[Congressional Record Volume 148, Number 105 (Monday, July 29, 2002)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E1468]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




  SUPPORT OF MOTION TO GO TO CONFERENCE ON H.R. 3210, TERRORISM RISK 
                             PROTECTION ACT

                                 ______
                                 

                          HON. JOSEPH CROWLEY

                              of new york

                    in the house of representatives

                         Friday, July 26, 2002

  Mr. CROWLEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the Motion to Go to 
Conference.
  As a Representative from New York City, I have seen and heard first 
hand the massive need for such a Federal backstop.
  While our nation has plunged into a recession over the past 2 years--
the economic conditions of New York City are even more precarious.
  For example, between August 2001 to May 2002 while unemployment rates 
have risen 13 percent in the U.S. they have increased by 20 percent in 
New York City.
  While there are a number of factors for this decline, one is the lack 
of new construction and building.
  This dearth of investment and new construction is due to a lack of 
financing by banks that will not provide lending to a project that 
cannot get commercial property and casualty insurance.
  Furthermore, for those few businesses that can obtain limited 
insurance coverage often do not have adequate coverage and are paying 
drastically higher prices for such limited coverage.
  This again saps vital and badly needed resources out of New York's 
and all of America's economy.
  Providing a Federal backstop is good for workers and good for the 
economy.
  Additionally, while in conference, I also hope that the Conferees 
will give serious consideration to an issue I brought up with Chairman 
Oxley during Committee mark up--that of providing a backstop to 
personal lines of property and casualty insurance lines as well.
  While personal P&C insurance carriers now claim they can handle any 
claims for unthinkable terrorist attacks that could effect personal 
property and casualty holders, such as homeowners, we heard this same 
thing about commercial lines pre-September 11.
  No one can predict the future, and we need to be prepared for 
anything.
  Could personal lines provide for a large-scale attack on a 
neighborhood using nuclear, biological or chemical terrorism?
  We don't know, and that is why I brought this issue up at mark-up and 
am hopeful for some work on this issue in conference.
  Additionally, I am hopeful that the Conferees will work to provide a 
real backstop and strip out an extra legislative riders such as the 
damaging tort reforms added by the Republicans leadership to the House 
bill in the dark of night.
  These riders threw a red herring into this debate and slowed 
Congressional action on this issue--not a lack of trying by the Senate, 
including Senator Schumer of New York, a leading proponent of backstop 
legislation.
  America needs a Federal backstop for both commercial and personal 
lines or property and casualty lines and we need to keep such a bill 
clean for extraneous amendments that are divisive and bad for our 
economy.
  I wish the Conferees well and yield back the balance of my time.

                          ____________________