SAFE Act

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to the conference report on the bill (H.R. 2622) to amend the Fair Credit Reporting Act, to prevent identity theft, improve resolution of consumer disputes, improve the accuracy of consumer records, make improvements in the use of, and consumer access to, credit information, and for other purposes.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks on the conference report and insert extraneous material thereon.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 6 minutes.

Mr. Speaker, I am proud to bring before the House today the conference report on H.R. 2622, the Fair and Accurate Credit Transactions Act of 2003. This is a bipartisan bill that will foster economic growth and development throughout this country. When 9/11 hit our country, Congress responded quickly with the passage of the USA PATRIOT Act and the Terrorism Risk Insurance Act. When corporate scandals threatened to undermine the integrity of the stock market, we responded with the passage of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. And today, as the laws governing our national credit markets are set to expire, we must again respond swiftly and responsibly with the passage of this bipartisan solution to keep the American economy stable and growing and assure that the American consumer continues to enjoy the benefits of a robust national credit granting system.

One of the hallmarks of the modern U.S. economy is quick and convenient access to consumer credit. Though it would seem unimaginable a generation ago, consumers can now qualify for a mortgage over the telephone, walk into a showroom and finance the purchase of a car in one sitting, and get department store credit within minutes. As the distinguished Federal Trade Commission chairman Tim Muris has stated, the ``miracle of instant credit'' created by our national credit reporting system has given American consumers a level of access to financial services and products that is unrivaled anywhere in the world. The protection and growth of these services, as provided for in this legislation, are critical to the success of our economy.

Since the Fair Credit Reporting Act's uniform national standards were established in 1996, we have achieved some of the lowest mortgage rates and credit rates on record, with more competition and more offerings for consumers than ever before. This has led to the record level of credit available today to all Americans, regardless of income level. Over the past 30 years, the availability of nonmortgage credit to households in the lowest income bracket has increased by nearly 70 percent, including a nearly threefold increase in the number of low- income households owning credit cards just in this last decade. The increase of available credit, coupled with the declining price of this credit, has also fueled the record homeownership levels we are experiencing today, again with the largest gains achieved by low- and moderate-income groups. These improvements in the credit and mortgage systems have saved consumers nearly $100 billion annually, according to some estimates.

In addition to preserving our vital national credit system, this legislation is an extremely comprehensive consumer protection bill. The protections are designed to meet head-on the growing crime of identity theft which has accompanied the expanding credit market in our country. The FTC released a study in early September which revealed the damaging extent of this crime in our country. Ten million Americans were victimized by identity thieves last year alone, costing consumers and businesses over $55 billion, not counting the 300 million hours spent by victims to try to repair damaged credit records. The financial costs are staggering, with over $10,000 stolen in the average fraud.

The Committee on Financial Services has worked tirelessly to explore and find solutions to this destructive crime. Over 100 witnesses have come before the committee since last April to discuss the renewal of the Fair Credit Reporting Act, and many of them focused their statements on the urgent

need to increase safeguards designed to protect consumers and businesses alike from this crime. With the bipartisan support in the House, as well as valuable input and assistance from our friends in the Senate, we have a bill before us today that empowers both consumers and businesses as we attempt to eliminate this terrible crime. Congress needs to pass strong, uniform identity theft protection; and it needs to do it now.

This conference report preserves many key elements designed to fight identity theft from the bill that passed the House with close to 400 votes. These strong new identity theft provisions standards established by the bill will be national, ensuring uniform protection for consumers in all 50 States.

This legislation includes provisions that allow consumers to place fraud alerts, allowing consumers to block information from being given to a credit bureau, providing identity theft victims with a summary of their rights, giving consumers the right to see their credit scores, giving all consumers the right to a free copy of their credit report, restricting access to consumers' sensitive health information, simplifying the way consumers can limit unsolicited marketing offers, ensuring improved accuracy of credit reporting procedures, and providing consumers with one-call-for-all protection by requiring credit bureaus to share consumer calls on identity theft, including requested fraud alert blocking.

This legislation also provides valuable tools and resources to financial institutions to ensure accuracy and prevent identity theft. These provisions include requiring creditors to take certain precautions before extending credit to consumers who have placed fraud alerts in their files; prohibiting merchants from printing more than the last five digits of a payment card on an electronic receipt, and others.

Mr. Speaker, this is a rather lengthy and long statement, and I will submit this for the Record.

I want to thank my ranking member, the gentleman from Massachusetts, for taking on this challenging and important legislation. Also to the chairman of our Subcommittee on Financial Institutions, the gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Bachus), who sat through hours of hearings, over 100 witnesses in eight separate hearings; to Chairman Shelby who chaired the conference committee and also, of course, is the chairman of the Banking Committee in the Senate, as well as Ranking Member Sarbanes for working in good faith on this effort.

Mr. Speaker, this was indeed truly a bipartisan, bicameral effort. We worked very closely with the White House and the Treasury to put together this conference report. This is good public policy. It is good for the country's economy, maintaining this constant flow of credit that we have come to take for granted. This is positive legislation, and I urge all Members to give it their strong support.

This legislation also provides valuable tools and resources to financial institutions to ensure accuracy and prevent identity theft. These provisions include:

Requiring creditors to take certain precautions before extending credit to consumers who have placed ``fraud alerts'' in their files; prohibiting merchants from printing more than the last 5 digits of a payment card on an electronic receipt; requiring banks to develop policies and procedures to identify potential instances of identity theft; and requiring financial institutions to reconcile potentially fraudulent consumer address information.

It is our duty to protect our national credit system and the economic growth that this system promotes by continuing to provide Americans with the most affordable and accessible credit market in the world today. We must ensure that the U.S. remains the engine of growth for the global economy.

I want to thank my ranking member from Massachusetts, Mr. Frank, for taking on this challenging and imperative legislative project and for engaging all the major stakeholders in crafting a bipartisan piece of well balanced, highly effective legislation. I would also like to thank my friends from the Senate Banking Committee, Chairman Shelby and Ranking Member Sarbanes, for working in good faith to resolve differences between the House and Senate products. And finally, a huge debt of gratitude is owed by Members of this body to the gentleman from Alabama, Spencer Bachus, who wrote the House version of this bill; presided over countless hearings in his capacity as Chairman of the Financial Institutions and Consumer Credit Subcommittee; and helped lead the House conferees to a successful outcome in our negotiations with the Senate. Without the gentleman from Alabama, we would not be standing on the House floor today about to pass this historic consumer protection legislation.

The final FCRA legislation states that no requirement or prohibition may be imposed under the laws of any State with respect to the conduct required under the nine specific provisions included in the new identity theft preemption provision of the law. Accordingly, States cannot act to impose any requirements or prohibitions with respect to the conduct addressed by any of these provisions or the conduct addressed by any of the federal regulations adopted under these nine provisions. All of the rules and requirements governing the conduct of any person in these areas are governed solely by federal law and any State that attempts to impose requirements or prohibitions in these areas would be preempted.

I should note that the legislation lists the provisions to be preempted. However, to the extent such provisions would enjoy preemption under another provision in the FCRA, the other provision would control.

One of the central elements of the approach taken by the bill that the House passed overwhelmingly last September was to make the new fraud prevention and mitigation provisions contained in the legislation the new uniform national standards on those subject matters. The bill was drafted in this way because identity theft is a national concern, not only because of its impact on our system of granting credit, but because it knows no boundaries. The consumer victim may be in one State, the financial institution victim in another State, and the perpetrator may be in a third State. The credit bureaus that receive and report information relating to a fraudulent account may be in yet a fourth State.

In drafting the House bill, we were careful to stipulate--and to clarify in a colloquy on the House floor among the gentleman from Massachusetts, Mr. Frank, the gentleman from Alabama, Mr. Bachus, and myself--that the uniform national standards for identity theft were limited to the subject matters that the bill's provisions actually address, such as fraud alerts, blocking bad credit information, and truncating credit card account numbers at the point of sale. Thus, for example, this national uniformity would not affect State criminal statutes, or State laws governing the public display of social security numbers.

The conference committee further refined this standard, by providing that the new uniform national standards on identity theft created by this legislation apply with respect to the conduct required by those specific provisions.

I strongly urge my colleagues to vote for this Conference Report.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Bachus), the chairman of the Subcommittee on Financial Institutions and Consumer Credit, who has done such a wonderful job on this bill.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Kelly), the chairwoman of the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations.

(Mrs. KELLY asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Illinois (Mrs. Biggert).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Harris).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Sessions), a distinguished member of the Committee on Rules, who has an important measure in this legislation.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Gillmor), a valuable member of the committee.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. LaTourette), a former prosecutor, who has done such great work, particularly in the identity theft part of the legislation.

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

Mr. Speaker, does the gentleman have any further speakers?

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

I have the right to close, is that correct, Mr. Speaker?

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the remaining time.

First of all, I want to thank the staff. I always tend to forget to do that, and we have been through a lot on this bill. This is a complicated piece of legislation that got more complicated as we took on this whole issue of identity theft, and throughout this process, the staff on both sides of the aisle have been just superb, working late nights and early mornings to get us where we are today, and I want to personally thank them for their efforts. They know who they are, and I know who they are and we most appreciate it, and also to the Members, I think this is, Mr. Speaker, perhaps a textbook example of how the legislative process ought to work in terms of hearings, in terms of everybody having an opportunity to have their say, involving Members on both sides of the aisle, many of them newer Members, freshmen Members, to really get their feet wet on an important piece of legislation that we bring to the floor today and this conference report that will close it out.

This is truly a historic day, and I think in the real traditional way that we have started in the Committee on Financial Services of turning out good legislation in a bipartisan manner, and for that, I am very thankful to all concerned.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman for yielding me this time.

I am going to limit my time to thanking Members, because this legislation I think more than anything is a testimony of what we as Members do when we all work in the best interests of the American public.

This bill contains sweeping new protections against identity fraud. It also will enable consumers, which make up 70 percent of our economy, to have available more credit and more choices. And as important as that is, it does a third thing. It has many different tools to ensure that our credit information is accurately reported and that our private information and confidential information such as medical records are not shared.

At this time, I would like to thank the cosponsors. This bill was introduced by me; the gentlewoman from Oregon (Ms. Hooley), whom we have heard from; the gentlewoman from Illinois (Mrs. Biggert); and the gentleman from Kansas (Mr. Moore). The gentlewoman from Oregon (Ms. Hooley), the gentlewoman from Illinois (Mrs. Biggert), and the gentleman from Kansas (Mr. Moore) all had significant input into this legislation. The gentleman from Ohio (Mr. LaTourette), a lot of the fraud provisions were drafted by him or the gentlewoman from Oregon (Ms. Hooley). The gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Kanjorski), the gentleman from Delaware (Mr. Castle), the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Maloney), the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Shadegg), the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Ford), the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Tiberi), the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Hinojosa), the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Hensarling), the gentleman from New York (Mr. Crowley), the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Sessions), the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Ross), the gentleman from Utah (Mr. Matheson), the gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Davis), the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Baker), the gentleman from New York (Mr. King), the gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Lucas), and the gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. Lucas), the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Ney), the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Kelly), the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Jones), the gentleman from New York (Mr. Israel), the gentlewoman from Pennsylvania (Ms. Hart), the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Miller), the gentlewoman from West Virginia (Mrs. Capito), the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. McCarthy), the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Barrett), the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Feeney), and the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Harris).

All of these Members participated in this process, and the bill, which was passed almost unanimously by the House, went over to the Senate; and I would like to credit the other body for working, I think, in a professional manner and improving what we thought was a wonderful bill. And then, in conference, I would finally like to salute the gentleman from Ohio (Chairman Oxley), first, for giving me the opportunity of working on this legislation; and secondly, I would like to salute him and the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Frank), our conferees, Mr. Sarbanes and Chairman Shelby. All of the people I have named deserve particular praise for a wonderful piece of legislation.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of the conference report to H.R. 2622, the Fair and Accurate Credit Transactions Act (``FACT Act''). H.R. 2622 represents the culmination of my efforts, and those of my colleagues, to craft legislation to strengthen our economy and to provide consumers with meaningful identity theft protections. The FACT Act is the bi-partisan product of a thorough review of the Fair Credit Reporting Act (``FCRA''), identity theft, and related issues, Indeed, the legislation was approved overwhelmingly in the House by a vote of 392-30 and in the Senate by a vote of 95-2.

I want to express my deepest sense of gratitude to Chairman Oxley who gave me the opportunity to introduce this landmark piece of legislation and then skillfully guided it through the legislative process. In my career as a legislator, it is only on a rare occasion when you get the chance to draft legislation in such a bipartisan and cooperative atmosphere. The Chairman deserves a lot of credit for establishing such a collegial process, and I think our legislative product is better because of his efforts.

As Chairman of the Subcommittee on Financial Institutions and Consumer Credit. I conducted 8 hearings on the FCRA and related issues over the past year, receiving testimony from nearly one hundred witnesses including consumer groups, businesses, law enforcement, and various government regulators. On June 26, 2003, I introduced H.R. 2622 with Representatives Hooley, Biggert, and Moore. The FACT Act--a byproduct of our hearings and bipartisan cooperation--passed its version of FCRA legislation--S. 1753--by a vote of 95-2. This week, the conference report to H.R. 2622 was approved almost unanimously by the conferees from both the House and Senate. H.R. 2622 is supported by a broad coalition of interested parties, including large financial institutions, community banks, credit unions, retailers as well as the Administration.

H.R. 2622 will benefit consumers and our economy by ensuring the continuity of our national uniform credit system. Indeed, our economy depends on several national delivery systems--each represented by incredible amounts of investment and infrastructure. For example, the national interstate highway system and our telecommunications networks are all critical to our national economy. Today we can drive from state to state without worrying

about whether a road will come to an abrupt end at the state line. Our consumer credit system is similar to these examples--we do not really think about it, we just expect that it will work. Although not perfect, our consumer credit system makes life better, easier, and cheaper for American consumers.

Just as our highway and telecommunications networks have improved and become more efficient over the years, so has our credit system. Creditors have always needed to evaluate the likelihood that a borrower would repay a loan. As a result of the framework established by the FCRA, creditors, no longer need to ``eyeball'' an applicant and review application materials for days or weeks. Rather, our national credit system has produced a virtually seamless system whereby consumers can apply for, and receive a decision on, credit within minutes. The national uniform system has also lowered costs and increased choice and convenience for American consumers. By far the most striking result of our national credit system is the dramatically increased availability of credit--or the ``democratization'' of credit. However, this system could be put in jeopardy if the state law uniform standards in the FCRA were permitted to expire on January 1, 2004. H.R. 2622 would ensure the continuity of our national credit system by making these standards permanent.

The conference report also directly addresses the problem of identity theft.

Sec. 151 of the conference report requires that the FTC and the federal banking regulators provide identify theft victims with a summary of their rights. It is important for the agencies to let consumers know that identity thieves target home computers because they contain a goldmine of personal financial information about individuals. In educating the public about how to avoid becoming a victim of identity theft, the FTC and the federal banking regulators should inform consumers about the risks associated with having an `always on' Internet connection not secured by a firewall, not protecting against viruses or other malicious codes, using peer-to-peer file trading software that might expose diverse contents of their hard drives without their knowledge, or failing to use safe computing practices in general.

Identity theft occurs when a criminal obtains enough information about an individual to allow the criminal to ``assume'' that individual's identity for nefarious purposes. My Subcommittee heard from two identity theft victims. Their stories were truly nightmarish, and we need to work to prevent countless others from joining the ranks of identity theft victims. Not only does identity theft harm the direct victims, but it also has an impact on all consumers. Financial institutions lose millions of dollars each year as a result of identity theft. This increased cost on financial institutions is absorbed, at least in part, through increased costs of financial products and services to all consumers.

H.R. 2622 will also improve consumers' access and understanding of their credit information by allowing consumers to request a free credit report annually from each credit bureau. In addition, consumers will have the opportunity to obtain their credit scores from credit bureaus. Transparency in the credit granting and reporting process will increase consumers' financial literacy and improve their confidence in the financial services system in general.

I want to commend Chairman Oxley for the tremendous leadership he has shown in steering this complex bill through the legislative process. I also want to thank the Ranking Member of the Committee, Mr. Frank, for his support of this important piece of legislation. In addition, let me commend Ms. Hooley, Ms. Biggert, Mr. Moore, Mr. LaTourette and the Members of the Financial Services Committee on each of their efforts. I also appreciate the efforts of Mr. Sanders, the Ranking Member on my subcommittee, for his work on this issue. Lastly, I want to mention my appreciation for the input we received from the Administration, particularly from Treasury Secretary John Snow and Treasury Assistant Secretary for Financial Institutions Wayne Abernathy.

Let me also take this opportunity to thank the staff members on the House Financial Services Committee who worked on this legislation. Both Chairman Oxley and Ranking Member Frank are to be commended for assembling such a talented group of staff to work on H.R. 2622. On the majority side, I would like to thank Bob Foster, Hugh Halpern, Carter McDowell, Jim Clinger; Robert Gordon, Charles Symington, Karen Lynch-- who no longer works for the committee but did a lot of work on this issue before leaving--and Dina Ellis, my designee on the Committee. I would also like to thank Warren Tryon of my staff for his work on this issue. On the minority staff, I would like to thank the following staff members: Jeanne Roslanowick, Jaime Lizarraga, Ken Swab, Erika Jeffers, Dean Sagar and Warren Gunnels.

In conclusion, I would like to note that I am proud of the work we have done in crafting H.R. 2622. This has been, by necessity, a long and thorough process. I believe H.R. 2622 presents a solid achievement in protecting the security of consumers' personal information, enhancing the transparency of the credit reporting process, and ensuring continued access to a wide variety of financial products at low cost.

Mr. Speaker, our economy today is important to all of us. That goes without saying. But what a lot of people do not realize is that two- thirds of our economy is consumer spending. That is the driver in our economy today. And consumer spending today is contingent upon maintaining a national uniform credit reporting system. I urge all of my colleagues to support our economy by voting for H.R. 2622.

Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore

Mr. Speaker, it is, yes.

Mr. Speaker, yes, I share that understanding. Not only

should consumers know they can opt out of getting these offers, they should also know that opting out or not affects their chances of getting additional credit offers with competitive terms.

Mr. Speaker, yes, I agree.

Mr. Speaker, if the gentlewoman would yield, I would be glad to engage in a colloquy. I think what the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Harris) was inquiring into was that the Florida Banking Association has created a system that permits banks to combat identity theft, check fraud, and other criminal activity. And as I understand it, this system it produces reports that banks use exclusively to fight fraud not for the purpose, either in whole or part, of determining an individual's eligibility for credit insurance and employment.

And she has asked me to confirm that information that is provided for the exclusive purpose of detecting, preventing, or deterring a financial crime identity theft, or the funding of a criminal activity does not constitute a consumer report under the Fair Credit Reporting Act, even as amended by

this bill. And my response to that is that is correct. Such information was not a consumer report under the Fair Credit Reporting Act as it existed before this legislation, nor will it constitute a consumer report as amended by this bill.

Mr. Speaker, it happens I do not agree with the previous speaker. I rise in strong support of the conference report before us. I would like to commend the gentleman from Ohio (Chairman Oxley) and the gentleman from Massachusetts (Ranking Member Frank) and their counterparts in the Senate for moving this legislation with great thoroughness, deliberation, and really in a strong spirit of bipartisanship.

At the heart of the legislation is the permanent reauthorization of the Fair Credit Reporting Act. It has provided a national uniform credit reporting system that has effectively lowered the cost of credit. And it has increased the choice and convenience for millions of Americans across the country.

The FCRA has helped to address other vital security issues such as combating identity theft and blocking terrorist financing under the U.S.A. Patriot Act, both issues that I have held hearings on in my subcommittee.

Combating identity theft and drying up terrorist financing requires a collaborative effort of law enforcement and regulatory agencies, consumers, and financial institutions, all with access to appropriate information.

We have also made some other important improvements to the FCRA in order to protect the sanctity of privacy for the American people throughout the credit granting process. I believe that one of the most important pieces of that is medical information. The medical information of consumers should be kept private. It does not need to be shared or be distributed by creditors or listed on credit reports.

Individuals should know that their personal medical information belongs to them and it is not released for any other purposes, whether it is for the credit-granting process or employee background checks. And we have done that with our legislation by coding the information.

I would like to thank the gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. Ross) and the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Watt) for working with me on this amendment that will protect medical information of individuals without disrupting the access to low-cost credit and the security of information.

By allowing consumers to benefit from reporting the financial aspects of their transactions to credit bureaus while maintaining the sanctity of their medical privacy, this legislation is a real win for all Americans.

Finally, I am pleased we were able to include a new title in the legislation, which creates a Commission on Financial Literacy and Education, or the SAFE Act. As a result of that strategy, we will have a clear vision of the future financial literacy that will be the benefit of all Americans.

Mr. Speaker, I strongly support this legislation.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of the Conference Report before us.

I would like to commend Chairman Oxley and Ranking Member Frank--and their counterparts in the Senate--for moving this legislation with great thoroughness and deliberation and in the spirit of bipartisanship.

The legislation, ``The FACT Act'', is the result of a dozen hearings, one hundred witnesses, and months of deliberations by my colleagues on both sides of the aisle, and both sides of the Capitol.

At the heart of the legislation is the permanent reauthorization of the Fair Credit Reporting Act, or FCRA. FCRA has provided a national uniform credit reporting system that has effectively lowered the cost of credit, and increased choice and convenience for millions of Americans across the country.

As a conferee on this report, I can tell you that we worked with many diverse interests before we reached a unified, solid product. And in this product, we have built on the framework of FCRA to ensure that the legislation continues to lower the cost of credit and help fuel our economy--while also creating new opportunities for populations who have never had access. That's why this legislation has overwhelmingly bipartisan support.

FCRA has also helped address other vital security issues, such as combating identity theft and blocking of terrorist financing under the USA PATRIOT Act--both issues which I have held numerous hearings on in my Oversight Subcommittee. Combating identity theft and drying up terrorist financing requires the collaborative effort of law enforcement and regulatory agencies, consumers and financial institutions--all with access to appropriate information.

I am extremely pleased that this conference report addresses these important issues, and improves our ability to combat identity theft and help law enforcement officials track down illicit money. The information-sharing under this legislation is essential to protecting the American people by detecting suspicious activity and weeding out wrongdoers.

The national uniform standards under FCRA have also facilitated a financial institution's ability to utilize additional authentications and identity verifications to protect consumer security. And the increased protections incorporated in this legislation are critically important in enabling victims to correct the damage to their credit histories created by identity thieves.

This legislation will further help law enforcement combat financial fraud and track down criminals and terrorists. And it adds new protections that are important to achieving these goals.

We have also made other important improvements to FCRA in order to protect the sanctity of privacy for the American people throughout the credit-granting process.

I believe the medical information of consumers should be kept private, and it does not need to be shared or distributed by creditors or listed on credit reports. Individuals should know that their personal medical information belongs to them and is not released for other purposes, whether it is for the credit granting process or employee background checks. And we have done this in our legislation by coding this information.

I would like to thank Reps. Ross and Watt for working with me on an amendment that will protect the medical information of individuals without disrupting access to low cost credit and the security of information.

By allowing consumers to benefit from reporting the financial aspects of their transactions to credit bureaus while maintaining the sanctity of their medical privacy, this legislation is a real win for all Americans.

Finally, I am pleased that we were able to include a new title in the legislation, which creates a Commission on Financial Literacy and Education to improve the financial literacy of millions of Americans of all ages.

At the crux of this language is the creation of the first ever national strategy for financial literacy--which will facilitate new public, private and nonprofit partnerships to help educate all Americans in financial literacy. The national strategy, and its subsequent report to Congress, will be known as ``The Strategy for Assuring Financial Empowerment'' or ``SAFE strategy'', based on legislation that I introduced--H.R. 3520, ``The SAFE Act''.

As as result, the ``SAFE strategy'' will provide a clear vision for the future of financial literacy. The vision will provide a systematic approach to identify effective ways to increase the general education level of current, and future, consumers of financial services and products. The Commission and the ``SAFE strategy'' will be goal- oriented and subject to reviews by Congress through annual testimony.

Mr. Speaker, I strongly support this legislation that is crucial to the economy and the security of the American people.

I thank you for addressing these important issues and urge my colleagues to support this conference report.

Mr. Speaker, I am glad to yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from Oregon (Ms. Hooley), a member of this committee who really did extraordinarily good work here and who early on became our task force head on identity theft, and this bill is really path-breaking in what it does for identity theft.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Vermont (Mr. Sanders), the ranking member of the subcommittee from which this bill came.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Kanjorski), who is the second ranking member of the full committee and the ranking member of the Subcommittee on Capital Markets, Insurance and Government Sponsored Enterprises and who has a major input to this bill.

(Mr. KANJORSKI asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks, and include extraneous material.)

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Emanuel), who was very active particularly with regard to the medical privacy provision of this bill.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Indiana (Ms. Carson), one of our most active and energetic members of our committee.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Crowley), another member of our committee who played a very active role in this.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Maloney), who played an important role in this bill.

(Mrs. MALONEY asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Hinojosa), another active member of our committee.

Mr. Speaker, I have several.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/4\ minutes to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Markey), who has been so active on the privacy issue.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I want to begin by saying that if we on the Democratic side were in the majority, this would be a different bill. We are not, so we have the bill that we have here.

Given that, given that there are some differences, I must tell you that this is a better bill than I had hoped we would see. And I am very appreciative of my colleagues on the other side. They did not give in on any issues of principle that are important to them. We have on both sides of the aisle a strong commitment to making sure that the free- market system in this country can work.

These credit allocations have become a very important part of that free-mark system. And this bill, I believe, preserves that system, the credit allocation system for individuals as well as need be.

We also, though, have, as we often do with the free market, a situation where the market does well what it is supposed to do, but it does not do everything. There are areas where we need to step in and help the market. What is important is for us to do that in ways that do not impinge on the market function.

I believe that working together we have come closer in doing that in this bill than I had thought. I would like if there had been fewer preemptions in the field, for instance, of identity theft; but as a result of a meeting which we had this morning, I think we agreed to preserve the integrity of the identity theft provisions that we have in there, to make sure that they can function without interference and without distraction, but did not unduly preempt if the States want to be additive in other areas. So there is, in fact, room for States to do something as long as the scheme that has been set forward in this bill is not interfered with, detracted from, and in particular, companies are not subjected to conflicting or confusing multiple requirements.

We have done other things. People, as a result of this, will be able to get a lot more information. Until recently, credit and credit scoring have been kind of mystical things to a lot of people. Consumers, home buyers, automobile buyers, others have found their lives affected financially by factors of which they were only dimly aware. As a result of several provisions in this bill, the system will be allowed to work, but consumers will have a lot more information about it. And they will get that information in many cases early enough to act on it.

Frankly, one of the things that some of our friends in the business community were skeptical of I think will wind up helping them. A requirement that people be notified if something they have either done or failed to do will cause them to have a negative comment on the credit report, I think that will have an incentivizing effect. I think the first time someone is late unneccessarily with a payment for a mortgage and is notified that this will

be on your credit report, you are likely to see much less lateness. We also took steps to improve the accuracy of the data.

The system on the whole works very well, but no system works perfectly. I think this credit system was a little bit flawed in that it did not adequately give people a chance to correct errors. We do a much better job of this. I would have liked there to have been a sunset on the preemptions.

I think this bill benefits from the fact that it was here today. Congress did this 7 years ago. There was a sunset. And as a result, we are here today doing what everybody agrees is improving the bill. I would have liked, and my colleague from Pennsylvania (Mr. Kanjorski) offered an amendment to give us a chance to do that again. We lost on the floor, and that is the way the votes went. But I do hope and I believe that we may very well from experience learn that more has to be done or things have to be done differently.

When this bill was passed in 1996, identity theft was not a big issue. The fact that it was sunsetted gave us a chance to deal with identity theft I think in a very effective way. This will not be the last time that the crooked people in this world will think of a way to swindle the great majority of the honest ones.

So I just want to make it clear that while we will not have this automatically coming up, I hope we are all committed, and I believe we are, that as new problems come up we will be able to deal with them.

Given the fact that the majority is the majority, I believe that we did a good job, not a perfect one, in adding consumer protections and safety factors to this general system of allowing the credit allocation to individuals to work, and for that reason, I would urge Members to vote for the bill.

Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend, and I congratulate him for all the good things that are in this bill, all the credit report and the negative statement issues that are dealt with.

But there is one concern which I have which is consumers are, by this bill, going to see the California privacy law preempted, as they are going to see as well other States who want to make stronger privacy protection for their constituents something that is part of the law.

My concern is that increasingly what we see with companies like TransUnion and Equifax is that they are sending the records off shore. For example, TransUnion, one of the three major credit reporting agencies' spokesman said last month, 100 percent of our mail regarding customer disputes is going to India at some point. We expect to sign that contract by the end of the year.

My hope is that as the years go by we will be able to return to this issue because the globalization of the information marketplace is going to make clear that Americans are going to want more protection as their information is going to be put in the hands of foreigners with no laws on the books or the ability to police them.

I rise to opposition to this legislation.

I understand that some good things have been done in this bill, such as the provisions granting consumers free access to copies of their credit report, notice of negative statements being added to their credit reports, or adverse credit decisions being made based on their credit report. I support these provisions, and I also support stronger protections against identify theft.

The problem is that consumers are being asked to pay a price for these provisions--their privacy. As I read this bill, we are permanently pre-empting any stronger state privacy laws, such as the California law, in favor of a federal standard that provides consumers with only a very narrow ``opt-out'' right to block affiliate sharing of the consumer's information for marketing purposes. I do not believe that an ``Opt Out'' is appropriate. Companies should have to obtain the affirmative consent of the consumer--an ``Opt In'' before they share information about their transactions or experiences with the consumer with other affiliates or with unaffiliated third parties.

Moreover, I am concerned that by limiting the ability of a consumer to exercise their Opt-Out solely to marketing, this bill allows affiliates to share information about the consumers for other purposes without any consumer right to say ``No.'' I am also concerned that even after a consumer has ``opted out,'' their decision to do so gets sunsetted after 5 years and they have to ``opt out'' again. If the consumer has said no, that should mean no illness and until the consumer says yes.

I also want to raise a concern about some statements I have seen in the press from the credit reporting agencies suggesting that if these companies are forced to provide consumers with free credit reports, they will accelerate their current efforts to transfer their databases and back office operations off-shore.

TransUnion and Equifax, two out of the three major credit reporting agencies already are in the process of offshoring the processing of detailed credit files on 220 million U.S. consumers.

Earlier this month, a TransUnion spokesman said that ``A hundred percent of our mail regarding customer disputes is going to go to India at some point. We expect to sign that contract by the end of the year.''

Equifax has had a vendor in Jamaica for four years, where Jamacian workers handle data entry at the beginning of the reinvestigation process for disputed credit reports.

Experian, the third of the three major credit reporting agencies, is considering whether to offshore some of its operations: ``We definitely are evaluating every option on the table, and offshoring is one of them. I don't want to be quoted as saying we'll never do it.''

Privacy experts are concerned about offshoring of the Social Security numbers, addresses and other personal information contained in credit reports:

``Consumers should be worried. The infrastructure to protect information just isn't there in a lot of these places.'' (Beth Givens, director, Privacy Rights Clearing House)

``The problem is not that they're in India, the problem is that American laws are not going to be enforced in India.'' (Chris Hoofnagle, Electronic Privacy Information Center)

``If you're an international crime ring, and you want Social Security numbers for identity theft, you're going to look at the weakest link, and that's quite possibly these overseas companies.'' (Beth Givens)

In October, a Pakistani woman threatened to post UCSF patient files on the Internet, unless she was paid for the medical transcription services she had performed. In the email she sent to UCSF, the woman wrote: ``Your patient records are out in the open to be exposed, so you better track that person and make him pay my dues or otherwise I will expose all the voice files and patient records on the Internet.''

That is the future that we are looking at with the credit reporting agencies. Consumers may be able to call up to get a free copy of their credit report, but the person on the other end of the line may be in Karachi or New Delhi, where U.S. privacy standards do not apply.

Indeed, this bill may provide Americans with the most expensive ``free'' credit report they'll ever get. They'll pay with their privacy.

That is why I think that we need to put the consumer back in control of their own information. We need an ``opt-in'' not a limited ``opt- out'', and we need to ensure that American's privacy does not get offshored at the same time that their jobs are getting offshored.

I urge the defeat of this legislation.