[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 151 (2005), Part 21]
[House]
[Pages 29348-29354]
[From the U.S. 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 
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

[[Page 29349]]

       ``(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 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

[[Page 29350]]

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 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.

[[Page 29351]]

       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 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

[[Page 29352]]

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. 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.

[[Page 29353]]


  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.
  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

[[Page 29354]]

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.

                          ____________________