mr. bachus: thank you, mr. chair. the chair: the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from arizona. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the noes have it. the amendment is not agreed to. mr. flake: on that i request a recorded vote. the chair: further proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from arizona will be postponed. it is now in order to consider amendment number 5 printed in house report 112-138. for what purpose does the gentlewoman from florida rise? ms. ros-lehtinen: thank you, mr. speaker. pursuant to the rules i have an amendment at the desk. the chair: the clerk will designate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 5 printed in house report 11-138 offered by ms. ros-lehtinen of -- 112-138 offered by ms. ros-lehtinen of florida. the chair: the gentlewoman from florida, ms. ros-lehtinen, and a member opposed each will control five minutes. the chair recognizes the gentlewoman from florida for five minutes. ms. ros-lehtinen: i thank the ch

mr. bachus: thank you, mr. chairman. mr. chairman, what is this awful thing that republicans are bringing tpwhever congress today? this monstrosity the democrats have called it is an attack on consumers. it's a proposal first brought to us by our democratic colleagues and that was to have a bipartisan commission to protect consumers. that is what we're being attacked for today. a five-member board. now, all of us in this body are for consumer protection. our voters, our constituents, are all consumers. and we are all for protecting them. we're also for protecting our financial institutions and our economy. and we need a balance. so how do we achieve that? well, the democrats, elizabeth warren, the originator of this -- of this consumer protection commission, back in 2007, proposed a consumer protection product safety commission. in 2008, the consumer federation of america pr posed a financial product safety commission. senator dick durbin, acting on their recommendations, introduced in 2009, a consumer protection commission.

mr. bachus is question? does anybody have a view of what that world looks like? >> back to mr. bachus' comment about, the comments about real problems were were with the securitization structures, and a view of the world is, you know, there will be some reliance on credit ratings, but there should be additional due diligence. there should be an understanding on the part of the banks we regulate and other investors on what is actually underlined that securitization. that's not a new view for the occ. we have guidance in that area. we reaffirmed and strengthened it in 2009. arguably we didn't enforce it as much as we should have, but i think that's the view is again, back to this idea of reducing reliance on credit ratings. >> thank you. i see my time has expired. i thank the chair for the additional time. >> and now the vice chairman, mr. fitzpatrick for five minut minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman. mr. ramsey i want to follow up on the chairman's life questions earlier. having to deal with the designation process at the sec for recognizing the national recognize statistical or

mr. bachus: thank you, mr. chairman. mr. chairman, what is this awful thing that republicans are bringing tpwhever congress today? this monstrosity the democrats have called it is an attack on consumers. it's a proposal first brought to us by our democratic colleagues and that was to have a bipartisan commission to protect consumers. that is what we're being attacked for today. a five-member board. now, all of us in this body are for consumer protection. our voters, our constituents, are all consumers. and we are all for protecting them. we're also for protecting our financial institutions and our economy. and we need a balance. so how do we achieve that? well, the democrats, elizabeth warren, the originator of this -- of this consumer protection commission, back in 2007, proposed a consumer protection product safety commission. in 2008, the consumer federation of america pr posed a financial product safety commission. senator dick durbin, acting on their recommendations, introduced in 2009, a consumer protection commission.

mr. bachus says he cannot do anything until the obama administration lets him. the only time since 1992 that the congress has acted on fannie mae and freddie mac was in 2007, 2008, when i was the chairman, and we got together a bill at the request of the secretary paulson, which president bush signed, which gave the secretary the authority to put them in a conservatorship. i agree with mr. shelby had too much of the market, but at least it is not that cost on us that it was before. they are behaving in a much more responsible fashion today. mr. chairman, i appreciate this opportunity. >> thank you for coming over here today. the need to get back to the house. senator shelby has a couple -- >> i feel at home here today. i count nine of my former colleagues here. >> a few observations. congressman frank and i have sparred over issues over a number of years. i agree with him that there is a difference between managed risk and speculation. i think we agree on that. speculation will cause people to get into trouble. managed risk will help people. as far as fannie mae

mrs. capito: i yield two minutes to m bachus. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. mr. bachus: i never voted for a stand-alobe consumer protection advancement -- consumer protection bill, i never voted against it, because that was never offered. what was offered was a 10,000-page extravaganza for federal employees to enforce rules that weren't enforced in the first place. i consistently said let's enforce the rules we have and not just hire more regulators and create more rules. as you know, we offered a bill which did have several positions. thank you, mr. chairman. the chair: the gentlewoman from west virginia, reserves. mr. frank: the gentleman from alabamdid in fact vote against it. it wasn't just voted on in the final. we had a markup in committee just on this bill. and the gentleman voted against a free standing consumer agency whether it had five minutes -- members or not. he said it was a good idea which we rued but he voted against it. the republicans offered a substitute which took 14 officials, made them a council, gave them the power to have a hot line and sa

mr. bachus. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for two minutes. mr. bachus: thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, we just lerppeds -- heard we were cutting medicare, but it was the minority party that cut $500 billion out of medicare last year to pass obamacare. how quickly we forget. mr. speaker, one time people stored cash under their mattress for safe keeping. now people all over the world put that same money in treasury bills. that benefits every american and count -- in countless ways, let's not lose that advantage. the imminent threat to the safe haven of treasury bonds and our national security is default and downgrade. however, by far the overriding danger is too much government spending. the federal government must do what every family in america is called on to do. at times when things are tight. that's cut spending and live within their means. as long as we ignore our spending problem, the economy will weaken, confidence will not be restored, jobs will not be created. we and more profoundly our children and grandchildren will bear the cost. e

mr. bachus says he cannot do anything until the obama administration lets him. the only time since 1992 that the congress has acted on fannie mae and freddie mac was in 2007, 2008, when i was the chairman, and we got together a bill at the request of the secretary paulson, which president bush signed, which gave the secretary the authority to put them in a conservatorship. i agree with mr. shelby had too much of the market, but at least it is not that cost on us that it was before. they are behaving in a much more responsible fashion today. mr. chairman, i appreciate this opportunity. >> thank you for coming over here today. the need to get back to the house. senator shelby has a couple -- >> i feel at home here today. i count nine of my former colleagues here. >> a few observations. congressman frank and i have sparred over issues over a number of years. i agree with him that there is a difference between managed risk and speculation. i think we agree on that. speculation will cause people to get into trouble. managed risk will help people. as far as fannie mae

mr. bachus for five minutes for questioning. >> i would like to clarify something first. when ms. warren testified in march before our committee, i specifically asked her if she had participated in negotiations. her response is she gave advice when asked. i then wrote her after the hearing and asked she would clarify and at that time she did so either she has been an active participant with both federal and state agencies, were which was i consider that quite different from advice. she was forthcoming in response to 9/11 although most of the headlines at that time said she give the same response that she gave the hearing. he would have to be illiterate to think that. i don't think many people read or responded to the testimony. we asked inouye bup letter in march ms. capito and i asked for any documents pertaining that participation. we didn't get those until this tuesday night. a lot of them judicial watch put out about a month ago, but it was tuesday night of this week when we were given information which other independent sources picked out. the staff has handed view of this se

mr. bachus says he cannot do anything until the obama administration lets him. the only time since 1992 that the congress has acted on fannie mae and freddie mac was in 2007, 2008, when i was the chairman, and we got together a bill at the request of the secretary paulson, which president bush signed, which gave the secretary the authority to put them in a conservatorship. i agree with mr. shelby had too much of the market, but at least it is not that cost on us that it was before. they are behaving in a much more responsible fashion today. mr. chairman, i appreciate this opportunity. >> thank you for coming over here today. the need to get back to the house. senator shelby has a couple -- >> i feel at home here today. i count nine of my former colleagues here. >> a few observations. congressman frank and i have sparred over issues over a number of years. i agree with him that there is a difference between managed risk and speculation. i think we agree on that. speculation will cause people to get into trouble. managed risk will help people. as far as fannie mae

bachus. the chair: those will be considered under general leave. the gentlewoman is recognized. mrs. biggert: thank you, madam chairman, and i yield myself such time as i may consume. the chair: the gentlewoman is recognized. mrs. biggert: mr. chairman, i rise in support of h.r. 1309, the flood insurance reform act of 2011. i'd like to thank appellate waters and all the members -- ms. waters and all the members from both sides of the ilet who helped to craft this bill. on may 13, the financial services committee favorably reported the flood act by a unanimous vote of 54-0. this bill is important and reflects the hard work and bipartisan support of the financial services committee. it would re-authorize for five years the national flood insurance program and s.i.p., the bill would enact a series of reforms designed to, number one, improve nfib's financial stability, two, to reduce the burden on taxpayers, three, restore integrity to fema mapping system, four, to explore ways to increase private market participation, and, six, to help bring certainty to the housing market. for over 40

thank the chairman, chairman biggert, and the chairman of the full committee, chairman bachus, and theals ranking member, mr. frank and the ranking member in the committee, ms. waters for their leadership. what we don't need now is to have the other side try circumvent this process with a disaster relief billism urge my colleagues on this side and that side to support the underlying bill and reject the motion to recommit. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back his time. without objection, the previous question is ordered. the i request unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks -- the question is on the motion to recommit. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the noes have it. >> i request a recorded vote. the speaker pro tempore: a recorded vote is requested. those favoring a recorded vote will rise and be counted. a sufficient number having risen a recorded vote is ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device. pursuant to clause 18 of rule -- clause 8 -- clause 9 of rule 20, this 15-minute vote on the motion to recommit w

bachus from montana. congressman shaw said it perfectly right here on the floor a decade ago when he said, mr. speaker, it is remarkable to have this broad cross section of americans supporting legislation on any single issue, but protection of the everglades is a national priority because most persons speak of this national treasure in the same breath and the red wood forest, the appalachian trail, or grand canyon. i couldn't agree more. and presidents clinton, bush, and now president obama share this commitment. in 2001 president george w. bush said, i quote, this area needs our protection and i am here to join with your governor in the cause of preserving and protecting the florida everglades. for its part the federal government carries important responsibilities and stew -- stewardship. it is not enough to regulate and dictate from afar. to preserve places like this we must bring to our work a new spirit of respect and cooperation. again i couldn't agree more. history is important. so are the words that we use or do not use. that is why i'm deeply disappointed the chairman has refused so f