[Congressional Record Volume 147, Number 167 (Wednesday, December 5, 2001)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E2212]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                     TERRORISM RISK PROTECTION ACT

                                 ______
                                 

                               speech of

                           HON. DENNIS MOORE

                               of kansas

                    in the house of representatives

                      Thursday, November 29, 2001

  Mr. MOORE. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to H.R. 3210, the 
Terrorism Risk Protection Act.
  In the last two months, the Financial Services Committee, on which I 
serve, has held two hearings plus a roundtable on the state of the 
insurance industry after the September 11 terrorist attack. From these 
meetings, a consensus on several facts emerged. First, the lack of 
available terrorism reinsurance may cause significant disruption in the 
primary commercial insurance markets.
  Second, without assurances that commercial firms can receive 
terrorism coverage, lenders (such as banks or other institutional 
investors) will not underwrite new loans for construction projects 
necessary to grow our economy.
  Finally, and most importantly, is the fact that prompt congressional 
action on this issue is essential, since most reinsurance contracts 
will be renewed on January 1. Absent some form of terrorism coverage, 
the economic effects to our country will be devastating.
  On November 7, a proposed bipartisan solution to this problem was 
reported by the House Financial Services Committee (H.R. 3210) by a 
voice vote. Our committee reported legislation that provided immediate 
assistance in the case of a terrorist disaster; it spread the risk 
across the industry, helping the industry to essentially act as its own 
reinsurer; it spread the costs out over time, to minimize the impact of 
an event in any given year; and it provided limited liability relief to 
protect insurers and taxpayers against litigation in the event of an 
attack.
  Mr. Speaker, this bill was considered under regular order--the 
deliberative congressional process--as all legislation should. Our 
committee held hearings and markups; we took testimony from all 
interested parties; we vigorously debated all of the relevant issues; 
and we reported a well-thought out, well-designed, bipartisan product 
that met the needs of the marketplace.
  Unfortunately, the majority leadership decided yesterday that their 
pre-September 11 agenda was more important than the deliberative 
legislative process and the will of the Financial Services Committee, 
which includes almost one-fifth of this House. At 2:30 p.m., yesterday 
afternoon, the majority leader introduced an entirely new product that 
did little to address the real needs of the insurance markets, but 
rather addressed the majority's desire to change long-standing and well 
established legal procedure in this country. Adding insult to injury, 
the majority party designed a rule that eviscerated the will of the 
Financial Services Committee by automatically making in order the 
leader's bill without allowing the full House the courtesy of a vote on 
our bipartisan product.
  Mr. Speaker, I cannot support disregard for the expertise of 
committees, the erosion of our legislative process, and abuse of 
minority rights. I can no longer support business as usual.
  The real injustice in the majority's actions is the fact that we must 
pass responsible legislation to provide terrorism coverage for primary 
insurers and policyholders. I hope the other body quickly enacts 
legislation to address the real needs of the marketplace, while 
eliminating the extraneous provisions attached to the product we are 
considering today. Our country needs that legislation. I want to vote 
for that legislation. I look forward to soon being able to vote for a 
conference report that reflects the priorities of the Financial 
Services Committee and respects the processes of our institutions.

                          ____________________