Max Burns

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me time.

I would like to thank the gentleman from Ohio (Chairman Oxley) of the Committee on Financial Services and the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Baker), the subcommittee chairman. I would like to thank my distinguished colleagues and the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Emanuel) for their support and input.

I rise in strong support of H.R. 5011, the Military Personnel Financial Services Protection Act.

Mr. Speaker, I introduced H.R. 5011 to halt the fiscal abuse of our servicemen and -women by those in the life insurance and securities industry that use devious sales practices to collect exorbitant fees and sales commissions.

Further, H.R. 5011 is targeted at those who use our Federal military installations, both at home and abroad, as a shield to evade individual State insurance regulations and restrictions.

The 12th district of Georgia that I represent is home to many active duty, Reserve, and retired military personnel. I have Fort Gordon in Augusta; Fort Stewart in Savannah. I have the Naval Supply Course School in Athens. Georgia is represented by all branches of the military service: Army, Air Force, Coast Guard, Marines and Navy.

In recent months, my office had become aware of servicemen and -women residing in the 12th district and throughout the State of Georgia that have suffered financially as a result of dubious financial products and questionable insurance policies. Unfortunately, these questionable sales practices are not limited to the State of Georgia and have been found to be pervasive on our military installations within the United States and abroad.

Investigations into these practices are currently being conducted by the Department of Defense, the NASD, the Securities and Exchange Commission, and the State insurance commission regulators, including Georgia's commissioner of insurance, John Oxendine.

Let me provide my colleagues with a few unfortunate examples of what has happened just in Georgia.

Young recruits have been approached in group settings during boot camp and asked to fill out savings plan allotment forms that in truth turn out to be primarily payments for insurance premiums and sales commissions.

Junior enlisted personnel have been encouraged by senior enlisted personnel to participate in savings plans that are, in fact, insurance products.

Junior enlisted personnel and their superiors have received free meals at local restaurants and other gratuities as an enticement to participate in these illicit plans.

Junior officers have been provided free drinks and food at base officers clubs and then asked to participate in flawed mutual fund contracts that give the appearance of being endorsed by their chain of command.

Retired military personnel now employed by financial insurance firms have used their base and command access to inappropriately influence junior officers and enlisted personnel to participate in these questionable products.

Flawed mutual fund contractual plans that are disparaged by the financial and industry experts have been marketed virtually exclusively to our military personnel.

Outrageous as these may seem, sales agents banned from military installations in Georgia subsequently moved to Germany and continued their illicit sales practices to soldiers living abroad.

I will not, and I cannot, sit by and watch innocent servicemembers suffer from unscrupulous sales practices on our military installations. I say shame on those companies that allowed these practices to take advantage of our military personnel and shame on us for not acting sooner.

My staff has been in discussions with the Committee on Financial Services, the government regulators, corporate representatives, and independent financial experts to ensure that H.R. 5011 effectively addresses the illicit sales practice being encouraged by our armed services personnel and to prevent any unintended consequences.

H.R. 5011 does not target systematic investment plans or legitimate investment in insurance products, only those flawed mutual fund contractual plans and insurance contracts that require the payments of exorbitant fees and high front-loaded sales commissions.

As a bipartisan measure, H.R. 5011 has received overwhelming support from the various financial, insurance, and military organizations and support

groups and has been reported out of Committee on Financial Services by a unanimous vote, bipartisan vote of 68 to zero.

Working together we can and we must act in a prudent manner to protect our servicemen and -women from harm caused by dubious financial products and questionable financial and insurance sales practices and policies.

I urge my colleagues to recognize the importance of acting to protect the financial interests of our armed services personnel and vote ``yes'' on this worthy resolution.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time. I thank the chairman and the ranking member of the Committee on Agriculture for moving this rapidly through the committee and to the floor of the House.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 4569 in an effort to stop a nationwide tree epidemic before it further infects America's forest and horticultural industry. Mr. Speaker, my distinguished colleague from Georgia (Mr. Scott) and I introduced this legislation because we recognize the similarities of what could result if sudden oak death disease continues to spread across the Nation in a similar fashion to that of the Dutch elm disease which devastated American forests and cities in the 1930s.

The bill would expand the U.S. Department of Agriculture's endeavors to halt the spread of the oak-destroying fungus Phytophthora ramorum and its harmful effect on America's oaks. Phytophthora ramorum invades susceptible trees through the bark, killing portions of the tree, creating an ideal environment for insects and other fungi to invade. Although primarily a west coast disease today, the sudden oak death disease has infected nurseries all across the United States and has recently made its way to Georgia through the sale of plants in the nursery industry killing over 100,000 oaks in the process, putting businesses in danger of closing and millions of trees at risk.

Our Nation's oak woodlands, urban forests, agricultural forestry and horticultural industries are all in jeopardy. The sudden oak death disease now affecting several States across our country has everyone waiting for something to be done to address this potentially disastrous problem. Sudden oak death negatively affects ecosystem functions, increases fire and safety hazards, and reduces property values in developed areas.

Over 7 million people lived where the initial outbreak occurred in the urban/wildland interface of central and coastal California. Neighborhoods were transformed within months. Dead trees surrounded communities where green trees formerly thrived. Communities were overwhelmed as residential yards, parks, open space and recreation areas were irreparably altered and in need of costly removal of thousands of hazardous trees.

The U.S. ornamental industry is valued at over $13 billion in annual sales, the third largest crop value in America. Georgia produces over $601 million in sales annually, and in my district alone, the 12th District of Georgia, we have $66 million in ornamental horticulture sales. Our nursery and horticultural interstate trade, international export markets, lumber companies and gardeners all will suffer a traumatic loss if we do not take action to prevent the spread of the sudden oak death disease.

We have seen the early stages of the sudden oak death disease and its capability of spreading far and wide. If we fail to stop this threat to our oak trees, the similar type of disease that caused catastrophic damage among Dutch elms over decades ago, the Dutch elm disease, will seem pale by comparison. Mr. Speaker, H.R. 4569 is bipartisan legislation that takes the necessary steps to combat this threat. We need our Secretary of Agriculture to immediately develop a plan to manage this disease that is rapidly spreading across our Nation.

I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' to protect our 21st century forests and our horticulture industry from the kind of devastation that we experienced in the 1930s with Dutch elm disease.

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

Mr. Speaker, we have an obligation to the people of America to settle this debate over whether a handful of political activists are allowed to use the Federal courts to impose their moral view on the unwilling majority of the country.

The overwhelming majority of the people of the 12th Congressional District of Georgia oppose legalized same-sex marriage. They do not want to play semantic games about the issue.

The people in my district and State believe that legal marriage, and the benefits associated with the institution, should be reserved for those whom the benefits were intended, the union of a man and a woman, period.

Georgia has placed a referendum for a State constitutional amendment to that effect on this November's ballot lot. That is how it should be. As a Georgia voter, I will support the amendment with my vote, as will the majority of my State.

The Federal amendment we consider today will allow those State decisions to determine this issue, as they have since our Nation's founding, rather than allowing a small minority to dictate their opinions on an unwilling majority.

We need to speak plainly here today. A vote against this legislation is a vote for legalized same-sex marriage to be forced on an unwilling America. Such a calamity would not just be morally reprehensible to the majority of Americans, it would provide a chilling precedent for undermining our system of self-government. We will pay for inaction on this issue with the loss of government by the people on all issues.

I urge my friends on both sides of the aisle to support the amendment to restore the protections of the Constitution and self rule.