mr. perlmutter: thank you, mr. speaker. i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. perlmutter: thank you. i rise in support of h.r. 5062, the examination and supervisory privilege parity act. which is difficult to say but easy to understand. it's to provide for full cooperation and discourse and communication among regulators while at the same time preserving some confidentiality and protections for those whose books and records are being reviewed. i want to thank my friend, congressman barr, for working with me on this legislation. this legislation accomplishes two important things. first, it reduces regulatory burden by ensuring federal regulators, the cfpb, state banking agencies, and now nonbank agencies, may coordinate their respective examination schedules. and, two, it provides parity to ensure privilege is not compromised when regulated entities turn over sensitive information to their regulators, and when this information is subsequently shared among state and federal

mr. perlmutter: thank you, mr. speaker. i yield myself such time as i might consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. perlmutter: h.r. 4626, introduced by chairwoman capito, aims at protecting shared information in the mortgage and financial services industry by putting safeguards on confidentiality. the bill is very simple, it applies the same confidentiality standards to information shared with state regulators regarding nondepository financial services companies that enjoyed -- being entered into in the national mortgage licensing system. as long as that information is shared through nationwide mortgage licensing system among all mortgage regulators. . in the leadup to the financial crisis, state regulators and congress needed the need to zwrofere see the mortgage industry and efficiently by promoting start regulation to state

mr. perlmutter: mr. chairman, i would just urge the chair in ruling that this does not change the law in one -- in any respect. it respects the guidance that has been promulgated by the justice department and the treasury department and does not make a change and is not outside of the rules and i would say to my friend from florida that his point of order is incorrect and would ask the chair to rule that the gentleman's amendment is in order. the chair: the chair's prepared to rule. the chair finds that this amendment includes language -- language requiring a new determination as to the reason a financial institution provides financial services to an entity. the amendment therefore constitutes legislation in violation of clause 2 of rule 21. the point of order is sustained and the amendment is not in order. the chair: for what purpose does the gentleman rise? will the gentleman specify his amendment? >> amendment 68. the chair: the clerk will report the amendment. the clerk: amendment offered by mr. walb

mr. perlmutter voted in favor of that. my question to you, would you support such a proposal to give a safe harbor status to portfolio loans in which the mortgage originator retains there is? >> i would have to look at the specifics. he said it would encourage it. we have to give it to the senate and loosen the risk protection. i would like to have a portfolio allowed to be whatever -- to have stronger risk protection. >> i appreciate your general favorability towards that. mr. was my want to show the slide here. the ranking member literature the fact that you should have no problem originating mortgages now because you are $2 billion below in assets. this is a slide from the consumer financial protection bureau. the slide shows what is required in the chart in order to qualify for the safe harbor protection. it's not just you have to be 2 billion or below. it slowed features and its balloon payment features and underwriting in points and fees and then there's the portfolio provision. does the slide explain why you another