Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, like my colleagues today, I rise in opposition to the previous question so that we can immediately consider H.R. 5586, Prohibiting IRS Financial Surveillance Act.

Mr. Speaker, Hoosiers are outraged. My friends across the aisle would have you believe that it is just the Hoosier financial institutions that are outraged at having to hand over the personal account information of their customers. It is, in fact, those account owners that are outraged at the notion that my friends across the aisle would build an apparatus to surveil and snoop in their personal bank accounts.

Now, their horror only grows as I answer questions for them. First, they ask, surely this must apply only to the super rich and not to me. But I reply, no, it applies to you if you spend just over $200 a week.

Then they will ask, surely this must only apply to those that are suspected of a crime. And I say, no, it is collection on every account, irrespective of whether there is a suspected crime or tax evasion afoot.

Then, of course, they will ask me, surely the IRS has a very good track record of keeping this data safe. And I have to reply, no, the track record, in fact, indicates the opposite. The IRS has a terrible track record of keeping this data safe against the intrusion of actors from around the world and right here at home.

And then they say, well, surely the IRS has a good track record of not mobilizing this data for political purposes. And yet, again, I have to say, no, in fact, the evidence indicates the IRS has mobilized this data for their own political purposes and for the political purposes across the aisle.

My friends, this is horrifying, this surveillance state that is trying to be built. Hoosiers understand what is being asked of them. Trillions of dollars are being proposed to be spent, and now they are being asked to give up their personal information from their personal bank accounts to foot that bill for my colleagues across the aisle. I hope this stops here.

Madam Speaker, I am proud to honor and recognize Dr. Emily Volk, Chief Medical Officer at Baptist Health Floyd, for being sworn in as President of the College of American Pathologists this past Saturday.

Dr. Volk has dedicated over 25 years of her life to working in the health care system and serving patients. Her outstanding record of clinical practice and operational leadership led her to the position she now holds with the College of American Pathologists, and she will no doubt exude the utmost competence while holding the position.

Throughout her career, Dr. Volk has championed physician and patient advocacy. I can personally attest to Dr. Volk's passion for advocacy during our interactions both at Baptist Health Floyd and with the College of American Pathologists.

I have full confidence that Dr. Volk will carry this new title with pride and lead by exceptional example. I wish her the best of luck in this new role.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor a community leader Steve Kerr. Steve is retiring after 28 years of service to Wheeler Mission, a ministry that has been serving Hoosiers for over 128 years, including two locations in my district.

Steve has been with Wheeler since November 22, 1993. He began his role as the Capital Campaign Director and then moved into the Director of Development role. He has built a strong legacy that has impacted thousands of lives, went from three staff members to now twenty-two who make sure the needs of residents, staff, donors and volunteers are met daily.

In 2003 Steve had the vision to bring runners, walkers, and families together on Thanksgiving Day to help raise money for the ministry. The Drumstick Dash is now headed into its 19th Dash and continues to grow. People from all over the country descend on Indy and virtually to ``Move Their Feet So Others Can Eat.'' The annual campaign, along with other special events, raises around million dollars each year for this vital ministry.

Wheeler Mission offers the Indianapolis and Bloomington communities homeless shelters, residential programming, addiction recovery services, and social enterprises. Wheeler has adapted to meet the community's ever-changing needs and is unwavering in its commitment to Christ and the transformation through the Gospel. I thank Steve Kerr for his commitment to Wheeler Mission, and the lives he has and will continue to impact due to his legacy.

Madam Speaker, in honor of President Michael McRobbie's upcoming retirement from Indiana University, I am proud to recognize his outstanding record of leadership and service to higher education.

Serving nearly 14 years as president, McRobbie is among the country's longest-serving presidents of a public higher education institution, and his dedication to expanding IU's programs, its impact on students, and the University's greater influence around Indiana is nothing short of remarkable.

Throughout his tenure, President McRobbie has worked to ensure IU remained an academically competitive and excellent institution. Under his leadership, President McRobbie prioritized building curriculums that were highly responsive to the evolving needs of its students, the Hoosier state, and industries

around the world. To that end, over the last decade, IU has strengthened its position as a research powerhouse and invested in improving communities around the state.

President McRobbie's commitment to IU and also serving Hoosiers has made a lasting impact on all who have passed through the institution. His legacy will live on long past his retirement, and I know I join graduates, colleagues, and Hoosiers around the state in thanking President McRobbie for his service to IU.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this legislation.

As I travel the district and travel across the State, I constantly get asked two very important questions: What is Washington doing for Americans? And, what is happening on a bipartisan basis in Washington,

Madam Speaker, I, too, rise in support of this legislation.

This is not just a Main Street issue. It is an Elm Street issue; it is a Maple Street issue; it is a Broad Street issue. This is an issue that affects our friends; it affects our neighbors; it affects our veterans; it affects our parents and our grandparents. This is something that has gone on far too long.

We have all seen the startling statistics. Over 24,000 cases were reported to the Treasury Department last year alone, more than double just 5 years ago.

We have seen the statistics about how over $3 billion a year are lost by our senior citizens to scammers and fraudsters.

We have all seen the statistics showing how more than 10,000 baby boomers are retiring each and every year, so this problem will only grow into the future.

I applaud Representative Gottheimer for reaching across the aisle and working on how we stop this problem, how we slow the growth of this problem by setting up a task force at the SEC to specifically focus on how our senior citizens are being targeted, how we can lessen their vulnerabilities.

This is an issue that I am extremely passionate about, not only because of the statistics that are startling and eye-opening, but also because of the Hoosiers who walk through our offices every single day being the victims of these crimes.

We had one a couple of weeks ago who had already wired half of her life savings as a part of a scheme to get a Nigerian prince into the country. We had somebody last year who had wired over $8,000 because they believed that their son had been imprisoned in Mexico, wrongfully, and the money was needed to get him out of prison.

They try all sorts of schemes. They try all sorts of ruses. Well, it is time that we come together and try to stop them.

Madam Speaker, I appreciate the work of Representative Gottheimer reaching across the aisle and developing legislation on how we find the best practices to ensure that our senior citizens, our veterans, our friends, our neighbors, our parents, and our grandparents are protected in this very important time.

Mr. Speaker, every morning our heroes in law enforcement wake up and they kiss their loved ones good-bye, knowing that there is always a chance they may not return that night.

Last night, in Charlestown, in Clark County, in the Hoosier State, one of those heroes, Sergeant Ben Bertram of the Charlestown Police Department did not return home. Sergeant Bertram was killed in pursuit of a suspect into an adjoining county, doing his duty, doing what he loved, and protecting Hoosiers all the way across the State.

It is with deep sorrow our community back home mourns his loss, and celebrates his sacrifice to the Hoosier State.

We thank Sergeant Bertram. Rest easy.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the Bicentennial of Martinsburg, Indiana.

Martinsburg was founded in the wilderness of southern Indiana less than two years after the Hoosier State joined the union. Over the course of 200 years, the inevitable forces of time and nature have changed Martinsburg, but fortunately much remains the same.

Martinsburg is still a town that prides itself on being a friendly place to grow up and a good place to raise a family. It is still a town that knows that small-town values of decency, hospitality, and hard work are worth protecting.

It is a town that remembers and treasures its heritage. Members of the namesake Martin family still live, work, and worship here. In fact, since 1859, residents have been able to shop or just visit at Billy Martin's Store. Today, they boast that they are the oldest operating store to be passed down from father to son in the entire state of Indiana.

It is a town that understands that when disaster strikes, the only way to rebuild is to rebuild together. Many of the homes and storefronts look different today than in the old pictures because while the tornado may have destroyed homes, it did not destroy this community.

Martinsburg is not just part of the fabric of our Hoosier history, but also our American history. Each year, millions of visitors to the Smithsonian have the opportunity to see the orange school bus that carried rural children to school in Martinsburg during the 1930s and '40s.

Much has changed, but the spirit and values that have made this community great for two centuries have not. Martinsburg is truly a magnificent addition to Washington County and the state of Indiana. I am honored to represent this town and its people on the 200th anniversary of their founding. Here's to the next 200 years of friendship, fellowship, and community in Martinsburg, Indiana.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairwoman for hosting this very important Special Order, and I am so glad that we are talking about the tremendous benefits that we have seen from the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act passed just over 6 months ago.

During the last 6 months, we have heard a lot of impressive statistics about the national economy. We have heard about unemployment being down to 3.8 percent. We have heard about second quarter GDP being projected at in excess of 4 percent. We have heard about there being more available jobs than there are available workers in this country for the first time since the Labor Department has been keeping that statistic.

It is really impressive what the national economy has been doing over the past 6 months, but what matters most to me and what matters most to Hoosiers back home in the Ninth District is, what it is doing for them; what it is doing for their small businesses; what it is doing for their pocketbooks; what it is doing for their families; and what it is doing for their communities.

In Ellettsville, Joe said:

Per month, my wife and I alone will receive over $200, and

for our family, that really helps us out. That is groceries

for an entire week.

Down in New Albany, Will said:

As a small businessowner, I am now able to invest more in

our company and employ more qualified people.

These are just two stories of what I hear day in and day out when I am traveling about the district.

When I go to townhalls, I hear about the tax reform. When I go to small businesses, I hear about the tax reform. When I go and visit families at their farms, I hear about tax reform's impact.

I want to ensure that we continue to see the impressive national statistics, but also continue to hear the great stories about how this bill, how the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, made a difference in individual Hoosiers' lives.

Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

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

I recently had a townhall in a small county, Washington County, Indiana, where a farmer came up to me and explained to me the choice that he had before him: he could lose thousands of dollars of his cattle or pay thousands of dollars in fees because he is unable to kill the black vultures that continue to murder his calves during calving season.

This amendment changes that process and enables him to take proactive nonlethal and lethal steps if the Secretary of the Interior deems it worthwhile in that region or that State to protect those young calves, to protect his property. I want to make sure that we enable and empower farmers to be able to keep their livestock alive, to be able to keep their property alive.

This amendment simply allows the Secretary of the Interior to designate States or designate regions where farmers can take proactive nonlethal and lethal measures to protect their property from black vultures.

It is important to note that black vultures are not protected under the Endangered Species Act. Right now they are listed in the least concern category. But they are protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act.

All this amendment does is enable them to take proactive measures rather than waiting until they have lost thousands of dollars' worth of calves in taking reactive measures.

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

Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the gentleman's support.

Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. Crawford).

Mr. Chair, I would submit to Mr. Crawford that perhaps those black vultures moved in because of the great representation he provides to all of his constituents.

Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. DesJarlais).

Mr. Chair, in closing, again, I think this amendment is very common sense and very focused on exactly what I hear from Hoosier farmers back home, what I have heard from farmers all the way across the country, which is they want to take the proactive measures to protect these calves, to protect other livestock, to protect their property, and also to save them from the horrific death caused by black vultures.

I urge all of my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on this amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise in support of this legislation because I think it addresses a fundamental flaw in how we have looked at operational risk capital.

Fundamentally, we want banks to hold capital necessary for the risks they are taking today and the likely risks that they may incur losses into the future. By purely looking backwards, we are driving down the Interstate in the financial system driving by looking in the rearview mirror only. That is a terrible mistake by only looking at past risks instead of the risks they have today.

If we want to encourage institutions to become less risky, then we need to ensure that they can reduce the amount of capital buffer if they are doing less risky activities. This is basically incentivizing the right behavior. If we continue to say to institutions: You are going to be penalized for the past irrespective of what you may be doing today, irrespective of the less risk you may be taking into the future, then we are essentially providing them no incentive to become less risky.

I think the lesson after 2008 is making sure that we allow the free markets and institutions to act with the right incentives, not the wrong incentives. We want them to become less risky over time by their own decisions and by their own elections.

This doesn't change anything about the basic operational risk capital that they must maintain, except that it says it should match what they are doing today and the activities that they are going to be engaged on in the future.

So I do think this is commonsense legislation. I do think this is a thoughtful response to a genuine problem that I hear about back home in Indiana frequently. So I continue to support H.R. 4296, and I urge all of my colleagues to do the same.

Mr. Speaker, there are many days when we stand in this Chamber and I specifically talk about the regulations, the regulations that are holding back our economy from growing, holding back consumers from getting the products that they want--we talked about them in very sweeping, hyperbolic terms--but this is not one of those days. This is a day where, in this bill, we are simply codifying what has been the law of the land for over five decades, what is currently the law of the land in 47 out of 50 States.

So not only has this historically been the case, what we are arguing for here, but it is also the case in 47 out of 50 States. And I don't think those three States, the consumers or the citizens of those States, should be disadvantaged by not being able to access affordable capital to be able to grow better futures. That is what I hear back home is they want the opportunity to get loans, to get credit, to get more chances for them to build better financial futures.

And, frankly, this bill does that. It solves the problem of uncertainty, and capital flees uncertainty. This makes clear what has been the law of the land. It doesn't change State usury laws. It doesn't impact payday. It merely restates that which we have operated under for decades before this Second Circuit decision and says the law in 47 States should be the law in 50 States.

Valid when made is an important aspect of our financial markets and ensuring that we can turn over capital more frequently, thus, get more capital out to more individuals. And, frankly, that is what we are here fighting for: making sure everybody gets the opportunity to participate in a better economy by building a financial future. H.R. 3299 goes a long way in solving that problem by a very simple, very narrow fix in ensuring those three States get to participate in the benefit of a vibrant secondary market just like the 47 other States outside of the Second Circuit.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the legislation and encourage all Members here to support this legislation.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 4279.

There are two big problems that I hear a lot about in district. The first is ensuring that mom-and-pop investors in retail Main Street America have all of the options available to them to be able to invest for their future retirement and invest for their kids' college education. They want a cornucopia of different investment opportunities for them to be able to pursue: making the decision as to whether mutual funds are the right answer, making the decision as to whether open-end funds are the right answer, making the decision as to whether ETFs are the right answer, and making the decision as to whether, yes, closed- end funds are the right answer.

Over the last 10 years, we have seen closed-end funds decline in number by 81 percent. Some of that decline has been because of the regulatory burden, the onerous burden that is on them, compared to some of their counterparts. We want to make sure that ultimately there might be reasons for a level playing field between them and some other well- known seasoned issuers.

The second big problem that I continue to hear about is how dynamic the market is; how fleeting opportunities are; and how we need to make sure that there is not long, duplicative timelines and not onerous, duplicative paperwork that companies and closed-end funds are having to fill out and having to wait in order to take advantage of the opportunities that may exist in the market. We want to truncate down that time without removing any of the regulation and governance that is so important to ensuring the transparency and credibility of U.S. markets around the world.

I want to thank Mr. Foster because, as he well said, from day one he has been diligently working on both of those problems. We have been able to work together and, as he said, negotiate all the way through the eleventh hour, not to come up with a shotgun solution that doesn't address both of these, but, instead, to come up with a comprehensive solution that solves both of these problems: the problem for the Main Street mom-and-pop 401(k) investor that wants to be able to pursue different opportunities in saving for their retirement, and for companies that are pursuing dynamic opportunities in the market. I want them to be as competitive as possible in this global marketplace.

Mr. Speaker, I thank Mr. Foster for all of his effort along the way. I want to thank the committee for their 58-2 support of this legislation. I am hopeful and I urge my colleagues on the floor to vote for this legislation as well. I think this is a commonsense, thoughtful approach to both of those problems that I hear far too often when I am back home in my district.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity to lend my voice to an important piece of legislation. First, like others, I want to thank everybody who has worked very hard on this legislation. I know it is a matter of passion for many Members on both sides of the aisle in solving this problem for consumers.

One thing I am constantly asked about in the district is: In a democracy, why does it seem that the bureaucracy is in charge?

We keep coming back to this very same question with many pieces of legislation here in the House. I am excited that we are going to resolve some of that with this piece of legislation.

As was talked about earlier, what has been going on is that someone can be excluded from the U.S. Federal banking system simply because they are in an industry that might not have the best reputation. They can be excluded from the Federal banking system. This is not something that we take lightly. It is something that is very serious that we talk about in terms of sanctioning North Korea, sanctioning Iran, and now we are excluding U.S. businesses simply because they may be operating in a certain industry instead of because of the activities that individual business or that individual is actually in.

So this bill is really about looking, as my friend, Mr. Heck, said, to the individual business and to the individual themselves and saying whether they pose a national security risk, not painting with a broad brush because of the desire of some in bureaucracy to exclude certain industries from the banking system.

What Hoosiers talk about back home is how tired they are of electing officials only to see bureaucracy drive their own agenda forward, not the people's agenda forward. With this piece of legislation, we are rolling some of it back and enabling those bureaucrats to provide an annual list to Congress of the accounts that they have closed and why they have been closed. It is that level of transparency and accountability that a democracy demands.

I am excited to stand with so many other members of the House Financial Services Committee and with so many Members, I hope, later today on the House floor and say that we will deliver that transparency.