Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I regret that I was not present for Roll Call votes on September 14, 2026. Had I been present, I would have voted YEA on Roll Call No. 296, and YEA on Roll Call No. 297.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the life and legacy of one of my constituents and a dear friend, Louis ``L.B.'' Eckelkamp, Jr. of Washington, Missouri. It is difficult to put into words what L.B. meant for so many people and the City of Washington. L.B. started his career at a young age, learning the value of hard work while working for his father at Diamonds Restaurant in via a Ridge as a teenager washing dishes and busing tables. He was a tireless advocate for our community, devoting his life to making the world better for those around him. He served over five decades with the Bank of Washington, the longest-serving director in its history, and he also founded the oldest law firm in Washington, Eckelkamp Kuenzel LLP.

He had a great many professional accomplishments, but he was so much more than just the successes of his career.

He believed in volunteer service and giving back to the community and was one of the most involved and engaged people I have ever had the pleasure of knowing. He was deeply committed to the Boy Scouts, serving locally and nationally, and helped nurture so many individuals who will become leaders in their own right in the next generation. His service included roles at the YMCA, Washington Town and Country Fair, Mercy Hospital, St. Louis Archdiocese, Missouri Historical Society, and St. Francis Borgja Parrish, among so many others. L.B. worked every day of his life to inspire those around him. He was a pillar of Washington and will leave a long legacy from which we all can learn.

I am blessed to have known him personally and learned so much from him, and I know

there are so many in Washington who feel the same.

These are big shoes to fill, and it will truly take the entire community coming together to do the work that L.B. was doing. But the reality is, we all will and L.B. knows we will. He led by example, and we have much more to learn from all he did.

He leaves behind Bonnie, his wife of over six decades who was always by his side and is a force to be reckoned with in her own right. Their marriage serves as a strong example of how two likeminded Missourians who care about those around them can make lasting changes here in our neighborhoods as an equal partnership. They were inseparable as they built a life of service and philanthropy that was centered around a shared passion to invest in their community, make Washington a better place for all, and give a helping hand to those in need.

My prayers are with Bonnie, children Buzz and Jeanna, his sisters Judy and Susie, and his grandchildren and great grandchild. I thank L.B. for all he did for Washington, for Missouri, and for all those who loved him. May God Bless him.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of my resolution celebrating the 200th anniversary of Jefferson Barracks in St. Louis County, Missouri.

Established on July 10, 1826, Jefferson Barracks is the oldest operational military installation west of the Mississippi River and has played a remarkable role in our nation's defense. From its beginnings as the Army's first Infantry School of Practice, to its service as a major staging ground, training center, hospital, and recruitment depot through the Mexican-American War, Civil War, World War I, and beyond, Jefferson Barracks has helped shape American military history.

Today, Jefferson Barracks continues to play an active role in serving our country and our community through the Missouri National Guard, veterans' services, and historic preservation. Furthermore, the Jefferson Barracks National Cemetery, where more than 200,000 veterans are laid to rest, stands as a living symbol of service, sacrifice, and Missouri's enduring contribution to the defense of the United States.

I am proud to recognize the thousands of men and women who have served, trained, worked, and been honored at Jefferson Barracks over the past two centuries, and I urge my colleagues to support this resolution.

Mr. Speaker I regret that I was not present for Roll Call Votes on June 24, 2026. Had I been present, I would have voted YEA on Roll Call No. 225, and YEA on Roll Call No. 226.

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

Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman of the Financial Services Committee, my friend, Mr. Hill, for his tremendous support, his leadership, and for yielding his time.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of my bipartisan bill, H.R. 2478, the Financial Exploitation Prevention Act.

Far too often, back home in Missouri and across this Nation, our senior citizens are directly targeted for financial fraud. Like Chairman Hill, I, too, hear from scores and scores of constituents in my district who have fallen prey to these horrible, horrible scams and fraudsters.

The consequences of this crime extend to millions of Americans, with one out of every five senior investors falling victim to financial fraud and exploitation.

Sadly, the problem is only getting more severe.

According to the FTC, fraud perpetrated against those over the age of 60 increased by nearly 400 percent between 2020 and 2024, Mr. Speaker.

The total cost to American seniors reached almost $2.5 billion. Even worse, a significant portion of this increase is attributed to individual financial losses of over $100,000.

Think about that for a moment, Mr. Speaker. Seniors and retirees across our country work their entire lives to save for their future, and they depend on their savings to pay the bills, keep the lights on, and put food on the table. A loss of over $100,000 is absolutely devastating, and these financial crimes are being committed every single day.

We have the tools to fix this. There are gaps in Federal law that can be addressed to prevent this exploitation from occurring, and that is exactly what my bill does.

My bill, the Financial Exploitation Prevention Act, allows financial institutions, including investment companies like mutual funds, to temporarily delay a transaction if they have a reasonable belief that the transaction is the result of financial exploitation.

By allowing for this pause, the bill creates a crucial window of up to 15 days with the possibility of a 10-day extension that will provide the time necessary to investigate the situation and notify the appropriate authorities.

This gives potentially vulnerable investors, including our seniors, as well as those with certain disabilities, a crucial, extra layer of defense that will help preserve the hard-earned savings they have built over decades.

This bill would also establish a safe harbor for financial institutions that make a good-faith effort to prevent exploitation. By removing the fear of litigation, this change will empower the financial system to stop fraudsters in their tracks through timely and decisive action.

Finally, my bill requires the Securities and Exchange Commission to report to Congress on additional legislative solutions to further combat the financial exploitation of seniors and vulnerable adults.

This issue, fraud against our seniors, has gone on long enough, and we must take action.

Many of us have had the personal experience of caring for a parent or loved one as they grow older. They took care of us when we needed it most, and it is our responsibility, our duty, to return the favor.

This legislation, with strong bipartisan support, will create a new tool to protect parents, grandparents, and everyday American families across the United States.

I thank Congressman Gottheimer for joining me in introducing this bill. By working together, we can ensure that not only government but also the American financial system is doing everything possible to protect against fraud and exploitation.

Mr. Speaker, I strongly urge support of this legislation.

Mr. Speaker, I regret that I was not present for Roll Call Votes on June 8, 2026. Had I been present, I would have voted YEA on Roll Call No. 208, and YEA on Roll Call No. 209.

Mr. Speaker, I regret that I was not present for Roll Call votes on April 27,

2026. Had I been present, I would have voted YEA on Roll Call No. 138, and YEA on Roll Call No. 139.

Mr. Speaker, I regret that I was not present for Roll Call votes on January 20, 2026. Had I been present, I would have voted YEA on Roll Call No. 32, and YEA on Roll Call No. 33.

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 909) to temporarily provide additional deposits into the Crime Victims Fund, as amended.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the bill under consideration.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, I am beyond proud to rise in support of my bill H.R. 909, the Crime Victims Fund Stabilization Act.

This bipartisan legislation will provide critical support to over 7 million crime victims throughout every State in this country, without spending a single taxpayer dollar.

Mr. Speaker, across the United States, domestic violence shelters,

rape crisis centers, and child advocacy centers are in dire need of support. These organizations serve the most vulnerable in our society: battered spouses, rape survivors, and children, even toddlers who have been sexually abused and exploited.

As elected officials, it is our duty to ensure these victims receive the support, care, and, equally important, the justice they deserve.

Tragically, over the past 8 years, across multiple administrations, the balance of the Crime Victims Fund, or CVF, has plummeted, jeopardizing Federal support for these victims.

This fund does not use taxpayer dollars. It is solely financed by the fines, settlements, and other monetary penalties collected from Federal criminal prosecutions. From 2017 to 2023, the balance of CVF dropped by over 92 percent. It was almost completely wiped out.

Congress attempted to correct this decline in 2021 with the bipartisan VOCA Fix to Sustain the Crime Victims Fund Act, but Federal resources are still not meeting the needs of victims in our Nation.

Child advocacy centers and domestic violence shelters have been forced to triage their services or, even worse, to close entirely.

In 2024, my home State of Missouri saw a $10 million cut, over 40 percent, Mr. Speaker, of its Federal support for victims of violent crime, gone. This is unacceptable.

Mr. Speaker, I got to work, and over the past 2 years, I have worked with my colleagues on both sides of the aisle, with law enforcement, with prosecutors, and with victim advocacy groups to craft this legislation and build an overwhelming coalition of support.

Today, with 327 bipartisan cosponsors, this bill, the Crime Victims Fund Stabilization Act, will be the most widely supported piece of legislation considered on the House floor so far this Congress. I would like to emphasize that for just a second. With 327 bipartisan cosponsors, this bill is the most widely supported piece of legislation to receive a vote in Congress.

My bill uses nontaxpayer dollars to ensure vital programs can survive and victims receive the assistance necessary to heal, recover, and help law enforcement hold offenders accountable.

For years, the CVF had been financed by criminal monetary penalties, but those resources are no longer sufficient. With my bill, the CVF will also receive, through fiscal year 2029, the unobligated civil penalties collected through antifraud law.

One of the most prominent Federal antifraud laws is the False Claims Act. The False Claims Act allows the Federal Government to sue entities that defraud government programs and seek up to three times the damages. For example, if an entity defrauds the Federal Government out of $1 million, the government can sue that entity for up to $3 million. If the government wins, $1 million is returned to the defrauded agency, up to 30 percent is rewarded to any relevant whistleblower, when necessary, and the remaining leftover funds are unobligated.

The Crime Victims Fund Stabilization Act only redirects these leftover, unobligated funds to the CVF. We include specific protections for government reimbursement and whistleblower rewards. Those dollars remain untouched. This bill simply ensures that the surplus damages collected from those found liable for fraud in Federal court are used to support victims of crime.

This temporary infusion of resources will stabilize the CVF, support both victims and law enforcement investigations, while also retaining the fund's original intent of being financed by the legal fines from bad actors, not tax dollars.

This commonsense legislation must pass Congress as quickly as possible because every day that we wait, victims of the most horrific crimes across our country are left in need.

I urge all of my colleagues in both Chambers to support this bill, and, Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Moran), a co-lead of this legislation.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Kansas (Mr. Schmidt), who is another co-lead of H.R. 909.

Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 30 seconds to the gentleman from Kansas.

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

Mr. Speaker, I note that in 2024, child advocacy centers provided assistance to over 370,000 children nationwide who suffered abuse. That is 370,000 children in one year alone. For those who might not be aware, after a child is tragically exploited or sexually assaulted by a predator, one of the first places a victim is taken is a child advocacy center, or CAC.

At CAC, specialized interviewers are able to work with the child victim to not only make them feel safe and secure but also to get vital information that can be used by law enforcement to identify and arrest the offender. These often horrifying details are then used by our prosecutors, who stand firmly with this legislation, to ensure the predator is put behind bars.

My most recent visit to a CAC was in October last year. I had the pleasure of meeting with the executive director of the Missouri Network Against Child Abuse, Jessica Seitz, and her team at the Union, Missouri, child advocacy center.

The work these incredible individuals do every single day to protect and help children going through unspeakable trauma deserves the highest recognition. I want to ensure that all of them are recognized on the floor of this Chamber for what they do in Missouri and beyond. I also want to recognize all of the CACs throughout the United States that open their doors every day to help those who need it most.

The legislation before all of us today will turn our gratitude into action, Mr. Speaker. We will get these organizations, the amazing people who work there, and the children who rely upon them the resources they so desperately need.

Mr. Speaker, in closing, I first thank my co-leads for their help in pursuing and pushing this legislation forward: Representatives Derek Schmidt, who we heard from, and Nathaniel Moran, Stephanie Bice, Jim Costa, and my dear, dear friend across the aisle, Congresswoman Debbie Dingell, who I wish could have joined us today for this debate.

I also thank the House Judiciary Committee and the Appropriations Committee, who had a strong hand in this, and Leader Scalise for working with my team to bring this bill to the floor. Of course, I thank Congresswoman Lucy McBath for her tremendous support and her testimony to just the terrible injustice and travesty that she has endured. I thank her for her support and her management of this piece of legislation, H.R. 909, across the aisle.

Through our collaboration, we were able to include strong language ensuring a comprehensive audit of the CVF will be delivered to Congress. The information from this audit will help us do our jobs as policymakers and properly plan for the future of the CVF and avoid another crisis like this.

To the dozens and dozens and dozens of supporting organizations that stood with me in this fight, including the National Children's Alliance, the National District Attorneys Association, RAINN, Covenant House, the National Network to End Domestic Violence, the National Network to End Sexual Violence, and the National Association of Assistant U.S. Attorneys.

Mr. Speaker, our work is not done. We can and must get this bill through the Senate, as we discussed across the aisle, and signed into law. It has been an honor to lead this effort, and I am humbled to have gained cosponsors from well over a majority of the United States House Republican Conference and 75 percent of the entire House of Representatives.

This could not have been accomplished without dedication, teamwork, and a true get-stuff-done attitude. Representing our constituents in this Chamber is not a job, Mr. Speaker. It is a calling. There is no higher calling than helping the most vulnerable in our society.

I, again, urge all of my colleagues to support this legislation, H.R. 909, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Chair, I would like to share the preliminary estimate by the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) on H.R. 3383, the INVEST Act.

CBO has previously estimated the direct spending and revenue effects, on a preliminary or final basis, for each section of the Rules version of H.R. 3383. CBO and JCT estimate that H.R. 1013 (Retirement Fairness for Charities and Educational Institutions Act of 2025), whose language is mirrored in section 202 of H.R. 3383, would not impact direct spending over the 2026 to 2035 period but would affect the revenues and deficit by an insignificant amount over that same period. For every other bill that has been compiled into H.R. 3383, CBO estimates that there would not be any direct spending or revenue effects over the 2026 to 2035 period.

On a preliminary basis, CBO estimates that the combined bill has no direct spending effects and would impact the revenues and deficit by an insignificant amount over the 2026 to 2035 period.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the bill under consideration.

Mr. Chair, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Chair, I rise in support of H.R. 3383, the Incentivizing New Ventures and Economic Strength Through Capital Formation Act, the INVEST Act.

America's economic strength has always come from our builders, inventors, and risk takers. We are a nation of startups born in garages, family businesses turned into thriving enterprises, and Dreamers who take an idea and make it real.

Today, too many of those dreams face serious obstacles. Right now, three areas--Silicon Valley, Boston, and New York--account for nearly three quarters of all venture capital funding. Entrepreneurs across the country are told to move to a coast or move on.

Meanwhile, mountains of red tape are stifling growth. When a founder spends more time navigating Washington rules than creating jobs, something is broken. We cannot win the next century with a playbook written in the last one. The INVEST Act is our course correction, and it builds on proven success.

More than a decade ago, a divided Congress came together to pass the JOBS Act. It worked. Companies that went public using JOBS Act provisions expanded their workforce by an average of 150 percent in just 3 years.

This legislation that we are talking about right now, the INVEST Act, takes the next step. Our Capital Markets Subcommittee heard from entrepreneurs and small businesses that can't access capital in their own communities, Main Street investors with deep expertise who are locked out of opportunities just because they aren't wealthy enough, and emerging fund managers who confirmed that outdated rules are holding America back.

These aren't abstract problems. They are costing us jobs, innovation, and economic growth in every district that we represent.

The INVEST Act delivers targeted solutions. It revises the ``accredited investor'' definition to recognize that financial sophistication comes from what you know, not just from how much you earn.

It also reduces the regulatory burden that discourages companies from going public. Small businesses will find it easier to raise capital locally so that economic success can be shared within communities, not just concentrated on the coasts.

This is bipartisan, pragmatic policy. I am proud to lead this effort along with our esteemed chairman, Chairman Hill, and my colleagues across the aisle, Representatives Meeks and Gottheimer. I would like to note that the ranking member voted for 19 of the 22 bills included in this package.

There is a reason this bill has won resounding support. I think we are at 81 total organizations from every corner of the country. When we expand access to capital and opportunity, everyone wins. More companies will choose to grow here, go public here, and create jobs here instead of overseas. More Americans and everyday retail investors will invest in innovation, and more communities across the country will participate in the prosperity that entrepreneurship creates.

I urge my colleagues to support this legislation, H.R. 3383, the INVEST Act. Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Chairman, I would like to just mention to the Chair that those three so-called poison pills that the ranking member keeps mentioning, these bills passed overwhelmingly in the Financial Services Committee with strong bipartisan support.

Mr. Chairman, I include in the Record the 81--let me underscore, 81-- organizations that are supporting this piece of legislation, everything from the American Retirement Association to the Small Business and Entrepreneurship Council, the United Way, the U.S. Black Chambers, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, even the YMCA.

H.R. 3383--INVEST Act (Wagner) (FSC)

groups supporting

1. Accredited Investor Alliance

2. American Benefits Council

3. American Council of Life Insurers (ACLI)

4. American Heart Association

5. American Retirement Association (ARA)

6. American Securities Association (ASA)

7. Ameriprise Financial

8. Angel Capital Association (ACA)

9. AngelList

10. Arizona Technology Council

11. Association of Women's Business Centers

12. Biotechnology Innovation Organization (BIO)

13. Cancer Fund Impact Investments

14. Capital Integration Systems (CAIS)

15. Carta

16. Center for American Entrepreneurship (CAE)

17. Charles Schwab

18. Chorus America

19. Coalition for Business Development (CBD)

20. Committee of Annuity Insurers (CAI)

21. Council on Foundations

22. Crowdfunding Professional Association (CFPA)

23. Defined Contribution Alternatives Association (DCALTA)

24. Edward Jones

25. Empower

26. Engine

27. Fidelity Investments

28. Financial Services Institute

29. Financial Technology Association (FTA)

30. Franklin Templeton

31. Great Gray Trust Company

32. Habitat for Humanity International

33. Illinois Venture Capital Association

34. Incubate

35. Independent Sector

36. Inland Real Estate Group of Companies

37. Institute for Portfolio Alternatives (IPA)

38. Insured Retirement Institute (IRI)

39. Investment Adviser Association (IAA)

40. Investment Company Institute (ICI)

41. Investor Choice Advocates Network (ICAN)

42. LPL Financial

43. Lutheran Services in America

44. Make Startups

45. Managed Funds Association (MFA)

46. Maryland Technology Council

47. Massachusetts Biotechnology Council (MassBio)

48. Meals on Wheels America

49. Michigan Venture Capital Association

50. MissionSquare

51. Nareit

52. Nasdaq

53. National Association of Insurance and Financial

Advisors (NAIFA)

54. National Association of Manufacturers (NAM)

55. National Small Business Association

56. National Council of Nonprofits

57. National Bankers Association

58. National Venture Capital Association (NVCA)

59. Nationwide

60. New England Venture Capital Association

61. New York Stock Exchange

62. Prudential

63. Rocky Mountain Venture Capital Association

64. Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association

(SIFMA)

65. Small Business & Entrepreneurship Council

66. Small Business Investor Alliance (SBIA)

67. Small Business Multi-Cloud Coalition

68. SPARK Institute

69. Stable Value Investment Association (SVIA)

70. State Street Investment Management

71. Technology Association of Georgia (TAG)

72. Technology Councils of North America (TECNA)

73. Texas Venture Alliance

74. TIAA

75. United Way Worldwide

76. U.S. Black Chambers, Inc.

77. U.S. Chamber of Commerce

78. Coalition Letter from 25+ Organizations Representing

the US Innovation Ecosystem

79. Venture Atlanta

80. Y Combinator

81. YMCA of USA

Mr. Chair, I yield 3\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. Hill), the esteemed chairman of the Financial Services Committee and my wonderful partner in this capital markets endeavor.

Mr. Chairman, I am not even close to closing. I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Huizenga), my good friend and the sponsor of the Improving Disclosures for Investors Act in this package.

Mr. Chair, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Meeks), the co-lead of this bill and my very good friend here in Congress.

Mr. Chair, I yield an additional 30 seconds to the gentleman from New York.

Mr. Chair, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Steil), the sponsor of the Expanding WKSI Eligibility Act in this package.

Mr. Chair, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Flood), the sponsor of the Equal Opportunity for All Investors Act in this package.

Mr. Chair, I yield an additional 30 seconds to the gentleman from Nebraska.

Mr. Chair, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Iowa (Mr. Nunn), my good friend and the sponsor of the ELEVATE Act in this package.

Mr. Chair, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Chair, I also would like to pull up a few more of the organizations supporting the INVEST Act of our 81 total that we have received to date: the American Council of Life Insurers, the American Heart Association, the American Retirement Association, the Association of Women's Business Centers, Habitat for Humanity, the Lutheran Services in America, even Meals on Wheels America.

Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Haridopolos), a sponsor of the Greenlighting Growth Act in this package.

Mr. Chair, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. McDowell).

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

Mr. Chair, in closing, I ask every American to talk to their parents and to their grandparents. Talk to the 81 groups supporting this piece of incredible legislation including the INVEST Act, most especially the American Retirement Association; Lutheran Services in America; Meals on Wheels; MissionSquare Retirement; the Small Business and Entrepreneurship Council; the United Way; the U.S. Black Chambers, Inc.; the U.S. Chamber of Commerce; and the YMCA. Why are they signing onto and supporting this tremendous piece of legislation?

Mr. Chair, I want to address the statements of the ranking member. A few of the statements about the INVEST Act are simply incorrect, and I want to set the record straight.

The ranking member claims that this bill creates a loophole for bad actors to sell, as we just spoke about, the retirees' products outside of government oversight and regulations. The collective investment trusts are overseen and regulated by the OCC and other Federal or State banking regulators, the IRS, and the Department of Labor.

In addition, investors have additional protections under the bill by requiring either the plan to be subject to ERISA protections, the employer sponsor to serve as a plan fiduciary, or a government plan subject to additional State protections.

The ranking member claims that this bill would make it harder for investors to receive disclosures. That is just simply and categorically untrue. The INVEST Act requires an initial paper communication, a transition period, annual paper reminders of the right to opt out, mechanisms to detect failed deliveries, and readability retention standards. Plus, there is standing anytime to opt out back to paper.

It modernizes disclosures in line with recent actions by the Thrift Savings Plan, TSP, while preserving protections for low-tech, low- income, and older investors.

The ranking member claims that this bill will turn closed-end funds into a vehicle for private funds to add unlimited amounts of risky private assets to everyday investors. That is categorically false. This provision does not change the strong regulatory obligations for both closed-end funds and their advisers under the securities law.

These protections include robust requirements with respect to fiduciary obligations, liquidity, transparency, valuation, and disclosure on fees, risks, strategies, and costs.

Mr. Chair, this bill is simply a bipartisan, targeted approach to modernizing outdated rules and expanding access to capital, while preserving strong investor protections. We have an opportunity today to unleash innovation and opportunity in every community we represent, putting more money in the pockets of our constituents and making life more affordable. That means more opportunities for workers, for savers, and for entrepreneurs.

The INVEST Act opens the door for everyone to share in the wealth of America, not just Wall Street.

Mr. Chair, I urge a ``yes'' vote so Congress can invest in our community, invest in our jobs, and invest for our future. I thank my colleagues on both sides of the aisle, again, for their very hard work and support

Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I rise in respectful opposition to this amendment which would remove an important provision from the INVEST Act. Section 307 is not new or untested policy. This exact language passed the House floor earlier this Congress as H.R. 3357, the Enhancing Multi-Class Share Disclosure Act, with overwhelming bipartisan support.

Multi-class share structures date back to the late 1800s and were first conceived to allow companies, particularly family enterprises, to maintain control over voting decisions even without holding a majority of shares. These structures have become increasingly common, particularly among newer public companies.

Currently the SEC does not require the company to disclose the disparity between an individual's equity ownership and their controlling or controlled voting shares, though many companies already voluntarily provide this information.

Section 307 simply standardizes the information shareholders receive in proxy materials by requiring this information be provided in a consistent manner when it comes to voting power, particularly from the officers, directors, and those with more than a 5 percent stake.

This is a thoughtful, balanced approach. It enhances transparency for retail investors while preserving multi-class structures as a mechanism to encourage founders to go public. We are not banning these structures. We are simply ensuring investors understand what they are buying before they invest.

Enhanced disclosures protect retail investors who may not have the resources or expertise to navigate complex corporate structures. It levels the playing field by providing the same information to all market participants.

Given the strong bipartisan support, Mr. Chair, this provision has already received, I respectfully urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment and retain section 307.

Mr. Chair, I thank the gentleman for yielding.

I rise in support of the gentleman from Texas' amendment. This is a commonsense clarification that ensures section 105 cannot be misinterpreted as a blank check for expanding the Federal bureaucracy.

The INVEST Act is about modernizing our capital markets and expanding opportunities for investors and entrepreneurs, not about growing government.

This amendment provides helpful statutory clarity that protects taxpayers while preserving the important work this legislation accomplishes. I thank the gentleman from Texas for his amendment, and I urge my colleagues to support it.

Mr. Chair, I claim the time in opposition.

Mr. Chair, I rise in opposition to this amendment, which would impose sweeping new regulatory requirements on investment advisers and hedge funds serving foreign clients.

While combating illicit finance and addressing national security threats are critical objectives we all share, this amendment takes the wrong approach, one that FinCEN itself recognized as flawed.

Let's be clear about what happened. The Financial Crimes Enforcement Network, FinCEN, proposed a substantially similar rule and then postponed it before implementation. That postponement wasn't arbitrary. It came after careful consideration of the rules, operational challenges, compliance burdens, and questions about its effectiveness.

This amendment would impose requirements that even the agency charged with combating financial crimes determined needed further review. Investment advisers are already subject to robust oversight under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940. They owe a fiduciary duty to their clients and must comply with comprehensive Federal securities laws and regulations.

The SEC has extensive authority to examine advisers and enforce compliance. Moreover, imposing duplicative know-your-customer and anti- money laundering requirements specifically on foreign clients creates a two-tiered system that could harm U.S. competitiveness and global capital markets. International investors would face additional barriers when working with American advisers, potentially driving capital and business relationships to foreign jurisdictions with less stringent oversight.

If we believe gaps exist in our anti-money laundering framework, the solution is thoughtful, coordinated rulemaking by the appropriate agencies, not legislating requirements that are still under active consideration by FinCEN.

I urge my colleagues to reject this amendment and allow our Financial Crimes Enforcement Network to develop effective, practical solutions rather than imposing requirements they themselves abandoned.

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

Mr. Chair, I am prepared to close.

Mr. Chair, has the gentlewoman-- The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman from California is recognized.

Okay.

I would ask the Chair who is closing first: the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Waters) or myself?

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Mr. Chairman, I rise one more time in closing to oppose this amendment by Ms. Garcia that requires investment advisers and hedge funds to perform know-your-customer verifications and implement anti-money laundering procedures for foreign clients. It is a sweeping new regulatory requirement on investment advisers and hedge funds that serve foreign clients.

Mr. Chair, I will be clear here that if we believe that any kind of gaps exist in our anti-money laundering frame, the solution that we have is thoughtful, coordinated rulemaking by the appropriate agencies. Obviously, FinCEN is still actively considering how to move forward.

Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Chair, I rise in opposition to the amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong opposition to this amendment, which would pose a significant obstacle for the same small businesses and startups that we aim to support.

These proposed new requirements would act as a speed bump for smaller issuers. These are not massive Wall Street institutions. These are often first-time founders, small businesses, and innovative startups relying on 506(c) to raise essential seed and growth capital. Adding complex or ambiguous new filing requirements diverts their precious time and scarce resources away from innovation and job creation and toward burdensome compliance.

These additional disclosure burdens will actively discourage the startups and small businesses that desperately need access to this private market capital. They will choose to forgo fundraising altogether rather than navigate this complex, costly, and legally risky environment.

In fact, the Securities and Exchange Commission has examined similar ideas twice in the last decade. In both instances, the market response was a resounding chorus of concern. In both cases, the message was clear: New filing or disclosure obligations would significantly raise costs and ultimately chill early-stage capital formation.

We should be focused on expanding opportunities for American entrepreneurs, not erecting new bureaucratic barriers. We must prioritize a system that makes it easier and not harder for startups and small businesses to secure the capital that they need to grow, hire, and innovate.

Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to reject these unnecessary and harmful reporting burdens. I urge a ``no'' vote on this amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Meuser), the sponsor of the ACCESS Act in this package.

Mr. Chairman, I simply urge my colleagues to reject these unnecessary and harmful reporting burdens, and I ask that they oppose this amendment. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition.

Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong opposition to this amendment, which represents a fundamental departure from the careful, deliberative process that has guided the INVEST Act.

Let me be clear about what we are being asked to consider. This is not a modest technical correction or a narrow clarification. These are sweeping, complex changes that redefine fee structures across the entire securities industry. They create new prohibitions, and they establish an unprecedented public ranking system for SEC registrants.

It has never been vetted by participants, investor groups, legal experts, or Congress. It has not even been considered or marked up through the Financial Services Committee through regular order, the very process that every other provision in the INVEST Act has undergone.

We are being asked to inject unexamined policy into a carefully crafted bill at the 11th hour. This is not how we should legislate, particularly on matters affecting trillions of dollars in American retirement savings and investment accounts.

Beyond the procedural concerns, the policy itself is deeply flawed. SEC-registered advisers and broker-dealers are already subject to comprehensive fee disclosure requirements under existing law. They must provide clear, written disclosures about all fees and compensation. They are subject to fiduciary duties or Regulation Best Interest standards that require fees to be reasonable and in clients' best interests.

This amendment creates vague, undefined standards about what constitutes

a fee that is ``not proportional to services provided.'' Who decides proportionality? By what standard? This invites endless litigation and regulatory uncertainty that will ultimately harm investors by increasing costs and limiting service offerings.

I urge my colleagues to reject this substantively flawed amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Chair, as we come to a close on what I believe is the final amendment of H.R. 3383, the INVEST Act, I thank my colleagues who have been so bipartisan in this package of 22 amazing capital formation bills that are going to lift up retail and mainstream investors, that are going to grow small business and entrepreneurs, and give more companies the possibility of having the capital for them to go public.

Mr. Chair, I thank my wonderful co-lead, Mr. Gregory Meeks from New York and Josh Gottheimer, and also Chairman Hill for their tremendous support in this effort and my entire Capital Markets Subcommittee, the staff, and the team that has brought what is years and years of hard work together that is going to grow this economy, grow jobs, and grow the future of the United States of America and our economy.

Mr. Chair, I thank the ranking member for the good, healthy debate this evening and the collaboration that we have, but I must say still, Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to reject this specific amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Chair, I move that the Committee do now rise.

Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend from Ohio for yielding.

Mr. Speaker, I am proud to sponsor H.R. 4429, the Developing and Empowering our Aspiring Leaders, or DEAL, Act.

This bill, which passed with almost unanimous support out of the Financial Services Committee, seeks to ensure the United States remains the most entrepreneurial country in the world, where the next great companies are founded and funded.

It is often said that small businesses are the engine of the American economy, and that is an absolute truth. Small businesses make up 99 percent of U.S. employers, and they are the driving force behind the creation of a majority of new jobs.

The entrepreneurs leading these companies are building something new, taking real risks, and driving growth in communities across the Nation, but too often, they can't get a fair shot at investment.

Right now, our capital markets suffer from an extreme geographic imbalance. The data is stark. Nearly 70 percent of venture capital flows to three States, Mr. Speaker: California, New York, and Massachusetts.

This leaves entire regions of the country struggling to access funding. It leaves communities in the Midwest and the South without the capital they need to build and scale businesses. Access to capital is not just a coastal issue. It is a national economic necessity.

This capital divide is why the DEAL Act is so critically important. This bill is a targeted, forward-looking effort to modernize outdated rules and channel investment to where it is needed most.

The DEAL Act fundamentally strengthens the ability of capital to reach more founders and more communities. It achieves this by allowing larger venture funds to invest directly in smaller, regional funds, a fund-of-funds investment.

This mechanism is a game changer, Mr. Speaker. It means more funding for startups, more opportunities for businesses that might otherwise be overlooked, and more innovation happening everywhere, not just in a handful of elite ZIP Codes.

Newer, regional venture funds are often best positioned to back the entrepreneurs who are building businesses on Main Street. The DEAL Act ensures that these funds can expand that important work, giving them the flexibility to partner with larger institutions to reach a wider base of early-stage companies.

H.R. 4429 ensures our policies are helping capital move efficiently and effectively, empowering those taking risks to build something new, and helping good ideas grow into great companies.

I thank Chairman Hill for his support, and also I thank Congressman Casten for joining me and co-leading this commonsense and bipartisan piece of legislation.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 3351, the Improving Access to Small Business Information Act.

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleagues on both sides of the aisle, Representatives Kim and Gottheimer, for their work on this commonsense, bipartisan piece of legislation that will give Americans, small businesses, and entrepreneurs a stronger voice at the SEC.

H.R. 3351 offers a straightforward solution to empower the SEC's Office of the Advocate for Small Business Capital Formation, the advocate, making it a more effective champion for American entrepreneurs.

Mr. Speaker, I also rise today in support of my bill, H.R. 3382, the Small Entity Update Act. I thank my colleagues across the aisle, Congressmen Casten, Himes, Scott, and Torres, for their support of this impactful bipartisan legislation. It ensures that the SEC fairly weighs in its rulemaking the regulatory burdens faced by small businesses.

This bipartisan bill would direct the SEC to assess the costs of compliance for small and growing businesses, ensuring that regulations placed on these businesses are not overly burdensome.

Specifically, the bill would direct the Commission to conduct a study, followed by a rulemaking consistent with the results of such study every 5 years, including defining the term ``small entity'' under the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

Simply put, small businesses can't afford the extensive legal and regulatory expertise that large, multinational firms employ to comply with every regulation while still managing their operating costs.

Recognizing that company sizes and market dynamics constantly evolve, my bill requires the SEC to update its definition of ``small entity'' every 5 years.

For our economy to flourish, Congress and regulators must ensure that all policies consider their impact on America's millions of small businesses.

Mr. Speaker, by creating a more focused regulatory approach for small entities, the Small Entity Update Act will make it easier for entrepreneurs across the country to achieve the American Dream.

Mr. Speaker, I urge all of my colleagues to vote for this bill, H.R. 3382.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman for yielding.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 1469, the Senior Security Act. I thank my colleague, Representative Gottheimer, for his work on this vital piece of bipartisan legislation that will strengthen protections for senior investors. I am proud to be the co-lead of this bill.

Fraud and exploitation jeopardize the integrity of our capital markets. When this illicit activity specifically targets senior investors, it poses an even graver threat, impacting those who often rely most on their investments.

According to the FBI, in 2023, senior investors fell victim to scams and fraud totaling over $3.4 billion in losses, an increase of approximately 11 percent from the year prior.

The Senior Security Act is designed to reinforce and enhance our safeguards protecting senior investors from financial fraud and abuse.

H.R. 1469 creates the senior investor task force within the Securities and Exchange Commission which is tasked with reporting on industry trends and challenges impacting investors over the age of 65. The task force will also make recommendations for changes to existing legislation and regulations to address the unique issues faced by our senior investors.

Mr. Speaker, H.R. 1469 has received strong bipartisan support in the past, passing by suspension in the last three Congresses. It remains a commonsense solution to ensure that senior investors receive adequate protection against fraud and exploitation.

Again, I thank Mr. Gottheimer for his work on this bill and his partnership on other efforts to protect senior investors, including my Financial Exploitation Prevention Act.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 1469.