[Congressional Record Volume 151, Number 163 (Saturday, December 17, 2005)]
[House]
[Pages H12135-H12141]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
TERRORISM RISK INSURANCE REVISION ACT OF 2005
Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and concur in the
[[Page H12136]]
Senate amendment to the House amendment to the Senate bill (S. 467) to
extend the applicability of the Terrorism Risk Insurance Act of 2002.
The Clerk read as follows:
Senate amendment to House amendment:
In lieu of the matter proposed to be inserted by the House
amendment to the text of the bill, insert:
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Terrorism Risk Insurance
Extension Act of 2005''.
SEC. 2. EXTENSION OF TERRORISM RISK INSURANCE PROGRAM.
(a) Program Extension.--Section 108(a) of the Terrorism
Risk Insurance Act of 2002 (15 U.S.C. 6701 note; 116 Stat.
2336) is amended by striking ``2005'' and inserting ``2007''.
(b) Mandatory Availability.--Section 103(c) of the
Terrorism Risk Insurance Act of 2002 (15 U.S.C. 6701 note;
116 Stat. 2327) is amended--
(1) by striking paragraph (2);
(2) by striking ``AVAILABILITY.--'' and all that follows
through ``each entity'' and inserting ``AVAILABILITY.--During
each Program Year, each entity''; and
(3) by redesignating subparagraphs (A) and (B) as
paragraphs (1) and (2), respectively, and moving the margins
2 ems to the left.
SEC. 3. AMENDMENTS TO DEFINED TERMS.
(a) Program Years.--Section 102(11) of the Terrorism Risk
Insurance Act of 2002 (15 U.S.C. 6701 note; 116 Stat. 2326)
is amended by adding at the end the following:
``(E) Program year 4.--The term `Program Year 4' means the
period beginning on January 1, 2006 and ending on December
31, 2006.
``(F) Program year 5.--The term `Program Year 5' means the
period beginning on January 1, 2007 and ending on December
31, 2007.''.
(b) Exclusions From Covered Lines.--
(1) In general.--Section 102(12)(B) of the Terrorism Risk
Insurance Act of 2002 (15 U.S.C. 6701 note; 116 Stat. 2326)
is amended--
(A) in clause (vi), by striking ``or'' at the end;
(B) in clause (vii), by striking the period at the end and
inserting a semicolon; and
(C) by adding at the end the following:
``(viii) commercial automobile insurance;
``(ix) burglary and theft insurance;
``(x) surety insurance;
``(xi) professional liability insurance; or
``(xii) farm owners multiple peril insurance.''.
(2) Conforming amendment.--Section 102(12)(A) of the
Terrorism Risk Insurance Act of 2002 (15 U.S.C. 6701 note;
116 Stat. 2326) is amended by striking ``surety insurance''
and inserting ``directors and officers liability insurance''.
(c) Insurer Deductibles.--Section 102(7) of the Terrorism
Risk Insurance Act of 2002 (15 U.S.C. 6701 note; 116 Stat.
2325) is amended--
(1) in subparagraph (D), by striking ``and'' at the end;
(2) by redesignating subparagraph (E) as subparagraph (G);
(3) by inserting after subparagraph (D), the following:
``(E) for Program Year 4, the value of an insurer's direct
earned premiums over the calendar year immediately preceding
Program Year 4, multiplied by 17.5 percent;
``(F) for Program Year 5, the value of an insurer's direct
earned premiums over the calendar year immediately preceding
Program Year 5, multiplied by 20 percent; and''; and
(4) in subparagraph (G), as so redesignated, by striking
``through (D)'' and all that follows through ``Year 3''and
inserting the following: ``through (F), for the Transition
Period or any Program Year''.
SEC. 4. INSURED LOSS SHARED COMPENSATION.
Section 103(e) of the Terrorism Risk Insurance Act of 2002
(15 U.S.C. 6701 note; 116 Stat. 2328) is amended--
(1) in paragraph (1)--
(A) by inserting ``through Program Year 4'' before ``shall
be equal''; and
(B) by inserting ``, and during Program Year 5 shall be
equal to 85 percent,'' after ``90 percent''; and
(2) in each of paragraphs (2) and (3), by striking
``Program Year 2 or Program Year 3'' each place that term
appears and inserting ``any of Program Years 2 through 5''.
SEC. 5. AGGREGATE RETENTION AMOUNTS AND RECOUPMENT OF FEDERAL
SHARE.
(a) Aggregate Retention Amounts.--Section 103(e)(6) of the
Terrorism Risk Insurance Act of 2002 (15 U.S.C. 6701 note;
116 Stat. 2329) is amended--
(1) in subparagraph (B), by striking ``and'' at the end;
(2) in subparagraph (C), by striking the period at the end
and inserting a semicolon; and
(3) by adding at the end the following:
``(D) for Program Year 4, the lesser of--
``(i) $25,000,000,000; and
``(ii) the aggregate amount, for all insurers, of insured
losses during such Program Year; and
``(E) for Program Year 5, the lesser of--
``(i) $27,500,000,000; and
``(ii) the aggregate amount, for all insurers, of insured
losses during such Program Year.''.
(b) Recoupment of Federal Share.--Section 103(e)(7) of the
Terrorism Risk Insurance Act of 2002 (15 U.S.C. 6701 note;
116 Stat. 2329) is amended--
(1) in subparagraph (A), by striking ``, (B), and (C)'' and
inserting ``through (E)''; and
(2) in each of subparagraphs (B) and (C), by striking
``subparagraph (A), (B), or (C)'' each place that term
appears and inserting ``any of subparagraphs (A) through
(E)''.
SEC. 6. PROGRAM TRIGGER.
Section 103(e)(1) of the Terrorism Risk Insurance Act of
2002 (15 U.S.C. note, 116 Stat. 2328) is amended--
(1) by redesignating subparagraph (B) as subparagraph (C);
and
(2) by inserting after subparagraph (A) the following:
``(B) Program trigger.--In the case of a certified act of
terrorism occurring after March 31, 2006, no compensation
shall be paid by the Secretary under subsection (a), unless
the aggregate industry insured losses resulting from such
certified act of terrorism exceed--
``(i) $50,000,000, with respect to such insured losses
occurring in Program Year 4; or
``(ii) $100,000,000, with respect to such insured losses
occurring in Program Year 5.''.
SEC. 7. LITIGATION MANAGEMENT.
Section 107(a) of the Terrorism Risk Insurance Act of 2002
(15 U.S.C. 6701 note; 116 Stat. 2335) is amended by adding at
the end the following:
``(6) Authority of the secretary.--Procedures and
requirements established by the Secretary under section 50.82
of part 50 of title 31 of the Code of Federal Regulations (as
in effect on the date of issuance of that section in final
form) shall apply to any cause of action described in
paragraph (1) of this subsection.''.
SEC. 8. ANALYSIS AND REPORT ON TERRORISM RISK COVERAGE
CONDITIONS AND SOLUTIONS.
Section 108 of the Terrorism Risk Insurance Act of 2002 (15
U.S.C. 6701 note; 116 Stat. 2336) is amended by adding at the
end the following:
``(e) Analysis of Market Conditions for Terrorism Risk
Insurance.--
``(1) In general.--The President's Working Group on
Financial Markets, in consultation with the National
Association of Insurance Commissioners, representatives of
the insurance industry, representatives of the securities
industry, and representatives of policy holders, shall
perform an analysis regarding the long-term availability and
affordability of insurance for terrorism risk, including--
``(A) group life coverage; and
``(B) coverage for chemical, nuclear, biological, and
radiological events.
``(2) Report.--Not later than September 30, 2006, the
President's Working Group on Financial Markets shall submit a
report to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban
Affairs of the Senate and the Committee on Financial Services
of the House of Representatives on its findings pursuant to
the analysis conducted under subsection (a).''.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from
Ohio (Mr. Oxley) and the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Kanjorski)
each will control 20 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Ohio.
General Leave
Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may
have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks
on this legislation and to insert extraneous material thereon.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Ohio?
There was no objection.
Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, on the morning of September 11, 2001, this Nation
suffered a series of brutal terrorist attacks. Al Qaeda's terrorists
murdered thousands of innocent Americans, caused billions of dollars in
damage and placed our financial markets in jeopardy. While the
marketplace was ultimately able to survive the more than $30 billion
loss, insurance reserves were demolished and solvency was put at risk.
Insurers could not predict when another terrorist attack would take
place or how damaging the next attack could be and were forced to begin
to exclude terrorism coverage from commercial policies, leaving
policyholders bare. The resulting lack of terrorism insurance put at
risk numerous development projects and threatened our Nation's economy.
{time} 1830
To respond to this crisis, the House Financial Services Committee
immediately created the Terrorism Risk Insurance Act, or TRIA. A year
later, the Senate finally acted and the President signed TRIA into law.
TRIA has provided a Federal backstop protecting policyholders against
future catastrophic terrorist attacks. TRIA has been a resounding
success in ensuring the availability of terrorism coverage for
commercial policyholders.
TRIA is set to expire at the end of the year. Unfortunately, the
risks from terrorism remain acute and the private markets cannot
function without an appropriate government backstop. The legislation
before us today, S. 467, the Terrorism Risk Insurance Extension Act,
temporarily extends the terrorism risk backstop for 2 years, while
increasing participation of the private sector.
As in our committee legislation, this bill raises the program trigger
from $5 million to $50 million in the first year of the extension and
then to $100 million for the second year, ensuring that
[[Page H12137]]
Federal participation will only happen for large-scale attacks.
It also increases the insurer deductibles by a reasonable amount each
year and significantly increases the taxpayer payback to better protect
consumers.
Mr. Speaker, it is with some frustration and sadness when I say that
Members of Congress and the administration who believe that the risk of
terrorism will disappear in 2 years are fooling themselves. It is my
firm belief that a TRIA extension should have included some actual
reforms to reinvigorate the private sector and replace our Federal
program with a permanent private sector solution.
While this legislation is bereft of any reforms to build long-term
protections for commercial policyholders, I am confident Congress will
be forced to return to this issue before 2 years have expired. It is a
sad commentary on our ability to look forward and to be creative, which
I think the House legislation clearly did. It is unfortunate that our
brethren in the other body saw fit to take such a narrow attitude.
I hope that the Presidential working group that is created by this
legislation will examine the need to create dedicated, long-term
terrorism reserves and private pooling and risk-sharing facilities to
permanently protect our Nation from the economic threat of terrorism.
If such forward thinking and planning is not done as contemplated in
our bill, the industry will be back at the Federal trough seeking yet
another extension of this program; and make no mistake about it,
whatever it is, Congress will respond.
We should give special recognition to the subcommittee chairman, the
gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Baker), for introducing legislation
developing a long-term private sector reform to strengthen the private-
public sector partnership, to improve terrorism insurance for
consumers.
I also applaud my colleagues Mrs. Kelly, Mr. Sessions, Ms. Pryce, Mr.
Davis, Mr. Fossella, Mr. Renzi, and Mr. Ferguson for their help and
leadership, as well as Ranking Member Frank, Mr. Kanjorski, and Mr.
Capuano for their bipartisanship cooperation and commitment to
protecting our Nation.
Their leadership is proof that the House can work together to get
things done for America. Too bad we did not have better cooperation
from the other side. I urge all of my colleagues to vote in favor of
this important and necessary legislation.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. KANJORSKI. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Mr. Speaker, I join my colleague in expressing a little
disappointment in the failure of the other body to rise to the
occasion.
A considerably better piece of legislation was drafted and passed
here in the House and sent over to the other body, only to get to this
11th hour and get back some legislation that is less than a good
product.
It does several things; and I dare say, I have to rise to support it
because it is the only thing flying in town tonight. And since
terrorism reinsurance will expire in 2 weeks to an incredible
disadvantage of American business and American jobs, I think we have no
alternative but to support this piece of legislation tonight.
What it does not do, however, is it does not pass on and consider
legislation taking care of nuclear, chemical, biological, radioactive
terrorism incidents. What it does not include is allowing for a
commission that would sit down and analyze and develop a mechanism so
that we can pass the responsibility for the public back to the private
sector in a smart and reasonable way.
And it does not extend it nearly for long enough or provide for the
continuation of this type of coverage into the future, because as the
chairman well said, 2 years is entirely too short. The only thing we
are certain of is we will be back in this Chamber within the 2 years to
do something over again, having lost 2 years of work product and
probably again 2 years of involvement.
Finally, the last thing the bill does not include today that is a
great disappointment to me is comprehensive health coverage insurance.
It seems that we are willing to insure the buildings, but not the
people. Group life was included in the House side of the bill, but has
fallen out as the bill has come back from the Senate.
I guess the last sport I would complain about with the Senate is, if
I recall, several days ago or maybe a week has gone by, we had the
appointment of a conference committee in the House. And our coach was
lined up and ready to go. We all went out and bought uniforms and
prepared to do battle, and somebody forget to give the referee a
whistle. As I understand, the conference never started or ended. This
is merely a product sent over as a last-ditch effort, take it or leave
it. That is what we are faced with.
But with all of that said, I think it is another example that, at
least here on the House side, the Financial Services Committee has had
and has displayed a great deal of capacity to work together in trying
times.
I wanted to thank and recognize all the folks on the Republican side
of the aisle that were so bipartisan in working on this. And I think we
were of common mind to get it done, and we got a good product done.
On my side of the aisle, many of the participants in this legislation
will have an opportunity to speak, and they can critique the
legislation and their own role as they do speak.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from
Ohio (Ms. Pryce).
Ms. PRYCE of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the time yielded by the
gentleman.
Mr. Speaker, today the House will vote on legislation that continues
the commitment Congress made in 2001 to safeguard our Nation's economy
in the event of another catastrophic terrorist attack. Chairman Oxley
and Chairman Baker and their staffs deserve enormous credit for the
hard work throughout this process, because just last week the House
passed a bill which presented a balanced and very responsible approach
to continuing the TRIA program.
It provided for the availability of terrorism insurance, encouraged
the development of private capital, and required full mandatory
taxpayer reimbursement of Federal assistance granted to the insurance
industry.
While the House version included more forward-looking market-based
provisions than the final bill that we have before us today, passage of
this legislation nonetheless remains necessary.
The potential for another terrorist attack is frightening enough, but
hamstringing our Nation's ability to recover finally is unthinkable and
irresponsible. Without action today, our economy would suffer. This
bill is about more than our insurance industry. Businesses large and
small depend upon the availability of this insurance.
We must provide certainty to our manufacturers, our builders, our
bankers, retailers, Realtors, developers and others; and we are
dedicated to securing our country against the physical and economic
consequences of another terrorist attack.
I appreciate so much Chairmen Oxley and Baker's hard work on this
issue, Congressman Kanjorski as well. Congress must continue to work to
find a permanent solution enabling the private market to better provide
terrorism insurance, and I am sure we will continue to seek that
solution.
Mr. KANJORSKI. Mr. Speaker I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
Massachusetts (Mr. Frank).
Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the hard work
and the candor of the chairman of the committee. It really is
disappointing. We did a good bipartisan effort here, put together a
bill. There were some questions about it. It was a comprehensive bill
and attacked a number of the issues.
What happened in the Senate was a travesty of the legislative process
and a refusal finally by the chairman frankly of the committee to
engage us at all. We are left with this Hobson's choice, in the literal
sense, that is, no choice at all, that is, we have to pass this bill or
else this program expires.
Unfortunately, a number of things were left out. We will hear from
the gentlewoman from Florida about her important provision protecting
people against unfair discrimination in their travel plans. One of the
things that we
[[Page H12138]]
will also hear is from the gentleman from New York (Mr. Israel). He
worked hard with the families of 9/11.
Mr. Speaker, I will submit for the Record a packet of correspondence
to and from the families. They wanted a commission to study this issue
as part of this. They wanted representation. And the families of 9/11,
after all, are the people out of whom this whole terrorism response
grew, the victimization of their loved ones.
They asked for a commission. We in the House worked with them on a
bipartisan basis. We have that commission. The Senate simply blatantly
ignored them. And they tried. They appealed to the Senate and they
appealed to the White House and they were turned away.
Group life is gone. This is kind of like, remember the old neutron
bomb? It killed people and left the buildings standing. We have neutron
terrorism insurance. It protects the buildings, but it ignores the
people. It is both a travesty of the legislative process, what the
Senate has done; and I have to say this, despite the fact that we got
good bipartisan corporation here, and there were differences, we had
differences where ideology got into play, but unfortunately there is a
right wing ideological fundamentalism so entrenched in this Capitol in
various places that that is why we do not have the kind of terrorism
risk insurance bill we ought to have.
I believe in the market. I believe in the market's function, but we
have people who believe in the market when it does not exist. And that
is the case in terrorism insurance.
Families of September 11, Inc.,
New York, NY, November 3, 2005.
Hon. Michael G. Oxley,
Chair and Co-Sponsor of the House TRIA Bill, House of
Representatives, Committee on Financial Services, Rayburn
House Office Building, Washington, DC.
Hon. Richard Baker,
Co-Sponsor of the House TRIA Bill, House of Representatives,
Committee on Financial Services, Rayburn House Office
Building, Washington, DC.
Hon. Barney Frank
Ranking Democrat, House of Representatives, Committee on
Financial Services, Rayburn House Office Building,
Washington, DC.
Dear Representatives Oxley, Frank and Baker: The
undersigned is Chairman of the Board of Families of September
11, Inc. (FOS11). FOS11 is a nonprofit organization founded
in October 2001 by families of those who died in the
September 11 terrorist attacks. The FOS11 mission is to raise
awareness about the effects of terrorism and public trauma
and to champion domestic and international policies that
prevent, protect against, and respond to terrorist acts. Our
members (over 2,000) reside in 48 states and 20 countries.
Soon after its founding FOS11 began analyzing and
responding to issues raised by the Air Transportation Safety
and System Security Act (the Act), of which the September
11th Victims Compensation Fund of 2001 (the Fund) forms a
part, and subsequent legislation. In June of this year FOS11
submitted to the Justice Department its Final Report on the
Fund, an Executive Summary of which was placed in the
Congressional Record. In that report FOS11 expresses deep
concern about the wide swath of immunity granted by the Act
and subsequent legislation to public and private entities for
the consequences of the September 11 attacks. We observe that
the deterrent goals of our American compensation system--
imposing the cost of harmful acts on those who could and
should have, but did not, prevent them--were not achieved.
Nor could they have been. The reason. The insurance industry
had not (understandably) appreciated and analyzed the
terrorist exploitable vulnerabilities of its insureds and the
magnitude of the exposures and built the reserves and
provided the limits necessary to pay the losses that
resulted.
The FOS11 Final Report on the Fund concludes by urging
Congress to:
a. use the perspectives of time and experience in
implementation of the Victim Compensation Fund to consider
carefully issues it was forced to address hastily in the
immediate aftermath of the terrorist attacks of September 11,
2001;
b. assess how well the rules adopted in 2002 to implement
the legislation met Congressional intent;
c. consider the incentives and disincentives to reducing
the risks of terrorist attacks implicit in the legislation;
and
d. fashion legislation that will reduce those risks and
ensure that victims of future terrorist attacks and their
families are made whole.
Although FOS11 believes that the Terrorism Risk Insurance
Act (TRIA) is not the long term solution to deterring and, if
deterrence fails, paying for future terrorist losses, it does
believe that it is a necessary bridge to comprehensive
forward looking legislation that will allow the insurance
industry to play the vital role of providing remedies to the
casualties of future terrorist attacks and, through risk
assessments and premium allocations, a safer America.
FOS11 joins the Defense Research Institute in its support
of legislation that (1) extends TRIA until December 31, 2007,
to ensure an orderly transition to a long term solution to
the terrorism risk insurance questions and (2) provides for a
Presidential Working Group or Congressional Commission to
develop a viable and solvent program to succeed TRIA.
The unique perspective of FOS11 equips it well to
participate in the creation of solutions to the complex
accountability, responsibility, remedies and related
prevention issues raised by the continuing threat of
terrorist acts and the vital role insurance can (must) play
in these solutions. We ask that FOS11 be a participant in
this crucial debate.
Very truly yours,
Donald W. Goodrich,
Chairman of the Board.
____
Families of September 11, Inc.,
New York, NY, December 12, 2005.
Re Preservation of the Commission approach in the Compromise
Terrorism Risk Insurance Act that reconciles S. 467 and
H.R. 4314.
Senator Paul S. Sarbanes,
Senate Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs,
Washington, DC.
Dear Senator Sarbanes: Last week, Ron Robinson, Chair of
the Defense Research Institute's TRIA Subcommittee and I met
with most of the Senior Staff for Senators Shelby, Bennett,
Dodd, and Kennedy and Representatives Oxley, Baker, Shays,
Crowley, Israel and Maloney and of the Senate Banking and
House Financial Services Committees to listen and to debate
the captioned matter.
Families of September 11 remains fu11y committed to a
reconciliation of these two bills in favor of the mandate,
membership and direct broad stakeholder participation in the
House Commission approach. We also support adding each of the
members of the Presidential Working Group to this Commission
and a representative from Homeland Security, an actuary and a
risk manager/modeler.
Unless Congress takes a leadership role by providing this
neutral forum for all stakeholders to openly and ``face to
face'' debate the complex and interdependent issues necessary
for the insurance industry to play its traditional role, we
will be no further along in two years than we are now.
Congress's leadership is far more important than its dollars
on this issue. We need to prepare, so that government will
not be obliged to step in again, as it did following
September 11, 2001. Failure to provide such a forum will
increase the risk of future terrorist attacks and result in
an unplanned and disproportionate government response at
taxpayer expense.
Moreover, achieving viable, solvent and long term terrorism
insurance that is driven by the private sector, but
appropriately supported by government, is not a matter of
resolving unilaterally one or a few simple ``insurance''
questions. The issues are many and touch every social,
economic, and po1itical policy in our nation. Congress can
use this Commission to lead the private sector stakeholders
to a day when they will find it in their economic interests
to reduce the risk of the next terrorist attack (sadly, there
will be one) and have the resources, in the form of
insurance, to respond to the losses. The compromise we
support is a critical opportunity for loss mitigation and
remediation at all levels of our society.
I urge you and your staff to work with your counterparts in
the House to reach the Commission compromise Ron and I
support. He and I have pledged our groups and ourselves to
work as hard with the Commission to achieve this goal over
the next year as we have with Congress to date on the
terrorism insurability/risk transfer debate.
Very truly yours,
Donald W. Goodrich,
President
Families of September 11, Inc.,
New York, NY, December 14, 2005.
Re Preservation of the Commission Approach in the Compromise
Terrorism Risk Insurance Act That Reconciles S. 467 and
HR 4314.
Dear Mr. Hubbard: The undersigned is President of Families
of September 11, Inc. (FOS11). FOS11 is a nonprofit
organization founded in October 2001 by families of those who
died in the September 11 terrorist attacks. The FOS11 mission
is to raise awareness about the effects of terrorism and
public trauma and to champion domestic and international
policies that prevent, protect against, and respond to
terrorist acts. Our members (over 2,000) reside in 48 states
and 20 countries. Solvent and viable terrorism insurance is a
weapon against terrorism and the matter in caption is vital
to this goal.
Although FOS11 believes that the Terrorism Risk Insurance
Act (TRIA) is not the long term solution to deterring and, if
deterrence fails, paying for future terrorist losses, it does
believe that it is a necessary bridge to comprehensive
forward looking legislation that will allow the insurance
industry to play the vital role of providing remedies to the
casualties of future terrorist attacks and, through risk
assessments and premium allocations, a safer America.
FOS11 takes no position on the insurance specific
differences between the TRIA extension bills from the House
and Senate now in informal conference, but it is fully
committed to a reconciliation of those bills in
[[Page H12139]]
favor of the mandate, membership and direct broad stakeholder
participation in the House Commission approach. We also
support adding each of the members of the Presidential
Working Group contemplated by the Senate bill to this
Commission and a representative from Homeland Security, an
actuary and a risk manager/modeler.
Unless the White House takes a leadership role by
supporting this neutral forum for all stakeholders to openly
and ``face to face'' debate the complex and interdependent
issues necessary for the insurance industry to play its
traditional role, we will be no further along in two years
than we are now. Leadership is far more important than
dollars on this issue. We need to prepare, so that government
will not be obliged to step in again, as it did following
September 11, 2001. Failure to provide such a forum will
increase the risk of future terrorist attacks and result in
an unplanned and disproportionate government response at
taxpayer expense.
Moreover, achieving viable, solvent and long term terrorism
insurance that is driven by the private sector, but supported
by sound government policies, is not a matter of resolving
unilaterally one or a few simple ``insurance'' questions. The
issues are many and touch every social, economic, and
political policy in our nation. These policy issues need open
and rigourous debate by a broad spectrum of perspectives in
order that the private sector stakeholders will come to a day
when they will find it in their economic interests to reduce
the risk of the next terrorist attack (sadly, there will be
one) and have the resources, in the form of insurance, to
respond to the losses. The compromise we support is a
critical opportunity to achieve loss mitigation and
remediation at all levels of our society.
Solutions to the complex accountability, responsibility,
remedies and related prevention issues raised by the
continuing threat of terrorist acts and the vital role
insurance can (must) play in these solutions are essential to
the war on terrorism. I urge you and your staff to work with
your, counterparts in the House and Senate to reach the
Commission compromise FOS11 supports. Only with the cross
debate and transparancy this type commission assures can full
participation by the private sector in the war on terrorism
here on our soil be achieved.
Very truly yours,
Donald W. Goodrich,
President.
Attachment: Letter from Representative Barney Frank dated
December 9, 2005.
Congress of the United States,
House of Representatives,
Washington, DC, December 9, 2005.
Don Goodrich,
Chairman of the Board,
Families of September 11.
Ronald R. Robinson,
Chair, TRIA Subcommittee,
Defense Research Institute.
Dear Mr. Goodrich and Mr. Robinson: I thank you for your
support for the extension of the Terrorist Risk Insurance Act
and for your constructive suggestion to not only have a
Commission with broad membership, but also to include a
representative of the victims of terrorism on the Commission.
As you are no doubt aware, on December 7, 2005 the House
passed legislation that includes those provisions by a vote
of 371 to 49 and sent it to the Senate with a request for a
conference.
We only have about 10 or 12 days to work out the
differences between the two bills, and the Administration has
expressed its opposition to the House-passed bill and will
likely try to get the Senate to oppose compromising with the
House. We will work hard to preserve the Commission and the
inclusion of a victims' representative on it. I urge you to
continue your efforts in support of the House provision, and
I will work with you to be as persuasive with the Senate as
you were with the House.
Barney Frank.
____
Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from New
York (Mrs. Kelly), who has been one of the leaders on very important
issues and chairs the oversight subcommittee.
Mrs. KELLY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to urge my colleagues to vote
for this bill, although I do so with a great deal of disappointment.
This bill does reauthorize TRIA for the next 2 years, and failure to
reauthorize the program would lead to gaps in insurance coverage that
could kill economic growth and recovery nationwide. Unfortunately, this
bill contains none of the improvements to the TRIA program that the
House passed earlier. The bill before us today lacks group life
coverage. It lacks coverage for domestic terrorism. It lacks a
commission to study the availability of terrorism insurance for the
World Trade Center, and other sites after this current extension ends.
The other body's refusal to negotiate with this House on ways to make
TRIA work better for the taxpayers, policy holders, and regulators is
beyond seriously disappointing. As Chairman Oxley said, and you have
heard from other Members, this legislation simply kicks the can down
the road. It is an opportunity that has been lost.
I want to thank Chairman Oxley and Chairman Baker for their hard
work. I want to thank my colleagues on the other side of the aisle. We
have worked together to try to create a very strong bill that would
help the United States of America economically.
Mr. Speaker, I look forward to immediately working with them on a
better, stronger reauthorization of the program before it expires again
in 2009.
Mr. KANJORSKI. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from New York
(Mr. Israel) for 3 minutes.
Mr. ISRAEL. Mr. Speaker, I did not become involved in the issue of
TRIA because of my seat on the House Financial Services Committee. I
became involved in it because my district is located approximately 50
miles from Ground Zero, because I represent over 100 families whose
lives and livelihood were completely upended as a result of the attacks
on our Nation on 9/11.
Mr. Speaker, I am going to support this extension, but I join with my
colleagues on both sides of the aisle in supporting it with some
measure of disappointment. Our committee, under bipartisan leadership,
reported a strong, comprehensive TRIA extension that included group
life and covered domestic terrorism, had a public-private commission to
ensure long-term alternatives to TRIA. None of that was included in the
final product that we are going to vote on today.
I have two major concerns that I will share with my colleagues, Mr.
Speaker. One is the public-private commission on long-term solutions.
The 9/11 families very much wanted to participate in a commission that
would develop new policies, new alternatives to TRIA. Not only was
their voice left out of this bill, but the commission itself was left
out of this bill.
Instead, we are going to have a bureaucratic report produced by a
Presidential working group. I am sure it will be a good-faith effort,
but surely those families deserve to be heard.
{time} 1845
Surely those families have a tragic expertise in how lives can be
destroyed and how livelihoods can be lost. And I am very disappointed
that they have been excluded, that their voices have been silenced.
And the second concern that I have, Mr. Speaker, is that group life
was not included in this product despite the best efforts on both sides
of the aisle. It seems to me common sense and certainly compassion that
if we are going to insure bricks and steel and glass and mortar, then
surely we should insure the lives of people who work inside the bricks
and the steel and the glass and the mortar, that surely their lives are
just as valuable as property. So it is with a measure of profound
disappointment that group life was excluded from this final product.
This is, in fact, an imperfect bill, and certainly it is drastically
less perfect than the language that was reported on a bipartisan basis
from the House Financial Services Committee. But we ought not let an
imperfect bill stop an adequate bill. And so because this is a good
start and because we do have an opportunity to still get this right, I
will support this extension and urge all of our colleagues to continue
to work together to pass something that makes the most sense for our
Nation and its economy.
Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. KANJORSKI. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from
New York (Mrs. Maloney).
Mrs. MALONEY. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this
time and for his leadership on this extremely important bill.
And I rise in strong support of the extension of the Terrorism Risk
Insurance Act for an additional 2 years.
The creation of antiterrorism insurance after 9/11 stabilized our
Nation's economic footing, but it is set to expire at the end of this
year. Businesses in my district with insurance policies that have
expired since this September have told me that they cannot find
insurance coverage in this country anywhere. They have been forced to
look in England. Homeland security includes economic security, and
after 9/11, of all the acts of this body, the most important was the
antiterrorism insurance. It helped us start to rebuild and to build our
economic foundation in New York and across this country.
[[Page H12140]]
That is why it is so very important that we pass this extension.
Clearly, the terrorist threat remains, and TRIA is still an economic
necessity.
I am disappointed that the good work of the Financial Services
Committee to create a stronger bill that would help the private sector
take on the problem of terrorism insurance has been set aside in favor
of a more limited bill that simply kicks the can down the road, as
Chairman Oxley so correctly put it and as Ranking Member Frank and Mr.
Kanjorski have highlighted. The bill before us would be better were it
to extend to group life, domestic terrorism and if it covered nuclear,
biological, chemical or radioactive events, and were it to create the
commission to study the problem and make recommendations, as included
in the House bill. We should task the private sector with developing
innovative solutions instead of just relying on the government.
Because I feel these elements are so very important, I am
cosponsoring a bipartisan bill with my New York colleague Vito Fossella
to establish the commission and to provide flexibility in extending
coverage for target sites such as Ground Zero.
Though the House bill did much better than this bill, we need to pass
what we have before us today and continue to work on the problem
together.
Once again, I thank my colleagues on both sides of the aisle for
their help and support to New York City, and I thank the leadership on
both sides of the aisle for backing this bill and passing TRIA. It is
important, and we will continue to work together.
Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Texas
(Mr. Neugebauer), a valuable member of the committee.
Mr. NEUGEBAUER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman for yielding me
this time.
Like many of the previous speakers, I, too, am very disappointed this
evening that we did not have an opportunity to bring some real reform
to this process. The committee, I think, worked very hard in making
sure that we move down the road of transitioning this insurance program
back to the private sector, which is where it belongs. Unfortunately,
the version that we are considering tonight will not do that.
Another thing that is extremely disappointing, I think, about
tonight's version is that, in the event of a catastrophic event, the
American taxpayers were going to step up in a gap basis but eventually
get all of their money back. In this particular bill, that will not be
the case. This is an area where the government, I think, stepped in at
an appropriate time to shore up the marketplace, the insurance
marketplace; but I think one of the things that is very important is
that, as we move forward, while we are going to extend this for a
period of 2 years, I think it is important that the committee continue
to work very diligently to make sure that we work towards a process
working with the private sector, ensuring that we move and transition
in a way that really puts this back into a free marketplace, which is
where it belongs.
So I want to thank the chairman for his hard work. I know that he
shares in the disappointment that we are not really considering the
House version, which is a better version, tonight and which was a more
fiscally responsible version.
Mr. KANJORSKI. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from
Florida (Ms. Wasserman Schultz).
Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Mr. Speaker, the infinite risks associated
with terrorism demonstrated their potential to destabilize our Nation's
markets after the attacks of September 11, which is why I will support
the final version of TRIA before the House today. However, I, too, do
so with strong reservations and some disappointment in what could have
and should have been.
In spite of the tremendous leadership, hard work and cooperative
efforts put forth by House Financial Services Committee Chairman
Michael Oxley and Ranking Member Barney Frank, the other body chose to
forego a fair and democratic conference process and needlessly tossed
away an opportunity to truly strengthen our markets and protect
consumers.
I commend Chairman Oxley, Ranking Member Frank, Mr. Kanjorski and Mr.
Baker and all the members and staff, especially, of the Financial
Services Committee for producing an initial bill that included a number
of critical reforms to help protect Americans and our economy in the
event of another terrorist attack.
This initial bill passed by an overwhelming majority here on the
House floor and included a number of important consumer protections. As
has been discussed, it would have extended the Federal backstop to
include group life insurance, thereby ensuring that taxpayer dollars
would be used not only to undergird real estate and insurance companies
in the event of brick and mortar losses, but it would have provided
financial protections to families who suffered the loss of a loved one
in the event of another tragedy like September 11.
Moreover, those same taxpayers are being denied the right to travel
freely by some of the very insurance companies who sought the extension
of TRIA in the first place. The House's bill included a provision that
I introduced and passed with the support of my colleagues on the
Financial Services Committee during the markup of TRIA to address this
unfair practice. While Americans can legally travel without the fear of
government standing in our way, some life insurance companies do stand
in the way, and they will continue to do so until this Congress acts.
As Americans, one of the liberties we cherish and enjoy is the
freedom to explore and travel legally and freely around the world, be
it for recreational, religious or cultural purposes. The unrestrained
lawful foreign travel of American citizens is generally considered to
be in the best interest of the United States.
Potential future travel to countries, especially our Nation's allies,
should not be the sole basis for denying individual life insurance
coverage. When we allow this to occur, we give in to terrorists and
others who wish to change our way of life. While we should be proud
that this provision gleaned broadbased, bipartisan support in the
House, it is wrong that the other body refused to conference on the
important elements in the House-passed version of TRIA. We cannot stop
fighting for American consumers and taxpayers. We must back up our
tough talk about fighting terrorism with action.
And, again, Mr. Speaker, I wish to thank Chairman Oxley and Ranking
Member Frank for working cooperatively together. It is a privilege to
serve on a committee that puts as a high priority working together for
the greater good.
Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. KANJORSKI. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from
New York (Mr. Crowley).
Mr. CROWLEY. Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend from Pennsylvania for
yielding me this time.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the Terrorism Risk Insurance
Revision Act of 2005.
As one of the original voices calling for an extension of this
important Federal backstop, I am pleased we are voting on this bill
before today and allowing the TRIA program to continue for an
additional 2 years.
And while I support this bill and do so because I recognize the
importance of this legislation and its critical need to our economy,
especially in major urban areas like New York City, this is not the
bill I would have written. The House Committee on Financial Services,
under the leadership of Chairman Mike Oxley and Ranking Member Barney
Frank, produced a strong bipartisan bill; then we responsibly named
conferees to hammer out the differences between the Senate- and the
House-passed bills.
Unfortunately our colleagues in the Senate, led by Chairman Shelby,
refused to participate in civics class 101, ignoring the House bill and
ignoring the important contributions of the House. They ignored major
provisions such as the inclusion of group life coverage in this bill so
that the Federal TRIA program would cover not only buildings destroyed
by terrorists but the people in them as well. The Senate ignored
language that would have prohibited the denial of life insurance to
Americans who have traveled or even planned to travel to countries that
actuaries view as ``troublesome,'' such as Israel or Colombia.
[[Page H12141]]
The Senate refused to include language to provide for a real
commission to look into a long-term nongovernmental solution to the
issues involved in insuring and reinsuring for the threat of terror.
And this bill ignores language to provide insurance protections for the
rebuilding of the World Trade Center, the actual reason we created this
Federal backstop program in the first place.
But while I am not happy about the process and exclusion of important
provisions, the underlying need for TRIA to be extended is reason
enough for me to vote for this bill, and I urge all my colleagues to do
the same.
I want to thank Chairman Oxley for his honesty, for all of his hard
work on this bill, as well as Congressman Steve Israel, Mike Capuano
and Congressman Paul Kanjorski, all who have worked very hard to see
this pass. But most importantly, I want to thank Ranking Member Barney
Frank, who has pushed for the reauthorization of this program for over
a year, has incorporated ideas from both sides of the aisle and has
been a true champion in developing and in crafting legislation that
helps keep our economy moving.
With that, Mr. Speaker, I urge all of my colleagues to support this
worthy legislation.
Mr. KANJORSKI. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from
Massachusetts (Mr. Capuano).
Mr. CAPUANO. Mr. Speaker, I just rise briefly to congratulate the
chairman, the ranking member, and the chairman and the ranking member
of the subcommittee.
This is a classic piece of legislation that hopefully will never,
ever, ever be used. No one, hopefully, will ever know that we actually
did this because if they do, it means we will have suffered another
terrorist attack. At the same time, it is absolutely necessary.
We have heard of all the details of what is not here, but to me, the
most important thing that is not here is the formal mechanism to make
sure that we are not stuck in the same position a few years from now. I
fear that if we do not get to work in an official way through a
commission, that we will be here a few years from now doing this all
over again, simply saying we could not get it done and we did not do it
right, and that is a travesty to the American people. It is
unnecessary, and I will tell the Members that, based on this experience
and past experience, particularly with the chairman, he is a man of
honor, he is a man of his word, and I know he will be pushing as best
he can to get this Congress to pay attention to this issue for the next
year so that we will not be placed in this position.
Mr. KANJORSKI. Mr. Speaker, I urge all of my colleagues to support
this legislation because of its necessity to America's working men and
women and the business community of America.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Speaker, in closing, I just want to say, and a lot of
us have intimated this, we could do better than this that we have
before us today. We did better in the House version, and I think all of
our committee members know that, and I think most of the Members of the
House know that. But there is a time to hold them and a time to fold
them.
At this point, I would ask that the House do adopt this conference
report.
Mr. GUTIERREZ. Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased that we are passing
this crucial Terrorism Risk Insurance Act (TRIA) extension, which will
provide necessary stability for our Nation's economy in a post 9-11
world. I have strongly supported this legislation from the outset, and
I congratulate Chairman Oxley and Ranking Member Frank for their hard
work and the excellent product as it passed the House. While I wish
more of the House provisions we passed 10 days ago had survived
conference, I am pleased that we are able to extend TRIA before the
deadline, so that it does not expire in 2 weeks. I urge my colleagues
to vote in favor of this important conference report.
A stable, secure insurance market is vital to the health of our
national economy. More than 4 years ago, the stability of the insurance
industry, and all of our Nation's policyholders, were put in jeopardy
when insurers and reinsurers lost more than $30 billion as a result of
the 9/11 attacks. After these substantial losses, insurers were unable
to make terrorism insurance available, which left many of our Nation's
businesses vulnerable to unacceptable risk.
In response, Congress overwhelmingly passed TRIA to provide a
temporary, limited federal backstop in the event of another
catastrophic terrorist attack. While we still expect the insurance
industry to eventually develop methods for making terrorism insurance
available without government support, the market has not yet stabilized
to the point where this is possible. Extension of TRIA, which is
necessary to prevent the chill of development in our cities, has wide,
bipartisan support, and should be enacted promptly.
Mr. CANTOR. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the Terrorism
Risk Insurance Extension Act. This bill provides key safeguards to
stabilize the economy in the event of a terrorist attack while putting
us on a path toward restoring a private terrorism risk insurance
market.
This legislation will ensure that terrorism insurance coverage is
available, providing a degree of certainty in a still uncertain market
place.
It is time to make the reforms necessary to encourage the continued
development of a market for terrorism risk insurance. A healthy market
for terrorism insurance is critical to continued economic growth and
expansion. America's taxpayers expect Congress to help that market
develop and relieve their burden for assuming much of the risk in the
existing TRIA program.
That is what this legislation will do, and I am proud to support it.
Mr. OXLEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. LaHood). The question is on the motion
offered by the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Oxley) that the House suspend
the rules and concur in the Senate amendment to the House amendment to
the Senate bill, S. 467.
The question was taken; and (two-thirds having voted in favor
thereof) the rules were suspended and the Senate amendment to the House
amendment was concurred in.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
____________________