[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 162 (2016), Part 1]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page 1419]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




   H.R. 1675, THE CAPITAL MARKETS IMPROVEMENTS ACT AND H.R. 766, THE 
             FINANCIAL INSTITUTION CUSTOMER PROTECTIONS ACT

                                 ______
                                 

                          HON. EARL BLUMENAUER

                               of oregon

                    in the house of representatives

                       Thursday, February 4, 2016

  Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, this week, I voted against H.R. 1675, 
the Capital Markets Improvements Act and H.R. 766, the Financial 
Institution Customer Protections Act--both missed opportunities to 
garner the strong bipartisan consensus needed to appropriately refine 
our nation's financial oversight rules.
  While I am sympathetic to concerns of small businesses, and remain 
ready to work with my Republican colleagues to address those concerns, 
I continue to support strong, targeted oversight of our financial 
markets. Strong consumer and market protection regulations, 
administered by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), are 
needed to prevent the risky practices that badly damaged our economy 
during the Great Recession. These rules are also necessary to put a 
stop to the predatory lending practices and financial gimmickry that 
wreaked havoc on the economic security of Oregon's working families.
  These two bills exemplify the Republican leadership's unwillingness 
to work with Democrats to strengthen our nation's financial oversight. 
It is clear that these bills were unnecessarily partisan, making them 
unpalatable in the Senate and veto targets for President Obama. While 
there are elements of H.R. 1675 that I have voted for in the past and 
continue to support, the bill that was brought to the floor yesterday 
included poison pills, like requiring a review and full commission vote 
on every major rule every 10 years under full Administrative Procedure 
Act-style requirements would severely hinder the SEC's ability to 
monitor markets and protect investors. The vast majority of Democrats 
rejected a similar proposal in the previous Congress. Today, the 
Financial Services Committee leadership forced a partisan vote on H.R. 
766 by including provisions that would restrict the ability of 
government watchdogs to investigate and hold accountable those who 
perpetrate financial wrong-doing.
  Appropriate financial rules should protect American families and the 
broader economy without being unduly burdensome to small businesses and 
innovative entrepreneurs. When the Administration misses this mark, it 
is my hope that Congress can work in a constructive, bipartisan manner 
to refine regulations, tailoring them to strike an appropriate balance 
between business and consumer needs. Unfortunately, this week's efforts 
fail to meet that standard.

                          ____________________