Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 294, I call up the joint resolution (S.J. Res. 18) disapproving the rule submitted by the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection relating to ``Overdraft Lending: Very Large Financial Institutions,'' and ask for its immediate consideration in the House.

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 resolution under consideration.

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this joint resolution of disapproval.

Today, we can protect consumers and ensure continued access to financial services by voting to nullify the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau's disastrous rule on overdraft fees.

In a time burdened by the 40-year-high inflation, when many middle- and low-income households are living paycheck to paycheck, ensuring Americans have access to affordable credit has never been more important.

Overdraft protection is an optional service that financial institutions provide to help consumers avoid having purchases declined. Instead of the transaction being denied, the bank or credit union charges a flat fee to cover the check on behalf of that consumer. It lets that purchase proceed. It lets that payment to a utility company proceed. It lets that payment for an important rent or mortgage company to proceed, thereby allowing American families to take care of essential needs like that mortgage payment, rent payment, groceries, or gas before their next paycheck arrives.

Over the last decade, competition has driven financial institutions to lower their overdraft privilege fees to retain customers. Innovation has made accidental overdrafts less likely as many financial institutions now offer low balance alerts, automatic transfers from savings, and other tools to help consumers avoid being in overdraft and better manage their financial cash flow.

Competition and innovation, not government-mandated price caps, remain the best way to ensure consumers have access to affordable financial products and services.

Unfortunately, this CFPB rule undermines this very approach and threatens to restrict access to credit and overdraft privileges, which all of us should be concerned about.

The CFPB's rushed and haphazard approach to the rule is a clear example of how not to regulate. The CFPB made this decision before conducting meaningful research or considering the real-world consequences of its actions.

The CFPB's rule imposes a government-mandated price cap on what financial institutions may charge in the way of a fee for an overdraft privilege.

Like all price caps, this would reduce the availability of these very overdraft services, especially, Mr. Speaker, for consumers who have lower credit scores or are considered high risk.

By doing so, it effectively limits access to credit and that overdraft privilege for those who need it the most at the time they need it the most.

The CFPB's failure to consider the cost associated with this regulation, especially the real-world impact on consumers, their local community's financial institution, and the broader financial system only underscores the need to stop this price control before it is too late.

The CFPB also creates a false narrative of choice by suggesting that banks and credit unions can either offer an overdraft service at this federally mandated price fixed cost of $5 or comply with extending that as credit and, therefore, complying with the Truth in Lending Act. In other words, actually underwriting a consumer loan instead of simply offering the overdraft--simple, straightforward, fast, overdraft fee.

This redefinition of what products and services constitute credit thus is problematic, especially since Congress has already defined credit for regulatory purposes.

Even more troubling is the way the CFPB oversimplifies the costs of providing overdraft protection.

The rule only considers the cost of operating a call center and ignores the many other expenses involved such as ratifying and dealing with consumer disputes, mailing and postage for overdraft notices, third-party collection expenses, technology costs, and cost of regulatory compliance.

The reality is that these additional costs make it increasingly difficult for banks to continue offering overdraft protection. Many will simply choose to stop providing the service altogether. Those who will suffer the most from this are the very people the rule is designed to protect.

Mr. Speaker, in 2023, a survey found that 92 percent of customers who were aware their balance wouldn't cover a transaction preferred paying the overdraft fee rather than having their transaction declined. Not only is it inconvenient or potentially embarrassing in a particular situation, but it is also fundamental to in-between paycheck cash flow. They are making the decision to go into overdraft so they make that mortgage payment on time, despite buying clothes for back to school and trying to do Christmas shopping.

In my experience with my customers, over my many years of working with families, I never found one who was not a worthy steward of how to use these services.

Another survey found that 64 percent of customers think it is reasonable for a bank to charge an overdraft fee, and 72 percent feel these fees are justified, particularly when it helps them ensure timely payment of a much larger important bill, like a mortgage or rent.

In my experience of helping families across rural Arkansas for many years, as I said, managing their finances, they are pretty smart about how to do that, Mr. Speaker.

The truth is if the consumers lose access to overdraft protection, they will be forced to turn to alternative sources of credit that may be more expensive and riskier, have less consumer protection and documentation, and be less holistically handled than they would be at their home community financial institution or credit union.

I encourage all of my colleagues to support this resolution to restore common sense to our regulatory framework and ensure that consumers continue to have access to the financial services on which they rely.

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

Mr. Speaker, let me say that the gentlewoman from California knows my respect for her and her leadership on our committee, but there is no effort here to raise overdraft fees in this resolution. It is quite the contrast. All we are saying is we don't need the Federal Government having a price cap on a product that is a very competitive product, with many, many banks not even charging for overdraft protection.

There is nothing hidden, Mr. Speaker, about fees on overdrafts. The Electronic Fund Transfer Act signed by this Congress made it clear decades ago that consumers must opt in to overdraft protection. Let me repeat that. Consumers select to do this. They shop for financial institutions online, down the street, whatever. They pick their credit union or bank to do business with. If they want overdraft protection to make sure that they are actually being protected on an extra payment or some bill they have between paychecks, they have it. It is completely spelled out.

Regulation DD in the Truth in Savings Act requires financial institutions to provide that information. Clearly, customers opt in to it.

Mr. Speaker, I promise you, I had it all through my early career when I couldn't make payments between paychecks. A young family, one income, lots of children, a lot of expenses, you do it. It is a good, prudent practice.

As a community banker for decades, I can promise you families were smart about it. There is nothing hidden about it. It is fully present. Consumers opt in to it, and the competition is intense to retain those customers.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Rose), my good friend. Mr. Rose was the Commissioner of Agriculture in Tennessee before coming to Congress. He is a very active member of both the House Financial Services Committee and the Agriculture Committee. He has rural Tennesseans and their financial success at heart.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Fitzgerald), a greater leader there, a fine leader in this House on the Judiciary Committee, and an active member on the House Financial Services Committee.

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

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

Let me say that the gentlewoman makes a good point about financial management when it comes to late fees and accelerated interest rates on credit cards. That is why we are actually talking about overdraft protection today, because time and time again people take advantage of affordable, convenient, disclosed, not hidden overdraft protection so that their family can avoid a late fee on a credit card, which she just gave an excellent overview of her concerns about.

If we want to do that, then give people the financial tools that they have in overdraft protection without micromanagement from the Federal Government. Don't take my word for it or anyone on this side of the aisle.

The Federal Reserve Bank of New York found that artificial price caps, like the one being discussed, being proposed by the CFPB on overdraft protection programs, reduced the supply, leading to fewer bank accounts for low-income families, period, full stop. I hear all the concern.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. McDowell). We are glad to have his voice in this debate.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Montana (Mr. Downing), a new member of the House Financial Services Committee. We are so delighted to have his expertise on our committee. He has a securities regulatory background. He was the State auditor. He serves on our committee and on the House Small Business Committee.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Haridopolos), our new Member from the Space Coast.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Huizenga), the vice chairman of our full committee, who has such distinguished service on our committee. He is a leader in every way and also in the House Foreign Affairs Committee.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. Barr), the chairman of our Subcommittee on Financial Institutions.

Mr. Speaker, he has his two top advisers with him, Eleanor and Mary Clay.

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

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Stutzman), who brings his entrepreneurship and State legislative practice. He is a former Congressman returning to the House Financial Services Committee.

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

Mr. Speaker, I would like to inquire of my good friend from California if she has any other speakers. I am prepared to close, and I reserve the balance of my time.

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

Mr. Speaker, I thank my friends on this side of the aisle who have worked hard today, Mr. Speaker, to convince everybody in this body that this is a serious overreach by the CFPB in a Federal price mandate.

Instead of letting consumers choose their financial institution and choose which one has the lowest overdraft fees and the best consumer accounts, instead we have the Federal Government trying to tell people what the price can be. It is Federal price-fixing.

What the opposition has argued today is that these fees are hidden. They are not. Consumers opt into this product, Mr. Speaker. They know what the fee is because it is disclosed to them. It is required by Federal law today to disclose it under regulation DD.

This is about access for overdraft protection. One of my colleagues called it overdraft protection insurance so that they don't make a mistake and miss a mortgage payment, a rent payment, or a utility payment that causes higher costs, higher fees, and higher interest rates.

Two-thirds of consumers support overdraft protection products. Two- thirds of consumers think a reasonable fee is appropriate. Competition has brought down fees for years. In fact, many large banks don't even charge for overdraft protection.

The assertion that consumers complain about this all the time, Mr. Speaker, I am sorry, I don't find the evidence to that. Even the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau's own database shows that less than 1 percent of consumer complaints over this past decade even reference this kind of a product.

This is not a junk fee. This is an overdraft protection that helps millions of families across the country manage their payments and their bills between paychecks. It should be competitive and it should be accessible. We should vote ``yes'' on this resolution so that we agree with the Federal Reserve of New York when they say that to cap this fee to do price intervention here is to deny credit and deny this product to the hardest working families in America.

Mr. Speaker, I urge a ``yes'' vote, and I yield back the balance of my time.

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

Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman for kindly yielding to me.

Mr. Speaker, the policies of the Biden-Harris administration crushed the spirit of the American people under the weight of rising costs from a 40-year high inflation, open borders, uncertain futures, and spending an avalanche on Biden's Big Government spending priorities that have saddled us with an annual deficit of $2 trillion.

The resolution before us today offers a path forward to rein in wasteful spending and put our Nation on a responsible and sustainable fiscal path. It reflects the commitment to the American people that would secure a better future for all of us.

This resolution secures the opportunity for tax cuts for hardworking American families and small businesses. It reins in the regulatory overreach that has long stifled our economic growth. It roots out waste, fraud, and abuse in the Federal budget.

It is simply common sense that we focus on fiscal responsibility and rein in wasteful spending to which Washington has become so addicted.

Mr. Speaker, I look forward to working with my House colleagues, Chairman Arrington, and the Members of this body to accomplish the President's goals by way of this reconciliation measure.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to welcome today's guest chaplain, my friend, Rabbi Pinchus Ciment.

Rabbi Ciment is the director of Chabad Lubavitch of Arkansas in Little Rock and is currently the longest serving rabbi in our State.

He was born in Boston, Massachusetts, and moved to Little Rock with his wife in 1992.

Rabbi Ciment has lectured on matters in Judaism at several universities in Arkansas and has been a frequent author in the ``Ask the Clergy'' section of our statewide newspaper, the Arkansas Democrat- Gazette. He studied at the Rabbinical Seminary in Morristown, New Jersey, and the Central Lubavitch Yeshiva in Brooklyn, New York, receiving his rabbinical ordination in 1990.

Rabbi Ciment is a devoted husband to Estie and a proud father of 10 children.

I extend my heartfelt thanks to Rabbi Ciment for delivering a beautiful opening prayer.

Mr. Speaker, I wish him, his family, and Chabad Lubavitch of Arkansas continued success in serving the central Arkansas community.

Mr. Speaker, I was unable to vote because I was in a legislative meeting which ran over. Had I been present, I would have voted YEA on Roll Call No. 77.

Stated against:

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize Keaton Beasley of Simmons Bank.

Keaton is a graduate of Henderson State University, a member of the Alpha Phi Alpha fraternity, and a banker in Little Rock.

Keaton exemplifies the ethos of a community banker, frequently working with children, adults, and seniors to teach them the importance of financial literacy. His efforts prove it is never too late or too early to learn how to manage your finances.

As a former community banker, I admire his efforts to uplift his community and help those around him build a stronger foundation in finance.

I look forward to seeing Keaton's continued impact in central Arkansas

and wish him the best of luck in his bright future in banking.

Honoring John Edward Hain, Jr., on His 100th Birthday

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor John Edward Hain, Jr., who celebrated his 100th birthday on March 20.

A Little Rock native, John graduated from Catholic High School at age in 1941 and is currently the school's oldest living alumnus.

He is a World War II veteran. John was drafted at 18 and served in England, Belgium, Germany, France, and the Netherlands as an Army corporal in the field artillery attachment of the 5th Army Division, the 9th Army spearhead, the 5th Armored Division, and the 29th Division in Operation Kaput.

John married his wife, Beverly, in 1947. They have 5 daughters, 17 grandchildren, and 19 great-grandchildren.

After his service to our Nation in World War II, he worked at the Krebs Brothers Supply Company as a traveling salesman, and he retired as president of Krebs after working there for 50 years.

I thank John for his long service to our community, and I congratulate him on reaching this amazing milestone.

PAWS for Justice

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in recognition of Susan Bradshaw and Fawn Borden of PAWS for Justice.

PAWS for Justice is an Arkansas charity that provides courthouse facility dogs to assist witnesses and victims as they go through difficult court proceedings. For children who are recounting heartbreaking terrible events, these dogs provide comfort and support to make those difficult moments just a little bit better.

While these dogs can often cost courthouses around $50,000 each, PAWS for Justice provides them free of charge.

As a proud owner of my great pup, Taft, I have an incredible appreciation for PAWS for Justice's efforts and thank them for their hard work in providing comfort for those who need it the most.

Recognizing Lance Restum

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize Lance Restum, director of community relations for the Arkansas Travelers baseball team.

Lance has been with the championship-winning Travelers since 2006 and is the founder of the Arkansas Travelers Youth Foundation.

Since 2021, the foundation has been introducing kids across the Natural State to America's pastime. They provide baseball clinics, equipment, grants, and scholarships to get kids active and interested in baseball.

Lance and the foundation's work serve as an excellent example for those of us who want to make a difference in our communities.

I wish Lance and the Arkansas Travelers the best of luck in their new season, and I look forward to my next game at Dickey-Stephens Park.

Madam Speaker, I rise to wish Lorie Tudor, the former director of the Arkansas Department of Transportation, a very healthy and happy retirement.

Lorie was with the Department of Transportation for over four decades and served as the director for the last 5 years.

She began her career at the department as a clerk-typist back in 1982. After taking time away to earn an engineering degree from the University of Memphis, she returned to the department as a civil engineer in 1998.

In 2014, she was promoted to deputy director and chief operating officer, and she became the agency's first female director in early 2020.

Lorie guided the department through the challenges of COVID-19, played a pivotal role in the Connecting Arkansas Program, which included over 30 State highway construction projects and helped modernize the Natural State's transportation infrastructure.

She has left a lasting mark on the department and our State, and she has proven to be a tireless and effective leader.

I thank Lorie for her lifetime of dedication and her terrific perseverance to accomplish her personal goals and those of the department.

Recognizing Austin Booth

Madam Speaker, I rise today to recognize Austin Booth, an exceptional Arkansan who recently completed his service as the director of our Arkansas Game and Fish Commission.

A native of Scott, Arkansas, the outdoors and a passion for public service were integral to Austin's upbringing.

After witnessing the 9/11 attacks from his classroom at Catholic High School in Little Rock, Austin was determined to serve his country, ultimately becoming a Marine Corps officer and deploying to Afghanistan.

After his tour in Afghanistan, Austin came to Washington, D.C., where he would go on to work as an advocate for the corps on Capitol Hill and, later, a judge advocate.

He returned to Arkansas to serve in the Arkansas Department of Veterans Affairs and then as a director of the Arkansas Game and Fish Commission. Under his leadership, the commission launched its strategic 5-year plan and Austin was instrumental in conservation projects that will benefit hunters, anglers, and conservationists for generations to come.

I thank Austin for his leadership, for our friendship, and for his unwavering commitment to Arkansas' natural treasures, and wish him all the best in his future endeavors.

Recognizing Bart Likes, Owner of Ol' Bart Southern Eats

Madam Speaker, I rise today to recognize Bart Likes, the owner of Ol' Bart Southern Eats.

What started as a job at a hunting lodge has become a successful multilocation restaurant and catering business that serves customers across our State. Yet, Bart's contributions to his community are not confined to his successful business.

Since the tragic passing of his mother, he has been serving others in our State, including sponsoring local sports teams, feeding healthcare workers, and providing free meals to victims of domestic abuse.

Bart's story should remind us all that life has twists and turns but following your passions will never steer you wrong. It should also remind us that there is no greater obligation in life than to help those in need.

Madam Speaker, I applaud Bart for his success and thank him for his dedication to helping others.

Celebrating John Gill

Madam Speaker, I rise today to celebrate a truly remarkable gift to higher education in Arkansas and honor the legacy of John Gill, whose name will now grace the newly renamed prelaw program at Hendrix College in Conway.

Thanks to a generous $250,000 donation from George and Sallie Gill in honor of their brother and brother-in-law, this endowed program will help prepare Hendrix students for a legal career.

As a former president of the Arkansas Bar Association and member of the

American College of Trial Lawyers, John Gill has left an indelible mark on our State's legal landscape over his six-decade career.

From serving as a delegate to the 1969 Arkansas Constitutional Convention and shaping the Arkansas Supreme Court's Rules of Civil Procedure, John's legacy is one of integrity and mentorship.

Through this endowment, Hendrix will continue to enhance its already impressive prelaw program, which boasts an 87 percent law school acceptance rate.

Madam Speaker, I commend Hendrix College and the Gill family for their commitment to advancing legal education in Arkansas, and I look forward to seeing those students thrive in law school and beyond.

Mr. Chair, I thank Mr. Arrington for yielding this time.

Mr. Chair, what is irresponsible, to those watching this debate, is the truth about the Biden-Harris policies, that when you combine irresponsible fiscal policy in this Nation over the past 4 years and an irresponsible monetary policy--what is irresponsible, Mr. Chair, is the fact that our families are suffering from inflation, the highest in 40 years. It takes $1.21 for what cost $1 just 4 years ago.

The resolution before us changes the direction. It delivers on President Trump's agenda to put the American people first. This resolution does protect the American people from the largest tax increase in American history.

Let's set the record straight: The top 1 percent are paying more in taxes than they have ever paid in the history of the country. They pay 45 percent of all the taxes in this country, and 50 percent of us are paying the least amount of tax they have ever paid in American history.

This bill goes on to support border security and national defense, which President Trump campaigned on and Republicans campaigned on, and it reins in wasteful spending. It reduces our long-term debt to GDP.

In the Financial Services Committee, we are pleased to follow the direction of the House Budget Committee and deliver on spending reforms by cutting back one of the most wasteful agencies that we have, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.

Madam Speaker, I thank my good friend from the First District of Utah for yielding.

His magnificent career before he came to Congress in business and in national security make us all proud. We are so grateful that he is our vice chair of the Conference, and that he leads us in bringing the good work of Republicans to the House floor every week so the American citizens see what we are doing and hear from us directly.

Aside from his beautiful family, the best thing about him is that he is an Eagle Scout. People are still talking about his Eagle Scout project in Utah. I thank him for letting me share some time with him.

Madam Speaker, I come to the House floor tonight to also express my deep dismay for the plethora of midnight rulemakings that we saw at the end of the Biden-Harris administration.

Last December, Senate Banking Committee Chairman Tim Scott and I were clear when we sent letters to outgoing Biden-Harris regulators and department heads urging them to put their pens down. Don't issue any more rulemakings or guidance. Don't sue anybody. Their time has come to an end.

What did we see in response? We saw an avalanche of relentless rulemakings, one after another after another.

Madam Speaker, the worst offender was former head of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau Director Rohit Chopra.

Madam Speaker, I think he became the poster child of midnight rulemaking renegades. Chopra never put his pen down. Under his leadership, the CFPB went full steam ahead with their reckless rulemakings. They capped fees on overdraft services, which is just another form of price control that harms customers who deserve access to financial choices and financial options when it comes to managing their household budgets.

He issued a rule to hide medical debt owed from credit reports, which will drive up the costs of all Americans' access to credit and to seeking healthcare. It will have a devastating long-term impact on consumers.

Mr. Chopra initiated lawsuits one after another before he left office.

Mark my words, Madam Speaker, we are going to fight to overturn these erroneous actions. The House passed my colleague Representative Andy Biggs of Arizona's bill today that ensures Congress can exercise appropriate oversight of these kinds of executive rulemakings.

It would allow multiple agency rules to be considered en bloc, that is in a group, as a single Congressional Review Act resolution if the rulings took place at the end of a Presidential term. I think this is a terrific idea from our friend and colleague Representative Andy Biggs.

It is an important step in fighting back to rectify the misguided rulemakings at the end of the Biden-Harris administration, and I thank him for leading this effort.

As the chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, I am committed to my work with Chairman Tim Scott across the Capitol in the Senate, as well as the Trump administration, to rightsize the regulatory burden facing America's financial providers.

When we do that, we will preserve safety and soundness absolutely, but we will also increase the access to capital to our families, to our businesses that need it. Together, we will facilitate faster and stronger economic growth in the years ahead.

Madam Speaker, I appreciate my friend from Utah and I thank him for the time.

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 224) to amend section 102(a)(20) of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974 to require the exclusion of service- connected disability compensation when determining whether a person is a person of low and moderate income, a person of low income, or a person of moderate income, and for other purposes.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 224, the Disabled Veterans Housing Support Act, introduced by my good friend from Texas, Congresswoman Monica De La Cruz.

It has been said that what the American people desire is not bigger government but a much better and more effective government. The reforms proposed in this bill would accomplish just that. This bill would reform a program meant to assist those in need, HUD's, Housing and Urban Development's, Community Development Block Grant program. This includes helping our Nation's low-income veterans with the housing challenges that many of them face across our Nation. However, the bureaucratic obstacles at HUD know no bounds.

Mr. Speaker, today, veterans are being turned away from this very positive CDBG program. How is that? The formula HUD tells communities to use to see if veterans qualify as low income and are therefore eligible to participate in the CDBG program counts service-connected disability compensation as income, whereas other government programs correctly do not.

The result has been, in some places, especially in our most rural areas, communities have to tell low-income, disabled veterans they are too wealthy to qualify for help.

Truly, Mr. Speaker, you cannot make this up.

Excluding low-income veterans because they are disabled is not what Congress intended for communities to take action on by receiving CDBG funds. Of course, HUD understands this exclusion has been happening. Yet, rather than fix the issue by providing clear rules on how to calculate the income of disabled veterans, the Biden administration kept saying that it was someone else's problem.

Mr. Speaker, that ends today with this good bill.

This bill would reform CDBG's income calculation formula, telling HUD, in no uncertain terms, to stop including service-connected disability compensation as income.

Fixing programmatic flaws and bureaucratic obstacles is exactly what the American people have sent these Members to this House floor to do. It is unfortunate that HUD has had several opportunities to fix its flawed guidance without Congress, but it has refused to act even with multiple letters from our Financial Services Committee.

This commonsense fix, which passed out of the committee with strong bipartisan support and on suspension in this House during the previous Congress, ensures that disabled veterans who have served our Nation with honor receive the benefits that they have earned and deserved. Under the leadership of Representative De La Cruz, we will ensure that HUD stops excluding our Nation's heroes.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this legislation, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend, Mr. Vargas from California, for his strong support of this bill.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. De La Cruz), who is the lead sponsor of the bill.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Iowa (Mr. Nunn).

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 224 as put forward by the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. De La Cruz). She has heard strong support on a bipartisan basis on both sides of the aisle from our friends, Mr. Vargas and Mr. Sherman in the minority, and Mr. Nunn in the majority.

Mr. Speaker, I urge Members to support this bill, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 386) to require the United States Governor of, and the United States Executive Director at, the International Monetary Fund to oppose an increase in the weight of the Chinese renminbi in the Special Drawing Rights basket of the Fund, and for other purposes.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 386, the Chinese Currency Accountability Act.

I thank my good friend, the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Davidson), for sponsoring this important legislation.

As chairman of the House Financial Services Committee in this Congress, I am delighted that Mr. Davidson has assumed the chairmanship on our Subcommittee on National Security, Illicit Finance, and International Financial Institutions.

The Chinese Currency Accountability Act is not a new initiative. It passed the House under suspension of the rules last year after our committee reported it unanimously to the full House.

This bill is important to limit China's influence over one of our most crucial international, multilateral organizations. The International Monetary Fund, the IMF, acts as the world's critical lender to nations, particularly those heavily indebted, to handle critical balance of payments financing. It conducts its business through Special Drawing Rights, or SDRs.

SDRs not only serve as a unit of account for the IMF, but they also act as a reserve asset on the balance sheet of central banks and, as such, SDR assets earn interest.

Prior to 2016, both the value and the interest rate of the SDR was determined by a basket of currencies issued by the independent central banks of the world and overseen by democratic governments. These currencies were the U.S. dollar, the euro, the Japanese yen, and the pound sterling in the United Kingdom.

In 2016, the IMF then added the Chinese renminbi to the basket, even though the use of the renminbi was miniscule and the People's Bank of China is controlled by the Chinese Communist Party. Mr. Speaker, I don't believe that the rule of law in China merits this inclusion.

The decision in 2022 by the IMF to increase the weight of the Chinese currency in that basket was equally shocking. Not only did China's political control of the central bank remain unchanged, but the IMF also knew that China's predatory lending through its Belt and Road predatory lending program to emerging markets was threatening the future of the IMF's own programs.

The fact that it went ahead and boosted China's weight in that important SDR basket at the Fund is an embarrassment. Now the IMF finds itself lecturing other countries about central bank independence, but it charges them interest that is partially determined by the decisions at the People's Bank of China.

Hopefully, on this House floor, that irony is not lost on any Member or any

of the countries on the Board of Directors at the IMF.

Mr. Davidson's bill would put an end to rewarding China's bad behavior. His legislation would require the Treasury Department to oppose further increases for Chinese renminbi in the IMF's currency basket until the Department of the Treasury certifies that China is in compliance with the IMF Articles of Agreement and adheres to the lending standards upheld by the world's major creditors.

In other words, Mr. Speaker, H.R. 386 isn't about holding China to a double standard. It means forcing the People's Republic of China to follow the same international rules of the road if it wants to enjoy the benefits of multilateralism and global leadership.

Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend Mr. Davidson for this important measure. I urge all of my colleagues to support it, and I reserve the balance of my time

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Davidson), the bill's sponsor and author.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I will echo the comments of my friend from Ohio (Mr. Davidson) about the fact that China is not a full market economy. It has not met its obligations to act as a good sovereign on settling creditor concerns. The belt and road policies of China have deeply indebted so many global south nations in such a way that the IMF does not have a full picture of their financial status in order to have access to the IMF's lending authorities.

This is just another way, Mr. Speaker, for this House to, I think, make better policy and that we ask the IMF to have full transparency on what is happening in China and their participation with the Fund. One way to do that is to accomplish the worthy objectives here in H.R. 386. I ask all my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to support this bill.

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

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the

bill (H.R. 692) to require the United States Executive Director at the International Monetary Fund to advocate for increased transparency with respect to exchange rate policies of the People's Republic of China, and for other purposes, as amended.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 692, the China Exchange Rate Transparency Act. I thank my friend, the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Meuser), for his leadership in crafting and sponsoring this legislation.

I also congratulate him for assuming the chairmanship of the Financial Services Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations for this, the 119th Congress. He is off to a superb start.

H.R. 692 is a critical tool as we reassess our economic relations with the People's Republic of China.

Unlike advanced economies with floating currencies, the Chinese manage their exchange rate through a nonindependent central bank and a state-owned set of financial institutions.

The Treasury Department has long been tasked with monitoring foreign countries' intervention in the currency markets, with a legal mandate from this House to call them out when manipulating exchange rates in order to gain an unfair trade advantage.

The problem with China is that its exchange rate management is so opaque that Treasury cannot effectively assess the country's exchange activities.

Year after year, Treasury reports back to Congress showing how Beijing's lack of transparency makes China an outlier among our major trading partners. This is not only alarming for the United States but the world at large as last year the People's Republic of China recorded a trade surplus of nearly $1 trillion.

Mr. Meuser's bill requires Treasury to lobby for stronger surveillance of Chinese currency practices at the International Monetary Fund, the primary institution overseeing foreign countries' exchange rate practices.

In addition, Treasury will have to push the IMF to highlight how China's opaque policies diverge from that of other major economies in the world.

H.R. 692 also requires Treasury to take China's lack of transparency into account when reviewing Beijing's shareholding level as a shareholder in the International Monetary Fund.

During the last shareholding review, Congress made it clear that an increase in voting power for China would be unacceptable given its absolute flouting of the multilateral rules of the road. To the IMF's credit, it agreed to keep China where it was.

Mr. Meuser's important bill underscores that future increases should also be off the table if China continues to shroud its exchange rate practices in secrecy.

Mr. Speaker, I, again, thank the gentleman from Pennsylvania for sponsoring this measure. He is going after China in precisely the manner that Beijing most dislikes, by harnessing multilateral pressure across the world to hold this regime and Beijing accountable.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support the China Exchange Rate Transparency Act, and I reserve the balance of my time.

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

Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend from California (Mr. Vargas) for his remarks, but I will point out to him that here on this House floor today, Mr. Speaker, on both sides of the aisle, we are talking about how to improve oversight through the multilateral process against some countries such as China who don't always have the best interests at heart, both in the trade market and in economic affairs in the country.

I believe that our recently elected, recently inaugurated President absolutely knows how to help hold them accountable. These are the exact kind of tools that will strengthen the hand of our new Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent as he thinks about going to multilateral meetings. These will strengthen the hand of our hopefully soon-to-be- confirmed colleague at the United Nations.

We are here on the House floor today to talk about how we can strengthen American leadership across the globe. One way to do that is to counter China's attempt to manipulate world's rules.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Meuser), to describe its benefit.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Haridopolos), one of the newest members on the House Financial Services Committee, the committee whip.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time to close. I thank Mr. Meuser for his hard work on this bill.

To friends on both sides of the aisle, these are both significant reform efforts in the IMF to improve transparency and particularly for what we have seen over the years as a lack of being willing to play by the multilateral rules that all large developed economies have been doing. Therefore, I really support these bills.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 692, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 736) to amend title 31, United States Code, to modify the deadline for filing beneficial ownership information reports for reporting companies formed or registered before January 1, 2024.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 736, the Protect Small Businesses from Excessive Paperwork Act. I thank Representative Nunn of Iowa for his work on this important legislation.

In 2021, Congress passed the Corporate Transparency Act, known as the CTA. The goal of the CTA was to strengthen national security tools to target bad actors and nation-states attempting to launder money through illicit activities. To accomplish this, the CTA established the beneficial ownership information reporting regime through Treasury's Financial Crimes Enforcement Network, known across the country as FinCEN.

With an effective date of January 1, 2024, the CTA regulations required roughly 32,600,000 small businesses in the United States to report their beneficial ownership information to FinCEN by the following year. To the best of my knowledge, Mr. Speaker, only some 9 million, or one-third, of those required small businesses have filed.

Recent Federal court actions on this confusing and complex rule have just added to the confusion that many of our Members are hearing about from their constituents in their districts.

Although this law was enacted with good intentions, Treasury's promulgation and implementation of the new reporting regime has been overly complex and particularly burdensome. Over the last year, Members have heard consistently from their constituents that confusion reigns when it comes to beneficial ownership reporting requirements.

We have all heard not only from small businesses that are in the real estate business or some small operating businesses that have a limited liability company or a limited partnership, but we have heard from their CPAs, their certified public accountants, and their legal advisers about all the confusion and concern around these reporting requirements.

It does not help that many small businesses have no idea what FinCEN is, making them wary of submitting such sensitive data to a government agency with which they are not familiar. It is personally identifiable information, the most sensitive information we have: our name, our taxpayer ID number, and ownership of our companies.

That is why Congressman Nunn's bill provides a 1-year extension of the reporting deadline, which will allow FinCEN to address gaps in its nationwide education campaign and tailor its outreach to small business owners.

This extension ensures that all small business owners that qualify and are required, as beneficial owners, to report have adequate time to try to complete their reporting requirements, while here in Congress we continue to fight back against this particular rule and its structure. Otherwise, Mr. Speaker, these small business owners face aggressive penalties if they fail to report, even if it is unintentional.

Small businesses in this country are the backbone of our economy. I hear that said many times every week on this House floor. If that is true, we ought to be working together to get relief for them from this onerous rule. I commend Mr. Nunn for offering relief with this particular legislation.

I want to highlight the work of my Republican colleagues for their cosponsorship of this critical legislation and thank my friends on the other side of the aisle, the gentlewoman from Kansas (Ms. Davids) and the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Davis), for signing on to H.R. 736. I hope they will help us get this legislation over the finish line to benefit America's small businesses, even if it is in a moment of reprieve from the avalanche of rules.

Mr. Speaker, I urge all of my colleagues to join me in supporting Mr. Nunn's bill, H.R. 736, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Iowa (Mr. Nunn), the lead sponsor who has crafted this constructive bill.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Meuser).

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

Mr. Speaker, I think it is important that you note the comment made by Mr. Meuser on the subject of 20 employees or $5 million. The definition of this bill says that a small business that has to report, these 32-plus million businesses that we are talking about, the definition is that they have fewer than 20 employees and fewer than $5 million.

My friend from California rightfully said that the concern of the Federal Government is about illicit finance through the use of shell companies incorporated in one of our States. Let that sink in for everybody listening to this debate: $5 million in revenues, 20 employees.

Mr. Speaker, for decades, before I came to Congress a few years ago, I helped start businesses and helped finance businesses, all of which would dream to have $5 million in annual revenues and 20 employees.

Think about your best friend who has an HVAC contracting company to help people with their air-conditioning and heating. He works there. His son works for him. They have a couple of million dollars in revenue. It is his whole livelihood. He loves it. He is the best at what he does, but in this world, in this House, he is accused of being a shell company and is being burdened by this rule.

Once again, so many times the government goes after the bad guy and sweeps up everybody. That is why Mr. Nunn has come to this floor to say that we need another year to think about

this. I would certainly urge the incoming administration to rethink the whole process because Mr. Vargas is right: It is an important thing to do, to try to capture illicit finance, but it is another thing in the world to sweep up every American trying to live the American Dream with their own small business.

We want people who want $5 million in revenue and have 20 employees. What a joy.

We are united on this today, Mr. Speaker, and I think that is good for the American people to see, too, that we care about what is happening. Occasionally, we get it wrong in government, and we work hard to try to rectify it. That is what Zach Nunn of Iowa is fighting for small businesses to do.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Haridopolos), the committee whip.

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

Mr. Speaker, we have had a good, robust debate on the importance of the right tools for the Treasury, for our States, and for our law enforcement to root out illicit finance.

Today, the Corporate Transparency Act, I think, has been exposed for what it is, which is a tremendous overreach in that effort that has added complexity, financial burden, and confusion for our small businesses.

There is a better way to go about this, and I hope we can work together on both sides of the aisle and with the Treasury Department in the coming months to find that better solution, that least-costly solution, that solution that protects people's privacy, that protects personally identifiable information contained in these filings, and that does it in a way that is less intrusive and less costly.

The concern I have about these big databases, Mr. Speaker, is intrusion from China, Iran, Russia, and North Korea, our adversaries that every day are trying to break into the systems of the Federal Government and our private sector of this country to gather this personally identifiable information.

We have talked about it on this House floor, Mr. Speaker: IRS, hacked; Office of Personnel Management, hacked; the CFPB, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau databases, hacked; others, hacked; private sector, hacked. This is just another giant database that puts people's data at risk.

Not only do I think there is a better way to do it, a less costly way to do it, and a more effective way to do it, but also a way to do it that protects people's privacy.

I thank Mr. Nunn for working on both sides of the aisle to craft a way. Let's take a new look, and let's do that by approving this bill overwhelmingly, encouraging the Senate to do the same so that we protect these small businesses in the interim, over the next year, from this horrendous cost and confusion by rising in strong support today on both sides of the aisle and passing H.R. 736.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 975) to amend the Federal Credit Union Act to modify the frequency of board of directors meetings, and for other purposes.

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

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 975, the Credit Union Board Modernization Act.

I applaud my Committee on Financial Services colleagues, Representatives Vargas and Huizenga, for introducing it. This bipartisan bill will help focus credit unions' time and resources where it really matters, which is serving their members.

Federal credit unions are governed by boards of directors who are currently required by law, Mr. Speaker, to meet at least once a month. This outdated requirement prevents credit unions from attracting talented volunteers and professionals to a credit union's board due to the time commitment of a monthly board meeting.

Under H.R. 975, certain well-functioning credit unions are provided with the option to meet at least six times annually with at least one meeting held during each fiscal quarter of the year.

This crucial change frees up the time and resources used for meetings to put toward the critical mission of providing financial services to their credit union members. Importantly, this bill has guardrails to ensure the safety and soundness of our financial system. Only credit unions with a CAMELS composite rating of a one or two will be permitted to meet at this less frequent rate.

All credit unions, just like commercial banks, are subject to a supervisory rating scale. It is called the CAMELS rating. A credit union is assessed at each of the six categories under that acronym, and they are assigned a composite rating on a scale of one, the best, to five, the worst, based on: capital adequacy, asset quality, management, earnings, liquidity, and sensitivity to market risk, hence the acronym

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Mrs. Kim).

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

Mr. Speaker, I urge all my colleagues to support H.R. 975. I appreciate Mr. Vargas sponsoring this good bill and Mrs. Kim speaking on it. They represent the State of California, and the State of California has some of the largest Federal credit unions active and headquartered in their State.

This will be a great service to those credit unions particularly and their home State of California to be able to focus on their members and have a few less meetings. I thank the gentleman from California for his sponsorship.

Mr. Speaker, I urge a ``yes'' vote, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 965) to amend section 3(b)(4) of the United States Housing Act of 1937 to exclude certain disability benefits from income for the purposes of determining eligibility for the supported housing program under section 8(o)(19), and for other purposes.

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 965, the Housing Unhoused Disabled Veterans Act introduced by my colleague on the Financial Services Committee, Congressman Brad Sherman of California.

Much like the bill that we just considered a few minutes ago from our friend from Texas (Ms. De La Cruz), I want to start out by commending our colleague from California for his work on this related issue that once again speaks to the fairness in HUD programs on behalf of our Nation's veterans.

The Housing and Urban Development-Veterans Affairs Supportive Housing, or HUD-VASH, program was created back in 1992. The purpose was to assist homeless veterans with psychiatric and substance abuse disorders.

The VASH program is an important Federal tool that provides housing assistance and supportive services for low-income veterans experiencing homelessness. Of course, it might seem redundant to some that a program to help homeless veterans would be geared towards those who are low- income, but sometimes with HUD nothing is ever simple.

Much like how HUD treats service-connected disability compensation of veterans as income in its CDBG program, HUD treats any disability benefits a veteran receives under chapter 11 or chapter 15 of title 38 of the U.S. Code as income under HUD-VASH.

A predictable result is some disabled homeless veterans are blocked from using a program to help all homeless veterans because HUD has decided that those low-income veterans that are disabled are too wealthy to qualify. Sound familiar? This is exactly the debate we had a few minutes ago.

Mr. Speaker, someone always has to explain these government bureaucratic messes to me because they never make any common sense.

The reform we are talking about today offered by Mr. Sherman fixes this problem. It reforms the HUD income calculation used in the HUD- VASH program to ensure that the disability payments of a low-income veteran do not exclude them from accessing this housing support.

The bill goes on to say that HUD needs to adopt the same income calculation standard for any future veteran housing program it might create using HUD-owned property. I applaud my colleague for calling attention to this problem and for his bipartisan work to find a solution.

While this may seem like an easy fix, this is Washington. There are no easy fixes, and HUD has consistently placed bureaucratic obstacles in the way of program efficiency time and time again.

In fact, when Representative Sherman brought this up last year to the Secretary of HUD, he got the same answer that Representative De La Cruz got on her veterans CDBG income question: Hey, that is Congress' job to fix it, not HUD's.

Fix it, indeed we will. The approach the gentleman has taken in crafting this bill is a good one. It is one that will make a big difference in the HUD-VASH program, as well as: How about making a difference for the veterans who are eligible to use it? That is why we are on this House floor.

Mr. Speaker, I thank Representative Sherman for his hard work to honor the promises that we have made to our veterans. I urge bipartisan support of this bill, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. De La Cruz), who has done so much to advance these reforms in HUD and our committee. We are grateful for her leadership.

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

I thank Mr. Sherman for his good work on this and his partnership with Ms. De La Cruz of Texas.

Mr. Speaker, I also express my deep empathy and support of Representative Sherman, Representative Chu, Representative Kim, and others in the L.A. basin who are coping with the horrendous results and tragedy connected with the fires at Pacific Palisades and elsewhere where some 45,000 California homes were destroyed in just the blink of an eye and lives lost.

I thank Mr. Sherman for his focus on housing the least fortunate, our veterans, but also I know that he is concerned about what is going to happen in the months ahead as southern California recovers.

In this regard, Mr. Speaker, we will have a bipartisan roundtable tomorrow in the House Financial Services Committee where Members on both sides of the aisle will talk with experts about how best to improve resilience and think through recovery for southern California.

I thank my colleagues for their bipartisan work on H.R. 965. I urge a ``yes'' vote on both sides of the aisle, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to highlight the critical steps that my colleagues and I are taking to protect Americans and their families from the illicit fentanyl crisis that has been harming our communities for years.

Illicit fentanyl has become the leading cause of death for Americans between the ages of 18 and 49 and ravages communities in every corner of Arkansas.

In 2019, my Fentanyl Sanctions Act became law, imposing sanctions on Chinese drug manufacturers that supply synthetic opioids and transnational criminal organizations that traffic fentanyl into our country.

In 2022, my Preventing Overdoses and Saving Lives Act passed the House with overwhelming support and became law. That bill expands lifesaving drugs like naloxone by promoting its coprescription with opioid medications.

Later this afternoon, the House will come together again and pass the HALT Fentanyl Act, permanently extending President Trump's 2018 classification of illicit fentanyl-related substances in schedule I.

Mr. Speaker, together, this Chamber and President Trump will continue our work to save American lives by keeping illicit fentanyl off of our streets and out of our communities.