taxpayer dollars and decide which creditors get paid back and how and when they get paid. the american people don't want washington, d.c. in that business. they want a refereed private sector that says yes to traditional bankruptcy and no to bailouts because we are here to protect the taxpayers, not wall sthreet. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from massachusetts is recognized. mr. frank: i recognize again one of the leaders in protection from consumers, the gentleman from -- the gentlelady from new york, ms. maloney, for three minutes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized for three minutes. mrs. maloney: thank you for

presiding over the most open period of the congress. it will allow our financial services industry to continue financing the creativity and innovation which has, even in these very difficult times, made the american economy the envy of the world this bill restores safety and soundness, reduces the likelihood of another systemic crisis, restores faith and confidence in our institutions and markets while safeguarding americans from predatory, unfair, and deceptive practices. i have made it a mission throughout my career to help put consumers on an equal footing with their financial institutions. through laws like the credit card act and today we can take a huge step forward toward a more level playing field with the creation of the consumer financial protection bureau. for far too long in our

financial system and its products, any concerns about consumer protection came in at a distant second or a third or not at all. now anyone who opens a checking or savings account, anyone who takes out a student loan or a mortgage, anyone who opens a credit card or takes out a payday loan will have a federal agency on their side to protect them. for the first time, consume brother text authority will be housed in one place, it will be completely independent with an independently appointed director, an independent budget and an autonomous rule-making authority. very importantly, it will have a seat at the table at the financial stability oversight council. continuity and oversight of our financial institution will consider not only safety and soundness but also the best

interest of the american consumer, the american taxpayer, the american citizen. i am particularly pleased that two items that i offered were included that will give consumers direct access to the cfpb through a consumer hotline and consumer ombudsman. the bill also addresses the challenge of interchange fees, working with senator durbin and representative meeks, we were able to craft a balanced compromise that addressed both the concerns of merchants about high interchange fees and the concerns of the financial sector to be fairly compensated for their services. this bill ensures transparency, establishes accountability and protects consumers and investors. america has long been the world lead for the financial services with this landmark bill we can set an x. and take the lead in global financial reform. i urge a yes vote. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from alabama.

mr. bachus: at this time, i recognize the ranking member of the subcommittee on international monetary mollcy, mr. mill over california, for two minutes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for two minutes. mr. miller: thank you, mr. speaker. i rise today in opposition of this by this country is going through a period of economic distress, and this will only serve to restrict access to credit and place more and more undue burdens on the back of consumers this bill contains language that change the ways borrowers pay their mortgage origination fees. currently they can pay up front and partly finance it. this eliminates that choice. this leads to higher cost and fewer options. it places several onerous restrictions on banks and

exempts the federal government from these restrictions. the borrowers will be steered toward the federal government when looking for options. this breaks our proppings that excess tarp funds would go to pay pais down debt and deficit. we promised that any return the federal government made from taxpayers' investment into the financial sector of this economy would go to pay -- paying down the deficit and the national debt, currently over $13 trillion. we break that promise by taking the remaining tarp fund and use home to pay for the takeover of the economy. we need to get the federal government out of the way so small businesses can begin to innovate and expand. we need to provide a regulatory framework to allow small businesses the ability to make their own financial decisions. we cannot continue to break our promise to the american people. the future othis -- of this great nation depends on the actions we take here today and i can only conclude this action

will lead us to great -- further into recession and lead us to greater debt. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from massachusetts. mr. frank: i yield one minute to the gentleman from georgia, mr. barrow. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. barrow: i rise in support of h.r. 4173, the wall street reform and consumer protection act. i believe this bill takes positive steps to protect us from the risky behavior that took our country to the edge of 237bs rble ruin. i voted against the bank bailout bill because there was no accountability and it didn't get at the root of the problem this legislation gets at the root of the problem and gets banks back in the business of making good loans instead of gambling with our money. i look forward to passage of this legislation and i urge my colleagues to lend their support as well. with that, i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from alabama.

mr. bachus: thank you. mr. speaker, at this time i recognize the chairman of the republican study committee the gentleman from georgia, mr. price. for two minutes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for two minutes. mr. price: thank you. thank you, mr. speaker. this ought to sound pretty familiar. here's just part of this bill, another 2,000-page monstrosity. look at it, mr. speaker. it's down there, held together by rubber bands. held together by rubber bands. called the dodd-frank wall street reform bill. senator dodd even said about it, quote, no one will know until this is actually in place how it works. unquote. that's no way to do business. the fundamental assumption of this bill is that since the smart people regulating banks let us down, we should just hire really, really smart people to prevent it from happening again that assumption is not only false, it's dangerous. when the government picks winners and losers, the nation

loses. if my colleagues on the other side of the aisle believe the same leg reg lators who failed to see the housing crisis are going to see the next chi sis thanks to heavy handed government regulation, the american people would say to the democrats in charge that they put too much faith in the power of washington to see the future. the fundamental question we've got to answer is, if this law were in place in 2008, would it have prevented the crisis? the answer to that question is clearly no. more os preive, job-killing regulation isn't the answer. what we need is flexible and accountable and nimble regulation this bill does not do it. what will it do? it will ensure bailouts, puts bailouts in place forever. it doesn't address fannie and freddie at the epicenter of the problem. doesn't address it at all. it kills american jobs with impressive regulation and it will decrease the availability of credit and increase the cost of credit to all the american people. that's even moring anering to americans because they know there are positive solutions. h.r. 3310 is the bill we put

forward nearly a year ago now that would make certain we address the issue of regulatory reform in a positive way that makes it more flexible and nimble, that addresses the issue of fannie and freddie, actually solves the challenge that got us into this crisis in the first place and makes certain we end bailouts. the american people are sick and tired of bailouts. that bill, mr. speaker, will ensure that bailouts continue. the american people are urging us to vote no on this bill. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expire. the gentleman from massachusetts. mr. frank: i yield two minutes to a very important member of the committee who has helped in many pieces of this, the gentleman from new york, mr. meeks. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for two minutes. mr. meeks: today is a historic day because of the job of our chairman, barney frank, who we are so proud of. very few people could have marshaled the bill the way he did. because of him and that leadership, today we end too

big to fail and implement unprecedent condsumer protections and issue rules that will prevent taxpayers from footing the bills for the irresponsible behaviors of others while still, because i'm a new yorker, maintain new york's status. this bill has death penaltiers in greedy financial institutions. if you are a institution that's causing systemic risk this bill allows regulators to dire-solve you and dissolve you without the cost to any taxpayer money. i repeat, let me emphasize, taxpayers will bear no cost for liquidating risky, interconnected financial firms this bill includes strong investor protections and transparency mechanisms through the use of stress tests which is more than i advocated for and the results will be published. it will increase the amount of information available for investors to make wise decisions with their hard-earned savings.

most importantly to my constituents, this bill establishes a consumer financial protection bureau to police lenders to ensure that the predatory lending that mr. watt was talking about that ensnared so many unsuspecting americans will be halted, led oby an independent director and the office will be able to act swiftly so consumers won't need to wait for an act of congress. we have placed explicit language into the bill to prohibit introbrawn price -- intra-brand price discriminations which would put community credit unions at a disadvantage. we explicitly exempt them from the regulation and finally by fixing concerns that the federal government had, we -- we save the taxpayer $40 million. mr. frank: i yield the gentleman 15 seconds. mr. meeks: $40 million a year according to estimates.

we need this bill,s the right bill the bill that -- without lending from wall street, there would be no main street this bill responsibly regulates the former to ensure the vitality of the latter. . the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from alabama. mr. bachus: two minutes to the the gentleman from california, mr. mccarthy. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for two minutes. mrs. mccarthy: i thank the -- >> i rise in opposition to this conference report. at a time when california has 12.4% unemployment and my district has 16.5, my home county, my constituents are being -- asking what is being done to create jobs. this is another example of washington not listening. instead of policies that promote private sector job growth, this bill creates more government and

create a new bureau with sweeping authority and a budget to create new government jobs in washington, d.c. and creates the new office of financial research, empowered to collect personal information about all of our financial transactions. this office can actually issue subpoenas to get the information these unelected bureaucrats want to have about us. aside from the personal concerns we may have about this, what is being done to help create a private sector job? this is not job creations for families in my district but part of the majority's continuation of overreach and expansion of government. first, it was $787 billion stimulus that failed to keep unemployment down. then the national energy tax. then a $1 trillion government takeover of health care and now another expansion of government that will raise costs for consumers and small businesses. well, mr. speaker, republicans offered an alternative to this report that would have ended

bailouts, addressed too big to fail and the failures of freddie mac and fannie mae, but that was rejected. congress needs to be focusing on pro small business policies and lend to job creators that are at the heart of our communities, job creators are at the heart of what we all want, a job-filled recovery. this conference report will do none of these things and i urge a no vote. and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from massachusetts. mr. frank: mr. speaker, another member of the committee who has played a major role in this is my coal eeg from massachusetts. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for two minutes. mr. capuano: mr. speaker, i will tell you that this bill is one of the best bills i have been involved in in the 12 years in congress. it doesn't give me everything that i want. i don't think anybody would say that, but this is a bill that

brings us back toward thoughtful oversight over the financial institutions of this country. from -- for 70 years, we had the best financial institutions, the best financial system in the world. every other country tied to emulate us. what happened? slowly but surely through the congress and its president decided we wanted to deregulate everything. let's look at nothing. let everything go. what was the result of it? a financial meltdown. that was in the economic sector. what was it the result of in the gulf? an oil spill of ultimate proportions. the concept that government can't regulate has been proven wrong time and time again. nobody argues for overregulation. that's a fair argument where's the appropriate line. in this case, in the financial institutions' case, we went years with loans that nobody

knew what the standards were. we went years with credit agencies giving everybody a a.a.a. rating without a clue what is behind those papers. we went years people betting with our money, pension fund money and other money we didn't want to do on things that didn't exist. they didn't exist. the result of it was the financial kneltdown. this bill brings us toward a more thoughtful regulatory regime that will ensure the stability of our economic stm system and that's what this is all about. it's not about raising revenue or killing anything. my district has a very vibrant financial sector. we want to keep it that way. but i want to make sure it's stable. that's more important than anything else. this bill accomplishes that and that's why we should support it. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from alabama.

mr. bachus: i recognize the gentleman from florida, mr. putnam, for two minutes. the gentleman is recognized for two minutes. mr. putnam: i rise in opposition to the frank-dodd bill and would not reform wall street and fail to provide consumer protection and doesn't prevent a future crisis. the permanent bailout would ensure that the federal government maintains the ability to use taxpayer funds to bail out financial institutions deemed too big to fail. that may be important to the d.c. bureaucrats but to the community banks and credit unions and communities they serve, i can assure you it's not. they are treated as too small to save. they don't receive the special treatment accorded to the big guys in this bill. they go through the bankruptcy process. why the double standard? why the double standard for our communities? they didn't cause wall street's collapse and yet they are held to a different standard. this is harmful to main street small businesses.

the legislation creates an office of financial research to, quote, monitor, record and report on any financial transaction, including consumer transactions without the consent of the consumer, monitor, record and report any transaction without your approval. this new big brother bureaucracy will be funded through assessments on financial institutions that trickle down to consumers through higher fees. according to the c.b.o., the cost of the proposed fee would be borne through the customers, employees and investors. the legislation welcomes a new washington knows best bureau housed within the federal reserve. the credit czar will dictate which financial products can and cannot be made available to consumers and will have broad authority to set sales practices, limit products and mandate compensation. the bureau misses its mark to protect consumers and will create more barriers to consumers he' ability to obtain

credit, pursue their dreams, buy a home, refinance and expand their business. this conference report totaling over 2,300 pages is bad for small business and i urge its defeat. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from massachusetts. mr. frank: how much time remains on both sides? the speaker pro tempore: 37 1/4. 40 1/2 to the jeasm alabama. mr. frank: i yield to the gentleman who tried to help people with their mortgages, mr. faa for one minute. -- fattah for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. fattah: the american people get it right. when they wanted to pick a party that would rein in the abuses of wall street they gave the majority in the house and senate to the democrats. you can hear from the other side that they obviously made the

right choice because there is no willingness to deal with some of these challenges from my colleagues on the other side. i want to congratulate chairman barney frank. i met with him over a year ago about some of the challenges in terms of foreclosures in our country. in this bill is the result of language that i offered which replicated a very successful program in pennsylvania that we believe will help others throughout the country and thank migrate colleague from california, congresswoman waters, for her efforts to make sure that this was fully engaged by the committee. but beyond my proposal that it's included in terms of homeowners' assistance, in terms of foreclosures, this is a very good bill. and it's regulation of wall street, consumer protection. this house, i urge that we vote in favor of the wall street reform bill. and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from alabama.

mr. bachus: i would like to recognize the republican whip, mr. cantor, the gentleman from virginia for two minutes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for two minutes. mr. cantor: i thank the speaker and the gentleman from alabama. i rise in opposition to this conference report. mr. speaker, the flow of credit and capital throughout the financial system is the building block of american prosperity. it is enabled entrepreneurs to pursue their ideas. it has enabled people to balance their budgets to achieve a better standard of living. when businesses and families cannot access capital from banks, consumers don't spend, small businesses hunker down and investment drives up. the economy simply can't grow jobs. this legislation is a clear attack on capital formation in america. it purports to prevent the next financial crisis, but does so by vastly expanding the power of the same regulators who failed to stop the last one.

dodd-frank is the product of a tired philosophy with the notion that you can solve the problem by piling vast new layers of bureaucracy, regulatory costs and taxes on it. and who will pay the price? it won't merely be the big banks who the bill supporters rail against. smaller less leveraged community banks will have a difficult time surviving. and most alarming, costs will be passed on to consumers and businesses in the form of higher prices for credit. we know this because last year's credit card act is already having just that effect. before it was passed, republicans warned that more government expansion and more washington prescription would create additional costs borne by the consumer. it was common sense. and sure enough, we were right. in response to that legislation, lending rates were reset higher as credit became less available.

meanwhile, free checking accounts are becoming a realic of the past for all but the wealthiest bank customers. republicans agree that the financial system needs a shakeup to bring transparency. but the fact is that this legislation does not accomplish this goal. it's bad for private business. it's bad for families. and i urge my colleagues to vote no before we do any more damage. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from massachusetts. mr. frank: mr. speaker, i want to recognize one of the leaders in housing and matters of fairness on our committee, chairman of the housing subcommittee, the gentlelady from california for southern california. ms. waters: i'm proud to stand here in support of this most significant piece of legislation that is before this house. again, i thank chairman frank for his leadership and i'm especially proud that this work

of the conference committee was done by such a diverse group on this side of the aisle. i'm especially proud that members of the conference committee included not only women, but african americans and latinos and anglos. it was truly diverse and you can see that work reflected in what came out of the conference report. for example, the c.b.c., members of the financial services committee worked on a number of these issues over the past several years. and we came up with those things that have been brought to our attention year in and year out that are finally paid attention to in the conference report. the federal insurance office, we will be asking them to gather information about the ability of minorities and low-income persons to access affordable insurance products. to give consideration and mitigation of the impact of

winding down a systemically risky institution on minorities and low-income communities. the expansion of the consumer financial protection bureau's advisory board to include experts in civil rights, community development, communities impacted by high priced loans and others. and perhaps most importantly, the establishment of the offices of minority and women inclusion at each of the federal financial services agencies. these offices would provide for diversity in the employment, management and business activities of these agencies. the data for the need for these offices speaks for itself. diversity is lacking in the financial services industry. within the g.a.o. reporting that from 1993 to 2004, the level of minority participation in the financial services profession only increased marginally from

11% to 15.5%. we tike care of that in this bill and now we'll have the opportunity to not only give oversight to diversity but help these agencies understand how to do outreach, how to appeal to different communities so we can get the kind of employee that will create the diversity to pay attention to all of the needs of the people of this country. mr. chairman, i'm pleased to note that this conference report includes a provision that i championed, to allow the s.e.c. to issue rules on proxy access, given the nation's pension funds and other long-term institutional investors, a say in the governing of the companies in which they own stock. additionally, i'm pleased this bill addresses foreclosures, which have single-handedly inflicted tremendous damage in my neighborhoods in california and across the country. it has long been my position

that this bill would be incomplete without directly addressing the needs of america's homeowners and neighborhoods. that is why i fought for an additional $1 billion in funds for the neighborhood stablization program whose legislation i wrote in 2008 and it is helping neighborhoods all across this country who had foreclosed properties and rundown properties that are driving down the price of other homes in their communities. now we can rehabilitate those properties and keep the value up in the neighborhood. an additional $1 billion in emergency assistance for unemployed homeowners was included in this bill. 60% of individuals seeking help in avoiding floshese are doing so because they are unemployed. this funding will provide a critical bridge for homeowners and allow them to maintain

stable housing for their children. this bill will combine $6 billion, two rounds of funding is another step towards addressing the foreclosure crisis. more needs to be done. that is why i'm pleased the treasury has committed to providing another $2 billion for unemployed homeowners in addition to the amounts provided under this bill. i will continue to fight for both additional funding and loss mitigation legislation which will make it mandatory for banks to offer real, sustainable loan modification offers. mr. chairman, thank you for your assistance. thank you for your support. thank you for your leadership. i'm proud to be part of this congress, so proud to have been a part of the conference committee and i think we are doing all of america's justice in this bill as we pay attention to needs that have been so long overlooked. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the

gentleman from alabama. mr. bachus: i yield to mr. issa, the ranking member of government oversight and government reform for three minutes. four minutes, i'm sorry. the speaker pro tempore: the jell is recognized for four minutes. mr. issa: i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: wok. mr. issa: mr. speaker, others will rise and they'll talk about the underlying bill. although i was on the conference committee and for two weeks, chairman franks, ranking member bachus and the rest of us were together, i do not claim and will not claim to be an expert on all the things that led to a financial meltdown or all the things that will preclude the next. i do rise to oppose the dodd-frank bill and i do so because i don't believe it will preclude another meltdown and another crisis. i don't do that because i'm an expert on the financial system, i'm not. the people i serve with on

conference, many of them are. i'm not concerned that the process was not open. i think chairman frank allowed us an unusually great amount of time to be heard. i'm disappointed that at the end of the day so many things were left out. i appreciate chairman frank offer for a separate bill to make up for the fact that the transparency and data issues i worked for two weeks in this bill to put in, because they were rejected by the senate, we'll have to send them again and hope that the senate is more benevolent when we simply ask the agencies to have data standards that allow for the kind of transparency among regulators that will in fact see reckless behavior ahead of time or allow us to know the underlying value of assets when the market begins to melt. the reckless behavior that led to the meltdown will be debated for year bus the absence of transparency at the time the meltdown, an inability for our

regulators, our banks, or anyone else to actually tell us what the underlying value of various assets were, were in no small part of the result of arcane systems that underlie these very modern instruments. you cannot have paper copies sitting in banks to tell you the details about a loan and then cut it into thousands of pieces, spread it around the world and hope that somebody can have confidence in the document when things start going wrong. technology, transparency is the most important -- technology transparency is the most important thing missing in this bill. i hope to work with the majority to bring it in the coming days. i don't do it for my committee, i do it because next time there's a hiccup anywhere in the world, even if it's a massive power out leading to caffed loss we need to have the ability for regulators, with confidence to say we have

transparency we know what these assets are worth and we can assure them this bill does do a few good things and i would be remiss if i didn't mention that the ability for banks to trust each other in financial transfers of noninterest bearing large amounts is in no small part something that will keep the market going if otherwise there is a lack of confidence in the bank. i do object to the way this bill is paid for. i believe that it was inappropriate and unfortunately people at the conference were not willing to consider a real pay-for, not even a real rollback in unexpended funds that would otherwise be available. mr. speaker, this bill is done. we cannot look to what this bill or won't do. we have to look to the future. will we do a better job in data management in transparency in creating the tools that would allow the financial oversight board and the financial industry regulators to do the

job the next time that they didn't do the last time? mr. speaker, i do not have high confidence that it will be done. i have high confidence that this body will work together to produce a bill, send it to the other body and try, try to get them to understand that data transparency is essential if we're not going to have another meltdown. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from massachusetts. mr. frank: i yield two minutes to the gentleman from florida. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for two minutes. >> i ask unanimous consent to engage in a colloquy with chairman frank. the speaker pro tempore: without objection sms mr. hastings: i look forward to supporting this legislation. before that, however, i'd like to clarify a few points as they pore tain to the intent of the bill. it's my understanding that certain provisions, intended to

improve access to mainstream financial institutions are not intended to further limit access to credit in other financial services to the very consumers who are already underserved by traditional banking institutions. as you know, each year, over 20 million working american families with depository account relationships at federally insured financial institutions actively choose alternative sources and lenders to meet their emergency and short-term credit needs. these alternative sources and lenders often are offered as convenient and less expensive products and services than the banks where consumers have relationships. further, as the demand for short-term, small-dollar loans continue toin crease as a result of the current economic environment, nontraditional lend verse filled the void left by mainstream financial institutions in many of our nation's underbanked communities. mr. chairman, i have a longer

statement and with your permission would skip to the clause i think is particularly important and include my full statement in the record in the interest of time. i feel that the financial services should be well balanced and carried out in a manner that encourages consumer choice, market competition and strong protections. it's my sincere hope that this legislation is designed to carefully and fairly police the financial services industry treating similar products in the short-term credit market equally while encouraging lending practices that are fair to consumers. is this the intent? mr. frak: anybody who asks has my permission to skip any statement. i do agree with the gentleman. i yield myself 15 seconds. we do want to make sure it's an

informed choice, we're going to work on financial literacy. it's not our sfwonings deny anybody that choice. mr. hastings: thank you, mr. chairman. i commend you for your efforts to pass meaningful financial regulatory reform in this congress. i deeply thank you and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from alabama. mr. bachus: thank you, mr. speakee. mr. speaker, at this time, i yield three minutes to the gentleman from texas, mr. paul, the ranking member of the domestic monetary policy committee. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for three minutes. mr. paul: i thank the gentleman from alabama for yielding. i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: wok. mr. paul: i rise in opposition to this piece of legislation, i'm afraid it's not going to do much to solve our problems. i know it's very well intended and it's believed that more regulations will solve the problem, but quite frankly the problem that we're facing comes from a very deeply flawed monetary system. i had made an attempt to team

size this point by talking about a full audit of the federal reserve and fortunately, this house was strongly in support of this piece of legislation. there's 320 co-sponsors of this bill. it passed rather easily on the financial services committee. then it was put into the house version of this reform package. but it was removed in conference. though there is some attention given to getting more information from the fed, it truly doesn't serve as a full audit. if we don't eventually address the federal reserve in depth, we will never understand how financial bubbles are formed and why more regulations tend to fail. if the financial markets were pleased with what we're doing here today and the discussion in the last several weeks they wouldn't be reeling as they are at this very moment. so i would say that we should

be very cautious in expanding the role of the regulatory agencies which doesn't -- which does not solve the problem. at the same time, give manager power to the federal reserve doesn't make much sense if the theory is right that the federal reserve is the source of much of our problems. now, some objected to the transparency bill of the federal reserve and said that that was too much information, that the federal reserve had to be totally independent. the federal reserve transparency act doesn't do anything about removing transparency. it doesn't change monetary policy. it says that the american people and the congress have a right to know what they do. after the crisis hit, the federal reserve injected $1.7 trillion in garen -- and guaranteed many more trillions of dollars and it was very hard to get any information whatsoever. so an ongoing audit to find out

exactly what they do and why they do it would be a first step to finding out the relationship of the federal reserve system to the banking system and the financial community. transparency is something the american people have been asking for and they want. they didn't like the lack of transparency with the tarp funds and once the american people found out about what goes on at the fed they want transparency of the fed. fortunately, today, we have a chance to vote on this because it will be in the recommital motion and it will give -- give us a chance to put the language back in, the h.r. 1207, the federal reserve transparency act a chance to audit the fed. this will be a perfect opportunity to team size the importance of the fed and to say that we do need a full audit. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from massachusetts. mr. frank: i yield 3 1/2 minutes to the gentleman from illinois, chairman of the subcommittee who has done a great deal of work to improve

our financial situation through this bill. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for 3 1/2 minutes. >> chairman frank, i want to commend you for getting this through congress and your dedication to reforming our financial system.% mr. gutierrez: the legislation before us takes a multipronged approach to ending the problem of too big to fail. by giving regulators the tools only when it is necessary to decrease the size of financial institutions, limit their risky behaviors and wind down systemically significant firms if they threaten the health of our financial system. the most direct way to end too big to fail is to stop firms from growing too big in the first place. to limit their size and complexity, this legislation would improve -- impose increasingly strict rules on capital levels and leverage ratios which would limit a firm's risky behavior and diminish the threat to the stability of our financial

system. by implementing a strong vocal -- volcker rule and eliminating proprietary trade, we minimize a bank's ability to use subsidized funds for trading. additionally, the bill will create a financial stability oversight council that will be able to force a company, as a last resort to dizest -- divest its holdings and shrink its size if it's determined to be a risk are. the most important of this legislation that will help to end too big to fail is the resolution authority we create to safely wind down a failed significant firm and to prevent any further bank bailout. this legislation ends individual open bank assistance. let me repeat, this legislation ends individual open bank assistance, meaning that if the resolution authority, the death

panel, the burial panel is applied to a bank, it will not be bailed out but allowed to safely fail and prevent contagion from spreading to the marketplace. let me repeat this. no more bailout, we have a funeral fund. . the banks pay for this and the republicans have said no. in the house and senate, they refuse to support a pre-funded funeral fund that would be paid for by the riskiest and biggest banks. the big bankers don't pay. main street has to pay. opposition from certain republican senators and i won't mention their name, was forcing banking assistance. republicans are sided with big wall street banks at every opportunity and they oppose an amendment in the conference to

increase the f.d.i.c. insurance to help protect people's deposits along with community banks and small businesses. let's be clear, they refuse to guarantee that the banks clean up any future messes that they create and it's obvious where the line has been drawn by republicans. if it helps wall street banks, they favor it. if it helps main street and regular americans, they won't vote for it and we don't think they will today. mr. chairman, i won't hold my breath for any republican support of this historic legislation but i urge my members to support this vital bill. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from alabama. alabama alabama i yield myself 15 seconds. i don't think you would go to a funeral home and loan the corpse money so i don't know why you would loan money to a failing fund. you ought to put them in

bankruptcy like we want to do. at this time, i yield three minutes to the gentlelady from illinois, who's the chairman of the financial services oversight committee. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized for three minutes. mrs. biggert: i thank the gentleman. i rise in opposition to this conference report and the bill. in the fall of 2008, our entire financial system and economy were on the verge of collapse. the $750 billion tarp program was proposed. i for one would never have backed it were it not for taxpayers' protection and promised that the taxpayer would be repaid. this bill breaks that promise to taxpayers and takes unspent money from the tarp program instead of paying down our $13 trillion debt. it uses the money to pay for the new federal spending. and contrary to my colleagues' rhetoric, this bill makes

bailouts permanent. look at section 210 and five and section 210 and six. these provisions authorize bureaucrats to bail out the six largest too big to fail to the tune of $8 trillion. what you have is taxpayers footing the bill to pay for failed wall street firms and that's a bailout. my colleagues on the other side of the aisle claim that the bill requires taxpayers be paid back. how can taxpayers believe that this bill that breaks the earlier promise can believe what they say? this bill also fails to reform freddie mac and fannie mae, the two mortgage giants at the center of the housing crisis. taxpayers have bailed fannie and freddie out to the tune of $250 billion and more to come. this bill doesn't reform them but calls for a study and fails

to include as part of our federal budget the trillions in liability taxpayers face because the federal government owns and operates freddie mac and fannie mae. let's look at our hidden costs. our midwest manufacturers had nothing to do with the financial crisis, yet this people requires them to divert trillions of dollars of working capital to pay for financial transactions, which may stifle job growth and raise the cost of commodities for american families. what's the cost to small businesses? job growth. taxpayers, small businesses and consumers pick up the tab for a new federal bureaucrats, studies and reports according to the u.s. chamber of commerce. in the name of financial reform we must not stifle job creation by saddling our small businesses and manufacturers with additional burdens. we need to get financial reform

right so that innovators and entrepreneurs can secure credit, expand and create desperately needed jobs. we need to get reform right but this bill doesn't pass the test. i urge my colleagues to not support this conference report and bill. mr. frank: i would ask my colleagues, my colleagues from agriculture are here. i'm about to yield, but could i ask unanimous consent to yield 13 minutes of my time to the the gentleman from minnesota, with him having the right to control that time as chairman of the agriculture committee? the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. bachus: i agree with that. i would ask unanimous consent that i yield some time to our ranking member of ag to do the same thing. mr. frank: thank you so much. i now yield 1 1/2 minutes to the

the gentleman from michigan. the speaker pro tempore: how much time do you want to yield to the ranking member? mr. bachus: at some point you want unanimous consent to yield time to the -- mr. frank: i ask unanimous consent which i got. and you want it for mr. lucas? mr. bachus: yes. the speaker pro tempore: how much time would the gentleman from alabama yield? mr. bachus: i'm not prepared to say. i'll know in a minute. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from is recognized. mr. frank: i yield 1 1/2 minutes to mr. peters. mr. peters: the frank-dodd bill is historic and protect consumers and reduce economic failures and provide for increased oversight of our entire financial system. it strives to protect job-creating main street businesses.

this legislation will, for the first time, bring transparency and oversight to the currently unregulated $600 trillion derivatives market. because commercial end users, those who use derivatives to hedge, do not pose systemic risks and use these contracts as a way to provide consumers with lower cost goods and they are exempted from clearing margin requirements. i offered an amendment that would extend the companies that use swaps to hedge their interest rate and foreign currency risk arising from their financing activity. the amendment was narrowly written to make sure companies can only qualify for the exemption if 90% of their derives from the sale or lease of their parent company's manufactured goods. another provision provides a two year transition period for affiliates. i would like to yield so he can

clarify because they provide a limited provision for qualifying captive finance companies and two-year transition period for all others that would not qualify for the limited exemption created -- mr. frank: the answer is he is correct. his statement is completely accurate. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from alabama. mr. bachus: unanimous consent request to yield seven minutes to the the gentleman from oklahoma, mr. lucas, to -- who is the ranking member of the agriculture committee to then yield time to his members. mr. frank: i now turn my time over to the the gentleman from minnesota, chairman of the agriculture committee. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. bachus: both these gentlemen will control the time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized.

>> i thank the gentleman for yielding. i rise today in support of the conference report wall street reform and consumer protection act. i thank chairman frank, who has demonstrated his great policy making skills and leadership on this important issue. the staffs of both the house agriculture committee and financial services committee have worked closely on this legislation for the past year and it is thanks to our efforts that we have a conference committee report before us today. one of the bill's key components is title 7 which brings greater transparency and accountability to derivative markets. the house considered financial reform in december and derivatives were one area in which we had strong bipartisan. the house produced a very good product. the senate's efforts on derivatives were in a different direction. as with any legislation, with such stark differences, compromises had to be made. this legislation represents a middle ground between the house

and senate. while no one got everything they wanted in this bill, i think we got a bill that will prevent another crisis in the financial markets like the one we experienced in 2008. the house agriculture committee started looking at some of the issues addressed in this legislation even before evidence of the financial crisis started to appear. i'm pleased that the conference report contains many of the provisions the house ag committee endorsed of passing three bills on this topic. let me briefly talk about some of those provisions. our review began when we experienced price volatility in energy future markets due to excessive speculation, first with natural gas and crude oil. we remember when we had $147 oil. the ag committee examined the influx of new traders in these markets, including hedge funds and index funds and we looked at the relationship between what was occurring on regulated markets and the unregulated over

the counter market. this conference report includes the tools we authorize and the direction to the cftc to mitigate outrageous price spikes. the house agriculture committee spent time considering the role of derivatives in the collapse of the financial markets and debating different approaches to regulating these financial tools. in the end, it was the agriculture committee on a bipartisan basis that embraced mandatory clearing well before the idea became popular. clearing is not the only means -- not only a means to greater transparency to the derivative markets but should reduce the risk that was prevalent throughout the out-of-control market. the conference -- market. in crafting the house bill, we focused on creating a regulatory approach to have end users to continue using derivative,

whether it is an energy exploration, manufacturing or commercial activity. end users did not cause the financial crisis of 2008. they were the victims of it. now that -- now that has been some concern and frankly, misinterpretation of the conference report's language regarding capital and margin requirements by some who want to portray these requirements as applying to end user derivatives. this is patently false. the section in question governance the regulation of major swap participants and swap dealers and its provisions apply only to major swap participants and dealers. no where in this section do we give regulators any authority to impose capital and marginal requirements on end users. what is going on here is that the wall street firms want to get out of the margin requirements and they are playing on the fears of the end playing on the fears of the end users in order to obtain an