Floor Statements

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

``In all cases affecting ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls, and those in which a State shall be party, the supreme Court shall have original jurisdiction. In all the other cases before mentioned, the supreme Court shall have appellate jurisdiction, both as to law and fact, with such exceptions, and under such regulations as the Congress shall make.''

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 431) to award a Congressional Gold Medal to the Foot Soldiers who participated in Bloody Sunday, Turnaround Tuesday, or the final Selma to Montgomery Voting Rights March in March of 1965, which served as a catalyst for the Voting Rights Act of 1965.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and to insert extraneous materials into the Record concerning H.R. 431, currently under consideration.

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of this very important bill, H.R. 431, a bipartisan bill to award a Congressional Gold Medal to the foot soldiers, the courageous men and women who participated in historic days such as Bloody Sunday, Turnaround Tuesday, and the final March from Selma to Montgomery to ensure voting rights for African Americans.

Mr. Speaker, sometimes, it is hard for people in today's society to realize the historical significance of the events that took place in the past. For younger people, it may seem like a lifetime ago, but for those who lived through those experiences, it may seem like it just happened yesterday.

One series of events that we cannot and must not allow to fade away are the historic marches that began in Selma in the spring of 1956. On March 7, 1965, led by two fearless men, the Reverend Hosea Williams and a man many in this Chamber know well, Representative John Lewis, 500 of those brave foot soldiers determined to have their voices heard and their right to vote be recognized as they bravely lined up at the Edmund Pettus Bridge.

These initial marchers were then brutally assaulted and beaten by Alabama State troopers as they attempted to cross the bridge, seeking to assert their constitutional right to vote. That atrocity became known as Bloody Sunday.

Two days later, nearly 2,500 foot soldiers, led by Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., peacefully assembled and again attempted to cross the Edmund Pettus Bridge. The group marched to where the attacks occurred a few days before on Bloody Sunday, and at Dr. King's request, they stopped and knelt in prayer. Following the prayer, the marchers turned around and returned to Selma.

Finally then, on March 21, under the protection of the U.S. Army, Federal marshals, and the federalized Alabama National Guard at that point, that group had swollen to 8,000 foot soldiers who were escorted safely for 54 miles from Selma to Montgomery.

By the time the march reached the steps of the State capitol, that group had grown to approximately 25,000 people strong there on those steps in Montgomery.

Mr. Speaker, instead of bringing the campaign to search for voting rights to a halt, 50 years ago, the photographs and blurry television images of that violent attack on Bloody Sunday on that bridge galvanized the national attention. In fact, the first march was a catalyst for action.

Just 5 short months after the first march, Congress had passed and President Johnson had signed into law the Voting Rights Act.

Mr. Speaker, we, as a Nation, must do more to ensure voting rights are protected for all Americans, and in doing so, we must remember the sacrifices of those individuals who came before us and worked so tirelessly to make a difference and to create voting rights equality.

It is truly a privilege for me personally to stand before you today as Congress recognizes these brave men and women and the historical significance of those marches that began in Selma and forever changed the direction of our great Nation.

I thank the gentlewoman from Alabama (Ms. Sewell) for highlighting these historic events, and I urge all of my colleagues to support H.R. 431.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as she may consume to the gentlewoman from Alabama (Mrs. Roby), who is the lead cosponsor of this legislation.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Ross), a member of the Committee on Financial Services, which has been dealing with this issue.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from California (Mr. McCarthy), the distinguished House majority leader.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 30 seconds.

I have no interest in politicizing this great bipartisan Gold Medal act that we currently have before us. And let's not turn this important act into a debate that will be, frankly, held in the Judiciary Committee, rather than on the House floor.

We know that the Voting Rights Act--being a man who represents a significant part of Gerald R. Ford's congressional district, it was men like him that were hand-in-hand, arm-in-arm with those in that movement that helped create the original Voting Rights Act. And I know that this body

can rise again to do the right thing and move forward in a bipartisan manner.

With that, Mr. Speaker, recognizing that the other side has numerous requests for time on this bill, particularly from the Congressional Black Caucus, I ask unanimous consent that 7 minutes of the majority's time be transferred and placed under the control of my good friend and colleague from Alabama (Ms. Sewell), who is the Democratic manager.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time at this moment.

I reserve the balance of my time.

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

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

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

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

To my friend, it is amazing to me today the irony as we talk about the Edmund Pettus Bridge, a man who served as the grand dragon of the Ku Klux Klan in Alabama, who just 100 years ago was serving in the U.S. Senate, and to have that be a symbol and discussed in the same breath as a man like John Lewis and Martin Luther King and so many others and in that short 50 years for us, even though we may be of a different political persuasion, for me to be here and witness the first African American to be President of these United States, what an amazing journey this has been.

Gone are the poll taxes, gone are the reading and history tests, gone are a number of those legal impediments and formal legal impediments that were there both in the North and in the South that dictated to someone where they could or couldn't live.

What has not gone--I am struck by this time and time again--is sin and hatred in human hearts. As C.S. Lewis talks about in his book ``Mere Christianity,'' by means of laws, a man can attempt to change a man's actions, but they will not succeed without a change to those men's hearts.

I think that is our legacy. I think that is our duty as Americans, and I think that is part of what we are doing here today--to honor, to recognize, and to celebrate, knowing that the journey is not done necessarily, knowing that we have other areas where we need to work on this as a society, but knowing that progress has been made.

It is truly an honor to be a part of this with you as well, my friend.

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise today regarding three missed votes due to inclement weather on Monday, February 2, 2015. Had I been present for roll call vote number 51, H.R. 361, the Medical Preparedness Allowable Use Act, I would have voted ``yay.'' Had I been present for roll call vote number 52, H.R. 615, the Department of Homeland Security Interoperable Communications Act, I would have voted ``yay.'' Had I been present for roll call vote number 53, H.R. 623, the Social Media Working Group Act of 2015, I would have voted ``yay.''

Madam Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity to rise and discuss this issue briefly. It just came to me last week when my 13-year-old daughter turned 14 and I looked at her and have seen her with her friends, just the scourge, the horrendous things that are done to these young ladies, whether it is here or internationally.

I was brought back to a visit I had last year to an organization called WAR, Women At Risk International, in my district, the Second District of Michigan, where they are trying to use civilian first responders to identify those signs of trafficking to make sure that those aren't those police reports saying ``minor returned to parent'' and that they are able to utilize the things that they see or suspect as a way of pulling those girls out of those situations.

It is heartfelt that I want to make sure that this body pursues this issue, and I commend all of our colleagues who have dealt with this as we are trying to create these circles of protection and hope around these women and children that are in this horrible situation.

Madam Speaker, I commend everybody for this legislation, and I urge a ``yes'' vote.

I appreciate my friend from New Jersey yielding me this time, and I rise today to join my colleagues and thousands of Americans who will be marching on Washington, D.C., tomorrow because every life truly is a gift, which is this year's Right to Life march theme. It has been talked about, the millions of young lives that have been tragically cut short.

But I, like my colleague and our friend from Kansas, who was just talking about his personal experience with adoption, I come from a place in western Michigan that has really embraced the notion of adoption. We have a number of friends and neighbors who have done both domestic and international adoption. In fact, one family is now on their third adoption from Africa, and this time they are coming home with a brother and sister for four kids, adding to their own natural five that they have. And I must add that, a little jokingly, we are not Catholic typically in western Michigan, we are just passionate Protestants. We are wanting to share that gift of life and opportunity for those children who have that potential that their parents see and go through a difficult decision to put them up, and whether it is domestically or internationally, we are so pleased that they have done that.

It is also why, because life being so precious, why my wife, Natalie, and I have been active through our church and Michigan Right to Life, and my wife particularly through the Lakeshore Pregnancy Center, a crisis pregnancy center that she has been on the board of for a number of years that is helping young men and women make those difficult choices in those difficult life circumstances.

I understand, and I know my colleagues know this as well. This is very difficult. It is very emotional. These are issues that have affected so many of us. As we deal with difficult circumstances where these pregnancies have arisen, whether it is through rape or through mistakes that have been made to have these unplanned pregnancies, I think we need to show that love and that mercy that we have been shown at various times in our life.

I do want to encourage my colleagues in the House, though, to take a close look at a loophole, an issue that I became aware of a couple of years ago. Over the previous two Congresses, I introduced something called the Homeland Security Respect For Life Act and worked with my friend and Appropriations member, Representative Aderholt, to attach language to the annual Department of Homeland Security Appropriations bill.

This commonsense bill simply prevents hardworking taxpayer dollars from paying for abortions through the DHS programs that currently would fund abortions for detainees who lack lawful status here in the United States. In fact, this bill codifies pro-life language that is already found in the ICE, Immigration and Customs Enforcement, manual on detention standards. But since this manual lacks a basis in law and the weight of law, it can be changed at any time by unelected bureaucrats.

Well, I think it is time for us to put the DHS in line with other departments of the government and codify this and make sure that this is crystal clear. Our current policy prohibits Federal taxpayer funding for abortions for law-abiding citizens on Medicaid, as well as citizens who are in Federal prison, why not the DHS and why not in these detention areas? It only makes sense to apply those same life-affirming standards to immigration detainees as well.

This is an easy fix, Mr. Chairman, and I am hopeful that this year the Senate and the President will agree to our bill language and follow the precedent as consistent with current administration policy in the other Federal agencies. I, too, want to say thank you for your leadership in this area and appreciate the opportunity to spend some time on the floor.

Mr. Speaker, I, too, share my friend from Wisconsin's frustration at this. This is sort of like saying we are going to have a cookie that is getting baked here on the House floor and our friends across the aisle approve of the eggs, they approve of the butter, they approve of the sugar, and they approve of the chocolate clips, but they don't want the final

product. I am confused as to why we cannot put all these ingredients together and get this done finally. The American people are begging us to get this work done. That is why I rise today, Mr. Speaker: to support H.R. 37.

Part of that bill has my bill from the last Congress, H.R. 2274. Excessive and unnecessary regulations have been hurting our economy, increasing costs to consumers and investors, reducing wage growth, and restricting access to private sector capital that our Nation's job creators need in order to grow the economy and create jobs.

This unanimously passed bipartisan legislation is a compilation of commonsense regulatory relief bills that have been carefully crafted to help grow the economy for Main Street and not from Washington, D.C. My bill actually is part of that.

Eleven of these bills have previously been passed by this very body or at the Financial Services Committee with overwhelming bipartisan support. In fact, my bill idea came not from anybody on Wall Street, not from anybody in Washington, D.C., but from a mergers and acquisitions lawyer back in my district in Grand Rapids, Michigan, who said: We've been struggling with this problem and we need some help because we cannot get the SEC to move on this.

So that is why I put together the Small Business Mergers, Acquisitions, Sales, and Brokerage Simplification Act, and this has been kindly rolled into this larger package.

It has been estimated that approximately $10 trillion of privately owned, small family-owned-type businesses will be sold or, worse yet, closed in the coming years as baby boomers retire. I don't think any of us would think that that is a good thing. Mergers and acquisitions brokers play a critical role in facilitating the transfer of these smaller privately held companies. Who benefits? Small communities and the workers that they employ and that live in those areas. This bipartisan provision would create a simplified system for brokers performing services in connection with the transfer of ownership of these smaller privately held companies.

In today's highly charged political environment, however, it is hard because it would be nice to show the American people that we have positive, effective initiatives that should be passed.

``But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the executive and judicial officers of a State, or the Members of the legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such State, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such State.''

Mr. Speaker, I rise today regarding a missed vote on December 10, 2014. Had I been present for roll call vote number 560, H.R. 1204, on the motion to suspend the rules and concur in the Senate amendment for the Aviation Security Stakeholder Participation Act of 2014, I would have voted ``yay.''

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the Honorable James M. Batzer and his commendable service to Benzie and Manistee counties as a Circuit Court Judge.

Judge Batzer served West Michigan as a circuit court judge for 30 years. His commitment to the people of West Michigan has been exemplified through his long and illustrious career.

After graduating from Wayne State University with his Juris Doctor, Judge Batzer chose to remain in Michigan to practice. Before his election to the 19th Circuit Court, Judge Batzer worked a number of different jobs helping Michigan's youth. From 1968-1975, he served as a Children's Protective Services Worker as well as a Juvenile Delinquency Case Worker. He then went on to become a Teaching Fellow at the Detroit College of Law, where he taught legal research and writing to first- year law students. In 1979, Judge Batzer served as an Assistant Attorney General for the state of Michigan as well. Judge Batzer was later elected to the 19th Judicial Circuit Court on January 1, 1985.

Judge Batzer has proven his dedication to the courts of Michigan throughout his career, and he has been a respected and prominent figure in the law community. From 1989-1995, he served as a Member of the State Bar Committee on Criminal Jury Instructions, and he served as Chair of the committee from 1993-1995. He has also been a member of the Northwest Michigan Community Corrections Advisory Board from 1989-2010. Judge Batzer was later named as one of the least reversed trial court judges in criminal cases in Michigan by the Detroit Free Press, and was also profiled by the college textbook, Criminal Justice in America.

Judge Batzer stands as a shining example of the Michigan Judicial System. I ask my colleagues to join me in honoring Judge James Batzer for his service to the state of Michigan.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the Honorable Gregory C. Pittman and his commendable service to Michigan's Western District as a Muskegon County Probate Judge.

After graduating from Michigan State University with his Bachelor's Degree, Judge Pittman went to Indiana University to obtain his Juris Doctor. After receiving his law degree, he returned to his birthplace in Muskegon, Michigan. On January 6, 1998, Governor John Engler appointed Judge Pittman to the Muskegon County Probate Bench. Judge Pittman has now served the Muskegon County Court System for 16 years, and he currently serves as the presiding Judge of the Muskegon County Family Court. Judge Pittman also promotes the strengthening of Michigan families, and in 2001, was awarded the Michigan Family Forum's Champion of the Family award.

Throughout his career, Judge Pittman has been committed to serving his community, and this has led to him being active in many educational, social, and civic organizations. He has served as the President of the Muskegon Heights Public Schools Board of Trustees, as well as a Trustee of the Muskegon Area Intermediate School District. Judge Pittman currently serves his community in many other ways as well. He is a member of the Hackley Hospital Board of Trustees, and the Community Foundation for Muskegon County Board of Trustees. Judge Pittman is also a Fellow of the Michigan Bar Association Foundation.

For all of his work and commitment, on November 22, 2014, Judge Pittman will be receiving the Living Legends Award at the Muskegon BEAT Awards Ceremony. I want to congratulate Judge Pittman for receiving such a prestigious reward, and thank him for his service to Muskegon County and the state of Michigan.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today regarding a missed vote on November 17, 2014. Had I been present for roll call vote number 520, H.R. 5162, to amend the Act entitled ``An Act to allow a certain parcel of land in Rockingham County, Virginia, to be used for a child care center'' to remove the use restriction, and for other purposes, I would have voted ``yay.''

Mr. Speaker, I rise today because this coming Saturday, November 22, is designated as National Adoption Day.

Each year, thousands of families navigate a complicated and expensive adoption process and welcome a much-wanted child into their families and into their lives. This Saturday, we will recognize, honor, and say ``thank you'' to these families.

We will also raise awareness of the over 100,000 children who are currently in the foster care system who have not found permanent homes or a permanent family to belong to. Sadly, 32 percent of these children will wait over 3 years in foster care before being adopted.

Globally, estimates are that there are 153 million orphans. U.S. families have adopted more than 7,000 of these children in 2013, but that is just the start. It may feel and appear to be overwhelming, but we can make a difference one child at a time.

I am proud to report that adoption rates in west Michigan, my hometown area, are among the highest in the country. Since the beginning of 2014, just one west Michigan adoption agency alone has processed 38 domestic infant adoptions, 26 intercountry adoptions, and helped many others.

We want to say thank you to them for their work.

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 5461) to clarify the application of certain leverage and risk-based requirements under the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, to improve upon the definitions provided for points and fees in connection with a mortgage transaction, and for other purposes.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days with which to revise and extend their remarks and submit extraneous materials for the Record on H.R. 5461 currently under consideration.

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 5461, a bill authored by the gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. Barr), my colleague on the Financial Services Committee, and cosponsored by Mr. Gary G. Miller of California and myself.

This bill contains four titles, three of which having already passed this House with overwhelming or unanimous support and one of which passed with only a dozen ``no'' votes.

Mr. Speaker, it is rare that the Senate sends us meaningful legislation; and, frankly, it is even rarer when they send us legislation that amends and fixes the Dodd-Frank Act. As we on the Financial Services Committee have seen in our hearings and our markups, our friends on the other side of the aisle and the other side of the Capitol usually defend Dodd-Frank to the hilt, bestowing on it deference normally reserved for the sacred texts handed down from the heavens.

Well, we should agree that Congress doesn't always get it right. When sweeping legislation is enacted--remember, Dodd-Frank is a 2,300-page bill--there are often areas that later need clarification, and that is exactly what we are talking about here today.

Whatever one's position is on Dodd-Frank, we should all be able to agree that the text is not sacred and does need some fixing. That is why I am pleased that the Senate has sent us a bill to clarify that regulators should not impose regulatory capital requirements designed for banking institutions on insurance companies. That was not what was intended.

The Senate bill, S. 2270, passed the other body unanimously. There is broad support in the House for a companion measure, but there is equally broad support for three other Dodd-Frank technical correction amendments that have previously passed this House: Mr. Barr's bill on the treatment of collateralized loan obligations under the Volcker rule, Mr. Grimm's bill to exempt end users from derivatives from Dodd- Frank's overreaching margin requirements, and my own bill on how points and fees are treated under Dodd-Frank's onerous qualified mortgage rule.

My legislation that is included in this package is a strong bipartisan provision that modifies and clarifies the way points and fees in a real estate transaction are calculated. This provision is narrowly focused to promote access to affordable mortgage credit without overturning the important consumer protections and sound underwriting requirements that Dodd-Frank's ability to repay provisions has in place.

Homeownership has been a pillar of American life for generations, and this particular provision will help more Americans realize this portion of the American Dream.

This bill is a commonsense measure that should and, I believe, does have broad bipartisan support. I was puzzled, however, by a Dear Colleague letter produced by Ranking Member Waters circulated earlier today. In the letter, she writes that Mr. Barr has coupled the insurance capital bill with other ``divisive legislation.''

Now, I would ask my friend the ranking member: What divisive legislation are you referring to? Is it the CLO bill which passed the House on voice vote? Is it the end user bill which passed the House on the ranking member's ``yes'' vote herself and only a dozen ``nay'' votes? Or is it my bill that also passed the House by voice vote? I don't see the divisiveness, and I don't see where the problem is.

The reality is Americans don't care about the parliamentary process so much as they want results.

We are pleased that the Senate has finally come to the table on Dodd- Frank reforms. This is legislation that represents a step forward in working with the other body to make sure that my constituents and your constituents can get mortgages to buy their first home, that farmers can assess the financing that they need to buy tractors and work their land, and that Americans can buy insurance policies without severe premium increases.

I encourage my colleagues to support H.R. 5461, especially my Democrats friends who I believe support every component of the package.

I reserve the balance of my time.

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

I wish I had actually asked if the gentlewoman would yield because I am confused. I am confused on a bill that she has voted three times--I am positive--three different bills, how that is divisive, how it is not targeted with significant Democrat support.

I personally with one of these bills--my bill has been sitting in the Senate since June. It has been targeted, it has had Democrat support, and it has had Republican support. We simply cannot get the Senate to move, and I am not sure why my colleague would support a Senate bill without any House input, but not expect the Senate to look at our material and to look at our bills.

Mr. Speaker, with that, I yield now as much time as he may consume to the gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. Barr) the author of this legislation.

Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 30 seconds to my colleague from Kentucky (Mr. Barr), who would like to clarify.

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

I am curious why we are here. The House of Representatives is only going to pass Senate bills. I am curious why my colleagues would be willing to do that. I would love to hear from my colleagues, which overwhelmingly passed House bill does the Senate object to? We simply cannot get them to take our bills up.

I am glad to hear that my colleague, Mrs. McCarthy, is going to be supporting this bill package. I too am hopeful. But I do believe that this is not political theater, for the robust list of supporters, like credit unions, banks, insurers of all sizes, the entire real estate community and end-users strongly support the policies that are within this bill. And I do have that list available as well, which I will include for the Record.

So, Mr. Speaker, I am prepared to close, and with that, I reserve the balance of my time.

September 15, 2014.

Dear Members of Congress: The undersigned trade

associations, representing job creators across the country of

all shapes and sizes, write to urge your support for

bipartisan legislation recently introduced by Reps. Andy Barr

(R-KY), Gary Miller (R-CA), Bill Huizenga (R-MI), and David

Scott (D-GA). H.R. 5461, currently scheduled for floor

consideration on Monday, September 15th, includes important

technical corrections to the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform

and Consumer Protection Act that strengthen the underlying

Act and provide critical clarifications to better oversee our

financial system while allowing for economic growth.

The ongoing implementation of the Dodd-Frank Act has

revealed unintended consequences that have adversely impacted

job creation and economic growth. We believe that the Barr-

Miller bill, comprised of a series of noncontroversial,

thoroughly examined, bipartisan proposals will fix these

unintended consequences and help make financial reform more

workable and effective. Specifically, this legislation

contains the text of three bills previously approved by the

House (H.R. 634, the Business Risk Mitigation and Price

Stabilization Act; H.R. 3211, the Mortgage Choice Act; H.R.

4167, the Restoring Proven Financing for American Employers

Act) as well as one bill that recently passed the Senate (S.

2270, the Insurance Capital Standards Clarification Act) by

unanimous consent. In fact, three of the four titles of this

package have previously passed either the House or Senate

without one dissenting vote.

We urge your support for the Barr-Miller-Huizenga-Scott

bill to help foster job creation and economic growth.

Signed,

American Bankers Association; American Bankers Insurance

Association (ABIA); American Financial Services Association;

American Insurance Association; Consumer Bankers Association;

Consumer Mortgage Coalition; Community Mortgage Lenders of

America; Credit Union National Association; The Financial

Services Roundtable; The Financial Services Forum;

Independent Community Bankers of America; Leading Builders of

America; The Loan Syndications and

Trading Association; Mortgage Bankers Association; National

Association of Federal Credit Unions; National Association of

Home Builders; National Association of Mutual Insurance

Companies; National Association of Realtors; The Realty

Alliance; Real Estate Services Providers Council, Inc.

(RESPRO); Securities Industry and Financial Markets

Association; U.S. Chamber of Commerce.

Mr. Speaker, I am prepared to close, Mr. Speaker, and reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, again, I am prepared to close, and I reserve the balance of my time.

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

I will address my remarks to the Chair, but, again, this is not about parliamentary procedure. This is about results.

The only bill that we will see here that may bring confusion to this entire process is the one that my colleagues are advocating for, the Senate bill. It is the only bill that we haven't dealt with in committee. It is the only bill we haven't had a vote on in the Houses. The other three bills have passed, two of them unanimously by voice vote, and the other one had 12 people, out of a body of 435, vote against it. Sounds like it is overwhelming. If it is that confusing to my colleagues to figure out what bill and how they voted for it when they come to the floor to vote on this package, they maybe should reconsider their current line of work. This should not be that tough.

This is, again, something that we need to move forward on. The political theater that seems to be happening here is on the other side. I am not sure why, if it is about trying to play to a base for an election issue or what, but this is the one time I think in the history of my working career that the whole is worse than the sum of its parts. This doesn't make any sense.

So there has not been bipartisan work on the underlying bill, Dodd- Frank, which I might remind my colleagues passed with zero minority Republican votes when the bill was passed. This package of bills has passed with overwhelming bipartisan support. I applaud my colleagues on the other side of the aisle when they oppose the Senate.

And I guess I needed to clarify that my comments about people acting like this is holy writ from the heavens does tend to be concentrated with my colleagues over in the Senate who apparently don't want to touch this or others in the administration who oppose the nine-bill package on derivatives reform that passed overwhelmingly bipartisanly out of our committee as well.

That is the kind of holdup that we have that is frustrating Americans, that is frustrating me as a policymaker and my colleagues, that is frustrating, frankly, future generations as they look in on this process.

It is time, Mr. Speaker, to pass this package of bills that includes three bills that this House has already dealt

with, that the Senate should have absolutely no opposition to or excuse why they will not take up.

With that, I again ask my colleagues to pass this particular bill, H.R. 5461, and look forward to its passage here soon.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize Medal of Honor Recipient, Master Chief Hospital Corpsman William R. Charette, for his commendable service in the Korean War.

William Charette was born in Ludington, Michigan. He stayed in Michigan until he signed with the U.S. Navy on January 11, 1951. Charette served in the United States Navy from 1951-1977. During his years of service, William Charette served in Korea, where he was a part of the 2nd Battalion of the 7th Marines.

On March 27, 1953, Charette was serving near Panmunjom, Korea, when his company

was attacked by enemy troops. Charette worked quickly to treat his fellow soldiers as best he could. While treating one soldier, a grenade landed near them, and Charette threw himself on top of the other soldier in an effort to absorb the blast. Although the blast destroyed Charette's medical kit he continued to treat soldiers by tearing off pieces of his uniform to help treat wounds. At one point, a soldier was so badly wounded that he was unable to move on his own accord. Charette stood up in the trench and lifted the man and carried him through enemy fire to safety. For his actions, William Charette was awarded the Congressional Medal of Honor from President Dwight D. Eisenhower on January 12, 1954.

William Charette stands as a shining example of bravery and determination that all Americans strive toward. I ask my colleagues to join me in honoring Master Chief Hospital Corpsman William Charette for his service to the United States of America.